This article describes the process of designing the Great Eastern Galleria, a large commercial project in Nerul, Navi Mumbai ...

When I came back from such exhilarating meets, I used to be all excited; thinking that now I would finally become a sensitive architect. As I put my pencil on paper, I would get visions of the changes in my project and I dreamt of the approving nods of everyone...

........................but wait a second!

Those people have other priorities too, other than think about architecture. Suddenly I realised that the theoreticians were trapped in their own words. The harsh reality is a mocking client, or a harried contractor or an apathetic site-engineer. They were effectively taunting me to bring out a solution, where they had to bow down to other concerns -- maybe of a short-term nature -- but nevertheless those issues effectively dicated the immediate course of my designing.

I expected my peer group and my masters to offer me guidance. Unfortunately, I was disappointed. The forces that bring down designs are so strong whereas the forces that promote good design sense are so disorganised and unfocussed. Invariably, the slides that are displayed at architectural meets talk about unique situations and contexts. Invariably, the projects spoken about were pre-destined to be special.

Many of them are institutional works, set up in cloisetered situations. Those works had almost no choice but to proceed in the right manner. The lessons are almost impossible to duplicate for an architect involved in a run-of-the mill job.

There did not seem to be any guidance for the common architect doing ordinary jobs. Are we slowly convincing ourselves that the ordinary necessarily has to be mediocre? And that if we do not find ourselves in extraordinary contexts, are we condemned to doing bad architecture?

In my last eleven years of practice, I have been mulling over these issues. There is too much mediocrity around and I am sure each and every architect who was responsible for such mediocrity, never intended that. I know that the common architect who is simply rolling up his/her sleeves to work, and who is never really involved in theoretical debates and architectural meets is also a sensitive person. After all, we are all exposed to the same ethos. Everytime a building that I designed became a mediocre one, it broke my heart. I always want to get the thing right, but intentions never made a good building. It requires something extra, which was so far eluding my practice.

The Great Eastern Galleria started off as an ordinary project. Potentially, the project could have been awarded to any architect, in a very ordinary situation. In fact, the project is the same as any 'developer's project' in Navi Mumbai: Make a building whose units are sold out to third parties. There was nothing in the project that determined its destiny. If its fate had indeed been destined; it should have met the same fate as any other 'developer's project' which litter the landscape of Navi Mumbai.

When I got the commission, I said I must put in all efforts so that even a project like this should come out of the mediocre to make a statement. I now feel that something has worked right here, and I am offering it here for a closer scrutiny. I am not trying to glorify the design. I am not offering any quick or deep explanations.

If I could describe this project in a line, I would say that I managed to respect different viewpoints - that is the algorithm for doing 'just that much better' to a project. As would hopefully be noticed from the explanation (and the drawings/photos of the projects), I managed to satisfy the clients from their perspective and the project also seems to have some architectural merits in a very uniquely Indian context. I hope that with this design, I may have found a few directions, and maybe just a faint path through the thicket.

I am documenting in this report some of the thought processes that happened as I proceeded with this design. I must underline that it is imperative to look at this project just as an ordinary project in the commercial world of Navi Mumbai. There was nothing in the project which gave it a 'favoured status', something which would have automatically given rise to a improved building. Let this point be kept in the back of the mind, while reviewing this project.

The Beginning
Our office was approached by the clients to participate in a private competition. Their goal was simple: They wanted maximum saleable area for their project. The plot for the commercial building at Nerul was bought at a very high price, during the boom period at Navi Mumbai. The downward slide in the market had just begun after they purchased the plot, and they were justifiably worried about its saleability. One way to counter the slide was to have more area to sell. That formed the basis of the competition.

To me, as an architect, it was significant that the project was the only privately developed commercial building in that side of Nerul (Sector 4). The project was also located at a prime location: at the point intersection of the road-overbridge and other important avenues. Being a large project (approximately 6165 sq.m that translated to effectively 90,000 sq.ft of constructed work), It had the potential of creating a vista, and much needed relief within the mediocrity around.

But those points were gloassed over by the clients: It was for tackling the sheer commercial pressure that they had approached us. They simply wanted a building with as much saleable area as possible, whose premises can be sold fast and at a good value. Their end goal wasn't anyway different from that put forward by any other developer working in this region. In fact, making a costly building was fully ruled out in the times of a plunging real-estate market.

The report that was submitted along with the competition drawings, is given here:

"

For the sake of brevity, I am not including the mathematical calculations that were submitted. It is sufficient to state that the clients main anxiety points (i.e. saleable areas, efficiency in the shopping areas, etc.) were taken care of. We proved to them that in our design there was much lesser usage of areas taken into FSI that went into non-revenue spaces like corridors, than what is normally done in a conventional doubly-loaded corridor design. Whatever increase in construction cost was greatly offset by the increased revenue that such an 'fsi-efficient' design brought.

The ball was then in our court, to work out the details and arrive at a solution that also satisfied us as architects and the end users who would be moving in. Once I realised that the clients requirements were satisfied, I had but no choice but to investigate the project further, and put in ideas that did not shoot up the cost of the project and still had an 'architectural' statement to make. I must emphasize that the clients had no requirement whatsoever on what the building should look like.

The users
One of the first conclusion that we came to is that the building must be designed to be an impact building. Its location at a point that generated the various vistas down the various roads leading upto it almost demanded it. As a player in the overall urban-design of Nerul, it had an important role. After all, it was the only large commercial building in that locality. In that sense, it could not be a more significant public building. I did not want to spoil the effect by insensitive shop-keepers who would put up name-plates without any pattern. We therefore made the Indian Atrium charged with architectural features, with the hope that it would be an exciting place to be, and an area that can contain all the shop entrances.

To drive the point home, the main facade shop windows were constructed at a lesser height than a regular doorway, and it was intersected by a beam. This hopefully would ensure that no one would break open a door in those areas. We also tilted the shop-windows, again to serve as a reminder to the shop-keeper that those weren't to be converted to doors. The tilt of the glass should also prevent reflections when someone is doing window-shopping.

The Atrium space also acts a fairly well represented shortcut to the large colony on the west side of the building, as people walked in from the south east junction - that is the place where people would be if they came from the railway station, or down the bridge.

What is the commercial benefit to this approach? The shops in the rear of the building would also get their clientele. It is as if the front shops became a magnet to pull in potential shoppers into the building who could then be diverted to the rear shops too.

Our office concentrated on the way the users would react to this building. We discussed issues of way-finding, whether people would get confused on how to walk to and through the building. All users have expectations and if we did not respect that, the building would pose considerable confusion. Especially, a large monumental building more often than not over-awes people. So we were careful to detail out the mouths of the building to ensure that the users became intuitively aware of the entrances. (What happens once a user walks in through an entrance, is described later on in this article)

Aesthetics
I had a lot of debates in my office on the kind of look the building should have. What is an Indian look? is a question that is perpetually on my mind. I do not want to be guilty of branding my buildings. At the same time, my projects need not become desperately anonymous all the time. I feel that the search for a style in an architectural office is often used deviously to establish an indentity to the architects rather than offer an apt solution. However, in this particular case, for the reasons already stated in the project report above, it was justified to have some kind of visual impact.

I am of the opinion that as Indians, we are necessarily a mixed, amorphous lot. Our aesthetic tastes differ widely and wildly. Instead of fighting it and imposing our own interpretation, we must accept that as a feature and not an disadvantage. Our culture is the one that invented the zero, the unique concept in mathematics that takes no position: it is neither a positive number or a negative number. That is only possible if we accept a wide ranging idea of aesthetics. We as Indians had never said that this is good aesthetic sense or that is a bad one. Our culture nourished the great Buddha who sat smiling beningly in the centre. Unfortunately, in our colleges, we are taught to take positions -- and that may be due to the influence of western textbooks. In the real world in India, not taking a position is also a valid premise!

Why then should this building have this kind of aesthetic, you may wonder. Actually, to settle the seemingly endless debate in the office, I made it a point that the aesthetic did not originate from me. I took my assistants to Churchgate, and the first building that came to my sight - an art-deco, LIC building accross the road, became the inspiration of The Great Eastern Galleria. Again, this was done because of the unique context in which this project was. I definitely would not have done the same thing had it been that the project was not the only large privately developed commercial building in Nerul or it wasn't at the end of the bridge etc. I did not copy the features verbatim; but you would see the influence in the treatment of the external facades.
Having done that, we came back to our drawing boards (err... computers) and we ensured that the aesthetic was translated keeping in mind other parameters too. I did not want a pastiche add-on makeup to a building. Due to this concern, you would find very little redundant effort for getting the aesthetic right. (In fact, only the flutes on the facades are an added on element. And they too can be regarded as something that help throw shadows on the building and keep it cool!) All the recessed windows came about due to the detailing of built in cupboards next to them. The top cornices were created to ensure that rainwater did not run down the wall like a river but got thrown off. We wanted natural light for the lofts, and the windows for the lofts further modulated the building facades.

The large four-storeyed cutout towards the south-east was created to receive a fountain, to reinforce the position of the building in the urban-context of Nerul. That should have acted as a mate to the fountain on the other side of the bridge. Unfortunately, the client decided to cutout the fountain at the end of the project due to budgetry constraints. That did not leave a void, however as the feature created at the south-east still symbolises the fountain.

In short, we side-stepped the problem of wanting to establish a style of a building, by merely adopting one that was in existance. We could have used any other style for that matter and as long as the details were appropriately worked out and there were no superflousness, I wouldn't have objected. If you are shocked by this admission, I must emphasize that contrived originality is often the resort of a person looking for a quick explanation. I do not feel insecure about my creativity for I have ample other projects that deserved original and fresh aesthetic approaches and I have demonstrated such capabilities there.

I feel that it is only the theoreticians among us who is isolating and casting disparaging, sweeping comments on the new trends in Mumbai architecture. I may agree to the criticism if the project is a residential complex, or a private bungalow but for public buildings we must also look at the responsibility of creating a sence of place within a city.

The common Indian on the road has accepted many of the changes in his/her stride. They do not perceive that anything bewildering is happening when encountering a public building designed in this fashion. Has anybody got worried that Chatrapati Shivaji Terminus or the Mahatma Phule market is too gross or culturally out of context? So, the Indian look for a commecial centre is a contrived terminology. But what about the Indian feel of shopping and commerce?

The feel
The exterior was designed to be almost monolithic and monument-like, just to create an impact. One would expect the project to abruptly pull you inside it. One would normally expect a sudden change in the nature of space once inside; almost cloistered from the outside world, as that is what happens in a standard commercial building.

In fact, the building does the opposite.

The Indian feel that we all have within us is the feel for transitions. Nothing we do is abrupt here: Marriage is done after a lot of protocols. The birth of a child is preceded by many ceremonies. When someone dies, it calls for very regulated and graduated set of get-togethers that give a proper send off to the departed. The list can go on. Similarly, when we experiene an architectural scene, we do not abruptly walk into it; but we experience and feel the gradual changes that happen to the context.

In much the same way, the transition of spaces in this building respects these aspects. One smoothly moves from a public to a semi-public to semi-private to a private space. The Indian atrium in the Galleria, gathers together many architectural features that serve out many vantage points. Just like in an Indian bazaar, there are many surprising elements and lookout points that respects individuality and add to the color. To aid this transition, we added glass backed lifts so that one gets a sense of where we are headed. Initially, we thought that the varied elements in the interior spaces may create confusion, but after the building came up, we found that it is extremely intuitive to use.

Multiplicity of use is another charactersitic of Indians. We often combine many activities together and weave them into our culture. Usage of space is typically plural. Terraces gets enclosed, balconies are converted, staircase landings become lobbies and lofts gets used for many activities.

I have already indicated the way the lofts and terraces were detailed. The corridor staircases that lead to individual offices were detailed in such a way that if one were to purchase 4 offices together (2 on one floor and 2 directly above) then it would actually be possible to use the staircase landings as a reception area, and the two flights of such a corridor staircase can be taken into the office.

Each and every office and shop has got openings both to the outside the plot and it even has internal looking windows. This respected the varied expectations of people at work. People who want to have a view beyond the site, as well as those who want to expect constant, unchanging views can both fit in. It also ensured that even if cabins were used in the office, there was still some chance for the general office areas to be lit naturally. Such an approach once again respects plurality.

This detail of the lofts allowed flexibility. The height of the loft is almost 1.5 metres, and we made it out of structural steel. This was a realistic solution, as the occupant would easily be able to adopt the loft to suit his/her requirement, without having to demolish anything.

This project also has varying types of scales. At the exterior it is almost monumental, but it also has many other scales. For example; the alternate staircase landings act as an intimate lookout that overlooks a corridor below. The corridor that lead to offices on the fifth and sixth floors cuts down the scale of the building to such an extent that people perceive that they are walking accross a narrow pedestrian path. Galleria reflects the nature of Indian bazaars that at first sight is overwhelming but has narrow streets and paths which touch a personal chord.

The moles and the warts
What could be wrong with the project? It did not meet my standards regarding workmanship and final choice of materials. Due to the plunging financial scene, the clients had to change many of the initially selected finishes. There were compromises in the quality of workmanship too. Some features were simply discarded. For example; the floor of the Atrium was to be heavily landscaped, with waterbodies, etc. Unfortunately, only the public benches and a token splash of greenery has come up. The external flower beds are just been constructed, after a lot of delay on the part of the landscape contractor. A sculpture at the south west corner of the building that is proposed is yet to see the light of the day. As stated before, the fountain at the south-east terrace on the first floor was discarded due to budgetry constraints. Lastly, the roof of the corridor on the sixth floor was removed. The last may not be such a bad thing after all, because it gives the last few floors a very charming, personal scale; as shown in the photos.

Conclusions
The summary of the project and the reaction of the clients can be deciphered from the letters submitted by the clients. But that is not the final conclusion. The project has been just completed, and as expected of any developers project, it would be sometime before the actual users come into the building. In spite of its current poor occupancy, the project does contribute to the urban context, which one visit to the project would convey.

When you total up everything, I still think that inspite of its deficiencies, the project does contribute to shaping my design approaches. Contrary to expectations, I am now convinced that one can respect both the commercial aspects of a developers project as well as those aspects that make a commercial building a well respected public building which contributes to the sense of place in an urban context. I was also able to dispell the myth that the cost of a building is synonymous with the perceived complexity of the project. This project is a highly unusual one (to say the least), with its large cantilevers, large perimeter, etc. It can be forgiven to label it as an expensive project to make. But the cost of making it when seen in perspective of the saleable areas it offered is nothing more than any ordinary project. The fact that the project did come up in the landscape of Navi Mumbai where the current financial recession has been particularly cruel to developers ( the place is littered with incomplete projects) amply drives this point home about cost efficiency.

There are two lessons: There is always a fairly down to earth set, albeit intricate, protocols that can be adopted to carve out a path through the thicket of mediocrity. The second lesson is that if we have to make a project work, we have to factor in the fact that things will go amiss and simply put in 120% work. The 20% deficiencies that come up will still ensure a 100% building.

• Add new comment