Physical Density and Urban Sprawl: A Case of Dhaka City - KTH

More documents

Recommendations

Info

lock to provide infrastructure facilities and maintain good spatial qualities. The FAR value is very low as well, so the FAR value can be increased to increase the efficiency of space. On the other hand the FAR and percentage of land coverage by buildings varies block to block in formal settlements. Those depend on the income level of the residents providing the justification for selecting the blocks according to the income levels of the residents. Dhanmondi, the first planned residential area in Dhaka city; the FAR value of one block namely Road number 3 is approximately 2.7 where the percentage of land coverage by buildings is approximately 48%. The building height of this block is ranging from 2 to 7 storeys where the FAR value and percentage of land coverage are very high. In this block the open space is not sufficient to provide services and facilities. The second block of formal settlements is Shobhanbagh officers’ colony at Shobhanbagh in Dhanmondi where the approximate FAR value is 0.95 and the land coverage is approximately 21%. Here the height of building is ranging from 3 to 5 storeys. The FAR value is low due to the low land coverage by buildings. In this block there is a sufficient open space. Third one is the block Baridhara residential area where the FAR value is approximately 1.11 and the land coverage is approximately 33%.The FAR value is low but the percentage of land coverage is medium. Here the building height is 1-3 storeys. In this block there is an open space inside the plot which has been left by the house owners. Fourth formal settlement is block from Banani Model Town where the FAR value is approximately 1.05 and the percentage of land coverage is 43%. Here the FAR value is low but the percentage of land coverage is medium. This block is look like the block of Baridhara residential area. Fifth formal settlement is Mirpur 10 number circle residential area in Mirpur thana where the FAR value is approximately 1.06 and percentage of land coverage is 57%.The FAR value is low but the percentage of land coverage is high. In this block there is no open space inside the block due to the high percentage of land coverage by buildings. In this block the FAR value can be increased by decreasing the percentage of land covered by buildings. The last one is newly planned Defense Officers’ housing society (DOHS) at Baridhara in Gulshan thana where the FAR value is approximately 3.1 and percentage of land coverage is 61%. In this area the FAR and percentage of land coverage are very high. In this block the percentage of land covered by buildings can be decreased to increase the efficiency of space. 6.2 Spatial qualities One of the objectives of this present study was to analyze the spatial qualities, in terms of efficiency of open space, cross ventilation and provision of daylight inside the residential block by focusing on informal housing block. Spatial qualities have been analyzed for all cases of formal and informal settlements to compare each other. But the main focus is to analyze the usability of space, cross ventilation of houses and presence of sun light inside the block of informal settlements. The following section will analyze the space usability first, then the cross ventilation and presence of daylight will describe respectively for both formal and informal settlements. The analysis of spatial qualities for informal settlements has been done by photographs. On the other hand the analysis of formal settlements has been carried out by aerial photographs which have been collected from the Google Earth. The houses in the ‘Geneva camp’ are very close to each other. There is a narrow strip of roads inside the block just to move one or two persons at a time. The types of spaces found in ’Geneva camp’ are mainly open spaces among the buildings, narrow roads inside the block, corridor of the houses as well as surrounding roads and footpath. The residents are using 52
narrow roads for drying and washing clothes, gathering for social interaction, store woods for their cooking, cooking food, taking shower, and as children playground. The corridor is used for their daily chores, for instance to cut the fishes, vegetables and store household accessories. The surrounding roads and foot paths are being used as a common space for gathering, selling daily groceries and for the disposal of waste. In ‘Tikkapara Bustee’ houses are also very close to each other. There are narrow roads inside the block which are being used for cooking, gathering, cooking food, taking shower, washing and drying clothes as well as children’s playground and tube well. The surrounding roads and footpaths are being used as their gathering, children’s play and selling daily groceries. Correa notes the hierarchy of spaces around the block from the observation of Indian settlements. He is of the view that space which is closer to the houses is more private and that people within the vicinity can interact, which is semiprivate. Places like wells where people meet when collecting water is semi public and which is not directly in the control of the people in the community refers to as public space (Correa, 1998, p: 107 in Nnaggenda - Musana, 2004 126). However, the present study is in regard to the block level, the spaces which are being used by the community can be referred to as communal spaces instead of semiprivate space. After considering the above mentioned uses of spaces in the first two paragraphs and comparing them with the definition of Correa in the third paragraph; the space inside the houses in ‘Geneva camp’, for instance corridor can be considered as a private space but in ‘Tikkapara Bustee’ there is no private space. The internal roads of the houses for both cases can be treated as a semiprivate. In ‘Tikkapara Bustee’ there are communal spaces in front of internal roads where the inhabitants collect their water from tube well. In both cases the surrounding footpaths can be treated as communal space due to their functionality where as the roads can be considered as public space. All the spaces inside block of informal settlements are either roads or space between houses. There are no open spaces inside the block as private, semi private or communal space. On the other hand, the space variations in the formal settlements are totally different from the formal settlements. Some areas of high income class people as for example Baridhara, Banani, Dhanmondi which can be considered as formal settlements leave open space inside the plot as a private space for their gardening and car parking. But in the block of middle and lower middle income class settlements there is no private or communal spaces. They use footpaths as communal spaces. Only one block called Shobhanbagh officers’ colony has communal space where children go to play and people gather themselves for social interactions. The surrounding footpaths are also being used as a communal space and so making the road to be considered as a public space. The cross ventilation in the houses of informal settlements is not available. In Geneva camp the inhabitants open their roof’s tin to get fresh air. But in another informal settlement like ‘Tikka Para Bustee’ there is no provision of cross ventilation. In both cases the houses are very close or they are attached to one another. So there is no provision of cross ventilation. On the other hand cross ventilation can be seen in the formal settlements in spite of the close distance among the houses. Houses are very close to one another in the lower middle, middle or upper middle income class area. There is maximum 4 to 5 feet distance among them (estimated by the Google Earth). But the houses beside the surrounding roads are getting 53
Page 1 and 2:
KTH Architecture and the Built Envi
Page 3 and 4:
CHAPTER 6: FINAL ANALYSIS..........
Page 5 and 6:
ABSTRACT Md. Syful Islam: Physical
Page 7 and 8: CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This study a
Page 9 and 10: Habraken (1998:292-93) states that,
Page 11 and 12: Since the study is dealing with the
Page 13 and 14: Banani Model Town residential area
Page 15 and 16: Applied Procedure to calculate land
Page 17 and 18: CHAPTER 2 THEORY OF THE CONCEPTUAL
Page 19 and 20: crowded and unsuitable environments
Page 21 and 22: unrealistic because tall buildings
Page 23 and 24: Carlos Barquin et. el. (1986) emplo
Page 25 and 26: Fig 2.7: Cluster of Informal settle
Page 27 and 28: Figure 3.1: Physical growth of Dhak
Page 29 and 30: Until 1951, Bangladesh was almost c
Page 31 and 32: 3.5 Land use pattern of Dhaka city
Page 33 and 34: construction is illegal while squat
Page 35 and 36: even accuse RAJUK, the most promine
Page 37 and 38: CUS, the number of informal settlem
Page 39 and 40: Figure 3.9: Ratio of formal and inf
Page 41 and 42: CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS FROM THE INFORMA
Page 43 and 44: Spatial qualities Spatial qualities
Page 45 and 46: settlement are selling their daily
Page 47 and 48: The houses are very close to one an
Page 49 and 50: Figure 4.15: The space inside the h
Page 51 and 52: It can be seen from the findings of
Page 53 and 54: 5.2 Shobhanbagh officers’ colony
Page 55 and 56: . Figure 5.4: Aerial photograph of
Page 57: CHAPTER 6 FINAL ANALYSIS Chapters 4
Page 61 and 62: CHAPTER 7 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCL
Page 63 and 64: of proper monitoring in housing mar
Page 65 and 66: Nnaggenda-Musana A., (2004), Sprawl
show all

Physical Density and Urban Sprawl: A Case of Dhaka City - KTH

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?