Haveri Study for h4h 16.08.2010 in Nivasa Format

8/4/2019 Haveri Study for h4h 16.08.2010 in Nivasa Format

1/50

A VERNACULAR STUDY: HAVERI DISTRICT, KARNATAKA

A PRESENTATION BY AKHILA RAMESH


2/50

AGE

NDA

The Need for Rural Housing in India

Features of Rural Housing in India

Haveri District

The Villages

Page 3

Page 5

Page 8

Page 11

Methodology of Study

Field Observations

Conclusions & Path forward

Page 13

Page 15

Page 39


3/50

THE NEED FOR RURAL HOUSING IN INDIA


4/50

According to Indian Government 2007 census & WB 2005:

Our Country lacks 25-30 Million units of rural housing

42% of Indias population lives on US$1.25 a day

The rural area is home to 71% of the population

1 in 5 rural dwellers live in kuccha houses

Poverty is concentrated in rural areas

THENEEDFORRU

RALHOUSIN

ININDIA


5/50

FEATURES OF RURAL HOUSING IN INDIA


6/50

Self Built, Self Managed, Community Financed

No public/Private Housing Finance Agencies until recently

No Master-plan to regulate development & No bye-laws

to regulate construction

No trained professionals- Architects/Engineers

No Real estate developers & contractors operate in

rural areas

House Builder in control of production process:

FEATU

RESOFRUR

ALHOUSING

Features of Rural Housing in India

households access to land, finance, skills, technology &

services determine quality

Features Courtesy: Ar Kirtee Shahs presentation at CAPARTs National

Workshop on Rural Housing at New Delhi 18-19 Oct 2002

ININDIA


7/50

Participatory Social Production Process:

A Peoples process

Declining Access to bio-mass materials like thatch,

bamboo, wood, cow dung

Limited Exposure and Access to new building materials,

construction methods & technology

Gradual Disappearance of traditional know-how on

materials & methods

Exodus of skilled labour to cities

Features of Rural Housing in India FEATU

RESOFRUR

ALHOUSING

Under-Developed Credit system

Features Courtesy: Ar Kirtee Shahs presentation at CAPARTs National

Workshop on Rural Housing at New Delhi 18-19 Oct 2002

ININDIA


8/50


9/50

HAVER

IDISTRICT

According to Indian Government Ground Water Report July 2008 :

The Haveri district is located between north latitudes

14d 17 02 to 15d 15 01 and east longitudes 75d035 to 75d 4923

Haveri has an area of nearly 5000 Sq km with nearly

700 villages

Population as per 2001 census is 14.30 lakhs

Has annual rain fall of 590-700mm

Major soil types are red sandy soil, Medium &

Deep black soil, Red loamy and Lateritic soil

r nc pa crops are ag , owar, a ra, a ze, ea ,

Pulses, Oil seeds, sugar cane, spices, cotton


10/50

HAVER

IDISTRICT

According to Indian Government Ground Water Report July 2008 :

Sub tropical climate with temperatures ranging between

18 d to 40 d C The rainfall varies in the district from over 903 mm in

West (Hangal) to less than 592 mm in East (Ranebennur)

October is the wettest month with normal monthly

rainfall in excess of 100mm; heavy rainfall though not

flooding hazard

Major part of the terrain is gently undulating with hilly

terrain on western most parts

-

Major drainages are Tungabhadra, Varada, Kumudavati

and Dharma

It lies in low seismic zone


11/50

THE VILLAGES


12/50

THEVILLAGES

S. No Village Houses Population Area in

Sq. Km.

Amount

earned per

family per

year in INR

Kachcha

Houses

Pakka

Houses

1 Kakola 600 12513 1099 13000 525 75

A Survey

2 Chandapura 320 2358 0004 18000 290 30

3 Shrabala 117 630 0440 15500 107 10

9% to 12% of houses are Pakka houses compared to a national average of 20%


13/50

METHODOLOGY OF STUDY


14/50

METHODOLOGYOFSTUDY

The Village study was conducted over 3 days with the help of NEEDS

Detailed Questionnaire with focus on

Socio-Economic-Space Usage-Needs

Focused Group Discussions

with a diverse sample of village

representatives

Individual Interviews with Beneficiaries

Informal talks with local contractors

Documentation of materials,

space usage, prac ces e c us ng p o ograp s


15/50

FIELD OBSERVATIONS


16/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

Kakoli Chandapura Shrabala


17/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

Socio Economic Commonalities

Main Occupation is Agriculture

All children are sent to school

Most cant afford higher education

Joint family system

All own their houses

Men marry between ages 22-30

Women marry between ages18-20

Most of them own cattle and a few goats

Very few graduates from any of the villages


18/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

Infrastructural Commonalities

All internal roads are kuchha roads

Exposed street drain in front of houses

Public taps through bore-wells as source of drinking water

No plumbing within the houses

Villages are electrified

Only few hours of electricity per day

Kakola 020 out of 600 houses

Chandapura 100 out of 320 houses

Shrabala 0 out of 117 houses


19/50

FIELD

OBSERVATI

ONS

Infrastructural Commonalities: Kuccha roads

Kakola

Shrabala


20/50

FIELD

OBSERVATI

ONS

Infrastructural Commonalities: Exposed drains

Kakola

Chandapura


21/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

Infrastructural Commonalities: Common drinking water source

Kakola


22/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

Space Usage Commonalities

All live in houses away from their fields. All believe in

Vaastu/ Aaya

All of them want a katte or verandah outside the house for

activities like sitting, chatting, sleeping, entertaining guests,

storage of grains, drying clothes etc

All of them prefer to have a puja room, and that should be inside

the house

All of them prefer separate kitchens inside the house; almost of

them use firewood and all eat inside the kitchen

All houses are in dearth of storage spaces, especially in

rainy seasons

Kitchens are the only spaces that are relatively free of storage

clutter; they are used for dining

All of them prefer the bath room to be accessed from

inside the house


23/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS


All prefer toilet access from outside the house

All of them dont prefer to have a courtyard inside theirhouses. This is because they revere a courtyard as integral part

of temples

They prefer cattle shed to be at the side of houses. This will

ensure protection from mosquitoes yet easy access to feed

the cattle


24/50

Space Usage Commonalities FIELD

OBSERVATIONS


Katte is an essential feature of all houses. The deeper, the better!


25/50


OBSERVATIONS


A screened and separate puja room however small the house


26/50


OBSERVATIONS

Paucity of Storage spaces


27/50


OBSERVATIONS

Paucity of Storage spaces

S U C li i


28/50


OBSERVATIONS

Lots of built in storage and shelves.Area lit from roof!

C liti


29/50

Commonalities FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

Ornate Main doorways; Around 60

lintel- one has to bow low while entering!

Commonalities


30/50

Commonalities FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

Narrow windows preferred to

ward off cold wind; glass is

definite no-no!



31/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS


Grinding stone - flat

(in Kakola only)

Shoe racks in kattes!

Stone ledge in bath Submerged grinding stone! Peg for baskets in the katte!

Innovative Nuances!

Where they differ


32/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

Where they differ

S. No Description Kakola Chandapura Shrabala

1 Houses Very densely spaced; Ground orG+1 structures

Are more dispersed, only

single-storied

Are more dispersed;

mostly single-storied

structures

2 Roof Prefer flat roof; low roofs @ 86-10; they want an external

staircase to the roof

Prefer tiled roof; high

ceiling up to 15

Prefer tiled roof; high

ceilings up to 15

3 Toilets Ok if wall is shared and entry Strictly segregated from Ok if wall is shared andfrom outside rest of house entry from outside

4 Loft Only for storage Are open to using loft forsleeping

Are open to using loft for

sleeping

Houses in Kakola


33/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

Houses in Kakola

High density; mix of G and G+1

structures; low roofs

FHouses in Chandapura


34/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

Houses in Chandapura

Low density, Single storied, High ceiling,

more run down houses

FHouses in Shrabala


35/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

Low density, High ceiling, mix of G and

G+1 structures, run down houses

FWhere they differ - Materials


36/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

S. No Description Kakola Chandapura Shrabala

1Roofs Wood, slate, mud & bamboos;

RCC used for roofs

Tiles for roofs Tiles for roofs

2Walls Laterite /stone/mud/burnt

bricks for walls. All walls internal

and external are thick

Mud/burnt bricks for

walls. All walls internal


Mud/burnt bricks for

walls. All walls internal


Plinth High plinth; stone Low or no plinth!( But Low plinth, stone/mud

3 people prefer to have

plinth)

4Flooring Slate, Red oxide, IPS Slate Slate/mud

5

Wood Wood used in large quantities-Mango and Neem wood for

reapers, frames, shutters andeven columns inside the houses.

Wood used sparsely

Mango and Neem wood

for frames and shutters

Wood used sparsely

Mango and Neem wood

for frames and shutters

FConstruction Materials in Chandapura & Shrabala


37/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

Mud, un-burnt, & burnt country bricks for walls

Slate for lintels and flooringRandom stones or mud for plinth

FConstruction Materials in Kakola


38/50

FIELD

OBSERVATIONS

Slate stone for roof with 3 Rcc

on top

Laterite for walls

Stone rubble for walls Mango or Neem for rafters,

beams, columns


39/50

CONCLUSIONS & PATH FORWARD

PAA holistic approach to construction


40/50

ATHFORWARD

Cost Reduction Methods: Site

Aim at localized or in-situ services toavoid

extensive piping, wiring etc

Build for future expansion- Build a

CORE HOUSE- a simple basic plan

including

living area (sleeping, sitting, and

eating) and

serv ce areas a as c tc en an a

basic latrine

and washing place). Then, according

to

individual requirements, additions

can be

made later.

Courtesy: Wisdom from Laurie baker!

PACost Reduction Methods


41/50

ATHFORWARD

Foundation

Foundation need not be too deep;

usually as

deep as its width (usually 45cm)

The dug out soil is to be used as in-

fill

For traditional deep foundations as

in this case,

deep excavations and infilling with

sand or

gravel etc can be replaced with a

surface beam.




42/50

ATHFORWARD

Walls

The C.B.R.I (Central Building Research Institute)Brick Block is useful for interior walls to save

space. Small stones are laid into a mould and

packed in with a weak concrete to form a block

Also, bricks are plentiful in this area. 4.5" walls

are stable and strong if corrugated or

buttressed. 9" walls are usually capable of being

load bearing up to three storey height

25% of bricks, mortar, cost etc can be saved by

using the Rat trap Bond. This can also usually be

safely used up to 3 storeys in height and is

equally load bearing




43/50

ATHFORWARD

Windows

Large glass windows to be

avoided- In rural

areas one works in the sun and

enters a

house to be away from heat and

glare.

Larger windows dont effectively

shut out

insects, mosquitoes, bats.

A square meter of window costs

up to TEN

times the cost of the wall it

replaces!




44/50

ATHFORWARD

Windows

A Jali wall is a better substitute for

a glass

window. Jalis can be made from

brick, tile,

laterite, stone, cane etc. Their

patterns are

endless and pleasing. Simple Jalis

cost less

than the wall they replace.




45/50

ATHFORWARD

Doors

Wood is scarce and costly. Use aslittle

as possible.

In many instances frameless doors

and

windows are acceptable and reduce

both

quantity of timber, labour and costs

Board and batten type shutters are

less costly,use less labour and less timber than

paneled shutters.


PAT

Cost Reduction Methods


46/50

THFORWARD

Roofs

Tile roofs are OK but call for a lot of timber support (purloins,

rafters, battens etc)

On the other hand prefabricated and various R.C slabs use

energy-intensive steel and cement.

Both systems have advantages and evil disadvantages.

These including labour and transport cost and other problems

have to be studied locally before the better choice is made.

Regarding Concrete roofs: C.B.R.I etc have a variety of

systems-L-panels, double funicular shells, etc. In practice the

latter often has leak problems.

Both use steel and cement and have to be over designed to

cope with handling and transport.

Alternative slab in-situ systems include filler slabs

(void formers) which reduce materials and cost by about 30%,

but shuttering is costly. Again, local balancing and comparing

of overall costs, transport, labour, and energy used etc, have

to be made before a choice is made and it will vary from place

to place.


PAT

A holistic approach to construction


47/50

THFORWARD

Waste Management

ECOLOGICAL SANITATION PROCESS (ECOSAN)

Separation of Human Waste; Solid & Liquid;

Dried & Composted

ADVANTAGES

Reduces Water Usage

Reduces load on sewage system

Recycles phosphate and nitrogen contained

in human waste

Collectors

Simplifies treatment of grey waterBefore & After Ecosan:

CONSUMPTION LTRS of WATER/DAY

DRINKING 3 3

COOKING 4 4

BATHING 15 15

CLOTHES 23 20

UTENSILS 25 25

GARDEN 25 0

FLUSHING 40 0.5

TOTAL 135 67.5

ECOSAN

SAVING

50%

Toilet Pan

PAT

A holistic approach to construction


48/50

THFORWARD

Rain Water Harvesting

Courtesy: Wisdom from Chitra Vishwanath!

PAT

Conclusions


49/50

THFORWARD

Given the huge amount of similarities between these villages, there is a

possibility for some modular solutions for house plans that can be

tweaked to suit the local cultural preferences and differences

in materials.

Compressed Stabilized Earth Blocks (CSEBs) seem a viable and cost

effective option with their clear advantages over mud/burnt bricks

Design options must be prepared incorporating the points mentioned in

the study.

Part 2 of the study can dwell into probable design solutions;

AestheticCost

EffectiveCulturallySensitive


50/50

A NIVASA PRESENTATION

THANK YOU

Haveri Study for h4h 16.08.2010 in Nivasa Format

Documents

Transcript of Haveri Study for h4h 16.08.2010 in Nivasa Format