LOW COST HOUSING

LECTURE 3

Ar. Yatra Sharma

Approach to Low Cost Housing-I

 Planning of land and infrastructure services

 Design of Individual house
 Building materials and construction technology
outline
 Planning of Land and Land Development
 Supply of Land
 Economization of land
 Housing Density

 Low Cost Infrastructure Services

 Status of Services in Nepal
 Low Cost Sanitation
 Waste Disposal
 Water Supply
 Energy
Group discussion
 Group division 2 groups of 5 members
 Brainstorm among your group members on:
 How can we plan/develop land to make
cost-effective design?
Planning of Land and Land Development
Supply of Land
 Land is fixed asset- not expandable
 Housing needs land supply
 Housing involves buying of plot, construction of
house and reception of road (more land) and
services
 Urbanization creates more demand of houses but
scarcity of land
 Scarcity of land increases its value
 High priced land increases cost of housing
Supply of Land and Housing Costs
Population growth

Increasing housing
demand

Scarcity of land

Increased land
prices

Increased housing
costs
Supply of Land in Nepal
 Out of total land in Nepal only 16.07% is fit for
agriculture.
 Most of our settlement near fertile land.
 Haphazard planning consumes land unnecessarily
 Currently, no. of houses/hectare is only15 units
 Standard density in urban areas should be 300
houses/hectare
 Continuation of low density housing will destroy
land for growing population.
 Economization of land necessary not only for
affordability of house owner but also safeguarding
annual food product
Economization of Land Use

Higher Land
Prices

Economization
of Land Use

Higher
Density
Housing Density
 Measure of number of dwelling per area occupied.
 Net Residential Density =number of dwelling per
area excluding roads, parks, playground, school,
commercial areas and other land uses
 Gross Residential Density= number of dwelling per
area inclusive of all land uses

Generally speaking, Density =Gross Density

Housing Density
 In Nepal housing is owner-built system.
 Unplanned/uncoordinated residential growth
 Sparse land use
 10-15 houses/hectare even in periphery of
Kathmandu city core.
 But cost of house is more than cost of land in places.
 Formal housing supply has enabled density control
although they are due to commercial reasons.
 More need of High Density
High Density Vs Congestion
But!
HIGH DENSITY ≠ Congestion

 High density should be achieved through proper

planning.
 Row house or apartment design can enable high
density along with good living environment
Benefits of High Density
 Economy in Land
 Economy in Infrastructure cost

 Efficiency in Maintenance

 Better Urban Environment

Low Rise High Density
 1-5 stories is considered low rise
 1-3 stories is ideal for Nepal
 Cost-effective load-bearing construction for 3 storeys
 Row housing preferable for low rise high density
 Good housing even in 1.25 ana. Eg. Pokhara Housing
Low Rise High Density
 Pokhara Housing (Sanchaya Kosh):
 Total area= 3ropanies
 Built Up Area= 42.25%
 Open Space= 57.75%

Housing Density
Kathmandu 15 Houses/H
Kuleshwor Housing 25 Houses/H
Dallu Housing 38 Houses/H
Galphutar Housing 45 Houses/H

Pokhara Housing 180 Houses/H

High Rise High Density
 Multi-Storeyed Apartments
 Low income groups cannot afford apartments in Nepal
 Allows more density over low rise
 Cost of share of land is much lower
Low Rise Vs High Rise
 Low rise construction can use vernacular techniques
 Low rise allows incremental growth
 Low rise can allow individual land ownership
 Low rise allows controllable open space
 High rise technology is more costly per sq.ft.
 High rise services difficult to maintain and operate
 High rise requires high safety requirements
 Low rise can allow indegenious lifestyle and income
generation activities
Low Cost Infrastructure Services
Types of Services
 Sanitation
 Waste Disposal
 Water Supply
 Energy
Status of services in Nepal
Services % of houses (National
Indoor toilet 5.85
Outdoor Toilet 17.85
Firewood for cooking 84.45
Electricity for cooking 0.83
Electricity for lighting 29.98
Kerosenne for lighting 68.96
In house Drinking water 28.08
Public stand pipe 0.12
National Shelter Policy, 1996
Low cost Sanitation
 Lost cost solutions vary for villages to towns to
metropolitan
 World bank study 1980 Identified 20 sanitation
system
 Only few systems indentified to be cost effective
 Septic tank and other wet-systems expensive
 Evaluation based on soil condition, cost technical
assistance, housing condition, cleaning material and
also requirement for manure
Low cost Sanitation
 Pour flush latrine with Twin leach pit latrine:
 “Sulabh Sauchalayas”
 Slopy pan requires only 2 ltrs. Unlike normal 12.5 litres
 Twin pits to receive excreta in rotation can last for 100 years

 Shallow Sewers:
 Appropriate for high density slums and squatters
 Seen in Brazil and Pakistan squatters
 Sewers laid at shallow depth (30cm)
 Small inspection chambers and underground disposal system

 Eco-san
 Separate urine and feces collection
 Effective decomposition
 Environment friendly community toilets
Waste Disposal
 Door to Door collection of household waste is
expensive
 Separation of containers for organic and inorganic
waste
 Composting of organic materials can produce
good quality manure
 Tablets made of organic wastes can be alternate
fuels
 Recycling or inorganic elements like paper, plastic if
possible
 Economizes land-fill area.
Water Supply
 Per capita requirement per day =225 litres daily
 Urban and rural water supply in Nepal insufficient
 Gravity flow most cost-effective but necessity for
pumping seen in most cases
 Rain water harvesting can allow cost –effective water
storage
 Roof water collection pipes along eaves connected to
storage tanks
 Other options: auto-stop shower and taps, double
flush button in WC, waste water for plants, reedbed-
treatment
Energy
 Most houses do not have electric supply for lighting,
cannot afford LPG gas for cooking and depend on
firewood
 More sustainable at cost-effective can be Bio- gas for
Cooking and street –lighting in rural areas
 Giant powerhouse-sun!
 Solar energy can be used to cook, light and heat in
cost effective manner.
 Improved ovens (Sudhariyeko chulo)
Group discussion

Any other low-cost infrastructure technology ?