In an industry often dazzled by striking visuals and launch-day spectacle, architect Suvir Mathur makes a quieter but far more durable case for planning. In conversation with Asma Rafat, Senior Correspondent at Realty+, the senior architect specialising in real estate design and development explains why circulation, services, adaptability, and cultural context matter more than dramatic façades. Drawing from years of working across Indian cities, Mathur argues that buildings age poorly not because they lose visual appeal, but because they fail functionally. From short-term marketing decisions to long-term operational realities, he breaks down how thoughtful planning becomes the unseen backbone of architecture that lasts.
In real estate-led architecture, how do you argue for planning decisions that may not be visually dramatic but are critical to a building’s long-term success?
Suvir Mathur: Architecture isn’t just about visual appeal; it’s about buildings that function effectively over decades. I always focus on the consequences of planning choices. Things like circulation, how services tie in, structural efficiency, and day-to-day practicality aren't obvious on the first day, but they decide if a building stays useful in the long run. Clients and teams get shown how skipping these creates ongoing hassles, higher running costs, and tough maintenance. Eye-catching figures grab headlines, but solid planning is what keeps a building going strong.
The method here is to tackle the functional issues first and let the looks come naturally after. When the operational framework is solid, even simple design touches feel right and put-together. That's why those quiet planning choices, however low-key, form the real backbone of good architecture.
Without them, beauty fades fast, and the building begins to age poorly in both function and perception.
Many projects look striking on launch day but age poorly. What planning oversights cause that decline?
Suvir Mathur: Design brief is often mistaken for Marketing brief. The former relies heavily on the underlying beliefs and behaviours of target audience, while the latter is all about connecting with them in the most effective way. A decision that maximizes short-term returns but undermines asset lifecycle commitments or alienates consumer beliefs can quickly destroy long-term value.
The root cause is planning with short term vision -circulation paths that quickly turn unhygienic or unsafe , service cores that are poorly accessible & serviced, not enough room for future changes, and poor natural light or airflow. Small slips like tight stairways, jammed-up entrances, or awkward parking while petty at the outset, soon turn into constant headaches. They rarely get spotted in pretty renderings but show up fast once people start using the place.
Designers sometimes get caught up in aesthetics, miss the real flow of movement, or don't think far enough about how the real estate will evolve over years. In offices or shops, this means unhappy tenants; in homes, it hits daily living and resale value. Buildings aren't static: they evolve, expand, and adjust to new needs. If planning is compromised, the structure becomes difficult to manage, expensive to maintain, and loses relevance quickly. Ageing poorly is rarely aesthetic, it’s functional. Good architecture ensures that every element, visible or hidden, works for the long term.
How do factors like circulation, services, and adaptability influence your design process before form and façade?
Suvir Mathur: I always start with program logic. How will people move, interact, and use spaces day to day? How will plumbing, electrical, fire safety, and upkeep work smoothly even decades later? Will rooms flex for different uses down the road? These are the questions that build the core structure long before any outer style gets decided. These are heavily influenced by regional culture, beliefs & behaviour. Shape and exterior only come once the practical side is sorted. Skipping this groundwork gives buildings that might wow at first glance but fall apart under actual daily use. Planning proper movement, services, and flexibility isn't exciting work, but it keeps everything running smoothly, handles growth, and stays relevant over time. This way of thinking also earns trust from clients and facility teams, they see the clear logic in every choice. A building that just works well ends up feeling more beautiful because it does its job without any struggle.
In Indian cities, planning often compensates for weak surrounding infrastructure. How much responsibility should architects take on beyond site boundaries?
Suvir Mathur: Architects must be pragmatic. You can’t fix an entire city’s infrastructure, but you can anticipate its limitations and design accordingly. If streets are narrow, you plan for parking, loading, and drop-off points within the site. If utilities are unreliable, you include redundancy, storage, or alternative systems. How the building fits with everything around it matters a lot, overlooking that brings constant operational headaches. Being responsible doesn't mean fixing the whole city's problems; it means building in smart fixes that shield users from common risks. Good architecture in India calls for grasping the wider surroundings outside the site lines, spotting likely issues early, and weaving in room to adapt. A project that handles its own plot well while adjusting to outside realities will wear its age better and keep working properly. The aim is quiet resilience, not grand gestures.
Does the client culture reward good planning enough, or is it focused on surface aesthetics?
Suvir Mathur: In most cases, aesthetics still dominate attention. Buyers and investors applaud façades and launch-day wow factors. Few notice planning unless it directly impacts operational cost or usability. This is of course, is guided by organisations looking to maximise short term gains, while unknowingly destroying long term value since its not visible prima facia.
The business of design is quite different from the business of selling. The deeper value of urban designis social integration. Designsthat are planned with this in mind foster continuity between generations, enabling citizens to locate themselves within a broader narrative. In societies undergoing rapid transformation, such continuity acts as emotional infrastructure. It anchors identity amid the instability of modernization. Communities that conserve their built and intangible heritage also tend to preserve social cohesion, because shared memory reinforces shared purpose.
As architects, an important part of our role is to create this awareness, and at times even educate the Client. Planning may appear boring in the initial development stages of a design and doesn’t earn immediate applause, but it determines whether a building succeeds over decades.
Glass towers, highways, and malls create glitter &convenience, but they rarely create meaning. A design rooted in culture & heritage addressing people’s beliefs & behaviours, in contrast, roots the citizen. It provides a sense of origin and belonging that transcends stability and resilience. The irony is that the faster a city modernizes, the more it hungers for identity.Over time, those who understand and reward these planning aspects see the real long-term value, propelling organisations into propelling organizations into sustainable conglomerates.
