We are accustomed to the fact that in the present-day urban context, building byelaws (or the Development Control Regulations) virtually dictate the entire form of the architectural design. These regulations are so exhaustive and unyielding that architects at times complain that these regulations effectively suppress the free expression of architectural design.
But the reality is quite the opposite. It was the creative ideas of many architects, coupled with their empathy for the building occupants that led to the format and content of the development control regulations as we see them today. We also need to understand, that what these regulations stipulate is a minimum set of requirements for a habitable space, and as architects, we can actually provide a much better quality of space, exceed the minimum standards and norms, and provide a much more conducive environment for the occupant of a building than what is envisaged in the regulations.
The control of development in an urban area is a fairly recent phenomenon, brought in by the idea of planned development of the city. For quite some time, design of buildings was not regulated by the authorities, except for stipulating that the building should be built exclusively on one's own land, and should not encroach on a public amenity, access or the neighboring properties. The present-day regulations in India for construction in a village reflect these preliminary controls.
In 19th century New York, the large influx of immigrant population led to largescale development of tenement houses, built by unscrupulous developers without any basic amenities. The first tenement bylaws in New York were enacted in 1867, in response to the highly unhygienic and claustrophobic environment in and around these tenements. These byelaws insisted on outward-facing windows in every room, an open courtyard, proper ventilation systems, indoor toilets, and fire safeguards. The Tenement House Acts continued to evolve, as later amendments stipulated interior plumbing and a courtyard for garbage removal. A similar legislation in London in 1905 stipulated at least one bathroom in every new building.
The regulations, therefore, have responded to the issue with empathy for the occupants of the building, which is a common feature of all such regulations even today. In fact, the city authorities have responded positively for every new feature or design idea by an architect, which improves the quality of life of people in the city.
In New York, the regulations stipulated a setback for tall buildings after a certain height, which made the top of many skyscrapers into a pyramidal shape. In the design of Seagram building, Mies van de Rohe chose to leave a large set-back from the ground level itself and designed a rectangular shaped office building instead of this tapering shape at top. This offset at the street level was designed by Mies as a public plaza, and he added two waterbodies in this plaza, which improved its appeal as a public place, and became immensely popular.
Impressed by the idea of a private space made open and accessible to the city, the New York City regulations in 1961 provided incentives for builders and developers in the form of FAR, if the street level of a project was made accessible as public place. Many buildings in Manhattan have taken advantage of this, resulting in a pleasant walking experience in an otherwise car-dominated high-rise development of the Manhattan area.
In India, when Charles Correa designed Kanchenjunga in Mumbai, he introduced a concept of a double height terrace and the authorities agreed to exempt the space from the FAR, on the lines of exemptions to balconies and cupboards, as additional amenities for the occupant. This led to the amendment in the byelaws to exempt all such double height terraces from FAR.
The provisions of FAR and FAR exemptions have acquired enormous importance in the urban scenario today, when the construction industry is dominated by the builders and developers, but the original purpose of the regulations has not changed. As architects, if we are sincere and provide a design solution which improves the quality of space in individual buildings and the quality of life in the city, the regulations will definitely follow.
No comments:
Post a Comment