New Delhi: Approved in principle in 2006, the project to build a National War Museum near the iconic India Gate in Lutyens’ Delhi has hit a roadblock. While the Delhi Urban Art Commission (DUAC) has raised an objection to the concept design not conforming to the “architectural surroundings of the area as also the overall urban design character of Central Vista and Lutyens Bungalow Zone”, the Heritage Conservation Committee (HCC) has noted that 406 trees that line up the Princess Park area may be “adversely affected” should the construction take place as per the winning design.
For the museum – which is to be connected through a tunnel to the proposed National War Memorial being built in two lawns at India Gate – the Centre had floated a global design competition in 2016. Mumbai-based design firm sP+a Studio’s proposal was adjudged the winning design in April 2017.
Incidentally, the Centre had specified that the “National War Museum will be an institution to collect, preserve, interpret and display military artefact, portray significant events of our nation’s wars and conflicts and related objects of historical importance for education and promoting patriotism.” With respect to the National War Memorial, the DUAC had conveyed its online approval and closed the file on February 9, 2018.
It had also laid out that the museum would be constructed on a 10.71 acre plot and would include an interconnecting underground tunnel to India Gate.
Plan for multi-sensory display
The criteria for the design was that it should “portray military campaigns, heroic deeds and victories through multi-sensory display so as to reinforce citizens’ faith and pride in the armed forces; to profile human experience of war and chronicle military events which shaped the development of the country and national character; to enhance awareness of the glorious military heritage of India to instill and motivate citizens to greater devotion and duty to the country and to establish itself as an outstanding landmark in the National Capital Region for Indian and foreign visitors.”
Among the exhibits proposed to be installed was the jeep-mounted recoilless (RCL) gun that was used by Havildar Abdul Hamid to destroy at least three Patton tanks before he was martyred in the epic battle of Asal Uttar during the 1965 Pakistan war. Hamid was later conferred with the Param Vir Chakra.
‘Design did not conform to architectural surroundings’
The contest for the museum was held in two stages. In the first phase, out of the nearly 300 entries, seven were short-listed. These seven participants were made to submit detailed designs, including 3D models, before the competition jury, which then selected three top designs.
However, when the winning design was placed before the HCC and the DUAC, several objections were raised. The DUAC said it considered the matter in the overall context.
“The Commission observed that the first prize winning entry for which the opinion of the Commission has been sought does not conform to the architectural surroundings of the area. It was also observed that the terms of reference of the design competition for which the concurrence of the DUAC was taken have not been respected w.r.t. its edifice in Princess Park around ‘C’ Hexagon, amongst other landmarks such as Baroda House, Hyderabad House, etc. and also does not integrate with surrounding buildings in the Lutyens Zone,” it said, while giving its decision on the design.
DUAC chairperson P.S.N Rao later observed that when the proposal had initially gone to the commission, it had asked that it be first cleared by the Central Vista Committee and the HCC. “After that, they came back to us, but we didn’t find the project acceptable,” he said in January this year.
In-principle approval in 2006
According to the minutes of the 1432nd meeting held on October 18, 2017, the DUAC had also pointed out that when the proposal for the National War Memorial & National War Museum was put before it by the ministry of defence in 2016, it had clearly stated that the ministry may go ahead with the competition but should take into account the observations and recommendations of the commission.
The DUAC had spelt out eight broad points. While welcoming the idea of holding a global/national level architectural competition for the project, the commission had given its “in principle go ahead” to the proposal in 2006. It said the proposal may be seen by the jury in context of the unique urban design of Central Vista; a comprehensive Master Plan for the overall complex be prepared; there should be no change in the existing road network; the status of hutment plots in hexagon complex be given “due consideration”; comprehensive proposals be prepared of all six lawns around India Gate, and a traffic transportation study be conducted.
While the results of the competition were announced in April 2017, a month earlier, in March, the defence ministry issued notices to Princess Park residents asking them to vacate the place for the war museum.
While taking up the representation of a design consultant at its meeting on May 3, 2017, the Commission had observed that it “has no role in evaluation the design competition entries”. It had noted that the “complainant may like to take up his grievance with the Ministry of Defence, the organisers of the Global Design Competition on the subject matter”.
Subsequently, when the joint director, National War Memorial & Museum Integrated Defence Staff, sent a photograph of the chosen design for the museum to DUAC on August 8, 2017, with the request that it offer its views as to whether the concept design conforms to the architectural surroundings of the area, as per the condition put by the ministry of urban development in December 2016, the Commission observed that the proposal falls within the purview of the Central Vista Committee as well as Heritage Conservation Committee, and asked for their views on the matters first.
DUAC wanted museum to be an “imposing edifice”
The DUAC had also specified in the terms of reference in August 2016 that: “.. The National War Museum’s building should be an imposing edifice in Princess Park around ‘C’ Hexagon amongst other landmarks such as Baroda House, Hyderabad House, etc. It should be integrated with National War Memorial and the surrounding buildings in the Lutyens zone.”
However, while going through the winning design, it observed that the “overall architectural character in terms of the integrated central vista has not been respected in the design submitted to the commission.”
The HCC, too, raised objections to the design.
The concept design of the winning entry for National War Museum, the HCC said, was referred to it by the director of National War Memorial and Museum, Colonel Basera, on October 10, 2017 for “technical advice/comments as to whether the design of SPA Studio View is in conformity with the architectural surroundings of the area like Hyderabad House, Baroda House and similar other buildings”. Subsequently, the officer also made a presentation before it.
The HCC said it was “informed that the size of the proposed museum structure will be 430 metre X 58 metre with a height of approximately 24 metres with four floors.” However, it said, “no detail drawings, actual tree survey plan or any other plan as on site was made available to it” though some 3D views (not to scale) of the building were shown as part of the presentation.
HCC site visit revealed prospective damage to old trees
The HCC said it visited the National War Museum site at Princess Park. It said Colonel Basera had also informed them that the architect of the first prize winning entry had claimed that “out of 406 number of existing trees, only 28 trees will be required to be transplanted”. But the HCC observed that “as per the documents/presentation, it appeared to be an unrealistic/unverified figure, keeping in view actual conditions at site and proposal for construction of two basements.”
“It was observed that it will be very difficult to retain the fully grown up/old trees (some of which forms an essential part of natural heritage of the Lutyens zone). Obviously besides 28 trees, many other well grown trees will also be adversely affected,” the HCC held.
It also expressed the view that “on the basis of the presentation made (3D) and the block model shown, the heritage elements/materials, or the historic form which relates to the heritage of Central Vista is not reflected in the present proposal. The overall architectural scale, design, colour of the building block, as proposed in the design shown to the HCC, also does not conform to the historical and architectural surroundings of the site as far as could be made out in the absence of detailed drawings and merely on the basis of a presentation and block model.”
Doors still open for other designs
In it subsequent meeting on January 18, 2018, the HCC said “as far as design no. 1 is concerned, it had deliberated the matter in its meeting held on 12.10.2017 and had communicated its observations to the National War Memorial and Museum, HQ Integrated Defence Staff.”
In this meeting, the HCC also decided to request the NWM&M to submit a specific proposal that it may prefer for consideration and observations of the committee. It said this could be “design no. 1, 2 or 3 or any other design.”
Note: This article was edited as the earlier version erroneously said that that Ministry of Defence sent the DUAC the winning designs on April 21, 2017.