Mumbai stands at a critical urban crossroads, distinguished by a rampant and largely unregulated vertical expansion that sets it apart from major global cities. While international metropolises employ conscious zoning laws to manage their skylines and neighbourhood character, Mumbai permits buildings to soar with little regard for foundational planning principles like infrastructure capacity, architectural harmony, or population density.
The Erosion of Planned Development
This trend has reduced urban planning to an arbitrary exercise, severing the vital link between construction and civic infrastructure. Atul Kumar, founder trustee of the Art Deco Mumbai Trust, criticizes this approach, stating that planning now occurs at an ad hoc level with no correlation to supporting systems, and with zero effort towards aesthetic viability. The driving force, according to urban planners, is a vision where profit overrides prudent planning, fueled by what architect Rahul Mehrotra terms "impatient capital."
The primary tool enabling this sprawl is the Floor Space Index (FSI), which is being increased in leaps and bounds without logical justification tied to a broader city plan. Architect and urban planner Chandrashekhar Prabhu highlights the absence of controls on building height or shape, especially on sensitive threshold spaces like waterfronts and prominent vistas. He asserts that ad hoc decisions are frequently made to benefit builders, with no thought given to ensuring proportionate public open spaces or adequate roads, leading to pervasive traffic snarls.
Forgotten Precedents and Lost Skylines
This current free-for-all ignores Mumbai's own history of thoughtful town planning. In 1912, the Bombay City Improvement Trust formulated stringent norms, finally implemented in 1919, based on the 63.5-degree rule. This rule mandated minimum open spaces between buildings and controlled maximum heights to ensure equal right to light and air for all residents, from the ground floor to the top.
The city's first development plan in 1967 introduced the FSI concept, moving away from older by-laws that regulated development by floor count and footprint limits. Urban designer Harshad Mehta reminisces about areas like Cumballa Hill and Malabar Hill, where skylines were once defined by treetops. Iconic buildings like Usha Kiran, Woodlands, and Kanchanjunga, though called 'skyscrapers' in their time, were still spaced apart as per prescribed rules. Today, these landmarks are lost amid a forest of newer, taller neighbours.
Global Lessons and a Warning for Mumbai's Future
Contrasting Mumbai's approach, Arzan Sam Wadia, a New York-based architect, points to Manhattan's strategic zoning laws. New York uses tools like "contextual zoning" and "tower setbacks" to manage the height and bulk of new developments, ensuring they fit better with their surroundings and do not overwhelm lower-rise neighbourhoods. "It's all about balance," Wadia explains.
Mumbai, however, appears to be challenging this very idea of balance. While the new, twinkling skyline might project an image of prosperity from a distance—such as from the coastal road—the reality at ground level is starkly different. Experts warn that this policy-driven yet indiscriminate high-rise development is foolhardy. Continuing this mindless building spree, they caution, will culminate in a self-induced disaster for the city in the coming years, sacrificing livability for unchecked vertical growth.
