How to avoid buying a house in a building that will collapse

As we digest the death of 41+ people including 11 children due to a building collapse in Mumbra, several questions arise.  Why did the building collapse? Who is responsible? What should I do to avoid a similar fate?  Let us talk about the last question, because if you find answers to what you can do, take responsibility and question every decision the local authorities and the builder will fall in line. 

So, what is it that you can do to avoid a catastrophic collapse of the building you buy a home in- ask questions. Some things that you should consider when you are buying a house-

1.       Thoroughly factcheck the Builder from whom you are buying the property. Ideally, you want to buy from someone who has been around in business for atleast 10 years. Ask them of their prior constructions and go visit those complexes. 
2.       If the promoter and builder for a complex are different entities again follow point no. 1
3.       Personally visit the site where your dream home is being built. If you are new to the city ask around if the land is reclaimed land. Enquire prior usage of land. What structure was present on land prior to building your dream home makes a huge difference on the design of foundations for the building.  If the building is being built on marshy land, reclaimed land or soft soil ask the builder if he has adopted pile foundations. Ask the builder if he has used steel liner for the foundations. Ask for proof of having these in the ground. If he refuses, walk out. If 10 such people walk out the 11^th person will get proof without asking.
4.        Ask the builder who is the RCC Consultant for the complex. Go visit the RCC Consultant’s office. Ask him his prior projects. Go visit those projects.
5.        If you are taking a loan from the Bank ask what has the Bank done to ensure quality and safe construction.  The Bank expects you to take insurance for repayment in case of loss of your life. What happens when the building collapses?
6.       Even if you are a second buyer if the complex is less than 5 years old do your research. 

As a consumer when you demand you get answers otherwise you continue to be in the dark. Educate yourself. 

1. 
   

Cost differences and impact of inflation

Cost differences between 2000-2004 and 2010-2012 for performing foundation analysis for structures in India. The figures speak for themselves about current inflation. Typically the price of any commodity is reduced with larger demand however niche a product may be. Even though construction industry growth has been phenomenal in the last few years in India inability to control inflation by the current government is taking its toll on small size company like mine.

Low income housing and quality

As a building forensic analyst and repair specialist I have had the opportunity to visited cluster of buildings built in the last three decades in the heart of Mumbai. The oldest cluster of buildings is 30 years old while the youngest is only 6 years old. It is sad state of affairs if a building needs extensive repairs within its first 10 years of service-life. 

These structures are in such sorry state and need extensive repairs. Some of the older structures are unsafe to live and need to be evacuated as soon as possible. One of the structures was a fire station building, which also housed some firemen families on upper storeys of the building. These buildings are a part of housing scheme provided by the local government for families of men serving in the police force and fire brigade.  As I surveyed these buildings I also spoke to its occupants.  Residents had numerous complaints about the status of the building, some of which were self-evidentiary while others had to be pointed out.  Plumbing leakages through kitchen walls, chunks of concrete falling off slabs, corroding steel exposed from slabs and columns. One of the worst things to hear was about constant water dripping from upper storey bathrooms in to those living below effectively nullifying the purpose of having a bath for those living below. Families of serving officials living in such squalor was heart wrenching. None of us can live in such conditions and to expect people to live in such conditions and also do their duty protecting you is a crime. 

The agency in charge of maintenance claims that there aren’t sufficient funds to do the maintenance. Closer inspection of premises reveals to me that buildings are in dilapidated conditions due to low quality control and usage of cheap construction designs and practices. I am told since the housing was meant for lower rung officers and havaldars (read low income) low cost was maintained. Does low costing also mean low quality? Not necessarily. This is not just about corruption and reducing cost but also about how we perceive living standards for different sections of society. If the fire brigade does not turn up on time we are quick to call on their lacksidal attitude. Yesterday, as I left the premises there wasn’t much joy of having an assignment on my hands but a series of thoughts on how our perceptions of things based on economic class structure.

 

Not all flyash is bad

Approximately 170 million tonnes of fly ash was produced in 2010 in India from the combustion of coal of which @ 35% is used for commercial purpose whereas in the United States about 131 million tons of fly ash are produced annually and 43 % is used for commercial purpose. The rest of the flyash that is not recycled is currently disposed off in landfills, requiring large tracts of land and water. In India currently 65,000 acres of land occupied by ash ponds where as in the US that number is around 28,000 acres-ft of land. Ponding or impoundments of flyash is termed as unbenificated use of flyash or uncapsulated flyash. There are no strict regulations on usage of flyash or its ponding in USA or India. 

Currently, in the US beneficial use of fly ash is excluded from federal regulation under EPA’s May 2000 regulatory determination that the Bevill amendment applies to such uses. Tomorrow a vote is set in US of House of Representatives on H.R. 2273, the coal Residual Reuse and Management Act. The EPA is proposing to regulate usage of all fly ash 

“EPA wants to ensure the safe management of coal ash that is disposed in surface impoundments and landfills. Without proper protections, the contaminants in coal can leach into groundwater and often migrate to drinking water sources, posing significant health public concerns. 

Structural stability concerns associated with fly ash impoundments came to national attention in 2008 when an impoundment holding disposed ash waste generated by the Tennessee Valley Authority broke open, creating a massive spill in Kingston, TN, that covered millions of cubic yards of land and river, displacing residents, requiring hundreds of millions of dollars in cleanup costs and damaging the environment.

EPA believes that additional fly ash specificfederal regulations are necessary to protect human health and theenvironment.  This is the first time national rules have been issuedspecifically to manage coal ash disposal.”

Currently, fly ash is considered a non-hazardous, solid waste material and thus its disposal and beneficial use is left up to individual states in US. However, EPA has decided that such a classification is no longer sufficient and in 2009 decided to move forward with regulating fly ash as a hazardous waste.

Doing so could prove to be disastrous and we would be going backwards in terms of research and education carried out on using flyash as a resource in the building industry. 
Flyash generated by the coal power plants is used worldwide as an additive in concrete and cement based infrastructure products. Typically it is used in the encapsulated form i.e. flyash is bound in to products such as wall board, roofing products, concrete, cement mortar blocks or bricks, in soils for soil stabilization. Environmental benefits from these types of uses include greenhouse gas reduction, energy conservation, reduction in land disposal, and reduction in the need to mine/process virgin materials.

The most widely recognized beneficial application of flyash is its use as a partial substitute for portland cement in the manufacture of concrete.  The use of flyash increases the durability of concrete and the process generates fewer greenhouse gas emissions.  For each ton of fly ash that is substituted for portland cement, approximately one ton of greenhouse emissions are avoided. 

Assessments of the rule’s effect on the industry have suggested possibly higher priced fly ash, restricting or ending the use of fly ash in concrete in certain municipalities and types of projects, less durability concrete, lost jobs, and a greater likelihood of insurance and litigation lawsuits.

While fly ash, depending on the coal source, may contain various heavy metals, the amounts are "trace," which in analytical chemistry terms means the average concentration is less than 100 parts per million measured in atomic count, or less than 100 micrograms per gram. Heavy metal content in fly ash is comparable to soil (results of studies by the USGS, NIST, EPA, EPRI, and industry) and poses an infinitesimal risk to public health and the environment as evidenced by decades of safe use and sound scientific field study of this material. In addition, the ability of fly ash to "leach" or "leak out" toxic substances requires very specific soil and environmental conditions. Even when spilled in massive quantities as a result of a major disposal/ containment failure the impact in terms of toxicity has proven infinitesimal. Coal ash is not "toxic" nor is it "hazardous" by any sound scientific research methodology.

Interest groups focused on ending coal-fueled power have embarked on a national fear campaign intended to drive up the cost of coal as an energy source. They are targeting fly ash and pressuring the EPA through the threat of lawsuits and negative media/political pressure to enact expensive hazardous waste regulations. These groups gain large amounts of funding and support by promoting fear of coal ash and other CCPs. They have received extensive political interest and media coverage as a result the billion-gallon coal ash slurry spill in Kingston, Tenn., in December 2008.

Responding to EPA’s attempt to unnecessarily further regulate an important concrete ingredient, Representative David McKinley (R-1-WV) introduced H.R. 2273 which aims to pull back the reins on the rule by prohibiting the EPA from regulating fly ash as a hazardous waste, and instead establish minimum state disposal requirements.

Regulations to reduce the number of coal power plants are essential. But until we are able to truly develop sufficient alternative sources of energy that produce same quantum as those produced by coal power plants we will continue to depend on the later. Prudence would be in developing alternative non-hazardous uses of fly ash rather than bringing harsher rulings on its current status.

India can learn from the current debacle in US. The Indian Ministry of Environment and Forests advocates compulsoryusage of fly ash in all building projects within a 100km radius of coal power plant. But strict standards are not being laid down for ash ponding. Regulations particularly in fly ash ponding would benefit the cause of usage of ash as resource in building industry. This may reduce a risk for ash spills like the Tennessee Valley spill.

In order to develop a sustainable world a good marriage between resources, demand & regulations are necessary. Unnecessary regulation will not halt building of more coal power plants but may truly hurt the planet. I urge those in the US to send or call your representatives and ask them to vote in favor of HR 2273. 

Sustainability and Innovation

Amongst the naysayers of climate change there is a strong argument that regulation protecting environment retards development. Claims that regulations either advance or retard innovation and development are overly simplistic.  Value of development cannot be a simple intrinsic price but embodies many extrinsic parameters too.  Regulations do not necessarily always throttle the speed of development but in fact compels us to innovate. It propels better performance and longetivity of products and systems. A recent study discusses the story of five ideas that were spurred by regulations.  Everyday products that have made our lives far more sustainable than a few decades ago such as the incandescent light bulb or energy efficient appliances are examples of direct results of stricter regulations being applied for use of said product in itself. But there are many regulations that were applied to one set of industry and the benefits of the regulations have been reaped by another industry.  This is true more so for the construction industry and infrastructure systems.

Prior to the regulations laid down on coal industry, ash particulates formed from burning coal were dispersed into the environment causing large amount of air pollution.  Similarly, silica fume a by product of reducing high-purity quartz with coal or coke and wood chips in an electric arc furnace during the production of silicon metal or ferrosilicon alloys, was also discharged into the environment before stricter laws were put in to place in 1970s . Environmental regulations forced the power industry to develop high performance bag filters to collect fly ash or silica fume rather than discharging it into air.  The next question was utilization of these collected by-products. Similarity of chemical composition of fly ash or silica fume with cement has lead to its extensive use in the construction industry.  Usage of fly ash, silica fume or slag (from steel industry) in cement as partial replacement enhances the strength, quality and long-term performance of the structure.  It’s a win-win situation for both the stakeholders as well as the producers. Currently, 5 billion tonnes of concrete is produced worldwide of which nearly 40 % is made using industrial by-products as partial cement replacement additives.  

The production of Portland cement is an extremely resource and energy intensive process where every tonne of cement requires about 1.5 tonnes of raw materials. In addition, each tonne of cement produced releases approximately one tonne of carbon dioxide (CO₂) into the environment. Thus the production of Portland cement is a significant contributor to atmospheric pollution and the green house effect.  Addition of fly ash or silicafume as partial replacement to Portland cement helps in reducing usage of extensive raw materials as well CO₂ emissions. Each tonne of cement replaced by fly ash reduces the CO₂ emissions by approximately one tonne.  Thus, regularizing two industries, which did not have any direct connection with the construction industry, has lead to innovations that have benefitted stakeholders as well as users worldwide.  The promise of innovation should not be viewed as a requirement to justify necessary rules to protect workers, the public and the environment. However, the fact that it often happens is something to keep in mind when industry repeats its yelling about the burden of regulation. 

Look beyond the glossy advertisements of real estate

Currently real estate prices have escalated to a price range well beyond the reach of common man.  The real estate industry has now become a predominantly high price to the customer and high-margin development for the builder.  Most of the time buyers do not get their value’s worth in terms of quality and design of the building.

With festive season on us most have one more reason to buy or book an under construction home for the family. Advertisements with glossy pictures of aesthetically beautiful buildings, lush green gardens and jogging tracks are printed in leading newspapers to lure the buyer to the booking office. Builders offer sparkling bathroom fittings, amenities like swimming pool and gym, throw in discounts for festivals and early bird offers.

What the builders don’t tell you are the type of materials being used in construction, the codes adopted for building design, the strength of concrete or type of concrete.  Much of northern India and western regions fall under medium to high probability earthquake zone but there are very few builders who design buildings taking into account the effects of an earthquake.  There is every likelihood that within two to three years of completion of constructing the building the plaster may start to peel off or water starts leaking in the bathroom or from terraces in to the top floor slabs.  Continuous usage of building will require maintenance but given high initial costs we as consumers want our property to function without much maintenance.  Unfortunately builders get away from providing a guarantee that such damages will not occur because municipal bye-laws do not require them to do so.  The real estate industry is largely unregulated despite being the largest contributor to national growth. The government requirements for authorizing a residential or commercial building are very minimal and poor at best. 

How long a building will function safely with bare minimum maintenance schedules is dependent upon quality of materials used, quality control and quality assurance adopted at site. Superior quality finishes and aesthetically pleasing structure does not always result in good quality construction. Quality assurance from builder can be relied upon either based on past 20 + years of performance of his buildings or by assessing a paper trail maintained during construction site.  Most builders are fly-by-night operators and don’t necessarily maintain a paper trail to track back quality assurance on site. In the absence of any real estate regulatory authority or an appropriate consumer redressal forum it is essential that the buyer is well-informed about expected requirements from the builder.

As an informed buyer it is necessary to ask for information about construction materials, techniques and time span from the builder.  Most buildings in and around Mumbai these days have 8 or more storeys.  From a quality standpoint for high-rise buildings it is necessary to use ready mix concrete (RMC) technology for concreting.  RMC involves mixing of concrete under controlled conditions at a ready-mix plant and transporting it to the building site in a truck .  Such plants are available in India but very few builders make use of this technology. RMC insures that quality and desired strength of concrete are consistently maintained.  RMC can help in reducing weak zones or empty air pockets within the concrete thereby reducing leakage issues to a large extent.  Many new buildings experience leakages from terrace slab during monsoon within about 2-3 years of construction.  Typically, well done water proofing on the terrace should last a minimum of 7-10 years. Ask the builder to provide five years written guarantee for it.

While buying directly from the builder request for an authorized structural plan of the building.  An authorized plan should have a seal from the local municipal authorities. Many a times builders accept booking amounts for a certain type of plan and sometimes even build a few floors before going back to drawing board and adding a few more floors to the building.  The builder does not necessarily go back and increase the strength of foundation safety levels similar to prior design. This means that the building is now standing precariously on minimal design and safety requirements.  Such a building can easily fail even due to minor damage. It is essential to have some written contract with the builder which will restrict any changes to the plan after you have booked the flat for a given approved plan.

All these factors and a few more are important behind the glossy advertisement that need to be looked into before buying real estate.  Look before your leap in to the quagmire of buying real estate. 

(An edited version of this post appeared in mid-day)