PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Location: SIDR effected area, Bangladesh.
Funding: BRAC Ngo.
Design team: BRAC University Architecture Dept.
Engineer: BRAC University Architecture Dept.
Construction: Feb 2008 -June 2008.
Floor area: 17 m².
Building costs: 500 €.
Building costs/m²: 29.5 €/m².
Total number of house: 1200.
On November 15th 2007, Cyclone SIDR has left behind a trail of devastation affecting the lives of at least 4 million people. In the aftermath of this disaster BRAC NGO initiated a project, in the coastal areas to provide 1200 emergency shelters in six villages. The government, international organizations and NGOs have been working for quite a while now ‘to give’ shelter to the victims but so far the approach to solve the problem has been quick and efficient but also superficial, often not paying attention to the actual needs of the people. The entire process including beneficiary selection, site location, choice of materials and house construction is decided at the bureaucratic level. So rather than a superficial quick-fix to very deep-rooted problems the design team believes in “sustainability”. Being responsive to that aspect requires the users’ involvement in the whole process .Gender Awareness is another important factor, considered in this project. Thus to make the project successful bottom-up approach was encouraged allowing the non-professionals to participate actively and make them feel confident and enabling the fusion of the traditional and professional knowledge. Based on these decisions a field study was conducted to understand the local building typologies and the context since the spatial needs of low-income households are based on some factors such as: family members; occupations; if the family engages in some economic activities at home or not; presents of cattle. Also socio-cultural norms, space use pattern and their activities were understood by interviewing individually or in groups to identify the building techniques, strengths and weakness of houses, options of building materials, local builder’s idea about safer houses etc. Several appropriate options for core house were formulated and estimated cost was prepared. These information were further refined through a participatory workshop. The aim of the workshop was to exchange knowledge (both local and those gathered by the team), cross-examine them and transmitting knowledge to the participants (local builders) so that they too can build houses themselves and help more people to try the possibilities discussed. Interacting with the community with regard to find what shall be the appropriate means of construction technique so that strength could be maximized with minimal cost; how safe will the house be when another disaster strikes or will be considered at all? Local people will take part in the construction process for the core house. Later they will design and construct other necessary spaces by themselves. Now the core house concept was a local originality evolved through trials and errors, for centuries.
This typology consists of a semi two-storied house with central space around which other spaces/rooms gradually evolved. During the construction process emphasis were given on strengthening plinth using cement-stabilization technique since during the time of disaster tidal surge eroded the mud plinths, causing many buildings to fall on its sides. The whole structure of the house sat on plinth without any anchorage in the ground. Wooden posts were common but as a safety option RCC posts were preferred, at least at the corners if not all. An inverted t-shaped RCC bases (bolli) were used embedded into the plinth and connected with lower horizontal frame for safety option to prevent the house from being blown by wind. Another option was the concrete stump (Kaatla). Both of these could be used to protect the wooden frame/posts by forming composite joints. To increase stability and wind resistance of the structural frame, both vertical and horizontal cross-bracing was introduced. Also wooden pieces across the top of each corner are fixed for more support. In most houses purlins on lower edges of roof s were not closely spaced so that heavy wind easily blew away the CI sheets which proved hazardous during SIDR. So purlins (butti) are placed at close intervals on the lower portion although the spacing may become even as one moves upwards. The number of screw used, can be more at the lower part although the total number of screw used is the same as the conventional roof. Also, tall trees with shallow roots were located at a close distance which got up-rooted and fell upon the house. Therefore, homesteads were carefully landscaped, planting trees at strategic location to weaken storm and tidal surge. Thus during the implementation process both men and women took part because when a person builds a house, a sense of possession and responsibility develops. So involvements in every steps and finally having a house for the family is a useful experience for the owners. It allows residents to make their own decisions and feels that they own the houses and the maintenance of the houses is their responsibility.
