Craving for a meaningful skyline in Bangalore

Craving for a meaningful skyline in Bangalore

Planning must be flexible, not impulsive, architect K. JAISIM tells The Hindu


From European-classical and Graeco-Roman style public buildings, a blend of Indo-Saracenic approaches and Dravidian elements and bungalow styles of architecture to the latest blocks of concrete, glass and steel in commercial buildings, the Pensioner's Paradise has had to see itself transform by leaps and bounds.

Software and biotech has pushed Kempe Gowda's four-Tower boundaries much farther to the suburbs and village areas. And as one would expect, emerging office complexes, commercial blocks and people's tastes speak of cosmopolitan brick and mortar expressions.

Do our new buildings lack architectural receptivity? Is it ever possible for Bangalore to play a twin role of an IT-Capital and still be a Garden City? Fraught with infrastructure inadequacies and nudging for space, buildings are forced into vertical expansions. What are Bangalore buildings up to?

As PropertyPlus blew the candle for celebrating its First Anniversary, we thought it appropriate to talk to the senior architect K. Jaisim of Jaisim-Fountainhead, closely associated with the building scene in the city for nearly four decades now, to get his view on the changing buildings and cityscape commotion in Bangalore.

With a grandfather who was the Palace Architect to the Mysore Kings till the 1940s, the architect in Professor Jaisim made him develop far-sighted views on nature-friendly features.He installed rainwater harvesting systems and cost-effective and energy-efficient approaches in his own home, Anthem, three decades ago. "Materials are like letters in a language. You put them together efficiently for building appropriate expressions," is his motto.

Jaisim's eye on good-old Bengaluru...

Good Old Bangalore was a Princely place. I remember passing a comment in the 70s, after I had visited Singapore, that Bangalore was a thousand times fairer and could evolve to be a great city if certain principles where followed. But that was not to be. Remember a drive in Bangalore then, there would be parks and open space in a continuum and the roads were real avenues. The concept of green belt killed all this in one stroke.

Disturbed

Devoid of a far-sighted approach, the policies only had impulsive planning. Earmarked portions of the green belt were trespassed upon and unplanned structures came up without a vision. Look at the disturbance caused with each round of changed thinking!

Is there a sea change in perceiving the architecture of buildings now?

Yes, it is a different city. The Vidhana Soudha building destroyed anything meaningful in Bangalore's skyline and architecture. The new world of democracy should not be fortified in a make-believe palace of stupendous proportions. The so-called magnanimity should not over-awe you.

Modesty in brick and mortar should draw one closer to it. That's when buildings become approachable. Town Hall, Seshadri Memorial Building, Tipu Sultan's Fort and the clubs and old colonial houses of Bangalore were a visual treat. The love for Bangalore was for the spirit of space it offered!

And again during the sporadic growth of the late 90s, anybody who wanted to build lost all sense of context and started aping the West. In came the neo-colonists for more confusion. My point is why do we need other people's ideas? Copying is not creativity. After being ruled by kings, Mughals and the British, our minds have been conditioned to accept somebody else's ideas. Why do we need a Windsor Manor as a shrunken model of some European Palace?

In the mega city transformation have we lost out on something heavenly?

Yes. We are in a cauldron of great change. It is painful. Would you believe that for such a wonderful city we have no school of Urban Planning or Urban Design? Our planners had no vision whatsoever. They just drew circles around the city and went on to draw a few criss-cross lines to call it metro.

Why ape wrong things?

And talking of aping, they could have at least copied the right things and thought of an underground rail that we badly need. Interlinking parks are a forgotten issue. Lakes were nature's way of making up for loss of rainwater harvesting habits, but they are almost covered up now. Schools, colleges, media and forums should emphasise on people-and-nature-friendly living habits!

Your comment on builders and planning...

Planning needs vision, it also demands the understanding of the evolving city growth pattern. Let us understand what growth is. One cannot force planning, it must be flexible but not ad hoc. Take car parking, for instance. Imagine a scenario where the authorities have one simple rule — that you cannot park on the main arteries, as also on the main roads.

New stream

The designer or promoter is not stopped from having basements for either parking or some other purpose. This will evolve to a position that either you provide enough parking in your premises or come up with exclusive multi-level parking as businesses. It will also encourage a whole new stream of public transport.

It is time the builders took some mainstream city-improvement initiatives.

Should we have a ratio for commercial buildings-apartment-parks?

No, I do not believe in zoning. That is a strange western influence. Our ethos is more fascinating. We are a complex people with a glorious past of great integration and multi-task individuals and groups. We must have and enjoy our order in chaos.

Will vertical growth help ease the pressure on infrastructure development?

There is a lesson here. Urban sprawl is more dangerous than a vertical expansion.

When one builds vertically, the design allows for a lot of open space around which the activities of relaxation and entertainment are taken care of.

Also in a vertical growth, technology is explored and makes new ways of discovering space. Again interlinking of these tall structures with underground or heliports or monorails is simpler and more economical and efficient.

If you know how to design, a single home or a tall tower can be as beautiful in both looks and experience. All the senses can really play a significant role in such creative spaces.

Why do you call Jaisim Fountainhead as being ecologists too?

I heard of environmental engineering in the 1970s and later, as I explored the "tomorrow," it dawned on me that individual buildings will make some points but it's only a holistic approach that will make sense to human living.

Those days, nobody knew what environment meant or how to spell ecology.

So, to set myself apart I called myself an ecologist, not knowing that it would become a byword.

Nature's principles

Any project I design generally follows the principles of nature. Today, I am called by several names — crazy architect, green architect, nature & material friendly or extreme designer.

My policy is we should not ape or copy or do something that we do not believe in.

This, especially with regard to the basic fundamentals in structure, material and space.