Mumbai Discussions

[MeMumbaikar]

Originally Posted by dreadathecontrols

donald trump tower ?

no Donald duck, complete with Huey Duey and Louise and Scooch McDuck and the cast of Duck Tales.....





On the protest, I think its on a building called "vasant sagar" Vasant Sagar plot on 'A' Road, Marine Drive.

and its not that tall from what i know. Its just that it apparently ruins the art deco style.

Edit : oops did not read the article posted by CB and heard it on the news.


It was not a voilent protest. Just signature collection for the time being. They are getting signatures of people who flock to MD during to look at the sunset at the weekends.

[dreadathecontrols]

i guess youre being ironic.
remember im a bit thck so have to have things spelled out simply....

[MeMumbaikar]

I personally dont see what the issue is. Technically its not directly facing the sea. Some of these Churchgate association people really come off as snobs. Land is at a premium in mumbai especially in that area. They keep acting at uptight idiots then other places in mumbai will walk right over them.

[MeMumbaikar]

Marine Drive Skyscraper to retain Art Deco ethos

Redevelopment of Vasant Sagar building at Marine Drive will in no way harm the Art Deco character of the Marine Drive precinct, the developers have assured

Our structure is going to be in tune with the character of the area. We are equally sensitive to the environment and we will ensure to do nothing that will take away beauty from our promenade,” explained Pujit Aggarwal, Managing Director and CEO of Orbit Corporation that has undertaken the construction. He said that the height of the redeveloped building was not going to be extra-ordinary. “Ambassador Hotel, that touches our plot boundary, is a 12 storey building. We have sought a similar height for the building that will have a few floors for parking and a few floors that will be habitable. One must understand that the city needs space badly, which makes the redevelopment of cessed and dangerous buildings absolutely necessary. Keeping this in mind, the law has offered a few provisions that are enshrined in the Development Control rules. This means that if one is developing properties in precincts, the height shall be granted on a practical basis and the decision for the same lies with the authorities,” Aggarwal said. He further added that even the cities like Miami that have Art Deco buildings and elevations had high-rises and were up to 20-storeys in the precincts. “We need to be more practical on this. A handful of residents have complained on the basis of newspaper articles which were not based on facts. Lots of residents from this area want to redevelop buildings here, but can’t do them as it is not financially viable. With no relaxation on height, the society can’t consume the entire FSI that is available to them. How will they then be redeveloped? After all, every structure has a life and most of them in the precincts have outlived theirs,” he said. “At Orbit, we have always been sensitive to the city, its heritage and its character.We have developed buildings in the past that had approval from MHCC. That should illustrate our commitment,” he concluded.

http://www.orbitcorp.com/en/news/abo...eco-ethos.html

[sixsigma1978]

Originally Posted by Cov Boy

HIGH RISE AT MARINE DRIVE

Does anyone know about this high-rise being built at Marine Drive.

Protests are going on to get the development stopped for all good reasons.

I also have to object to this high-rise as it will spoil the charm of Marine Drive low rise Art Deco precinct.

Who is building it and what are proposals, designs, renders etc.

Big B has also made his reservations in his blog.

Source:

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/high-rise...tml?from=blaze

They can keep it as heritage - but spruce it up so you don't see rows of blackened, many-monsoon exposed crumbling low-rises as facades! Besides, I wonder what the definition of "heritage" really is? If a building becomes old - how old does it have to be to be categorized as heritages? There are planty of ugly chawls up for redevelopment - some of them over 70 years old - some low rises in SLUMS are older than the promenade facing buildings - so are the mills - some of them more than a century old!!!
If we decided to keep them all as heritage - we'd be no better than the "salaam bombay" mumbai of yester years!!!

I feel truly historic building should be left alone - identified by historical accuracy of their worth - like its been done in London and New york. Artificially labelling a giant stretch as "heritage" really doesn't work in the long run - for a space-starved city will reclaim the dubious ones - once supply-demand puts too much pressure. This is how all these "redevelopment" and "SRAs" started - might as well get it right!!!

[Bombay Boy]

the individual buildings are not heritage, they can be broken down and redeveloped. but marine drive's look is heritage, so they all have to be the same height and have the same look

wankhede could not get permission for a higher structure, dont see why a private building should get permission. it will stick out like a sore thumb

[MeMumbaikar]

Originally Posted by Bombay Boy

the individual buildings are not heritage, they can be broken down and redeveloped. but marine drive's look is heritage, so they all have to be the same height and have the same look

wankhede could not get permission for a higher structure, dont see why a private building should get permission. it will stick out like a sore thumb

they are talking about making it a similar height to the Ambasador hotel.


Plus i would love to know what the "heritage" group think of renters who pay Rs50 a month and thus dont maintain the buildings.


Wonder how many live in churchgate like that. Rather than targetting a builder maybe they should start a signature campaign for that

[Bombay Boy]

no need to confuse the two issues. heritage regulations dont relate to rent. and no one wants to tackle the rent control issues, especially politicians. it should be resolved as well, but that doesnt mean all heritage regulations should be thrown out of the window

the ambassador hotel was made before heritage regulations were introduced in bombay. you cant pull it down now

[MeMumbaikar]

Originally Posted by Bombay Boy

no need to confuse the two issues. heritage regulations dont relate to rent. and no one wants to tackle the rent control issues, especially politicians. it should be resolved as well, but that doesnt mean all heritage regulations should be thrown out of the window

the ambassador hotel was made before heritage regulations were introduced in bombay. you cant pull it down now

hmm so basically all those renters staying in buildings which are marked as heritage can cant afford to maintain it, what about that?

Both issues are interlinked. The vast majoirty of mumbai's heritage is being fcuked up by these people who cant afford the maintainace.

How many bungalows i have seen in bandra which are in total disarray with people living in them as not paying renters.?


Quite frankly, i dont even like the art deco style. Miami offers great clubs and beaches.

Thats the main tourist attraction.Not freaking art deco.

[dreadathecontrols]

Originally Posted by MeMumbaikar

they are talking about making it a similar height to the Ambasador hotel.


Plus i would love to know what the "heritage" group think of renters who pay Rs50 a month and thus dont maintain the buildings.


Wonder how many live in churchgate like that. Rather than targetting a builder maybe they should start a signature campaign for that

aint no one here who supports rent control, except in san francisco of course where its great.
And u dont like art deco? maan you realy are a happy philistine.
Come to europe and see how good it can be....

[myspacebardontwork]

Tenants don't maintain the buildings. The landlords who get the pittance of a rent are the ones who maintain the buildings. If I were getting a sum total of Rs 500 as rent for a complete building, I wonder if I would renovate a building.

If you notice, there are quite a few buildings on Marine Drive which look really run down, however the top floor will look brand spanking new. Those flats, more often than not, belong to the landlord. Other than a few CHS's, most flats in the area are pagdi.

[Bombay Boy]

ey? doing away with heritage regulations does not solve rent control. if you allow redevelopment with more fsi you just push the problems of rent control to another generation. not to mention overcrowding an already dense area

if you seriously believe that there is no such thing as heritage architecture or vistas and that it does not need to be preserved then this discussion is totally pointless

p.s. you not liking art deco means nothing. heritage regulations are decided by people who know what they are talking about, not any person on the street

[MeMumbaikar]

Originally Posted by Bombay Boy

ey? doing away with heritage regulations does not solve rent control. if you allow redevelopment with more fsi you just push the problems of rent control to another generation. not to mention overcrowding an already dense area

if you seriously believe that there is no such thing as heritage architecture or vistas and that it does not need to be preserved then this discussion is totally pointless

p.s. you not liking art deco means nothing. heritage regulations are decided by people who know what they are talking about, not any person on the street

Heritage regulation were framed in which year? I would like to know that. Is its something lik the 1950s, I am sure that practically that law is out of date.


The reason rent control issue was brought up was rather than harassing the builder it seems that they take care of the biggest issue hindering heritage maintainace. Non paying renters. It seems to me atleast

(a) a big chunk of those protesting against this builder are non paying renters. (or pay a pittance)

(b) they want to stop any development what so ever. Its not even directly facing the sea so what the hell is their problem.



the art deco you talk about would be fine to protect if there was something worth protecting. Myspacebar hit the nail on the head when he said that quite frankly Marine drive looks ugly during the day due to non paying renters.

buildings are not painted for years in many cases, they have big cracks on the side with a lot of greenery growing in them if you know what i mean.


and these snobs are worried about builders building something a little bit higher than the area.

Maybe they should get their priorities right.

PS you free to visit the citiscapes thread. Whatever pics of marine drive during the day, those buildings are not well maintained.

[sixsigma1978]

Good point - thats exactly what I'm getting at! However, there's only one flaw - the people who decided that Marin Drive is "heritage" put in a simple assessment : Since "old" and "colonial" therefore = Heritage.
People LIVING eating shitting inside a "heritage" building is ludicrous! Unlike Old city of Jaipur or even Delhi(sure people live in those- but Pink City norms are VERY strict about tampering with any aesthetics or infrastructure of the heritage street house or building) - Mumbai's heritage is simply an attempt to get a "Heritage" identity - something that's being artificially created!!!

Either declare the entire stretch as a true heritage site - do some acceptable facade improvement to market it as cultural and tourist focal point - or tear it down and turn it into Pudong !!

Ugly buildings with people living in them and the political shenanigans as the ones mentioned around rent, maintainence is making a mockery of the whole thing!

[MeMumbaikar]

^
a good chunk of them are dilapidated dude. Sometimes looking at them i think that they might not even be stable enough for restoration.

[KuwarOnline]

Dont worry, they will goin to collapse in next rain....

[devendra1]

I don't like the so called art deco or pheko buildings at all. It looks out of time. Only few buildings like CST, BMC, or Taj are worth to be called heritage. If I was a mayor I would have ordered for redevelopment of entire area including NP, with min 70 floors height with broad raods. This area is show case of Modern India and we need some really tall buildings there.

[MeMumbaikar]

Originally Posted by devendra1

I don't like the so called art deco or pheko buildings at all. It looks out of time. Only few buildings like CST, BMC, or Taj are worth to be called heritage. If I was a mayor I would have ordered for redevelopment of entire area including NP, with min 70 floors height with broad raods. This area is show case of Modern India and we need some really tall buildings there.

yeah and some of the residents there have their own potted plants which eventually leave a stream of mud when they water it.

Having said that its the same where i live. I guess some people are just too dumb or dont care to realise that it ruins the building.

some art deco.

[Yagya]

Originally Posted by devendra1

I don't like the so called art deco or pheko buildings at all. It looks out of time. Only few buildings like CST, BMC, or Taj are worth to be called heritage. If I was a mayor I would have ordered for redevelopment of entire area including NP, with min 70 floors height with broad raods. This area is show case of Modern India and we need some really tall buildings there.

The amount of ignorance in this comment is just shocking.

[flyinfishjoe]

+1