This work was first presented as part of the Archichakkar Seminar series under the guidance of Ar. D. Vishwanathan at the School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi, the shared alma-matter of the authors.

• Divya Chand is an Urban Researcher and Architect, with an MSc. in Urban Studies from Vrije Universiteit Brussel. She was previously an Urban Fellow with the Indian Institute for Human Settlements.
• Divleena Singh is a Product Designer from National Institute of Design, Ahmedabad working with tensile structures. She is also the founder of Studio Slow.
• G. Lakshmi Chaitanya Reddy is an Architect and Capacity Building Consultant with mHS Citylab, and has been an Anant Fellow, from the founding cohort of the fellowship focused on sustainable built environments.
• Preeyambika Bagha works in Mauritius with the ENL Group on the Moka Smart City project, and has an Advanced Masters in Urban Management and Real Estate from the Essec Business School in France.
• Suprima Joshi is an Urban Designer based in Pittsburgh with a Masters from Carnegie Mellon University. Her work has focussed on Riverfront development in Nepal and USA.

Delhi is a site of frantic urbanization and construction activity is extensive. There are ever-growing suburbs and the burdened core – all building more to serve more. Urban-dwellers thus interact directly or indirectly with construction-sites on a daily basis. The plenitude and the protracted periods of construction inspire the discussion in this research – viewing construction-sites in themselves as interim environments, complex micro-urbanities where many stakeholders interact to survive and create something.
This research explores the potential of a site during construction in affecting the conditions inside and outside its boundaries. In the process. it questions the common practice of considering a construction-sites (especially for large-scale projects) as transient, given their deep and prolonged effects on the surroundings, the environment, and the people in contact. The nature of sites in Delhi is contrasted to a few global examples, highlighting the peculiarities of this metropolis. There is an attempt to understand where the quality of the site environment falls in the order of priorities of the many stakeholders, and what kind of incentives and efforts work in the favor of maintaining better sites.
The race of creating 'smart' cities in the megacities of Asia is preceded by long bouts of construction. As the city adjusts and makes way for development, these interim spaces of destruction, disruption, and creation, act as a stage for everyday democracies to play out. The text deliberates the role and potency of various actors in creating healthier and more nurturing site environments.

To understand where site environment falls in the priorities of the stakeholders, they are broadly classified into two categories: those who wield most power with respect their influence on site and those who are most vulnerable due to their immediacy to site. The former, including the client, developer, contractor, urban governing authorities, managers/engineers, and the architect, prioritize cost and efficiency of construction. Contrary to this, the latter, workers onsite, residents and commerce around site, and onsite managers and engineers, are most concerned by site environment.
It is an essential tenet of modern urbanism to constantly grow. The city is in a continuous cycle of repair and disrepair. It is important to acknowledge the transient permanence of construction. Production is a time where the roots of a project are established. This phase provides the opportunity to foster familiarity and ownership among the public with regards to the upcoming project.

An ideal solution would be effective state policy, that allows and mandates migrant laborers a safe environment at work and at home. However, among those wielding more power in a project, site environment only seems to gain importance with respect to marketing and increased efficiency. Further impetus to better sites is given, to a certain extent, by building codes, green building certifications, and awards. Better results can be achieved by aligning the major concerns of the influential stakeholders (cost, time, and quality) with better site environments.
For instance, ambitious clients and cooperating contractors would be willing to exploit a well-maintained site’s potential in branding or attracting business. However, the risk with interventions like these is that socio-political issues tend to remain obscure.
Another important aspect is the need for better representation and communication about the production phase of a building. Spatial design, visual design, media, and literature can all contribute to the interim design of the site. But the argument being made is a far cry from mere decoration of hoardings. The objective is to focus on the people in the process. There are several possibilities of misunderstandings, in the context of worksites. While the space is of temporary absence, it activates everyone’s imaginations, desires, and assumptions. Transparency about the project and its processes nurture an informed and responsive public. Juxtaposing and balancing this openness with safer environments is then a design problem.

International initiatives like Construction for a Livable City (CLC) in New York, Considerate Contractors scheme in UK, and UnSITEly Colloquium in Montreal have attempted to explore the many possibilities while encouraging best practices.