Finding fit in fractured landscapes by Here There Architecture

FINDING FIT IN

FRACTURED LANDSCAPES Initiating Resettlement in Post-Earthquake Bungamati August 2016

Degree Studio 7 Diploma Unit 6 / MA by Project

Architecture of Rapid Change and Scarce Resources Sir John Cass Faculty of Art, Architecture and Design

Contents Acknowledgements & Credits

ARCSR

Foreword

Project Outline

Introduction Bungamati and the Kathmandu Valley

Peri-Urban Settlement Conditions

Existing Approaches to Building and PostEarthquake Failure

Local Political Context and Aid Efforts (November 2015)

Local Political Context and Rehabilitation (August 2016)

The 17 Families

Location of Homes

Topography of Skills

Scoping Walk

First Meeting with the 17

Surveying the Houses

Exhibition November 2015

Exhibition August 2016

Workshop Weekend

Survey Drawings

Planning to Rebuild Potential Sites for Reconstruction

111

Estimated Costs

121

Suggested Reconstruction Stages

123

Suggested Design Guidelines

129

Proposal for a Dense Urban Context (Ratna Man Tuladhar)

133

Proposal for a Peripheral Site (Prem Lal Mali)

145

Community Rebuilding Strategy

155

List of Recommendations

159

Summary

165

Glossary

167

Appendix

169 3

Acknowledgements With special thanks to

Sukha Ratna Brahmacharya Sangita Shakya Utsab Shakya Savina Khadgi Manju Bramhacharya Lalita Shrestha Karuna Tuladhar of the Bungamati Foundation, Nepal Anil Tuladhar and Sabindra Shrestha, local representatives for UN-Habitat and NSET in Bungamati The Water Trust (ARCSR) Prof. Maurice Mitchell and Robert Barnes

Credits Isobel Chapman Rengin Dogan Nicola McFarland Nicholas Rose Pradeepa Sivasanthiran Tanya Stagnetto Corina Tuna Coordinated and edited by Rengin Dogan Corina Tuna Dr. Bo Tang

ARCSR The Architecture of Rapid Change and Scarce Resources is an emergent, studio based, research area within the practice and academic discipline of architecture. It examines and extends knowledge of the physical and cultural influences on the built environment, focusing on situations where resources are scarce and where both culture and technology are in a state of rapid change. Suspicious of the tendency of strategic and largescale policy planning to distil out rich but fragile local interactions, the studio encourages students to work outwards from the observed fragment of lived experience. The studio aims to explore how the urban landscape is inhabited, made and remade through personal and collective acts, events, memories and experiences; attempting to cut through the surface to expose the undercurrent of silent issues that constitute the everyday. Since 2006 the School of Architecture at The Sir John Cass Faculty of Art, Architecture and Design (The CASS) at London Metropolitan University has been offering studio modules for its 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th year architecture students in this research area which have involved direct, on the ground, cultural and physical surveys of marginal urban settlements in India, Nepal, Kosovo, Sierra Leone and London. Since 2010 MA by Project and PhD by Project courses have also been run in this research area. Study is by project and has included live projects including the construction of a number of small schools and water and sanitation projects.

Previous page Bungamati residents build a temporary structure from salvaged materials

Foreword Prof. Maurice Mitchell

This survey comes at the start of the ARCSRâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s third year of study in the Kathmandu Valley and follows on from the November 2015 survey of the settings and situations within which 17 families, residents of the ancient peri-urban town of Bungamati, found themselves in the immediate aftermath of the April 2015 earthquake. At first, government and NGOs worked together in emergency mode to bring some immediate relief to victims, courageously navigating a regular series of aftershocks. Now, over a year hence, geological upheaval has quietened down and the process of families re-occupying damaged and demolished sites and rebuilding their dwellings is framed and impeded as much by the need to follow government policy as it is by a lack of adequate funding. The aims of this survey are firstly to find the gap between what the 17 families would like to happen and what is possible with such restrictions; and secondly to explore ways of inserting a small live making project within that gap. The purpose of the project would be to uncover latent physical and cultural resources already present and to test out tentative ideas about how to build appropriately, now, in Bungamati. By proceeding slowly and heuristically, modifying first and subsequent intentions to accommodate the resistances encountered at the various scales from dwelling to neighbourhood, town and city, both process and product can be fine-tuned to better fit the actual situation. The ARCSR teaching and research area has found that in similar settings, future building activity, based on the experience of live making research is more likely to fit the concrete situation present in Bungamati than remotely planned, rapidly implemented, capital intensive, initiatives, at all these scales. This survey has been facilitated, and any future live making-project will only be possible, through our emerging partnership with a very local NGO, the Bungamati Foundation Nepal (BFN), which is deeply embedded within Bungamati culture and its dramatic landscape. BFN has been instrumental in guiding the delivery of education, sanitation and disaster relief by both international NGOs and government within the town and its immediate hinterland. ARCSR is extremely lucky to be on the point of formalising our working relationship with BFN, which has given us access, on-site support and the collective wisdom of its membersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; deep experience over the last year.

Previous page Evening festivities brings fire to the streets of Bungamati to celebrate the return of the God

From the academic perspective, the physical and cultural topography of Bungamati provides an ideal setting for our architecture students to develop their hypothetical and live projects at Degree, Diploma, Masters and PhD levels. By pursuing parallel agendas in development and architectural education, BFN and ARCSR can evoke an ethnography of the concrete setting and, through exhibitions and live making-project work, provoke an ethical discourse around the Bungamati yet to come. 9

Project Outline In August 2015, during a study trip to the Kathmandu Valley, a new relationship was established between ARCSR students from the CASS and a small NGO, the Bungamati Foundation Nepal (BFN). Ever since the 2015 earthquakes devastated the historic town of Bungamati, BFN has had an active involvement in local relief, education and reconstruction efforts. Among many other activities, it has directed the construction of a number of temporary shelters for those who lost their homes and built temporary classrooms for local schools that were most affected by the earthquake. More recently, with the participation of ARCSR students and local youth, it has been working directly with community members to empower families to work together in rebuilding their homes, and encourage young people to learn new skills that will aid reconstruction and give them future job prospects. ARCSR’s relationship with BFN was strengthened in November 2015, when four students worked alongside Sukha (founder and director of BFN) for two weeks to seek out potential live projects that would help 17 displaced local families to begin the process of rebuilding. This work has since been continued during a three week study trip in August 2016, when six students carried out more extensive research by surveying potential sites and organising a series of events, including workshops and an exhibition, designed to engage the 17 families and the extended Bungamati community. Presented in this publication is the research and fieldwork conducted during both the November 2015 and August 2016 study trips. The publication will also propose two potential sites, briefs and recommended design strategies for future live projects, to be developed further by ARCSR students in subsequent visits. This is the fifth publication published in a series that documents ARCSR’s research work in Nepal, following on from Scoping Kathmandu (Aug. 2014), March of the City (Nov. 2014), Kathmandu Edgelands (Aug. 2015) and Remaking Places (Nov. 2015), as well as two years of work undertaken by students at Degree, Diploma, and Masters level. The intention for this trip was not only to develop live project proposals, but also to establish our presence within the community, to continue to strengthen our current relationships and build new networks that will allow ARSCR and future students to continue their research and live project work within Bungamati and beyond.

Previous page Local residents clear the earthquake-damaged ‘house of light’

This document, in conjunction with a separate scoping booklet, is intended for use by the Degree, Diploma and MA by Project students developing propositional design projects during the academic year 2016/17. It will serve as an introduction to a two week field trip to Nepal in November 2016. 11

KATHMANDU

PATAN (Lalitpur)

BUNGAMATI

Introduction Bungamati and the Kathmandu Valley

Located on the southern fringes of the Kathmandu Valley, Bungamati developed as a satellite village in the medieval era - when the three major settlements of Kantipur (Kathmandu), Lalitpur and Bhaktapur, were recognised as distinct cities, each under the governance of separate kings. Since those times, the local economy of the Kathmandu Valley has prospered based on the products that come out of its rich, fertile clay soil. Once occupied by a lake over a thousand years ago, the expansive land is predominantly used as agricultural fields, keeping local farmers busy throughout spring, summer and autumn. The winter brings more seasonal work to those willing to take it; thousands of migrant labourers flock to the many brick factories scattered around the valley, utilising the nearby fields to dry the millions of bricks being produced every day. With clay featuring predominantly in the landscape, the production and utilisation of brick as a building material has evolved and been the prevalent method of construction for at least two thousand years. The craftsmanship and articulation of traditional brick buildings, along with supplementary timber and bamboo, is uniquely mature, recognised and prized as a symbol of the identity of the Newari culture.

BHAKTAPUR

In the present day, the rapid urbanisation of Kathmandu has begun to engulf its three major cities into one indistinguishable mass. Kathmanduâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s growing importance within Nepalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s economy, as a centre of government, industry and tourism, has drawn increasing numbers of migrants from rural areas. Over the last four decades, the population of the Kathmandu Valley has multiplied by six, reaching over 3 million inhabitants in 2010. This rapid expansion, growing outwards from the heart of the valley, has been putting pressure on the periphery, thus blurring the traditional boundaries between village and city. The 7.8 and 7.3 magnitude earthquakes that struck Nepal in April and May 2015 caused the death of 8,856 people and injuries to more than twice as many. A large number of historic temples were reduced to rubble and many houses collapsed or were heavily damaged, leaving thousands homeless. These families are now living in temporary shelters, awaiting a large government initiative to drive and support the reconstruction of their settlements. More than a year on from the event, there is very little evidence to suggest that progress has been made.

Previous Spread South-western view of the Kathmandu Valley from Bungamati Left The location of Bungamati in relation to Kathmandu, Patan and Bhaktapur

Kathmandu

Patan (Latitpur)

Bhaktapur

Kathmandu 2003 Kathmandu 2003 City expands along its main outbound roads

Kathmandu 2009 Kathmandu 2009

Patan

Progression of The Ridge Roads Ri

in g Maps and Kathmandu to show how the city has changed over the years Ro

Kathmandu 2003 The sprawl of development encroaches towards the historic Kathmandu 2003 villages of Bungamati and Khokana along a ridge road

River The City

Rd Ekantakuna-Tikabha irab

b Rd bhaira

Khokana

Bungamati

ato-Ti ka Satdob

Satdob

ato-Ti ka

bhaira

b Rd

Ekantakuna-Tikabha irab

Rd Ekantakuna-Tikabha irab Khokana

Key:

R Ro

Khokana

Bungamati

Kathmandu 2006

Bungamati

Kathmandu 2009

Kathmandu

Patan (Latitpur)

Bhaktapur

Khokana

Kathmandu 2015 Kathmandu 2015

Kathmandu 2003

Key: River Patan Patan Patan

Patan Patan Patan

The City Minor Road Major Road

Ri n Ri g R ng oa R Ro d ing ad Ro

Road (Other)

Ri n Ri g R ng oa R Ro d ing ad Ro

Site

Progression of The Ridge

rab Rd ato-Ti kabhai

Satdob

Satd Saob tdat ob o-atTiokaTibh kaai bh raai bra b Rd Rd

Ekan Ekan takun takun a-Tik a-Tik abha abha irabirab Rd Rd Khokana Khokana Khokana

Khokana Khokana Khokana

Bungamati Bungamati Bungamati

Kathmandu 2012 Kathmandu 2012 Kathmandu 20122012 Kathmandu

Ekantakuna-Tikabha irab Rd

rab Rd kabhai ato-Ti

Satdob

Saob Satd tdat ob o-atTiokaai kaTibh bh raai b Rd bra Rd

Ekan Ekan takun takun a-Tik a-Tik abha abha irabirab Rd Rd

Ekantakuna-Tikabha irab Rd

b Rd bhaira ato-Ti ka

Satdob

Satd Saob tdat ob o-atTiokaTibh kaai bh raai bra b Rd Rd

The march of the city down Ekanta

Kathmandu 2015 Kathmandu 2015 Kathmandu 20152015 Kathmandu

A 800M TO K HOK M BAG

ATI

RIV

BFN

TO PAT AN 4 KM

ANA 800M TO K HOK

Peri-Urban Settlement Conditions

10km south of Kathmandu, travelling down a steep ridge road, you will find the historic Newari hill town of Bungamati, set within a landscape of horticultural terraces and brick factories that overlook the Bagmati River. Though largely medieval in its architectural makeup, the settlement, famous for its crafts, temples and traditional brick buildings, has not been oblivious to the technological and social changes in construction and culture that are slowly redefining the capital city. The majority of houses were built quickly in the aftermath of a major earthquake in 1934, using traditional Newari methods of construction and locally-available materials: unfired bricks, timber and mud. These properties were the first to collapse in the earthquakes of 2015 - 900 out of 1114 houses were damaged. Houses that had been built more recently using reinforced concrete structural supports were somewhat less affected. Furthermore, the recent earthquakes led to the complete destruction of the famous Machhendranath Temple and reduced the amount of water naturally supplied from the upper hills to the townâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ponds, fountains and wells by blocking ancient water channels built into the landscape. Prior to the earthquake, Bungamati was hailed as a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;living museumâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; - a traditional Newari town with medieval aesthetics and activities that were frequently appreciated by tourists. Along with the threat of a generational loss of crafting skills, the significant damage caused by the earthquake to buildings hailed important both to the local community and to the draw of tourism-generated income - such as the collapsed Machhendranath Temple - has thrown the historically accepted way in which these settlements have managed and sustained themselves out of balance. One year on, unable to start reconstruction due to a lack of resources, lack of guidance and political impediments, an overwhelming number of local people continue to live in temporary shelters that are scattered all over the town, occupying central squares and edgelands and encroaching onto agricultural land. Moving forwards, one of the biggest challenges will be to reconcile and embrace a locally evolved form of architecture with global modern technology and materials. The sudden shift in standards and way of living post-earthquake also raises questions about how the communities will want to rebuild, where they will want to rebuild, and crucially, in what way will it be different from before? House

1. Machhendranath Temple

Collapsed Building

2. Prathampur Mahabihar

Religious Structure

3. De Pukhu Pond

Landfill Waste

4. Bungamati Foundation Nepal Office

Water Civic Square

Primary Paved Path (Kota Tole) 1:2000

Secondary Paved Path 19

Damage: Full collapse Structure: Traditional unfired brick and bamboo

Major collapse Traditional fired / unfired brick and timber

Damage: Severe crack failure Structure: Traditional fired / unfired brick and timber

Minor crack failure Traditional fired / unfired brick and timber

Damage: No damage Structure: Reinforced concrete frame and brick infill

Little to no damage Fired brick and timber

Existing Approaches to Construction and Post-Earthquake Failure

A range of building materials and construction methods make up the built fabric of Bungamati, ranging from traditionally-built structures using fired and unfired bricks, bamboo and mud, to more recent ‘modern’ typologies demonstrating reinforced concrete frame construction with brick infill. The different types and levels of damage caused to buildings by the 2015 earthquakes were recorded and patterns in relation to construction methods analysed, as a means of understanding why strutures failed, what needed to be done to prevent certain failures in future constructions and how repairs could be carried out for each unique scenario.

Minor collapse Traditional unfired brick and timber

Wall collapse Brick and concrete

No damage Reinforced masonry and concrete slab

Almost all cases of recorded damage corresponded to the traditional Newari method of construction using a fired brick outer layer with an unfired brick inner layer and either bamboo or timber beams. After analysing a range of case studies, it became clear that the key reasons for the extent of failures related to building elements not being tied together and thus breaking away from each other under movement and pressure, resulting in different severities of cracking and collapse. Worsening the situation, the different types of brick used respond differently when exposed to imposed forces, moving at different speeds and therefore potentially in different directions, causing the building to collapse. Good examples of resilient construction methods were also noted when investigating the few buildings that had suffered little to no damage. In respect of traditional brick and timber construction, the Buddhist monastery Prathampur Mahabihar withstood with little to no damage as it made use of solely fired bricks reinforced with horizontal timber ladders that tied all four walls together. Its low height and regular, simple form contributed to its stability. Most ‘modern’ buildings constructed using reinforced concrete suffered little to no damage as once again, all elements were tied together and thus moved together when exposed to the earthquake’s movement.

Left Case studies analysed to determine the relationship between earthquake damage and used construction methods and materials

If the land is privately owned:

Scenario A

Scenario C

The shelter was built on a vacant site away from the family home, usually on agricultural land. The main problem this creates is that the familyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s capacity to produce food is reduced and subsequently, so is their income, making it more difficult to build up savings that can be used to rebuild their house in the future. There is little incentive for the family to start the process of clearing and reconstruction.

The family or as was often the case, an aid organisation offered to support rent payments for a small plot of land. This process sees people become overly reliant on aid and gives them no incentive to move back to their land. To reduce this dependency, aid organisations mostly offered to pay rent solely for one year, after which the family must find the means to cover the payments alone.

Scenario B The shelter was built on the site of the collapsed house. This would have required the site to be cleared first, at least in part, with the help of family members, neighbours, and sometimes aid agencies, when families were unable to carry out or pay for labour themselves. Looking ahead, this scenario could also prove problematic for the rebuilding process. Foundations would need to be built around the shelter, or the shelter may need to be relocated in the future to allow reconstruction to start, adding extra costs and time delays to the overall process.

If the land is rented:

Scenario D The government allowed local residents to build shelters on public land. This comes with added risk and lack of security that arises from the fact that people can be displaced from their shelters in the future whenever it is deemed as appropriate.

Local Political Context and Aid Efforts November 2015

Relief and Rehabilitation In the immediate aftermath of the 2015 earthquakes, many different local and foreign organisations started working in Bungamati, contributing to local relief and rehabilitation efforts. Walking around the town, one would often come across shelters ‘stamped’ with the names of its benefactors, including the Triple Gem Buddhist Society, the Danish People’s Aid, the Tzu Chi foundation, the Kathmandu University and the Bungamati Foundation Nepal (BFN); not to mention those who brought emergency aid, volunteers and primary relief, whose names are not so apparent now in the current stages of redevelopment. Each one of these organisations donated capital in its different forms of exchange for the initial rescue mission. The death toll, from a population of around 1,000 in the inner village, reached 27 [1]. The lonely planet guide introduces Bungamati as “formerly one of the prettiest villages in the valley” [2]. Scarred by the earthquake, the town now plays host to a scattering of temporary shelters, housing the hundreds of people that have been displaced from their homes. In Nepal, plots of land are precious assets that are handed down through the family line and divided amongst children in order to financially secure their future. However, most post-earthquake houses that once stood on land owned by family ancestors have been destroyed. In many cases the sites remain too unsafe to be cleared, which leaves them worthless as long as they remain in such a state of disrepair. The topography of Bungamati and its immediate surroundings is now defined by clear areas of destroyed houses built from brick or concrete, and areas solely comprised of temporary shelters made from plywood, tin, bamboo and other salvaged or found materials. It appears that the shelter plots have sprung up quite organically, without an overall master plan, occupying suitable open public spaces within the centre and extending towards the forest and agricultural fields along the town’s edgelands. Wherever possible, streets and neighbourhoods were relocated together in groups in order to retain a sense of community. The circumstances in which temporary shelters were erected differ from family to family, based on whether the occupied land required clearing and if it is owned by the family, as illustrated on the left.

Previous page Temporary shelters were erected in different contexts Above A diversity of post-earthquake shelters were built in Bungamati, from self-built to aid agency donated, using a range of locally-available materials

Looking ahead to the long-term future, people are currently waiting for the government to provide guidelines for rebuilding earthquake-resistant homes in heritage zones, remove legislative impediments and offer financial support. Many inhabitants of Bungamati did receive a victim card and NRP 15,000 from the government to help towards rehabilitation, if their house was classified 23

as damaged or destroyed in a recent survey [3]. However, this sum was simply not enough to make a significant difference to their circumstances. With little available resources of their own, they will continue to live in shelters for the foreseeable future. Wider Political Context Political unrest between India and Nepal has added further stress to families. The border between the two countries was blockaded for a time, creating a widespread fuel crisis across Nepal. Families were forced to make alternative arrangements, queuing for hours for fuel, constructing clay ovens on which to cook their food, and coping with rationed electricity strictly controlled through a load-shedding timetable. With a lack of long-term government initiatives and general poor distribution of aid around the country, it leaves those affected by the earthquake with little hope for rebuilding in their current economic situation. To get a better understanding of the financial circumstances of Nepalese people, some general guidelines have been listed below, in reference to costs of living at the time of writing (November 2015). The average daily wage of a worker is only 100 NPR a day. (£1)[4] Using a local builder’s quote, a typical four-storey house would cost NPR 19,500 to build (£13,000). The everyday cost of living in Nepal is as such (based on quotes given by local residents in November 2015): 45 minute bus ride - NPR 20 (14p) Taxi across capital - NPR 100-150 (60p-£1) 1 litre of fuel NPR 125 (90p) Vegetarian meal (dal bhat) - NPR 100-150 (60p-£1) 1 litre of clean water - NPR 5-10 (3-6p)

Previous page Residents queue for hours to purchase fuel

Notes [1]. Sengupta,K. (2015) Nepal earthquake: Inside the ‘classic medieval village’ that is now a place of desperation and sorrow. Independent, [online] Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk [Accessed 2015] [2]. Mayhew, B. (2015) Lonely Planet, Nepal. Lonely Planet Publications Ltd. [3]. Primary interview with government official Mina Maharjan – please see minutes from meeting on 18th November 2015 [4]. Pitt, D. (2012). How much money does a person from Nepal earn or make a day? Journal of The longest way home, [online]. Available at: http://www.thelongestwayhome.com/blog/nepal/ how-much-money-does-a-person-from-nepalearn/ [Accessed 2015] 25

FOUNDATIONS NPR 50,000

50,000

WALLS NPR 80,000

130,000

ROOF NPR 70,000

200,000

TOTAL NPR 200,000 (2 lakh)

Local Political Context and Rehabilitation August 2016

In August 2016, we returned to Bungamati to continue our work with local families, alongside the Bungamati Foundation Nepal (BFN). Previously, we had generally understood that the main obstacles to rebuilding, aside from individual circumstances and access to financial, material and labour resources, were existing restrictions in government policy and a lack of information on earthquake resistant technology. During the last visit, it became apparent that the situation is much more complex. Grants for Red-List Residents We understand that the government has surveyed every household in Bungamati using engineers hired by the Bureau of Statistics. If it were deemed that every room was uninhabitable and that the whole house was 70-100% damaged, residents would be eligible for a grant of NPR 200,000 (2 lakh). Houses that were only partially damaged and had at least one habitable room would not qualify. Earthquake victims would also have access to a loan of up to 25 lakh, but many people are discouraged by the 2% interest rate. 789 families from Bungamati were placed on this â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;red listâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, which was published at the beginning of July 2016. The grant is to be paid in instalments of: NPR 50,000, to be allocated towards a municipalitydrawn architectural plan and the foundations for a new house, NPR 80,000 to be allocated towards the walls and NPR 70,000 towards the roof and electrics. With the help of a local mason trained in earthquake-resistant technology, we calculated that a one-storey house with minimum earthquake resistance would cost around 6-7 lakh, more than three times the value of the grant. At the time of our meeting at the municipality office on the 2nd of August 2016, only three official agreements had been made for families to receive the funds and start rebuilding. Residents who did not qualify for the red list had two months to appeal the decision by submitting a grievance form (150 such forms had already been submitted), after which their cases would be reviewed by government representatives.

Previous page top Municipality grant for red-list residents is split into three installments Previous page bottom Bungamati rebuilding masterplan developed by the Youth Group, highlighting priority areas to start reconstruction

Governmental Policies and By-laws Since November 2015, the government has released new policies to guide reconstruction in rural areas, but not ones which are applicable to dense urban contexts or protected heritage zones. The policies facilitate rebuilding on minimum plot sizes of 2 ana (1 ana = 342 sq.ft.), which are rare in Bungamati where the average plot size is 8 x 20 ft. (160 sq. ft.). The government has also issued a guidance book showing 23 standard designs for earthquake-proof housing, none of which are appropriate for a traditional urban context. Furthermore, the government has forbidden further rebuilding until appropriate by-laws are released. Interested in driving forwards rehabilitation, the recently formed Bungamati Youth Group continued 27

to meet regularly for four months, after being initially introduced to each other in November 2015 (see p.45 for more details). They surveyed damaged houses and developed a masterplan to guide reconstruction. They also wrote a charter stating how they would like to rebuild their town, as appropriate for a heritage zone, which was submitted and positively received by the government. As a result, Bungamati and Khokana have become priority areas that will act as model settlements to guide the rebuilding of historic towns and villages in the Kathmandu Valley. The government is in the process of defining core areas as heritage zones and writing new by-laws specifically for these that incorporate the terms of the charter. Under current legislation, red list residents have a 4-year time limit to collect their allowance and complete reconstruction. Most residents are waiting for new by-laws to be published before they commence rebuilding, as well as political stability after the recent change of government to ensure that current policies are not modified or revoked. Development of Public Spaces During the last study trip, we started to observe some physical changes to the built fabric of Bungamati, mainly in public spaces. The bus park was under reconstruction, with plans to relocate the buses behind the municipality office, fit new 24” sewage pipes around the triangle to connect to the existing system and level the triangle area to facilitate a volley ball court and a small green park. The town’s committee is also proposing widening the road between Bungamati and Khokana, which has been contended by local organisations. The extension would enlarge the current 3m wide dirt surface to a 10m wide ashphalt road, demolishing houses situated along its edge in the process. It is understood that many of these houses were built without planning permission after the road proposal was publicised. Rebuilding of religious structures inside the temple square has begun, funded by the Sri Lankan government. During our visit, we observed workers clearing the plinth of the Macchendranath Temple and taking down the nearby ‘house of light’. The Bungamati Museum, located in the centre of the village, has recently been refurbished to accommodate six shops, the museum collection, an office and bathroom facilities. A large steel and corrugated metal roof was added to create an upper terrace, providing a rentable community space suitable for events and functions. Pre-existing waste and water problems have been amplified, exemplifying the need for adequate waste removal programmes and sanitation systems. These issues are most visible along the northern and south-western edgelands of Bungamati, where dumping of waste and material debris continues to encroach on forest fringes. Previous page Left to right: Landfill north of Prathampur Mahabihar; new sewage pipes are being installed at the bus park; Bungamati Museum’s new roof; clearing the plinth of the collapsed Machhendranath Temple Top Survey map marking recent changes observed in Bungamati Bottom Sketches showing rebuilt one-storey structures

Generally, there was a distinct lack of reconstruction of earthquake-damaged houses. A few more sites had been cleared and some one-storey structures had been built in their place, but most houses did not appear to have significantly changed. 29

The 17 Families

Prem Lal Mali

Shova Shakya

Buddhi Deshar

Chanda Mali

Manshyam Tuladhar

Dhana Raj Tuladhar

Ashok Bajracharya

Hira Shakya

Keshari Shakya

Druba Raj Tuladhar

Santi Shrestha

Narayan Shrestha

During two weeks in November 2015, we worked closely with Sukha Ratna Brahmacharya of the Bungamati Foundation Nepal (BFN). Sukha was eager and enthusiastic to empower local people to rebuild following the earthquake, and promote collective action within the community through the activities of ARCSR and BFN. He provided us with local access, perspective and knowledge about post-earthquake rehabilitation efforts. He also introduced us to 15 specific disadvantaged families during a scoping walk around the village, who he believed would benefit the most from our growing collaboration and a potential live project. Additionally, two families we had previously met in Bungamati were added to the group. All chosen families were understood to be of those in most need and living in substandard conditions. The total of 17 families formed the focus of our research project for the November 2015 and August 2016 field trips. Through our collaboration with Sukha and BFN, we would like to continue to work alongside the 17 families to produce an appropriate model for rebuilding homes within Bungamati, which will hopefully lead to a future live project. Sukha, as founder and director of BFN, is the main local point of contact for ARCSR. He has opened up many opportunities for us to engage with local community groups and other organisations working in Bungamati to mobilise families, local tradesmen and youth in assisting and catalysing rehabilitation.

Previous spread View across De Pukhu pond Previous page The families leave BFN offices following a workshop Left Portraits of representative members of the 17 families Prem Raj Shakya

Chike Tuladhar

Ratna Man Tuladhar

Binita Maharjan

Gopilal Maharjan

6. 6. 2. 5. 7. 7.

3. 4.

9. 9.

13.

12. 11.

10. 12.

14.

15. 16.

11. 16. BFN

17.

Location of Homes 5.

This map shows the location of each of the 17 familiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; demolished homes and the temporary shelters that they are currently occupying. We assigned a number to each site, based on the order in which they were visited during the scoping walk on the 16-17th of November 2015 (please see p.39 for further details).

Family Home Temporary Shelter

17. 1:2000

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

Prem Lal Mali Buddhi Deshar Man Shyam Tuladhar Shova Shakya Chanda Mali Dhana Raj Tuladhar Ashok Raj Bajracharya Hira Shakya Keshari Shakya Druba Raj Tuladhar Narayan Shrestha Santi Shrestha Prem Raj Shakya Chike Tuladhar Gopilal Maharjan Ratna Man Tuladhar Binita Maharjan 35

1. 6. 2. 5.

3. 4.

unknown

13.

10. 12.

14.

15. 16.

11.

BFN

17.

Topography of Skills

Based on their professions and knowledge of traditional crafts, most members of the Bungamati community, including the 17 families, have many practical skills that would be useful in the process of reconstruction. With a view to empower the 17 families to work together as a community and help each other through this process, we mapped the collective skills that each individual family can contribute. This information is based on the survey data collected from the family tree drawing exercise during the weekend workshops on the 13-14th of August 2016 (please see p.53 for further details).

Masons Labourers / Farmers Wood Carpenters / Carvers Electricians Engineers / Mechanics Drivers Weavers / Tailors Housewives / Teachers / Office Workers / Assistants / Shopkeepers Students Other Tradeable Skills (Gardeners, IT, Electronic Makers, Artists, Metal Crafters, Silversmiths, Nurses, Health Assistants, Priests, Cooks, Security Guards, Policemen, Army Officers, Hotel Owners, Guides)

1:2000

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

Scoping Walk

Our scoping walk on the 16-17th of November 2015 began at the northern entrance to Bungamati alongside Sukha (BFN director), who introduced us to certain families that he identified as most disadvantaged in the community. Firstly, we visited the previous residence of Prem Lal Mali, located outside the entrance gates. The site was uncleared, with clearly defined boundaries marked by waste material. Close by, we came across the severely damaged homes of Buddhi Deshar and Man Shyam Tuladhar’s families, both of whom now resided in temporary shelters away from their ancestral homes. Our walk around revealed the full extent of the damage, ranging from completely demolished sites (some of which had been cleared) to severely damaged ones (whose lower floors continued to be used as living spaces) and a few concrete frame constructions that remained standing. From the gate, we walked west to explore the residential areas concealed behind the main processional routes, and discovered a collection of shelter typologies constructed from mud, plywood and tin. Residing in the far corner was Dhana Raj Tuladhar, who continued to live on the ground floor of his damaged home with his wife whilst his nine other family members occupied an adjacent shelter. Around De Pukhu pond, we met Ashok Raj Bajracharya, whose house had collapsed but remained upright, supported by surrounding concrete frames. A young boy called Sanish Shakya approached us to explain that his house had also been completely destroyed, forcing his family to live in the terraces beneath the ridge road. Moving on past Prathampur Mahabihar Monastery towards the temple steps, we visited the residence of Keshari Shakya, a four storey brick house that had been reduced to one storey with a temporary tin roof. Near the temple square, we identified another four four-storey residences that had been severely damaged, though their facades remained intact. Prem Raj Shakya’s dwelling, situated amongst a terrace of houses, had been reduced to two floors, whilst Druba Raj had only a single storey remaining of his detached house.

Previous page Map drawn during the scoping walk to identify the location of the 17 families’ homes within Bungamati and their post-earthquake living situations Top Revisting scoped sites in August 2016 with Sangita Shakya (Sukha’s wife) Bottom Revisitng the home of Druba Raj in August 2016

Exploring east of the temple square brought us to what remained of the neighbouring houses of Ratna Man Tuladhar and Gopilal Maharjan. Unable to clear their sites because of structural ties to other adjacent properties, Ratna Man had relocated to a self-made shelter built on his vegetable plot further up the street, whilst Gopilal and his family continued to occupy the lower floors. Our final encounter introduced us to mother-of-two Binita Maharjan, who had a similar story. Her home, located between two terraces of concrete framed houses near the bus stop, had fully collapsed at the rear, making access difficult in order to clear the site. 39

First Meeting with the 17

After conducting a scoping walk with Sukha to identify families that fell into our criteria, a sample of 17 families were invited to a meeting at the BFN office. The purpose of this meeting was twofold - firstly for our benefit, in getting to know the individual situation of each of the families and to introduce ourselves, and secondly, for the encouragement of the selected families to collectively discuss their situation and position as part of the larger community. Presented with photos of their properties, and simple cartoon strategies about stages of rehabilitation, they were asked to respond critically and constructively about their personal circumstances and how they could see themselves facilitating rebuilding, incorporating improved methods of building and infrastructure, and recycling.

Previous page Cartoon strategies produced to evoke responses from the families Top Photos of the meeting showing introductions and the presentation

Surveying the Houses

Following the meeting, we surveyed the houses and makeshift shelters of the 17 families. Through the act of sketching plans and elevations of each property, it was possible to see the range of structural failures caused by earthquake damage and physically understand the shift in living conditions, past to current, of the families. With plots dispersed around the settlement, the exercise was helpful in enhancing our understanding of the spatial distribution of shelters either on cleared sites and open spaces within the settlement, or on surrounding farmland and the forested hillside. All original houses belonging to the families were of traditional brick construction: either fired or unfired brick with timber and bamboo. Structural failure thus occurred in a top-down sequence - many of the upper storeys of the houses had collapsed. In most cases, this collapse had rendered the houses uninhabitable, though several families had taken down damaged walls, leaving a single ground floor storey to occupy. We observed that flank walls were more susceptible to collapse than front facades, and where front facades were left intact, cracking was common from the edges of openings and from the sides where flanks walls were pulling away. The extent of damage, and consequent actions to clear and take down rubble, varied for each family based on their relative position to neighbouring buildings. Houses set within terraces were more likely to have facades still kept in position. End properties were more badly affected on all sides.

Previous page Plan and elevation sketches of the remains of Druba Rajâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s house, which has been reduced from four storeys to one Top Survey of Buddhiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s house, showing how the brick facade of her house was kept intact by the support provided by neighbouring concrete frame buildings

Exhibition November 2015

Sukha was keen for us to present our work to the community, and an exhibition was arranged for our final day in Bungamati in November 2015. The purpose of the exhibition was to generate interest in the research we had done, and instigate debate within the community about how to take collective and individual actions towards rehabilitation and properly executed, permanent ways of rebuilding. We advertised the event by creating and displaying posters in Nepali at notable junctions around Bungamati. The exhibition opened at 8am at Prathampur Mahabihar Monastery and had a heavy turnout of people who came by before heading off to work and school. This included school children, young adults, women, elderly, local architects, craftspeople and representatives from each of the 17 families. We presented the sketches and photographs the Unit had created in the previous weeks, as well as large A1 sheets illustrating the condition of the properties belonging to the 17 families. Due to the close-knit nature of the community, everyone was able to identify what they were looking at, where it was located, and even themselves or their houses in photos, which stimulated interest and discussion. Sign-up sheets were also displayed for people to register their interest in volunteering in rebuilding, as well as sheets documenting a tally under various actions such as ‘I will recycle’ and ‘I will clean’. Utilising the heightened interest in rehabilitation following the exhibition, Sukha created groups on social media for youth interested in involving themselves in rebuilding. They have since held regular meetings and discussions over a course of four months about how to proceed and take collective action for the sake of Bungamati.

Previous page Drawings were hung on suspended string in the open courtyard Top Residents signed up to volunteer in rebuilding and help drive this forward through actions Bottom Sukha created a social media group to empower youth to take control of ‘rebuilding Bungamati’ Following spread The presented images stimulated interest and discussions among the local community

Exhibition August 2016







      

 

   

One week after arriving back in Nepal in August 2016, we organised a second exhibition as a way to reintroduce ourselves to the 17 families and the wider community of Bungamati. We used this event as an opportunity to show local residents the hypothetical design projects that had been developed by ARSCR students over the past six months, to encourage the families to think again about reconstruction and to learn from them what has changed in their circumstances since our last visit. We promoted the event throughout the community by producing a Nepali and Newari poster a week prior, advertising on all notice boards at notable junctions around Bungamati and visiting all 17 families to invite them personally to the exhibition.

                            The exhibition opened at 7am on Tuesday 9th August, hosted by BFN in their recently-built hall outside their office. The work displayed consisted of A1 drawings, photographs and a series of projected videos, showcasing some of “Good to see earthquake resistant technology” the research work conducted by CASS students in November 2015 and the proposals that developed from this. There was a large turnout “Good modern design but may not be feasible” for the exhibition, including many adults that visited before starting work, local architects and engineers from NSET and UN Habitat, school “Locals might not understand the difference children and representatives from each of the between proposal and existing” 17 families. It was encouraging to observe local people looking carefully at the drawings, intrigued by the new buildings depicted on sites that they “Lovely drawings but descriptions needed to recognised. Architects and architecture students explain them” enjoyed the style and clarity of our illustrations, which communicated ideas more easily than technical CAD drawings. All visitors’ feedback was “More technical information on drawings” collected through a ballot upon exit (from a total of 103, 77 voted ‘very good’, 21 voted ‘good’ and 5 “A location map would be useful to show where voted ‘ok’) and optional written comments. the proposals are” In addition to research and proposal drawings, we re-displayed all 17 sets of survey drawings from November 2015 for the benefit of the 17 families, alongside updated surveys of houses that had changed since our last visit. As well as reminding the families of our ongoing commitment to continue working with them, the drawings acted as a stimulus to encourage all 17 households to participate in our upcoming workshops.

Previous page The exhibition was visited by different people throughout the day Top Promotional poster Bottom A range of collected feedback comments Following spread Visitors , including members of the 17 families, discuss the work on display

Workshop Weekend: Day One

Following the exhibition, we invited all 17 families back to the BFN hall to participate in a two-day workshop on the 13th and 14th of August 2016. Through a series of organised activities, we encouraged families to talk to us and to each other about their individual circumstances and potential to contribute towards reconstruction. The main aims were first, to make the families aware that by talking and learning from each other, they can achieve more as a collective team; and second, to help them understand that the skills and other resources available to them as individuals within 17 families can be better utilised if they are shared within the larger ‘family’ of 17 households. On the first day, families were split up into six smaller groups for the purpose of the exercises. Each group consisted of two or three households, a student from LMU and an assisting translator from BFN or the Bungamati community. Exercise 1: Family Tree We asked participants to draw their individual family trees and list the skills and occupations of relatives, using our own drawn trees as examples. A member of each family was then asked to present their tree to all the groups. Most people enjoyed doing this exercise and thinking about what skills and other resources they had available to them that could prove useful for rebuilding. It was great to see people gaining confidence as they were describing their family members, in particular Prem Raj Shakya, a trained mason, who proved to be a very engaging public speaker. Following the presentations, we started to identify groups of skills that families had in common or were missing, including non-specialised occupations such as those of farmers (that could work as labourers) and housewives (that could work as organisers), and trained construction work, such as that of masons, carpenters and electricians. Collectively, we introduced the idea that skills can be traded between the individual families and tried to stimulate discussion around this topic.

Previous page Prem Raj Shakya, a trained mason, presents the skills and occupations found in his individual family to all the groups Top Santi Shrestha’s family tree (exercise 1) Bottom Buddhi Deshar’s pre-earthquake survey drawings (exercise 2) Following spread Family members worked with students, translators and each other in small groups to complete the two exercises

Exercise 2: Draw your House Using our drawn surveys of each family’s demolished house as a base, we asked participants to draw the floor plans of their house as it existed before the earthquake, with our assistance. During this activity, we discussed how spaces were used at different times of the day and if they suited the family’s lifestyle. We were able to obtain a lot of useful facts and quite accurate information from people’s memories. In addition to helping us understand the needs of each family and improve the accuracy of our surveys (particularly in determining the boundaries of each site), this activity forced participants to question how well their previous home worked for their family and to consider how a new house might be built to work better. 53

Workshop Weekend: Day Two

The second day of the workshop elapsed through a series of open discussions with members of the 17 families, whilst sitting in a circle. The first topic of conversation was to reflect on what participants had learnt from the previous day’s exercises. After receiving comments from each person, we focused the discussion on the idea of the 17 families sharing skills and forming a collective team, alongside BFN and ARCSR students, to support each other through the process of rehabilitation. We presented the families with a ‘Skill Tree’ (displayed on the following spread) that organises all 17 families’ available skills into distinct groups. The purpose of this diagram was to enable each individual family to clearly see what skills they could contribute to the team and what skills they still required for rebuilding. A lot of family members expressed enthusiasm for the idea of exchanging skills. Prem Raj Shakya, the only trained mason, offered to teach masonry skills to young people and to exchange his skills for the services of those lacking specialised construction training, such as tailor Dhana Raj Tuladhar. In the second half of the morning, we asked family members to reconsider their current circumstances and start to plan the incremental rebuilding of their houses, based on the limited resources currently available to them. We presented them with a series of diagrams and drawings, that explained what can be built on a budget of 2 lakh (in reference to the governmental grant available to red-list residents), the incremental stages of clearing and construction using earthquake-resistant technology, and suggested guidelines for choosing materials and incorporating sanitation into a feasible phased construction plan, prioritising long-term benefits over short-term gains. At each stage, we identified opportunities to save costs by recycling materials and utilising the collective skills of the team to carry out the majority of the works. (This material can be viewed on pp.120 - 131.) The information was generally well received. Prem Raj Shakya in particular showed strong support for our ideas, reiterating their importance and elaborating on each topic in conversation with the rest of the participants. The presentation ended with a series of questions, where we addressed some of the families’ specific concerns regarding rebuilding.

Previous page Guidelines for building earthquake-resistant houses were presented to the 17 families and openly discussed in a circle

The material collected during the workshops was later collated into booklets, along with relevant research, survey drawings, worksheets and a record of all past activities in November 2015 and August 2016 that involved the participation of the 17 families. These booklets, customised to each individual household, were distributed to the 17 families in the last two days of the field trip. As well as providing a useful record of our ongoing work, the booklets were designed to act as a toolbox to help the 17 families plan the rebuilding of their new homes, in a way that ensures that they will be safe, improved and considerate of future additions. 57

Bungamati Foundation Nepal Sukha Ratna Brajacharya

Bungamati Foundation Assistants

17 Families

Organisers

Project Managers

Housewives / Organisers Santi Shrestha Narayan Shrestha Ram Bhakta Mali Manshyam Tuladhar Ashok Bajracharya Dhana Raj Tuladhar Gopilal Maharjan Keshari Shakya Chike Tuladhar Shova Shakya Hira Shakya

Masons

Wood Carpenters

Electricians

Keshari Shakya Prem Raj Shakya Chike Tuladhar Hira Shakya

Chike Tuladhar

Binita Maharjan Gopilal Maharjan

Ram Bhakta Mali Manshyam Tuladhar Ashok Bajracharya Keshari Shakya Prem Raj Shakya Buddhi Deshar Binita Maharjan Shova Shakya Gopilal Maharjan

Farmers

Wood Carvers

Students

Santi Shrestha Narayan Shrestha Ram Bhakta Mali Manshyam Tuladhar Ashok Bajracharya Dhana Raj Tuladhar Prem Lal Mali Ratnaman Tuladhar Gopilal Maharjan Buddhi Deshar Chike Tuladhar Prem Raj Shakya Hira Shakya

Santi Shrestha Narayan Shrestha Ashok Bajracharya Ratnaman Tuladhar Chike Tuladhar Shova Shakya Gopilal Maharjan Hira Shakya

Santi Shrestha Narayan Shrestha Ram Bhakta Mali Manshyam Tuladhar Ashok Bajracharya Dhana Raj Tuladhar Keshari Shakya Prem Lal Mali Binita Maharjan Hira Shakya Chike Tuladhar Shova Shakya Gopilal Maharjan

Labourers

Gardener Prem Lal Mali

Teachers Dhana Raj Tuladhar Binita Maharjan Shova Shakya

Artists Gopilal Maharjan

Electronic Maker / IT Ashok Bajracharya Dhana Raj Tuladhar

Skill Tree

London Metropolitan Students

Rebuilding Bungamati Youth Group

English Translators

On-site Supporters

Supporters Isobel Chapman Rengin Dogan Nicola McFarland Nicholas Rose Pradeepa Sivasanthiran Tanya Stagnetto Corina Tuna

Sabindra Shrestha Samjhana Shakya Anjana Tuladhar

Kabita Maharjan Joyorti Shakya Rajesh Tuladhar Babita Deshar

Metal Crafters

Weavers

Engineers

Shova Shakya Gopilal Maharjan

Santi Shrestha Narayan Shrestha Prem Raj Shakya Gopilal Maharjan Hira Shakya

Dhana Raj Tuladhar

Silversmith

Bike Mechanic

Dhana Raj Tuladhar

Ashok Bajracharya

Shopkeepers Santi Shrestha Narayan Shrestha Dhana Raj Tuladhar Shova Shakya Gopilal Maharjan

Hotel Owners

Tailors

Dhana Raj Tuladhar Gopilal Maharjar

Nurse / Health Assistant Dhana Raj Tuladhar Keshari Shakya

Priest

Santi Shrestha Narayan Shrestha

Prem Raj Shakya

Guides

Binita Maharjan Chike Tuladhar

Dhana Raj Tuladhar

Drivers

Manshyam Tuladhar Keshari Shakya Buddhi Deshar Shova Shakya

Cooks

Security Guard Keshari Shakya

Policeman

Manshyam Tuladhar

Army Officer

Office Worker

Manshyam Tuladhar

Dhana Raj Tuladhar

1. 6. 2. 5.

3. 4.

13.

10. 12.

14.

15. 16.

11.

BFN

17.

Survey Drawings The following package of drawings collates the main survey work conducted by students during the two field trips. It records the original site conditions for each of the 17 familiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; houses, as they were found post-earthquake in November 2015, along with any changes observed in August 2016. In addition, we have included a written profile on each family and a set of floor plans for each house as it existed prior to the earthquake damage, which were drawn with the input of each household during a workshop (please see p.53 for more details). 8.

This package should be regularly reviewed, updated and expanded during subsequent field trips, as work with the 17 families continues to progress. It is indended to be used as a point of reference for both ARCSR students and members of the 17 families, who have had the opportunity to review the drawings on multiple occasions at past exhibitions and workshops. Each household currently has a printed copy of their corresponding set of drawings, which was given to them within a booklet in the last two days of the August 2016 field trip.

Family Home 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

1:2000

Previous spread A new house being built in the fields, below the ridge road

1. Prem Lal Mali

Occupation: Farmer Household includes: Wife Chini Nani (gardener) and two daughters Their home, that is located along the eastern edge of Bungamati, was completely destroyed in the earthquake and they were displaced to a shelter located behind the bus park; a considerable distance from their old home. Prem Lal’s existing home once belonged to his grandfather, and was later split between Prem Lal and Prem Lal’s uncle. The existing home was approximately 40-50 years old. In November 2015 Prem Lal’s plot of land was the only plot that hadn’t been cleared, however this summer the plot had been cleared and a wood workshop had been erected on Prem Lal and Prem Lal’s uncle’s plots by his nephew. Prem Lal was also one of the families names listed on the municipality list for potential applicants for the government housing grant. His site also has significant live project potential as it is located near a well and a drainage channel that discharges wastewater into a nearby field. November 2015

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

Loft Plan

November 2015

Side Elevation

Back Elevation

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

August 2016

Side Elevation

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

2. Buddhi Deshar

Occupation: Farmer Household includes: Wife, two sons and two daughters Buddhi and his wife are both farmers, his two sons are both employed separately, whilst his two daughters are still in education. Initially we met this family through Buddhiâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s daughter Babita Deshar, 19, after she generously invited us to her home for lunch. We arrived at a temporary shelter donated to the family by the Triple Gem Buddhist society, located on land rented for now by the society from a private landlord. She showed us the damage the earthquake had caused to her family home, located roughly 300m from the temporary shelter. The house was a middle property within a terrace made of brick, with bamboo and mud floor construction. The earthquake had caused the entire front faĂ§ade to peel away exposing the internal spaces. The end buildings to the rear of the terrace are of concrete frame construction and we assume that they are holding the rear of the Deshar house upright. The front of all the properties within the terrace have been reduced to a single storey in the earthquake. November 2015

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

November 2015

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

3. Manshyam Tuladhar

Occupation: Carpenter Household includes: Wife and three children They have one young daughter and two older sons, aged 18 and 21. Recently married, the older son works as a truck driver, whilst the younger one is currently studying and learning the skills of woodcarving. Manshyamâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s former four-storey house completely collapsed in the 2015 earthquakes, leaving behind a pile of rubble that has not yet been fully cleared away. He currently lives with his wife Geeta and their three children in a temporary shelter made out of bamboo, corrugated metal and tarpaulin sheets (that he presumably built himself using his carpentry skills), less than 10m away from his former home.

November 2015

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

Third Floor Plan

November 2015

Side Elevation

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

August 2016

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

4. Shova Shakya

Occupation: Housewife Household includes: Husband Deepak (driver) and two children (Saroj is a handicraft worker) Their pre-earthquake house was a three-storey structure with storage in the roof space, divided in two and shared between Deepak and his brother. The house had been destroyed in the earthquake but with private funding they cleared the site and were provided with a basic vaulted shelter of one room. There is a self-built toilet to the back of the shelter and a drain to the rear, which is used for food waste and grey water. The property is adjacent to the entrance gate of Bungamati and situated south-west of a communal sunken courtyard where the family socialises with their neighbours. The main crossroads, connecting the site with the bus-stop, the ridge road and the road to Khokana lies adjacent to a large water tank with a tap system. Between the sunken court and the road to Khokana a large sewage pipe has been exposed in the monsoon rains- this may have some potential for the waste services on this site.

August 2016

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

Third Floor Plan

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

5. Chanda Mali

Occupation: Housewife Household includes: Husband, two sons and one daughter Ram Bhakta and Chanda Mali have lived comfortably in this small, terraced, four-storey house for 20 years. Originally, the house was a larger unit but it was split in half when it was passed down through the generations. An uncle lives next door, with an identical mirrored house layout. A carpenter by profession along with his brother, Ram Bhakta has a workshop in a different location in Bungamati. The 2015 earthquakes caused the entire 4th floor of the house to collapse (the kitchen) and severely damaged the structural integrity of the building. The family continues to use the lower floors for storage, but primarily lives and sleeps in a bamboo self-made shelter away from their house.

August 2016

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

Third Floor Plan

November 2015

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

6. Dhana Raj Tuladhar

Occupation: Tailor Household includes: Wife Nic Devi Dhana is a tailor and his house is located along the northern edge of Bungamati, whilst his tailoring shop is located elsewhere in Bungamati. His home, which once belonged to his grandfather, was divided between himself and his three brothers, and his only sister lives with her husband in Kirtipur. Prior to the earthquake 12 of his family members resided within this four-storey house, with each brother living in their own section. Dhana had intended to take down his home, along with his brothers, and rebuild it with a more modern construction. Unfortunately the 2015 earthquake prevented this from happening and the family home is now uninhabitable, although Dhana and his wife still sleep in one of the ground floor rooms. The rest of his family live in a selfmade shelter adjacent to their property.

August 2016

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

Loft Plan

November 2015

Side Elevation

Front Elevation

Back Elevation

Ground Floor Plan 79

7. Ashok Bajracharya

Occupation: Woodcarver Household includes: Wife and two sons Ashok and his wife run a woodcarving workshop together, in a rented house in Bungamati where they live with their two young sons. Similarly, Ashokâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s four brothers and one sister (including one other woodcarver and two carpenters) also rent separate houses for their own families, mostly outside of Bungamati, in order to be closer to their workplaces. The focus of this study is the small family home, which completely collapsed during the 2015 earthquakes. The house has been in the family for multiple generations. Aside from the concrete extension, it has undergone no structural changes or major renovations in the past 79 years. The house is difficult to clear, unstable and uninhabitable in its current state, supported by neighbouring buildings on three sides. Prior to the earthquake damage, the house was too small to accommodate Ashokâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s extended family. His parents, who used to live in the house alone, have since moved in with Ashok in his rented house.

November 2015

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan 80

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

November 2015

Side Elevation

Rear Elevation

Ground Floor Plan 81

8. Hira Shakya

Occupation: Wood Carpenter Household includes: Wife Laxmi (weaver) and two children (Sanish and Supriya) We initially met Hiraâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s familiy through an introduction by Sukha to his son, Sanish. He explained that house was destroyed by the earthquake, and now they live much further away. Their self-built shelter is located far into the fields behind this site- it can be viewed but not easily accessed. The original family home was located on the road between the entrance gate and the ridge road, it was three storeys and has been completed demolished since the earthquake. The adjacent properties were damaged but the lower storeys are still inhabited following some repairs. The street contains very little infrasturcture- private drains can be seen within the concrete plinths under the neighbouring property, and a well is located in the field behind the site.

August 2016

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

November 2015

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

9. Keshari Shakya

Occupation: Housewife Household includes: Husband Keshari is the mother-in-law of Sukhaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s brother, and her elderly husband was/is a carpenter. She has two daughters and a son and a considerable number of grandchildren. Her only son lives in Patan with his wife and since the earthquake has had little contact with Keshari. It is also known that one of her grandchildren lives with them in their shelter, located near the Bamboo Pati and built by a Buddhist organisation. It was evident this summer that her shelter was not adequate for living in during monsoon season, as the monsoon rains flowed through the entire structure, which meant that a lot of their furniture had to be put on stilts. Keshariâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s existing home is located along the Temple Steps and was significantly damaged in the earthquake. The amount of storeys prior to the earthquake is unknown but the earthquakehas since reduced it to just one. Since November 2015 there was no evident clearing of the site apart from some bricks being stacked at the front of the property. Other properties around this site have already rebuilt one-storey since November 2015.

November 2015

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

10. Druba Raj Tuladhar

Occupation: Retired Teacher Household includes: Wife Dhruba lives with his wife in their house near the southern entrance of Machhendranath Bahal. The earthquake affected the house significantly, reducing it from four-storeys to one. Having received no formal aid or alternative means of shelter, Dhruba and his wife have made the single storey remnant habitable for their imminent needs. This is despite Dhrubaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s affliction of being paralysed in one leg, and needing to use a walking stick to get around. We are unsure if Dhruba is employed, but he is almost always present at their house in the Bahal. As far as we understood, Dhrubaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s name was on a list of families who were going to receive shelters from Tzu Chi Foundation - a Buddhist NGO - but the project it seems never materialised. Dhruba is, however, listed on the municipality list for potential applicants for the government housing grant.

Novmber 2015

August 2016

November 2015

Side Elevation

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

August 2016

Side Elevation

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

11. Santi Shrestha

Occupation: Housewife / Farmer Household includes: Husband Sampurna and son Sahim Santi’s house, adjacent to the Bhairab Temple in Machhendranath Bahal, is a corner house at the end of a terrace, accessed via a courtyard. Due to the position of the property, the earthquake completely tore off the exposed side wall, leaving floors and walls cracked and balancing precariously. Unable to continue living in their house, the family relocated to a shelter built by a Buddhist Organisation, called the Triple Gem Society, on the western edge of the town. The site is where students engaged in a bamboo making project with local residents of the shelter and carpenters in November 2015. Sampurna and Santi shared the house with Sampurna’s brother Krishna and family, as well as Sampurna’s father. Sampurna and Krishna are both woodcarvers who utilised the ground floor as a workshop space. Krishna and his family occupied the first floor, Sampurna shared the second floor with his family and father, and the roof space was used as a kitchen by all.

August 2016

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

Third Floor Plan

November 2015

Side Elevation

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

12. Narayan Shrestha

Occupation: Wood carver Household includes: Wife and two children Narayan and his family lived in a courtyard house near the Bhairab temple of Machhendranath Bahal. Forty years ago, Narayanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s father divided this ancestral home into half, and one half was subsequently given to Narayan. The house was four-storeys high and constructed of traditional brick and timber following the earthquake of 1934. A modern concrete extension to the back of the house was added by Narayan around six years ago.The house can be accessed on two levels as a result of the site topography. The front of the house is entered at ground floor level via the courtyard. The back of the house is entered at first floor level from the street. Narayan used the ground floor as a workshop space for his craft. Despite the facade of the house remaining intact, the house suffered significant damage internally. Narayan and his family were therefore one of the sixteen families that were displaced to a shelter constructed by the Triple Gem. August 2016

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan 92

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

Third Floor Plan

November 2015

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan 93

13. Prem Raj Shakya

Occupation: Mason Household includes: Wife Prem Raj Shakya’s house is located on the eastern elevation of the Macchendranath Bahal Temple Square. The house, within a terrace of formerly fourstoreyed buildings, sits on a plot measuring 5m x 7m, and was reduced to two-storeys following the earthquake. Prem Raj still occupies the building. As a mason, by profession, Prem Raj has been involved in post-earthquake masonry training programmes that happened in Bungamati after the earthquake, facilitated by the Training Centre Nepal. In an article posted by the Nepali Times on August 3rd 2015, ‘Building Back Bungamati’, Prem Raj was interviewed and quoted as saying: “No one wanted to learn masonry skills before the earthquake...But now interest in brick-laying has surged.”

November 2015

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

14. Chike Tuladhar

Occupation: Woodcarver cleaner Household includes: Husband and four daughters Chike is a woodcarver cleaner and works alongside her woodcarver husband in their workshop. Chike has four daughters: two have moved out following marriage to their respective husbands whilst two still live with Chike and her husband. Their existing home was three-storeys high and lost one storey in the earthquake, and the interior of the building was also significantly damaged. The existing family home had a roof terrace for drying crops, and six of them lived in this house prior to the earthquake. In November 2015 we were told that Chike and her family lived in a flat nearby to their home, which was of a concrete frame construction. It is unknown whether Chike and her family still live in this flat. Pramila, one of Chikeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s daughters used to work for Sukha and the Bungamati Foundation as their secretary. Pramila spoke good english and worked with us during the November 2015 trip. Pramilaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mother Chike does not read or write English. Auguat 2016

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

Loft Plan

November 2015

Rear Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

15. Gopilal Maharjan

Occupation: Wood Carpenter Household includes: Wife Laxmi (farmer/ housewife), three sons and one daughter (including a wood carver and a painter) Gopilal’s family now live between homes- since the earthquake they have been assigned one room in the Buddhist shelter by the Pati built by LMU students, and they also spend some time living with Gopilal’s brother who resides in a concrete framed house near their severely damanged ancestral home. The home was originally split between three families, Gopilal, his cousin Kieran and his nephew Indra. The top floor of Goplial’s section has been assigned to his son and wife. This property highlights the continued division of assests into small and smaller properties. After the earthquake all three of these properties were destroyed or severly damaged. Gopilal’s is destroyed on one side and attached on its flank wall to the neighbouring properties in the terrace, making it a very unstable structure to progress with rebuilding. The street this property resides on, contains a drain within the street and three manhole covers. The toilet within the wreckage is still in use.

November 2015

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

Third Floor Plan

November 2015

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

100

August 2016

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

101

16. Ratna Man Tuladhar

Occupation: Farmer Household includes: Two sons (Dinesh and Naresh are woodcarvers and artists) Ratna Manâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ancestral home was a three storey brick structure inherited from his grandfather. After the house was destroyed in the 2015 earthquake, Ratna Man was subsequently very proactive with clearing his site and salvaging and re-using materials. He built himself a temporary shelter on his vegetable plot further up the road. However this seemingly created issues with the municipalities aid programme, and it was not until 2016 that the family received a formal shelter. The street this property resides on- contains a drain running down the street and three manhole covers. The toilet has been left on the site and is still in use. His neighbour is Gopilal Maharjan.

November 2015

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan

102

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

November 2015

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

103

104

August 2016

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

105

17. Binita Maharjan

Occupation: Cook Household includes: Husband, son and daughter Binita has fantastic english verbal and writing skills and is employed by the local primary school as a school cook. Binita is 24 years old and has been married for 9 years. Her husband is a construction labourer and works in Bungamati and nearby Patan. Binita has two young children, one of which attends the school where his mother works. Their family home was occupied by the four family members before the earthquake. However, the building suffered intensive damage beyond the buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s primary frontage and appears to only be supported by the adjacent concrete frame structures to either side of the property.

Pre-Earthquake

Ground Floor Plan

106

First Floor Plan

Second Floor Plan

November 2015

Front Elevation

Ground Floor Plan

107

108

109

1. 6. 2. 5.

3. 4.

13.

10. 12.

14.

15. 16.

11.

BFN

17.

110

Planning to Rebuild Potential Sites for Reconstruction

The latest set of surveys conducted in August 2016 highlighted some of the difficulties faced by the 17 families with the first step toward rebuilding: clearing the site of their demolished homes. For some, the reality is that they do not currently have sufficient funds or access to labour in order to complete this stage. Many large families continue to live in the lower floors of their structurallyunstable houses as there is simply not enough space in temporary shelters to accommodate everybody; they would need to find alternative accommodation until their home could be rebuilt. Several families face additional challenges in that their houses, although collapsed, are tied together to neighbouring structures and cannot be removed without technical assistance. Overall, most families who had access to their site have been able to clear at least a part of it over the past year, such as the fallen rubble from a collapsed upper floor.

Planning ahead, we have assumed that groups of the 17 families will start rebuilding in phases, based on the difficulties faced when clearing each site. For the purpose of testing ideas on specific sites for a potential live-making project, we have identified four families with cleared â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;greenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; sites that have the most potential to start rebuilding first. We re-surveyed these sites in more detail to consider their suitability for the project, before proceeding to develop site-specific design proposals and strategies for implementation.

Cleared Site Partially Cleared Site Uncleared and / or Inaccessible Site 1. Prem Lal Mali 2. Buddhi Deshar 3. Man Shyam Tuladhar

(Had previously cleared collapsed upper floors but the structure re-collapsed in July 2016 as a result of heavy monsoon rain)

4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

1:2000

Shova Shakya Chanda Mali Dhana Raj Tuladhar Ashok Raj Bajracharya Hira Shakya Keshari Shakya Druba Raj Tuladhar Narayan Shrestha Santi Shrestha Prem Raj Shakya Chike Tuladhar Gopilal Maharjan Ratna Man Tuladhar Binita Maharjan

Previous spread View of damaged housing surroung the northern pond

111

Area Ground Plan

A’

B’

Original location of collapsed house Cesspit toilet Water drainage Direction of surface runoff 112

Site 1 | Prem Lal Mali

The remains of Prem Lal Mali’s collapsed house have been completely cleared since November 2016, to make space for a new temporary structure that currently serves as a wood workshop and materials storage area for Prem Lal’s nephew. This structure would need to be relocated or removed prior to starting construction work. a. Permanent cesspit toilet

b. Open drainage channel

c. Water drains onto open ground, creating a waterlogged wastesite

d. Water well

Despite this additional complication, we identified the site as having significant potential for a live project because of its interesting physical conditions. Being located on the periphery of the town, rainwater and wastewater is directed to this area along drainage channels, then discharged into nearby fields without further treatment. This sanitation problem is replicated for the neighbouring cluster of properties. These specific conditions provide an opportunity to develop a housing typology that deals with sanitation and waste problems for settlement edgelands, to be replicated and adjusted to fit neighbouring properties and other peripheral sites.

Front Elevation | Section AA’

Site Topography | Section BB’ b 113

a. Temporary cesspit toilet built behind shelter

b. Covered drainage channel

c. Open drainage channel and exposed sewage pipe

d. Water tap outside the pumping station, next to the pond

Front Elevation | Section AAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

Street Elevation | Section BBâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; 114

Site 4 | Shova Shakya

A’

The site of Shova Shakya’s house is located near a prominent intersection at the entrance gate to Bungamati and the start of the paved path that marks the procession route to Macchendranath Bahal Temple Square (the Kota Tole). Shova, along with her two neighbours, received a basic vaulted shelter after clearing her site, which is now installed on the previous footprint of her former home. Immediately around it, she has access to a self-built cesspit toilet and a drain that channels greywater. East of the site, there are a number of interesting water and sanitation features. On the western side of the road leading to Khokana, we found a potential sanitation problem in the form of a large open drainage channel, saturated with water and waste, and what appears to be an exposed damaged sewage pipe. On the eastern side of this road, there is a small water pumping station and an attached public water tap. Rainwater is collected and stored in an adjacent pond, but its specific use is currently unknown.

This site has not been selected at present for further investigation as to its live project potential because the logistics of relocating Shova’s shelter to begin any construction would cause a lot of problems, to her own living situation and unavoidably those of her immediate neighbours. The identified sanitation problems would also be difficult to address since sewage pipes are owned and maintained by the municipality.

d 2.

3. B’

Area Roof Plan

Original location of collapsed house Cesspit toilet Water drainage Direction of surface runoff 3. 1. Entrance gate 2. Water stored in pond 3. Water pumping station 115

Front Elevation

Front Elevation | Section BB’

Street Elevation | Section AA’ 116

Site 8 | Hira Shakya

Hira Shakya cleared his site soon after his house collapsed as a result of the 2015 earthquakes. He has since moved away into a distant shelter, located in the fields near the upper ridge road. A lot of adjacent properties were also severely damaged and were thus taken down to single storeys, which remain inhabited by neighbouring families. Similarly to Prem Lal Mali’s site, the house was part of a cluster of properties that were erected on the fringes of Bungamati, between the fields and the town. However, the sanitation problem observed near Prem Lal’s site was not perceived to be as severe in this location, perhaps partly due to the inclination of the terrain which quickly drains water away from this area in a north-west direction. A neighbouring property appeared to have incorporated a drainage system within the concrete plinth that supported the house. We also noticed a well in the field behind the site. We considered that Prem Lal’s site had more interesting site conditions than Hira’s for a potential live project to develop, but there is scope for the project to extend to this site in the future.

Original location of collapsed house Water drainage Direction of surface runoff

Area Ground Plan

A’

B’

a. Open drainage channel 117

a. Water tap and wash area

b. Covered drainage channel

c. Permanent toilet was retained when demolished house was cleared

Original location of collapsed house Permanent toilet Water drainage

Direction of surface runoff

Aâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

Area Ground Plan

118

Bâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

Site 16 | Ratna Man Tuladhar

Ratna Man Tuladhar has been very proactive in the past year in repurposing materials and land to improve his standard of living - he has not only cleared his site, but has repaired his previouslyexisting toilet and planted a small vegetable garden. The location of his site in a terrace of houses in the centre of Bungamati provides an ideal opportunity to develop an exemplary housing typology for a dense urban context that carefully considers incremental construction, phased strategies for relocating facilities and a sanitation system that connects to existing drainage provision. Additionally, his house is surrounded by other cleared and partially-cleared sites, including that of his neighbour Gopilal Maharjan (one of the 17 families), opening up the possibility of extending the scheme to include the whole street.

Street Elevation | Section BBâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

Front Elevation | Section AAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;

119

MUNICIPALITY GRANT FOR Municipality Grant for Red-list Residents RED-LIST RESIDENTS

1. FOUNDATIONS

50,000

2. WALLS

80,000

3. ROOF

70,000

TOTAL

NPR 200,000 (2 lakh)

FOUNDATIONS

WALLS

50,000

ROOF

130,000

200,000

MUNICIPALITY GRANT FOR RED-LIST RESIDENTS

CLEAR. DRAW.

25,000

FOUNDATIONS

90,000

WALLS

ROOF

166,500

198,500

ESTIMATED COS

120

,500

ESTIMATED COSTS FOR BUILDING A 10 x 12ft HOUSE

CLEARING

unknown

DRAWINGS

20-25,000

FOUNDATIONS

65,000

WALLS

58,500 / 76,500

ROOF

32,000

DOORS & WINDOWS

unknown

LABOUR (12 days)

27,600

ELECTRICS

15,000

SANITATION

unknown

TOTAL

NPR 218,100 - 241,100 (exc. clearing, sanitation doors & windows)

D&W

LABOUR

226,100

ELEC.

Estimated Costs Cost of Building a 10 x 12ft House

Most of the 17 families should be eligible to receive a 2 lakh grant from the government to aid reconstruction by being registered on the ‘red list’ at the local municipality office. The grant will be released in three distinct stages, subsequent to an engineer’s inspection and approval of each completed construction stage. 2 lakh will not be enough to rebuild a full house, but it is enough to get started. With the help of a trained mason, we have estimated the cost of building a 10 x 12ft house (August 2016), which may be feasible with a budget of approximately 2 lakh. It is hoped that this modest structure will serve as part of the ground floor for a larger envisaged house, which can be extended in incremental stages as families accumulate the resources to do so. As you can see on the left, certain unknown prices were omitted from costing, which need to be accounted for prior to starting construction. All given prices also have to be checked and updated before building works can commence. There may be opportunities for families to save on construction costs by reusing undamaged salvaged materials or components from their old homes and helping each other with manual labour, using their collective skills to carry out as much of the manual work as possible. The following sections give a breakdown of the suggested reconstruction stages, highlighting the trade skills needed at each stage in the hope that this will help families identify the skills that they already have access to and the ones that they require.

SANITATION

241,100

ATED COSTS FOR BUILDING A 10 x 12ft HOUSE

121

Estimated Material Costs

Foundations - NPR 65,000 (exc. labour) STONE SAND BRICKS CEMENT RODS

15,000 1,500 28,000 18,500 2,000

(30in deep, 2 tips) (1 tip) (2 tips) (20 packets) (2 rods, 40ft)

Walls - NPR 76,500 (exc. labour) BRICKS SAND CEMENT

63,000 (45,000 bricks) 4,250 (1/2 tip) 9,250 (10 packets)

Roof - NPR 32,000 (exc. labour) TIN STEEL

12,000 (12 sheets, 6ft) 20,000 (10 rods, 7ft)

2 1

122

Suggested Reconstruction Stages 1. Clear your site

Each site must first be cleared safely, without causing additional damage to neighbouring properties. Families may need technical assistance on particularly challenging sites. Neighbours may need to work together to clear areas where collapsed houses are structurally tied together. Workteam: Labourers

123

2. Build Foundations

Before construction can start, an architect / engineer needs to produce a package of technical drawings that will guide the rebuilding of an earthquakeresistant home. Foundations should be built with sufficient reinforcement in order to create a stable base. Sewage and water pipes must be integrated and installed at this stage, following the consulted advice of a plumber. Workteam: Architect / Engineer Mason Labourer Plumber

124

Suggested Reconstruction Stages 3. Build Reinforced Walls

Reinforced walls need to be built according to the architect / engineer approved drawings and a masonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s advice (professionals trained in earthquakeresistant construction). The weakest elements will be the corners, the door and window openings and the connections to foundations and components of the roof structure. Therefore, it is crucial that walls are securely tied to each other with a continuous ring beam at the top (reinforced concrete or timber ladders where appropriate) and to the foundations at the bottom. All openings need strengthening at the top with the ring beam or a separate lintel. Layers of blockwork should be connected with metal ties. Additional vertical reinforcement may be needed. Workteam: Mason Labourer Carpenter

125

4. Install Roof

The illustration below shows the simplest roof that can be built using corrugated tin sheets and steel structural trusses. The roof can be temporary, to be repositioned or replaced when the house expands. Appropriate materials should be used to weatherproof joints and sufficient overhang must be left to protect walls and openings from rain. The design needs to consider how rainwater will runoff the roof, e.g. the placement of gutters and a rainwater harvesting system for domestic use. Workteam: Welder Labourers

126

Suggested Reconstruction Stages 5. Make it Livable

Before families can move into their new homes, they need to fit doors and windows, reusing the ones from their old houses if possible. Appropriate weatherproof finishes should be applied to the exterior of houses (such as anti-rust paint and wall protection panels). Electrical wiring and fixtures can then be installed, along with sanitary fittings that need to be connected to water and sewage pipes. Workteam: Carpenter Electrician Plumber

127

1. Prioritise Phasing

The construction of houses should be planned ahead to be built in incremental stages. Investing more in the foundations at the beginning means that they will be strong enough to support a larger house in the future. Families will save money in the long term by not needing to rebuild the foundations when they extend their homes. Workteam: Architect / Engineer

128

Suggested Design Guidelines 2. Prioritise Sanitation

Water and sewage pipes and sanitary fittings must be planned ahead and installed in the optimum location on each site. Sanitary additions should be built on top of one another when houses are extended. It is very expensive to install water and sewage connections after the foundations have been built. Workteam: Architect / Engineer Plumber

129

3. Invest in Infrastructure First

At all stages, families should consider how money will be best spent. It is more important to build something small that has been well planned, than an entire house quickly and without planning. This will save money in the long term. The most important thing to do is to organise priorities alongside the available budget. If there are insufficient funds to rebuild an entire house, families can invest in building parts that might be more important to them than others, using safer construction methods and improved technology. For example, one can first invest in building foundations and a sanitation core using permanent materials with earthquake resistant technology. Temporary accommodation can then be built around it, to be extended into permanent accommodation later when resources become available.

tin roof

sanitation core (masonry)

temporary accommodation built around core (bamboo / timber)

130

Suggested Design Guidelines 4. Traditional v. Modern Construction

The illustrated construction model is not the only way to rebuild. It is safe to use traditional materials instead of concrete as long as the structure is sufficiently reinforced and securely tied together, following the advice of professionals trained in earthquake-resistant construction. Families should be encouraged to re-use undamaged materials and other building components as much as possible, in keeping with a more traditional appearance.

Top Left House typology demonstrating the use of a reinforced concrete structural frame with brick infill and a roof terrace. Middle Left House typology demonstrating the use of traditional brickwork reinforced with timber ladders and a tiled roof. Bottom Left House typology demonstrating the use of concrete blockwork, recycled traditional doors and windows and a tin roof. Far Left House typology demonstrating the use of a temporary bamboo / timber structure built around a permanent masonry sanitation core.

131

Foundation plinth

Sanitation core

Septic tank E C

Ratna Manâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s site Neighbouring sites to be rebuilt Septic tank The illustrated axonometric shows Ratna Manâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s site and neighbouring plots following the Phase 1 construction of a plinth and sanitary core. The figures demonstrate activities and ask questions that may arise during and following the initial phase of this proposal. The questions are hypothetical, but may help continuing students to develop the scope of the project.

132

Proposal for a Dense Urban Context: Site 16 | Ratna Man Tuladhar

A - Student: What function does this drain serve, and where does it lead? There is a drain that runs along Ratna Man’s street. Its history and what purpose it serves should be investigated to understand the existing infrastructure, its capacity, and whether or not we can utilise it.

B - Student: What are these man-holes? Likewise, a set of manholes run along the street. Whether this gives access to an existing sewer should be investigated.

C - Neighbour: Engineer, how can I plan my foundations for the future? Regulations must be followed in the design of foundations and walls. An engineer must be consulted to help aid design according to earthquake resistance rules and to plan ahead for future adaptations and expansion. It may be that an engineer has to sign off plans before construction takes place. The technicalities of obtaining permission for projects should be investigated.

D - Ratna Man: Has the mason been trained in earthquake resistance? Many masons in Bungamati have been given formal training in earthquake resistant building methods. It wouldl be diligent to make sure that any serious construction work is undertaken by, or under the advice of, a trained mason.

E - Neighbour: Can we plan a toilet to connect to the septic tank? Assuming that the courtyard behind Ratna Man’s and his neighbour’s house is shared land, could the septic tank be constructed to accommodate for the waste of both properties? Is the relationship between the two families good enough to take equal responsibility in the maintenance of the tank?

Ratna Man Tuladhar’s site, shown in red on the illustration opposite, is a mid-terrace plot situated in the heart of the town. The street, paved and narrow, and lined with a mixture of collapsed and standing brick and reinforced concrete properties, is exemplary of the physical context of many households in Bungamati and illustrative of the ‘urban’ character of the town. We chose this site to develop a proposal because of its potential to act as a model for other households - both neighbouring and in other areas of the settlement - to rebuild their properties within similar contexts of high density. The plot, cleared to the base by Ratna Man, offers the opportunity to implement phased reconstruction with upgraded earthquake resistant technology and sanitary management, correlating to the ideas of incremental rebuilding discussed earlier. Using the conditions set forth by the housing grant as a starting point, we see the proposed development of Ratna Man’s site to be implemented in four conceptual stages, ranging from activity on the scale of his plot to the scale of the street. The first phase is focused on Ratna Man’s site and involves the construction of a foundation plinth and sanitary core (illustrated opposite). Foundations will be adequately constructed with reinforcement, and designed to accommodate for any future expansion Ratna Man may envisage. A septic tank has also been proposed to treat effluent from Ratna Man’s house and encourage localised management of waste and water. Advocating the need to plan ahead and invest in critical elements early on, such as the foundations and sewage treatment, is one of the aims of our involvement. Subsequent phases deal with the impact of the initial phase on the neighbouring properties, and the incremental growth of Ratna Man’s house from the plinth and sanitary core to a permanent rebuild. At the street scale, we envisage neighbouring properties to imitate the phased development on their sites with the construction of plinths, cores and shared tanks. Gopilal Maharjan, another member of the 17 families, lives in the house next door to Ratna Man’s. We hope that through the affirmation of the skill tree, and the encouragement of sharing resources between the 17 and their neighbours, the activity on Ratna Man’s site will benefit the process of rebuilding on Gopilal’s and others. The overarching strategy is that these small projects will incrementally and collectively play a part in the larger reconstruction and upgrading of this area.

133

- 2.4 - 2.4

0.0

+ 0.2 + 0.2

0.0

+ 0.8

+ 0.6

+ 2.5

+ 0.6

134

+ 0.2

Existing Survey - 2.4

Ratna Manâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s immediate surroundings were significantly affected by the earthquake. Whilst he and other nearby plots have cleared their sites of rubble, both houses next door remain partially intact. The house on the right being the property of Gopilal Maharjan, another member of the 17 families. The street is paved with stone and brick pavers, and has a drain running along one edge. Manholes have been observed at regular intervals along the road.

0.0

+ 0.2

Currently, Ratna Man is using his site as a vegetable patch and the toilet has remained in place for use as well.

Questions to investigate: Is the land directly behind Ratna Man's property shared land? Where are the plot boundaries drawn? How do households currently get access to water? What type of toilet is common in existing households? How is waste treated? + 0.6

What purpose does the existing drain and manholes serve? What are they for and where do they lead? How significant is owning a vegetable patch to the livelihood of Ratna Man (since his former one is being used as a shelter)? Will he need it during the process of construction on this site?

Ratna Manâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s site 17 families site Demolished wall

+ 0.6

+ 2.4 + 2.4

1:200 135

- 2.4 - 2.4

0.0

to soakaway

+ 0.6

+ 0.2

0.0

+ 0.8

+ 0.6

+ 2.5

+ 0.6

136

+ 0.2

Phase 1 - 2.4

To involve: Approval by an architect or engineer that the foundation will be sufficiently well constructed using appropriate earthquake resistant techniques and designed to accommodate future vertical expansion. In addition, this may require municipal approval. The construction of a base structure, consisting of a foundation plinth and toilet core on Ratna Man’s site.

0.0

The construction of a temporary shelter around the core - an initial step to reoccupying the site.

+ 0.2

Approval that the land behind Ratna Man’s site can be used to install a septic tank. The construction of a septic tank connected to the toilet core as a means of treating waste locally, before fluids are discharged into the existing drainage system. If there is a mains sewer running along the street with sufficient capacity, this may not be needed. Discussion with neighbours to be had about the potential of sharing septic tanks, as this may affect the size and capacity. The clearance Gopilal’s site.

+ 0.6

rubble

Ratna Man’s site Neighbouring site being cleared Septic tank

+ 0.6

+ 2.4 + 2.4

1:200 137

- 2.4 - 2.4

0.0

to soakaway

+ 0.6

+ 0.2

0.0

+ 0.8

+ 0.6

+ 2.5

+ 0.6

138

+ 0.2

Phase 2 - 2.4

To involve: Decision by Ratna Man whether to construct permanent walls on his site. 0.0

to soakaway

Approval by an architect or engineer that the walls will be sufficiently well constructed using appropriate earthquake resistant techniques and designed to accommodate future vertical expansion. In addition, this may require municipal approval. The construction of masonry walls around the core.

+ 0.2

The construction of a foundation plinth and toilet core on Gopilal’s site, following the correct approval. A temporary shelter to be constructed around this core. Approval that the land behind Gopilal’s site can be used to install a septic tank. The construction of a septic tank connected to the toilet core as a means of treating waste locally, before fluids are discharged into the existing drainage system. If there is a mains sewer running along the street with sufficient capacity, this may not be needed. Discussion with neighbours to be had about the potential of sharing septic tanks, as this may affect the size and capacity.

+ 0.6

The clearance of rubble neighbouring properties.

Ratna Man’s site Neighbouring site being rebuilt Neighbouring site being cleared Septic tank

+ 0.6

+ 2.4 + 2.4

1:200 139

- 2.4 - 2.4

0.0

to soakaway

0.0

+ 0.6

+ 0.2

0.0

+ 0.6

+ 0.8

+ 2.5

+ 0.6

to soakaway

140

+ 0.2

Phase 3 - 2.4

Phase 3 to involve:

0.0

Neighbouring properties starting to build foundation plinths and toilet cores, encouraged and supported by representatives from the 17 families and others. Temporary shelters to go up on the new plinths.

to soakaway

Installation of new septic tanks for households, or connection into previously constructed ones. Ratna Manâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s site Neighbouring site being rebuilt Neighbouring site being cleared Septic tank

+ 0.2

+ 0.6

+ 2.4 + 2.4

1:200 141

- 2.4 - 2.4

0.0

0.0 to soakaway

+ 0.2

0.0

+ 2.5

+ 0.6 to soakaway

142

Phase 4 - 2.4

0.0

Phase 4 is a projection into the future illustrating the roof plan of Ratna Manâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s house and neighbourhood. It is an idealised vision showing the community adopting localised initiatives to sustainably deal with water, waste, power and rebuilding to collectively upgrade and reconstruct their neighbourhood.

to soakaway

Phase 4 envisions: The reconstruction of damaged properties in a variety of construction techniques.

+ 0.2

The implementation of greywater and rainwater recycling strategies in the form of shared water collection tanks. The installation of solar panels on the roof to heat water or generate electricity for household use.

Ratna Manâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s site Neighbouring sites Septic tank Rainwater / greywater tank Solar panel Water tank

+ 0.6

+ 2.4 + 2.4

1:200 143

Reed beds

Sanitation core Foundation plinth

Septic tank C

Prem Lalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s site Neighbouring sites to be rebuilt Septic tank DEWAT terraces

The illustrated axonometric shows Prem Lalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s site and neighbouring plots following the Phase 1 construction of a plinth, sanitary core and reed bed waste management system (DEWAT terraces). The figures demonstrate activities and ask questions that may arise during and following the initial phase of this proposal. The questions are hypothetical, but may help continuing students to develop the scope of the project.

144

Proposal for a Peripheral Site: Site 1 | Prem Lal Mali

A - Neighbour: Engineer, how can I plan my foundations for the future? Regulations must be followed in the design of foundations and walls. An engineer must be consulted to help aid design according to earthquake resistance rules and to plan ahead for future adaptations and expansion. It may be that an engineer has to sign off plans before construction takes place. The technicalities of obtaining permission for projects should be investigated.

B - Prem Lal: Architect, how can I plan my next stage of rebuilding? Whilst temporary accommodation can be set up on the finished plinth and sanitary core, any desire to move onto the next phase and begin to build walls permanently with earthquake resistance will need the input of an architect or engineer..

C - Neighbour: Can we plan a toilet to connect to the septic tank? Assuming that the courtyard behind Prem Lal and his neighbour’s houses is shared land, could the septic tank be constructed to accommodate for the waste of both properties? Is the relationship between the two families good enough to take equal responsibility in the maintenance of the tank?

D - Neighbour: Can we connect to the reed bed system? The possibility of the growth and development of reed beds is to be incremental and needs further investigation, as more households opt to connect to the system. Technical advice about the feasibility of this proposal will be required from an engineer or a consultant.

Prem Lal’s site is situated on the northern periphery of Bungamati and near to the road leading to Khokana. The surrounding buildings, predominantly of reinforced concrete frame, are indicative of the modern expansion of Bungamati into the forested agricultural edgelands that bind the town. The relationship between the town and edge has been an overlooked contextual issue that reconstruction and upgrading strategies for the town must begin to consider. There is an opportunity to explore this relationship on Prem Lal’s site and propose a project that aims to mediate between the town and edgelands. The objective will be to encourage the upgrading and development of infrastructure on the scale of the plot, neighbourhood and periphery, alongside the process of reconstruction. The proximity of the town periphery to fertile farmland is an advantage to the residents of Bungamati. However, the improper treatment of waste produced by the town, both physical and effluent, has been detrimental to the upkeep and condition of the edgelands that demarcate it. On Prem Lal’s site, we propose the development of a sewage management system (DEWATS) that will treat effluent from households before outflowing into the surrounding farmland. Terraced reed beds will treat wastewater so that it can be utilised and released into the paddy fields, and thus create a productive and beneficial relationship between town and farmland. At the scale of the household, the implementation of sewage treatment in the form of septic tanks integrated into the first phase of reconstruction will be the primary filter for waste before it is directed to the reed beds. The illustration opposite shows the relationship between Prem Lal’s site, highlighted in red, to the ‘backyard’ farmland with the introduction of a reed bed system that could take waste-water from the septic tanks of his and surrounding households. Existing intact houses can improve on their current infrastructure for waste management, whereas plots to be rebuilt - such as Prem Lal’s - can integrate systems into their process of reconstruction. Similar to Ratna Man’s proposal, reconstruction can be phased and incremental, with priority given to planning for strategies such as waste treatment and greywater recycling in addition to improved earthquake resistant construction.

145

- 1.4 - 1.0

- 0.9

- 2.0

-1.4

- 0.9

- 0.8 - 0.8

0.0

- 0.8 - 2.0

146

Existing Survey - 0.8

Prem Lal’s site, and the damaged property next door, have both been almost completely cleared. At the moment, Prem Lal’s plot is being used for the storage of timber by the carpenters based in the building next door. Behind his site, a path drops down and leads to a platform with a well that sits above rice paddies. An open drain, presumably for rainwater runoff, runs along this path and flows into a ditch alongside the well’s platform. - 0.6

The immediately surrounding buildings are reinforced concrete frame structures, in various stages of completion, which were not visibly affected by the earthquake.

Questions to investigate: Who does the well belong to? Is it shared amongst households? How do households currently get access to water? What type of toilet is common in existing households? How is waste treated? Is the area directly behind Prem Lal’s property shared land? Where are the plot boundaries drawn?

- 0.2

Who owns the paddy fields behind the houses? What is the relationship of the carpenters using the site to Prem Lal? Will he be able to easily regain ownership of his site for construction? Is the land being rented for a source of income?

- 0.8 - 0.9

0.0 + 0.2 + 0.2

Prem Lal’s site 17 families site Demolished wall

0.0

0.0 + 0.2

+ 0.2

1:200 147

- 1.4 - 1.0

- 0.9

- 0.8

- 2.0

- 0.8

-1.4

0.0

- 0.8 - 2.0

-1.4 - 0.8

148

Phase 1 To involve:

- 0.8

Approval by an architect or engineer that the foundation will be sufficiently well constructed using appropriate earthquake resistant techniques and designed to accommodate future vertical expansion. In addition, this may require municipal approval. The construction of a base structure consisting of a foundation plinth and toilet core on Prem Lal’s site. - 0.6

The construction of a temporary shelter around the core - an initial step to reoccupying the site. Approval that the land behind Prem Lal’s site can be used to install a septic tank. The construction of a septic tank connected to the toilet core as a means of dealing with waste locally, before fluids are discharged into the new DEWAT system. If there is a mains sewer running along the street with sufficient capacity, this may not be needed. Discussion with neighbours to be had about the potential of sharing septic tanks, as this may affect the size and capacity.

- 0.2

Approval from land-owners, technical advisors and municipality to build a waste management system on land separating the paddy fields from the edge of the settlement. Construction of terraced reed beds to which septic tank outflow from surrounding households can connected to.

- 0.9

0.0 + 0.2

Prem Lal’s site Reed beds Septic tank

0.0

+ 0.2

0.0

+ 0.2

1:200 149

- 1.4 - 1.0

- 0.9

- 0.8

- 2.0

- 0.8

-1.4

0.0

- 0.8

-1.4 - 0.8

150

Phase 2 To involve:

- 0.8

Decision by Prem Lal to construct permanent walls on his site. Approval by an architect or engineer that the walls will be sufficiently well constructed using appropriate earthquake resistant techniques and designed to accommodate future vertical expansion. In addition, this may require municipal approval. The construction of masonry walls around the core.

- 0.6

The construction of a foundation plinth and toilet core on the neighbouring site, following correct approval. A temporary shelter to be constructed around this core. Connection of the new toilet core into the constructed septic tank. Expansion of reed beds along the settlement edgelands as to accommodate a growing demand for increased capacity.

Prem Lalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s site Neighbouring sites being rebuilt Reed Beds Septic tank

- 0.2

- 0.9

0.0 + 0.2 + 0.2

0.0

+ 0.2

1:200 151

- 1.4 - 1.0

- 0.9

- 0.8

- 2.0

- 0.8

-1.4

0.0

- 0.8

-1.4 - 0.8

152

Phase 3 - 0.8

Phase 3 is a projection into the future illustrating the roof plan of Prem Lalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s house and neighbourhood. It is an idealised vision showing the community adopting localised initiatives to sustainably deal with water, waste, power and rebuilding to collectively upgrade and reconstruct their neighbourhood. Phase 3 envisions: The reconstruction of damaged properties in a variety of construction techniques.

- 0.6

The implementation of greywater and rainwater recycling strategies in the form of shared water collection tanks. The treatment of wastewater purposes, and improvement of edgelands.

and utilisation for agricultural the subsequent the settlement

The installation of solar panels on the roof to heat water or generate electricity for household use.

Prem Lalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s site Neighbouring sites Septic tank Rainwater / greywater tank Reed beds Solar panel Water tank

- 0.2

- 0.9

0.0 + 0.2

0.0

+ 0.2

1:200 153

CASE STUDY B: PERIPHERAL SITE

6. 2. 5.

CASE STUDY A: DENSE URBAN CONTEXT

13.

14.

15. 16.

10.

12.

11.

BFN

17.

154

Community Rebuilding Strategy

Once the first stage of construction is complete for Ratna Man Tuladhar and Prem Lal Mali, it is intended that the rest of the 17 families will follow to clear their sites and commence rebuilding in subsequent phases, by applying and adjusting one of the two developed housing models to fit their circumstances. Through our continued support, we hope to then empower each of these families to act as community leaders in their local areas, encouraging neighbours to follow their example. This strategy can be slowly implemented to the rest of Bungamati, beyond the scope of the live project, changing and adapting as 17 dispersed nodes of activity spur further action around them.

In the case of Ratna Man, there may be an opportunity to test the proposal at the scale of the street, by extending the program to include neighbouring cleared and partially-cleared sites such as that of Gopilal Maharjan. Focusing part of the project on a cluster of houses could have a greater impact on the wider community than dispersed case studies. The scope of the suggested rebuilding strategy goes beyond guidelines for earthquake-resistant housing to address local sanitation issues. The scheme proposes that households invest in septic tanks to treat the outflow from toilets before it joins the existing drainage system. On peripheral sites similar to Prem Lalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, it recommends that neighbours collaborate on building and maintaining a belt of DEWAT terraces (fed by existing drainage channels) that can further treat wastewater before it reaches agricultural fields. Developing this system requires the input of a water and services engineer. Particular areas such as the northern and southwestern waste sites may require a larger system of terraces to be installed to cope with a large volume of discharge. Municipality support will be needed if it becomes necessary to use both public and private land in order to successfully implement the scheme on a large scale. The following spread envisions how rebuilding might extend to a wider area around Ratna Man and Prem Lalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s houses, as neighbouring properties follow their example to install appropriate sanitation systems and phase out the construction of their new homes. Proposed DEWAT terraces Water Existing open drainage channel Existing closed drainage channel

1:2000

1. 2. 3. 4.

Prem Lal Mali Buddhi Deshar Man Shyam Tuladhar Shova Shakya

5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.

Chanda Mali Dhana Raj Tuladhar Ashok Raj Bajracharya Hira Shakya Keshari Shakya Druba Raj Tuladhar Narayan Shrestha Santi Shrestha Prem Raj Shakya Chike Tuladhar Gopilal Maharjan Ratna Man Tuladhar Binita Maharjan 155

well

Stone spout

14. well 13.

15.

16.

1:500

Case Study A: Dense Urban Context 156

Open drainage channel Closed drainage channel

Proposed septic tank Proposed solar panel

to Khokana

well

Pond

3. water pump

4. Water Water tank

Entrance gate 1:500 Proposed DEWAT terraces 17 families site

Case Study B: Peripheral Site 157

158

List of Recommendations

The proposals build upon research conducted to date, into the physical and sociocultural conditions of the 17 families and their households. For the development of these initial proposals into live projects, we have summarised recommended routes of investigation, based on queries that have emerged during and after our time in Bungamati. The themes listed below apply to both case studies, and are intended to open new threads of discussion to both challenge and augment the proposed schemes. Water supply It would be wise to futher investigate the existing management of water and rainwater in relation to each site, and how these systems fit into a larger water management scheme that may or may not be prevalent in Bungamati as a whole. It would be good to understand the capacity, cost and variety of water supply and drainage systems currently in place, and the sufficiency of such. Waste management Likewise, it would be useful to investigate the treatment of waste from the scale of a household toilet, to municipal sewer pipes and their outflows. Comparing historic and contemporary methods of waste management might be interesting in seeing what can be improved or retained, and how the concept of DEWAT systems can fit into a larger strategy of reconstruction and upgrade. Engineer input We do strongly advise that an engineer is consulted on all design schemes, structural and infrastructural. It may be wise to set up a working realationship with local engineers who are familiar with earthquake-resistant technology, local construction methods and conventions and have some knowledge of hydrology. Land ownership and relations To develop the proposals, there should be a better understanding of the use and division of land and the specifics of what is private and what is shared. This is also refers to resources such as wells and tanks. Relationships between households and familiarity of neighbours should also be noted to recognise the potential for sucessful collaborative initiatives.

Previous page Surveying changes in Bungamati throguh mapping

Government legislation Due to continuous political flux in Nepal, many have voiced concerns over the reliability of issued guidelines and legislations for reconstruction by the current government, in the fear that a new government will come and overturn them. The scheme for any live project should therefore be flexible enough to fit into whatever political context 159

160

that might emerge. Equally important, it should be developed with an awareness of current legislation and grant elegibility requirements, so as not to jeopardise residentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; chances for obtaining future financial support. Drawing plans As it stands with the current regulations on reconstruction, plans for rebuilding must be officially approved, or drawn up by municipality engineers. It would be helpful to find out if that remains the case, or if there are any exceptions to the rule that will allow architects or architecture students to draw up plans, provided they have been checked by an engineer. Whatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s permanent, whatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s temporary? There seems to be official classification as to what is deemed temporary and permanent, and it would useful to find out the requirements for both. The process of obtaining permission to build is linked to these classifications so it will be useful to work out if there is any middle-ground which can be utilised in projects. Potential to expand It is important to continue to develop relationships with community members, engaging them in workshops and activities. Building up support for the scheme will enable it to have a larger long term impact and bring up more opportunities for live projects to develop at different scales.

Previous Page Drawing pre-earthquake floor plans with Narayan Shrestha

161

162

163

164

Summary The August 2016 study trip to the Kathmandu Valley was instrumental in enabling ARCSR students to continue to develop working relationships with the Bungamati community that were previously established in August and November 2015. Through active engagement with the 17 families and the ongoing support of BFN, we extended our knowledge of each familyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s circumstances and improved the accuracy of our site surveys, which has allowed us to identify suitable locations for a live making project and to begin to develop a design brief. Two site-specific potential projects emerged from this extensive research. They propose improved designs for earthquake-resistant housing that is safe and considerate of current financial and legislative impediments. The devised programme suggests appropriate models for incremental construction that address local sanitation problems and envision strategies for future expansion at different scales. In so far as it has been developed, the proposed implementation strategy encourages a dispersed group of 17 individual families to work together as a collective team, using the skills and resources available to them to help each other to build back each one of their homes. The greater ambition is to empower these dispersed families to act as leaders in their local communities, instigating further development in neighbouring properties. In particular circumstances, such as those of Ratna Man Tuladhar and his neighbours, it may be possible to extend the scope of the live project beyond one house to include a cluster of properties in the initial phases of reconstruction, thus testing and implementing the proposal at the larger scale of the street. The information presented in this publication is intended to be used as a starting point for new and continuing ARCSR students, at Degree, Diploma and MA level, from which to pursue live making opportunities in Bungamati and beyond. Any potential project will need to be rigorously tested and adjusted through proactive and diverse methods of architectural research and practice, in order to find accommodations that better fit the physical and cultural topography of each site. We look forward to returning to the community of Bungamati to continue our work alongside BFN in the upcoming November 2016 field trip.

Previous spread Residents gather to celebrate Youth Day in Bungamati Previous page Clearing the plinth of the collapsed Machhendranath Temple

165

166

Glossary BFN BFN (Bungamati Foundation Nepal) is a local NGO in Bungamati, founded by Sukha Ratna Brahmacharya ARCSR ARCSR (Architecture of Rapid Change and Scarce Resources) is a research area within the Cass Faculty of Art, Architecture and Design, London Metropolitan University LMU London Metropolitan University Machhendranath Temple Machhendranath, at some point in the days before modern Âday Hinduism and Buddhism, was the most revered God in this part of the world. The temple, located in Bungamati, was destroyed during the 2015 earthquakes DEWAT Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Systems; an affordable low-maintenance technology that can efficiently treat wastewater before it is discharged into the surrounding land. Standard applications are based on four basic treatments using sedimentation, flocculation, anaerobic filtration and aerobic filtration; the latter is often facilitated through a series of planted ponds Newari Indigenous people of the Kathmandu Valley Pati Traditional Nepali rest house; a public building often found in squares or public places Pukhu Water tank Tole Street

Previous page Rooftop view near the bus park

167

168

Appendix This publication is accompanied by a separate scoping booklet that serves as an introduction to the upcoming study trip to Nepal in November 2016.

Previous page Goats standing on a shrine in Khokana

169