Questioning neutrality

Even before the first pueblo fire was lit in the LA basin and the first cars arrived in Shanghai, the atmosphere was toast. The dirty yellow glow of Beijing and southern California, although capable of producing beautiful sunsets, stands as a troublesome reminder of an atmosphere in demise. Mere neutrality is not enough. The sheer mass of ineffective and bad building technologies has to be recalibrated and an over-correction applied. We are developing a building that moves beyond itself, and through an act of supererogation, attacks the more global conditions. One building can only have so much of an impact but a collective, that leads by examples and inspires other progressive green thinking, can truly make a difference.

This tower takes an active stance and attacks the problem of dirty air by aiming to help purify the air of our cities. The tower pulls dirt, grease, and bacteria out of the air, producing only oxygen and water as a result. The reaction is triggered by the use of a nano coating of titanium dioxide on the outer skin of the project. The reaction is naturally powered by sunlight acting on the titanium dioxide during the day and supplemented by ultra violet light at night. These UV lights are powered by energy collected through PV panels during the day. The tower will be a glowing indigo object at night varying in intensity according to the amount of solar energy collected during the day. The indigo glow will become symbolic of the cleansing, counteracting the yellow haze that dominates the daytime hours.

The formal design moves of the tower are shaped by basic passive solar ideas, that are amplified in magnitude, by a focused analysis of wind and light. Every twist and pull in the massing is set off by a series of interrelated environmental considerations. The passive solar attributes are enhanced by the additional layer of technological innovation provided by the titanium dioxide. Keeping the technology as simple as possible, we avoid the inherent traps of technological problems by piling on more technological solutions. Currently, we are in direct contact with the mine in the US where the titanium dioxide is harvested, to further our research for any potential detrimental environmental concerns. We realize that the liberating aspects of the technological solution are often tied to the imprisoning traits that follow as a result of the solution.

The tower is split into three bars to 1) increase the amount of surface area, 2) provide southern light to the south face of each bar, and 3) focus and increase wind speed. The added surface area allows for maximizing the amount of titanium dioxide that can be placed on the building—enhancing the amount of air being cleaned. The focused and increased winds speeds not only power a series of vertical wind turbines, but also pushes the air across the titanium dioxide panels and provides cross ventilation for every room of each unit in the towers. A positive pressure is created on the southern face of the towers and the resulting negative pressure on the northern facades creates optimal conditions for cross ventilation. A series of wind turbines are mounted on bridges connecting the three towers. The air flow is compressed and directed by the form of the building to generate maximum wind pressure at the location on the turbines. The bridges are all two-story spaces, each containing a small garden to help mitigate the buildings internal humidity levels. The units are also two stories to reduce the amount of elevator stops needed for the building while creating a natural separation between living and sleeping. Each unit has both north and south facing facades to take advantage of the beneficial light and heat gain potential. The east and west facades have minimal glazing to neutralize low-angled and uncontrollable light.

The skin design is inspired by the pocketed and cellular texture of the titanium dioxide molecule (TiO2). A series of organic cells cover the building and are tapered to naturally collect the water, a byproduct of the skins chemical reaction, and to collect and slowly release rain water. The skin pulls off of the building on the south facades to provide natural shading and pushes into the inner skin of the north façade to maximize daylight and provide a 50% coverage to reduce heat loss during the winter months. The skin also floats off the building to conceal the UV lights which can be harmful to humans who are directly exposed to it, and further maximizes the building’s envelope.

A series of gardens are located at regular intervals all the way up the tower. They become public gathering spaces as well as marsh lands to collect the water from the chemical reactions of the skin and to filter and process grey water from the towers. The plants also turn the carbon dioxide, created in the chemical reaction of the skin, back into oxygen. It is paramount to have the plants help maintain the base-level carbon neutrality. A large pool around the base of the tower is the final collection point of the filtered water which goes to support a large amount of animal and plant life. Water is also pumped back up the towers from the pool to service toilets. Furthermore, the pool at the base acts as a heat sink for the release of the heat generated from a back-up air conditioning system. Here, the heat is released slowly, thus helps reduce the heat island effect.

We also propose the use of self-cleaning windows and bathroom tiles, which are available in the market for more than a decade. Scientists have been working on a solution on developing a “smart coating material” which can wash away dirt and keep the surface clean. However, it is not sufficient for the rapid urbanization we face. The ultimate challenge is how we can destroy the molecules of the pollutants, including nitrogen oxides, which are mainly the effects of heavy industries and automobile emissions.

The density of our large cities brings the additional complication of transmittable disease. The nano material we propose can also be used on internal hallways, trash rooms, and elevators to remove or reduce bacterial agents. In an age of globalization with more potent infectious diseases, a building that can help neutralize bacteria within itself, can help curb infection rates. SARS and now H1N1 have demonstrated to us that our buildings are not ready. A sanitized walk-off mat is simply not going to prevent the next global pandemic. The air streams that blow out of each individual unit, as a result of cross ventilation, are designed to disperse the contaminated air away from the building and prevent back flow into adjacent units.

With the advancement on today’s nanotechnology, scientists can now modify and enhance the coating technology on building facade panels for incorporating the light activated nano titanium dioxide (TiO2). The TiO2 based photocatalysts can trigger a series of chemical reactions to generate hydroxyl radicals when exposed to sunlight or ultraviolet (UV) light.  The artificial near-UV light source will give the maximum power on the photocatalyst reaction. These radicals will oxidize and degrade most of the airborne urban pollutants such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or nitrogen oxides. They can even assist in deactivation of bio-contamination. This technology can make any surface anti-bacterial and mold-free. It can purify our ambient air and protect our buildings from bio-aerosol contamination.

The building is a explorative exercise aimed at taking full advantage of passive solar technique carefully married with the benefits of a titanium dioxide skin. The location of the project is set in Qingdao, China where we have some developers interested in furthering the research. Profitability will play a key role amongst investors in the shift towards our sustainable solution. We believe that coming out of a global recession, the consumer will be looking for a stable investment. The choice between purchasing a residential unit with a positive environmental attitude and not, will hopefully become a simple one. To get the product to market, significant tax breaks will be needed to help secure the positive direction the developers and consumers are looking for. Such architecture should be backed by progressive policy.

Indian cities are traditionally low-rise cities.  Tall by its very nature wants to stand out. As a result, tall needs to be a deliberate and mindful exercise that is respectful to the vernacular ethos of the place and contribute to the vitality of street life.

Historic photograph of Kalbadevi Road, a uniquely Indian street shaped by contextual buildings designed for Indian climate, Indian people — and their customs and preferences.

The character and setting of Kalbadevi Road and buildings are specifically designed for the location.  The street is a shared space where pedestrian, trams, and other forms other forms of transportation coexist. The buildings and its openings are designed for the Indian climate, customs, and individual preferences.  Ground floor is commercial uses with residences above.  For residential uses at the street level there is a semi-public court or verandah in the front before you access the more private areas.  The windows extend from the floor to the ceilings. The openings in the facade offer a variety of permutations for personal comfort.  Indian families sit on the floor.  The bottom panel when opened allows cool breeze and views when the person is sitting on the floor.  The central panel has louvers for shade and privacy.  The top panel allows light into the deeper areas of the rooms and when opened ventilates the hot air out of the rooms.

Context gives us high-quality buildings and streets that work together in harmony to create a place that is open, inclusive, and has a unique identity.  Paying attention to the context of an area ensures that new development reinforces rather than undermines local community.

Tall Buildings Characteristics

A tall building reaching for the sky is the most potent and visible symbol of success. Just as well-designed tall buildings can be standalone landmarks, unattractive and badly designed tall buildings will not blend in easily and harm the image of the city.  Without public design review and decent development codes the risk of bad architecture is great.

Tall buildings in urban setting can be efficient use of land — they pack more people on less land and preserve open spaces and farms that supply local food to the cities. However, tall buildings can also perpetuate social segregation and isolation, much like a vertical gated community.

A common damaging aspect of the tall building is how it meets the streets — blank walls and security gates destroy the street life.

The simple strategy with tall buildings is to take maximum advantage of the benefits while addressing the concerns.

Indian Context: Average Population Density

The density in Mumbai, Hyderabad, Bangalore is amongst the most populated cities in the world.  However, this density has largely been accommodated in low to mid-rise buildings. One reason for this is because Indian cities have the lowest floor space index (FSI), in the world. Besides being low, the FSI is also uniform.

Reform FSI

Ill-conceived FSI are a major hindrance to tall buildings.  The FSI should be a range, not an absolute number. To access the higher FSI range, developers should mitigate the impacts and provide needed amenities.

Rather than waiting for another 20 years for rail and metro that we need today, the FSI can be increased to 15-20 at transit stops with the developers contributing to the rail and metro network, while in other sensitive areas the increase may be a modest 1 to 2.5 FSI.

FSIs are also poor predictor of building form.  A FSI of 1 can produce a one story perimeter block building or a 12 story tall building.  FSI is a poor predictor of urban form and is a serious impediment to contextual development.

Contextual Tall Buildings.

Mediocre tall buildings that fail to connect with the context disillusion the public appetite for tall — less is better when it fails to make a positive contribution to the quality of life of the area.

There are five factors that make a tall building contextual.

1. Tall Building Strategy

To be contextual tall must be part of an overall tall building strategy.  The city’s skyline should be viewed as its topography.  A single tall building has high image value and is easier to insert at various locations in the city, the intensification from a single tall building is relatively low.  Clusters of tall buildings achieve more intensification but may be appropriate only in few areas. Each city needs a unique tall building strategy based on local context.

Recent tall buildings were threatening to replace the historic buildings in Old Town Foshan, China. Old town has the 900 year old temple and excellent examples of ling nan architecture.  The character defining features of this style are curved gables, stone walls, courtyards, and dense alleys. The height of buildings around the temple are limited — so when you are on the temple grounds you will not see the taller buildings.

The taller buildings are located along the transit line in clusters to minimize impact.  The master plan creates urban hill and valley forms. The temple and old town are the valley and the higher density development represents the hills that increase in height with increased distance from the historic area.  This layout provides sunlight and views for the new developments, while preserving the light and views for the historic areas.

2. Response to Climate Monsoon Window

Monsoon window detailing in Singapore (right) adapted from traditional home in Dyak (left). The window allows fresh air and keeps out rain and wind gusts. Images courtesy of WOHA Designs and Tim Griffith.

Vernacular architecture can teach us common sense solutions to climate. The Dyak Longhouses in Borneo have horizontal openings below projecting ledges, which allows the cool breeze to come in while keeping the monsoon rain out.  WOHA Architects adopted this vernacular response to climate into the high-rise form.  Designing buildings for local climate not only conserve energy but also give the building a unique identity.

To reduce heat gain, a perforated skin on the south facade fully shades the facade and conceals the air conditioning units, clothes drying area, and horizontal sun shading ledges.

3. Individual Preferences

People buy apartments as off the shelf products — with very limited opportunity to customize the space to individual preferences and needs. The window openings in the Kalbadevi Road buildings in Mumbai allow residents to customize the use of space to maximize comfort.

In Moulmein Rise, Singapore, the overhangs, planters, bay windows, sliding windows and sunscreens, can be rearranged to suit personal comfort of the residents. Image courtesy of WOHA Designs

Similarly, in tall building individuals should be allowed to customize and rearrange the overhangs, planters, bay windows, and sunscreen in myriad ways to suit individual preferences.  Designing tall buildings to respond to local preferences, customs, and needs makes the building contextual

4. Community Spaces & Nature

Indian cities have the lowest open space per person ratio in the world.  Tall buildings have a particularly important role to address this need because they add more people without adding to open spaces. Sky parks and landscaping adds visual cues of scale for residents in a tall building.  Sky parks also act as social spaces addressing alienation.

5. Street Level Impact

Left: Traditional mid-rise buildings line up to create a continuous street wall.  Center: Tall buildings sit as freestanding objects in a plaza or parking lot. Right: Preferred configuration where tall buildings are placed on a contextual base that preserves the street wall with publicly accessible activity at the street level.  Above the base, the tower can be individual creative expressions of design.  Images courtesy of Urban Advantage.

Traditional mid-rise buildings line up to create a continuous street wall that supports an active street life.

In contrast, tall buildings sit as freestanding objects in a plaza or parking lot.   The plazas are dark and desolated spaces that compromise street life.  In many cases, the street level walls, gates and guards provides a grim reminder of the exclusive nature.

A preferred configuration is where tall buildings are placed on a human scaled contextual base that preserves the street wall with publicly accessible activity at the street level.  Above the base, the tower can be individual creative expressions of design.

Public Sector

The public sector has limited resources to do it all by themselves.  They should partner with private sector, NGOs and citizens to develop a clear vision for growth, preservation and redevelopment.  The public sector should  reduce regulatory barriers and create a culture of growth.  Offering a streamlined development review and approval process saves time to do other the few and important things well.

Growth should pay for itself.  Tall buildings should be self-sustaining and not depend on taxpayer funds to provide affordable housing, infrastructure improvements, network of mobility options, public amenities and maintenance. The public sector has to determine needs for each area and set up a developer impact fee system to fund onsite improvements. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) can fund off-site improvements. In TIF, the developer up-fronts the cost of infrastructure and gets refunded from the increment in taxes generated from new development. Continued maintenance can be funded by the creation of public-private partnerships.

Form-based codes

The Form-Based Code include a Regulating Plan (a map of the streets and open spaces where different building envelope standards apply); Building Envelope Standards (regulations controlling the configuration, features, and functions of buildings that define and shape the public realm); Architectural Standards —including building materials and architectural detailing—that are important to the quality and character of a vibrant new downtown; and Street Type Standards (specifications for the elements within the public realm such as sidewalks, travel lanes, on-street parking, street trees, and street furniture).

Form-based codes (FBC) make the good easy to build. This type of development regulations produces predictable built results and a superior public realm by using physical form as the organizing principle. FBCs are graphic-based codes that allow the public to visualize in advance the form and location of the streets, buildings, and open spaces leading to a higher comfort level with taller buildings.  FBCs require far less discretionary review and process, which saves everyone time, money and effort.

Aim Higher

Indian cities have over 50% of its population living in substandard, illegal or unsafe housing. In addition, Indian cities are projected to add several million people. Taller buildings are going to be necessary. Where and how we grow are important considerations.

There is no need to build tall. Tall needs to be a deliberate and planned strategy that delivers more efficiency in land use and innovative contextual design.  Indian cities have rich and long history.  The existing buildings give the place an anchor and identity. India has for ages adapted to changes in a sustainable manner and can show the world how to integrate tall contextually.

While other places clamor to stand out, amongst this noise, India can stand out as an example of how to blend tall buildings into an existing context.

Alain Bertaud is an urban planner with over 30 years experience and has worked in America, Europe, and Asia. After retiring from the World Bank as a Principal Urban Planner, he has been working as a consultant for the World Bank and other private organizations. Over his 20 years of service with the World Bank, he participated in the design and appraisal of large urban infrastructure and housing projects. His most recent work involves advising municipalities in land use and land regulatory issues in relation to land markets.

What are the fundamental mistakes we have made while building our
cities?

A weak municipal corporation with little taxable power has translated to a substandard infrastructure. The lack of modern infrastructure in Indian cities is not due to lack of resources but because of a weak municipal administration. One of the main problems is absence of strong mayors with a term long enough to carry through a project. Also, too many cities are dependent on the state legislature for decisions concerning their regulations and I believe it is critical for these decisions to be made at a local level. We also see layers of absurd regulations which have accumulated over the years that have never been repelled although everybody admits these regulations have never met their objectives. The Urban Land Ceiling Act is one good example of this tendency.

Another inclination of keeping the FSI low in the centre of the city to prevent congestion has been negative seeing that it creates shortage of floor space where it is the most needed. As a result, today middle class Indians have to live in much smaller and uncomfortable dwellings than they would if the regulations on FSI were changed. The lack of investment in infrastructure has often been a pretext to justify a low FSI. But it is important to realise that development creates an economy to fund infrastructure.
2. What are the critical problems that have confronted Indian urban development? What can be done about it now?
In summary, it would be an inefficient and often unaccountable administration that has prevented for over 50 years an otherwise dynamic and enterprising private sector from building the modern cities that would be expected in an enterprising country like India.
Some of the steps to create better cities are by empowering and making the city authorities accountable. Ideally, cities should be able elect mayors for at least 2 terms of 4 years with wide powers. An elected city council should have wide taxation and spending power and regulatory power for land use. India should also review all the obsolete regulations and repeal the ones which have no clear objectives or have failed. It is important to make major investments in infrastructure with possibly transfer of capital from the centre and the possibility for cities to issue bonds to finance their infrastructure. Bonds can be guaranteed by tolls and taxes established by the new mayor and city council.

3. How would you define an ideal city?
My idea of ideal is pretty down to earth. It is a city where a very large number of people can move about back and forth with the maximum comfort and minimum friction. A city where, in each and every home – the water flows when you open a tap or light turns on when you push the switch. I envisage a city where the poor can find modest shelter on their own without government intervention, in many areas of the city, with basic services like water electricity, sewer, health and education. It would be a city where business wants to locate because the regulations are clear, decisions can be taken rapidly, and because there is a large educated manpower eager to work.

4. What are your thoughts on urbanization in Bangalore?
In Bangalore the dynamic private sector selected the only viable short term solution to be able to operate efficiently: to create high tech “campuses” in the periphery of the city, which are in fact large privately, run gated communities completely independent from the municipal corporation. While it was the best solution to get the IT industry developing rapidly it has not been good for the spatial structure of city of Bangalore itself, as it has created a polycentric city with some glamorous suburbs but a continually decaying inner core.

5. What are your thoughts on high density development?

High densities and high FSI are necessary for Indian cities to be able to maintain an efficient network of public transport. If urban transport has to rely on 2 or 3 wheelers or private cars the amount of pollution and congestion due to transport will be unbearable.


6. What are your thoughts on the transportation needs for our cities today?
On a macro level, to make urban transport work, it is necessary to revise the regulations which are distorting the urban structure of Indian cities. It is important to invest in rehabilitating the historical core of cities. The city can then handle the congestion through investment in public transport. One needs to push a high FSI in the centre and a low one in the suburbs (the opposite of what is happening now). Metro is not necessarily the best solution; dedicated bus ways can be a more efficient strategy in some cases. In Bangalore, unless the city centre is rehabilitated (through higher FSI) public transport will never work. The IT campuses are dispersing employment in the suburbs. And for suburb to suburb trips road travel is more efficient than public transport.

photo credit: xurde

At another extreme, newspapers are filled with inner-city redevelopment schemes that tout tall buildings, wide streets, and over 50% of green space in areas where little or no open space exists today.

What’s not to like about the private amenities, iconic buildings, and generous percentage of green space?  After all this is what the public aspires for and wants. There is nothing wrong with a rich private realm.  The same richness should also extend into the public realm.  The public realm that is defined by the private buildings and the design of public streets and the open space.

Buildings designed as icons in the landscape fail to spatially define a place.  Traditionally, buildings in the urban core line up to create a continuous street wall that supports an active street life.  In stark contrast, contemporary tall buildings sit as freestanding icons in green buffers or parking lots.   The open spaces are left over, dark and desolated spaces that does little more than add distance between the buildings and compromise a coherent street life.  Contemporary buildings should be placed on a human scaled contextual base that preserves the street wall with publicly accessible activity at the street level.  Above the base, the tower can be iconic creative expressions of design.

Streets designed solely to move traffic is a no-win proposition that are destroying many wonderful places in urban cities.  Peak demand will always outpace supply.  Flyovers and grade-separated skywalks progressively create unpleasant places at the street level and in relatively short time they too exceed capacity and fail to satisfy the driver or the pedestrian.  In urban cities, transit and pedestrian experience should trump driver’s comfort.

Open spaces when provided as abstract and numerical computations by individual projects seldom come together to promote communal life.  If we dig deeper and start to evaluate the functional types of open spaces, we can design these spaces for its intended purpose, whether it is a small pocket park, a large community green, an urban plaza, or a square.  These spaces can begin to serve as organizing elements for individual development.  Studies have shown that units that front open spaces generate a 25% premium sale and rental price.

In the past, loss of open space meant a gain of urbanism.  With each new development the city progressively became a better place to live.  The same cannot be said of development today — with each development the city gets slightly worse than before — the public realm gets compromised, and the infrastructure is more strained than before.  Walls, gates, and guards have become common responses to the public realm.

The development proposals at the real estate exhibition in Mumbai and the scores of redevelopment schemes have their share of iconic buildings and these buildings sit within meticulously landscaped areas — some proudly gated and guarded against the public realm.  Twisted, warped, and turned in every way humanly possible, these buildings may be great as icons but collectively they cannot sit next to each other and deliver great urban places.  These buildings are buffered from each other by landscaped areas so their architects can design in perfect freedom from its context.  Everyone likes landscaping — landscaping ends up covering the inadequacy to design an urban building that will create or add to a place. Sadly, these projects are now being marketed as eco- green- or landscape-urbanism.

Vibrant urban cities are the most climate-friendly human proposition to house the growing population.  If we neglect the public realm we impair a key reason why people live together in urban areas.  New- and re-development schemes that heal and reinforce the public realm is good business and good for the city and the environment.

The essence of an era or culture is often captured by the human imagination concisely in the form of architecture. As a century progresses, architecture increasing carries the burden of cultural expectation as a potent symbol of place – be it a neighbourhood, city or even a whole country to the future world. Here is a look at urban skylines of the century that distinctly portrays the technologic prowess; capitalistic and social values of the modern world.

New York, USA

photo credit: S J Pinkney

New York City has come to become the one of grandest and the most recognizable symbols of the  new world order. Its skyline is made out of a number of distinct skyscrapers with a variety of architectural styles in extremely dense clusters. Surrounded mostly by water, New York’s urban density and extremely high real estate values hold the record of having a set of 44 skyscrapers within the span of just 200 meters- the highest in the world. The Manhattan skyline is the famous for the now destroyed World Trade Center Towers, the Empire State building, The Chrysler building , Rockefeller Center,  the Statue of Liberty and the United Nations Tower. The proposed “Freedom Tower” (to be built on the old site of the World Trade Centers) with its revolutionary design concept is set to rewrite and add to the history books of contemporary world.

Shanghai, China

photo credit: nicolasrollier

The emerging economic powerhouse of the world illustrates the transfer of influence from west to the east. The Chinese city has become a play ground of the big name star architects of the world, ensuring that the city is at the forefront of progressive architecture and innovation. Its skyline is especially distinctive because of the Pearl TV Tower which seems like a Skyrocket topped with giant ball or perhaps a Space needle with satellite dish.

London, UK

photo credit: garryknight

London city has a fantastic mix of the old and the new. The lofty dome of St. Paul’s Cathedral, the giant chimney of the Tate Modern and the reconstruction of Shakespeare’s quaint Globe Theatre and The British Museum are some major highlights. London’s fundamental low-rise nature makes skyscrapers like One Canada Square and its neighbours at Canary Wharf and the BT Tower seem very prominent. The Millennium Bridge, the striking Millennium Dome next to the Thames ,the Swiss Re Headquarters are the newer landmarks has reinvented part of the London skyline.

Tokyo, Japan

photo credit: -ratamahatta-

The world most populated city has the eminence of being home to some 15 structures that are over 200 meters tall. Due to the incredible density and vast size of the city, every bend seems to have its individual skyline. The city’s height restrictions and the required red lights that flash atop all mid to tall-sized buildings make the city look spectacular at night. One of the city’s most famous landmarks is the Tokyo Tower which changes colors every night

Chicago ,USA

photo credit: n3m01983

The origins of the modern skyscraper can be traced back to Chicago. The first skyscraper ever built was created here in the late 1880’s. Chicago has 17 buildings over 200 meters tall. The windy city also has some of the finest mid-century architecture and examples of modern skyscrapers including the likes of Sears Tower, the Aon Center, and the John Hancock Center.

Hong Kong, China

photo credit: Michael Malz

Hong Kong has whopping 39 buildings over 200 meters tall. It also boasts four of the 15 tallest buildings in the world. The city has a stunning set of spiralling skyscrapers in an assortment of revolutionary architecture. The mountain backdrop makes its skyline more awe inspiring.

Dubai, United Arab Emirates

photo credit: attawayjl

The city’s patrons commission some of the most flamboyant modern architecture in the world. The Dubai skyline boasts of the world’s tallest all-hotel building and the tallest all-residential building in the world. Burj Khalifa , the tallest building in the world is the magnificent centerpiece of Downtown Dubai

Sydney, Australia

photo credit: bernardoh

The city’s world-famous harbour is adorned with the monumental Harbour Bridge, and the iconic Opera House. It has hundreds of skyscrapers (including has 8 buildings over 200 meters tall) in the central business district and many more high-rise buildings in the outlying neighbourhoods.

Singapore

photo credit: axa!

Singapore has one the most meticulously planned urban forms. Its regular building height and space pattern makes this skyline unique seeming almost artificial. The buildings are mostly light-coloured and there is a large expanse of greenery dotted around the city core.

Toronto, Canada

photo credit: jbcurio

Toronto has 7 structures in its skyline that stand at over 200 metres, including the amazingly tall 553 metres, CN Tower, which is often referred to as the tallest freestanding structure in the world. The CN Tower possesses the world’s highest observation deck, making the city’s skyline distinctive.

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

photo credit: mroach

Kuala Lumpur has three of the 25 tallest buildings worldwide. The city is home to a marvellous collection of modern skyscrapers and the twin Petronas Towers are its most identifiable landmark.

photo credit: ranavikas

I believe Mumbai is one of the greatest cities in the world.  It works well and inspires its citizens to work productively because of the way it is built. Mumbai as compared to any city in India has the maximum proportion of people who use public transport or walk to work which are  fundamental components of any good city.

So where and why have we failed inspite of Mumbai having all the essential ingredients to make a livable city and inspite of having a great entrepreneurial flair amongst our people.  Below are some of the causes:

• Slums were convenient to permit as it created a large source of unofficial income.  Indiscriminate declaration of NDZs and the Urban Land Ceiling Act made even private landlords queue up their lands to slum lands.  Housing supply was completely bottled up by severe and draconian laws.

• It is well known that India has the most complex and venal bureaucracy, definitely the worst in Asia when it comes to bureaucracy for conducting business.  Making India one of the most difficult places in the world to do business. This has ailed the Financial Capital too.

• We then failed to extend our metro rail system to create a grid which spreads throughout the city instead of only on a north south axis.

• We did not make adequate provision of additional roads considering that Mumbai has a lower percentage of road area as a percentage of its land mass than is the norm.

• We also did not create new public spaces and allowed the few we have to be encroached or disfigured.

What can we do to make Mumbai a sustainable and livable city?

1)    The solution to Mumbai’s future is to make it more vibrant.  Lutyens Delhi and Chandigarh are not example to be replicated.  What are we trying to emulate?   We are not a Monaco or a Mahableshwar or a Saint Tropez.  Isolated  pockets of developments on the outskirts of a city will only create colonies which are more like asylums.  You can have an isolated development as an escape from a busy city life.  But we cannot live and work in such places unless we want to create a huge private automobile connecting infrastructure.

2)    The city must grow organically outwards with 200 acre neighbourhood pods in places like Navi Mumbai and Vasai where today because of zoning, dormitory type developments have come up.

3)    We need to reduce the dependence on private automobiles within the city.  The streets of great cities like New York or London are full of taxes and buses. We must pursue that model of a walkable and a mass transit driven city

4)    We need a grid network of Metro Trains.

5)    We need to have roads with 3 to 5 M footpaths/ Pedestrian watys which are un-encroached.

6)    We need to provide enough incentives and remove bottlenecks to resolve the housing crisis.

7)    We need to provide s for public car parking and reduce private car parking in buildings.

There is a lot to be done at the nitty-gritty level but the city also need developments which can make a significant impact and also raise resources.

We need to create new development with large public places for example in

1)    Development of the Dock lands.  Anyone driving pass can see it a miserable place full of filth and lying under unutilized.  Only 2% of the cargo arriving at the port is meant for the city.

2)    Use the land between Cuffe Parade and Nariman Point to create a most scenic and colourful waterfront district of the city with a harmonious mix of developments.  Other waterfront areas of the city need also to be developed with large public spaces.

3)    Barrage a portion of the Ulhas River at two ends so that it could be converted into a new fresh water lake.  This has been done at the Marina Bay in Singapore.

That said, one cannot help but question the viability of such tall structures in Indian cities. There is an ongoing debate about the design and efficiency of the tall structures world over and especially in Mumbai.

How does having a tall structure help an Indian city like Mumbai? There are some obvious answers to this question like smaller building foot print, high density, augmented use of the urban resources and a possibility of use of height for producing alternative energy like wind, solar etc (though the idea is at an experimental stage). The arguments against tall structures are that they are known to be energy hoggers. High energy requirement for mechanical ventilation and conveyance required by tall structures seem difficult to meet when Indian cities are prone to power outages. Also the urban infrastructure in India needs to undergo a major revamp to support high densities and high floor space indices. With such opinions and some more I had the opportunity to have an open discussion with an Indian born Architect in New York. Mr. Sudhir Jambhekar, FAIA, RIBA, LEED AP, is a Senior Partner in FXFOWLE Architects, an International firm based in New York City, with additional offices in Washington, DC, and Dubai.

Mr. Sudhir Jambhekar, FAIA, RIBA, LEED AP, is a Senior Partner with FXFOWLE Architects

Mr Jambhekar heads the International studio at FXFOWLE and has been responsible for design and execution of quite a few tall structures around the world. His experience includes working with I.M.Pei, a partnership in Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates (KPF) and co-founding practise, Jambhekar Strauss, which later merged with FXFOWLE. Mr. Jambhekar has also been honoured as a Fellow by the American Institute of Architects, and as a Fellow of the Urban Design Institute of America.

The discussion that followed was a very intriguing one. I wanted to discuss and revisit some of the basics of tall building design and Mr. Jambhekar, with his experience of designing tall structures around the world, was the right person to have a conversation with. He had graciously agreed to meet with me and I will share a part of the discussion ‘as is’ with the readers.

Aditi: FXFOWLE has been working on tall structures in India, China and Middle East. You have been part of a few of them. How do you anticipate the effect of tall structures on urbanization of India? The urban infrastructure in India is already stressed; do you think the addition of tall structure to the urban fabric of city like Mumbai is feasible or there can be other solutions that we are not considering?

Jambhekar: I believe in density. Human beings are social animals and it is unnatural for them to be living out of the cities-in isolated areas. Also, when we promote living outside the city there is pressure on the land, urban resources and the environment. We must optimize the already existing urban infrastructure for more sustainable futures for us. In a Mumbai the tall buildings or the high density living is going to be the way forward. The relation between demand and supply in Mumbai’s real estate market is such that the city will have to think about accommodating high number of people on a smaller land mass. People are negatively opinionated on the viability of tall structures and the reason often given is that the infrastructure in Mumbai is not efficient enough to sustain them. It is a compelling logic to a certain extent but improvement in the infrastructure of Mumbai for it to become a prominent and successful city is inevitable. The world cities like London, New York and Beijing have one thing in common and that is efficient and workable infrastructure and more importantly excellent public transport system. Their systems efficiently transport large number of commuters from point A to point B without many delays, glitches or overcrowding. This allows dense cities to confidently grow further through high rise structures. Mumbai needs this type of confidence to address its need of space.  Another concept that I think will help in developing and utilizing density to our advantage is high Floor Space Index (FSI). Today on an average Mumbai has an FSI of 1 to 2, where as if we look at Manhattan the Average FSI is 18 and with bonuses this FSI can go up to 21. If the FSI can be increased and higher average can be achieved in Mumbai, hopefully habitation requirements of Mumbai can be eased.

Aditi: If we talk about tall Mumbai, we cannot ignore that Floor Space Index (FSI) does form a very important design parameter .In my experience it promotes skewed thinking in designers as every developer wants to maximize the FSI.  From an experienced designers perspective do you think there can be creative alternatives for FSI?

Jambhekar: I don’t think FSI is controlling factor in design. All it does it limits the building bulk, in terms of square footage. Other zoning regulations like set back lines or sky planes become more constrictive. For example, what is happening in Mumbai is that the authorities relentlessly demand that each building has to have setbacks on all sides, it does not matter how tall the proposed building is. Therefore each site becomes a box having an object within itself. Now if we compare the sites in Mumbai to sites in New York City, there is no such regulation in Manhattan and as the result the buildings are lined along the roads .They are connected and we have continuous retail store fronts like at Madison Avenue. Under present regulations there cannot be a Madison Avenue in Mumbai. For the liveability of a city we need public spaces where people can walk comfortably. These spaces create an environment of amenities, stores, colleges, and museums etc., which in turn contribute to the quality of life. Regulations like setbacks prohibit such public spaces. These regulations create building dots in the cityscape which are not connected and thus create spaces in between those building dots which are inhabitable. I am not saying every city should be like New York but you can borrow tried and tested ideas and design spaces adaptable to Mumbai.  Around the world, like in London, New York, Shanghai etc. cities are pleasurable when they are walkable. In Mumbai itself the British designed walkable streets like D.N road and Ballard Pier but sadly these notions of urbanism have not been carried out in the newer parts of the city.

Aditi: The trendy modern tall structures we design have a contextual significance. As architects designing tall structures we try to create landmarks for commercial success of a building. In a city like Mumbai, high density is seen as the possible way to solve its rapid urbanization. In such a scenario, if all buildings become tall and iconic in Mumbai, how do you think we can control the aesthetics, do you think the iconic designs will matter then?

Jambhekar: A tough question; Girgaon area developed in the 19^th century as trader settlements. Here future redevelopment is inevitable since the land value sky rocketed. It will be a great idea to create an overall vision for the area having some research based contextual constraints. Then the development for the whole or part of the area could be undertaken according to this vision. I wish this had been done for past redevelopments as well. In city planning if the designers and developers think about these visions, the developments can be more connected to the surroundings. I believe that any project, if has successfully merged with the fabric of the city, everyone involved in its design has succeeded. The owners succeeded because they have contributed to the city, the users succeeded because they can enjoy the development and the surroundings and society succeeded because their quality of life has improved. Ideally that’s what needs, to happen. In our office we quote a famous saying ‘If you think of a chair, think of  the room , if you think of the room ,think of the house , if you think of the house think of the neighbourhood and if you think of the neighbourhood , think of the city’. This big picture thinking is needed for a Mumbai. On the note of aesthetics, I remember, in one of the lectures Mr. Balkrishna Doshi, upon showing a slide of slum asked the audience ‘who are we to judge if this is right or wrong?’  So point being made was that aesthetics can be very subjective and as designers and planners we have to allow for that.

Aditi: Have you designed buildings that are creating and using alternative energy and has height of tall structures been of any advantage for that?

Jambhekar: I don’t know if height helps in creating/ using alternative energy or not but we have certainly used these alternatives in our designs. LEED has these X- numbers of categories and the two most important categories are energy conservation and indoor air quality.  When you deal with tall buildings most of them essentially need mechanical systems to regulate ventilation as opposed to the naturally ventilated buildings. So, by nature they demand more energy. In India if you are doing a housing project, there is no need for centrally conditioning the air. Depending upon where you are in the country, one can chose to use air conditioning in residences. It is different in the office buildings, there you need mechanical ventilation and so there you need to think of alternative ways of looking at either conserving or producing energy.  At FXFOWLE we have done it in many ways like geo thermal, solar, wind etc. We also try to efficiently manage water like in Riyadh we have designed buildings for water conservation but in Mumbai rain water harvesting is important and we designed to address that .

Aditi: Growing up in Mumbai and living in New York, I have noticed that there is a distinct difference in tropical living and temperate living. Tropical living that is how we live in India; is more outward looking.  We like to take a stroll in the evening all year long, know our neighbours and most of us live in some sort of community. We celebrate festivals like Ganpati, Navratri, Durga Pooja, and Diwali on our streets which transform them into public spaces.  The temperate living on the other hand is more inward looking.  In New York because of the harsh and extreme climate people don’t go out as much. After work, on weekdays people stay at home with their families and plan their outings only on weekends. The high rise designs typologies that are emerging work very well in temperate conditions.  Don’t you think high rises will have a huge cultural impact on the way we live in India?  Can you think of design solutions which can accommodate these cultural habits or nuances?

Jambhekar: There is surely a distinct difference in how we live in India as compared to elsewhere. I don’t think the cultural habits can change so easily though. Today the vertical transit systems are such that the travel time is not much. The new elevators can travel about 160 – 170 foot per second. The total time frame of travel even in tallest buildings is negligible, so people talking stroll will still go out as per their routine, but there is another way of dealing with these nuances.  There is a trend of cluster development that is emerging. Steven Hall has recently designed high rise structure in China called Linked Hybrid. It plays on similar ideas and has created urban links in sky. Even with our work at FXFOWLE we have created common spaces within the tall buildings to deal with social isolation.

My take away from the discussion was that whichever stand we take, tall structures in high growth cities of India are rapidly becoming a reality.  Though there are very rational and compelling reasons for us to build tall structures, we need to customize their designs according to our Indian sensibilities. To promote a tall structure or not is soon becoming just an academic dialogue while Indian cities are leaping forward with an ambition of becoming the next Shanghai. As designers developing proposals for this metamorphosis of our cities we have to make sure that we equip our tall structures for a sustainable future.

Hydroponics, a technology for soil-less farming of fresh vegetables, herbs, fruits and flowers in a specially formulated nutrient-mix substrate, is now ripe for use in back-yard, roof-top, greenhouse, and commercial farming. The practice has been around for a number of decades, but recent innovations have allowed this technology to grab the discerning eye of green-tech entrepreneurs and venture capitalists. The value proposition is abundantly clear, especially in land and soil deprived urban areas. It is a mode of agriculture that does not need soil and hence can be practiced just about anywhere with the right tools, that needs 90% less water than soil irrigation, that can grow in-demand non-native produce, that can grow them faster with significantly higher yields and therefore revenues, that can be productive on a year-round basis, that is less prone to soil borne diseases and micronutrient deficiencies, that needs less growing area per unit of organic output, and finally, that if practiced well enhances the flavor and nutritional content of food. Much like in the renewable arena, hydroponics is a form of agriculture that enables distributed production, where farmer/producer and consumer are brought closer to one another while eliminating wastage.

So the key feasibility questions remain: What early successes have proven the solution? How costly and available are the hydroponics options? Which hydroponics business models may be attractive in places like India?

Successes:

There are diverse examples of hydroponics projects across the globe, with varying levels of innovation, scale and success. Relevant to hydroponics to urban locales, Changi General Hospital in Singapore uses rooftop farming to now meet most of its fresh food needs. Gotham Greens prides itself as New York’s first commercial rooftop ‘closed loop’ hydroponics operation, in which plants are being grown directly in nutrient-enriched water that is carefully cleaned and recycled back into the system, and solar-powered pumps are feeding nutrient-enriched rainwater to an acre of greenhouse space. ProMedica Health System network of clinics has used the roof of a hospital in Toledo, OH, to grow using hydroponics more than 200 pounds of vegetables and then serve them to patients and a nearby food shelter. This project led to the setup of eight more vertical gardens throughout underserved areas of Toledo. The Woman of Hope Project in Hyderabad, at the Center for Promotion of Simplified Hydroponics, shows different ways of setting up hydroponics for generating livelihoods for women. Atul Kalaskar uses hydroponics to grow strawberries, and believes that as small and marginal farmers become more competitive by moving up the chain of activities such as drip-irrigation, poly-houses and cooperatives, they will eventually aspire to going soil-less in hydroponics. The Pet Bharo (meaning “fill your stomach”) project in India, affiliated with the Institute of Simplified Hydroponics, provides training, consulting services, agricultural inputs and testing services for setting up simplified hydroponics as well as commercial hydroponics.

Some of the more capital and technology intensive projects are AeroFarms, which is building hydroponics farms in containers stacked on top of each other in warehouses and old buildings, lit by LED lamps that also provide pest control when set to emit certain wavelengths. Cityscape Farms in San Francisco is developing rooftop organic greenhouses that use hydroponics along with aquaculture, in which the nutrient mix for the hydroponics is organically fertilized with fish waste produced from tilapia fish raised on-site. The water is then cleaned and recycled back into the fish tanks to complete the loop. One of the most technology-intensive hydroponics projects, and one that was voted one of Time Magazine’s Top 50 Best Innovations of 2009, is Valcent’s ‘Vertical Farming Technology.’ His VertiCrop innovation grows non-GM plants in rotating rows one on top of another, feeding them precise amounts of light and nutrients while using the vertical stacking to use far less water than conventional farming. And, by growing upward instead of outward, he can expand food production without using more land. He claims to be able to increase production volume for field crops up to 20 times over, while using as little as 5% of the normal water supply. One final examples of very large scale operation is Eurofresh’s 274-acre hydroponic greenhouse in southeastern Arizona, where more than 200 million pounds of tomatoes were produced in 2007.

Cost:

With regard to cost, here are some initial resources for gathering information. Vincent Dessberg, a rooftop hydroponic farmer in Sarasota, FL, growing fruits & vegetables, says he spent $25,000 to set up his facility, including the cost of his 6,000 plants growing vertically in 180 hydroponic planters. One could visualize his capex and opex needing to be much higher for a commercial setup that needed to pump water through sophisticated sensors that automatically adjust nutrient and acidity levels in the water. Dinesh Rao, a relatively new hydroponics practitioner in India who carefully manages his water and nutrient mix, says a capex of ~Rupees 100,000-150,000 ($2,200-3,300) was required to set up a 1000-plant capacity, giving 10 tons of annual tomato output. The cost of a high-end hydroponics greenhouse, using state of the art technologies for lighting, water, nutrients and so on would probably need to be offset by sales into premium organic retail channels such as a Whole Foods, and export markets. Lower-end simplified hydroponics farms, which is the focus of my study here, is usually based on a static solution culture (compared to a continuous flow solution culture, or an aeroponics culture) or a solid-medium culture, and a powder (rather than liquid) nutrient mixture, and would also get the job done though at lower yield. Low-cost greenhouses and polyhouses would be key to designing a sustainable hydroponics model for growing affordably priced foods. Another convenient benefit of running such as project in tropical India, where greenhouse heating and humidity is not as much of an issue, is that less energy is required for the operation. In general, key cost drivers would be availability of affordable nutrient mix, access to training and quality analysis, and technology-level that is matched to the buyers’ requirements.

Models:

Low-cost hydroponics greenhouses (along with grading and packing area), built around distributed production with close proximity to consumers, can be a stabilizing factor in food production and retail. The model would need to capitalize on the predictability of producing year-round nutrient-rich vegetables, extract cost savings from increased yields, and adequately market the health benefits of pesticide-free produce. But this would make sense only if an affordable and stable price point is achieved for the produce. In urban India, one business model possibility would be to build a showcase hydroponics greenhouse on the rented terrace of a chain of hospitals, much like in some of the examples provided above, prove the model for a select range of fruit-bearing and leafy crops required by the hospital and the nearby community, and then franchise out the model across the rest of their network. The initial phase of this project would need to involve R&D into technology and the nutrient mix requirements for different families of crop. Over time, the business could then be expanded to co-locate (I’m using this term loosely) greenhouses with farmer’s markets and restaurants that need fresh produce, animal farms that require fodder crops, and specialty retailers that need flower/ornamental crops and condiments. Another more scale-oriented model would be to develop a high-tech vertical farm, expressly to supply large-format quality-sensitive food retailers such as Reliance Fresh. All of these models could provide employment to low-skilled labor, and stay true to their mission of local consumption by not entering into the logistics heavy export market.

On the related topic of quality, there is something to consider on the ‘organic’ versus ‘inorganic’ hydroponics front. With food inflation continuing to rise, one can imagine shoppers who spend more needing more alternatives to expensive, imported and organic vegetables. They may gladly gravitate towards the next best thing – fresh vegetables grown hydroponically, and locally by farmers right in their community. Note: hydroponic farms can use both organic and inorganic (i.e. artificially-made, the more popular) nutrient mixtures, and it is unclear as to whether the former option provides adequate yields and other benefits. I am therefore reluctant to suggest that going the more expensive organic-fertilizer route is worth it for affordable hydroponics.

In closing, did you know that more than half of the world’s plants already grow hydroponically? I’m referring to the oceans, where there is no soil and plants draw their nutrients directly from the sea water around them. It is worth appreciating that hydroponics is simply taking a cue from nature and applying it to our life on land. It is now up to our innovators and financiers to make this commercially viable on a grand scale.

I met with Leon Krier a while ago and I am posting excerpts of our conversation here. Krier who is among the most influential architectural thinkers and urbanists of our times was passionate and resolute in his views. I think his ideas are more and more relevant as we think about how to build next generation cities.

What makes cities Sustainable?

A sustainable city is only meaningful in a perspective that is not limited by years but in what is the right way of settling in a certain place. The word sustainable has become fashionable today. But the true meaning of sustainability has not been understood. We all know we are growing in the wrong way- Our dependency on fossil fuels and the pollution that we cause is truly catastrophic. We have to start engaging in an alternative way of development that is less intrusive on the natural world.

What are the fundamental errors we have made while building cities?

I think we have worked on the fundamental structures of planning cities. But, we have not understood where to locate and in what densities we should build our cities. I believe that building too high densities is not sustainable in the long run in terms of energy and materials. If you build over 6 floors, you will need to use synthetic materials. The embedded material in synthetic material is so high that it won’t be sustainable in the longer term. The energy used to make concrete, steel, aluminium and plastic is incredibly high when compared with natural materials. We are not aware of it today because fossil fuels like petrol and coal that are required to process these materials are relatively cheap today. But the energy costs are escalating every year and are bound to become extremely costly in the coming decades. We will realize the folly of the current model when we have an energy crisis that will render the present type of construction and development unfeasible.

Further, I think metropolitan development is a mistake and is unsustainable. I don’t think there is one metropolitan in the world that works. Metropolises like London, New York and other big concentrations are really like big imperial power centres rooted in the use of too much fossil fuel. I would encourage a more polycentric approach towards urbanization.

I believe that human civilization is in a systematic problem – we are overpopulated, we have built too high densities, abused the chemistry of the soil and used too much of energy. Societies have settled in the wrong place, in the wrong density and in the wrong way that is heavily dependent on the use of cheap fossil fuels.

What are your thoughts on contemporary development in Indian cities?

It is an explosion of vulgarity in the name of modernism. I could not see one building of great quality and thought among what I saw. Generally people who design these glass buildings call it intelligent buildings. I think they are stupid – they disregard climate and natural conditions completely. One image struck me. I saw a glass tower standing in middle of a slum. It was the metaphor for the future. Once the energy supply becomes critical; it will become so expensive that it will be only monopolized by small groups of people (imperialism).

I think that architectural and urbanist modernism belong like communism – to a set of blunders from which there is little or nothing to learn or gain. They are beliefs which literally blind even the most clever and perceptive individuals to deplorable wastes, risks, and dangers. Modernism’s basic mistake, nonetheless, is to suggest that it is a universal (i.e. inescapable and indispensable) phenomenon, thereby justifiably substituting and excluding traditional solutions.

The vernacular techniques and profound traditional knowledge on building towns was about how to use natural materials in order to make a place sustainable. But those ideas seem to have been lost in the newer developments in Indian.

Talk to us about the New Urbanism movement that you endorse.

New Urbanism is an urban design movement that came into being in the late 1980s and early 1990s. New Urbanists aspire to transform all facets of real estate development. Their effort affects regional and local urban approaches. They are engaged in new development, urban retrofits and suburban infill. They believe in strategies that reduce the use of automobiles (thus fuels), that increase the supply of affordable housing, and curb the unplanned urbanization or sprawl. It is profoundly marked by democratic participation and user-satisfaction is always the main concern. As a theory it is based on traditional settlement patterns but as a practice it is very new.

What is New Urbanist Planning characterized by?

New Urbanist neighbourhoods are walkable, and encompass a diverse range of functions like housing, shopping, recreation and offices. New Urbanists encourage regional planning for open space, appropriate architecture and planning and the combined development of jobs and housing.

New Urbanism is not utopian and does not enforce certain rules for developing a master plan. Instead, it advocates the unlimited diversity of human talent to put together harmonious and pleasant environments. It directs competitive forces to flourish as good neighbours while pursuing their own self-interest. In order for such communities to work, they need to evolve definite patterns of public spaces, of density and size, of hierarchy, of admixture and proximity. Their complexity, however, should not result from social engineering, but needs to be allowed to grow through a multiplicity of complementary activities developed on neighbouring plots, forming urban frontages along streets, squares, parks or countryside within an urban master plan as seen in traditional towns.

About Leon Krier: Léon Krier is internationally known as a pioneering architect, urban planner and architectural theorist. He is especially recognized as a passionate advocate of traditional urban models. He studied architecture at the University of Stuttgart. From 1968 to 1974, he worked in the studio of James Stirling, in London. He has also taught as professor of architecture and urban studies at the Architectural Association of the Royal College of Arts in London, at Princeton University of Virginia and as Davenport Professor at Yale University. He was awarded the Berlin Preis for Architecture in 1977, the Jefferson Memorial Medal in 1985 and the Chicago AIA Award in 1987. He has published books in Japan, Belgium and Great Britain and has exhibitions in many countries around the world, including a major one-man exhibition at the MoMA in New York (1985). He has completed projects in Luxembourg, Italy, Spain, Germany, the United States and England.

In the early 1980’s, Krier served as a consultant for the master planning of Seaside, Florida. In 1988, he became an advisor to the Prince of Wales, Prince Charles, who not only commissioned Krier to design four new towns in England, but has also been advocating Krier’s theories to the entire European Community.

Even though Krier had high regard for Le Corbusier at one point in time, later in his career, Krier came to look upon Le Corbusier as a “destroying angel” because of his desire to rebuild old cities along modernist principles. The Le Corbusier urban vision regarded the city as a machine; whereas Krier saw cities as a natural object or an “individual, possessing a body and a soul”. Krier is best known for his development of Poundbury ‘village’ in Dorchester, UK which was commissioned by Price Charles. He is also known to have had an enormous influence on the New Urbanism movement in the United States of America.

Imagine our beloved city of Mumbai if our hundred thousand ‘waste-pickers’ / ‘rag-pickers’ suddenly vanished! Our neighborhoods would be awash in waste, in excess of what the municipal authorities can handle. Our massive recycling industries, such as in slums like Dharavi, would lose a chunk of their raw material inputs. Our city’s greenhouse gas emissions would significantly increase, with landfills and their harmful effects ballooning further. Our commercial purchasers of recycled products would find costs rising. And most unfortunate of all, our most poor and vulnerable members of urban India would lose their one and only opportunity to earn a meager 100 rupees a day while contributing to our social development.

This is the great irony of urban India. Our most active ‘green collar’ workers are invisible to us though they perform a critical service to us all. These rag-pickers, many of whom are women and children, are driven as a final resort to the only job left for them in the city… the filthy and dangerous job of roaming the streets for hours on end, scavenging for solid waste, manually segregating it into paper, plastics, glass, e-waste and so on, and then selling it to traders and middlemen who supply the recycling and reuse industries. And all the while enduring a number of health hazards, abuse at the hands of local thugs, and a continual assault on their dignity.

And what do these ultra low-cost workers get in return for their services? No identity, no rights and protections, no access to public services, and not even the vaguest possibility of rehabilitation. As a relative of mine once opined: “India is a rich country with poor people.” And he was not referring to our population bracketed under ‘Below the Poverty Line.’ He was referring to our prosperous middle and upper-middle classes that continue to legitimize the plight of groups such as the rag-pickers… in the name of karma, the caste system, and an ingrained sense of apathy toward a corrupt and wrecked socio-economy.

But the tide is turning, and turning is it rapidly. More and more people share my sense of outrage, and want to find ways of alleviating some of these waste and human rights issues. For our cities are now bursting at the seams, these issues are spiraling out of control, and we all share in the same ecological destiny. Fortunately, hidden in this quagmire are a host of opportunities for businesses, non-profits, and of course the larger community. Businesses and social entrepreneurs are moving into professional waste management, waste-to-energy and recycling, and require low-cost labor and access to segregated waste. Non-profits that support waste-picker communities can enhance their ecological initiatives by hooking them into a sustainable waste value chain. Designers and retailers are beginning to see value in marketing and selling products made out of degradable and recycled materials. Educators are introducing reduce-recycle-reuse programs into their student bodies, and using student empathy as a powerful platform for spreading awareness on these issues. Housing colonies are beginning to see value in not just managing their own waste but also donating some of it to local waste-pickers. Corporates are seeing a good fit between their corporate social responsibility programs and some of these waste, water and conservation programs. And finally, even the media and entertainment industry is pitching in to sponsor and support awareness and fund-raising campaigns.

So where does this leave each of us? As each us connects with one or more of these avenues to alleviate our waste crisis, we need to simultaneously ensure that the fragile livelihood of our waste-pickers is not compromised or marginalized. We need to build a personal relationship with these courageous green collar workers. We need to furnish them with basic tools for their trade, provide them greater and safe access to solid waste, enhance their ability to earn, and encourage corporates to bring ultra low-cost utilities and healthcare to their communities. And finally, for the workers that then have a few new hours available to them in the day, we need to provide them re-skilling/education that promises new options for livelihood.

A noteworthy non-profit in this area of waste management, recycling and advocacy is ACORN Foundation India’s Dharavi Project, led by advocate Vinod Shetty. This non-profit utilizes a number of volunteers from the professional sector to help secure the livelihoods, working conditions and dignity of the above mentioned waste-pickers (many of whom are women and children). They conduct awareness and advocacy campaigns to increase public and private involvement in this community. They help recyclers increase the throughput of their value chain, and by essence that of the waste-picker. They work with dozens of schools on waste and recycling projects. They organize eco-fairs and musical concerts and workshops, targeted at kids from neighboring slums and municipal communities. And most recently, they have starting advising townships on their waste management programs. Their work and repute is growing, as evidenced by coverage in the Hindustan Times, Mumbai Mirror, and Times of India national edition.