belapur incremental housing - a case study

INCREMENTAL HOUSING,

CBD BELAPUR

A CASE STUDY OF LOW COST HOUSING TYPOLOGY

DESIGNED BY AR. CHARLES CORREA

"Making housing is like a bird

building its nest. You start with a

basic house, but you have to let

people change it to their own needs.“

- Charles Correa

G

O

O

G

L

E

M

A

P

L

O

C

A

T

I

O

N

SHAPE GRAMMAR DERIVATION

A BRIEF INTRODUCTION

Belapur incremental housing project - a proposal for mass affordable housing in

New Bombay (Navi Mumbai), which demonstrated how high densities could be

achieved with low-rise courtyard homes, built with simple materials at a human

scale.

Based on clusters of between

seven and 12 pairs of houses

arranged around communal

courtyards, the buildings did

not share party walls – allowing

each family to extend and

adapt their own house

independently.

550 families were planned for

in a 6-acre area limitation.

PLANNING SPACES The project is generated by a hierarchy of spaces. The first is the private

courtyard of single dwelling used as a space for outdoor activities during

most of the year.

Subsequently, seven units are grouped to form a small courtyard town of

about 8m x 8m.

Living area

Services

Private courtyard

Access roads

PLANNING SPACES

Three of these groups form a module of twenty-one homes that describes

the collective space of the next scale (approximately 12m x 12m).

3 X 1 X 71 X 7

3 X 3 X 1 X 7

SITE

MAP

PLANNING SPACES

Correa discussed housing and the

importance of people to be involved in

determining its design and use.

Additionally, he also emphasized

incremental housing as a centerpiece to any solution that was proposed for a place

like Dharavi

The footprint of each plan varies little in size

(from 45 sq. m to 70 sq. m), maintaining equity (fairness) in the community

Scheme caters wide range from the lowest

budgets of Rs 20000, Middle income groups

Rs 30000-50000 and Upper income Rs

180000.

TYPOLOGY A

THE SIMPLEST UNIT TYPOLOGY B

TYPOLOGY C

TYPE A TYPE B

The 7-house unit

Service line indication

MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION TECHNOLOGY: external walls of brick; roof

structure covered with wooden shingles.

MATERIALS: brick, plaster of white color,

colorful wooden fixtures, outdoor paving

stone blocks.

Individual houses rely on simple floor plans

and building methods, enabling local

masons and craftspeople to construct

them.

The village was produced with the idea

that the residents were going to alter it in

many ways, making it truly their own,

therefore homes are freestanding, so

residents can add on to them as their

families grow; and differently priced plans

appeal to a wide variety of income levels.

THE CURRENT SCENARIO

Many of the original buildings are

demolished and now replaced with much

bigger concrete houses by the aspiring

middle classes.

Yet the courtyards and the hierarchy of

community spaces remains intact: it is a strong

piece of city-making that has lasted beyond

the individual dwellings.

Some of the original houses still standing, but

most of them look different. The trees had

grown up and shrouded the whole complex in

shade in growth. There was a range of housing

there. Upon an informal count, it was found

that roughly one third of the original homes

had been torn down and completely rebuilt.

ON THE STREETS

The recently constructed RCC bungalows

The dilapidated structures which date back to the 1970s

One of the few original buildings

A Type-A house

Unmaintained central courtyard space

Multi-storey construction as opposed to the

original architectural grammar

Parks and garden spaces

The central nallah

Courtyard spaces

Freedom of Modification

Low cost housing, high-end transport!

THE SHORTCOMINGS

On speaking to some of the residents, there were some drawbacks

that were brought to light –

One resident we talked to complained that no provisions were made for

the common spaces in the center of each cluster of houses. No one was in charge of maintaining them. These spaces do not fall under any

jurisdiction; not private nor public.

Most of the houses have been remodeled or destroyed and rebuilt as

some inhabitants said they were impractical (”What was the architect

thinking when he put toilets outside the house?”). Some clusters of houses became “model” mini-gated-communities while others became mini-

slums.

The concrete houses arose as a result of the changing aspirations of the

residents. They no longer wanted a ‘village’ or a rural backdrop. Modern

materials and technologies have thus been employed to a great extent.

CONCLUSION

This housing project offers the quality

of life of a village with the

sophistication of a city.

Each cluster permits the emergence

of a local community feeling, while

integrating each house to the whole

settlement at different levels. The

hierarchy itself is very organic.

The complex allowed people to

modify their houses freely, whether

with a paintbrush or mortar -something that is NEVER allowed in

the type of mass housing devastating

the urban and psychological

landscape of cities around the world.

“

”

"It is really worth a visit. Don’t go to see

Charles Correa’s architectural skills or you will

be disappointed. Go instead to see what a

genius urban designer can do when he thinks

beyond design."

AIROOTS.ORG

THANK YOURASIKA DONGARE PRANAY BHAVSAR

JAYANT GYANI RITHIKA RAVISHANKAR

AISHWARYA HATKAR RAMA SHIRWALKAR

ROSHANI TAMKHADE