PHYSICAL ASPECTS
We can build N-bombs, why not safe houses (Times of
India, 4-02-01)
….there is no dearth of experts or research institutions on earthquake engineering in
the country. But the cavalier manner in which this country is governed is the root cause
of this enormous disaster. Science and technology gives us the ability to deal with
so-ccalled natural disasters- from floods and drought to cyclones and earthquakes.
Regulation and disaster management is the job of the government. It is its responsibility
for instance,to ensure that buildings in seismic regions are made in a way that they are
earthquake resistant. Since there is no dearth of knowledge in this field, why doesn't
this happen.
One key reason is technical incompetence. Government agencies are run by generalist
administrators from the Indian Administrative Service who cannot differentiate between the
front end and back end of science and therefore cannot integrate scientific and technical
competence into the decision-making. There is no public pressure on the politicians either
to deliver. One so-called natural disaster takes place after another but nothing changes.
Add to this heady cocktail the curse of corruption. Rampant especially in construction
related activities, and we have a perpetual disaster on our hands.
….Experts from the Central public Works Department (CPWD) have already stated
that local bodies do not have structural engineers who have the expertise to enforce
earthquake resistant norms.
'Structure of many Ahmedabad buildings flawed, says
expert' (Times of India)
Family ties bond Gujarat's politicians, builders.
Although 90 percent of the high rise buildings are illegal yet no builder has been
prosecuted (Indian Express 10-02-01)
Only 10 high-rises in Ahmedabad had occupancy
permission (Times of India, 14-02-01)
If one strictly goes by the rule-book, only about a
dozen high-rise residential buildings in Ahmedabad would be fit for occupation, claim
official sources. But the ``rule" that was followed till January 26 was ``pay and get
around laws".
Random surveys conducted recently in the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and the
Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority areas reveal that of the 1,000-odd high-rise
buildings in the city, only about 10 residential buildings had permission for occupancy,
or what is commonly called building use (BU) permission. AUDA sources say that in the last
10 years, only two high-rises were given BU permission, one of which happens to be the
ISRO building.
Thus, it was not just the earthquake, but conscious negligence and compromises made
to appease the powerful builder lobby that took its toll on Ahmedabad buildings. Though
civic officials in the post-quake scenario are now throwing up their hands saying it was
not their business to check the structural designs of the buildings, the fact of the
matter is that building bye-laws include a component that the ``structural designer's
report" be submitted for municipal approval which also verifies the strength of the
building with reference to the live load, wind load and earthquake force.
``But what usually happens is that the structural
designer is usually of the same construction company whose building has to be cleared for
occupancy," says an official.
This component was later revised to include the National Building Code and the
Indian Standard Specifications in 1990, but there was hardly any enforcement. Thus, of the
12,000-odd low-rise buildings in the AMC and AUDA area, the few that had BU permissions
were mostly schools or educational institutions. There are 450 high-rises in AMC and 538
in the AUDA area, most of which have deviated from the original plans. In AMC area, 99 per
cent buildings don't have BU permission. Interestingly, an AMC official revealed that many
employees at the town development department are practically on the rolls of certain
builders operating in the city.
Some TDO employees have also turned into full-time builders- Rakesh Shah is one
such. Shah used to work at the AMC TDO and even faced a suspension for irregular practices
before taking up construction business full-time. Three buildings in Maninagar, which were
built by Shah, have collapsed.
Officials allege that the nexus which flourished between builders and politicians
at the top levels made civic officials vulnerable to political pressure which forced them
to compromise.
According to reports, on one occasion when an AMC official insisted on laminating
plan blue-prints submitted by the builder, the request was turned down. A senior AMC
official said, ``If lamination of documents was made mandatory, tampering with the
original plans would have immediately stopped. But we had to back out due to strong
political opposition."
Officials admit that though there was a mention of seismic code in building norms,
no heed was paid to it till January 26. ``We only checked on FSI, parking lots, height of
buildings and its conformity with the approved plan," one source said. Civic
authorities have currently put a freeze on all construction activity in the city, but will
the state government revoke all the decisions taken by local bodies to appease builders
and raise funds for elections. Only time will tell.
Builders' carrot-and-stick to homeless (Times of
India, 14-02-01)
The quake brought down Shikhar Apartments here killing
nearly 100 people. But three times that number who used to live in the high-rise are now
out on the streets. Not one has so far pointed a finger at the man who had built Shikhar -
Subhash Nyalchand Shah.
Why? Shah dangled a carrot before them: free flats in three of his other projects.
But the inevitable stick was there too: no new flat if anyone files a complaint to the
police about Shikar. Eventually, the police themselves lodged a suo motu complaint against
him.
Ditto is the case of the Sarvadarshan building in the Satellite area. Though two
died in the collapse, none of the survivors came forward to lodge a complaint. Police say
that since the flatowners had formed a cooperative to construct the building, "they
don't know who to identify as the builder".
Since The Times of India here launched `Concrete Evidence', a serialised campaign
to attempt to expose the guilty builders and others, we were flooded with calls from
people whose dream flats collapsed in the quake. Fearful of reprisals from the building
mafia, most callers are not willing to identify themselves. "Builders are very
powerful, we are just small fry, they can do anything and we have, after all, to live in
society," said one.
……Builders who have been booked for culpable homicide by the police here
have either gone underground or trying hard to sell their new projects. On the other hand,
those whose buildings withstood the quake, are cashing in on that fact. The upshot of it
all is that the builders' lobby is a fragmented lot. "The quake has divided us,"
says a builder. "It's a them and us divide between those whose buildings crashed and
those whose didn't."
The builders' community is not peopled by black sheep only. After the quake,
several "with a conscience" visited the sites where their buildings once stood
immediately and stood by the residents. In the Satellite area, not only some builders
pitched tents for the homeless, but also arranged food for them.
- What comes very much to our attention is that
physical vulnerability cannot be judged merely on technical grounds. True, that the
byelaws are not followed and there is general negligence on part of the builders to follow
the safe building practices but more important is the role of power relations (politics)
in all this. Besides the builder-politician nexus, this is essentially deep rooted in the
social and cultural context that determines the local power relations within the
community. (Refer the section on socio-cultural aspects).
- Lack of integration of scientific and technical
competence into the decision-making is another issue worth mention
Go to: introduction | socio-cultural & political | economic |
cultural heritage | physical | psychological/health | management | rehabilitation
Back to the top