Mumbai: Charles Correa's contribution to the city he lived in, and loved, went far beyond Kanchenjunga, the Pedder Road apartment building that is known around the world.Mumbai, with its layered history , coastal location and indefatigable energy , was both inspiration and canvas for an architect who remained optimistic about cities as engines of prosperity and ideas---even as he became frustrated in recent years with the direction Mumbai had taken.
It was for Mumbai that Correa developed some of his most visionary ideas--some, like the plan for Navi Mumbai, came to be realised; others like his plan for the redevelopment of the mill lands of central Mumbai remained on paper.
From the 1960s on, Correa was active in city planning and debates, including through the Urban Design Research Institute. He was appointed to government committees on the Back Bay reclamation and on the textile mill lands, and proposed ideas for a global arts centre in the Bandra Kurla Complex. But his plan for Navi Mumbai, proposed in 1964, along with Shirsh Patel and Pravin Mehta, was his biggest contribution.
The idea of Navi Mumbai was groundbreaking in its time, says V .Phatak, an urban planner who believes Correa's insights on urban de sign been overshadowed by his architecture.
“At that time, people thought there should be small new towns around large cities to absorb the growth. But Correa understood that Mumbai was going to be an office economy that small cities couldn't cater to, and proposed a large city across the harbour,“ he said.
Although Navi Mumbai remained a dormitory town for many years the state government decided not to move there as planned it has taken off in the past decade. (So much so that the proposed new airport for Navi Mumbai will be exactly where Correa envisaged a lake and office district--something he was reportedly not happy about.) Correa also led the way in looking atpublic transit as a way to structure cities, but that hasn't caught on as it should have, said Phatak.
Perhaps Correa's biggest unrealised dream was his plan for the mill lands that cover almost 600 acres in central Mumbai. In 1996, Correa was tasked with coming up with a plan for the area based on a land-sharing formula between mill owners and the state. He proposed opening out the congested area, enhancing connectivity and creating a “Golden Triangle“ of business around a large park, as well as low-cost housing .
But hope for such holistic development was killed when the govern ment changed the rules , allowing mill owners to keep most of the land.It was a lost opportunity that Correa would call “the tragedy of Tulsi Pipe Road“---“taking urban land with tremendous potential and trashing it for quick profit“.
Correa comes from an age of social architecture, suggests architect Kamu Iyer, a peer and friend. “We were fresh from Independence, and full of idealism,“ said Iyer.
In recent years, though, the concern with planning, social housing and public transport has fallen out of sync with the free-for-all of Mumbai's real-estate market. “Correa opposed what's happening now in Mumbai rampant high-rise development without regard to the surrounding areas, and too much focus on private transport,“ Iyer said.
Yet Correa was also a modernist, who criticsed knee-jerk opposition to development. He called to scrap the Urban Land Ceiling Act and rent control, and amend coastal rules to allow low-rise buildings on the waterfront.In a 1992 Times of India piece, he criticised environmental opposition to a bridge that he felt would ease commutes. “Much of history is the story of interventions,“ he wrote. “Every change causes hurt.“
Correa famously called Mumbai “a great city but a terrible place“. The line describes the city perfectly but also reflects Correa's humanist understading of cities -as more than just a collection of buildings and roads. During the1993 communal riots in Mumbai, Correa warned that plagues and floods could not destroy cities but “what can destroy cities is bigotry and intolerance.“
Mumbai, he wrote then, is “like a marvellous old watch we have inherited, which we have not understood, and which no longer works.“
It was for Mumbai that Correa developed some of his most visionary ideas--some, like the plan for Navi Mumbai, came to be realised; others like his plan for the redevelopment of the mill lands of central Mumbai remained on paper.
From the 1960s on, Correa was active in city planning and debates, including through the Urban Design Research Institute. He was appointed to government committees on the Back Bay reclamation and on the textile mill lands, and proposed ideas for a global arts centre in the Bandra Kurla Complex. But his plan for Navi Mumbai, proposed in 1964, along with Shirsh Patel and Pravin Mehta, was his biggest contribution.
The idea of Navi Mumbai was groundbreaking in its time, says V .Phatak, an urban planner who believes Correa's insights on urban de sign been overshadowed by his architecture.
“At that time, people thought there should be small new towns around large cities to absorb the growth. But Correa understood that Mumbai was going to be an office economy that small cities couldn't cater to, and proposed a large city across the harbour,“ he said.
Although Navi Mumbai remained a dormitory town for many years the state government decided not to move there as planned it has taken off in the past decade. (So much so that the proposed new airport for Navi Mumbai will be exactly where Correa envisaged a lake and office district--something he was reportedly not happy about.) Correa also led the way in looking atpublic transit as a way to structure cities, but that hasn't caught on as it should have, said Phatak.
Perhaps Correa's biggest unrealised dream was his plan for the mill lands that cover almost 600 acres in central Mumbai. In 1996, Correa was tasked with coming up with a plan for the area based on a land-sharing formula between mill owners and the state. He proposed opening out the congested area, enhancing connectivity and creating a “Golden Triangle“ of business around a large park, as well as low-cost housing .
But hope for such holistic development was killed when the govern ment changed the rules , allowing mill owners to keep most of the land.It was a lost opportunity that Correa would call “the tragedy of Tulsi Pipe Road“---“taking urban land with tremendous potential and trashing it for quick profit“.
Correa comes from an age of social architecture, suggests architect Kamu Iyer, a peer and friend. “We were fresh from Independence, and full of idealism,“ said Iyer.
In recent years, though, the concern with planning, social housing and public transport has fallen out of sync with the free-for-all of Mumbai's real-estate market. “Correa opposed what's happening now in Mumbai rampant high-rise development without regard to the surrounding areas, and too much focus on private transport,“ Iyer said.
Yet Correa was also a modernist, who criticsed knee-jerk opposition to development. He called to scrap the Urban Land Ceiling Act and rent control, and amend coastal rules to allow low-rise buildings on the waterfront.In a 1992 Times of India piece, he criticised environmental opposition to a bridge that he felt would ease commutes. “Much of history is the story of interventions,“ he wrote. “Every change causes hurt.“
Correa famously called Mumbai “a great city but a terrible place“. The line describes the city perfectly but also reflects Correa's humanist understading of cities -as more than just a collection of buildings and roads. During the1993 communal riots in Mumbai, Correa warned that plagues and floods could not destroy cities but “what can destroy cities is bigotry and intolerance.“
Mumbai, he wrote then, is “like a marvellous old watch we have inherited, which we have not understood, and which no longer works.“
In my point of view, this is really very well information given about He had visionary ideas for Mumbai, but state govt nixed holistic mill land plan. Thanks for given this well information about this blog.
ReplyDeleteResidential Flats Gurgaon