URL:
http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=74036
Whose city is Delhi, anyway?
Heritage conservation has never been a priority with the powers that be.
But the Capital must not lose its second lung
Srikumar Bondyopadhyay
Chandni Chowk, Delhi’s oldest existing road (built in the 17th century
along with the Red Fort) and once a tree-lined avenue was shorn of its
greenery in 1912 after a bomb was hurled at Viceroy Hardinge.
In 1911, the British government shifted its capital from Calcutta to
Delhi and Old Delhi was to be the temporary capital with the present day
Delhi University building as the Viceroy’s palace. Lord Hardinge was
making his state entry into the new capital through Chandi Chowk when
the bomb was thrown at him. Hardinge escaped the attack. But the
government chopped off all those full-grown trees on either side of the
road for security reasons.
Old Delhi lost its lung and the unrestricted building development that
followed only worsened the habitat conditions in the ‘walled city’.
Over the next 20 years, Edwin Lutyens, the British architect famed as
the grand master of ‘garden architecture’, built the ‘garden capital’ of
New Delhi on 2,800 hectare of land comprising 1,141 bungalows for the
colonial government in India.
Lutyens hated India the most. But his ‘garden capital’, popularly known
as Lutyens’ Bungalow Zone (LBZ), became unique in the world. The
numerous trees that Lutyens had planted before he built the city helped
the temperature of the inner city (LBZ) remain five degree Celcius lower
than the outer city temperature at the peak of the summer.
Today, the city area has spread over 3,00,000 hectare and the LBZ with
its 70-year-old trees lining the wide avenues and boulevards still
provide the much-needed breathing zone for people living in the city.
But after 73 years since Lutyens had built New Delhi (in 1931), the
government bodies are once again raising their axe cutting trees and
demolishing the remaining bungalows to construct modern housing
complexes for politicians, bureaucrats, and other government employees.
The Rome of Asia is on the verge of losing its second lung, too.
But thankfully, late last month the Prime Minister’s Office took
cognisance of the Central Public Works Department’s (CPWD) veered
proposal of clubbing 20-odd bungalows in Lodhi Estate area into a
modern-duplex housing complex for VIPs to start with and extending the
project to 100-odd bungalows presently under government ownership. The
PMO directive categorically states that LBZ can’t be ripped of its
heritage character. The CPWD plan is put on hold at least for another
two years till the Delhi Development Authority’s Master Plan for
Delhi-2021 is brought out.
“The CPWD plan is put on hold, not shelved altogether,” rues Patwant
Singh, a noted conservationist and author. He adds, “Every time a new
government comes at the Centre, the proposal of demolishing the
bungalows to pave way for new housing complex is revived.”
“Only a legislation through Parliament endorsing the LBZ as a heritage
site can prevent this unique ‘garden capital’ from urban decay,”
elaborates A G Krishna Menon, a conservation architect and a member of
the expert committee (heritage) for consultation for the formulating the
city and zonal plans for the Master Plan for Delhi-2021. He adds, “Such
a legislation (declaring LBZ as conservation zone) can be enacted in two
ways—either through the Archaeological Survey of India Act or through a
town planning act. But since LBZ was built after 1920, it can’t be
brought under the ASI’s purview under the existing law. So, the only
option left is bringing it under the town planning, namely, a zonal plan
under the Master Plan for Delhi-2021.”
And according to a DDA official involved in the process of formulating
the Master Plan of Delhi-2021, “Heritage sites in Delhi and the issue of
demarcating the conservation zones is getting a more serious
consideration this time like never before.”
“We have given them (the DDA) a list of 26 heritage zones, including
LBZ, Shahjehanbad and others, in Delhi that need to be conserved and
protected,” says Mr Menon. But how many of them get the ‘conservation
zone’ status in the final plan is yet to be seen.
However, the former chief architect of CPWD and the Lutyens Trust’s
Indian patron, Mansinh M Rana agrees with the Intach’s (Indian National
Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage) conservation architect, AG Krishna
Menon that, of course, there are scope of redevelopment of the
single-storeyed bungalows into duplex ones. Says Mr Rana, “One can’t say
that redevelopment cannot be done. What we are insisting is that
redevelopment should be conservation oriented, that is, without
demolishing the basic architectural character of the bungalows. But what
the CPWD proposed completely violates this. If it (CPWD) had a go, they
would have destructed all the full-grown trees, demolished the
bungalows, erected highrise flats and hence would have changed the
entire skyline of the LBZ.”
The skyline of LBZ has already changed a lot with the tall buildings
such as the office of the State Trading Corporation, the LIC building,
Krishi Bhavan, Le Meridien Hotel, Udyog Bhavan, Shastri Bhavan, Rail
Bhavan, National Archives building, Vayu Bhavan, and others in and
around the Central Vista of the LBZ. In the back lanes of the main
avenues in some places highrise apartment blocks have come up.
Non-government offices in those bungalow blocks which were given to
private ownership by Jawaharlal Nehru have also constructed their
built-to-suit buildings. Whatever is remaining will also fall pray to
rapid urban growth unless protected immediately.
To protect their cities of historical and heritage importance, countries
around the world have put in place a proper legislation in their
respective town planning. In 1990, the municipal government of Vigan,
Philippines, framed an Ordinance demarcating the boundaries of the
oldest surviving Spanish colonial city and later on, in 2000, enacted
the Ordinance for preservation and conservation of the Vigan ancestral
houses. A Master Plan was formulated to relive the historic town for
international tourism.
The Scottish capital, Edinburgh, also has a similar Master Plan in place
protecting the heritage city.
Instances are abundant. Even in India, Hyderabad has enacted laws to
protect the city’s heritage buildings and heritage precincts. And, more
interestingly, the Huda (Hyderabad Urban Development Authority)
regulation, vide Regulation number 12 and 13 in the Huda Zoning
Regulations, 1981, do not specify ‘age’ as the criterion for a building
or place to be ‘heritage’. This, in other words, means that even a
recently constructed building can become a heritage building. The 1981
regulations define ‘heritage precinct’ as the entire area, designated as
such, which is to be conserved in entirety, including the surroundings
and skyline.
The sub-section seven of the regulation states: “...buildings included
in Heritage Precincts shall maintain the skyline in the precinct
(without any high-rise development) as may be existing in the
surrounding area, so as not to diminish or destroy the value and beauty
of the said listed Heritage Precinct.”
In a Notification dated April 30, 2000 (notification number
3023/PR/Huda/2000) the Authority mentions: “The notification of Heritage
Precincts will imply that development proposals, street furniture,
road-widening proposals and outdoor publicity within the Precincts shall
need to be approved by the Huda and HCC (Hyderabad Cultural Council)
before permission is granted by the MCH (Municipal Corporation of
Hyderabad) or other competent authorities.”
Delhi too have a Delhi Urban Art Commission (DUAC) on the lines of HCC.
But in most of the redevelopment instances in the LBZ area, the DUAC so
far has been bypassed. Can’t Delhi learn a lesson, if not from other
foreign cities, from its own country cousin on having a regulation for
preserving and conserving the LBZ and its skyline? The LBZ, anyway, is
the seat of the Union government and the nerve centre of the country.
The problem is that the size and volume of the government has increased
manifold since Mr Lutyens has planned for the city. Where to house
them—the additional government offices and officers? At present, the
pressure per bungalow allotted to Members of the Parliament (MPs) has
increased to 40 persons with each bungalow area housing 5-10 servant
quarters constructed in addition to the original.