A Suggestion On How To Prevent The Next Building Collapse

[kigash]

Please read then let us discuss. I am thinking of sending this to the
Town Clerk.

Yet another building has collapsed 16 people are dead and no one seems
to have bat an eyelid. On the Nation newspaper webpage carrying the
story, the comments are full of pessimistic people all saying nothing
will happen to those responsible. Why not make a difference by putting
in place today policies that would prevent another tragedy.

Let us start by asking some basic questions. Why did the building
collapse? From pictures and footage that I have seen of the disaster
site, poor material (concrete mix did not look right) and insufficient
reinforcement must have contributed to the collapse. This means there
are two possible causes for this:

a) Poor workmanship with the contractor using inferior material either
out of ignorance or knowingly to save money. The contractor is in
hiding and we will know more once he surrenders himself if he is not
on his way to India by now. He might have also done so under
instruction from the client.

b) Improper specification by the professional if there was one. I
noticed the Nation has been very careful to call the individual
responsible for the design a "designer" and not an architect.

This means that we are faced with two problems, quacks posing as
professionals and poor workmanship by the builders. How can these
problems be solved?

Clearly the municipal councils are ill equipped to inspect what they
have approved. What the NCC approves is also questionable. It is not
uncommon for the NCC to stamp superseded drawings which they had
earlier rejected. The NCC has tried to "manoeuvre" themselves out of
any liability by putting in a clause in the approval forms that the
architect is liable for building collapse. It is well and ok if the
person signing is an architect in the first place but what if he is a
poser?

The proposed radical solution would be:

1) Clearly most people are reluctant to use professionals to build
their houses due to the perceived expensive consultancy charges. Why
then not make a provision for people to be able to use registered
technicians to submit houses for approval that have a floor area not
larger than 180 square meters. This should also not be for more than 2
units on a piece of land. After the first approval, there should be a
minimum 5 year period before another approval for the same property is
given after occupation. Technicians would not be allowed to submit any
estates for approval. This policy I believe would cover most rural
areas and would be very welcome there but what it would do is put a
checks and balance to rapidly expanding areas like Mlolongo, Embakasi
or Kiambu Town.

2) Tanzania has this system where they use architecture students as
inspectors on construction sites. I doubt if that would be a viable
option here in Kenya due to the high probability of bribery taking
place. The best option for capitalistic thinking Kenya is to have
private companies deal with approvals. These would be about 5 in
number for Nairobi. Their fees would be paid by the City Council in
proportion to the number of approvals they process. They would have to
be registered architectural firms and would take full responsibility
for all that they approve. The requirements for the approval would
have to go up with emphasis on Life, Health and Safety issues like
fire escapes, distances from the boundary, earthquake prone areas etc.
For example, is the wall strong enough to support a fireman's ladder
which would lean against it? The firms would also have to go through
all the details and shop drawings done by the consultants, approve a
set of drawings and use a computerised system to archive a PDF of the
same. This would also mean that the requirements for approval would
have to be standardised into a check list available to everyone and
applicable to every approval request.

The City Council Planning workers would then transition to setting
rules and regulations on Zoning and City Planning. They would once a
year audit the firms that are approving drawings. If a company is
found to be violating any laws or By-laws, they loose their license to
operate as a business, the architect looses his licence. If a building
collapses, the firm and its proprietors can get sued and have to prove
the construction was in violation of the approval and can be called to
court as witnesses.

I hope this idea will be put to thought and acted upon speedily as it
is an issue that the public can easily be won over to at such a time
of tragedy.

Also note that this idea will be null and void once the new Housing
Bill is passed. The Housing professionals will be the ones running the
approval committees apart from registering everyone involved in the
building industry from real estate agents to painters.