ARCHITECT - THE SOLID GOODNESS OF NEWARI ARCHITECTURE Kathmandu,

THESE TRADITIONAL HOUSES WERE ENERGY EFFICIENT.

THE OCCUPANTS FELT COMFORTABLE INSIDE THE DWELLING

Sushmita Shrestha, lecturer at Khwopa Engineering College, is a young and dynamic architect. She is also completing her Masters in Sci- ence in Urban Design and Con- servation at the same college and has graduated from Purbanchal University.
The traditional Newari archi- tecture of the Kathmandu Valley that developed and flourished particularly during the Malla pe- riod (13th -18th century) basical- ly focuses on community and is based on socio-religious frame- work. It is unique and authentic in many ways. First, the dwelling unit considered as a sacred terri- tory of the family had different scales of the cosmos represented by different levels of the building: the upper floor for food prepara- tion and eating, worshiping area and performing major rituals whereas the ground floor as a zone of transition for either busi- ness purpose or storage area.
These houses had a fixed depth of generally 6 metres with verti- cally arranged rooms based on functional requirement which fa- cilitated extension on both sides with equal building height.

Second, common lifestyles, use of locally available building material together with similar construction methodology led to a uniformity in architectural styles with little variations only in material quality, workmanship and building façade finishing.
The unifying elements of build- ing façade -- vertical brick ex- posed façade, vertically oriented wooden windows and sloped roof with little variation in roof line -- together with the ratio of street width to building height within the range between 1:1 and 1:2 contributed to the formation of a `sense of enclosure' and `hu- man scale' on the streets, where visitors felt mystery, surprise, ex- citement and anticipation due to sequential spatial event and `sin- gular composition.' As numerous daily activities such as eating, working and sleeping used to take place at floor level in the past, low floor height (1.7- 2m), narrow ladder (90cm wide) and small door and window openings functioned well in traditional houses. Simple decoration around the windows and hori- zontal band indicating story dif- ferences illustrated the rural craftsmanship whereas tempo- rary additional layer on the building façade -- hanging of agricultural products especially in rural towns, which keep on changing with seasons and the type of crops produced -- pro- vided dynamism in the streetscape. i Third, these traditional houses were energy efficient. The occu- pants felt comfortable inside the l dwelling. The composite wall of adobe and sun dried brick (outer face) with inside mud plaster (good insulator and exposed brick acted as a good absorbent), heavy door and window frames (absorbing heat in daytime and emitting at night), thick mud mortar on the roof and wooden and mud floor (providing good nsulation) coupled with small windows generally on one side of the room resulted in minimum oss of energy in traditional hous- es. Warmer upper floors and courtyards were used during day- time whereas the top level and the ground floor acted as a buffer zone protecting occupants from the cold at night and in winter.

Fourth, Newari architecture also had social dimension and hence it is a subset of urban de- sign. The buildings usually con- sisted of building blocks of three to four storeys built in a row, nar- row non-axial streets paved with bricks or stone slabs and houses clustered around the courtyards and Buddhist monasteries (Bahal and Bahil) based on the social status and profession (jaat) of the people. There was an integration of visual and functional princi- ples into the social needs. Com- munity spaces in front of individ- ual houses were part and parcel of architecture where the families shared their public interests and activities with neighbours, there- by merging public and private lives. Fifth, the social system of living community of the same profession or clan in the same lo- cality of the neighbourhood strengthened the social network and work efficiency whereas cul- tural practice through tradition of rituals and celebration of nu- merous festivals strengthened community bond, thereby not only increasing the mutual assis- tance and the concern for overall community but also enhancing a feeling of ownership and sense of belonging to the community. The need for water for irrigation and drinking was solved through the construction of long distance wa- ter canals (Rajkulos) starting from the foothills, ponds with deep wells as reservoirs and de- pressed pit conduits (Dhunge- dharas). The provision of `Sagah' at the back of the house and `No- gah' within the house on the ground floor in traditional house for dumping the kitchen waste helped to keeo the neighbour- hood environment clean. The by- product of agricultural waste was used as fodder for livestock. Cow and buffalo dung were used for an alternative source of energy by mixing them with the straw and drying them in the sun.

However, demolition and verti- cal division of traditional housing stocks and their haphazard reno- vation and change in building use in the historic core areas as a consequences of rapid urbaniza- tion over the last six decades, on the one hand, and disintegration of traditional communal society coupled with demise of guthi sys- tem, on the other hand, has con- tributed to metamorphosis of the inner city societies and break- down of religious and cultural frameworks that had prospered for centuries in the past. These emerging problems cannot be addressed through existing legal and institutional frameworks.
Numerous hidden dimensions of Newari architecture mentioned above are yet to be acknowledged by those working at decision making levels in public organiza- tions, building industries and ar- chitecture colleges.

Integration of functional, ma- terial and technology into social needs within the cultural frame- work is the strength of Newari ar- chitecture of Kathmandu Valley.
Emphasizing on community spaces, use of urban design tech- niques and guiding the living and consumption patterns of com- munities, this architecture was able to sustain for many cen- turies. A combination of three different strategies: a) protection of traditional houses through in- centives, financial and technical support and inducing economic value of heritage, b) conservation of the neighbourhoods through urban design techniques and c) revitalization of socio-religious activities associated with dwellings and community spaces including community education can still make such unique cre- ations survive.