SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

1
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

Rebuilding Habitats : Process Document

SIFFS Tsunami Habitat Reconstruction Project
Nagapattinam, Tamil Nadu, India

June 2009

Published by
South Indian Federation of Fishermen Societies (SIFFS)
Karamana, Trivandrum - 695 002, Kerala, INDIA
Email: admin@siffs.org, Web: www.siffs.org
www.tarangambadi.in

Document Prepared by
Sajith Sukumaran and Rukmini Datta
Design and Layout by
C.R. Aravindan, SIFFS

Printed at
G.K Printers, Kochi

2
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

Contents
Preface
Acknowledgement
Acronyms
26thDecember2004 ..................................................................................... 1
ReliefactivitiesbySIFFS:Highlights ........................................................ 2
Reconstruction: Nagapattinam .................................................................. 4
Public housing .............................................................................................. 5
SIFFSapproachtohousing ........................................................................ 6
GovernmentOrder ....................................................................................... 6
HighlightsoftheGovernmentguidelines ................................................ 7
ConcernswiththeGovernmentguidelines ............................................. 7
Adaptedguidelines ...................................................................................... 8
Landallotment .............................................................................................. 10
Habitatmapping .......................................................................................... 11
Masscontactprogramme ............................................................................ 12
Designofthevillage .................................................................................... 14
Finalisingbeneficiarylists .......................................................................... 15
Cluster approach .......................................................................................... 17
Modelhouses ................................................................................................ 19
Feedbackonmodelhouses ......................................................................... 20
Selectionofoptions ...................................................................................... 20
FacetoFacetofinaliseindividualhousedesigns ............................... 21
Costofconstruction ..................................................................................... 22
Construction .................................................................................................. 23
Introductionofpieceratesystem .............................................................. 23
Anewmethodinconstruction ................................................................... 24
Constructionmanagementsystem ............................................................ 24
Qualityofconstruction ................................................................................ 27
Sanitation ....................................................................................................... 28
Monitoring ..................................................................................................... 30
Projectfinancing ........................................................................................... 31
Roads,electrificationandlighting ............................................................. 32
School building ............................................................................................. 32
Followupproject .......................................................................................... 32
Challenges ..................................................................................................... 32

3
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

Annexures

1.InundationmapChinnangudi .........................................................................................37

2.HabitatMaps ..........................................................................................................................38

3.HabitatmappingChinnangudi,resultsummary ..........................................................44

4.MapTomoveornottomove ..........................................................................................45

5.Layouts ...................................................................................................................................46

6.DrainagemapofTarangambadi .........................................................................................52

7.ModelhousesSummary ....................................................................................................53

8.DrawingofvariousHouseOptions ...................................................................................54

9.SIFFSReconstructionProjectMonitoringProcessFlowChart ................................... 60

4
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

Thetsunamikilledasmanyas304peoplein
Tarangambadi,ofwhichmorethan150were
young children. 904 houses were fully
damaged.Another266hadpartialdamages.
A large number of fisher households lost
26December2004 valuableproductiveassets.Thisincluded128
ofthe168FRPboats1,35outof50kattumarams2,
and165outof175motorisedkattumarams.

O n 26 th December 2004, the Indian

coastlineexperiencedoneof themost
devastating tsunamis in recorded history.
InChinnangudi137houseswerecompletely
destroyed,and131werepartiallydamaged.
Tamil Nadu was the worst affected among Fishinggearandnetswerelostordamaged.
Indianstates. NagapattinaminTamilNadu Thevillagesuffered48deaths,22amongthem
was the district that suffered the most. werechildren.3
TarangambadiandChinnangudiwereamong
the fishing villages of Nagapattinam that
encounteredextensivelossoflife,property,
andlivelihood.

Tarangambadiisarelativelylargevillagewith
1,725households.Thevillagepopulationof
6,991 comprises mainly fishing community
(1,112households).TherearealsoChristian
and Muslim families. They are engaged in
otheroccupations.Dalitpopulationsinhabit
Velli Palayam, Puthu Palayam, Kesavan
Palayam and Karantheru hamlets on the
peripheryofthevillage.

Chinnangudi is a smaller village with 563

householdsand2,475people.Apartfromtwo
MuslimfamiliesandthreeDalitfamilies,the
restarefromthefishingcommunity.Inboth
thevillages,mostofthepeoplelivecloseto
theseabecauseoftheiroccupationalneeds. Map of Nagapattinam

1
FRPboatmeansaboatmouldedoutofFibreReinforcedPlastic.Themostcommon FRPboat
ontheCoromandelcoastiscalledtheMarackanamboatorMarutiboat.
2
Kattumaramisatraditionalfishingcraftmadebytyingafewshapedlogsof
albizziatreetogether.Thishasbeenapopularcraftonthesurfbeaten coastsof
southIndia.Kattumaramliterallymeanslogstiedtogether.
3
AlldatafromdocumentationundertakenbyPraxis,2005

5
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT
InTarangambadi,thelowlyingnorthernpart
ofthevillagewheremostofthefisherpeople
livedsufferedneartotaldamage.Housesin
thesouthernpart,whichwasmoreelevated
with good vegetation and less density,
sufferedmuchless.Thisincidentallyhasalso
been the historic part of the village, where
Danish settlers of the seventeenth century
constructedbuildings.
Similarly, in Chinnangudi, the houses that
werefullyorbadlydamagedwerethoseclose
tothebeachwheretheelevationislowerthan
therestofthevillage.Thecoreofthevillage
isonhighergroundthantheperipheriesand
suffered very little damage. The low lying
edgesofthevillagecausedthewatertorush
infaster aroundthe northernand southern
peripheries. Water rushed in through the
creek on the southern end with enormous
force causing great damage to life and
property.
Thesouthernsideofthevillagegetsflooded
duetoAmmanriverfrequently.Peopleliving
Taranganbadi after Tsunami
close to the river had taken precautions to
build their houses on a raised plinth.
Consequently,theysufferednodamage.
Thus the nature and extent of damage
apparently had certain patterns. While low
lyingareasunderwentextensivedamageand
destruction, even temporary structures at
higherelevationssurvived.Areaswithbetter
vegetationalsoshowedhigherresistanceto
thewaves.
ReliefActivitiesbySIFFS:Highlights
South Indian Federation of Fishermen
Societies(SIFFS)istheapexbodyof150village
levelfish marketing societies in Kerala, Tamil
Nadu,Andhra Pradesh, and Pondicherry. It
provides a wide range of services to the
traditionalfisherpeopleofthesestates.
Withintwodaysofthetsunamistrikingthe
coast, SIFFS made its field presence in
Kanyakumari,Tirunelveli,Thoothukudiand
Nagapattinamdistricts ofTamil Naduand
Trivandrum,KollamandAlleppeydistricts
6

as well as the Malabarregion of Kerala. It
has since been involved in relief, repair,
rehabilitation,restorationoflivelihoodsand
habitatreconstruction.
SIFFSresponsetothedisasterwasconditioned
bythefactthatithadanongoingrelationship
with many of the affected communities
through its workwithartisanal fishermen.
Amongtheorganisationswhichundertook
relief work, SIFFS was perhaps the largest
representativeorganisationofthoseaffected.
It was in a position of unique advantage
because of its knowledge of fisheries and
fishing communities. As a cooperative
organisationinthefisheriessector,ithadthe
infrastructure,peopleandnetworktoreachout
tomanylocationssimultaneously.AsaNon
GovernmentOrganisation(NGO)atworkforthe
past25years,ithadawiderangeofcontacts
andlinkagesacrosstheworld.
Either through direct action or through its
networkofregionalanddistrictfederations,
7
SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
SIFFScontributedtotherescueandreliefwork
rightfromthestageofremovalofdeadbodies
anddebris.Reliefsupplieswereprovidedto
thegovernmentruncampsacrossthecoast.
In the initial period following the disaster,
SIFFSfocussedonfillingthegapsintherelief
efforts of the government and local
communities.
SIFFSwasinvolvedinvariouswayswithrelief
effortsadvocacywith the State, supplyof
reliefkitscontainingdryrationsandessential
materials received from various sources,
paymentofcompensationtomembersand
construction of temporary shelters. It has
played the roles of service provider and
coordinatorofreliefefforts.
Amongthevariousmodelsoftemporaryshelter
triedoutinNagapattinam, SIFFSmodelusing
thatchcaughtwideattentionandappreciation.
SIFFS put up 397 shelters in the district,
including135intheDalithamletofThetti.
Temporary Shelter in Taranganbadi Village
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT
SIFFSventuredintolivelihoodrestorationby
settinguptemporaryrepaircentresforboats
andoutboardmotors(OBMs)intheaffected
areasinearlyJanuary2005.Eventually1,080
boats and 1,728 engines were repaired at
thesecentres.Thefirstgroupoffishermen
in Nagapattinam went back to sea using
boatsrepairedandnetssuppliedby SIFFS.
Apart from the damaged, hundreds of
fishing cafts were lo st in the tsunami
resultinginlossoflivelihoodsofthousands
of fisher families. SIFFS, however, did not
agree with the excessive number of boats
bei ng g iven away i n th e name o f
co mp ens ati o n. It bel i eved that as s et
restorationshouldbe limitedto replacing
lost assets alone. There were reasons to
believe that the pretsunami fleet size of
fishingcraftswasbarelysustainablevis
visthefishresourcesavailableinthecoastal
waters. Increasing the fleet size would
adverselyaffecttheresourceavailability.
SIFFSundertooklimiteddistributionofboats
andenginesandfilledthedistributiongaps,
wherever they emerged, for deserving
fishermen.Besidessupplyofboatstoreplace
thelostones,SIFFSprovidedsupplementary
assistancetohelpfishermengetbacktowork.
Debtredemptionsupport,forinstance,helped
anumberoffishermen whowereunableto
gofishingsincetheywereindebtedtotheir
previousboatowners.
SIFFS provided working capital support to
women,whoplaycriticalrolesinthefishery
value chain fro m l anding s to th e end
customer. The organisations support for
children was through the setting up of
co mp uter c entres and by pro vi di ng
educationalaidsandscholarships.SIFFSalso
extendedsupporttononfishingcommunities
in the form of a small dairy programme
forDalits.
Apartfromprovidingdirectsupportthrough
its own resources and in partnership with
otherorganisations, SIFFSplayedtheroleof
coordinatorofnongovernmentreliefefforts
inthetsunamihitareas.AlongwithSNEHA,
another NGOworkinginthearea,andwith
thehelpandadviceofpeoplewithdisaster
reliefandrehabilitationexperience,SIFFStook
theinitiativetosetuptheNGOCoordination
Centre on 1 st January 2005. The district
administration took the Centre into
confidenceincoordinatingreliefactivities.It
waslaterrechristenedthe NGOCoordination
and Resource Centre (NCRC ) with a larger
mandatetoprovidearangeofservicestothe
communitiesandorganisationsinvolved in
therehabilitationprocess.
Reconstruction:Nagapattinam
SIFFStookupaprojecttobuild1,700houses
ineightvillagesintwodistrictsfourvillages
in Kanyakumari and four villages in
Nagapattinam.Thereconstructionprojectin
Tarangambadi and the adjacent villages of
Karantheru and Puthupalayam with over
1,080housesinalllikelihoodwouldendup
asthelargesttsunamireconstructionproject
atasinglelocationinTamilNadu.
For SIFFS Tarangambadi and Chinnangudi
werenaturalchoicesforhabitatreconstruction.
These were two of the three villages in
Nagapattinam district where SIFFS had
fishermen societies before the tsunami.
Tarangambadisocietywasthelargestamong
thethree.Tarangambadialsohadaboatyard
for an year before the tsunami. And, as
indicatedearlier,thesewereamongtheworst
affectedvillages.SIFFStookupreconstruction
projectsforKarantheruandPuthupalayamas
they were adjacent to the Tarangambadi
fishingvillage.
8
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

PublicHousing related organisations. The team was able to

WhentheGovernmentofTamilNadustarted
its deliberati ons on the publicprivate
participationinprovidingpermanentshelters
to the tsunami affected communities, the
responsefromNGOswasquiteencouraging.
Publicprivate participation meant the
Government wouldidentifyandallot land
while the NGOs would construct. SIFFS ,
di rectly as well as throu gh the NGO
CoordinationCentre(laterNCRC )hadbeen
activelyinvolvedinthedeliberations.
However,SIFFSdidnothaveanyplantotake
upprojectsonitsown.Itwasfriendsandwell
wishers with experience in post disaster
housing projects in Bhuj and Lathur who
encouraged SIFFS to consider taking up a
housingprogramme.Itwaspointedoutthat
SIFFS being a long term sectoral player in
marine fisheries, it was an opportunity to
utilise its knowledge and experience in
devisingappropriatestrategiesforahousing
programme in the given context. It was
argued that with its strong links with the
fishing communities, SIFFS would be in a
positiontodevelopatleastafewmodelsthat
would overcome some of the critical
limitations of mass housing projects seen
elsewhere.
witness typical examples in successes and
failures in mass housing projects. It also
provided insights into the possibilities of
appropriatedesigns,anduseofalternatives
inconstructionmaterialsandmethods.
Agenciesinvolved inpost disasterhousing
projects have found that the beneficiaries
oftendidnotoccupythehousesbuiltforthem
astheycouldnotrelatetothenewstructures.
Public housing schemes appear to have
relegated recipients of the houses into
standardisedneedbrackets,buildingaseries
of identical structures for them. In recent
years, there has been some investment in
ensuringparticipationofthehouseownersin
thedesigningofthehouses.Ithas,however,
been restricted to providing one or two
designstochoosefrom,ignoringindividual
requirementsandneeds. Thereasonsgiven
are many, including optimisation of cost,
efficiency, and impracticality of catering to
individualneeds.

SIFFSstartingpointinplanningitshousing
projectwastostudypastexperiencesofpublic
housingschemes.Asafirststep,anexposure
visitoftheSIFFSteamandrepresentativesof
thebeneficiariesoftheproposedprojectswas
organisedtoBhuj4inGujarat.Thiswaswith
Villagers on exposure visit in Kutch
the help of Kutch NavnirmanAbhiyan5 and

4
BhujistheheadquartersofKutchdistrict,Gujaratstate
5
KutchNavnirmanAbhiyan,popularlyknownasAbhiyanisanumbrellaorganisationof
morethan20 NGOs.These NGOshavebeeninvolvedinthepostearthquakerebuildingof
Kutch district.

9
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT
SIFFSApproachtoHousing
Learningfromtheexperiencesofpastpublic
housingprojectsandcommittedtogivingdue
respecttopeoplesneeds, SIFFStookupthe
projectwitharesolvetobuildhabitats;not
just houses. It was understood that if the
houses were not built according to the
villagers needs, it would be yet another
disasterinvolvingcolossalwastageofmoney
andtime.
Thequestiontobeaddressedwas,whatcould
betherightstrategyforaneffectivehousing
projectinthegivencontext?Couldtherebe
an alternative that would overcome the
limitations caused by the three aspects of
typical projects callousness towards
community perception, lack of attention to
individual needs, and contractor driven
method which preempted thepossibilityof
peoplesparticipationintheprocess?
Through a series of planning and brain
storming sessions, SIFFS devised a strategy
that had f acto ri ng i n peo pl es needs,
aspirations, life styles, and sociocultural
normsasanimportantcomponent.Theidea
was to go beyond mere provision of four
walls and a roof; and to see houses as
cu stomis ed products having cul tural,
economic,technicalandpoliticaldimensions.
Ensuring community participation was
considered the core of the strategy. Thus,
SIFFS formulated an ambitious plan to
customisethehousesfor allhouse owners
inaparticipatorymanner.
The maxim was 2,000 houses in 2,000
designsandSIFFSwasconfidentofachieving
itwiththerightapproachtoplanning,design,
layout and construction combined with a
positive mix of scientific temper and
sensitivity. While meeting the livelihood
requirements of the community and
safeguardingthemagainstfuturecalamities,
SIFFSincorporatedthefollowingelementsto
ensureahumandimensioninitsproject:
Ensuringtheparticipationofhouse
ownersrightfromtheearlydesign
stagethroughtheentireconstruction
process.
Taking into account peoples social
and cultural needs while planning
theirhouses.
Ensuringafeelingofownershipofthe
housesbyhouseowners.
Government Order
The Government of Tamil Nadu issued an
ordertoactasguidelinesforconstructingnew
houses in the tsunami affected areas of the
state.Theguidelinesweremadeonthebasis
ofthelocationofhouseswithrespecttothe
hightideline.
SomehighlightsoftheGovernmentorder
includedthefollowing.In allcaseswhere
newhousesweregiven,theoldsiteandthe
old house had to be relinquished;all the
newhousesweretobeinsuredfortenyears
atthecostoftheexecutingagency;thetitle
deedofthehousewouldbe given jointly
inthenamesofthewifeandhusband(in
case of their death, to the survivor and
eldestchild).
10
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

HighlightsoftheGovernmentGuidelines
(G.O.Ms.No.172dated30March2005)

Allhouseownersoffullyandpartlydamagedkutchaandpuccahouses
weregiventhechoicetogobeyond200metresandgetanewly
constructedhouseworthRs150,000freeofcost.
Houseslocated
within200metres Thosewhochosenottomovewerepermittedtoundertakerepairsof
ofthehightide theirexistinghouses,withnoassistancefromthegovernment.
line
Forthoselivinginhouseswhichwerenotdamaged,theoptionswere
eithergettinganewhousebeyond200metresortocontinuelivingin
theexistinglocation.

Allhouseownersoffully/partlydamagedkutchahousesandfully
damagedpuccahousesweregiventheoptionofmovingtonewhouses
beyond500metresofthehightideline.
Houseslocated
between200and Ifthehouseownerswerenotwillingtomovebeyond500metres,houses
500metresofthe wouldbeconstructedforthemintheexistinglocation.
hightideline
Fortherepairofpartlydamagedpuccahouses,financialassistance
wouldbeprovidedbythegovernmentonpredeterminedscalebased
ontheassessmentofthedamage

Allhouseownersoffully/partlydamagedkutchahousesandfully
damagedpuccahousesweregiventheoptionofmovingtonewhouses
beyond500metresofthehightideline
Houseslocated
beyond500 Ifthehouseownerswerenotwillingtomove,houseswouldbe
metresofthe constructedforthemintheexistinglocation.
hightideline
Fortherepairofpartlydamagedpuccahouses,financialassistance
wouldbeprovidedbythegovernmentonpredeterminedscalebased
ontheassessmentofthedamage

ConcernswiththeGovernment
Guidelines
TheGovernmentsofferofanewhousewith
titledeed,500metresawayfromthehightide
linewassomethingfewpeoplecouldrefuse
sincethe housesandplotsoccupied bythe
villagers before the tsunami were largely
without title deeds. However, there were
someconcernswiththegovernmentorder.
Manyhousesonthebeachwerevaluedat
more than what the government was
promisingtogivethreecentsoflandand
11
ahouse withaplinthareaof325square
feet.SIFFSdatashowedthatonlynineper
centofthepeopleinChinnangudihadless
than what the government was giving
them for free. Moreover, some house
owners had built houses which were
valuedatmorethanRs150,000.
TheGovernmentguidelinesweresilenton
the requirement of joint families, a
common occurrence among fis hing
communities.Therewouldbeaneedfor
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

ensuringthepossibilityofextensioninthe risks. The method used was a scenario

housesconstructed.
The differences in cost of land across
vill ages had not been taken into
consideration. In Tarangambadi, for
instance,thecostoflandwashigherthan
in Chinnangudi. The implication of this
wasthathouseownersmightnotbeable
topurchasenewplotsinTarangambadiin
futureforextensionpurposes.Allotment
oflargerplotsoflandwouldhaveresolved
thispredicamentinfuture.
Thegovernmentacquiredlandattherate
ofoneacreper25houses,whichleftlittle
open space for recreational use and for
publicbuildings.
One of the fears expressed by the
community was that the vacated beach
land would be used for purposes of
tourism andfish hatcheries,resulting in
thefishingcommunitylosingitsrightto
useitforfishingactivities.
Adaptedguidelines
SIFFS contention was that the risk of
inundationbyafuturetsunamiwasafunction
ofelevation,andnotofthedistancefromthe
sea.Itcarriedoutahazardmappingexercise
toascertaintherisksofthenewsiteandthe
existing habitat based on the inundation
duringthetsunami.Adetailedcontoursurvey
ofthevillageswasundertakentoassessthe
analysis in which the extent of inundation
caused by waves of various heights in
differentpointsintheexistingvillageswas
mapped.Thesamemethodwasusedtoassess
the safety of the newly allotted sites. The
exerciseshowedthatcertainexistinglocations
were saferthan the new sitesidentified for
construction,sincethelatterwerelowlying.
Basedonthisstudy,SIFFSdecidedtorework
its strategy for the reconstruction of the
houses.Thesafetyofthenewlocationvis
vistheexistinglocationwascommunicated
tothevillagers.Thefollowingguidelineswere
worked out in consultation with the
traditional panchayat 6 and the people of
TarangambadiandChinnangudi.
Houseswithinthe200metresofthehigh
tidelinewouldberelocatedtothenewsite.
The new site,whereverit waslowlying
and where water stagnated during the
rainyseason,wouldberaisedbyfilling.
Every house owner beyond 200 metres
coulddecidetostayintheexistinglocation
ormovetothenewlocation.
In the new location they would be
providedwiththreecentsoflandand
areinforcedcementconcretehouseof
about350squarefeet.
If they wished to stay back in the
samelocationandiftheypossessed

6
Traditional panchayatsarevillageinstitutionsthatplayacentralroleinthelivesofthe communities.
TheseinstitutionsareespeciallystronginthecaseoffishingcommunitiessuchasthePattinavarsofthe
Coromandelcoast.BothTarangambadiandChinnangudiarevillagesdominatedbyPattinavarsubcaste
andthereforetraditionalpanchayats playcriticalroles.These panchayatsshouldnot beconfusedwith
thePanchayat RajInstitutions(PRIs),whichareconstitutional entitieswith democraticallyelected
leadership.
12

theminimumrequiredlandofthree
cents for construction they were
eligible to get a new house at the
same plot. SIFFS would provide
assistance in clearing the plot of
damagedstructuresandalsobuild
atransitoryshelterintheplot.
Incaseafamilypossessedaplot
smallerthanwhatwasneededfor
constructing a house under the
project and still wished to stay
back , the onus was on them to
ensuretherequiredplotsize.
Familiesoptingforthenewsitehad
to relinquish their existing house
andtheplot.Suchplotsweretobe
usedforcommonpurposessuchas
wideningofroadsorinsomecases
forallotmenttothosestayingatthe
sameoldsitesandowninglessthan
threecentsofland.
Those whowanted to continuelivingin
theirexistinghousesandwantedrepairs
and improvement in them could do so
accordinglyand SIFFSwouldassistthem
depending on each house owner s
requirements.
There would be an attempt to give a
minimumofthreecentstoeachfamilyand
vehicular access for each plot in the
existingvillage.Drainage,sanitationand
the roads would be properly planned.
Commonamenitiesandpublicbuildings
wouldbedistributedintheexistingand
thenewsiteaccordingtothedistribution
of the population and the planning
exercisethatwasbeingcarriedout.
13
SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
Incasehouseshadtobebuiltinthehigh
andmediumriskareas,thegroundlevel
and the plinth level would be raised to
makethebuildingsafer.
Propersecurityoftenureandownership
wouldbe ensuredto thehouseowners
who had decided to continue in their
orginalplots,with theassistance of the
Government.
Demolitionoftheexistinghousewasmade
mandatoryforthosechoosingtomovetothe
newlocation.Theexistinghousewouldhave
tobedemolishedandthelandhandedover
to the government before moving in to the
newhouse.
Discussionsontheselineswiththevillagers
had a drastic effect on peoples decision
regarding the location of their house with
many people deciding to stay on. As
mentioned earlier, for many house owners
whohadgoodqualityhouses,theincentive
of getting three cents of land and a house
worthRs150,000wasunattractive.Thosewho
ownedmorethanthreecentsoflanddidnot
wanttovacatetheplots,becausetheycould
getanewhouseintheexistinglocationitself.
Thecriticalquestionatthisjuncturewashow
manyfamilieswouldoptforthenewsiteand
howmanywouldstaybackintheiroriginal
place.Asindicatedearlier,havingownland
wasaprerequisitetogetahouseconstructed
at the original site. They had the option of
buyinglandfromaneighbourorso,butthe
onus was on them. If there was no land
available,theyhadtomove.
Thedecisiontomoveornottomovealsowas
prompted by the results of the hazard
mappingthatSIFFSpresentedtothevillagers.
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT
Asmentionedearlier,theresultshadshown
theextentofinundationcausedbyincoming
waves of different heights. It showed, for
instance, why the central portion of the
Chinnangudivillageescapeddamageseven
as thebeachfrontareawassubmergedand
the waves damaged areas away from the
centre. It clearly brought out the fact that
some of the newly allotted plots could be
more prone to flooding than the existing
habitations.Annexure1showstheinundation
mapofChinnangudi.
Subsequently,thosewithinthe200metresof
thehightidelinemovedtothenewlocation.
Arelativelygoodstockofhouseswererepaired,
notdemolished.Theoldandthenewwould,
thus,combinetocreatetheredefinedandsafer
villages in Tarangambadi and Chinnangudi.
Further, the land being relinquished by the
houseownersmovingtonewlocationscould
beusedforcommonpurposessuchaswidening
ofroads,etc.FollowingtheSIFFSstudiesthat
showedthevulnerabilitiesofdifferentareas
inthe village,the traditional panchayats in
boththevillagesdecidedthatallthefamilies
within200metresofthehightidelinewould
shifttothenewsite.
LandAllotment
Identification of appropriate land by the
governmentturnedouttobethefirstmajor
hurdle in the habitat reconstruction
programme. The government was working
undertremendouspressure.InNagapattinam
districtitself,thegovernmenthadtoidentify
landforconstructingmorethan18,000houses.
Thelandhadtobesafe,atthesametimenot
far away from the sea, as most of the
beneficiaries were fisher people for whom
easyaccesstobeachwasessential.
With the need to optimise the elevation,
distancefromthehightideline,andaccessto
thebeach,landallotmentforconstructionwas
likeajigsawpuzzle.Inspiteofthebestefforts,
theGovernmentstruggledtofindlandthat
metthenormsandwasalsoacceptabletothe
people.Forallthevillageswhere SIFFShad
takenupconstruction,thelandallottedwas
Soil Testing
14
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

low lying. But there was no other land

available.ThereforeSIFFSdecidedtogoinfor
land filling, knowing the costs and effort
associatedwithsuchadecision.

LandallottedinTarangambadiwasinadequate.
Therewasevenlitigationinvolvedinonecase.
The matter was complicated. SIFFS had to
removethelandfillingfromalargeplotand
clear it even after it was allotted for
constructionbecauseoflitigation.Peopleof
Chinnangudirefusedtoaccepttheallotted
landastheythoughtitwasfarawayfromthe
beach.Itwasacomplexsituation.Adecision
continuedtobeelusivealsobecauseofthelack
of effective community leadership in
Chinnangudi. The district administration
triedtofindalternativeplots.Butultimately
peoplehadtosettleforwhatwasallotted,well
awayfromtheshore.Thedistanceofthenew Measurement for plot allotement
habitat from the sea shore is likely to have
implicationsfortheirlivelihoods. the beginning of a longer and dedicated
processoftakingthedesigningofthehouses
The land allocation problem continued for tomicroandindividuallevels.
severalmonths,delayingtheinitiationofthe
project. Then land filling further delayed Thehabitatmapping exercisewasaimedat
actualconstruction. integrating local knowledge and scientific
data.Itwasacombinationofsocialmapping,
resourcemappingandmobilitymappingand
HabitatMapping
comprisedthecollectionofarchitecturaldata,
OneoftheearlydecisionsintheSIFFShabitat visual documentation and interaction with
reconstructionprojectwastomakeanattempt residents. The study was done using the
to understand the way the people of followingmethod.
Tarangambadi and Chinnangudi lived. A
habitatmappingexercisewascarriedoutin Atotalstationsurveyofthetopographyofthe
theoldvillagesettlementstounderstandthe villageswascarriedoutcontainingdetailsof
use of space and peoples needs and streetsin relation withthebeach andriver;
aspirationsassociatedwiththem.Individual electric posts,telephone posts,wells, water
houseswerestudiedtounderstandtheneeds, taps,handpumps,etc.;contoursoftheland
culturalvaluesanddesignpreferencesthey atanintervalof0.25metres;locationofpublic
embody.Itincludedthestudyofnotonlythe buildings and vegetation in the common
distributionofhousesandtheusageofspace areas. Base maps were divided into grids
within the houses, but also the common which showed the village divided by the
spacesandthevillageasawhole.Thiswas streets.
15
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

These maps were developed

intothematicmapsbyadding
layers of information on the
villagecollectedthroughfield
surveys.Themapswereused
tocreateenlargedgridmaps
containing features of a
cluster (a group of houses
surroundedby streets on all
four sides). Subsequently,
detailsofindividualhouses,
as they existed before the
disaster were collected
throughvisitstotheclusters.
The details included plinth
Plot Regularisation
area,buildingmaterialused,numberofdoors,
vegetationaroundthehouse,measurementof constructionmaterial,locationofpoojaroom7,
indoorandoutdoorspacesandinformation kitchenandtoilet,needforstoragespaceand
about residents. The field survey was veranda,potentialforexpansionofthehouse,
conductedbyateamofarchitectsandstudent and occupational requirements associated
withthehouse(storageofnets,engines,etc.).
architectsfromdifferentpartsofthecountry.
Thetotalstationsurveyandmanualsurvey
Adetailedsocioeconomicsurveywascarried
werecomplementedbyvisualdocumentation
out subsequent to the habitat mapping
ofdetailsofthehabitatoftheoldvillage.Some
exercisetoascertainthehabitatconditionin
ofthemapsareprovidedinAnnexure2.
theoldvillage.Thesurveylookedintothe
various aspects of life within the fishing
The results of the Chinnangudi settlement villages.Itcoveredsexwiseandagewisedata
studyandhabitatmappingwerebroughtout on each family, educational level of each
as a special volume. Similar volume of member, sources of income and details of
Tarangambadiwasalsopreparedbutwasnot occupation.Familieswereclassifiedintotwo
published.Annexure3providesanindicative nuclearandjoint.Thisformsanimportant
classification among coastal communities.
list of observations from the Chinnangudi
Informationonthosephysicallyormentally
survey.
challengedwasalsocollected.

MassContactProgramme
Amasscontactprogrammewasorganisedin
Chinnangudi to understand peoples needs
andaspirationsassociatedwiththeirhouses.
At the programme, four paper models of
preliminary designs were presented and
peoples choice and feedback elicited. The
questionsaskedrangedaboutpreferencefor
Informationonthelandassetspossessedor
occupiedbythefamiliesalongwiththedetails
of title deeds or other documents was
collected.Ageandtypesofthehouseinwhich
theylivedbeforetsunamiwerealsoestimated.
7
Prayer room
16

Details on amenities such as electric
connection,drinkingwatersupply,andtoilets
werecollected.Incasethefamilyhadsuffered
deathsinthetsunami,thedetailsofthatwere
alsocollectedforcrossverification.Thesurvey
ended with questions on where the family
would like to have their new house
constructedandalsothereasonforthechoice.
Thesocioeconomicsurveybroughtoutmany
aspects of the lives, life styles, amenities,
economic condition, and livelihoods of the
villages.Inspiteofthepresenceofahundred
year old school in the village, the level of
illiteracyamongtheelderlywasfoundtobe
shockingly high. Current enrolment of
childreninschoolwasfoundgood,especially
forgirls.Amajorityofthepeopledepended
onfishingandrelatedactivitiesforlivelihood.
Fish vending by women came up as a
substantial source of livelihood in both
TarangambadiandChinnangudi.
While around 60% of the houses were
electrifiedbeforetsunamiinboththevillages,
a near total absence of household toilets
showedpoorsanitationsystemsinthevillage.
While most of the households had a
permanentspaceforcooking,around40%of
the families preferred to have the cooking
space outsidethe house.A majorityof the
households pointed out the importance of
Village Level Meeting
17
SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
pooja room, or a space earmarked for that.
When asked about neighbourhood
preferences,77%ofthefamiliesmaintained
that they would like to have the same
neighbours in the new settlement as well.
Thesurveyalsofoundthat24.8percentof
the people wanted tostay in their existing
plots.
Thesocioeconomicsurveyhadaquestionon
thefamilypreferencesinthisregard.Based
ontheresponsetothequeryaToMoveor
NotToMovemapwasprepared,whichwas
Training Programme
to become the base document on which
furthernegotiationswereheld.Themapfor
ChinnangudiisgiveninAnnexure4.
The reports of the socioeconomic surveys
werenotpublished.However,thepurposeof
the surveys was served as the results were
usedintwoimportantstagestheywerefirst
usedforfinalisingthelistofbeneficiaries,and
thenasthebaselinedataforthefacetoface
meetings with the families to finalise their
requirements for customising the designs.
Family level data tables obtained from the
socio economic surveys formed the base
documentintheindividualbeneficiaryfiles
maintained at the SIFFS site offices for
planningandmonitoring.
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT
Therehavealsobeenstudiesthatwerecarried
outalongwiththeconstructionprocess.Two
batchesofstudents,Indianandforeign,were
engaged as interns. These students were
entrustedwiththetaskofpreparingamaster
plan for the area and i n mapping the
drainagecanalsinthearea.Thewebsitefor
the project was developed by a volunteer
fromBulgaria.
Designofthevillage
Twolayoutsweremadeforthedesignofthe
newvillageinTarangambadi,onebasedona
gridlayoutandtheotheronaclusterlayout.
The density of habitation was less in the
clusterlayoutduetotheadditionalcommon
spaces provided therein. However, the
fishermenpanchayatselectedthe gridlayout
as theyfound itmore appropriateto check
unauthorisedencroachmentofopenspaces.
The grid layout had been made pedestrian
friendlywithopenspacesonalternatestreets
and childrens play area interspersed. The
differentlayoutsaregiveninAnnexure5.
Meeting with members of the Traditional Panchayat
The Governemnt had stipulated a house
densityof25peracre.Eachhousewastobe
builtonthreecentsandthebalance25cents
weretobeassignedforcommonspace.Initial
studies had shown that the requirement of
commonspacewasmuchhigherandhence,
inTaranganabadithehousedensitywasfixed
at20peracre.InChinnangudi,itwasfixedat
16housesperacre.
Theconstructionsiteswereelevatedbyland
fillingsothatevenifwaterrisesto2.1metres
abovethemeansealevel,itwillnotenterthe
houses. This was done for all the sites
including Tarangambadi, Chinnangudi,
Puthuppalayam and Karantheru, after
studyingthenaturaldrainagesysteminthe
village.
Landfillingwasconsideredproblematiceven
at the time of taking this decision. It was
pointedoutthatlandfillingwouldpushup
the over all investment in construction
substantially. Inaddition,itwas clear that
landfillingwouldblockthenaturaldrains
18

an d thus advers el y af fect th e mi cro
environmentandcouldleadtofloodingin
future.Thedelaycausedbylandfilling,it
wasargued,wouldfurtherincreasethecosts
ofconstruction.
Despite all these valid arguments, SIFFS
decidedtogoinforlandfillingmainlyfor not in a continuous stretch. Therefore land
tworeasons.One,thehazardmappinghad
clearlyshownthatthenewbuildingsiteswere
notsafeevenundernormalfloodconditions.
Two,alleffortstofindalternativesiteshad
failed and SIFFS had to construct on the
allottedland,howsoeverunsafeitwas.
Naturaldrainsatthesitesweremappedand
documented before initiating land filling.
These maps could be used for scientific
drainage planning for the new habitat.
Drainage map of Chinnangudi is given in
Annexure6.Experienceduringthesubsequent
rains showed that the fear of excessive
floodingoftheareaduetoblockingofnatural
drains was possibly misplaced or at least
exaggerated. There was no substantial
19
SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
Survey
flooding in spite of good rains. However,
scientificdrainageplanningisnecessaryfor
floodproofingforfuture.
Theinitialdecisionwastodolandfillingfor
allsites,oldandnew.However,itwassoon
foundunfeasibleforoldplotsastheywere
filling was limited to the new site in
Tarangambadi,KarantheruandPuthupalayam.
FinalisingBeneficiaryLists
Finalisingthelistofbeneficiariesofthehabitat
reconstructionprojectturnedouttobealong
drawn process in which traditional
panchayats, the critical decision making
forumforthefishingvillagesplayedamajor
role. Those who had lost their houses
completelyandhadbeenlivingintemporary
shelters since the disaster were to be given
priority.Othershadtowait.Thiswasaccepted
inprinciple.
Asetofcriteriaforbeneficiaryselectionwas
drawnupbasedon(1)theguidelinesinthe
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT
Governmentorderand(2)theresultsofthe
settlementstudywhichshowedthedetailsof
house ownership before tsunami including
thetypeofhouses.Amapwaspreparedwhich
showedthehousetypesastheyexistedbefore
the disaster. The following criteria were
evolved.
Criterion1:Ahouseforahousebut study were useful in this process. The
basedonwhereyoulived.Allthose
whohadahousewithin200metres
fromtheseawouldgetanewhouse
inthenewsettlement,basedonthe
principleofanewhouseforahouse
already had, validated by the
findings of the settlement study.
Beyond 200 metres, the families
couldoptforhavingthenewhouse
constructed in their old location,
provided theyhad 3 centsof land
withthem.
Criterion 2: Each family within a
joint family to get a new house.
Fishing villages traditionally have
thesystemofjointfamilies.Making
a family eligible for a new house
thereforewasproblematic.Through
severalroundsofdiscussionswith
the communiti es and o ther
stakeholders, it was resolved that
every family within a joint family
would also be entitled to a new
house.
Criterion 3: Criteria for special
cases.Awidoworwidowerstaying
with a married son was excluded
fromthebeneficiarylists.However,
insuchcases,thenewhousewould
be registered jointly on the names
of the widow/ widower and their
son.Widows orwidowers staying
alonewereincluded.
Theprocessoffinalisingthebeneficiarylist
wasthroughafourdaylongsessionthatwas
heldbetweentheSIFFSteam,thetraditional
panchayat andotherstakeholders. The list
thatSIFFShadpreparedbasedonitssurveys
cross checked with the list generated by
PRAXISthroughmicroplanningexercisewas
compared with the Governments list. The
habitatmaps preparedfromthesettlement
number of houses to be constructed was
broughtdownfromtheoriginallyestimated
numberssubstantiallythroughthisprocess.
ThefinalbeneficiarylistforTarangambadi
had1080housesandthatofChinnagudihad
543.
SIFFS insisted that the beneficiary list be
fi nali sed befo re th e begi nn ing of
construction. Itcouldonlybeachieved in
part,butthebeneficiariesforthefirstsetof
houses were selected before the beginning
ofconstruction.
Among the beneficiaries, those who were
selected based on the first criterion, i.e.,
havinglostahousewithin200metresfrom
theseawereeligibleforthefirstsetofhouses.
Somediscrepanciescreptin hereandafew
familiesselectedasperthesecondcriterion
gotwronglyincludedinthefirstlist.Anideal
stepwouldhave beentoallotonehouse to
thejointfamiliesandsubsequentlymeeting
theirclaimforthenewlyrecognisedfamilies.
Even after such an elaborate process, there
werestillerrorsinthebeneficiarylist.These
errors, mainly about duplication of claims,
weresubsequentlycorrectedinconsultation
withthetraditionalpanchayats.Beneficiaries
were given an option to decide on their
neighbours.Mostofthefamilieschosetheir
pretsunamineighboursinthenewsettlement
aswell.Inthefirstsetofhousesinthenew
settlement, these preferences were given
20

priority.Eventhoughthiscouldnotbemet
in all subsequent cases due to various
reasons,morethan80%ofthefamilieshave
got the neighbours of their choice. This is
suretoaddtothesocialcohesioninthenew
settlements.
SIFFSretractedfromtheoriginalcommitment
giventoChinnangudivillageonthenumber
ofhousesthat wouldbeconstructed.There
wereafewvalidreasonsbehindthis.Firstly,
the original village in Chinnangudi had a
numberofgoodhouses.Almostallfamilies
wantedanewhouse;howeverdidnotwant
torelinquishtheiroriginalhouseinthemain
village.Thepanchayatandthevillagerswere
harpingonatwohousetheorywhichwasin
discussionatthattime.Therewereproblems
when SIFFSrevisedthenumberofhousesto
be constructed. Ultimately when the
constructionisover,allthosewhoreallydid
nothavearoofovertheirheadswouldhave
gotanewhouse.
21
SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
Bhoomi Pooja being performed
ClusterApproach
The total habitat reconstruction project has
beendividedintoclustersof25to50houses
each.Thiswastoensurebettermanagement
oftheplanningandconstructionprocess,
greaterattentiontodetailsandtomeeting
individual requirements, and eliciting
parti c i pati o n o f every h o us e o wni n g
family.Thehouseownersineachcluster
selectedfivetosixmembersfromamong
th em w h o c o m p ri s e d t he c l u s t e r
commi ttee. Thei r ro le was to address
issueswithinthecommunityandtomonitor
thequalityofconstruction.
Aclustervolunteer,identifiedfromthevillage
by thecluster members, was tooversee the
construction process and to liaise between
SIFFSandthecommunity.Thiswasinaddition
tothehouseownersmonitoringthequality
of construction of their houses; they were
takenthroughclassroomsessionsonquality
assurance.
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT
Theconceptofclustervolunteerswasaspaid
community workers. As construction
progressed, cluster volunteers emerged as
trueleadersoftheirclusters. Inadditionto
the roles specified for them, most of them
started effectively supervising the
constructionprocess.Intheprocesstheyalso
gainedtechnicalskills.Fourclustervolunteers
were eventually promoted as supervisors
consideringtheirskillsandexperience.
Eventhoughtheoriginalideawastofinda
cluster volunteer for each cluster from the
corresponding cluster itself, this was not
strictly followed. The first set of cluster
volunteersexcelledmuchbeyondexpectations
and therefore they were maintained for the
nextphaseaswell.Inadditiontoconstruction
workclustervolunteersalsotookpartinthe
IEC campaign on water and sanitation
organisedaspartoftheproject.Sixvolunteers
werecontinuedtilltheendoftheproject.
Auniquefeatureof theSIFFSreconstruction
projectvisvisotherpublichousingprojects
wasitsinsistenceonallotmentofplotsbefore
theconstructionprocesssothathouseowners
couldparticipateateverystageofconstruction.
The fishermens panchayat allotted plots of
landtohouseowners,inkeepingwiththeold
settlementpattern.
Allotting plots before the beginning of
construction,orthefactthateachfamilyknew
whichwastheirplotandcouldseetheirhouse
comingupinfrontofthem,wasprobablythe
most critical factor that triggered active
participationbythefamilies.Ofcoursetheir
involvement at the design stage and their
activeroleincustomisingtheirownhousehad
setthestageforparticipation.
Plot allotment just changed the whole
environment.Familiesliterallytookovertheir
plots,conducting bhoomipooja,involving in
Door Pooja being performed
22
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

curingofthemasonrywork,installingdoors createdto give arange ofoptions tohouse

andholdingdoorpooja,checkingthequantity
andqualityofmaterialsthatwentintoeach
stageofconstruction,complainingaboutany
fall in the quality of workmanship at any
stage,gettingbacktothe SIFFSteamtoclear
doubts,approachingthesiteofficeifworkwas
stoppedforadayortwo,complainingincase
theyfeltthatanybodyelsewasgettingany
unduefavourortheyweredeniedsomething
whichtheythoughtwastheirdueandsoon.
Every cluster was assigned a construction
teamcomprisinganengineerandarchitectto
attend to the technical aspects, and a
community development officer to address
the social aspects of habitat building. SIFFS
identifiedthesocialfacetofconstructionas
integraltotheconstructionprocess.Cluster
engineers, who were trained in quality
supervision,werealsotaughtthenuancesof
maintainingapositiverapportand channel
ofinteractionwiththecommunity.
owners in keeping with their needs and
aspirationsregardingtheirfuturedwelling.
Asummarytableshowingthedetailsofmodel
housesisprovidedinAnnexure7.
Theconceptofmodelhousesemergedaspart
of an effort to involve people in designing
theirownhouses.Whenpapermodelswere
presented tothefamilies, theywereable to
visualise the design to a large extent and
commentonthem.Atthesametimeitwas
clearthattheywouldbeabletoengagemore
meaningfully in the design stage if actual
modelhouseswerebuilt.Themodelhouses,
asexpectedattheconceptstage,providedthe
much needed touch and feel effect, thus
encouraging the families to get seriously
involvedinthedesigningprocess.Eventhe
SIFFSteamdidnotrealiseitsfullimpactatthat
stage,astheycouldnothavevisualisedthe
extenttowhichthefamilieswouldgoinfor

Clustercommittees workedwell initially.It

waswomenwhodominatedthemeetingsof
the committees. There was a stage when it
appeared thatthe cluster committees would
even evolve into institutional systems for
managementofthenewsettlementsinfuture.
However,asconstructionprogressed,cluster
committeesbecamelessactive.Ironically,one
of thereasons thatmade cluster committees
inactivewastheroleofclustervolunteers.The
volunteers, who came up from the same
villageweretrustedbythepeopletolookafter
theirinterestswell.

ModelHouses
Based on the habitat mapping exercise
comprising interaction with house owners
andtechnicalsurveys,sixmodelhouseswere
constructedinactualdimensions.Theywere Model Hoiuse

23
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT
customisationandimprovisation,duringthe
laterstagesoftheproject.Itisafactthat,as
thingsemerged,someofthelaterimprovised
models only holddistantsimilaritiestothe
original ones offered through the model
houses.
FeedbackonModelHouses
Therewasaneedformorebuiltinshelves
inthehouses.
Manyhouseownersraiseddoubtsabout
thecontinuoussunshadeattherooflevel
and asked for flat sunshades above the
windowsalone.
Model Houses
Somequestionswereraised aboutthe
positionofkitchensandthereardoor.
The traditional panchayat in both
Tarangambadi and Chinnangudi were
keen on reinforced cement concrete
framedstructureinsteadofloadbearing
walls.
Thecommunitiesraisedafewdemandsfor
common structures also community hall,
open air stage near the temple, and a
memorialfortsunamivictims.
Selectionofoptions
Model II was the preferred option of most
familiesperhapsbecauseitcameclosestto
24
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

Face to Face meeting with families

atraditionalhouseplan.Thehousehadfour
ro oms whi ch suited the need of large
families.Althoughthemodeldidnothavea
veranda,thehouseownerscould buildone
usingnonpermanentmaterial.Thelocation
ofthepoojaroomandthefrontandreardoors
wereinkeepingwithculturalnorms.

ModelIII,whichistwostoried,wasselected
bysomepeoplewhowantedtostaybackat
their original homesteads but had serious
spaceconstraints.
Beneficiaries discussing options with the constuction team

Model IV was s el ected bec ause o f its

veranda with arches.Although the model
did not have a pooja room, house owners
decidedtoaddoneoftheirownattherear
ofthehouse.
Model I, which is the only one with an
attached toilet, was by families on the
conditionthattheentrancetothetoiletwould
beshiftedtooutsidethehouse.
Many house owners wanted to move the
kitchen outside the house and use the
allocatedspacewithinforotherpurposes.
25
FacetoFacetoFinaliseIndividual
HouseDesigns
Thehouseownerswereinvitedtohavealook
atthemodelhousesandtheirfeedbackand
suggestions sought. Face to face meetings
betweenthefamiliesandateamincludinga
membereach fromthe architects teamand
thecommunitydevelopmentteamwereheld
inordertofinalisethedesignofhouseforeach
family.Everyresidentwasallottedaspecific
timeslotinwhichtheyweretohaveafaceto
face meeting, independent and free of the
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT
Option 2 Rotated
influence of any other house owner. Their
doubtsandconcernswerenotedandclarified.
Suggestionswereincorporatedinthedesign
whereverpossible.Theseincludedproposals
for customisation as well as provision for
expansion in future. Set off from the
boundarieswasalsodecidedbythefamilies.
Once a house plan was jointly finalised, a
confirmationsignaturewasavailed.
Thesewerenegotiatingsessionsaswell,with
families trying to maximise their benefits
within a framework provided by the SIFFS
teamaroundthemodelhouses,andthelatter
explaining the trade off involved in
customisingeachcomponent.
The process of customisation became so
elaborate that a few models that look
completely different from their original
designs emerged. These new models are
popularlyknownasRotatedoptions,which
may be referring to the difference in
orientationofthenewhousewithrespectto
the original design. For instance, Model
HouseOption1wasalteredbyprovidingfor
averandabyshiftingthestaircaseawayfrom
itsoriginalposition.Orientationoftheliving
roomandbedroomhavealsobeenchanged.
ModelHouseOption4wasalteredbyshifting
Option 1 Normal
thestaircaseandprovidinganextraroofover
thespaceleftopen.Thedrawingsofvarious
optionsareprovidedinAnnexure8.
CostofConstruction
Theoriginalestimatesforthevariousmodels
were around Rs 160,000; about Rs 10,000
abovethecoststipulatedbytheGovernment.
However,thedecisiontouseframestructures
insteadofloadbearingwallsinstantlypushed
uptheestimatessubstantially.Therewerealso
problemswiththeinitialestimatesoflabour
rates.Labourwasnotavailableattherates
fixed.Therateshadtoberevisedmorethan
once.Addingtoitwasthesharpincreasein
the prices of building materials. Prices of
cement,steel,bricks,andsandstartedgoing
up at an unexpected pace. Delays in the
constructionprocessaddedtoit.Finally,by
thetimethefirstsetofhouseswerehanded
over,thecostperhousehadgoneuptoaround
Rs290,000.Theaveragecostperhousewas
Rs.256,000intheentireproject.
Theescalation incost withinsix monthsof
initiatingtheconstructionprocesswas43%of
theoriginalestimate.Thiswasmainlydueto
the decision to shift to frame structures as
demandedbythecommunity.Thereforeat
thebeginning itselfthe estimateshad tobe
26

revised to around Rs 200,000. The cost of
construction kept rising all throughout the
project, the total increase almost doubling
overthe nextcoupleofyears. Eventhough
thecostescalationcouldmostlybeattributed
totheriseinmaterialpricescompoundedby
thedelayinconstruction,overlookingafew
indirect costs at the planning stage also
contributedtoit.
The escalation of costs meant serious
problems to SIFFS and its partners.Among
others, SIFFS lack of experience in
implementing similar projects had been a
criticalfactorthatcausedsucherrorsatthe
planningstage.Lackofpriorexperiencewas
behind adopting a wrong strategy in
Chinnangudialso.Theinitialtestssuggested
theneedforpilingthere.Pileswerefabricated
for this. However, once the construction
started, it was found that piling was not
possible.Butchangingthedesignwasdelayed
forvariousreasons.Finally,themethodwas
abandonedafterafieldvisitbythestructural
engineerandateamofexperts.
Construction
Itwasdecidedveryearlyintheplanningstage
that SIFFS would attempt to overcome the
typicallimitationsofmasshousingprojects.
The decision to avoid contractors in the
constructionprojectwaspartofthestrategy.
This was considered important in ensuring
thecentralroleofthecommunityintheentire
projectlifecycle.ItwasdecidedtosetupSIFFS
ownteamandsystemstomanagetheproject.
Contractorsweretobeusedonlytoprovide
labourtotheproject.
Once the actual construction took off, it
becameincreasinglydifficulttogetadequate
labourfortheprojectinspiteofrevisingthe
scheduledratesofwages.Therewasnatural
27
SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
shortageasposttsunamihousingworkwas
goingonsimultaneouslyinmanyvillagesin
Nagapattinamdistrict.Inadditiontothiswas
the artificial shortagecaused by small time
labourcontractorswhodefaultedonpayment
to the labourers. Work was delayed quite
often and interrupted at times due to such
shortage.
Itbecameclearthat SIFFShadtodevisenew
strategiestoprogressfurtherintheproject.
Thelabourshortagebecamesoacuteatcertain
stages that various other options including
outsourcingwereconsideredanddiscussed.
The communitywas gettingupset with the
delays.TheSIFFSteamwasdevelopingdistress
symptomsastheyfounditdifficulttomove
forward.Evenrepeatedhikesinlabourrates
did not help in breaking the stalemate.
Targetswereslippingandtheprojectwas
stagnating.
IntroductionofPieceRateSystem
ItwasatthisjuncturethattheSIFFSconstruction
team came up with an idea they called the
pieceratesystem,whichprovedtobehighly
effectiveinmanaginglabourattheworksites.
The system involved breaking up of the
constructionprocessofanindividualhouse
intoseveralstandalonecomponentssuchas
excavation,foundation,wallmasonry,pillars,
roofing,plasteringetc.
Thesmallestcomponentofworkwasarrived
atinsuchawaythatasmallgroupofpeople
couldfinishitinadaystime.Thenumberof
peopleneededfordifferentcomponentswas
obviously different. For instance, a much
larger team is required to finish the roof
concretingofahousecomparedtoflooring
orexcavation.Remunerationforcompleting
each of these components was worked out
based on the over all cost of each design.
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT
Labourerswereinvitedtopickupanyofthe
components and complete them. Once a
groupcompletedacomponent,thepayment
was made tothem the same dayat the site
office.Thisprovedtobehighlyeffectivefor
thefollowingreasons.
Thenewsystemeliminatedtheneed
forlabourcontractorsandencouraged
small groups of workers taking up
componentsofwork.
Asthepaymentwasmadedirectlyby
SIFFS to the groups, the workers
instantlydevelopedconfidenceinthe
system.
T he s ystem allowed scope for
specialisation.Forinstance,ifasmall
groupfoundthattheirstrengthwas
inroof concreting,they couldfocus
onlyonthatcomponentandtakeup
enoughassignmentsatthesites.
Asthepayment became instantand
regular,peoplefounditeasytostick
onwiththeproject.
However,administrationofthenewsystem
was fairly complex. A typical house was
dividedinto30andoddcomponents.Daily
payment was insisted up on. In order to
overcomethecomplexityinadministration,
thesystemwasimmediatelycomputerised.
ANewMethodinConstruction
During the second phase of construction,
various new methods were considered to
speed up the project. One of the methods
adopted was allotting materials to the
beneficiaryfamiliesandencouragingthemto
arrangelabourandorganiseconstruction.Of
course,theconstructionwasdoneasperthe
designagreeduponandunderthetechnical
supervisionoftheSIFFSteam.Inall36houses
were constructed through this method, the
salient features of which are summarised
below.
The beneficiary family had to have
three cents of land with title deed
(patta).
Design of the house was finalised
throughthefacetofaceprocessasin
othercases.
SIFFSissuedmaterials,unloadedatthe
sites,asperthefinaliseddrawingsand
estimates.
SIFFS pro vi ded water, c entrin g
materials,andengineeringsupport.
Thefamilyhadtoarrangelabourand
pay the labourcharges, which were
reimbursedbySIFFSoncompletionof
constructionandmeasurement,asper
norms.
Whilestructuralchangeswerenotallowed,
beneficiaries were permitted to customise
withintheoverallframeworkofthedesign,
providedtheymettheadditionallabourand
materialcostswhereverapplicable.
ConstructionManagementSystem
SIFFS Boardof Directors entrustedthe over
all supervision of the project to a Project
Steering Committee.The Committeemet at
regularintervalsandprovideddirectionsto
the project. The implementation team was
headedby aProject Manager. There was a
ProjectManagementCommitteeconsisting
ofexpertsthatadvisedtheProjectManager.
Assistant Project Manager supported the
Project Manager in managing the team,
28

interactions with the community, and the
interface with the district administration. A
diagramshowingtheconstructionmanagement
systemisprovidedinAnnexure10.
Theconstructionprojectsweremanagedbya
completely computerised system using a
software application developed specifically
fortheproject.Theentiregamutofactivities
ranging from inventory management to
accountinghadbeencomputerised.Tallywas
used for accounts management, which was
linkedtotheothersoftwareapplication.
Thefollowingdepartmentslookedafterthe
constructionprocess.
Engineeringandarchitecture
Administrationandmonitoring
Stores(Inventorymanagement)
Purchase
29
SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
Accounts
Vehiclesandmachineries
Qualitycontrol
Communitydevelopment(Also
calledtheSocialteam)
Each department was headed by an
experienced person and all important
decisionsweretakeninthemeetingsofthe
headsofdepartments.
Procurement and inventory management
systemsweremaintainedwithahighlevelof
transparency and accountability. Once the
requirementofaniteminstockwasreported,
theprocessstartedwithgeneratingademand
notethrough processingofpurchaseorder,
takingthematerialinstockandissuingnote
formakingpayment,tillthepaymentprocess
was completed through the system using
checksandapprovalsatvarious levels.The
A planning session
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT
systemallowedmonitoring
to the l evel o f phys ic al
movementofeventhesmallest
components.
A spreadsheet based system
was in place for daytoday
monitoring of progress. The
system was maintained in
suchawaythattheteamwas
able toknow the progressof
work on each house under
constructionattheendofthe
day.
Interfacingthecommunityleadershipforthe
implementationoftheprojectwasataskthat
requiredcontinuouseffort.Theteamhadbeen
abletomanageitwell,inspiteofoccasional
conflicts and problems. The traditional
panchayatactivelyinvolvedintheproject.The
SIFFS team managers were invited to the
panchayatmeetingstosortoutprojectrelated
issues. Similarly, panchayat representatives
participatedinmeetingscalledbytheProject
Managerwhenevertherewasarequirement.
InterfacingwiththeGovernmenthadbeena
regularrequirementoftheproject.Thedistrict
Jally Production
Ferro cement tank production
administration had a monitoring system in
place,chairedbythedistrictcollector.There
wereregularmeetingsatthecollectorsoffice
to evaluate the progress. There had been
continuous pressure from the district
administrationtospeeduptheproject.Project
Manager,AssistantProjectManagerandother
seniormembers ofthe teamparticipated in
the meetings called by the district
administration.Inaddition,seniorofficersof
thestateGovernmentvisitedtheprojectat
regularintervals.
SKAThadbeenprovidingtechnical
adviceandsupporttotheproject.
SIFFShadputinplacesystemsfor
timelyreportingoftheprogressof
the project to various partner
agencies.
QualityofConstruction
Reinforced cement concrete
structures need a lot of care in
construction and maintenance
especiallyinacoastalenvironment.
Ifthequalityofconstructioncannot
30

be ensured, the maintenance of these
structuresoveraperiodoftimecanbecomea
serious issue. Due to the large number of
constructions taking place in the tsunami
affected areas and the resultant scarcity of
labour,ensuringthequalityofworkbecame
exceedingly difficult. It was, therefore,
essential to train house owners and
overseeing teams in the monitoring of
construction.
A number of training programmes were
organised in this connection training on
quality of construction for field staff and
engineers,qualitycontroltrainingtohouse
owners,andtrainingoflocalmasonstowork
with ferrocement and rammed earth
masonry (by Hunnarshala, Gujarat) were
amongthem.
The training programme for house owners
coveredsafetyaspects,importanceofquality
inconstruction,qualityofmaterials,technical
aspectsofconcreting,brickwork,plastering,
31
SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
flooringetc.,andhouseownersroleinthe
qualityofconstruction.
One of the model houses was constructed
usingrammedearthmasonryinordertooffer
analternativeinbuildingmaterials.However,
thechoiceofselectingbuildingmaterialswas
lefttothehouseowners.Oneoftheobjectives
of training local people in masonry and
related work was to generate options for
alternativeemploymentinadditiontomaking
aworkforceavailableattheconstructionsite.
A group of women who were trained in
makingferrocementtanksinitiallytookup
grill production for parapets of the houses
when such a demand came up. They were
giventrainingingrillproduction.Agroupof
six women, a male mason and helper
continued grill making as a small business
throughout the construction project. They
madeallthegrillsusedforthehouseparapets.
Thegroupmaybeabletosustainitsbusiness
evenbeyondtheSIFFSconstructionproject.
Quality Testing of Material
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT
The project team had material testing
equipmentinplaceforensuringthequality
ofsand,bricks,andconcrete.Aseparateteam
wasthereinitially forqualitymanagement.
Thiswaslatermergedwiththeengineering
team.
Acomprehensiveandstepbystepconstruction
manual was developed as a handbook for
projectstaffandsupervisors.Itisareference
documentofguidelineswhichcomplemented
theinstructionsgivenbythetechnicalteam.
UNDP Shelter Advisory Group had been
makingperiodicvisitstotheprojectinorder
tokeepawatchonqualityofconstruction.In
itsfeedbackandrecommendations,thegrouphas
expressed satisfaction over the quality of
constructionintheSIFFSproject.
Sanitation
Thesocioeconomicsurveyshowedthatthe
house owners in Tarangambadi and
Soaking of Bricks for construction
Chinnangudiwere,traditionally,notusersof
enclosed toilets. Although the structural
provision for toilets had been made, there
weresomeissuesthat SIFFShadtoaddress.
Incorporating toilets in the houses would
implyexpectingfirstgenerationuserstostart
using them. Further, the water table in the
region was high; therefore, the sanitation
mechanism introduced had to protect the
groundwaterfromcontamination.Duringthe
constructionphase,theamountofwaterthat
wouldbeavailabletoeveryfamilyinfuture
wasuncertain.Thishadimplicationsforthe
choiceofsanitationtechnology.
AnIECcampaignonenvironmentalsanitation
wasinitiatedinNovember2006coveringboth
the villages in the context of the habitat
project.Theprimaryobjectiveofthecampaign
wastobuildawarenessonissuesrelatingto
drinkingwaterandsanitation.Thecampaign
wasvisualisedinsuchawaythatitwouldalso
prepare the communities to use sanitary
latrines, considering the fact that the vast
32

Baseline survey on water and sanitation
majorityofthepeopleofthesevillageshad
noexperienceinusinglatrines.Itwasalso
promptedbytheendemicincidenceofwater
bornediseasesandthepoorstateofsolidand
liquidwastemanagementasseeninexisting
villagesingeneralandtemporarysheltersin
particular.
Multiplecampaignmethodsrelevanttothe
localcontextwereusedinthecampaignfor
communicatingtherequiredmessages.These
included group meetings, community
meetings, childrens meetings, cultural
programmes, film shows, participatory
exercises for premises cleaning etc. The
salientfeaturesofthecampaignwereasgiven
below.
A base line censu s survey on
envi ronmental sani tation was
designed, the conduct of which
continuedthroughoutthecampaign
period, and worked as the chief
carrierofmessagestothefamilies.
Each survey team included three
members,twowomenandaman.
Thesurveyteamwasgiventraining
in the strategy, methodology and
componentsofthecampaign.Special
training sessions wereorganised to
33
SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
trainthesurveyteaminadministering
the schedules. Pilot surveys were
conducted. During the pilot survey,
flawsinadministeringtheschedules
were identified and rectified. The
teams went through a final training
sessioninordertofinetunethesurvey
process.Specialemphasiswasplaced
on equipping the team members to
use administration of the survey
schedule as a means of building
rapportwiththefamiliessothatthey
couldbeencouragedtoparticipatein
the campaign and action. A system
wasputinplacetocheckthequality
of data collected regularly and to
effectcorrectivemechanismsincase
ofdoubtsontheveracityofthedata
collected.
Survey teams were asked to hold
meetingsofthedaysrespondentsin
the evening every day in order to
discussasetofissuesrelatingtowater
andsanitation.Theywerealsoasked
toorganiseweeklymeetingsofallthe
respondentscoveredduringtheweek
andtheirfamilies.
Effo rt was taken to ensure the
cooperationoflocal NGOsandtheir
SHGsforthecampaign.
Micro level actions for cleaning the
premiseswereorganisedregularlyas
demo nstrati on on solid waste
management
Regularfeedbacksessions were held
withthesurveyteamsandfollowup
trainingprogrammeswereconducted
to strengthen their capabilities in
educatingthepeopleonissuesrelating
to water and sanitation. A special
training programme on water borne
diseases was organised in a
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

For the larger community of donors, well

participatory manner, which had a
wishers and interested persons, SIFFS
positiveimpactonthequalityofthe
maintained a detailed and updated set of
campaign.
documentsonitswebsitespeciallycreatedfor
the reconstruction project. The status of
Asoftwareapplicationwasdeveloped
fordataentry.Dataentrywascarried
out along with the survey, so the
results could be c onsolidated
immediately

Thecampaignreachedahighpitchduringthe
eventthatmarkedthehandingoverofthefirst
set of houses to the community in
Tarangambadi. The team took up the
responsibilityofinitiatingthepeopletouse
thecommunitytoiletsthatwereprovidedas
an interim arrangement till household
sanitationsystemsareinplace.

Afollowupcampaignhadbeenproposedto
educate the people on the use and
maintenance of household latrines and for
improvingtheirhygienebehaviour.

Monitoring
Monitoring of the habitat reconstruction
project was undertaken by a number of
stakeholders: the administration, house
owners, representativesof clustercommittees
andclustervolunteersontheonehand,andSIFFS
throughitsownmonitoringmechanismsonthe
other. Transparency was maintained in all
dealingsandprogressstatuswasavailablefor Cleanliness campaign

the community on demand. Through weekly

meetingsthedistrictadministrationkeptaclose
watchontheprogressoftsunamirehabilitation
workofallorganisations,including SIFFS.The
meetingswereattendedbytheDistrictCollector,
Tehsildar, Engineer, Executive officer of the
elected panchayat and town panchayat
representative. The engineer made periodic
visitstomonitorprogressandreporttothe
collector.
construction was available by date on this
website.Theotherdocuments thatcouldbe
accessedwerethefollowing.
Profileofclusters
Socioeconomicandfamilydetailsof
everyhousehold
34

Recordofproceedingsofmeetingsof
individualhouseownerswith
architectsandcommunity
developmentofficers
Scheduleforpreconstructionworkin
everycluster
Constructionscheduleandprogress
reportofeverysinglehouse
Qualitycheckreportsoftheworksite
Qualitytestreportsofbuilding
materialsusedforconstruction
Manualforsitesupervision
ProjectFinancing
TheSIFFShabitatreconstructionprojectwas
fundedbythefollowingagencies.
SwissSolidarity(SwS)andSwissRed
Cross (SRC) , the largest funding
partners for the project, supported
1000 houses in Tarangambadi and
Chinnangudi.Inadditiontofunding
support, SRC had also brought in
technicalandmanagerialsupportto
the project, which are explained
subsequently in the document. SRC
had beenafunding partner to SIFFS
inlivelihoodprojectsduringthepost
tsunamirehabilitationphase.
terredeshommes,Germany,apartner
that had supported SIFFS through
threelivelihoodsupportprojectsfor
the post tsunami rehabilitation
programmeprovidedfundingsupport
to100housesinChinnangudi.
35
SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
PhilipsElectronicsIndiaLimited,the
sole corporate sector partner in the
project,supportedtheconstructionof
175houses.Inaddition,Philipsalso
supported SIFFS ininstallingenergy
efficientlightingsystemsinthenew
settlements. Philips had been a
funding partner for other post
tsunami projects of SIFFS as well,
includingtheconstructionofamulti
storied building for the school in
Tarangambadi.
Chri stian Ai d ( CA ) , UK , a DEC
partner,hadalsosupportedtheSIFFS
habitat reconstruction project in
Kanyakumari district in addition to
the one in Tarangambadi. CA had
earl ier supported a liveli hood
rehabilitation programme covering
Kanyakumari and Nagapattinam
districtsofTamilNadu.
Amongthepartnerssupportingtheproject,
SRC had a major role in construction
management and quality control. While
Initiatives In Development Support (IIDS)
provided project management and
monitoring support, SKAT looked after the
technical aspects including quality of
construction.
Table1showsthefundingparticipationofthe
partnersintheproject.
SKATMission
There had been quarterly visits of SKAT
Missiontosupporttheconstructionproject.
The technical back stopping that SKAT
provided to the project had been very
effective,compensatingtoalargeextentfor
SIFFSlackofexperienceinhabitatprojects.
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

Table1
HabitatreconstructionprojectFundingparticipation

FundingSupport
Village Community Total
SwS/SRC Tdh(G) CA PEIL NA

Chinnangudi Fishing 113 100 213

Karantheru Dalit 22 22

Puthuppalayam Dalit 45 45

Tarangambadi Fishing 887 27 108 78 1100

Total 1000 100 27 175 78 1380

Notes:
SwS/SRC:SwissSolidaritySwiss RedCross,TdH(G): Terredes hommes(Germany)
CA:ChristianAidUK.,PEIL:PhilipsElectronicsIndiaLimited
NA:Fundsnotavailable

In addition to providing technical and hadbeenstrugglingtoaccommodateallthe

monitoring guidance, SKAT also supported
SIFFSinsettingrealistictargetsinthedifferent
phases.
Roads,ElectrificationandLighting
facilitieswithinthe limitedspaceavailable.
TheprojectwasfundedbyPhilipsElectronics.
Theschoolmayutilisetheadditionalspace
availableforvocationaltrainingprogrammes
forgirls.

The Government laid asphalt topped roads

along the streets of the new habitats.
Electrificationofthevillagewasdonebythe
StateElectricityBoard.Streetlightshadbeen
provided. The compact fluorescent lamps
( CFL ) supplied by Philips Electronics
enhancedthepleasantambienceofthehouses
duringevenings,inadditiontosavingenergy
in lighting. Each house had been provided
with a couple of 19 W CFL s and a 40W
fluoresenttubelight.
SchoolBuilding
Tarangambadihasahundredyearoldschool
thathasplayedacentralroleinthe culture
anddevelopmentoftheregion.Aspartofthe
habitat reconstruction project, SIFFS
constructed a threestoriedbuilding forthe
school.Thisprovedusefultotheschoolasit
FollowupProject
TheSIFFSprojectofficewouldcontinuefora
yearbeyondprojectcompletiontolookafter
themaintenanceofnewstructures. SRChas
alreadyinitiatedapostconstructionproject
intheareasofhealthandhygiene,waterand
sanitation, solid waste management and
maintenanceoffacilities.TheGovernmentof
TamilNaduisexpectedtoinstallasewerage
treatment system in Tarangambadi. In
addition,thegovernmentisalsoplanningto
take up projects in water supply schemes,
drainage,andretainingwall.
Challenges
ForSIFFS,afishermensorganisation,thiswas
the first foray into construction. The
organisationtookonthechallengearmedwith
36

theconvictionofapplyinganappropriatemix
of scientific intervention and sensitivity in
providingspaceforhouseownersvoicesand
opinions. SIFFS invited expertise and
competencies from around the world and
integrated them with communities
perspectiveandtheorganisationsexperience
ofworkingwithfisherfolkforover25years.
The issues and challenges that the habitat
constructionprocessfacedhadbeenmany.
Creatingspaceforall stakeholdersto voice
their opinion had necessitated resolving
conflicting demands the administration
wanted speedy delivery, the community
wanted immediate resolution of conflicts,
observerssoughtstrictadherencetoquality
standards. Further, introducing a social
perspectiveinthemindsofthetechnicalteam
wasmetwithsomedifficulty.
The most important issue facing SIFFS had
beenthedelayinhandingoverhouses.There
werevariousreasonsforthedelay.
37
SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
New School Building
Theinitiallandfillingworkhadbeentime
consuming, causing delays early in the
project.
Customising houses to meet individual
needswasatimeconsumingprocess.
Therewasa shortage of quality labour
force in the region due to the sudden
upsurge in construction work after the
tsunami.
Negotiation with service providers had
sometimesbeendifficultandlongdrawn.
There were many teething problems
arisingoutofSIFFSlackofexperiencein
constructionwork.
Atthetimeofhandingoverthefirstsetof451
housestothecommunity,SIFFSconducteda
samplesurveyamongthehouseownerstoget
feedback on various aspects of the habitat
programme, including details of houses.
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT
Immersedintheconstructionprocessasthey
were,andconfrontingvariousissuesraised
bythepeopleandthepanchayatonadayto
daybasis,itwasdifficultfortheteamtoguess
whatpeoplereallyfeltabouttheprojectand
the houses.The feedback wasreassuring, a
feeling of ownership was evident in the
response.Thiswasreinforcedfurtherbythe
immediateandtotalandfulloccupancyofthe
newlyconstructedhouses.
Thewaypeopleoccupiedtheirhouses,and
infact,tookoverthenewhabitat,andtheway
theyhaveextendedandimprovedtheirliving
spaces, stand testimony to the ownership
feelinggeneratedthroughtheparticipatory
approach.Thedecisiontoinvolvethepeople
inthedesignprocess,thus makingitclear
thatSIFFSrefusedtoseetheprojectasmere
provisionofhousesand thatitinsistedon
deliveringahabitatreconstructionprojectby
recognisingtherightsofthepoortootohave
choices,andalsoacknowledgingthefactthat
everyfamilyhaditsownneedsinhousing;
andtheallotmentofplotsbeforeconstruction
that triggered unprecedented levels of
peoplesparticipationhadbeeninstrumental
increatingthisownership.
FG
38
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

ANNEXURES

39
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

40
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

Annexure1
InundationMapChinnangudi

41
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

Annexure2
HabitatMaps

42
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

43
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

44
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

45
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

46
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

47
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

Annexure3
HabitatmappingChinnangudi,resultssummary

Chinnangudi HabitatMappingOutcomes

Theoriginalsiteofhabitationinthevillagewasatanelevation.

HousesconstructedneartheAmmanriverwereonaraisedplinth.

Thereisaneedforspaceonthebeachforbeachingcraftandnetsand
forthebuildingofhomesclosetothebeach/landingarea.

Spacesinfrontofhomesareusedforvariouslivelihoodsrelated
activitiessuchasdryingnetsandfish.

Auctioning,donebywomen,iscarriedoutonthebeachduringthe
day.Thecatchwhicharrivesatnightisauctionedunderstreetlights.

Thepoojaroomalwaysfaceseast.

Womenalsofaceeastwhilecookinginthekitchenwhichisusually
separatedfromthemainportionofthehouse.

Thefrontandreardoorsofthehousearealignedinastraightline.

Storagespaceisatpremiumforboth,householdgoodsand
livelihoodrelatedarticlesandamongthem,storageoffirewoodand
waterisofgreatimportance.

Somefamilieshavepoultryandgoats.

Attachedtoiletsarerare,butthereisanincreasingdemandforthem
especiallyfromwomen.

Althoughthecommunitywouldlikeindividualhouses,theyasserted
thattheirsociallifeunfoldsonthestreetsandpathwaysinthe
village.

Whilethevillagerswantedallstreetstobenavigablebymotorized
transport,threestreetsinthenewlayouthadtobeextrawideto
accommodateprocessionsassociatedwiththevillagefestivals.

48
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

Annexure4
Tomoveornottomove

49
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

Annexure5
Layouts
NewLocation,InsituConstruction,Repairs

50
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

Annexure5.1
CihhangudiNewsitelayout

51
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

Annexure5.2
CihhangudiNewsitelayout

52
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

Annexure5.3
PuthupalayamandKaranStreetLayout

53
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

Annexure5.4
MeenavarColonyLayout

54
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

Annexure5.5
TharanganbadiNewSiteLayout

55
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

Annexure6
DrainagemapofTharanganbadi

56
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

ModelHousesSummary
Annexure7

57
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

Annexure8
Drawingsofvarioushouseoptions

58
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

59
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

60
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

61
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

62
 SIFFS POST TSUNAMI HABITAT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT

63
REBUILDING HABITATS : PROCESS DOCUMENT

Annexure9
SIFFSReconstructionProjectMonitoringProcessFlowChart

SIFFS Reconstruction Project Monitoring Process Flow Chart

SIFFSBoardof ProjectSteering
Directors
Committee

PMC(SIFFS)/ Project
External
Consultants/Experts
Manager

District Asst.ProjectManager VillagePanchayat

Administration (MonitoringandGen.Admn) &Beneficiaries

Manager Manager Manager Project Project Manager Manager

Strore Finance Engineer Architect Social Vehicles
Purchase Team &Eqpts

Accountant Cluster Drivers&

Store Site
/Cashier Machine
Keepers Engineer Volunteers Operators

Site
Supervisor

64