Article: Dossal, M. (2005). A Master Plan for the City: Looking at the Past. Economic and Political Weekly. Vol. 40. No. 36. pp. 3897-3900
This article reviews the political and social events in Mumbai since the plague in 1896. The authorities believed that hospitality and segregation were the most effective way to ease the epidemic. However, owing to cultural difference, the implementation of master plan in the city was opposed by the locals. The article also mentioned the debate between governors regarding how bombay should be planned.
Book: Kidambi, P. (2007). The making of an Indian metropolis. Aldershot, England: Ashgate.
Chapter 3-5 in the book by Kidambi described the planning of Bombay in response to the plague crisis. Detail citations of historical documents were used to display the intention of the trust’s scheme in an objective way. The author argued that the rather than careful consideration, the trust’s schemes were implemented loosely which jeopardized the well being of Bombay. He suggested that the acts by the trust caused over congestion of the city and penalized the working class.
Book: Rao, N. (2013). House, but no garden. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press
This book by Rao focused on the suburbanization of Bombay. The author suggested that suburbanization in Bombay was not for greenery of an alternate typology from urban and rural, but was a solution taken to resolve the housing crisis after the plague. He argued that it was the failure the trust faced in acquiring land and street in the old city improvement schemes that shaped the objective of suburbanization.
Book: David, M. (1995). Bombay, the city of dreams : a history of the first city in India. Bombay: Himalaya Pub. House.