By Anupama Mohanram / The Hindu

Not only has GRIHA evaluated and incorporated most of the green building criteria originally developed by LEED, a green building rating system that was developed in the US and adopted by the Indian Green Building Council in 2001, it has also added further requirements to make the system more suitable to the Indian building context. In addition, MNRE has made it mandatory for buildings to obtain a GRIHA rating to avail subsidies and other financial assistance allocated for green development. The Ministry also provides incentives to local bodies that offer rebate in property tax for GRIHA rated buildings.

Key features

Some of the key additional features that GRIHA requires are:

Basic building codes and standards: LEED originated in the US, where basic construction norms and regulations such as construction worker safety, health & sanitation, minimum visual and thermal comfort are strictly complied with and without which construction approvals are not granted. LEED’s criteria assumes adherence to these basic codes and norms which may not be mandatory in India.

On the other hand, GRIHA requires compliance with certain basic codes and norms prescribed by Indian standards such as the National Building Code (NBC), Energy Conservation Building Code (ECBC) and Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), by selectively enforcing a few of these even though they may not be required by local development authorities for construction approvals. This approach ensures that these basic standards are also achieved along with environmental performance. A few of these basic standards in GRIHA include:

- Minimum level of sanitation/safety facilities for construction workers.

- Minimum natural day lighting requirements as per the NBC

- Minimum artificial lighting requirements as per the ECBC

- Urban context consideration

Focus on non-airconditioned buildings: Traditionally, buildings in India have been designed with climate sensitivity in mind, trying to achieve thermal comfort for occupants without the use of mechanical interventions. GRIHA’s criteria provide more credit to climate responsive architecture and design to minimise energy use compared to LEED criteria.

Mandatory minimum requirement for solar energy: Backed up by MNRE subsidies, GRIHA requires, as a mandatory criterion, 1 per cent of the total energy needs for the development to be sourced from solar power. Quality of ground water in India is not guaranteed as in other countries such as the U.S. GRIHA mandates the treatment of ground water for drinking and irrigation to the norms as prescribed by ISI.

Noise pollution: LEED does not evaluate acoustical comfort. GRIHA requires adherence to Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and NBC guidelines for acceptable outdoor and indoor noise levels. All of the above make GRIHA very comprehensive. Incentives and subsidies by the MNRE: Buildings that achieve a minimum of 3-star GRIHA rating will be eligible for reimbursement of registration fees and cash incentives to their architects and consultants. Financial support for solar PV installations is also being offered. In addition , the MNRE is also offering Rs.50 lakhs to municipal corporations and Rs.25 lakhs to other urban local bodies that announce rebate in property tax for GRIHA rated buildings and make it mandatory for new government and public sector buildings to be rated under GRIHA.

Over the years, LEED has achieved global recognition as the rating system of choice for eco-friendly development. On the other hand, the availability of MNRE incentives and its greater relevance to the Indian context makes GRIHA an attractive option to government, quasi-government and private corporations with a predominantly Indian customer base. We spoke to Gaurav Shorey, GRIHA Secretariat, about the future of GRIHA . The next steps would be specific ratings for existing buildings and for low-income and rural housing developments that would be formulated in collaboration with organisations such as the HUDCO. The possibility of relaxation of FAR regulations for building developments with a GRIHA rating is also being weighed.

By Shailaja Tripathi / The Hindu

Three different structures by three different architects in three totally different countries and settings… but what binds them is their innate connection with the human beings who not only reside in them but also around them. Disappointed by the number of skyscrapers and high-rise buildings that lack a distinct identity of their own, Dutch architect Anne Feenstra brings us glimpses of these unique structures to inspire, sensitise and spread awareness, in the photo-exhibition ‘Architecture for Humanity’.

An initiative of Anne’s arch I, supported by the Centre for Media Studies and Embassy of the Netherlands, the project has taken off with three countries but as it progresses will travel to new countries and incorporate similar sites.

“We would like to do research on these sites, a detailed study on the culture, background, climate and the process of architecture. My mother doesn’t know anything about architecture and she recently visited India and she would look at these malls and giggle. I, too, was flabbergasted by the contradictions, the craft material for building available here and such structures. Where was India in them… nowhere. A building is meant for human beings. As an architect, we should create friendly buildings. You can call them green, sustainable, etc. This project is a platform for a dialogue in this area and addressing urban issues,” says Anne who divides his time between Afghanistan — where he teaches at the Kabul University — and India, where he is a member of the visiting faculty at the School of Planning and Architecture.

The process

As for the three buildings included in the first leg of the project, Anne feels you can’t get more diverse than this. And he is right. While the visitors’ centre at Pamir National Park in the Wakhan corridor in Afghanistan, built by Anne, is made of rockstone, Vasanth and Revathi Kamath’s residence is a mud house in Anangpur village, Haryana, constructed on what was once an abandoned quarry site. The third, Villa Maarsingh, made by Onix architects at Leeuwarden in the Netherlands is fashioned out of locally available timber.

“It’s a miracle that such structures have been built. The area in Afghanistan on which the visitors’ centre is built has the highest mountain of the region, which is 7000 metres high. With Marco Polo sheep and other endangered species, it is rich in bio-diversity and thus the government is developing it as a tourist destination,” explains the architect who worked with 104 unskilled labourers on the site. “There are schools built by Americans in the region but I have heard people saying that they would never send their kids there because the material used isn’t compatible to the climate. They say they would rather keep herds there. First by involving the locals, we created an ownership, and the material, the rockstone serves them well. We found a guy who makes grinding stones. I took him to the riverbed where we spent an entire day selecting stones to be used as capitals on the columns,” he adds.

The villa in Leeuwarden scores on the simplicity factor which is quite common in rural Dutch settings. “Two divorcees got married and live there with their four kids. It has been designed in such a manner that even though you live together, you don’t have to do everything together. There are special layers within the house, unexpected corners,” relates Feenstra. As for the Kamaths’ mud house, he says, Revathi has literally put her hands in mud. Though made out of an age-old material, it has a unique contemporary expression.

(The exhibition continues till October 31 at India Habitat Centre.)

The government has accused top officers at the COA, India’s apex architectural body, of criminal misconduct. BRIJESH PANDEY tracks the issues as the CBI investigates

IN A move that could change the face of the study and practice of architecture in India, the Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD) has recommended a CBI probe against the president, registrar and four members of the executive committee of the Council of Architecture (COA). The COA is a regulatory body constituted by the Architects Act of 1972, which accredits and licenses educational institutions to teach architecture in India. Moreover, every architect working in India has to be registered with the COA.

In a letter to the CBI dated August 27, 2009 (DO No. C-1301168/2009-Vig) — from the Joint Secretary and Chief Vigilance Officer (CVO) of the MHRD, Sunil Kumar — requested the investigation of six top officials of the COA, namely, the President, Vijay Sohoni, the Registrar, Vinod Kumar and four members of the Executive Committee: KB Mohapatra, Uday C Godkari, IJS Bakhsi and Prakash Deshmukh. In the letter (a copy of which is with TEHELKA) the Joint Secretary alleges that:

• People at the helm of affairs of the COA are misusing the authority of the Council to levy fees that are not authorised by the Architects Act.

• Institutions that refuse to pay the unauthorised fees are being threatened with de-recognition.

• Council memberships and COA executive committee memberships are being manipulated and members are being allowed to continue beyond their terms.

• Prestigious institutions such as the School of Planning and Architecture (SPA), NIT Patna, the Lucknow College of Architecture and the Chandigarh College of Architecture are singled out for punishment, while private Institutes such as Chitkara Institute in Punjab and the Piloo Mody College of Architecture in Orissa are given preferential treatment by these individuals despite having inferior facilities and fewer, less qualified faculty.

The letter states bluntly that the preferential treatment of private institutes suggests that bribes have been paid to those named above. Letters written by Anjali Bhawar, vice-chancellor of Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar (GNDU) and Kamal Singh Chahal, head of GNDU’s Department of Architecture to the MHRD seem to corroborate this. Bhawar writes that while an expert committee of the COA had allowed GNDU to admit 40 students to the architecture course, the Executive Committee of the same Council refused to accept the recommendation of its own expert committee. Chahal’s letter reveals that while GNDU had declared 14 faculty members in the prescribed form submitted to the COA, that figure was mysteriously reduced to 10 in the COA’s report. The Joint Secretary states that this was done “perhaps to show private institutes that if the COA wasn’t sparing government institutions, private institutions had better fall in line and cough up money” to avoid de-recognition.

THE HEADS of the department of two premier architectural institutes stated on condition of anonymity that the Council uses frequent inspections and the threat of de-recognition to extort and intimidate. On top of that, institutes have been charged exorbitant fees by the COA for inspections and for periodic extensions of recognition. The prestigious Jamia Millia Islamia, for example, was charged a whopping Rs 40,000 for a three-day inspection in 2008. While the law provides for an inspection once in five years (without permitting the COA to charge for them), several premier institutes faced yearly COA inspections, while, for arbitrary reasons, other institutes escaped. After several complaints to the MHRD, Deputy Secretary Harvinder Singh admitted on March 16, 2009 that the COA could not take money for inspections or for the extension of recognition and asked the COA to adhere to the five-year interval between inspections. Significantly, former COA Vice-President Vijay Uppal wrote in October 2005 to the MHRD, objecting against Sohoni’s role in appointing inspectors and approving their reports, but to no avail.

And where did all this money go? Shockingly, according to Prof SM Akhtar, the HoD of Architecture, Jamia Millia Islamia, “There has never been an audit of the funds of the COA.” The Architects Act clearly states that the COA has to go through an annual audit.

Another instance which has had universities and the COA at loggerheads is the National Aptitude Test for Architecture (NATA). The COA declared that from 2007, the NATA would not only be mandatory for all institutes, but exclusive as well. In other words, institutes would be forced to discontinue any other entrance examinations or procedures they had in place and accept candidates who passed the NATA. Significantly, the NATA is a computer-based test, a fact which would have made the manipulation of results extremely easy to commit and difficult to detect. Premier institutes such as the SPA, the JJ College of Arts, Mumbai, IIT Kharagpur, IIT Roorkee, Jamia Millia Islamia and Jadavpur University were up in arms at this, claiming that forcing them to use the NATA alone would dilute their high entrance standards. Unfazed, the COA asked the MHRD to de-recognise the SPA and 19 other premier institutes. When TEHELKA spoke to Vijay Sohoni about this, he said, “I had to act only because these so-called premier institutes have an abysmal studentteacher ratio. We look at facts and figures rather than the prestige of the institution.” After a fierce legal battle, the de-recognition of the institutes was lifted and the NATA no longer made an exclusive entrance test.

UNAUTHORISED FEES WOULD BE CHARGED BY THE COA FOR INSPECTIONS AND RECOGNITION

For a stickler for rules and someone so seemingly particular about de-recognition, Sohoni is curiously lax when it comes to himself. One of the most damning allegations in Kumar’s letter to the CBI is that while the Vidya Vardhan Institute of Design Environment and Architecture, Goa, of which Sohoni is the president, is shown on the COA’s website as an institute affiliated to the Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), the Vice-Chancellor of IGNOU has categorically denied any such affiliation. Kumar states bluntly that this amounts to cheating the public. The letter states that since “Sohoni is fleecing the students by collecting fees though the college is not recognised as per the Architects Act, the position of the President of the COA is thus being misused by him with criminal intent.”

However, when confronted with these allegations by TEHELKA, Sohoni denied them all. He rubbished charges of financial irregularity and stated, “I haven’t even received any complaint. The mandate of the COA is to ensure that there should be no compromise on the quality of architectural education, regardless of the name and fame of the institute. We take action only when there is a fall in the mandated student-faculty ratio. If the ministry has received any complaint, they should come to us, but sadly, this was not done.”

Ever since the CBI began its investigation into the case in the first week of September, there is a huge sense of relief among architects and at various schools of architecture. They believe that this investigation will ensure that instead of being focused on placating a rampant COA, they can now concentrate on architecture in India.

Original article here.

Rapid urbanization of developing countries such as India and China over the past decade have resulted in almost 200,000 people migrating from rural to urban regions somewhere on the planet every day (United Nations statistics). This translates into the need for the world to accommodate the equivalent of a new city of one million people every week. How can our existing – or new – urban centers accommodate this growth? The traditional American model of a dense working downtown core and an ever-expanding residential suburb have been generally recognized as an unsustainable model for the future, due to the high energy expenditure of the necessary expanded infrastructure (roads, power, waste etc), the transport commute itself (largely automobile) and the loss of natural greenbelt / landscape for agriculture and ecological balance. Humanity needs to evolve into a more sustainable pattern of existence, and cities need to become denser with more concentrated centers for living,

This is not a scenario that is unique to the developing world. Whilst population growth is more static in many developed countries, immigration and changing social demographics are having a massive impact on countries such as the US and UK. People are living longer, divorce rates have been rising for several decades, the average number of people in households has dropped, and the number of single-people households has risen. In the UK, for example, this results in the need for 200,000 new homes every year for the next ten years in order to cope with demand. Where can these new homes be built? In the ever-increasing, energy-profligate suburb, or in denser cities with their greater potential for energy saving?

Whilst these envisaged new cities have an important role to play in the future, in themselves they are not the solution. The rural to urban migration is centered on existing cities, many of which are struggling with the consequential population explosion and the impact on existing infrastructure and patterns of life. Our host city for the conference – Mumbai – is a poignant example of the pressures many cities in developing countries face. A population growth which currently sees the city census at 16 million and growing daily, is superimposed on an infrastructure which has seen little development since its initial creation. Every aspect of it seems way beyond capacity – mass transit, power, waste handling, access to clean water. Mumbai’s geographic make-up as a fairly narrow ‘dead-end’ peninsular, with the business center concentrated towards the end exacerbates this situation, with the north-south flow and reverse flow creating average travel speeds of 15 km/h.

Thus the real situation that countries such as India and China face – as well as large parts of the developed world – is not necessarily how to create new sustainable cities where the urban slate is wiped clean, but how to re-make existing cities in a sustainable way. This conference will debate these urban and policy issues, while also considering what role tall buildings and increased urban density will play. The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat is the arbiter of the criteria upon which tall building height is measured, and thus determines the title of ‘The World’s Tallest Building’. CTBUH is the world’s leading body dedicated to the field of tall buildings and urban habitat and the recognized international source for information in these fields.

We welcome you to join the world’s leading, and fastest growing, professional affiliation of all those involved in the creation and operation of tall buildings internationally.

Original article here.

The Maharashtra government is marking 50 years of the state by planning 50 ambitious projects, including Asia’s tallest building in the city.

“We have proposed the building as an iconic tower, which would be Asia’s tallest and have invited design and construction bids for it,” a senior official from the urban development department said.

The 531-metre high tower will be built at Wadala in Central Mumbai over 14 hectares of land, the official said, adding that the proposal has been submitted to the government. The tower will have commercial, recreational, academic and entertainment facilities, he said, adding, “the place has been chosen in such a way that it would be a conversion point for the proposed Monorail and Metro rail.”

To mark the Golden Jubilee celebrations of the coastal state, formed in 1960, the Congress-NCP Government is planning several projects. Chief Secretary Johny Joseph has convened a meeting of all departments tomorrow in this regard, the official said.

Original article here.

There is a personal connection here for us at UAI. The author of the monograph is Prof. H, Masud Taj my professor at Rizvi College of Architecture from 1992 to 1997,  and a dear friend.

This monograph is published and designed by Pranav Upasani, a fellow alumni from RCA and a good friend, and Prof. Y D Pitkar, a visiting faculty at RCA in the 90’s and a friend too.

Received via email from Pranav Upasani …

An interesting book is being published on the works of late Architect Nari Gandhi’s works by the Art & Design Book Press at Foundation ForArchitecture.

This is the first-ever monograph of Nari, the talented apprentice to Frank Lloyd Wright at Taliesin. I have just visited the foundation’s website at http://www.forarc.com Do visit the website to find out more information about the book. You can also see an online preview of the book in ‘About the book’ section and order your copy from the website.

More about Nari Gandhi

Nari Gandhi (1934-1993) was an apprentice to Frank Lloyd Wright at Taliesin from 1956 to 1961. He later worked with Architect Warren Weber and studied pottery at the Kent State University before returning to India. Through his early works, he introduced in India, Wright’s desert masonry and the Usonian grid. Nari worked without an office, without drawings, without formal associates, without a timetable, unencumbered by legal and financial constraints, retaining the trust of clients without entertaining their requests. He dispensed architecture that was intoxicatingly rich in materials and craftsmanship. He transformed architecture into a work of art and the client into a patron. [link]

More about the author Prof. H. Masud Taj.

H Masud Taj is an architect-poet-calligrapher (www.taj.ca). He was first featured as a poet by Jennifer Kapoor at her Prithvi Theatre Festival (Mumbai 1978). As a post-oral poet, his audiences vary from Officers of the Indian Navy at their Naval Base in Mumbai (architectural site of his War Memorial) to a single Bosnian refugee in Vienna. He is featured both as a contemporary Canadian poet (Atlas 2007) as well as a contemporary Indian poet (Penguin Books India 2008, 2005, 2002, Bloodaxe UK 2008, Wespennest Austria 2006, Fulcrum USA 2005) besides being aired on BBC, AIR and CFMTV Canada. His work has been translated into Arabic, Hebrew and German and interfaced with architecture (Graz Austria), landscape (Toronto Arts Council, Canada), calligraphy (Gallerie Jean concteau, Mumbai) dance (Dave Wilson’s Parahumans Dance Theatre, Toronto) and with paintings (Jehangir Art Gallery and National Centre of Performing Arts, Mumbai).

As an architect he was mentored by Hassan Fathy and as a calligrapher by David Hosbrough. He has held solo-exhibits in the English Italic-hand; his Arabic calligraphic-platonic-solid was shortlisted in Switzerland and his Hindi calligraphic-posters were exhibited in Scandinavia. His calligraphy is in the collection of Edward Said, Moshe Safdie, Arthur Erickson, etc. His favourite certificate remains his Kindergarten report card that graded his writing as “Bad.”  [link]

You can pre-order this book to receive their special discount.

Corbusier through his works in India opened up new possibilities which, we have not yet been able to integrate into our architecture.

This visionary had to fight our conventions of thought. He proposed cities where buildings were lifted off the ground on ‘pilotis’ or pillars and simultaneously terraces became gardens.

Huge vistas of green would have opened up on the ground and regained the lost open space on the terraces again. Concrete, his chosen material would have made this possible.

What we did was to adopt this method without understanding its full potential. We lifted buildings off the ground but filled the space so achieved with characterless, ugly parking etc. Yet this vision was not just for single buildings but for the entire planning of cities.

City planning could have changed the urban space by thinking in three dimensions. That way all infrastructure and the movements that cities are cluttered with would have been replaced by a new landscape which integrated architecture and city planning.
All is not lost however. We must remember that it took us a century to digest and integrate the new stimuli that came to our country.

British building types and elements such as the bungalow and verandah became part of our everyday language through slow assimilation and evolution. Perhaps we need time and our steps in integrating the massive stimulation of Corbusier’s work may well bear fruit.

Original article in the Times of India

Thursday’s first session was an introduction to the theme. Kazi Ashraf gave an overview of the current state of Indian architecture which was basically paraphrasing his article for the “Made In India” AD Issue of 2007. In showing a lot of proposals for projects he tried to cover ground about the typologies of emergent Indian architecture. However as Rahul Mehrotra pointed out later in the conference, most of them were just proposals and never ever left the drawing board. And sadly this would be a constant criticism of the conference over the next two days. More of that later in the article.

Some of the outstanding presentations were:

Ahmedabada-based Rajeev Kathpalia of Vastu Shilpa Foundation gave an overview of some of his latest work and the IMAX project for Ahmedabad stood out for its clarity of thought, site and function response and spatial organisation.

Another Ahmedabad based practise, that of Gurjeet Singh Matharoo gave a wonderful overview of the various materials they work with. A comparative analysis of the embodied energies of Concrete, Steel, Wood, and Earth showed how each material embodies and transforms energy. And then Gurjeet went on to turn his entire analysis over its head and showed 4 projects that did everything contrary to his analysis. Most people did not get the sarcasm which was a compliment to the straight-faced Gurpreet. The projects shown…especially the "House with Balls" and the Crematorium were really well thought of and executed.  By far the most impressive of all the presentations over the duration of the conference, in terms of content and clarity.

Bombay-based Rahul Mehrotra was his usual eloquent self and plowed straight into the issues that his practise deals with. He gave an overview of some of the conservation/preservation work that the practise deals with and then showed some of their recent projects. Notable amongst them were the TISS Rural campus and the House for an Actor in Alibag, and the Orchard house. Rahul presentation also brought forward the point about how presentations can be so intense and inspiring when the speaker has total control and command over his subject matter. Right through the conference and especially during the panel discussions Rahul brought forth a deep understanding of the non-architectural issues to the process of architecture. Be it the politics of SEZ licenses, or the issues of developers as majority clients in India or the reasons for US firms filling the lack of technical know how of Indian practises, when it comes to large scale projects.

Bangalore based Prem Chandavarkar of Chandavarkar n Thacker Architects presented the direction his firm set out on 4 years ago. In a series of questions they posed to themselves four years ago, the practise has tried to find answers to these questions through the work they do. Their Flower Auction House project was really inspiring as was the Valuelabs Software office that was built under the constraints of Vastu and turns out to be a wonderful inside-out building with public and private spaces interwoven. Prem through his presentation and later panel discussions showed a deep understanding of the theory of art and architecture and that was evident in all his work. What was also remarkable was his use of quotes to illustrate his points so succinctly.

Berlin and Auroville based Anupama Kundoo showed a series of projects that she has completed over the years that have dealt with the use of material and the issues of sustainability, way before it became a buzzword. Her use of bamboo, recycled glass and earthernware pots was completely refreshing in approach to design and as built work. Anupama spoke with a passion that comes from having lived in Auroville for years in dwellings that she then builds. Hence her practical know-how of materials and how they function in a built environment made her a true proponent of the sustainability movement in all its manifestations: environmental, economic and social.  One of her most poignant statements was "The essence of the pot is in its nothingness"….something that stuck to my mind the minute she said it.

New York based Tod Williams and Billie Tsien showed the right way that "starchitects" can bring their design talent and expertise to India. Their Banyan Tree project for the Tatas in the western suburbs of Bombay, showed a deep understanding of the ground realities and the sensibilites that are needed to design in a foreign culture. They spoke about the challenges of being foreign architects and hence having to prove more than their Indian counterparts, the "Indian-ness" of their design. Their insistence on understanding the skills and capabilities of the Indian craftsmen and their use of visual mockups before getting into construction, allowed them to sort out a lot of the issues that mar a project as it leaves the drawing board and touches the ground.

Philadelphia based landscape architects Dilip da Cunha and Anuradha Mathur gave a peek at their upcoming exhibition SOAK at the NGMA in Mumbai. They studied and analysed water bodies in and around Mumbai, especially the ecosystem that supports the Mithi River and the surrounding areas near the original 5 forts of Bombay. Through a rigorous design exercise they evolve a series of guidelines for the urban ecology and landscape in Mumbai. The exhibition starts in mid June and is a must-see.

Other notable presentations included the Shillom Spa resort in the Western Ghats by Margie Ruddick and Tom Zook. And a series of projects by Nisha Mathew and Soumitra Ghosh from Bangalore.

The structure and the pairing of speakers in the conference was not as seamless as one would expect. Also the co-chairs wasted too much time in introducing the same participants again and again.

Friday’s session started with an introduction by Brian McGrath who was completely off topic and his use of maps to illustrate some points was vague and ambigious. As was his need for self-publicity at each and every opportunity. In trying to sound too scholarly and academic he completely lost the plot and thankfully the presenters after him saved the day with their presentations and work.

A question that I posed to the co-chairs concluded the conference. The issue I raised had to do with the choice of the participants in the conference. All of the speakers showed great work and are fantastic proponents of their talent and craft. Sadly, however that was but a miniscule of the architecture of India in the past decade. The architecture that has come up in the past few years has been the developer driven, high-rise architecture that has built entire cities like Gurgaon, or enclaves like the Bandra Kurla Complex, or gated communities like the IT Parks outside of Bangalore. No one except Sudhir Jambhekar of FXFowle addressed such projects. It was in hindsight really nice of Sudhir Jambhekar to go out on a limb and present the 300 m tower proposed for South Bombay.

And thank god he did it. It made the entire "emerging" arguement a bit skewed in the typology of projects discussed. Sudhir did get some flak for the project and very professionally addressed all concerns of the audience and the panel. However one heartily wished for a Hafeez Contractor or the likes to present some of their work and discuss some of the challenges they would have faced. More insight into the developer-architect nexus would have made the conference a bit more worthwhile.

Asking the selected presenters to speak to the audience present was like preaching to the choir.

Hopefully the organisers will, in the future be more open to not pandering to just the "published" names in architecture, but scratch beneath the surface and bring about a more diverse array of presenters for a more meaningful and intense debate of the issues.

All in all, a wonderful two days spent. Hope that the next conference of such kind is not 12 years away, as was the case with the current one….following the previous edition in 1997.

By Tripti Lahiri

In the past five years, as India’s hunger for glass-encased IT parks and marble-swathed gated communities appeared insatiable, architects designed supersize projects dreamed up by Indian developers. Then the money disappeared. As the global economic crisis has snowballed, the country’s banks have turned skittish.

"The first to get hit are large projects," says Mohit Gujral, whose firm, Design Plus, does lots of big projects and has had to lay off a quarter of its 140 employees. Design Plus has worked on some of New Delhi’s swankiest mega-malls and with Singapore-based Kerry Hill Architects on the city’s first Amanresorts hotel. As business slows down, Gujral says, "You look at projects and scales you may not have considered earlier."

The Survam Knowledge Park, a 15-acre site in the tech suburb of Gurgaon, is an example of a "new India" project bowing to newer realities. Excavation began months ago on the $115 million project, but work has now paused. "They are revisiting the project," said Anil Rawat, India managing director for Canada’s B+H Architects, which worked on the design and opened an office in the country with a local partner 15 months ago.

Smaller firms that work directly with users have been less affected. "They’re still fitting out the same square footage, but at a reduced budget," said Rahoul Singh, whose firm, Rahoul Singh Design Associates, counts on residences funded by private wealth for half its workload.

Some major projects are going ahead, but with different customers in mind. B+H’s Rawat said that townships the firm is designing around the northern city of Haridwar were planned originally to include apartments of 950 square feet as well as villas three or four times that size. Now there will likely be fewer villas and more of the smaller, cheaper apartments, as "affordable housing" becomes the new mantra for developers.

Indian cities face a shortage of 25 million housing units, mostly for low-income families. But most apartments advertised in major cities until last year cost upwards of 60,000 dollars—75 times India’s average annual income. "There were never enough end-users for that and there were never going to be," said Manit Rastogi, of the mid-sized firm Morphogenesis, who says new projects will now be driven by real demand rather than speculative investment.

Rastogi has seen about a third of his projects shut down, but is optimistic about making up for lost work in areas that still face a shortfall—such as mid- and low-end housing, schools, and healthcare facilities. The firm is designing a university of 2.5 million square feet in a Delhi suburb. "There are real projects to be delivered," he said. "India is a developing country. We still have a shortage of housing. We have a shortage of true office space. We have a shortage of just about everything."

The way we describe and understand cities is being radically transformed, alongside the tools we use to design them and impact on their physical structure. While architecture has shaped the built environment to satisfy urban dwellers aesthetically and to accommodate their functional needs such as face-to-face interactions and travel, pervasive systems shape electronically mediated interactions in urban space, including use of both fixed and mobile displays and wireless communication (see CityWare).

A major issue is space and its relationship with behavior: how do we design the ambient created by fusing electronically created interaction space with architecturally created physical space? Another major issue is infrastructure: how do we provide interaction and interoperability that scale up to city-level pervasive systems, while ensuring that they function appropriately and merge aesthetically with urban spaces, materials, forms and uses?

Continue reading here.