It all started last December 16 when the Urban Heritage Committee, which had supposedly approved of the plans, did a volte face and, according to Reliance architect Salil Ranadive, "withdrew their support". Says Cyrus Guzder, chairman of DHL Airfreight and member of Intach's governing council: "Since Marine Drive was not notified as a heritage precinct then, there was no need for the proposal to come to the Heritage Committee. Worried about larger implications, Sudha Bhave, former additional municipal commissioner, directed it here. We did not give it a detailed examination, and the approval given by the subcommittee was purely for the mock-ups."
Advertisement
The initial proposal incorporated a fountain and an amphitheatre, which met with criticism from environment and heritage groups. They voiced the fear that Reliance's designs were but a watered down version of their actual bid to take over the Drive and that the company would give a five-star granite finish to the existing footpath, only to then plaster its logo all over.
In fact, there is much debate about the paving material to be used on the sidewalk. For his part, Ranadive is rather startled bythe controversy: "We want to restore the dignity of Marine Drive. It is amazing that this pavement has come under so much flak, considering that the one across has beige tiles and is totally out of keeping with the art deco ambience of the promenade."
Advertisement
Experts, however, claim that unlike the buildings across it, there is nothing to indicate that the promenade is art deco. "Marine Drive should continue to be neutral enough to belong to the assemblage of art deco buildings that form one side of it as well as the entire city," says Rahul Mehrotra, conservation architect and direc-tor of the Urban Design Research Institute.
The pavement pattern, too, has been less than a walkover for Reliance. Says an activist: "This looks like a rangoli pattern." And Shyam Chainani, honorary secretary of the Bombay Environmental Action Group, notes: "There may a lot of things wrong with pavements all over the city and nothing can be done about that. But one does not want the same to happen to Marine Drive which is in a big way the essence of Bombay."
But Ranadive stoutly defends the design: "Marine Drive is crescent shaped, and to avoid the obvious adjustments required, we decided on changing the size of the stones for functional reasons. This will not be done all over but only at the nodes. Again, the diagrams will be universal—maybe a north-south compass pattern—and, more importantly, subtle. The idea is to make the pavement interactive while not impinging on the view of the people."
However, the real obstruction for Reliance is the ongoing debate on the use of its logo, considering that the company is pumping Rs 5 crore into the project. While activists are adamant about not allowing an overt display of the Reliance logo, Ranadive's colleague, Samir Chinai, argues: "We are asking for one subtle logo every 100 metres, while there are instances all over the city of three to 500 logos visible per 100 metres. Why is Reliance being singled out for this kind of a treatment?"
Advertisement
"Because the entire premise on which this is based is incorrect and could set a dangerous precedent," answers Intach Convenor Tasneem Mehta. "One has absolutely no complaints against Reliance but the Bombay Municipal Corporation cannot give out notified precincts to industry and absolve itself of all further responsibility. Ideally, they should have constituted a Marine Drive trust to which RIL could have contributed significantly. Tomorrow they may plan to give up the Gateway and then the Taj Mahal, pleading a lack of funds for their upkeep."
Adds Mehrotra: "The Government has to take the responsibility of producing controlling guidelines in order to maintain the balance between what the city gets in terms of what the city gives." Clearly, in the absence of any such guidelines, the Marine Drive debate threatens to carry on without any hope of reconciliation.
