An example of how not to design

Five housing blocks meant to rehabilitate fishermen in Nochikuppam are like matchboxes on stilts. They are a perfect example of how not to design and what is wrong with the government approach to social housing.

The building corridors are dingy, long and narrow. Tiny tenements are endlessly lined on either side of them in a row. Individual dwelling are like shoe boxes, with only one window in them.

The spaces below the ramps are so clumsy that they are bound to turn into large sized dustbins. The only way to reach the terrace is by acrobatically squeezing through a two foot by two foot opening that can be approached using a metal ladder. A large courtyard in the middle of the compound stands isolated from the beach outside, where children energetically run around and play cricket. The entire design ignores the fact that the everyday lives of the fishermen who are going to inhabit these new buildings, would organically extend to the sea in front of them.

In defence, the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board (TNSCB), which built this complex, may argue that this is not a luxury apartment but a low cost unit built for free. They have targets to achieve and the cost is constraining. Do they mean that good design is only for the rich and the poor have to make do with pigeon holes?

Cost and good design are not directly proportional. The public purpose of architecture and social responsibilities of design can be realised in housing for the poor without incurring any additional expense. The TNSCB should revisit what architect Laurie Baker wrote, when he decades ago about the government insensitive approach. He criticised the concrete boxes built without any respect given to life and land. His demonstration in Chengalchoola, Thiruvananthapuram shows that numbers can be achieved without having to lose design quality.

If the TNSCB wants to look even further, there are plenty of instructive examples in cities across the ocean. In Iquique in Chile, designers did not force a finished product on its future inhabitants nor did they mechanically reproduce solutions. The design was anchored in local conditions and adidas running shoes powered through consultations. Space was intensely used without compromising on design standards. Consultants who partnered with government invested in researching and innovating housing solutions.

There is another lesson to learn from the city design center, University of Illinois, which compiled best practices in affordable housing. Lowering construction cost is not the only way to make dwelling units cheaper. Houses can be made more economically efficient by lower lifetime operating and maintenance costs and to achieve this, good design is imperative.

The problem with TNSCB is that it approaches housing as a number or a target to accomplish. The attention is only on the dwelling unit and the bureaucracy of building it. By creatively using land, open areas and terraces, limitations imposed by the size and adidas philippines store costs can be overcome. Instead of a large meaningless open space, smaller courtyards, front yards, interesting lanes that connect the blocks could be created and flexibly used. Buildings can have better aesthetic quality without builders having to spend more. An enriching living environment can be created with some effort and sensitivity.

Keywords: social housing, Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board, innovating housing solutions

I had always wondered though, why do low cost stuff need to look cheap. Even in the west where I live, a cheaper car looks bad than an expensive car. I can understand it going slower and having less features, but using the same amount of steel why can’t the designers shape the car better like a Benz or adidas philippines careers Audi. Certainly any car company can afford the salary of designers working in the big companies.

On the article above, beach front property right in the middle of the city is prime property in any part of the world. Only in India, do we give it away for free. I would have sold the land to some big developer and adidas shoes philippines with that money would have built a better dwelling for the fisher folk somewhere interior or another shore away from the city. If interior, I would have made sure dedicated transport for them and their materials to the sea. I am sure that would have worked out cheaper.

Posted on: Dec 11, 2012 at 01:45 IST

Posted on: Dec 11, 2012 at 01:41 IST

Hi Folks . Dont forget that these new builings also will resemble a multi floor slum within a few months .

The structures resemble manufacturing units. TNSCB should have hired outside architect to design the building. With minor modifications and with less expense these units can one day be converted into prison cells. Hope the structural engineer did not cut cost in designing the foundation and considered high wind loads in designing the frames.