rapid visual survey (rvs) study of important buildings ... buildings, transportation and...

Rapid Visual Survey (RVS) Study of Important Buildings, Transportation and Communication

System for Shimla City

FINAL REPORT

Submitted to

Commissioner, Municipal Corporation,

Shimla, Himachal Pradesh

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY HAMIRPUR

HAMIRPUR - 177 005

DEC 2015

NATIONAL INSITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY HAMIRPUR

PROJECT INVESTIGATOR'S DECLARATION

I hereby certify that the work being presented in the Research Project entitled "Rapid Visual Survey

(RVS) Study of Important Buildings, Transportation and Communication System for Shimla City" is

work carried out during the period from April 2014 to July 2015. The project was sponsored by Shimla

Municipal Corporation, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.

Principal Investigator Dr. Hemant Kumar Vinayak

Civil Engg. Dept.

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The principal investigator is obliged to former Commissioner Municipal Corporation, Shimla, Himachal

Pradesh for giving the opportunity to work for Conducting the Study on "Rapid Visual Survey (RVS)

Study of Important Buildings, Transportation and Communication System for Shimla City" which would

be beneficial for the safe and efficient construction in the city.

I am thankful to Sh. Prashant Shirke, Commissioner MC Shimla, H.P. for his support for the project. I

am grateful to Ms. Komal Kantariya, Shimla City Project Coordinator, UNDP India, for her efficient

coordination between Project Investigator and Shimla Municipal Corporation. I am also thankful to Sh.

Devender Kumar, PA to Commissioner MC Shimla for his administrative assistance.

I appreciate the efforts of Aakash Dubey, Project Assistant for conducting the survey of building in

Shimla City, Arun Guleria, Project Assistant for developing the webpages of the surveyed buildings,

maps and the management of the database of the survey carried out.

I am also glad that Shubam Sharma, Gaurav Sharma, Munish Kumar and Abhihnav Markandey,

students of Bachelor of Technology of Himalayan Group of Professional Institution Kala Amb, Sirmour

got involved in conducting the survey of buildings, showed high interest and delivered their best.

Finally I am thankful to the Department of Civil Engineering and National Institute of Technology

Hamirpur for giving me the approval to work with Shimla Municipal Corporation.

Dr. Hemant Kumar Vinayak Principal Investigator

ii

CONTENTSPage No.

Project Investigator Declaration i

Acknowledgement ii

Content iii

1. Introduction 1

2. Objective and Scope 2

3. Methodology 8

3.1 Sample Selection 8

3.2 Instrument used 8

3.3 Data Collection 8

3.4 Parameters Considered for the Format 9

4. Format taken up for Study 11

5. Parametric Study of Functional, Structural and Non-structural Components 15

5.1 Important Buildings and Rehabilitation Centres 15

5.2 Buildings along the main roads 23

5.3 Community Shelters 29

6. Bibliography 38

7. Maps 40

8. Present Status, Recommendations and Actions required 44

9. Summary of Safe and Unsafe Buildings 68

Appendix

Photographs of the buildings surveyed

iii

1. Introduction

Himachal Pradesh is vulnerable to various natural hazards such as earthquake, flash flood, cold wave,

wildfire, landslide etc. With the possibility of experiencing more severe events in upcoming days, it

becomes necessary to adopt an integrated disaster management approach for proper functioning of

important buildings during and after hazards. The integrated approach could include important

buildings, transportation and communication system. The important buildings comprise of hospitals,

fire stations, radio stations, administrative offices, schools, water supply stations, telecommunication

centres which must be serviceable after disasters. Therefore these buildings have been surveyed

against probable earthquake hazards in future.

Local level disaster management policies can set paradigm for sustainable and efficient approach

during and after earthquake. For that, state level departments need to be supportive in adopting and

incorporating risk reduction strategy. Some of the major devastating earthquake that have rocked the

state during the last century are as per Table 1 :

Table 1: Most severe earthquakes in Himachal Pradesh during the last decade

Date Locationsaffected

Magnitude Damage

4th April 1905 Kangra 7.8 20,000 people died , 53,000 domestic animals perished , 1,00,000 houses destroyed Economic cost of recovery ?2.9 million

1st June 1945 Chamba 6.5 N.A.

19th January 1975

Kinnaur 6.8 60 people died, 100 badly injured, 2000 dwellings devastated, 2500 people rendered homeless

26th April 1986 Dharamshala5.5

6 people died, Extensive damage to buildings Loss estimated at ?65 crore

1st April 1994 Chamba 4.5 N.A.

24th March 1995

Chamba 4.9 Fearsome shakingMore than 70% houses developed cracks

29th July 1997 Sundernagar 5.0 Damage to about 1000 houses

Since the Shimla city is the main administrative centre that controls the functioning of the state

government. Further, Shimla city also houses important communication system, medical facility in the

form of television station and state level emergency hospitals. Hence the condition assessment of the

infrastructure of the buildings is of utmost importance. It is the functioning of the important building

and infrastructure after the disaster like earthquake that would determine the sustenance of the

administrative control. Non-functioning of the infrastructure and the buildings would lead to total

chaos and helplessness of the state level departments. Thus with this concept the objectives and the

scope of the project was worked out.

2. Objective and Scope

I. Objective: The main objective of this project work will be to depict through Rapid

Visual Survey on the issues of:

a. Damageability grade of the important buildings.

b. Transportation system interruption in case of earthquake/ Landslide/ Snow in the study area.

c. Communication system disorder following earthquake related to networked area.

d. Framing guidelines to assist in drafting the policy framework for future construction /

expansion to mitigate the effect of disaster.

II. Background:a. The existing systems are presently constructed with large issues that need to be addressed

such as:

• Building Block - Unplanned construction leading to progressive failure in case of earthquake,

unsafe construction due to negligence in respect of codal provision, unplanned obstructions with

evacuation issues neglecting guidelines, inappropriate electrical installations leading to hazardous

environment (Fig 2.1 to Fig. 2.2).

• Water supply and storage - Unplanned and insecure (Fig. 2.3).

• Transportation - Interruption due to fragile slope and inappropriate construction (Fig. 2.4).

• Communication - Disruption due to communication tower and equipment failure (Fig. 2.5).

Fig. 2.1 : Unplanned construction along the hill slope

Fig. 2.2 : Improper load transfer

2

Fig. 2.3 : Unplanned water supply and insure storage tank

Fig. 2.4 : Traffic interrupted due to slope failure and retaining wall failure

Fig. 2.5 : Probable disruption of communication due to tower failure

3. Scope of the study: The study criteria and code of practice of various codes related to following

aspects shall be considered:

3

a. Building related aspects

Earthquake

• IS 1893 (Part 1):2002 - Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structure, general provisions

and buildings.

• IS 13920:1993 - Ductile detailing of reinforced concrete structure subjected to seismic forces -

Code of practice

• IS 4326:1993 - Earthquake resistant design and construction of buildings - Code of practice.

• IS 1905:1987 - Code of practice for structural use of unreinforced masonry.

• IS 13828:1993 - Improving earthquake resistance of low strength masonry buildings - guidelines.

Landslide

• IS 14680:1999 - Landslide control - guidelines

• IS: 14458: Guideline for retaining wall for hill areas

■ Part 1 : Selection of type of walls

■ Part 2: Design of retaining / Breast walls

■ Part 3: Construction of Dry stone walls

Fire

• IS: 1641:1988 - Code of practice for fire safety of buildings (general): General principles and fire

grading and classification.

• IS: 1642:1989 - Code of practice for fire safety of buildings (general): Details of construction.

• IS: 1643:1988 - Code of practice for fire safety of buildings (general): Exposure hazard.

• IS: 1644:1982 - Code of practice for fire safety of buildings (general): Exit requirement and

personal hazard.

• IS: 1646:1982 - Code of practice for fire safety of buildings (general): Electrical installations.

• IS: 14435:1997 - Fire safety in educational institutions - Code of Practice.

Stampede

• Document No. : IITK-GSDMA-Fire03-V3.0 Final Report :: C - Fire Codes

Functional

Spaces allocation

• Building Bye Law - Shimla city.

Road set back

• Planning regulation and standard norms - Dept. of Town & Planning, Govt. of H.P.

4

b. Transportation-related aspect

• IRC:32-1969 - Standard for Vertical and Horizontal Clearances of Overhead Electric Power and

Telecommunication Lines as Related to Roads.

• IRC:46-1972 - A Policy on Roadside Advertisements (First Revision).

• IRC:52-2001 - Recommendations About the Alignment Survey and Geometric Design of Hill

Roads (Second Revision).

• IRC:56-2011 - Recommended Practices for Treatment of Embankment and Roadside Slopes for

Erosion Control (First Revision).

• IRC:SP-48-1998 - Hill Road Manual.

• IRC:SP-88-2010 - Road Safety Audit Manual.

c. Communication related aspect

• Himachal Pradesh proposed policy for setting up mobile communication towers. Annexure C

dated: Oct. 2013. http://himachaldit.gov.in/page/Mobile-Com-Towers.aspx

• Himachal Pradesh Existing policy for setting up mobile communication towers. (DIT. Dev- (IT)

2005 (Misc.)) dated: 22nd August 2006.

http://himachaldit.gov.in/page/Mobile-Com-Towers.aspx

• Department of telecommunications Advisory Guidelines for State governments to issue of

clearance for installation of mobile towers (effective from 01.08.2013)

http://www.dot.gov.in/sites/default/files/Advisory%20Guidelines%20For%20State%20Govts%20effective%20from%2001-08-13.pdf

Rapid Visual Survey shall be carried out for the existing important buildings, their transportation

connectivity, water supply system and the communication network of the study area in Shimla city.

The various objectivity associated with this project has different reason to work for. Accordingly the

methodology has been defined as following :

RVS for buildings - Shimla city being the capital of Himachal Pradesh contains many important

buildings that have immediate occupancy importance. These buildings require to be operational even

if these buildings sustain damages converting the building to non-functional a bit, since it is considered

that administration of state disaster management authority will have to start their operation with

immediate effect in response to disasters such as earthquake / landslide / snow. Hence the RVS of

specific buildings will be carried out and accordingly the suggestion shall be drafted for upgradation

of the buildings.

5



http://www.dot.gov.in/sites/default/files/Advisory%20Guidelines%20For%20State%20Govts%20effe

RVS for transportation - A virtually universal phenomenon following disasters is the mass movement

of people, messages, and supplies towards the disaster-struck area. This "convergence action" has

been documented and verified in nearly every study of disaster. The city of Shimla has a serious

problem related to transportation issues. Traffic congestion is one of the prominent issues in this case.

Due to the typical geography and age old construction in the city, its magnitude becomes manifold at

the time of disasters like earthquake, landslide or snow. The road infrastructure in the town was

created in very old times to cater to the needs of that time population and little progress was made in

this regards subsequently. With the passage of time the population and inflow of the tourist resulted

in increased traffic congestion. The urbanization also lead to the haphazard laying of power and

telecommunication lines and roadside advertisements. The geometric designs of some of the roads

section does not seem to be as per codal guidelines. Also the roadside slopes and embankment are

susceptible to erosion. Educational institution particularly the schools are the places of traffic

bottlenecks which are characterized by regular traffic jam. Lack of proper parking place is another

reason which is enhancing the problem of traffic jams. It causes huge loss to business as it reduces

number of trips of heavy vehicles coming for commercial purposes. Traffic within the city causes

pollution and loss of productivity of local people. Around 200 vehicles are registered in the city every

day. During the busy tourist season around 3,000 tourist vehicles also fight for space on Shimla's

narrow roads.

Accessibility within the city sometimes becomes extremely poor. 72% of all buildings are not accessible

by trafficable roads. Out of that, 38% are accessible through pedestrian paths and stair ways with less

than one meter in width. Certain areas are built on such steep slopes and with such poor accessibility

that in case of a building collapse there will be no escape routes. Many of the trafficable roads too are

in such locations that in case of earthquake induced landslides or building collapse on the slopes above

the roads, they will get blocked. This can lead to the cutting off of critical rescue and relief routes.

These issues will be studied with visual screening of the study area and possible measures will be

suggested.

In all the possibility of such disaster the transportation / water supply and communication (TWS&C)

network are essential system that are required to remain functional along with the building space.

However with the present existing TWS&C systems, there are many issues that need to be addressed

so that these systems are functional to their best of the possibility even after disaster. The study will

thus involve finding out locations of disruption in road network / water supply and communication for

the selected building /area.

This study of presenting deficiencies and irregularity in the system will help in developing / modify the

selected area in the Shimla city with reduced vulnerability and risk to disaster. The surveys that will be

6

carried out will help in studying the requirements for various locations as per their deficiency. The

study will further lead to critical evaluation of the existing norms vis-a-vis the practices being followed

and assess the necessity to evolve specific guidelines.

RVS for Communication - The requirement of the communication for today's fast growing economy

like Shimla has result in mushroomed installation of mobile across the city. Although such tower are

highly desired for better communication after the disaster but towers if are erected on faulty building/

unauthorized roof tops / without necessary permission / competent approvals will itself result in

catastrophe in the area. To add to the problem of such unauthorized installation, the towers are even

being put up near educational institution and hospital. Such erection of towers near hospitals will

further add to the challenging of controlling radiation after disaster due uneven power supply.

7

3. Methodology

All the buildings on which Rapid Visual Survey has been carried out have been categorized under 3

categories: Immediate Occupancy, Rehabilitation Centres & Community Shelters (This list was

generated in May 2015). All the above mentioned categories are expected to be in usable condition

after earthquake. However, the Immediate occupancy buildings to be used by the respective owner

department, rehabilitation centres to be used by residents/immigrants of Shimla city after earthquake

whose houses have got damaged.

• The buildings considered under Immediate Occupancy consist of all important structures

including Administrative buildings (13 no.s), Hospitals (7 no.s), Electrical substations (3 no.s),

Telecommunication centres (10 no.s), Information dissemination centres (2 no.s), Transportation

structures (4 no.s), Bridges (2 no.s), Bus stand (2 no.s), Water supply (3 no.s), Food and civil

supplies (3 no.s), police stations (8 no.s) and fire stations (3 no.s).

• The buildings considered under Rehabilitation Centre majorly comprise of educational buildings

(Govt. 21 no.s, Pvt. 42 no.s), special institutions (3 no.s), community halls (2 no.s), parking (4 no.s)

and religious structure (1 no.).

• The buildings considered under Community shelter contains of 3 types: Training Venue, Main

Shelter and Contingency Shelter. Each component consists of 25 buildings.

However, it is to be noted that the above mentioned categories have some buildings in common.

The rapid visual survey has been done on the following basis:

3.1 Sample selection

The survey samples are those buildings which are considered as important to be used after earthquake

for administrative purpose and are not of residential nature. These buildings do not represent any

specific area and are distributed as per their existing location.

3.2 Instrument Used

The GPS device has been used for identifying the geographical location of the building. Additionally,

measuring tape have been used to measure the plan dimensions of the buildings and camera have

been used for capturing images of the buildings.

3.3 Data Collection

Visits were made to each of the selected buildings. The information was collected by filling rapid visual

survey format and photographs taken. The data collection process and further analysis of the collected

data was carried out.

8

The format used for the survey is prepared on the basis of Indian Standard codal provisions and with

the reference of existing RVS formats as given by BIS, NDMA, NIDM, IIT Roorkee, NIT Hamirpur to

check the present condition of the buildings. Separate forms have been used for masonry and

reinforced cement concrete (RCC) type buildings.

In the case of masonry construction, the parameters considered for the survey are layout of

masonry, mortar used, earthquake resistant features such as bands, vertical reinforcement, wall

bracings, through stone for random rubble masonry, sloping roof component such as ties, bracings,

wall opening percentage, wall thickness, roof type, roofing material.

Further the irregularities in the building are considered in the form of re-entrant corner,

diaphragm discontinuity, out of plane offsets (floating walls), non-parallel system, irregularity in

stiffness, mass & vertical geometry, staircase connectivity to building, bracing in roof, open ground

floor, floating wall, mezzanine floor, heavy mass at roof and partially filled panels.

The present status of the buildings surveyed are in terms of wall length/thickness ratio, wall

length and cracks in column, beam, floor & roof. The cracks were further categorized as fine (F),

moderate (M) and severe (S).

The anchorage condition regarding stabilization against earthquake of the following non

structural components are determined: partition wall, facade elements, false ceilings, brick

parapets/pillars/planters, water tank on roof, signs/display boards, almirah/racks, fire extinguisher.

Whereas, for the case of reinforced cement concrete (RCC) construction, the parameters

considered are whether the structural frame is of ordinary design without Earthquake Resistant

Design (ERD), Ordinary ERD with ordinary infill walls, ERD with ductile detailing provision or ERD

Ductile detailing provision with infill wall shear walls and braces.

The additional features surveyed from the earthquake disaster point of view are whether the

building is with soft storey, provision of fire safety devices, probability of land slide, non-anchorage

of heavy mass to the structural system, infill half-brick masonry walls or brick on edge walls, un

symmetrical placement of stair cases and elevators, plan aspect ratio, short column effect, floating

columns or floating structural walls, main load bearing columns along the length of the building plan,

beam-column supports/junctions centrally positioned in all floors or separation between adjacent

buildings less than 2% of building height.

The following structural irregularities are checked in the form of re-entrant corners,

diaphragm discontinuity, out of plane offsets, non-parallel system, vertical (stiffness) irregularity,

staircase connectivity and dampness.

3.4 Parameters considered for the format

9

The present status of the buildings were checked and presence of reinforcement corrosion

and thorough inspection of cracks in slab, beam and column are done. The cracks are further

categorized as fine (F), moderate (M) and severe (S).

The anchorage condition regarding stabilization against earthquake of the following non

structural components are determined: partition wall, facade elements, false ceilings, brick

parapets/pillars/planters, water tank on roof, signs/display boards, almirah/racks, fire extinguisher.

10

4. Format taken up for the study

RVS OF MASONRY BUILDINGS IN SHIMLA CITY

Date of inspection:

Name of the building

Building Type:_____

No. of floors:______

Location:________

Nearest Landmark:

Year Built:_______

1. Layout of masonry: Random rubble (Y / N) (b) Half-dressed stone (Y / N) (c) Brick masonry (Y / N)

2. Mortar used: (a)Mud mortar (b) Cement mortar (c) Lime mortar

3. Earthquake resistant features provided in the building:

(i) Bands: (a) Plinth (Y / N) (b) Sill (Y / N) (c) Lintel (Y / N) (d) Roof (Y / N) (e) Cannot say________

(ii) Vertical reinforcement at: (a) Corners (Y / N) (b) Junctions (Y / N) (c) Jambs of Openings (Y / N)

(iii) Wall Bracings (Y /N)

(iv) Through stone (Tick in case of Stone masonry): (a) Provided (Y / N)

(v) For Sloping roof: (a) Ties (Y / N) (b) Bracing (Y / N) (c) Roof and Gable band (Y / N)

4. Percentage openings in main w alls:_______________________________________

5. Thickness of: (a) Exterior w a ll_______ mm, (b) Interior w a ll_____________ mm

6. Roof type: (a) Flat roof (b) Sloping roof (c) Hipped roof (d) Others specify__________________

7. Roofing material: (a) RCC slab (b) Corrugated iron sheet (c) Stone Slates (d) Others___________

8. Irregularities in structure:-

S.No Description Yes No

i Re-entrant corner

ii Diaphragm discontinuity

iii Out of plane offsets (Floating walls)

iv Non parallel system

v Stiffness irregularity

vi Mass irregularity

vii Vertical geometry irregularity

viii Staircase connectivity to building

ix Bracing in roof

x Open ground floor

xi Floating wall

11

xii Mezzanine Floor

xiii Heavy mass at roof

xiv Partially filled panels

9. Present status of the building (Number of cracks to be entered)

S. No Description GF FF SF

i Whether Wall length/thickness Ratio <35 or Wall length>8m

ii Wall cracks F/M/S

iii Masonry Column F/M/S

iv Wooden Column F/M/S

v Wooden Beam F/M/S

vi R.C.C Beam F/M/S

vii Wooden Floor F/M/S

viii R.C.C. Roof

ix R.C.C. floors

10. Nonstructural Components

S. Item if provided and stabilized against Earthquake. Yes No N/A

I Partition (brick wall/wooden partitions)

ii Facade elements (cladding/decorative elements)

iii False Ceilings

iv Brick parapets / pillars / planters etc.v RC / Masonry/ plastic Water Tank on roofvi Signs/display boards etc.vii Almirah/Racks

viii Fire extinguisher

12

RVS OF R.C.C. BUILDINGS IN SHIMLA CITY

Date of inspection:Name of the building:____

Building Type:___________

No. of floors and height (m)

1.0 Structural frame Types:-

S.No. Description: Whether moment resistant frame - (RCF/SF) with :- YES NO

i Ordinary design without Earthquake Resistant Design(ERD)

ii Ordinary ERD and with ordinary in fill walls

iii ERD ductile detailing provision

iv ERD Ductile detailing provision, in fill wall shear walls and braces

2. 0. Description:

S .No. Whether the Building has :- YES NO

I Soft storey

ii Fire safety devices as per NBC-2005 in place

iii Land slide prone site

iv Any heavy mass not anchored to the structural system of Building

v Infill masonry wall made with half brick walls or brick on edge walls

vi Stair cases and elevators un-symmetrically placed in plan

vii Plan aspect ratio of the building more than 2.5

viii Situations to develop short column effect

ix Floating columns or floating structural walls

x Main load bearing columns are along the length of the building plan

xi Beam-column supports/junctions centrally positioned in all floors

xii Separation between the adjacent buildings is less than 2% height of building

Location:_________

Nearest Landmark: _

Year of construction:

13

3.0 Irregularities in structure:-

S.No Description YES NO

i Re-entrant corners

ii Diaphragm discontinuity

iii Out of plane offsets

iv Non parallel system

v Vertical (Stiffness) irregularity

vi Staircase connectivity

vii Dampness

4.0 Present status of Building (cracks to be entered):

S.No. Description GF FF SF

i Reinforcement corrosion

ii RCC Column F/M/S

iii RCC Beam F/M/S

iv RCC Slab F/M/S

5.0. Non-structural Building Components:

S.No. Items If provided and Stabilized against earthquake: YES NO N/AI Partition(brick wall/wooden partitions)

ii Facade-elements(cladding/decorative-elements)

iii False Ceilings

iv Brick parapets/pillars/ planters etc.

v RC/Masonry/Plastic Water Tank on roof

vi Signs/display boards etc.

vii Almirah/Racks

viii Fire extinguisher

14

5. Parametric Study of Functional, Structural and Non-structural Components

5.1 Important Buildings & Rehabilitation Centres

The important buildings and rehabilitation centres have been considered together for the parametric

analysis since both the categories of buildings are of immediate occupancy nature. Further, the

parametric study has been carried out for masonry and RCC typology separately.

5.1.1 Important Buildings and Rehabilitation Centres of Masonry typology

The parameters studied for masonry typology are layout of masonry, mortar used, bands, vertical

reinforcement if present at corners, junctions or jambs of opening, sloping roof features, roof type,

roofing material, irregularities in structure and anchorage of non-structural components.

vP0 s -

ClOC

DCD

CD_QED

6050403020100

& *9 * f

Fig. 5.1 : Layout of Masonry

Comments: The buildings were surveyed for the elements used in masonry. From the survey, about

90% of buildings came out to be using either half-dressed stone or brick masonry, which is a good

practice.

Recommendations: Random rubble should not be used in masonry.

Fig. 5.2 : Mortar Used

Comments: From the survey, about 15% buildings were found to be using mud mortar. However, for

rest of the case, either cement mortar or lime mortar has been used.

Recommendations: Mud mortar should not be used in earthquake-prone areas.

70

VPONtoClO_c

igD

CDM—Oi_Q)

_QED

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

* < ?/

/ cf

Fig. 5.3 : Bands

Comments: From the survey, it was found that about 60% of buildings have lintel bands, which is a

very good practice; but only 30% buildings were found having sill bands.

Recommendations: Sill bands should be introduced in buildings.

35NO

30 aa

25

5 20 4—

15(D

10 E

5 0

o0<

Fig. 5.4 : Vertical Reinforcement at several locations

Comments: It was found from the survey that only one-third of the buildings have vertical

reinforcement at jambs of opening, whereas only a few buildings were found having vertical

reinforcement at corners and junctions.

Recommendations: Vertical reinforcement should be provided both at corners, junctions and jambs

of opening.

16

g. 40to

3530252015

_Q1050

45

7?

Fig. 5.5 : Earthquake Resistant Features

Comments: Buildings with sloping roof were surveyed for provision of ties, bracings and roof and gable

band and it was found that about 40% of buildings are with bracings; whereas only 15-20% buildings

were found having ties and roof and gable bands.

Recommendations: Ties, bracings and roof and gable bands should be provided to improve

performance of buildings under effect of earthquake.

Fig. 5.6 : Roof Type

Comments: The buildings were checked for roof type. From the survey, it was found that very few

buildings have flat roof, which leads to more weight, thus more earthquake effect. Hence avoiding flat

roof in earthquake prone areas is a good practice.

Recommendations: NIL.

17

VP90to8070605040

-S33020100

100

Fig. 5.7 : Roofing Material

Comments: The buildings were surveyed for roofing material. From the survey, it was found that

corrugated iron sheets are used widely as roofing material, hence it is a good practice.


Fig. 5.8 : Irregularities in Structures

Comments: The irregularities in the buildings were surveyed. The major issues found were partially

filled panels and re-entrant corners.

Recommendations: Irregularities in structures should be avoided to improve performance of

buildings.

18

■nO

60C

3CO

6050403020100


Comments: With continuation to fig. 5.8, staircase connectivity to buildings and inadequate bracing

in roof were major issues found as structural irregularity.

Recommendations: These structural irregularities should be avoided.

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 100 —

NOON

CuOCD

_Q

0>_QED

/ / /

&

oT

Fig. 5.10 : Non Structural Components

Comments: The buildings were surveyed against anchorage of non-structural components. The major

issues found were related to display boards, fire extinguisher, false ceilings, facade elements and

partition.

Recommendations: All the non-structural components should be properly anchored.

19

The param eters considered for study are structural fram e type, aspect of soft storey, provision

of fire safety devices, land slide prone site issue, non-anchorage of heavy mass to the structural

system, infill half-brick masonry walls or brick on edge walls, un-symmetrical placement of stair cases

and elevators, plan aspect ratio, short column effect, floating columns or floating structural walls, main

load bearing columns along the length of the building plan, beam-column supports/junctions centrally

positioned in all floors or separation between adjacent buildings less than 2% of building height, re

entrant corners, diaphragm discontinuity, out of plane offsets, non-parallel system, vertical (stiffness)

irregularity, staircase connectivity and dampness, reinforcement corrosion, cracks in slab, beam and

column, stabilization against earthquake of the non-structural components such as partition wall,

facade elements, false ceilings, brick parapets/pillars/planters, water tank on roof, signs/display

boards, almirah /racks, fire extinguisher.

5.1.2 Important Buildings and Rehabilitation Centres of RCC typology

V O rdinary design w ithout ERD

O O rdinary ERD and with ordinary in fillw alls

= ERD ductile detailing provision

11 ERD ductile detailing provision,in fill wall shear w alls and braces

Fig. 5.11 : Structural Frame Type

Comments: The building structural frame type was surveyed against earthquake resistant design (ERD)

provisions. From the survey it was found that only half of the buildings possess the ERD provisions.

Recommendations: ERD provisions should be implemented to all buildings.

20

II Soft story

^ Land Slide Prone site

= Fire safety devices as per NBC-2005 in place

O Any heavy m ass not anchored to structural system of building

= Separation between adjacent building <2% height of building

II Plan aspect ratio of the building more than 2.5

Fig. 5.12 : Structural and Locational Deficiency

Comments: The buildings were surveyed against the above-mentioned criteria. Most of the buildings

(70%) were found having fire safety devices and about one-third buildings are too close to

neighborhood buildings.

Recommendations: Buildings should have enough free space between each other.

100

50

V77A

E3 Infill m asonry wall made with half brick w alls or brick on edge walls

H Stair cases and elevators un-sym m etrically placed in plan

■ situation to develop short colum n effect

H Floating colum ns or floating structural walls

m Main load bearing colum ns are along the length of the building plan

B Beam colum n supports/junctions centrally positioned in all floors

01

Fig. 5.13 : Wall and Column

Comments: The major issue located in this section is unsymmetrical placement of staircase in plan;

whereas rest seems to be OK.

Recommendations: Staircase is placed near the entrance and/or exit of a building. Hence the entrance

and/or exit points should be placed symmetrically in plan.

21

80

70xp~

60toaa50

40CO

o 30l—<v

20E■g 10

0

CDCouc

cCDCDor

0

ClOTOO uCO

Q T3

Q.TO

OCDC_roQ.

3O

m

ECD

co

TOQ.

>

COTO

7 CO

I

toto0)cQ.EtcQ

Fig. 5.14 : Irregularities in Structure

Comments: From the survey carried out on buildings, staircase connectivity and dampness were found

to be major problems related to irregularities in structure.

Recommendations: Irregularities in structure should be avoided in structures.

90

80c?

70COClO 60

50_Q

40O(D 30

_Q20

10

0

= COro c<: .2

c cO (D '43 -O '43 O

(Dco > ■—

QJ "OCD ClO "O Cs ^CO “Ou_ ro

u

CO"Oc_CO

ClO >*in _2

CD1=3ClOC

CD

Fig. 5.15 : Non Structural Building Components

Comments: The anchorage of non-structural building components were surveyed. From the survey,

anchorage of sign/display board were came out to be major issue. Apart from that, fire extinguisher,

facade elements and false ceilings too were found to be non-anchored in most cases.

Recommendations: All the non-structural components should be properly anchored.

22

The survey of the ordinary buildings along the roads were carried out. These buildings mostly comprise

of hotels, restaurants and residential. Hence these buildings being of ordinary importance factor are

always susceptible to moderate to severe damage during earthquake of high intensity. Hence their

failure during earthquake would result in highly decreased traffic mobility, thus posing difficulty for

post-disaster management.

5.2.1 Buildings along the main roads of Masonry typology

The parameters studied for masonry typology are layout of masonry, mortar used, bands, vertical

reinforcement if present at corners, junctions or jambs of opening, sloping roof features, roof type,

roofing material, irregularities in structure and anchorage of non-structural components.

5.2 Buildings along the main roads

Xpo x120100

CuOc

DCO

0J-S 3ED

806040200

\g>XV5ST


Comments: The layout of masonry were surveyed in the buildings. In the result, most of the buildings

found out to be using brick masonry.

Recommendations: Use of brick masonry itself is a good practice.


Comments: The buildings were surveyed and the type of mortar used were noted. It was noted that

in most of the buildings cement mortar has been used, whereas a few buildings (10%) were found to

be using lime mortar. Hence it is a good practice.


23

VPOV

QlOC

DCO

OJ-S3ED

9080706050403020100

< // °<<?


Comments: A part of the survey was carried out to check the roof types used. Flat roof seems to be

avoided, hence it is a good practice.


vPON'XnClOc

DCQ

O)_QED

120100806040200 I

/ A** ° v

4d“


Comments: The result obtained from the survey clearly shows that there is wide use of corrugated

iron sheet as roofing material, hence it is a good practice.



24

Comments: This part of the survey was carried out to find out the irregularities in structure. From the

survey it was found that the major irregularity issues were stiffness irregularity, floating wall and

partially filled panels.

Recommendations: Structural irregularities should be avoided.

Xpo x

QlOC

D-S3

OJ-S3

ED

12 10 8 6 4 2 0

& «S> s ? &

aP& £

&<y

«c?&

$ <? xS'£ &


Comments: From the survey carried out on the buildings it is clear that only few buildings (10%) have

fulfilled the anchorage provisions of non-structural components.

Recommendations: All non-structural components should be properly anchored.

25

5.2.2 Buildings along the main roads of RCC typology

The parameters considered for study are structural frame type, aspect of soft storey, provision of fire

safety devices, land slide prone site issue, non-anchorage of heavy mass to the structural system, infill

half-brick masonry walls or brick on edge walls, un-symmetrical placement of stair cases and elevators,

plan aspect ratio, short column effect, floating columns or floating structural walls, main load bearing

columns along the length of the building plan, beam-column supports/junctions centrally positioned

in all floors or separation between adjacent buildings less than 2% of building height, re-entrant

corners, diaphragm discontinuity, out of plane offsets, non-parallel system, vertical (stiffness)




boards, almirah/racks, fire extinguisher.

® Ordinary design with out ERD

® ERD ductile detailing provision

ERD ductile detaining provision,in fill shear wall and braces

® Ordinary ERD and with ordinary in fill walls


Comments: The buildings were surveyed against provision of ERD. From the survey, it was found that

about one-third of the buildings does not have ERD provisions.

Recommendations: ERD provisions should be implemented in all buildings.

26

■ Infill masonry wall made with half brick walls or brick on edge walls

$8 Situations to develop short column effect

H Floating column or Floating structural walls

Main load bearing columns are along the length of the building plan

H Beam column /junctions centrally positioned in all floors


Comments: A part of the survey was carried out for the above-said features. From the survey, no

major issue was found.


0 Soft storey

Land slide prone site

Any heavy mass not anchored to the structural system of building

plan aspect ratio of the building more than 2.5

§ separation between the adjacent buildings is less than 2% height of building

■ Infill masonry wall made with half brick walls or brick on edge walls

M Situations to develop short column effect

H Floating column or Floating structural walls

Main load bearing columns are along the length of the building plan

S Beam column supports /junctions centrally positioned in all floors


27

Comments: The above-mentioned features in the buildings were surveyed. In result, plan aspect ratio

and inadequate separation between buildings were came out to be major issues. However, some

buildings were found to be constructed on landslide prone site.

Recommendations: Buildings should not be constructed on landslide prone site. Aspect ratio of

buildings should not be too large (>2.5). Buildings should have adequate space in between them.


Comments: The buildings were surveyed for irregularities in structure. From the survey, it was found

that very few buildings have structural irregularities. Hence the buildings can be termed as safe from

this particular context.


20

18

16CO

14

12

10

0)_Q

E

co

O CDCO t/)

5 "2

Lo


Comments: Anchorage of non-structural building components were surveyed and as per the result

obtained, about 20% buildings do not have proper anchorage of non-structural building components.

Recommendations: All non-structural building components should be properly anchored.

28

5.3 Community Shelters

Shim la M unicipal Corporation decided to have a list of buildings that can be used as shelter

for the com m on people of the com m unity. These shelters have been selected as one per

ward.

5.3.1 Community Shelters of Masonry typology

The param eters studied for m asonry typology are layout of m asonry, m ortar used, bands,

vertical reinforcem ent if present at corners, junctions or jam bs of opening, sloping roof

features, roof type, roofing m aterial, irregularities in structure and anchorage of no n

structural com ponents.

Xpo x

toaacigD

COM—Ot_OJ

-S3

ED

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 153


Comments: The buildings were surveyed for the elements used in masonry. From the survey, about

95% of buildings came out to be using either half-dressed stone or brick masonry.

Recommendations: Random rubble should not be used in masonry.


29

Comments: The buildings were surveyed and the type of mortar used were noted. It was noted that

in most of the buildings cement mortar has been used, whereas some buildings (20%) were found to

be using lime mortar.

Recommendations: Mud mortar should not be used in buildings.

vPON

COCuo

DCD4—Oi_Q)

_QED

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0&

Fig. 5.30 : Bands

Comments: A part of the survey was carried out to find out provision of bands provided. From the

result obtained, it has been found that about 65% buildings have lintel bands, whereas only 25%

buildings have bands at sill level.

Recommendations: Sill level bands along with lintel bands should be provided in buildings.

Xpo xTo"aacigDCQ

M—O&_0JED

4035302520151050

Fig. 5.31 : Vertical Reinforcement at several locations

Comments: From the survey carried out on the buildings, it was found that only one-third of the

buildings have vertical reinforcement at jambs of opening.

Recommendations: Vertical reinforcement should be provided at both corners, junctions and jambs

of opening.

30

VPOV'uTaac

DCO

OJ-S3ED

454035302520151050

r*

XT

(F

Fig. 5.32 : Earthquake Resistant Features

Comments: For buildings having sloping roof, provision of ties, bracings and roof and gable bands have

been surveyed. From the result it was found that about 40% buildings have bracings; whereas only

few buildings have provision of tie and roof and gable band.

Recommendations: For sloped roof constructions, provision of ties, bracings and roof and gable bands

are necessary.

NOON

CuOCD

CQ

0>_QED

706050403020100

//

/jp

&

&


Comments: The types of roofs were surveyed and as per the result, a few buildings to be having flat

roof, which is a good practice for earthquake-prone areas.


31


Comments: The result obtained from the survey clearly shows that corrugated iron sheet as roofing

material has widely been used in buildings, which is a good practice.



Comments: The buildings were surveyed for irregularities in structures. From the data obtained, it is

clear that re-entrant corner, vertical geometry irregularity and partially filled panels are the major

issues regarding irregularity.

Recommendations: Irregularities in structures should be avoided for the sake of improved

performance of buildings under earthquake.

32


Comments: This part of the survey was carried out to find out the irregularities in structures along

with fig. 5.35. From the survey, it was seen that staircase connectivity to building and bracing were

found to be major issues regarding irregularity.

Recommendations: Irregularities in structures should be avoided for the sake of improved

performance of buildings under earthquake.

SC

QlOC

D-S3

OJ-S3

ED

9080706050403020100

/< f

&

/

I

£

m

AA , ' * CcP O'


Comments: The survey carried out on buildings was also regarding anchorage of non-structural

components. From the survey, it was found that the major non-anchorage issues were with false

ceilings, display boards and fire extinguishers.

Recommendations: All the non-structural building components should be properly anchored.

33

5.3.2 Safe Shelters of RCC typology

The parameters considered for study are structural frame type, aspect of soft storey, provision of fire

safety devices, land slide prone site issue, non-anchorage of heavy mass to the structural system, infill

half-brick masonry walls or brick on edge walls, un-symmetrical placement of stair cases and elevators,

plan aspect ratio, short column effect, floating columns or floating structural walls, main load bearing

columns along the length of the building plan, beam-column supports/junctions centrally positioned

in all floors or separation between adjacent buildings less than 2% of building height, re-entrant

corners, diaphragm discontinuity, out of plane offsets, non-parallel system, vertical (stiffness)




boards, almirah/racks, fire extinguisher.

Xpo x

CigD

COM—OOJ

-S3

ED

35

30

2520

15

105

0

^ O rd in a ry design w ithout ERD

^ ERD ductile detailingprovision,in fill wall shear w alls and braces

O rdinary ERD and with ordinary infill walls

= ERD ductile detailing provision


Comments: From the survey done on the buildings against ERD, it was found that about 20% of

buildings do not have ERD provisions.

Recommendations: ERD provisions should be incorporated in design of buildings.

34

60

N Land Slide Prone site

II Soft story

= Fire safety devices as per NBC-2005 in place

= Separation between adjacent building <2% of height of building

^ Plan aspect ratio of the building more than 2.5

Any heavy m ass not anchored to structural system of building


Comments: From the survey carried out for the above-mentioned features, the major issue found out

was regarding higher plan aspect ratio (30% cases); whereas separation between buildings was also

an issue (20% cases).

Recommendations: Plan aspect ratio of buildings should not be too high and also there should be

adjacent separation between buildings.

35

120

100

80

60

40

20

01

E3 Infill m asonry wall made w ith half brick w alls or brick on edge walls

H Stair cases and elevators un-sym m etrically placed in plan

■ situation to develop short colum n effect

Q Floating colum ns or floating structural w alls

[D Main load bearing colum ns are along the length o f the building plan

0 Beam colum n supports/junctions centrally positioned in all floors


Comments: A part of the survey was carried out for the above-said features. From the survey, no

major issue was found except unsymmetrical placement of staircase.

Recommendations: Staircase should be symmetrically placed in building.

NOON

ClOc

DCD

0>_QED

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

CDci_ou

-Mc05i_+-»cCDCDCC ClO

03

OM u 00Q '~o

CL03

CDc

Q .M—o

■M

O

03Q_Co

3ClOCD

03UCD>

>-M

■4—'UCDCcouCD0003Ui—

03■MCO


36

Dam

pnes

s

Comments: Among the buildings surveyed for irregularities in structure, staircase connectivity to

building and dampness were found to be major issues.

Recommendations: Irregularities in structure should be avoided to enhance performance of buildings

under earthquake.

60c


Comments: The buildings were surveyed against anchorage of non-structural building components.

From the results, it was found that major anchorage-related issues were with false ceiling, display

boards and fire extinguishers.

Recommendations: All non-structural building components should be properly anchored.

37

Bibliography

1. IS 456:2000 -- Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of Practice.

2. IS 732:1989 (Reaffirmed 2005) -- Code of Practice for Electrical Wiring Installations.

3. IS 1127:1970 (Reaffirmed 2003) -- Recommendations for Dimensions and Workmanship of Natural Building Stones for Masonry Work.

4. IS 1172:1993 (Reaffirmed 2002) -- Code of Basic Requirements for Water Supply, Drainage and Sanitation.

5. IS 1597(Part 2):1992 -- Construction of Stone Masonry - Code of practice: Part 2 Ashlar masonry.

6. IS 1646:1997 -- Code of Practice for Fire Safety of Buildings (General): Electrical Installations.

7. IS 1661:1972 (Reaffirmed 2001) -- Code of Practice for Application of Cement and Cement-Lime Plaster Finishes.

8. IS 1742:1983 (Reaffirmed 2002) -- Code of Practice for Building Drainage.

9. IS 1893(Part 1):2002 -- Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures: Part 1 General Provisions and Buildings.

10. IS 1905:1987 (Reaffirmed 2002) -- Code of Practice for Structural use of Unreinforced Masonry.

11. IS 2065:1983 (Reaffirmed 2001) -- Code of practice for water supply in buildings.

12. IS 2116:1980 (Reaffirmed 2002) -- Specification for Sand for masonry mortars.

13. IS 2212:1991 (Reaffirmed 2005) -- Brickworks - Code of practice.

14. IS 2250:1981 (Reaffirmed 1995) -- Code of Practice for Preparation and Use of Masonry Mortars.

15. IS 2527:1984 (Reaffirmed 2000) -- Code of Practice for Fixing Rainwater Gutters and Downpipesfor Roof Drainage.

16. IS 2571:1970 (Reaffirmed 2001) -- Code of Practice for Laying In-Situ Cement Concrete Flooring.

17. IS 2645:2003 (Reaffirmed 2005) -- Integral Waterproofing Compounds for Cement Mortar and Concrete - Specification.

18. IS 3067:1988 (Reaffirmed 2000) -- Code of practice for General Design Details and Preparatory Work for Damp-proofing and Water-proofing of Buildings.

19. IS 3414:1968 (Reaffirmed 2000) -- Code of Practice for Design and Installation of Joints in Buildings.

20. IS 4326:1993 (Reaffirmed 2003) -- Earthquake Resistant Design and Construction of Buildings - Code Of Practice.

38

21. IS 4837:1990 (Reaffirmed 2002) -- School Furniture, Classroom Chairs and Tables - Recommendations.

22. IS 4913:1968 (Reaffirmed 1996) -- Code of Practice for Selection, Installation and Maintenance of Timber Doors and Windows.

23. IS 6295:1986 (Reaffirmed 2001) -- Code of Practice for Water Supply and Drainage in High Altitudes and/or Sub-zero Temperature Regions.

24. IS 7662(Part 1):1974 (Reaffirmed 2004) -- Recommendations for Orientation of Buildings: Part 1 Non-industrial Buildings.

25. IS 7942:1976 (Reaffirmed 2004) -- Code of Practice for Daylighting of Educational Buildings.

26. IS 8225:1987/ISO 354:1985 (Reaffirmed 2002) -- Measurement of Sound Absorption in a Reverberation Room.

27. IS 8827:1978 (Reaffirmed 2006) -- Recommendations for Basic Requirements of School Buildings.

28. IS 9077:1979 (Reaffirmed 2002) -- Code of Practice for Corrosion Protection of Steel Reinforcement in RB and RCC Construction.

29. IS 10894:1984 (Reaffirmed 2005) -- Code Of Practice for Lighting of Educational Institutions.

30. IS 12054:1987 (Reaffirmed 2002) -- Code of Practice for Application of Silicone-based Water Repellents.

31. IS 12183(Part 1):1987 (Reaffirmed 2004) -- Code of Practice for Plumbing in Multi-storeyed Buildings: Part 1 Water Supply.

32. IS 13182:1991 (Reaffirmed 2000) -- Waterproofing and Damp-proofing of Wet Areas in Building - Recommendations.

33. IS 14435:1997 (Reaffirmed 2002) -- Fire Safety in Educational Institutions - Code of Practice.

34. IS 14458(Part 2):1997 (Reaffirmed 2002) -- Retaining Wall for Hill Area: Part 2 Design of Retaining/Breast walls.

35. SP 25:1984 -- Handbook on Causes and Prevention of Cracks in Buildings.

39

A A L L

Loharb Oghna 1 1 0 0 % ~ n r G o o g l e m a p

K hi I

Dhenda

Sharog

Harun

H iun

Sanog Uperla

Barhai

GulchhaKaranda

Shal

B H A l

Neri

K a b i

Paoba

K E L S T O N

C H A I L L Y Ron

A nji co]

JanolS U M M E R H I L L

Chahli Kaian

Kalawat

N i u n

Karog

Bhakoo

Kelti Maron

Muhal Dudhali

Dhi

Ka

Bagoloo

Pagog

Barohi

Up-Muhal Devli Dhar

Gahan

I n d i a n I n s t i t u t e O f — A d v a n c e d S t u d y *

IAWRI

Fatechi

B h a rya I

J a d e n i

L O N G \Naog

F I N C A S K E S T A T E C O M B L E Y <5> T H E ,

*■I n d i r

BANKSNOP ;T H W E L L 1N G

fE S T A T E U l I

D PL A L P A N I H O U S I N G B O A R D C O L O N Y

S A N G TUB O H

f r i a oP M A u ii *A N, A F■ I M A R Y A H A N

V I L L A G E

G H O R A C H O W K tv*? IL SI N <3 E S T A f l

TAL

T U T I K A N D I

S : I A N A NN A VmHA HARK NI I : -r:H j\

k v Am

F O R E S T C O L O N YB A C H

M A L Y A N AK H A L I N lS T R A W B E R R Y H I L L

S E C T O R 4

N E W S H I M L A

Dha

Bha <s>via

A n u

N i h a n

C E M E T E R Y

Shara wag

Jangal Shara wag

Badaya

Rug

B H A T T A K U F E R

Barmu

C H A K R A Y A L

Badf

J anga Badfar-

D watD E V N A G A R

V I K A S N A G A RS E C T O R 8

S H I V N A G A RV S U DA

Bagag li M a i h t h a i

Im m e d ia te O c c u p a n c yA d m in i s t r a t i o n

1.1 H P Secretariat Chota Shimla1.3 P olice headquarter Shimla1.4 D C O ffice Shimla1.5 M C O ffice Shimla1.6 D istrict C ourt Chakkar1.7 SSP O ffice ShimlaI S O ffice O f C iv il D efen ce & H om e G uard Shimla 1.9 P .W D N ig am vthar

1 .10 M eteoroLogical Centre1.11 N C C B h a w a n1.12 Fire Station M a ll road1.13 Forest Departm ent T a Hand

H o s p i t a l

2.1 IG M C Shimla2 .2 R ip p on H ospital M a ll R oad2.3 K am la N ehru H ospital Portm ore2 .4 R ed C ross S ociety C hota Shimla2 .5 Indus H ospital (N a v Bahar)2 .6 T enzm hospital Panthagathi2 .7 Shimla San lonum

E le c t r ia l s u b s t a t i o n

3.1 H P S E B P ow er H ouse Totu3 .2 H P S E B P ow er Sub Station K asnm pti3 .3 H P SE B P ow er Sub Station M a ll road

T e le c o m m u n ic a t io n

4.1 C .T .O M a ll R oad4 .2 B .S .N .L T elephone exchange Sanjauh4.3 B S N L Telephone E xch an ge N e w Shimla4 .4 B S N L Tel. E xchange T otu4 .5 B S N L Tel. E xchange C hota Shimla4 .6 A irtei K asm npn4 .7 R elianace H ead o ff ic e K asum pan4.S T A T A D o c o m o Kasnm pti4 .9 V od a fon e K asnm pti

4 .10 Idea K haluuI n f o r m a t i o n D is s e m in a t io n

5.1 A ll India R ad io Sum m er hill5 .2 D oordarshan Shimla

T r a n s p o r a t io n

T u n n e l

5. 1 V ic t o r y T u n n e l5.2 Dtialli Tu n n e l5.3 Low er Bazar P e destrian (Tunn el)

Bridge

7.1 Lift b r id g e7.2 A u c k la n d B rid g e

B u s standS I ISBT Tutikandi8.2 O ld B us Stand Shimla

W a t e r s u p p ly

9.1 W ater Pum ping Station kasum pd9.2 W ater Tank Saryauh9.3 W a te r Ta n k (K asum pti)

10.110.3

11.111.211.311.411.5 11.8 11.9

12.112.212.3

13.1.1

.3 .1 .2 13.1.3 L3.1.4 13 1 5

F o o d & C iv i l S u p p l ie s

F o o d gram god ow n Bhatta kuffer L P G G od ow n Bhatta K u ffe i

P o l ic e s t a t i o n

P olice Station (N ew Shimla)P olice Station B oileuganj P oh ce Station C hota Shimla P oh ce Station D halh P olice Station Sadar P olice Station Lakkar Bazar P oh ce Station Sanjauh

F ir e s t a t i o n

Fire station Chota Shimla Fire Station M a ll road Fire Station B oileugan;H P U . S u m m e r H i l l

R e h a b il ita t io nE d u c a t i o n a l

G o v t.C O E . G ovt. C o llege Sanjauh G S S S Portm ore G S S S L alp amR Ct C-rYwrt D p p t p p C n l l p w K r » t ' . i u > n

13.2 .2613.2 .27 13.2.2S13.2 .2913.2 .3013.2.3113.2 .3213.2 .3313.2 .3413.2 .3513.2 .3613.2 .37 13.2.3S13.2 .3913.2 .4013.2.4113.2 .42

13.2.213.2.313.2 .4 13-2.513.2.613.2 .713.2.813.2 .9

13.2 .1013.2.11

G H S Anna dale 1G .H .S B haran 1G H S C Laura M aidanG H S D halhG .H .S JakhooG H S KarthuG H S K haluuG H S Krishna N agarG H S Sum mer hillG H S T uti kandxG S S S BoileuganjG S S S C hota ShimlaG S S S Lakkar BazarG H S PhaghG .S .S .S Portm oreG S S S SanjauhG S S S T otu

Private

St. B ede's C o llege (N a v B ahar)St.Edw ards S ch oo l H im LandD A V Sr S ec S ch oo l N ew ShimlaD A V P u b l i c S r . S e c . S c h o o l ( L a k k a r B a z a rD A V P ublic S ch o o l T otuR K M V A uck landS V M V ik a snagarA uckland H ouse sch oo l ShimlaCentral S ch oo l fo r T ibetan C hota ShimlaB ishop C otton S ch oo l Shimla

17.1

L oreto C onvent (Tarahall)Ice Skating R in g Lakkar BazarA rva S r S ec S ch oo l ShimlaB al Shiksha N iketan ChakkarB lue B ells H igh S ch oo l D halhC hasp lee S ch oo l ShimlaD ayanand P ublic S ch oo l ShimlaE C I C halet D a y S ch oo l ShimlaH am ault P ubhc S ch o o l B enm oreH appy M od e l H igh S ch oo l SanjauhH im alayan P ubhc S ch oo l KarthuKenchrya V idyalaya JakhooLaureate P ubhc S ch oo l B haranMomal P ubhc S ch oo l SanjauhSacred Heart S ch oo l DhalhSanjay Gandhi Sr S ec S ch oo l N ew ShimlaSavxtn P ubhc S chool (Talland)S D S ch oo l R am B azar Shimla P ubhc S ch oo l Khalm i Shishu Shiksha N iketan T otu S P M M od e l S ch oo l E ngine Ghar St. M a n y S ch oo l Chakkar St. Thom as S ch o o l (Shim la)

S p e c ia l i n s t i t u t i o n

Anath A shram Tutikandi S ch oo l O f B lind C hildren (D h alh )S ch oo l O f Speech & H earing Im paired Children

C o m m u n i t y H a ll

C om m um tv C enter N e w Shimla C om m m itv H all Dhalh

P a r k in g

C ar Parking H igh C ourt Shimla M C ca r Parking Shimla N ew C ar Parking (N ear H H H )N ew C ar Parking (San jauh)

ReligiousK a h b a n Tem ple

E x t r a B u i l d i n g a

P oh ce L ine KarthuGrand H otelS SB C am pus Fir hillH im fed M ilk Plan N e w TotuG ovt Prim ary S ch oo l Sankatm ochanA m bedkai Bha w an Krishna N agarM ist C ham ber Forest C o lo u v Khaluu

Ban

>V

K h il

D h e n d a

a S h a ro g

H arun H iun

Sa rto g U p erla

B a rh a i

CHAILLY

— K o lu K i K w a li

C h a h l

K a irJ a n o l R ori

SUMMER HILLC h a h li K a la n

N iun

A m i TEACHERS f ln ) ' COLONY

K h u rd 0

Kalawat

B - o h i

0 J u t o g h

w j j j Ja b lo g

F a te c h i

Neri

G a h a n

Ind ian In s titu te O fAdvanced S tudy The

BOIL

ecil. Sh im la ~

PANJARI

GHORA CHOWKI TUTIKANDI

CHAKKAR

SANDALAnji

KYARI

h a ry a l BAG H

& b l .

D w at

la2a

I3a4a5a6a7a

) 8a9a10a11a

[12a13a

Safe ShelterPolice line BliaranIce Skating Ring Lakkar BazarLoreto Convent TarahallSimula Nursing College AimadaleHPU Sum m er HillA A Y BEE Banquet Hall TotuGopal Mandir BoiluganjG .S.S.S Tuti kandiRailway Club NabliaG .S.S.S PliaghValm iki M andir Krishna nagar SD School Ram Bazar D A V Prunary School Mall

G u lc h h aK a ra n d a

S h a l

II

| 1 0 0 % ■»■ I | G o o g le m a p

N eriK a b i

P a o b a

KELSTON

K a ro g

B h a k o o

K e lti M aron

M uhal O u d h a li

3 ?D h a g o i

K a n d i

B a g o lo o

£•*1 l IT HU

£

P a g o g

K, ___ LONCY<&mamN ao g

K a t li

M u n g a rD h ar

FIN GCOMBLEY

BANKS

ESTATE

^all f),Indira Gandhi

Jedic

U p -M u h a l D e v li D h ar

lalpani

PHAGLI

£ ___sQ .____Lakhu Tem ple &ns

BOTHWELL NORTH OAK DINGU BAWI ESTATE - SANJAULI

A n u

C h e n

C h u ra t N a lla

HOUSING D BOARD COLON^mm1SANGTI FRI

AHAN S h a ra w a g

J a n g a lS h a ra w a g

B a d a y a

■ a Ant

KANLOG

MILSINC ESTATE

TALLAND NAVBHAHAR SHANANBHATTAKUFER

B arm u

NIG AM VIHARCHOTTA SHiMLA

FOREST COLONY ‘ S H

KHALINI w

w

SECTOR 4

MALY AN A

CHAMIYANA

J a n g a lB a d fa r - I

R u g

CHAKRAYAL

KHALJOG

C h h a li

B a d fa r

J a n g a lB a d fa r - l i

B a n re ru

STRAWBERRY HILL

J a n g a l B a rm u

CHAURIPTINEW SHIMLA DEV NAGAR

VIKASNAGARSECTOR 8

SHIV NAGAR

TOLAGSHAURALA

L a m b i D har

lb R K M V Auckland 2b MC Rest House Bharari 3b Community Center C'hungi Kkana 4b R.G. Govt. Degree College Kotsheia

7b Sankat Mockan Temple8b I.S.B.T Tutikandi9b Govt Primary School Nabha10b Building O f Education Deptt. Phaglil i b G .S .S.S Lalpani12b Old Bus Stand Simula13b Indira Gandhi Sports Complex Mall

15b Radhasow m i Satsang Hall Benm ore

HIMUDAn m n i u v

14a Kendnya Vidvalaya Jaklioo15a Hamault Public School Benmore16a SPM Model School Engine Gliar17a St. Xavier School Sanjauh C'hovvk 17b Govt. Degree College Sanjauh18a Janjatiya Bhavvan Dhalh 18b M C Office Dhalh19a Shivalik Institute o f Nursing Bliattakufer 19b Hill Grove Sr Sec School C'hamiyana20a Sarasvvati Paradise School 20b Dnectorate of Horticulture Nav Baliar21a SV M Vikasnagar 21b G .S .S.S Kasumpati22a Central School for Tibetan Cliota Simula 22b Woodvilla Palace Hotel C'hota Simula23a C’onmimutv’ Center New Simula 23b D A V Sr Sec School New Simula24a Forest Rest House Khalmi 24b Bishop Cotton School Shimla25a Central Potato Research Institute Kanlog 25b St.Edwards School Hunland

42

C a rt R oadGitanjali Cottage Barnet SimulaOld Barriel(First Shop)K a r o qOld Barriel(Last Shop)S .4 N G T J

Regional Transport OfficeB h a k o o Oberoi Staff Rest House

SWIMMER HILL Hotel Oberoi CECIL SimulaP a g o g Tree(Near by Oberoi Hotel)

Labour Bureau O fficeM L A Rest HouseK AIT H Uachal Prudesh

A N N A D A L EUmv rs ity L 0 M G iv ld lian SabliaN a o g

S H A N K L I 10 M ES Inspection Bungalow'NY

11 Hotel VictorsCHERif L O N Victory Tunnel(First Shop)R a ilw a y s Victory Tunnel(Last Shop)

13 Bindu Raj DharmashalaT H E M A L L I D G A H C O L O N Yc a m b L lt v14 Cedar Grand HotelB A N K S P&TCOLONY15 R Tech Signal (Anuy Building)

■ Gref 1 6 Ranjan Hotel«*■ Christ Churc

7"o A n n a d a l e Old Bus Stop(First Shop)Shimla Old Railway BIndian Ins titu te OfEL a ZAnAdvanced Study s Old Bus Stop(Last Shop)CHAURA

ShimlaMAI D AN 1S Hotel V lkrantForest Area *

Local Bus StopiFirst Shop)K n I U N A N A G A RL A L P A N I Local Bus Stop! Last Shop)

Colors o f India Tours 20 GurdwaraPrivate Lim ited

21 Rippon Staff Rest HouseBOIL-EAUGANJ22 Hotel KolunoorP H A G L IS W A N A L G A R D E N23 Hotel MahainavaP A N J A R I

24 Tara View HotelZD Forest Department talland2D Deshraj Buildingh o r a \c h o w k i O K E S P L A iF U T I K A N D i M I L S I N G T C 26 uslia TradmgE S T A T E27 Lift bridge28 Hotel Crystal Palace

K A N L O G 29 Vidhan Sliablia Staff Rest HouseWater Tr.;Negr/30 High Court(New building)K A C H I G H A T T I

Rhawe 31 Tree(New Bemloe)K Y A R I

32 Udyog Bhawanoe ytotel33 Raiupal Shood Hnuland

F O R E S T C O L O N Y 34 2s inuaL Bliawan HnulandBAG H3D Balson Apartment Hnuland36 HP Headquarter Forest Departm ent

> Devi Temple ,So 37 Dnectorate o f Urban Dev elopment TollandBHAGWATITc Sankat M ochan Temple NAGAfl 38 C P W D Staff rest House Nigain V uiarW ater T a n k

K H A L I N I 39 PW D Departm entBISHOP COTTONSCHOOLC e n t e r : 3 1 . 1 0 5 8 0 , 7 7 . 1 6 5 7 6 40 HP Police Headquarter

Police Station Chota Shimla4 1M a p d a t a © 2 <

43

| 100% t | | Google map

Chungi Khana

Ram garhia Sabha

Sterling Castle

Bharari Regency

Garhwal Bhawan

Fnends ApartmentSecondry Delight Bar f 1

Sain ik Rest HouseHotel Paradise Regency

Batsley Bungalow

Jundokan Goju-Ryu K arate-Do Federation...

M Rad isson Hotel Shim la

Rajkiya KanyaLoreto Convent Tara Hall

Heritage Museum 9 ^

Army Recruitment Office

CYrcufej,Auckland School

Hotel Barowalia Resorts

0/* s r RdShim la British Resort

Indira Gandhi M edical College

Sh im la Youth HostelStrathmore Building Govt Dental College&Hospital

Koeniq Solutions IT Offsnore TrainingPostal Quarters

The Mall Shim la lc« Skating Rink

Hotel Gulm argtf i Passport Office Shim la Thomas Lodge BivoW T o '

Cedar Grand

Great Escape Routes

Hotel SidharathWildcraft

C hrist Church Shim laKalka Shimla Taxi Union

Sh im la O ld i Railw ay Station I k̂hoO RdRailway Staff Quarter Red Cross Building

Rippon Hospital

'° * e r BazarHim achal Pradesh Vidhan Sabha

C hauraKesri Bhawan

STEAM SHED

GurudwaraDirectorate of Education

Hotel Apsara

Hotel PrestigePo lice Station Sadar Shim la Cart RoadKrishna Nagar Mosque

Him achal Tour Travel Package

Forest Area

Indra Gandhi Sports Complex

|3»( Hotel Willow Banks

ClarkesC olors o f India Tours Private Limited Hotel H oliday Home

High Court Of Him achal Pradesh

Hotel Honeymoon

l C e nte t: 31.10772.77.172021

M ahavidyalaya Shim la

aFive Star Lodge

->Q

IT’D Ganga

GovernmentKendrtya v idyalaya

a

Shim la Q Cart Rd

Tunnel b v Pass R oa d1 v ic tory Tunnel2 Hotel \ aruna

Hotel Hans4 Hotel Ganga5 Hotel Auurae6 Hotel BaUees7 Hotel Surya8 Hotel Lord’s Grev9 Yathis Chandra bood10 Hotel Blue Diamond11 H o te l T a j P a la ce

12 BSNL (Staff Rest House)13 New Blessmgton Girls HostalH l=N Narkanda Resorts Shim la

14 Hiraa dial Prades h w aqf Board15 A u c k la n d T u n n e l

16 Auckland Bndae

44

8. Present Status, Recommendation and Action required for the Important Buildings

Reinforced concrete building (R)

Unsafe** - means that the building has been constructed before 1996 that did not account for codal provision of IS: 1893:2002 and IS: 13920:1993.

(The building has been considered to be constructed before 1996) Three years have been considered for the penetration of the code for construction.

Unsafe* - means that the building has been constructed after 1996 but did not account for codal provision of IS: 1893:2002 and IS: 13920:1993.

(The building has been considered to be constructed between 1996 and 2004) Two years have been considered for the penetration of the code for the

construction of the building.

Safe - means that the building has been constructed after 2004 and account for codal provision of IS: 1893:2002 and IS: 13920:1993.

Masonry building (M)

Unsafe- means that the building has been constructed that did not account for codal provision of IS: 4326:1993. The building have been considered to be

constructed before 1996. Three years have been considered for the penetration of the code for the construction of the building.

Safe- means that the building has been constructed that account for codal provision of IS: 4326:1993. The building have been considered to be

constructed after 1996. Further those masonry buildings have also considered under the category of safe buildings that have been constructed with

traditional earthquake resistant practices although these buildings might have been constructed before 1996.

Recommendations for all the important buildings in general that are considered unsafe:

1. Those buildings that are considered to be unsafe with respect to the existing codal provisions can be analyzed in detail and checked whether retrofitting

is required.

2. The respective building authorities can check if the dead load on the building floors can be reduced by removing unwanted items/ replacement of the

brick walls with light weight partitions/ light weight concrete blocks.

45

S.No Building/Structure Yr of Const. Typology Issues Present Status

Immediate Occupancy1 Administration1 HP Secretariat 1988, 1992 M, R Unsafe**,Unsafe**2 HP High Court3 HP Police Headquarters 1995 R Unsafe*4 Office of the DC Shimla 1899 M Safe5 MC Shimla Office N.A. M Unsafe6 District Court 2012 R cracks Soil settlement Safe7 Office of the SSP 1995 M Safe

8Office of Civil Defence & Home Guard

1978 RPeeling of surface

concrete layerUnsafe**

9 PWD Department 1996 R minor cracks not serious Unsafe*10 Meteorological Centre 2006 R By visual appearance Unsafe*11 NCC Bhawan 1815 M minor cracks not serious Unsafe12 Fire 1972 M cracks not serious Unsafe13 Forest Department 1969 R Unsafe**

Administration: (77% unsafe buildings, 10 out of 13)

Recommendation and Action required:

1. Since the buildings that are considered as important buildings are associated with state government department hence these particular buildings are

supposed to have immediate occupancy performance level means that the building should be in place for its respective function immediately after

earthquake. Hence the respective state government departments should have their Disaster Management Plan (DMP) in place for post-earthquake

scenario.

2. The disaster management plans made by respective departments should get shared with the other/ among the other state government departments.

3. Hence the state department should get their building retrofitted as per the existing codal norms.

46

S.No Building/Structure Yr of Const. Typology Issues Present Status2 Hospital1 IGMC 1986, 1994 R, R moderate crack

It seems that the hospitals does not

have standard operating

procedures w.r.t zone V

Unsafe**, Unsafe**2 Rippon Hospital 1882 M Safe3 Kamla Nehru Hospital 1924 M Unsafe4 Red Cross Society, Chhota Shimla 1989 R Unsafe**5 Indus Hospital, Nav Bahar 1983 R Unsafe**6 Tenzin Hospital, Panthaghati 2007 R Safe7 Shimla Sanitorium, Chaura Maidan 1996 M Unsafe

Hospital: (62% unsafe buildings, 5 out of 8)


1. Hospitals can be given the directions to follow standard operating procedures as that exist for the hospitals in the seismic areas. At present these

standard operating procedures does not exist in the hospitals of the Shimla city. Such as corridor with the dead materials/ unlocked stretcher etc.

2. Importantly the non-structural elements such as costly medical equipments should be anchored as per the requirement in the high seismic areas that

are highly required in the post disaster scenario.

3. Hospital staff should be trained to handle post disaster scenario of an earthquake the requirement of which is far different from the scenario of a normal

road accidents.

47

S.No Building/Structure Yr of Const. Typology Issues Present Status3 Electrial substation1 HPSEB Power House, Totu 1981 M moderate cracks Needs Attention Unsafe2 HPSEB Power Sub-St., Kasumpti 1990 R moderate cracks Needs Attention Unsafe**3 HPSEB Power Sub-St., Mall Rd 1908 M cracks Unsafe

Electrical Substation: (100% unsafe buildings, 3 out of 3)


1. Since power/electricity is an immediate required necessity in post disaster scenario, hence the state electricity board should maintain their building as

per the existing codal norms.

2. The disaster management plans made by respective departments should get shared with the other/ among the other state government departments.

48

S.No Building/Structure Yr of Const. Typology Issues Present Status4 Telecommunication1 Central Telecom Office, Mall Road 1886 M cracks Unsafe2 BSNL Tel. Exchange, Sanjauli N.A. R Unsafe*3 BSNL Tel. Exchange, New Shimla N.A. R Unsafe**4 BSNL Tel. Exchange, Totu 1996 R Unsafe*5 BSNL Tel. Exchange, Chhota Shimla 1994 R Unsafe**6 Airtel

Issue of Most of Building being

rented

7 Reliance 1995 R8 Docomo 2002 R Unsafe*9 Vodafone 2000 R Unsafe*

10 Idea 2002 R Unsafe*

Telecommunication: (100% unsafe buildings, 8 out of 8)


1. Any building that is taken up by Telecommunication Company on rent the procedure should be controlled by Municipal Corporation. At present it seems

that Municipal Corporation doesn't have any control over the buildings in which the Telecommunication Companies are running. The Telecommunication

is a dire necessity for post-disaster scenario of an earthquake and hence the Telecommunication system should exist in a building that has been designed

under the category of important building. Any building that has not been designed as an important building / does not fulfil the provisions of existing

codes cannot be taken up by Telecommunication Companies. This component should be ensured by Municipal Corporation of Shimla.

49

S.No Building/Structure Yr of Const. Typology Issues Present Status5 Information Dissemination1 All India Radio, Summerhill 1970 R Unsafe**2 Doordarshan, Shimla 1994 M,R crack Trans block soil settlement Unsafe*

Information Dissemination: (100% unsafe buildings, 2 out of 2)


1. Information dissemination is one of the important requirement in the post disaster earthquake scenario. Correct and important information is required

to be delivered to the common mass of the society.

2. Dissemination centers further help in the undesired rumors in the society.

50

S.No Building/Structure Yr of Const. Typology Issues Present StatusTransporation

6 TunnelVictory TunnelLower Bazar PedestrianDhalli

7 Bridge

1 Lift Bridge 1976 R CorrosionRetrofitting and Strengthening required

Unsafe**

2 Auckland Bridge 2013 R Safe

8 Bus stand1 ISBT Tutikandi 2012 R Safe2 Old Bus Stand 1990 R Unsafe**

Bridge: (50% unsafe bridges, 1 out of 2)


1. The reinforcement of tertiary beams of the lift bridge was found to be corroded; hence should be strengthened and corrosion should be arrested.

Bus Stand: (50% unsafe buildings, 1 out of 2)


1. It can be checked through a panel of committee if retrofitting is required for Old Bus Stand.

51

S.No Building/Structure Yr of Const. Typology Issues Present StatusServices

9 Water supply1 Water Pumping Station, Kasumpti 1992 R Unsafe**2 Water Tank, Sanjauli N.A. R Unsafe**3 Water Tank, Kasumpti N.A. moderate Cracks needs attention

10 Food & Civil Supplies1 Food Grain Godown 2003 R Unsafe*2 Kerosene Depot3 LPG Godown 2004 R Safe

Water Supply (Overhead Water Tanks): (100% unsafe structures, 2 out of 2)


1. Since water is one of the most essential requirement for life and hence is important requirement after earthquake. The concerned department should

check the compliance of all water tanks including overhead (including stacking), over the ground with respect to existing codal provisions. Incase found

unsafe should be given utmost priority for the retrofitting of the water tanks.

52

S.No Building/Structure Yr of Const. Typology Present Status

11 Police station1 Police Station, New Shimla 2010 R Safe

2 Police Station, Boileuganj 1886 M Unsafe

3 Police Station, Chhota Shimla 1905 M Safe

4 Police Station, Dhalli 2007 R Safe

5 Police Station, Sadar 1832 M

6 Police Station, Annadale7 Police Station, Sadar8 Police Station, Lakkar Bazar N.A. M Unsafe

9 Police Station, Sanjauli 2010 R Safe

Police stations: (33% unsafe buildings, 2 put of 6)


1. Police department should have post-earthquake disaster management plans to handle the chaotic situations.

53

S.No Building/Structure Yr of Const. Typology Issues Present Status

12 Fire station1 Fire Station, Chhota Shimla 2007 R Emergency operation to

be ensured - issue of Rohru village

Safe

2 Fire Station, Mall Road 1972 M Unsafe

3 Fire Station, Boileuganj 1975 R Unsafe**

Fire station: (67% unsafe buildings, 2 out of 3)


1. Fire station official should be trained to handle multiple accidental locations associated with fire hazard as it would be a scenario in case of postearthquake.

54

Rehabilitation Yr. of Const. Typology Present Status

EducationalGovt.

1 HP University, Summer Hill2 CoE Govt. Degree College, Sanjauli 1872 M Unsafe

3 Govt. Girls Sr. Sec. School, Portmore 1994 M Unsafe

4 Govt. Sr. Sec. School, Lalpani 1848 M Unsafe

5 RG Govt. Degree College, Kotshera 2003,2008,2011 R Unsafe*,Safe ,Safe

26 GHS Annandale 1987 R Unsafe**

27 GHS Bharari 1990 M Unsafe

28 GHS Chaura-maidan 1999 R Safe

29 GHS Dhalli N.A. M Unsafe

30 GHS Jakhu 2006 R Safe

31 GHS Kaithu N.A. M Unsafe

32 GHS Khalini 1996 R Unsafe*

33 GHS Krishananagar 1947 M Unsafe

34 GHS Summerhill 1990 M Unsafe

35 GHS Tutikandi 1942 M Unsafe

36 GSSS Boileauganj 1904 M Unsafe

37 GSSS Chhota Shimla 1990 R Unsafe**

38 GSSS Lakkar Bazar 1930 M Unsafe

39 GSSS Phagli 1930 M Unsafe

40 GSSS Portmore

41 GSSS Sanjauli N.A.,2000+ M,R Unsafe ,Unsafe*

42 GSSS Shimla

43 GSSS Totu 1963 M Unsafe

Private

55

1 Jesus & Mary School, Nav Bahar2 St. Bede's College, Nav Bahar 1973,1978,2004 R Unsafe**,Unsafe**, Unsafe*

3 St. Edwards School, Himland 1931,1996 M,R Unsafe, Unsafe**

4 DAV Sr. Sec. School, New Shimla 1999,2004 R Unsafe*,Safe

5 DAV Sr. Sec. School, Lakkar Bazar 1990 R Unsafe**

6 DAV Public School, Totu 1986 R Unsafe**

7 RKMV, Auckland 1994 R Unsafe*8 Saraswati Vidya Mandir, Vikas Nagar 1992 R Unsafe**9 Auckland House School, Aukland 1920,1941,2004 M,R,R Unsafe, Unsafe**,Safe

10 Central School for Tibetans, Chhota Shimla 1939,1990,1994,2004 M,R,R,R Unsafe, Unsafe** ,Unsafe**,Unsafe**

11 Bishop Cotton School, New Shimla 1859,1987,1992,2003 M,R,R,R Unsafe ,Unsafe** ,Unsafe**, Safe

12 Loreto Convent, Tara Hall 1892,1978,1992 M,R,R Unsafe, Unsafe**, Unsafe**

13 Skating Rink Building 2002 R Unsafe*

14 Arya Sr. Sec. School Shimla N.A.,1980,1992 M,R,R Unsafe, Unsafe**, Unsafe**

15 Auckland School Shimla

16 Bal Shiksha Niketan Chakkar 1980 R Unsafe**

17 Bishop Cotton School (Shimla) 1859,1987,1992,2003 M,R,R,R Unsafe, Unsafe**, Unsafe**, Unsafe*

18 Blue Bells High School Dhalli 1964 M Unsafe

19 Chasplee Garden School Shimla N.A. M Unsafe

20 Convent Of Jesus & Mary

21 D.A.V. Public School Lakkar Bazar

22 D.A.V. Public School Totu

23 D.A.V. Public School New Shimla

24 Dayanand Public School Shimla 1980 R Unsafe**

25 ECI Chalet Day School Shimla 1981 M Unsafe

44 Hainault Public School Shimla 1891,1996 M,R Unsafe, Unsafe*

45 Happy Model Sanjauli 1994 R Unsafe**

46 Himalayan Public School Kaithu 1988 R Unsafe**47 Himalayan International School, Chharabra

56

48 H.P.University Model School Summerhill49 Jesus & Marry School Shimla

50 Kendriya Vidyalaya Jakhoo 1964 R Unsafe**

51 Laureate B.Ed. College Bharari N.A. R Safe

52 Loreto Convent, Tara Hall, Shimla 1892,1978,1992 M,R Unsafe, Unsafe**, Unsafe**

53 Monal Public Sanjauli 1950,1994 M,R Safe, Unsafe**

54 Sacred Heart School Dhalli 2007,2010 R Safe ,Safe

55 Sanjay Gandhi SSS New Shimla 1996 R Unsafe**

56 Savitri Public School Talland 1970 R Unsafe**

57 S.D. SSS Shimla 1907 R Unsafe**

58 Shimla Public School 1979,2002 R Unsafe**,Unsafe*

59 Shishu Shiksha Niketan Totu 1990 R Unsafe**

60 S.P.M. Model School Sanjauli 1940 M Unsafe

61 St. Edward's School Shimla 1931,1996 M,R Unsafe ,Unsafe*

62 St. Marry School Chakkar 1997 R Unsafe**

63 St. Thomas SSS Shimla 1912,2003 M,R Unsafe ,Unsafe*

64 S.V.M. Vikasnagar 1992 R Unsafe**

65 Tibetan SSS Shimla

Special institution1 Anath Ashram, Tutikandi 1935,1973,2005 M,M,R Safe, Safe, Unsafe*

2 School of Blind Children, Dhalli 1976,2004 M,R Safe, Unsafe*3 School of Speech & Hearing Impaired Children, Dhalli 1976,1987 M,R Safe, Unsafe**

Community hall1 Community Center, New Shimla 1996 R Unsafe*

2 Community Hall, Dhalli 1997 R Unsafe**

Parking

57

1 Car Parking, High Court 2000 R Unsafe*

2 MC Car Parking, Below High Court 2002 R Unsafe*

3 New Car Parking, Near HHH 2004 R Safe

4 New Car Parking, Sanjauli 2011 R Safe

Religious1 Kalibari Temple Hall 1823,1885 M,R Unsafe, Unsafe**

Rehabilitation: (83% unsafe buildings, 84 out of 101)Recommendation and Action required:

1. Since the rehabilitation buildings are considered as important buildings which are associated with the state government departments such as education

department and Municipal Corporations hence these particular buildings are supposed to have immediate occupancy performance level means the

building should be in place for function immediately after the earthquake for being occupied by those people whose residences have been severely damaged/collapsed. Hence the respective state government department should have their disaster management plan (DMP) in place for the postearthquake scenario to handle the chaotic situations as these buildings will be occupied by the people.2. The disaster management plans made by respective departments should get shared with the other/ among the other state government departments.3. The state department/private bodies should get their buildings retrofitted as per the existing codal norms.4. The non-structural elements such as costly computer systems should be anchored as required in the high seismic areas to reduce economic loss.5. Any building that is functioning as a school and is taken up on rent the procedure should be controlled by Municipal Corporation. At present it seems

that Municipal Corporation doesn't have any control over the building's safety aspects. The school buildings are a dire necessity in case of post-disaster scenario of an earthquake. Hence the private schools should exist in a building that has been designed under the category of important building. Any

school building that has not been designed as an important building / does not fulfil the provisions of existing codes cannot be taken up by school authorities. This component should be ensured by Municipal Corporation of Shimla.6. Since water is one of the most essential requirement for the life and hence required after earthquake. School authorities should keep the water tanks in perfect conditions.

58

Masonry Building on the roadside

S. No. Building Name Yr. of Const. Present StatusTunnel Bypass Road

9 Yatis Chandra Sood Shimla(Tunnel Bypass road) N.A. Unsafe

12 BSNL Staff Rest House Shimla N.A. Unsafe

Cart Road4 Oberoi Staff Rest House 1881 Unsafe

5 Hotel Oberoi CECIL Shimla N.A. Unsafe

10 MES Inspection Bungalow Shimla N.A. Unsafe

15 R Tech Signal (army) Shimla 1929 Unsafe

16 Hotel Ranjan Shimla 1905 Unsafe

21 Rippon Staff Rest House Shimla N.A. Unsafe

22 Hotel Kohinoor Shimla N.A. Unsafe

29 Vidhan Sabha Staff Rest House Shimla N.A. Unsafe

41 Police Station Chhota Shimla N.A. Safe

Roadside Masonry Building: (91% unsafe buildings, 10 out of 11)Recommendation and Action required:

1. If possible, it should be ensured that the masonry buildings along the roadside should be strengthened/retrofitted by the owners to the extent that severe damage/collapse of the building does not take place. If such thing happens, it will lead to blockage of the roads in case of an earthquake.

59

RCC Building on the roadside

S. No. Building Name Yr. of Const. Present Condition

Tunnel Bypass Road2 Hotel Varuna Shimla N.A. Unsafe**

3 Hotel Hans Shimla 2004 Safe

4 Hotel Ganga Shimla 1881 Unsafe**

5 Hotel Anurag Shimla N.A. Unsafe**

6 Hotel BalJees Shimla

7 Hotel Surya Shimla 1986 Unsafe**

8 Hotel Lord's Grey Shimla 1994 Unsafe**

10 Hotel Blue Diamond Shimla N.A. Unsafe**

11 Hotel Taj Palace Shimla 1979 Unsafe**

13 New Blessington Girls Hostal Shimla N.A. Unsafe**

14 H.P. Waqf Board Shimla 1980 Unsafe**

15 Auckland Tunnel 1929 Unsafe**

16 Auckland Bridge

Cart Road3 Regional Transport Office Shimla N.A. Unsafe*

7 Labour Bureau Office Shimla N.A. Unsafe*

8 MLA Rest House Shimla 1967 (approx.) Unsafe**

9 Vidhan Sabha Shimla

11 Hotel Victory Shimla Safe

13 Bindu Raj Dharamshala Shimla 1984 Unsafe**

14 Hotal Cedar Grand Shimla N.A. Unsafe*

18 Hotel Vikrant Shimla 1965 Unsafe**

20 Gurdwara Shimla 1885 Unsafe**

23 Hotel Mahamaya Shimla 1994 Unsafe**

60

24 Hotel Tara View Shimla N.A. Unsafe**

25 Deshraj Building Shimla N.A. Unsafe**

26 Usha Trading Shimla N.A. Unsafe**

27 Lift bridge Unsafe**

28 Hotel Crystal Palace Shimla 1982 Unsafe**

30 High Court Shimla New Building 2014 Safe

32 Udyog Bhawan Bemloi 1987 Unsafe**

33 Rampal Shood Himland 1979 Unsafe**

34 Nirmal Bhawan Himland N.A. Unsafe*

35 Balson Apartment Himland Unsafe**

37 Directorate of UD Talland 1996 Unsafe*

38 CPWD Staff rest House Nigam Vihar N.A. Unsafe*

Roadside RCC Building: (91% unsafe buildings, 29 out of 32)Recommendation and Action required:

1. If possible, it should be ensured that the masonry buildings along the roadside should be strengthened/retrofitted by the owners to the extent that severe damage/collapse of the building does not take place. If such thing happens, it will lead to blockage of the roads in case of an earthquake.

61

Safe Shelter Masonry Building

S. No. Building Name Yr. of Const. Present Status

18.1a Police Line Bharari Admin Block N.A. Unsafe

18.3a Loreto Convent Tarahall Junior Block 1892 Unsafe

18.5a HPU Summer HillHimalayan Study N.A. Unsafe

Student Central Association N.A. Unsafe

18.7b Sankat Mochan Temple Main Temple Block 1962 Unsafe

18.8a GSSS Tuti kandi 1942 (in record) Unsafe

18.9a Railway Club Nabha N.A. Unsafe

18.9b Government Primary School Nabha N.A. Safe

18.10a GSSS Phagli 1925,1930 Unsafe

18.10b Building Of Education Dept PhagliBlock B 1980 Unsafe

Old Building 1980 Unsafe

18.11a Valmiki Mandir, Krishna nagar 1904 Unsafe

18.11b G.S.S.S Lalpani 1848 Unsafe

18.13a DAV Primary School Mall N.A. Unsafe

18.15a Hainault Public School BenmoreStaff Room Block 1891 Unsafe

Principal Office Block 1891 Unsafe

18.16a SPM Model School Engine GharPrincipal Office Block 1891 Safe

Class Room Block 1940 Unsafe

18.17b Govt. Degree College Sanjauli 1869,1872 Unsafe

18.22a Central School for Tibetan Chhota Shimla Prayer Block 1939 Unsafe

18.22b Woodvilla Palace Hotel Chhota Shimla 1938 Unsafe

18.24b Bishop Cotton School Shimla Office Block 1859 Unsafe

18.25b St. Edwards School HimlandBlock A 1931 Unsafe

Block B '1931 Unsafe

62

1. Since the Safe Shelter buildings are considered as important buildings associated with the state government departments such as education department

and Municipal Corporations hence these particular buildings are supposed to have immediate occupancy performance level means the building should be in place for function immediately after the earthquake for being occupied by those people whose residences have been severely damaged/collapsed. Hence the respective state government department/private bodies should have their disaster management plan (DMP) in place for the post-earthquake

scenario to handle the chaotic situations as these buildings will be occupied by the people.2. The disaster management plans made by respective departments should get shared with the other/ among the other state government departments.3. The state department/private bodies should get their buildings retrofitted as per the existing codal norms.4. The non-structural elements should be anchored as required in the high seismic areas to avoid any hindrances.6. Since water is one of the most essential requirement for the life and hence required after earthquake. The authorities concerned should keep the water

tanks in perfect conditions.

Safe Shelter Masonry Building: (92% unsafe buildings, 22 out of 24)Recommendation and Action required:

63

Safe Shelter RCC Building

S. No. Building Name Yr. of Const. Present Status

18.1a Police Line BharariBarrack Block 1985 Unsafe**CID Block 1980 Unsafe**

18.1b RKMV Auckland Science Block 1994 Unsafe**

18.2a Ice Skating Rink Lakkar Bazar 2002 Unsafe*

18.2b MC Rest House Bharari 1994 Unsafe**

18.3a Loreto Convent Tara HallSenior Block 1 1992 Unsafe**Senior Block 2 1978 Unsafe**

18.3b Community Center Chungi Khana 2001 Unsafe*

18.4a Shimla Nursing College Annadale 2003 (approx.) Unsafe*Auditorium cum Library Block 2003 Unsafe*

18.4b RG Government Degree College KotsheraArt Block 2008 SafeScience Block 2011 SafeIT Lab Block 2011 SafeAdmin Block 1984 Unsafe**Arts Block 1988 Unsafe**Auditorium Block 1975 Unsafe**Chief Warden Block 2000 Unsafe*COE Block 2006 SafeDCC Block 1975 Unsafe**

18.5a HPU Summer HillEOC Block Phase 1 2007 SafeEOC Block Phase 2 2007 SafeGandhi Bhawan 1990 Unsafe**Health Centre 1988 Unsafe**HPU Business School 2005 SafeICDEOL Block 1991 Unsafe**IT Lab 1995 Unsafe**Law Department 1990 Unsafe**

64

Library Block 1975 Unsafe**Multi Facility Block 2005 SafeNetaji Subhash Chandra Bose Bhawan 1991 Unsafe**Population Research Centre 2002 Unsafe*Science Block A 1971 Unsafe**Science Block B 1971 Unsafe**Guest House 2011 Safe

18.6a AAY BEE Banquet Hall Totu 2002 Unsafe*

18.7a Gopal Mandir Boileauganj 1960 (approx.) Unsafe**

18.7b Sankat Mochan Temple

Office Block 2003 Unsafe*Hospital Block 1994 Unsafe**Bhandara Block 1994 Unsafe**Toilet Block 2000 Unsafe*

18.8b ISBT Tutikandi 2012 Safe

18.10b Building of Education Department Phagli

New Building 2010 SafeBlock A 2005 SafeBlock C 1993 Unsafe**Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan 2001 Unsafe*

18.12a SD School Ram BazarAdministration Block 1907 Unsafe**Play School Building 1907 Unsafe**

18.12b Old Bus Stand Shimla 1990 Unsafe**

18.13b Indira Gandhi Sports Complex Mall Road 1984 Unsafe**

18.14a Kendriya Vidyalaya Jakhoo 1964 Unsafe**

18.15a Hainault Public School Benmore Classrooms and Library Block 1996 Unsafe*

18.15b Radhaswami Satsang Hall Benmore N.A. Unsafe**

18.17a St. Xavier School Sanjauli Chowk 1982 Unsafe**

18.18a Janajatiya Bhawan DhalliOld Building 1989 Unsafe**New Building 1997 Unsafe*

18.18b MC Office Dhalli 1993-1997 Unsafe**

18.19a Shivalik Institute of Nursing Bhatta KufferLibrary Block 1980 Unsafe**

Reception Block 1980 Unsafe**

65

18.19b Hill Grove Sr Sec School ChamiyanaOld Block 1996 Unsafe*

New Block 2010 Safe

18.20a Saraswati Paradise School 2009 Safe

18.20b Directorate of Horticulture Nav BaharLaboratry Block 1969 Unsafe**

FT Factory Building 1969 Unsafe**

Directorate Building 1982 Unsafe**

18.21a SVM Kasumpati 1992 Unsafe**

18.21b GSSS Kasumpati 1985,1990 Unsafe**

18.22a Central School For Tibetans Chhota ShimlaClass Rooms & Library Block 1994 Unsafe**

Computer Block 2004 Safe

Principal Block 1990 Unsafe**

18.22b Wood villa palace hotel 1938 Unsafe**

18.23a Community Center New Shimla 1996 Unsafe*

18.23b DAV Sr Sec School New ShimlaBlock A 1999 Unsafe*

Block A1 2004 Safe

18.24a Forest Rest House Khalini 1992 Unsafe**

18.24b BCS Shimla

Junior Block 1992 Unsafe**

Class Rooms & Lib Block 1987 Unsafe**

Boxing Hall & Shooting Block 2003 Unsafe*Activity Center 1985 Unsafe**

18.25a Central Potato Research Institute Kanlog

Administration Block 2000 Unsafe*

Auditorium Block 1980 Unsafe**

CMBL Lab 2000 Unsafe*

Director Cell Building 1965 Unsafe**

Social Science Division Block 2000 Unsafe*

18.25b St.Edwards School Himland Primary Block 1996 Unsafe*

66

1. Since the Safe Shelter buildings are considered as important buildings associated with the state government departments such as education department

and Municipal Corporations hence these particular buildings are supposed to have immediate occupancy performance level means the building should be in place for function immediately after the earthquake for being occupied by those people whose residences have been severely damaged/collapsed. Hence the respective state government department/private bodies should have their disaster management plan (DMP) in place for the post-earthquake

scenario to handle the chaotic situations as these buildings will be occupied by the people.2. The disaster management plans made by respective departments should get shared with the other/ among the other state government departments.3. The state department/private bodies should get their buildings retrofitted as per the existing codal norms.4. The non-structural elements should be anchored as required in the high seismic areas to avoid any hindrances.6. Since water is one of the most essential requirement for the life and hence required after earthquake. The authorities concerned should keep the water

tanks in perfect conditions.

Safe Shelter RCC Building: (82% unsafe buildings, 68 out of 83)Recommendation and Action required:

67

9. Summary of Safe and Unsafe Buildings

Category Total No. of Buildings Total No. of Safe Buildings Total No. of Unsafe Buildings % Unsafe Buildings

Administration 49 13 36 73.5

Rehabilitation 101 17 84 83.2

Transportation 43 4 39 90.7

Safe Shelter 107 17 90 84.1

Total 300 51 249 83.0

In general, it has been observed that most of the important buildings are old, i.e. constructed before the introduction of existing earthquake

resistant codal provisions, hence most of the buildings have been observed to be unsafe. Although the growth of Shimla city in terms of new

constructions are taking place leading to more and more congestion, hence it is highly desirable that an effective disaster management plan

should be worked out to handle any eventuality of an earthquake.

68

rapid visual survey (rvs) study of important buildings ... buildings, transportation and...

Documents