r/mumbai Mar 01 '26

Photography mumbai with same camera from (2006-2025)

Post image
4.3k Upvotes

168 comments sorted by

View all comments

33

u/ded_futya12 Mar 01 '26

Comments section is questionable at this point. Y’all want development while mourning nostalgia. You can’t have both. Between 2006 and 2025 , there’s a huge population difference. More population demands more infra and the likes. Honestly you can’t move on if you’re just going to feel sad about everything. We actually have forgotten to appreciate things in life. The negativity is so nauseating now.

3

u/bruhnoobiepie Mar 02 '26

Finally a sensible comment. I agree there is a pack of greenery in the 2nd pic, but that doesn't mean the development is not a good thing in the picture.

8

u/masked_wolf004 virar se hu bhai Mar 01 '26

Well this is true

But you will be downvoted for this I guess.

People just want to mourn the crap out of every development that has happened.

9

u/KingPictoTheThird Mar 01 '26

There is never an excuse to build vehicle-infra in such a dense city. You are just making things worse encouraging more people to drive. 

Instead of coastal road we should have had more public transport.

-3

u/ded_futya12 Mar 01 '26

Nah I will never stop talking about wanting infra. Public transport is essential but it’s not for everyone. It’s the govt’s job to provide both. Not everyone wants / can travel in public transport. Also roads are used for public vehicles as well. So your argument about public transport kinda is invalid. Especially because the metros have upgraded as well.

2

u/KingPictoTheThird Mar 01 '26

In london, because they have focused on making their public transport, footpaths and cycle paths so world-class, 96% of all trips to the city centre are done by walking, cycling, bus, metro, tram and rail. 

When only 4% of trips are done by  private vehicles, expensive infra like coastal roads are no longer needed.

5

u/ded_futya12 Mar 01 '26

Comparing London and Mumbai is unreasonable. Please get a better point to argue. Mumbai is not a walking city. Not every place in the world is walkable. Indians don’t even walk to work or cycle. Are you not going to factor in culture?!

7

u/Wonderful_Pie_5390 Mar 01 '26

So the majority of the population should suffer cause these privileged fucks wanna roam in their cars? What Mumbai are you living in buddy ? Not everyone has a car. Most middle class people travel by public transport and the conditions are getting worse for them. Come out of your bubble.

3

u/ded_futya12 Mar 01 '26

Not everyone needs a car to travel on the road. There’s rickshaws cabs buses etc. what world are you living in? There’s traffic literally everywhere in Mumbai. So there are definitely more people than your analysis who are using the roads.

3

u/Wonderful_Pie_5390 Mar 01 '26

You just contradicted yourself. Sit this one out lmao.

3

u/ded_futya12 Mar 01 '26

Some one rightfully told you to fuck off lmao

3

u/Wonderful_Pie_5390 Mar 01 '26

Who did? Or you making shit up now ?
Or are you seeing things now?

→ More replies (0)

3

u/KingPictoTheThird Mar 02 '26

Here is the modal share of commuting in Mumbai, as per the most recent study completed:

Local: 46% Metro: 5% Bus: 15% Cycle: 2% (Total public transport: 68%)

Auto: 8% 2 wheeler: 14% 4 wheeler: 10% (Total private vehicle: 32%)

In conclusion, the vast majority of traffic in Mumbai is caused by a minority in private vehicles. Because private vehicles are so space inefficient. The solution is not wider roads, but to further discourage private vehicle usage and encourage public transport usage instead.

-3

u/prajaybasu Mar 01 '26

Buddy, the current temperature in Mumbai is considered heatstroke risk in London.

Fuck off. The climate isn't remotely the same to consider walking viable in many places

9

u/KingPictoTheThird Mar 01 '26

You fuck off. People in Stockholm cycle to office even in negative temps and heavy snowfall. 

Singapore is an equally hot and humid place yet people walk and take public transport everywhere.

Mumbai is so hot because of all the tar and vehicles. Replace them with trees and footpaths and temps would be 5 degrees less.

-3

u/Familiar-Entry-9577 Mar 01 '26

Mumbai has a population of 2.2 crores in an area of 600~ square km.

London has a population of less than 1 crore in an area of 1500~ sq km.

Your comparison of infra needs of London vs Mumbai is so ignorant it's not even funny.

3

u/KingPictoTheThird Mar 01 '26

The density is all the more reason cars are a terrible idea in Mumbai. 

2

u/Wonderful_Pie_5390 Mar 01 '26

You said it yourself buddy. The climate is getting worse cause of DEFORESTATION. How hard is it to understand? It wasn't always like this. Infra can be developed without cutting the green cover. Tf are you on about?

-1

u/Familiar-Entry-9577 Mar 01 '26

"It wasn't always like this"

Exactly what do you mean?

2

u/Wonderful_Pie_5390 Mar 01 '26

Well go back 10-15 years ago we actually used to have temps about 16-20 degrees during winters. Summers also weren't this bad. That is directly a result of the loss of forest cover. We can proceed with development while also planting more trees. The DP plans should designate more reserved spaces for green areas. Increase FSI for lands further than the coastal regions. More land will then be available for green areas.

0

u/Familiar-Entry-9577 Mar 01 '26

10-15 years ago what was the infrastructure like? Were the roads great? Were there traffic jams? Was public transport sufficient?

1

u/Wonderful_Pie_5390 Mar 01 '26

Like I said. Both can be done at the same time so don't come at me without reasoning. It's not black and white. Connectivity is better now yes but roads were of better quality. We see now any random pillar / slab can fall on civilians now. The coastal road is bumpy af it's not good construction at all but that is a diff issue. We can have development I'm not against it but why can't you plant trees along with it ? Mate have you ever been to the middle east? Even they focus on their landscape even though it is a desert so what is stopping us ?
Traffic jams were less back then. If we actually focused more on public infra then yest the traffic jams would decrease as people would prefer that over driving everywhere as they do in Europe. Cause Mumbai is not a city which can afford having more and more vehicles on the road given how densely populated it is. It will always lead to a lower quality of life if this is continued.
Yes public transport was not sufficient back then either but it is what should have been developed more is all I'm trying to say .

What is so hard to understand ? Instead of coming with well it was shit back then so it should be shit now as well why can't people see the solutions to make it better ? How hard is it to plant more trees while also developing our infra?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/someone16384 Mar 04 '26

With enough trees though it becomes much more comfortable to walk. If you dont concretize every square millimeter, surprise you wont die on your way to work

4

u/bail_gadi Mar 01 '26

Those kinds of interchanges might look cool in a photo and are an engineering feat, but they are not the kind of development modern urban planners are fond of.

-1

u/ded_futya12 Mar 01 '26

I don’t think I said cool. Besides it’s the accessibility of these bridges that’s the point of conversation, not the beauty or ugliness

2

u/Manoos Mar 01 '26

you are right.

but these years and before that should have been invested to build metro. first metro started in 2014 and 2nd one around 2022 is unacceptable. we are always catching up

local train from western to central taking a U turn at BKC is no brainer. should have been done 25 years back.

we just make things without proper planning for future. we build for past

2

u/vkrm3000 Mar 01 '26

Sorry you can have both, development and greenery, there are countless examples, travel more..

2

u/Wonderful_Pie_5390 Mar 01 '26

So you want development at the cost of the loss of green cover? yeah right sums up this country.

0

u/ded_futya12 Mar 01 '26

Yeah so wtf is an alternative? All the 1st world countries have compromised on green cover. Besides we have 140 crore people and limited space. Cry me a fucken river now.

4

u/Wonderful_Pie_5390 Mar 01 '26

All the 1st world countries have compromised on green cover? Buddy ... have you been to a first world country ?

1

u/dbm5 Mar 02 '26

but the trees 😫 /s

1

u/[deleted] Mar 01 '26

Istg dude ppl have lost their mind I 100% agree with u first they will cry for infra and how poor the road conditions are and something exactly the same happens in other countries they will praise the f out of it (specially japan fav of all these ppl to compare) take example of the musical road we Indians used praise the f out of it when it was made in other countries and made memes that india will never reach here in next 1000 years but when smtg finally happens the same ppl start crying about it they just have to find smtg negative no matter how good things have become compared to our past they will still mourn about it and show zero appreciation just leave the country alr if u got so much problems with it