http://touron.aij.or.jp/2016/01/498
── By Mohan Pant | 2016/01/22 | 海外建築事情, 007号：2016年春（1月-3月） | 0 comments
The Nepal
Earthquake 2015 and the Rehabilitation Works
Mohan
Pant
sribahal@gmail.com
In the
sunny day on April 12, 2015, at 11:56 local time, a strong earthquake jolted
the terrains of Kathmandu Valley. Series of aftershocks in the following months
left around 9000 people dead and about half a million of structures collapsed
in the zones hit by the earthquake. The magnitude measured is 7.6 and the jolt was
experienced for about two minutes. At 12:20, it was hit by a shock of 6.6 and next
day by that of 6.9. Another powerful shock of 6.8 on May 12 further damaged the
buildings made vulnerable by the first motion and the series of aftershocks. The
epicenter of the first jolt was 76 km northwest of Kathmandu in the district of
Gorkha in the village of Barapak and of the aftershocks in the neighboring
regions (Fig 1).[i] In Barapak itself among
its more than 1100 households, only two units in
masonry and about 20 RCC units survived taking a toll of 72 lives (Fig 2a,2b).[ii] The human loss would have
been much more if it was not simply for the reason that people were out of
their home at this day time following usual routine schedules. The school
children also were not in the school as it was the weekend day.
Symbolic
representations of the damage of this earthquake abound in papers and in
websites. Among them is the collapse of Dharahara, a structure of 62 m height
first built in 1832 and rebuilt after the 1990 earthquake (Fig 3a,3b). The tower built in fired brick with
special mortar that uses lentil, molasses and lime collapsed breaking at its
second ring with a slash of about 45 degree. The tower served as a city symbol
as it could be seen from many locations of the city. Human casualty is thought
to be considerable since there were people at the viewing balcony of this
tower, and movement of people in the square around it is always substantial. Another
image was a section of a highway connecting Kathmandu and Bhaktapur that sunk
by about 1 m from the original road level (Fig 4).
The author could observe a crevice of more than two meter deep in the fissure
thus created. After around two months, the depressed section of the road was
filled up restoring the normal flow of this arterial traffic. But Dharahara is now
a point of debate on its cultural and historical significance, and the fate remains
uncertain.
To the international community, the scene of damage of the World Heritage Sites—the palace sites of the three cities, and Swayambhunath was enough. In Bhaktapur Palace Square, five monuments are destroyed of which a Sikhara style temple dedicated to Vatsala Devi built in stone totally collapsed from the plinth level (Fig 5a, 5b). A number of other structures suffered serious damage whose walls are now given temporary support from sideways by means of timber posts (Fig 6). The five story temple the symbol of Bhaktapur, standing 30 m high from the ground with a high plinth of 10 m in five receding levels, however, remained intact except the damage at the corner of its topmost level (Fig 7). The temple also had remained intact in the previous earthquake of 1934 whose shock, according to the people who experienced it, was much greater than the present one.
The degree of damage in Patan Palace Square and in Hanuman Dhoka Palace is even severe compared to the scene of Bhaktapur. In Hanuman Dhoka Palace Square, either there is a complete collapse of the structures, or the structures suffered serious damage which requires reconstruction (Fig 8). The complete collapse of Kasthamandap, an ancient wooden structure confirmed from 12th century records, is a testament to judge the level of consciousness of the concerned institutions such as the Department of Archaeology with respect to the vulnerability of historic structures, and on the precautionary measures that should have been taken before any of such disaster takes place (Fig 9a, 9b).
The pattern of
damage in the Kathmandu Valley suggests that the tremor hit particular
locations more strongly than others. Settlements at the south east direction
suffered more than elsewhere. And settlements with soil strata of rock and
gravels didn’t suffer much. The buildings that suffered serious damage belonged
to relatively older age which was built in brick with mud mortar. The study of
various damage situations suggest that the damage occurred more in cases where
there was lack of horizontal tie up with the vertical member such as wall
masonry.
Structures that are relatively new, of about 30-40 years, are built in RCC of which a greater majority is built in the past 15 years. This is particularly the case in residential units. These buildings by and large remained intact at least in their structure frame. In certain cases, serious damage occurred such as pancake collapse of the whole building, and falling of infill brick walls of the high rise apartment buildings (Fig 10, Fig 11). These represent situations of design and construction faults that ignored either the nature of soil strata or consideration of the common situation of building damage to be found in the seismic movements.
The April 25 and
the May 12 tremor hit 31 districts of Nepal causing damage of different degrees
of which 14 are crisis-hit. Around 9000 people lost their life and 22000 were
injured. The governments of Nepal figures indicate that 602,257 houses were fully
damaged, and 285,099 houses were partially damaged.[iii] The Ministry of Home
Affairs has classified the affected regions into three categories—severe, medium
and relatively less damage. 14 districts that include Kathmandu valley and its neighboring
regions belong to the category of first severity. The total damage due to the
quake to the entire country that includes private dwellings, educational and health
facilities, government institutions and infrastructure has been estimated to reach
7 billion US dollars.[iv] The Post Disaster Needs Assessment
(PDNA) done by National Planning Commission at the end of May 2015 gives
breakdown in each cluster of services.
With respect to the temporary shelter to be
provided, there are no acts and regulations that stipulate government’s responsibility
to the citizens. Ministry of Home Affairs, which holds the responsibility with
its Disaster Management Control Unit, didn’t come to the stage to supply the
emergency shelter units. The municipalities and district offices did coordinate
the donation activities by nongovernmental initiatives didn’t have their own
guiding relief activities with respect to the sheltering places.
People took
shelter particularly in places such as in the urban squares, school grounds,
and residential courtyards (Fig 12a, 12b). In
the historic cities of Kathmandu Valley, Buddhist vihara courtyards proved to
be of particular importance as emergency shelters. Probably all viharas of the
Valley served this purpose with their limited open and sheltering space. Worst
as sheltering place were the highway sides where one could find instances of
people taking shelter in the green belt at the middle of the highway and using
bus stop sheds. The largest shelter ground was the Tudikhel located at the east
of the old city area of Kathmandu (Fig 12c).
What the
government did with respect to the emergency shelter is the distribution of a
limited quantity of tarpaulin sheets of 3.6 x 5.4 m size
per family unit. Our observation visit shows that all the tents were supplied
by international donors and religious institutions. And a great many of them
were covered by plastic sheets that was either in the stock of the people or,
if not, bought by the people themselves (Fig 13).
As the
days passed on, the rainy season was nearing and the emergency shelters with
tarpaulin or tents evidently were not going to protect the inmates from the
weather. A shelter that could last for a period before one could move to the
permanent home was of immediate necessity. But the government again was unprepared.
There doesn’t exist standards to guide the construction of temporary shelters such
as that on floor space and other quality matters. The government simply resorted
to a measure declaring a support of RS 15000 asking the people to buy CGI sheets
to protect them from the weather. The amount was intended for the roofing of
two rooms.
The philanthropic
organizations were quick from the beginning to provide CGI sheets for the
shelter. There were already temporary unit models of CGI sheet material that covered
both wall and the roof (Fig 14, 15). People consequently
followed the CGI box model for their temporary dwelling unit. However, a unit
of 3 x 4 m when covered with cgi sheet both in wall and roofing did cost around
Rs 40,000. Yet by now, a great many varieties of such temporary sheds are to be
found. Such sheds use recycled material from bricks, CGI sheets to doors and
windows ( Fig 16a, 16b). These materials
supplement to the Rs 15000 support by the state to get the cgi sheet and
minimize the cost in building the shed.
At present, in
Bhaktapur, which suffered more damage compared to Patan and Kathmandu,
municipal records show that 6411 dwellings out of about 18,000 units in the
historic town area suffered total damage (Fig 17a, 17b).
More than half of the population has to shift either to temporary shelter or
find rooms in rent (Fig 18). A considerable
number of households live in their relatives’ place. It has been phenomenal
that the houses whose upper story collapsed or suffered serious damage are
cleared or dismantled leaving only one level over the ground floor (Fig 19). The floor is then given light CGI roofing. These
dwellings are now so called ‘half architecture’ and are utilized for kitchen
and storage if not for sleeping in the night for fear of further possible
shock. The remodeled two story dwelling and the temporary shed which could be
at certain distance from the location of the dwelling complement the regular
daily life of the inhabitants.
Clusters of
temporary shed are built in open spaces within the city or in the open fields
in the fringe (Fig 20). The sites are not the
planned evacuation sites. A site in Bhaktapur used for emergency shelter that
housed around 100 families suffered from a flood in August 27 and had to shift
to other location. Most of the sheds are built with the support of NGOs and
NPOs, and are of CGI sheets for both walls and roofing with meager floor space
of about 12 sqm. The CGI unit was popularized by the donating agencies and by the
state and the local government. However, the performance of such units both in
summer and winter is evidently worse and is taking the toll on the health of
the refugees particularly to the children, elderly, and adults who require
health care. In the ongoing winter, reports of death particularly of elderly
due to the cold in the newspapers are creeping in. The state is now giving Rs
10000 to warm the winter cold.
It is a pity to
know that there was a general trend on the part of the refugees to wait for
state or some philanthropic institution to come to their aid. Local skills and
material that were in their reach was not called for. It was only late that
there are peoples who rather than waiting any outside help relied back to their
own local strength in building their shelter. The local building material and
the skill certainly will prove beneficial to the inhabitants in the long run.
The state at the
early stage of assessing the damage declared a package of financial assistance
to those whose houses were completely damaged. The assistance is a flat amount of
Rs 200,000 to both rural and urban households. In addition, Rs 25,00000 to the
urban household and Rs 1500000 to the rural ones could be provided in the form
of low interest against the bank mortgage. The assistance is planned to be
provided in installments as the construction of the house proceeds in stages.
Further the dwellings have to meet the new construction standard that is
specifically tailored to withstand seismic movements. In terms of technical
validity, the rules are of empirical nature. Department of Urban Development
and Building Construction (DUDBC) under the Ministry of Urban Development, in
November, produced a guideline to be followed and to be referred by the
municipalities and rural village development committees. In addition, in October,
the Department in collaboration with JICA published 17 model types as a guiding
reference in the reconstruction of dwelling units in rural areas.[v] The models, in compliance
with National Building Code 1994, are of masonry construction of single and
double floors, and either in brick or stone with cement or mud mortar reinforced
by RCC horizontal tying bands at plinth, sill, lintel and floor levels (Fig 21a, 21b).
But the models show lack of consideration of
cultural patterns. They hardly reflect the floor plans or built forms of the
houses that one finds in the rural settings of Nepal. However, certain
instances of reconstruction effort from local initiatives that make a prior
study of the locality and are sympathetic to the traditional dwelling form are
coming up in the scene[vi].
The PDNA puts
forth a number of guidelines to follow in reconstruction process-- community
participation, coordinated effort of development partners, use of local
resource and expertise, disaster risk reduction and resiliency, development of
economic opportunities, environmental sustainability and equity. It also
recommends the owner driven reconstruction process—the ODR. These theories of
recovery have been formulated decades back, which carries much more weight in
paper than in practice[vii]. The financial support by
the state to build the individual units is accepted by the people, but the low
interest loan works in favor of the people with property to mortgage.
Immediately
following the aftermath of the quake, the state put a moratorium in building
constructions asking the people to wait until a new regulation was formulated.
On November, the Ministry of Urban Development brought forth a set of
guidelines that controls the design and construction of the building in both
the rural and town areas.[viii] To make these
regulations work, there is a dire need of capacity building of the
municipalities that now count to 217.
Further, the
guidelines are to be adopted by respective municipalities while tailoring to
their particular standards and needs. Historic towns of the Valley have special
problems. After eight months, cities like Bhaktapur have not yet been able to
come up with the new regulations. In this uncertainty, there are already instances
of beginning of rebuilding by the households in their plots over the same
footprint of the damaged building (Fig 22a, 22b).
A more progressive
initiative in the reconstruction is shown by a community of Pilachen
neighborhood at the eastern quarter of Patan. The locality has formed a
community that includes around 85 households whose houses suffered various
degree of damage. Their plan is to build together from the ground. But it is
going to be in the same footprint of the earlier unit and will be built to meet
the individual requirements of floor space. Community spaces such as streets
and courtyards and shrines will be part of this community project. The project
also explores new economic opportunities to attract tourists with facilities of
home stay.
Concepts of urban
regeneration are in the air and, occasionally, are the news highlights.
However, the individual interests and conservative suspicions are a hard knot
to crack, and hinder the way for a concerted community action. Municipality personnel
can’t be excluded from this mindset.
Until now, the state
has not taken initiatives to reconstruct the villages or the towns that have
suffered a degree of damage that asks for the development in the scale of the
village or a town block. It is at such places that the state will be in the
position to realize the ‘Building Back Better’ concept embodied in the
principle guidelines for reconstruction. This is also an opportunity to develop
the areas that were inaccessible sectors of the quarter and where living environment
were degrading due to excessive construction both in height and density.
Entirely left to the principle of ODR, there is an evident danger that houses
will be built in the same plots despite their inherent problems of access and
difficult plot geometry making them similarly vulnerable to the future
earthquakes. Steps towards this direction are urgently necessary to make the
use of the financial resource effective that now takes around one third of the
annual national development budget. The state should formulate relevant
financial and legal framework for community action to support and guide the
reconstruction initiatives. International Agencies and governments, such as the
government of Japan, which has pledged the assistance of 30 billion yen for the
post disaster recovery, should find a strategic framework of cooperation in
this direction of housing and town building.[ix] The state at least could
build small pilot projects in association with the local communities and create
an atmosphere where real life experience is possible that will guide the
community further in the rehabilitation and reconstruction works.
It is to be noted
that following the 1934 earthquake a section at the southeastern part of the
old city of Kathmandu was redeveloped introducing certain ideas of planning of
the time (Fig 23). This experience almost is a
forgotten past. Likewise, casual observation of the settlements of the Valley
suggests an established tradition of community initiatives in building the
towns.[x] It is only in modern times
that the role of the state and of the community has devolved leaving all the
responsibility to ODR. However, it is of importance to note that the post
disaster reconstruction and rehabilitation work is an excellent opportunity to
invoke the exemplary traditions and the value of which will pay back any
financial expenses made in this regard when meeting the present needs.
List of Figures
Fig 1. Distribution of intensity of Nepal
Earthquake 2015, April 25 (Wall Street Journal, US Geological Survey).
Fig 2a. The epicenter—Barpak, Gorkha. This
hilly rural settlement thoroughly collapsed.
Fig 2b. Barpak before the quake.
Fig 3a. Dharahara before the quake
(Wikimedia)
Fig 3b. Dharahara after the quake (Narendra
Shrestha).
Fig 4. The quake created a fault in the
Bhaktapur-Kathmandu section of Araniko Highway leading to the Chinese Border
Fig 5a. The Bhaktapur Palace Square (at the
centre is the Vatsala devi temple in Sikhara style)
Fig 5b. The Vatsala devi temple collapsed
from the plinth level.
Fig 6. Buildings of heritage importance are
now supported by the side stays. The photo is a residential building in Khauma,
Bhaktapur.
Fig 7. The Nyatapola (Five Story) Temple,
Bhaktapur.
Fig 8. The medieval Hanuman Dhoka Palace in
Kathmandu suffered most serious damage.
At right is 19th c neoclassical palatial building; In the front can be seen two
pyramid like structures which are the stepped plinths of the two three tired
temples that collapsed
Fig 9a. Kasthamandap, Hanumandhoka Palace
Square. A 19th c painting, History of Nepal (Oldfield, H.)
Fig 9b. Kasthamandap after the quake. The
structural members are transported to other location within the square.
Fig 10. The pancake type collapse of RCC
structure, Sitapaila, Kathmandu.
Fig 11. The collapse of infill brick walls
in a highrise apartment structure, Kathmandu.
Fig 12a, 12b. People taking emergency
shelter in Sundhara Square (12a), and at a pati, a colonnaded structure (12b),
Patan.
Fig 12c. Tudikhel, Kathmandu. Within a week
the population taking emergency shelter reached around 12,000.
Fig 13. The tarpaulin sheet used for the emergency
shelter
Fig 14. A model shelter by Arun Chaudhari
put at Tudikhel, Kathmandu.
Fig 15. The CGI sheet boxes are the most
common scene at present adopted for the transitional shelter.
Fig 16a, 16b. Different forms of the
transitional shelter. The use of recycle materials. 16a uses the wooden members
of the collapsed house; 16b uses fine earth packed plastic bags for walls and
reuse of windows.
Fig 17a. A Damage Assessment map of
Bhaktapur. UNOSAT (unitar.org/unosat)
Fig 17b. Jelan neighborhood, at the east of
Bhaktapur, suffered heavy damage
Fig 18. A survey showing damage assessment
of houses in Taulachhen, Bhaktapur. It also shows houses that are considered
uninhabitable by the residents (Survey: Khwopa Engineering College, B. Arch 4th
yr).
Fig 19. When the top floors collapsed, the
dwellings are given roof at second floor and used for living or storage, Khala,
Bhaktapur.
Fig 20. Clusters of temporary sheds of CGI
sheets are built in available open spaces and in fields at the fringe of the
old city.
Fig 21a, 21b. One of the model houses proposed
by JICA and DUDBC for rural areas.
Fig 22a, 22b. New RCC structures and brick
in mud mortar being built in the original dwelling sites, Bhaktapur.
Fig 23. A new area redevelopment immediately
following the 1936 great earthquake, Kathmandu.
[i] Gorkha
bhukampa, 2072 (Gorkha Earthquake, 2015), Govt of Nepal, Jeth 12.
[ii] Milan Bagale,
Barpak visit report (unpublished); Tandan, Pramod Kumar, Hakahaki, Dec 2072.
[iii] drrportal.gov.np
[iv] Nepal Earthquake
2015 Post Disaster Needs Assessment, Vol A: Key Findings; Vol B: Sector
Reports. Govt of Nepal, National Planning Commission, Kathmandu, 2015.
[v] Design Catalogue
for Earthquake Resistant Houses, Vol 1, Govt of Nepal, Ministry of Urban
Development and Building Construction, Nepal Housing Reconstruction Programme,
2015, Oct.
[vi] A reconstruction
program in Gudel Village, Solukhumbu initiated by Gudel Kiduk Samaj and CODE,
Kobe.
[vii] Gujarat
Earthquake Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Policy (GSDMA), The Gujarat State
Disaster Management Authority, 2001.
[viii] Vasti vikas,
sahari yojana tatha bhaban nirman sambandhi mapadanda, 2072 (Standard on
Housing, Town Planning and Building Construction, 2015), Ministry of Urban Development
(MoUD), 2015 Oct.
[ix] The Himalayan Times > Business > Japan assistance for Nepal earthquake recovery, Dec 21,
2015. This is a follow up of the International Conference on Nepal’s Reconstruction
held on June 25, 2015.
[x] Stupa and
Swastika—Historic Urban Planning Principles, Pant Mohan and Funo Shuji, 2007, Kyoto
University Press.
