Heritage Panel says no to a divider that is being built along Queen’s Necklace It is yet another case of how the state government found itself violating the heritage rules it made 12 years ago. The Mumbai Urban Heritage Conservation Committee (MUHCC) has rejected the design of the newly-laid concrete pipe divider along the stretch of the Queen’s Necklace, which is a critical part of the ongoing beautification plan of Marine Drive, funded by MMRDA.
Sharad Upasani, chairman, MUHCC, said, “The design shown to us when the first phase of project came to us for clearance has completely changed over the period. We have decided not to approve the existing design.” Technically, a negative vote like this would force the architect to undo the work. But the hitch is that MUHCC is a an advisory body and needs support of proactive state officials to implement its orders.
Ratan Batliboi, architect of this Rs130-crore two phase project pleaded non-guilty.
“The design has been approved by the state-appointed empowered committee, and even the Citizen’s Action Group. I have not been informed about the rejection of design so far,” he said.
Lack of transparency in its work, design and landscaping has been the story of the project so far. Since it has been laid, the church (pipe) organ design divider for the Marine Drive heritage precinct has evoked sharp criticism from conservationists. “We have seen people merrily crossing road by jumping the pipes and this would invite more accidents. Despite promises that they would come back to us in case of revision of design, the MMRDA and Batliboi chose to approach the empowered committee, which comprises corporate honchos and bureaucrats, for clearance and came to us when the divider was laid,” a MUHCC member said.
“This is a waste of public money. Fifty-two palm trees uprooted from the promenade and transplanted at Oval maidan have died. The bamboo trees planted along the new bus stops on Marine drive too have died,” said Sharada Dwivedi, historian and member, CAG. T Chandrashekhar, metropolitan commissioner, said, “There is no constructive support from the multiple committees governing the project. The MUHCC should have suggested changes instead of rejecting it.”
