Department of Architecture and Regional Planning, IIT Kharagpur

VISHESH GUPTA | 10AR10050

FIELD

OBSERVATION

REPORT STUDY AND ANALYSIS OF A SLUM IN BANGALORE

Contents DIFFICULTY OF DEFINITION .................................................................................................................................. 3

DIFFICULTY OF APPROACH .................................................................................................................................. 4

HOUSING TYPOLOGY OF VISITED SLUMS ................................................................................................................ 4

THE SLUM IN QUESTION ..................................................................................................................................... 9

LIFESTYLE, CONDITIONS ET CETERA ..................................................................................................................... 10

EFFORTS BY NGOS AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS ................................................................................................. 11

IMPORTANCE OF ATTITUDINAL AND BEHAVIORAL CHANGE ..................................................................................... 11

DISCOVERING THE PROBLEM ............................................................................................................................. 12

DESIGNING A PROTOTYPE ................................................................................................................................. 14

DEVELOPABLE SYSTEMS .................................................................................................................................... 15

REFERENCES AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ 20

Annexures(I,II,III) ......................................................................................................................................... 21

DIFFICULTY OF DEFINITION

The Census of India defines a slum as “a compact area having a population of at least 300 or about 60-70

households of poorly built congested tenements, in unhygienic environment usually with inadequate

infrastructure and lacking in proper sanitary and drinking water facilities.”

However, the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, following the definition adopted by the

National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO), considers as a slum “a compact settlement with a

collection of poorly built tenements mostly of a temporary nature, crowded together usually with

inadequate sanitary and drinking water facilities in unhygienic conditions”

It is, therefore, not surprising to note the following difference in data on account of the differences in

the definitions followed and minimum qualifying size, and other differences in enumeration techniques.

Data source: Slum types and adaptation strategies: Identifying policy relevant differences in Bangalore- Anirudh Krishna, M.S.

Sriram, Purnima Prakash

Slums tend to sprawl over time, thus stretching their original boundaries which were unrecorded.

Simultaneous dismantling and relocation is common. Hence the locating the slums on a map is largely a

product of guesswork. This also reduces the possibility of us confirming the development in slums.

Because re-surveys in a constantly changing atmosphere becomes redundant; thus making it hard to

ascertain the impact of government policies and NGO initiatives.

My analysis of the slums in Bangalore is mostly done from a perspective of redesigning the basic

dwelling unit to solve some of the major problems solved by the dwellers. Nupur and I volunteered on

the weekends with SELCO urban development labs and worked with Noorain, an architect by profession

visiting the community, asking problems, and brainstorming on how to solve them.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2009 estimate of NSSO and Ministry of Housing

and Urban Poverty Alleviation

2011 Census figure

Urban population of Karnataka not living in slums

Urban population of Karnatak living in slums

DIFFICULTY OF APPROACH

Approaching any slum for a field observation does not seem to be a difficult task. But a firsthand

experience made me realize that it is imperative to not be an observer1, but a part of the community to

truly understand the problems they face. There exists an inherent suspicion of us being ‘outsiders’/

officials. These households do not have land titles or identity papers. They fear the wrath of the

landlord. Outside influence instills fear in them. Language barrier was partly a problem. It was better

that we had some of the local language speaking SELCO people with us; who could direct us to Hindi

speaking dwellers. It is obvious, perhaps, that one should go as simply dressed as possible, with minimal

accessories. Bags, notepads etc. should be avoided, if possible. It is my own personal opinion, that

photography should be restricted to a minimum- since I felt their discomfort when we were clicking. The

architect, Noorain who accompanied us on our visit to Marathalli site, keeps visiting often. She knows

the people there, and hence it was relatively easier for them to relate to us.

With the setting of Integrated Energy Centers, and SELCO gradually becoming a household name for

them; they develop a positive image for it. They begin to think of SELCO people as helpers and open up

more than they would to any stranger who tries to interact with them on honest grounds of helping

them. Even putting an IEC in place is not that easy. In a lecture of Dr. Harish Hande that I attended in

Mumbai (December 2013) he told us of the hindrances relating to constructing an IEC, Architecture

becomes important. The IEC cannot have a well built structure, for then again they get alienated from it.

It needs to be similar to that of the community dwellings, tarpaulin cladding/ corrugate sheet roof;

cheap plastering etc. Similarly, in the banjara community, SELCO went to an extent of starting an IEC on

wheels!

Image Source: Small scale sustainable infrastructure development fund website

Such extent of behavioral understanding is essential for change. Annexure II gives details of the IEC in

Tubrahalli community, and how its use of bamboo and wood framework with corrugated sheet walls is

relatable to the dwellers.

HOUSING TYPOLOGY OF VISITED SLUMS

1 I would like to share a personal instance; As I took out my diary to sketch and to write down whatever they were telling us, Noorain was quick enough to tell me that I should not. This is because it creates an impression of something official, a ‘government’ survey etc. and then they stop sharing their real scenarios and problems. It is important to talk; not to write.

We can classify the slums in Bangalore (or anywhere, for that matter) into three broad categories, based

on the housing typologies.

1. Category 1 - Nomadic tent settlements2

Overview- Commonly known as the banjara community, the professions in which they are involved

are mostly hand crafted, lost traditions (for example- making drums). They reside in tents that are

supported by wooden logs, the fabric of the tent varying from flex, to cloth to tarpaulin sheets.

There is no provision for a door as such.

Observed location- Near Bayappanhalli metro station, towards the bus stand.

Conditions- Abject poverty, with unhygienic conditions; since they are always on the move, there

are no toilets. Cooking was done in an open central area that was surrounded by the tents. No

demarcated spaces within the dwelling unit could be seen.

Problems- The structures were temporary and easily subject to upheaval by storms in Bangalore.

Problems due to stray animals were also noted.

2. Category 2 - Ephemeral blue polygon settlements

Overview- Two types of settlements were visited. The structures are discussed under the next

heading. Daily wage laborers and house maids are the common professions. There structures are

more permanent than the previous category, but uninhabitable from a standard architectural point

of view nonetheless. Framework is created by bamboo/other wood and layering of tarpaulin sheet is

done for the roof. The walls are simply standing planks. Doors (wooden planks) are hinged onto

other planks, and hence a door is part of the unit.

Observed location- Tubrahalli + Marathalli

Conditions- A separate toilet unit does exist, but it is simply a temporary structure with a pit hole

and tarpaulin sheets as curtains. Children go to a school nearby, but mostly drop out. The relatively

larger homes do have a demarcation between sleeping and eating space, but the smaller ones don’t.

The SELCO center3 hosts a television unit operated by a school boy, and an NGO runs a kindergarten

in the center.

Problems- Major problems include the smoke from the chulhas, lack of ventilation, no natural light,

and entry of rodents and mosquitoes. Other minor problems include consistent rebuilding of the

structures, lack of storage space, and space organization.

3. Category 3 - Unorganized interspersed permanent settlements

Overview- These slums are interspersed within the developed areas of the city, and have proper

walls to their unit, but roofs are of corrugated metal, indoor spaces are unorganized, and there is no

2 My enquiries with this community were not that extensive and hence the information is recorded as seen. Discrepancies should be ignored, as the details mentioned come off merely as a presumption derived from my personal visual observation and perception of discussions with Noorain. 3 The structure, designed by Noorain, was typically low cost and stable. It served as a preliminary model of how we were to redesign the slum habitation unit. Annexure II details out the structure of the SELCO center.

proper ventilation. Most common occupations, that I observed, were those of laundry,

scrap/garbage collectors ,carpenters, security guards etc.

Observed location- 80 feet road, Kodihalli, Bangalore

Conditions- They have most of the facilities including toilets, television sets, basic furnishing, storage

spaces etc. The only concern remains is of the materials used for construction, and lack of

organization, both, in internal spaces as well as the way they are located in various niches of the

city.

CATEGORY 2 SETTLEMENT TYPOLOGIES

Type A. Pitched roof structures B. Vault roof structures

Location Tubrahalli Marathalli

Number 150-200 80-100

Structure Straight wooden logs supported to create triangular roof framework. Inner space heights at edges as low as 2’.

Slit bamboo pieces bent to form arched roof profiles. Supported by horizontal straight members.

Image

Image source: SELCO foundationblog

(Left) Category 3- Narrow lanes with

undefined entry spaces for individual

units

(Below) Category 3- Small windows

allowing minimal light entry and

ventilation.

(Below) Category 3- Corrugated sheets as roofs, built within the

concrete walls.

(Bottom right) Category 3- Disorganized spaces amongst buildings.

Category 2 - Ephemeral blue polygon

settlements; Pitched and vault roof.

(Top left, middle) Layering on tarpaulin sheets

done to make the surfaces of the unit.

(Right) open toilet, curtained by tarp sheet.

(Bottom left) Tarpaulin sheet acting as a

curtain door; plywood doors hinged onto

other plywood supports.

THE SLUM IN QUESTION- CATEGORY 2; TYPE B Vault roof ephemeral blue polygon settlement, Marathalli

A few kilometers off Marathalli, this community has the housing unit framework/structure similar to

that of a vault. It is made by slitting bamboo pieces and bending them, tying them down to a strong

foundation on the ground and supported by horizontal members (which are again bamboo pieces). Over

this framework, numerous layers of tarpaulin sheets are put down as the roof. This roof extends down

to the ground as the side walls. Thus the use of plywood and corrugated sheets is restricted only to the

front and the back. There are doors in some houses, which are fixed through hinges onto the plywood

walls. Following is the framework we observed when on sit, while a house was being dismantled then

reconstructed (since the rains were about to begin)

The cooking is done inside, and the smoke from the chulha does not go outside, creating a

claustrophobic space inside the unit. The tarpaulin sheet roofs can be seen covered in black soot. A few

basic reasons why introducing a simple hole( with/without mesh) doesn’t work are:

1. Re-use value of tarpaulin sheets- They cannot cut holes that would allow ventilation/natural

light in the tarpaulin sheet that serves as the roof and two walls. This is because the re-use value

decreases. Re-aligning layers of sheets with holes while re constructing the unit, and/or selling a

non usable tarpaulin sheet to scrap becomes difficult.

2. Mosquitoes/Rodent problem- Already quite disturbed by this problem, they cannot allow

further entry for the sake of removing smoke which they are used to by now.

More problems and possible solutions for this community have been discussed further.

LIFESTYLE, CONDITIONS ET CETERA

Following are few observations about their lifestyles, rents, and what problems they face on the

monetary, social and functional level.

1. Reconstructing the unit

Bangalore rains are pretty random, so every six months or so, they have to re-make the unit. It is

usually done through re-using materials from the previous unit, and discarding ones that are not

usable at all. Since layering is done for the surfaces, the tarpaulin sheets and plywood planks are

re-used many times. It is only the supports and structure that is re-anchored for stability.

2. Household income

Women usually work as house maids in morning and evening shifts. Men work as daily wage

laborers getting them a daily income of about Rs. 150. Both the husband and wife are out most

of the day, thus taking care of children is left to children themselves.

3. Children

Each family has, on an average, at least three children. Only a minor percentage of them go to

the government school nearby/ or the GMR-VF school. Most of them drop out after standard X

or XII. Since both parents work during the day, non school going children are all by themselves,

and hence have to be taken care of children who can go to school, but have no other option but

to baby sit them.

4. Land and permanence of structures

The land on which the slum exists is a private property in dispute. The owner of the land does

not allow them to build permanent structures, and hence they have to manage it out in the

slums. There exists a monthly rent of 250 rupees per house which the land owner collects. The

government cannot also rehabilitate the slum dwellers on the land because it is a private

property.

5. Materials and sources

The materials that are used are mainly plywood, tarpaulin sheets, concrete blocks, corrugated

sheets, gunny sacks etc. They are mainly procured from nearby dumps and collected.

Corrugated metal sheets are mainly stolen from construction site boundaries (where the men

work as daily wage laborers). It takes around 2000 to 3000 rupees to make one dwelling unit,

which lasts for a year to a year and a half.

6. Space organization/Privacy

Every unit had some sort of a seating outside, and there was no clear distinction of public, semi

private and private space. Cooking areas however, were preferred to be private, as they did not

want what is being cooked to be publicly known.

7. Lighting

Prior to introduction of lights by SELCO, these families relied on cheap, easily breakable lights,

dangerous and flammable kerosene lamps, or simple darkness. However, the situation now is

much better with SELCO bulbs.

EFFORTS BY NGOS AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS

GMR’s CSR wing runs a temporary school here that aims to bring children on par with the Government

school system.

SELCO has developed a brilliant model for solar-powering each home with light. Each home has a

battery operated 3 Watt bulb that hangs from the roof of the dwelling unit, from the bamboo support at

top. These batteries are given to the IEC in the day time; wherein they get charged (by the solar panels

installed atop the shop). [See Annexure II for details on another SELCO center in Tubrahalli community]

This is a self sustainable model, which

SELCO developed in this community.

The shopkeeper rents out a little less

than 100 SELCO solar powered

batteries to the dwellers. The families

who rent out the batteries pay seven

rupees to have them fully recharged.

The best part is, that SELCO

encourages entrepreneurship by

empowering the shopkeeper. Having

started with a capacity of only 40

batteries, he has also ventured into

mobile phone charging and

refrigeration.

IMPORTANCE OF ATTITUDINAL AND BEHAVIORAL CHANGE

The slum dwellers did not consider their ‘houses’ as their ‘homes’. Most of them are immigrants from

various regions, and they believe that their homes are at the place where they came from. Their mindset

is wired in a way that this is just a temporary place to say, with most of them being first or second

generation dwellers having arrived only to settle their village debts. Hence, natural light, ventilation,

spaces for storage, furnishing are the least of their concerns; especially when it demands spending more

than they have to. They have come to save money, and spending it on their temporary habitable homes

is a bad idea for them. Here arrives the need to convince them of the importance of spending on bare

necessities, and the harmful effects of not doing the same.

Also, it is important that after something better is designed and proposed, prototyped and

implemented, it is inculcated into their daily use and behavioral change is accompanied. This can

happen by post occupancy visits and constant monitoring. If behavioral change is not accompanied with

change in design, the solutions become redundant.

DISCOVERING THE PROBLEM

Our first challenge was to discover the design problem i.e. what was the major problem the slum

housing faced (in settlement 1) and how we can introduce minor changes to make it a better place for

living. Upon visiting and questioning, the core problem was found out to be the living conditions in

which they were staying.

Looking at all of this, our approach was to be holistic in nature. We could not have missed out on other

factors, while we were giving priority to this one. Other domains included,

1. Living space

2. Washing space

3. Cooling space/Storage

4. Water storage

5. Sanitation

Before beginning with the design, we jotted down what we knew and what we didn’t and that helped us

understand whom all could we talk to for gathering more information. We needed to talk to the slum

dwellers, other NGOs who might have redesigned the same, government polices to improve/change the

same, and inquire about various materials in the market that we could use.

Core problem? Living conditions

Symptoms

Diseases spread by rodents and mosquitoes

Children spend the entire day out of the

house.

Breathing problems in infants

Causes

No proper measure to keep them out

No natural lighting

No ventilation. Smoke from 'chulhas'

stays inside

The current cost as we came to know after asking, reached a maximum of 3000 Rs. We were looking at

an option that could go up to 5000 Rs. but not beyond that. The settlement currently in question is

settlement type B; arched roof. Other problems as mentioned above were quite profound. Although

they seemed to have no problem with the smoke, and even after mentioning that we can help release it,

they seemed uninterested.

The question of behavioral change became important, and that could have only been challenged once a

prototype was developed and occupancy/reactions were evaluated. Once the tangibility and result of an

output is presented to the community, a response is bound to come from their side because it implies

that our actions are not only on paper but take the shape of something useful for them as well.

What we knowWhat we don't

know

Their perspective+Usage patterns

Materials+Sources

Government policies

Other construction techniques+models

Rodent+Mosquito problem

Lack of ventilation+ natural light

Weather proof structure

Maximum cost 5000 Rs.

DESIGNING A PROTOTYPE

1. Individual brainstorming

Attached in Annexure I are some of the options I designed before the weekly meeting. They

range from initially demarcating spaces (living, washing etc.) to changing the structure already in

existence, to a complete revamp of the same inspired from internet references.

2. Material exploration

More material options and their feasibility were discussed. Following figure enlists all in a

comprehensive fashion.

3. Developable systems

Most of the systems were inspired from daily objects and product designs. Simplicity becomes

necessary because the prototype was to be self sustainable, that is, in the future, the slum

dwellers must be able to procure the materials and make it for themselves, without the help of

SELCO; that self-sufficiency, non dependency is in itself the SELCO model.

Each of these systems’ feasibility with each of the materials was seen and options were chalked

out. Then ten systems, their inspirations, and workability are discussed on the next page.

4. Tasks at hand

After the brainstorming sessions and the community visits, we made a presentation physical

model of the prototype we finalized upon. But to ensure we left no stone unturned, we were to

follow up on the connections/joining, material availability that would enable other discussed

prototypes to be further developed on. Because of weekly workload and office on Saturdays, we

couldn’t follow up the outcome in its entirety; but it was indeed a coveted learning experience

for us.

Ind

ivid

ual

bra

inst

orm

ing •Water bottles/plastic

•Gunny bags

•Bamboo

•Corrugated metal

•Cardboard boxes

•Plywood

Co

llect

ive

bra

inst

orm

ing •Paper rolls, connections

through bottles, wires

•Cartons

•Metal cans

•Thermocol packaging

•Flex

•Sawdust

•Military mesh

DEVELOPABLE SYSTEMS

1. XYZ module

The framework was named X-Y-Z because of the corner members that act like a plug-in module

in each of the direction, X-Y-Z.

As can be seen, we can plug in the vertical and horizontal members

that act as the support structure for the entire prototype into this

corner member. The advantage in this method is that the

framework of the dwelling becomes stable and sturdy. This makes

it weather proof. Also, since we were looking at

portable/temporary structures, the assembly and dismantling

becomes easy when we look at modules. However, when looking

at metal corners, the cost escalates, hence reducing the feasibility.

The walls and surfaces are proposed to be

the same that are used now, that is

plywood and/or corrugated metal sheets.

The material exploration for the corners

and supporting members are enlisted

below.

2. Auto rickshaw prototype

This framework was inspired by the auto rickshaw roof, basically involving a convertible

(stretchable) system wherein there exists a framework and the roof continues from base, and is

tied to one end.

The only possible

materials for this

were bamboo and

Corners Members

Metal Rope

PVC pipes Metal

Tying with rope Bamboo

metal (for the framework) and any fabric or tarpaulin sheet (that they already used) as the

convertible roof.

3. Truck- tying prototype

As can be seen in the figure above, this prototype followed the model of tying load in trucks. Each

bay has a hook through which the top layer is tied down. This proves to be a very innovative method

that banks on its simplicity. The ease of material procuring and assembly is a great advantage in this

model.

For the slum dwelling unit to be prototyped in a similar fashion, we would need bays of upright and

firm supports- which can be provided through (in order of priority) cheap/recycled fiberboard,

plywood, bamboo, corrugated sheets, masonry walls.

However, unless tested, the stability of the model is dubious. Since we had a deadline and a biased

agenda in mind (to digress minimally from the initial existing model), we did not further develop on

this model; but if further possibilities relating to this are worked out, prototyped and tested, this

could serve to give an interesting and useful outcome. More such feasible options, whose viability,

though questionable, is workable, have been discussed in detail in Annexure III.

4. Framelesss/Stretchable

Another idea suggested that

instead of having a frame

altogether, we make the

entire system a tensile one.

The front and the back walls,

were to be fixed (either

through foundation or by

tying them down), and in

between we could have a

stretched fabric/tarpaulin

sheet that is supported by an

array or taut ropes/wire

mesh.

5. Rope frame

Taut ropes would act as members and tied to vertical metal rod supports. This idea is basically an

extension of the rope/metal material combination being used in all other options above. Again, the

sturdiness quotient reduces, since only ropes are acting as the supporting members for the roof.

6. Curtain ring system

This is an extension of the auto rickshaw system. Similar to how a curtain operates, this allows a ring

to run freely on the support frame to create the wall with tarpaulin/flex sheet or fabric. This would

obviously need to be tied to the support once it pulled. There is no particular advantage of using this

vis-à-vis the auto rickshaw model, except for the ease of connection. Further following up on this

was to be continued after developing a prototype. This was however not given priority.

7. Truss system

This system had to be given a consideration, but was of no use without the task of material

exploration was completed. Complexity and amount of materials used made it the least priority

option, unless we could find a cheap material and simple connection methods.

Surfaces Roof Roof Supporting members

Metal Tarpaulin sheet GI wire Military mesh

Plywood Flex sheet Rope Weaving ridge

Reco sheet Fabric? Bamboo Paper rolls

8. Mohe’s inset frames/repetitive

The core idea was that a modular system be built that could repeat itself, attaching to the previous one

to form a structure. The diagram below shows a conceptual idea, however not exactly depicting the one

we were able to achieve through our brainstorming.

However, cost became a major concern since the

modules would mostly be joined using metal

connections etc. and if we were building a module

in that cost, it was better If we concentrated on a

cheaper module idea or the entire unit as one

piece.

Like the xyz module; we realized that our thinking

should be on the lines of either modular

connections or cheaply constructible modules that

can self sustain in the slum economy.

During the time we discussed about this solution, the materials we jotted down came out as a surprise

to us, since they could have been used easily elsewhere, and were mostly made of re-used materials.

Following table enlists the materials.

Of these, using plastic bottle connections (with wires or anything else) became an imperative option to

be explored; considering the insulation as well as cheap availability; and re-use. Further research gave us

the following options, which are explained in detail in Annexure III.

1. Connecting bottle by bottle through a wire. Becomes a compressed member that is sturdy

enough to form the framework.

2. We use the plastic bottles as screw able units to make an entire roof for the single unit.

9. Geodesic dome/Modular

From the idea of a modular structure, and reducing the size of the modules, we came up with the

concept of a geodesic dome or a less complex structure using materials such as bamboo/wireframe.

However, provision of such modules and the sustainability of the model in the slums (teaching the

methods etc.) was a hindrance in its subsequent development.

Module surfaces Members

Tarpaulin Wire canvas

Sheet metal Flex sheet

Tarpaulin Plastic bottles with wire

Tarpaulin Paper rolls

TASKS AT HAND

In concordance with the discussion on the systems, we were still uninformed of various

materials and joining possibilities that could be used. Following are some of the problems we

faced, and a constant lookout for these is necessary for developing on some of the systems

enlisted above.

1. PVC/Metal corners for XYZ framework

2. Metal holder for bamboo

3. Paper roll joinery/ connections

4. Planks standing (frameless/stretchable)

5. Plastic bottle connection

6. Woven wall/Looped fabric wall

7. Bamboo mats/materials?

8. Size and shape of modules

9. Rope frame fixing possibility

FINAL OUTPUT

A prototype was made, approved and installed in the

community and a family was requested to stay in it

for a while and give constructive feedback.

Although the ventilation and natural lighting factor

(our initial concerns) did not come out to be as what

one should have expected, the head room height,

and space availability was indeed something the

dwellers liked.

This positive response from the community and

them looked forward to having their units being

constructed in a similar fashion, was indeed a

progress in the direction of our motive.

The auto rickshaw and the truck model have been

combined in this prototype, as one can see in the

accompanying diagram.4

4 Since we were not involved until the very end of the prototyping, the above information was provided to me by Noorain when I later asked her about the status of our efforts.

REFERENCES AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am extremely grateful to Noorain for the help and guidance, and for motivating me to pursue a cause

and work for the benefit of the society.

I am deeply obliged to Dr. Harish Hande, whom I met in ShARE world seminar held at Mumbai, for

directing me to and giving me the opportunity to interact with Hooda and Noorain. A word of thanks to

Nupur for being a constant source of inspiration.

I would also like to thank Department of Architecture and regional Planning, IIT Kharagpur for providing

me with an opportunity to compile my observations and efforts into an accessible document; which

would serve as an inspiration and as a reference point for anyone to take up a similar project of

improving the housing model in slum communities. I would be pleased if my report encourages others in

this direction.

Most of the images and information are given from a firsthand account. Some images and data of the

slum population in Bangalore have been taken up from a few websites and papers, respectively;

mentioned as follows.

References

Wesbites:

http://www.selcofoundation.org/

http://s3idf.org/

Papers:

Slum types and adaptation strategies: Identifying policy relevant differences in Bangalore- Anirudh

Krishna, M.S. Sriram, Purnima Prakash

Annexure I Individual brainstorming

Annexure II SELCO center at Tubrahalli community

Annexure III Other unexplored feasible systems

(Above) Screw able plastic water bottles onto roofs to create thermally insulated recycled shelter.

(Below) Easily portable shelter home, but tent like structure reduces association of a ‘home’