Pule
November 8th, 2006, 03:06 PM
http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/homefront.aspx?ID=BD4A309246
Posted to the web on: 03 November 2006
A new take on RDP housing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail article Print-Friendly
KERRY HAGGARD takes a look at the lower end of the housing market, with ideas on how those more fortunate can get involved
WHILE this forum is normally the place where palatial mansions or peculiar design trends are examined, it is fitting that we take some time out to consider housing for the masses.
Judging by protests in areas such as Orange Farm over the last few months, this is an issue that is set to affect the nation as a whole, so it is worth considering how each of us can get involved and make a difference.
Earlier this year, I participated in the Women’s Build Project, an annual event during which corporates sponsor a reconstruction and development programme (RDP) house in a particular previously disadvantaged area. This year, Orange Farm was a hive of branding activity in August.
RDP houses are typically 36m² in size, with two bedrooms, a small bathroom and an open-plan room that is a sitting area and kitchen. The houses are built of brick and mortar with galvanised iron roofs, and are fitted with metal doors and smallish windows. They have running water and water-borne sewage, but no electricity. The houses cost in the region of R50000 to build and owners are encouraged to install the absent amenities themselves.
This notion of RDP housing has to be questioned though. One of the most striking things about the R50000 house was the absence of any heating mechanism (such as electricity) or a chimney — presumably a prerequisite if the home was to be heated by a fire in winter. The metal roof is in no way insulated, leading to heat loss in winter and extreme heat in summer.
Another element that seemed incongruous was the cheap and fragile cistern, which conceivably is not going to last longer than six months, with normal use — let alone being used by about five residents of each of these homes.
Arguably, these houses are better than the shacks in which their residents previously found themselves. However, surely it makes sense to afford their design a little more consideration?
Rob Bray of Bentel Associates International says that while government certainly has its heart in the right place in building these homes, the new RDP suburbs are essentially slums under construction.
“One man in one house on one plot is heading for disaster,” he says. “Already we’ve seen that once houses are complete, shacks are built alongside them — either for extra space for the family, or to be rented out to transients for extra income in their sub-economic space.
“Out of a situation such as this comes overcrowding, criminal elements, and uncertainty about children’s safety. Rows and rows of houses all the same, with no apparent thought given to the surrounding landscape, means that these suburbs have a complete lack of an environment.
“The solution would be
well- designed mixed-use developments, designed with low- to medium-rise apartments of a maximum of five floors. These apartment blocks should be built around well-maintained public spaces and integrated with community facilities and retail — essentially designed towns that, simply by their nature, do not allow shacks to be built,” he says.
“This format would create more exciting lifestyles and would make people feel more valuable. The current layouts and buildings, with their sub-standard fittings, don’t offer a sustainable housing mode. Within months, the houses require repairs and maintenance, leading to a loss of pride in the properties. Apartments do not cost more — in fact they should cost less, as it would be more cost effective to install services, and you wouldn’t have these sprawling expanses of houses — you would be able to contain development more effectively, making it easier to install suitable public transport mechanisms.
“Government and municipal authorities should be engaging architects to design their new cities, and they should outlaw the two-room shack — even if it is built of bricks!”
Interestingly, the Alexandra Renewal Project has identified and understood this issue, forced by the shortage of land in the area, and has a multistorey development planned, close to the Marlboro Transit facility.
In Phase 1, according to www.alexandra.co.za, a complex of 48 units will be constructed in a high-density configuration around a central open courtyard. The complex will rise to three storeys on one aspect with a lower two-storey northern orientation to allow for maximum natural light into open spaces. Landscaping the site will ensure a secure living environment for residents, with parking, general lighting and laundry facilities.
Each 34m² unit will consist of an open-plan living space with a bathroom and kitchen, and pay-as-you-go electrical connections. Solar energy and other cost-saving devices will be deployed wherever possible to assist owners in ongoing maintenance of their units.
Bray also criticises the subsidies and financing on offer, but this should be remedied during the course of next year as a result of various projects, among them an initiative between Nedbank and the French Development Agency that will see €14m made available to South Africans earning less than R2500 a month in the form of low, fixed interest loans.
Homefront’s challenge to its readers
If you are an architect: What are you doing about considering design for low income houses? If you want to make a difference to SA’s future — how about designing a well-considered, effective housing solution for the masses, that takes more than just cost into account. If you are seeking inspiration, look to Australian firm Iredale Pederson Hook for their solution to Aboriginal housing.
If you are a construction industry professional, or your company supplies materials:
How can your company’s products or services make the construction of a low-income home more cost-effective, and more sustainable?
If you are interested and have a high corporate profile:
Start planning now to find the budget to sponsor a home in next year’s Women’s Build (www.wfh.org.za) or link up with organisation Habitat for Humanity (www.habitat.org) to take on a similar project.
With all the sceptics professing doom and gloom about SA’s ability to deliver for 2010, it’s time to stop sitting down and moaning. It’s time to stand up, make use of our skills, and try to stir up some activity.
It’s what I’ve just done. What are you going to do?
Posted to the web on: 03 November 2006
A new take on RDP housing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail article Print-Friendly
KERRY HAGGARD takes a look at the lower end of the housing market, with ideas on how those more fortunate can get involved
WHILE this forum is normally the place where palatial mansions or peculiar design trends are examined, it is fitting that we take some time out to consider housing for the masses.
Judging by protests in areas such as Orange Farm over the last few months, this is an issue that is set to affect the nation as a whole, so it is worth considering how each of us can get involved and make a difference.
Earlier this year, I participated in the Women’s Build Project, an annual event during which corporates sponsor a reconstruction and development programme (RDP) house in a particular previously disadvantaged area. This year, Orange Farm was a hive of branding activity in August.
RDP houses are typically 36m² in size, with two bedrooms, a small bathroom and an open-plan room that is a sitting area and kitchen. The houses are built of brick and mortar with galvanised iron roofs, and are fitted with metal doors and smallish windows. They have running water and water-borne sewage, but no electricity. The houses cost in the region of R50000 to build and owners are encouraged to install the absent amenities themselves.
This notion of RDP housing has to be questioned though. One of the most striking things about the R50000 house was the absence of any heating mechanism (such as electricity) or a chimney — presumably a prerequisite if the home was to be heated by a fire in winter. The metal roof is in no way insulated, leading to heat loss in winter and extreme heat in summer.
Another element that seemed incongruous was the cheap and fragile cistern, which conceivably is not going to last longer than six months, with normal use — let alone being used by about five residents of each of these homes.
Arguably, these houses are better than the shacks in which their residents previously found themselves. However, surely it makes sense to afford their design a little more consideration?
Rob Bray of Bentel Associates International says that while government certainly has its heart in the right place in building these homes, the new RDP suburbs are essentially slums under construction.
“One man in one house on one plot is heading for disaster,” he says. “Already we’ve seen that once houses are complete, shacks are built alongside them — either for extra space for the family, or to be rented out to transients for extra income in their sub-economic space.
“Out of a situation such as this comes overcrowding, criminal elements, and uncertainty about children’s safety. Rows and rows of houses all the same, with no apparent thought given to the surrounding landscape, means that these suburbs have a complete lack of an environment.
“The solution would be
well- designed mixed-use developments, designed with low- to medium-rise apartments of a maximum of five floors. These apartment blocks should be built around well-maintained public spaces and integrated with community facilities and retail — essentially designed towns that, simply by their nature, do not allow shacks to be built,” he says.
“This format would create more exciting lifestyles and would make people feel more valuable. The current layouts and buildings, with their sub-standard fittings, don’t offer a sustainable housing mode. Within months, the houses require repairs and maintenance, leading to a loss of pride in the properties. Apartments do not cost more — in fact they should cost less, as it would be more cost effective to install services, and you wouldn’t have these sprawling expanses of houses — you would be able to contain development more effectively, making it easier to install suitable public transport mechanisms.
“Government and municipal authorities should be engaging architects to design their new cities, and they should outlaw the two-room shack — even if it is built of bricks!”
Interestingly, the Alexandra Renewal Project has identified and understood this issue, forced by the shortage of land in the area, and has a multistorey development planned, close to the Marlboro Transit facility.
In Phase 1, according to www.alexandra.co.za, a complex of 48 units will be constructed in a high-density configuration around a central open courtyard. The complex will rise to three storeys on one aspect with a lower two-storey northern orientation to allow for maximum natural light into open spaces. Landscaping the site will ensure a secure living environment for residents, with parking, general lighting and laundry facilities.
Each 34m² unit will consist of an open-plan living space with a bathroom and kitchen, and pay-as-you-go electrical connections. Solar energy and other cost-saving devices will be deployed wherever possible to assist owners in ongoing maintenance of their units.
Bray also criticises the subsidies and financing on offer, but this should be remedied during the course of next year as a result of various projects, among them an initiative between Nedbank and the French Development Agency that will see €14m made available to South Africans earning less than R2500 a month in the form of low, fixed interest loans.
Homefront’s challenge to its readers
If you are an architect: What are you doing about considering design for low income houses? If you want to make a difference to SA’s future — how about designing a well-considered, effective housing solution for the masses, that takes more than just cost into account. If you are seeking inspiration, look to Australian firm Iredale Pederson Hook for their solution to Aboriginal housing.
If you are a construction industry professional, or your company supplies materials:
How can your company’s products or services make the construction of a low-income home more cost-effective, and more sustainable?
If you are interested and have a high corporate profile:
Start planning now to find the budget to sponsor a home in next year’s Women’s Build (www.wfh.org.za) or link up with organisation Habitat for Humanity (www.habitat.org) to take on a similar project.
With all the sceptics professing doom and gloom about SA’s ability to deliver for 2010, it’s time to stop sitting down and moaning. It’s time to stand up, make use of our skills, and try to stir up some activity.
It’s what I’ve just done. What are you going to do?