Paper is a study of Chandigarh in terms of innovations made and strategies adopted to promote cost-effective housing in fifties

1. Chandigarh Experiment with Low Cost Housing
*Ar. Jit Kumar Gupta
Ex- Director
College of Architecture, I.E.T, Bhaddal
#344, Sec. 40-A, Chandigarh- 160036
Mobile-911-90410-26414
Email : jit_kumar2000@yahoo.com; jit.kumar1944@gmail.com

2. Sub-Theme: Case Studies of Sustainable Urban Housing Development
Chandigarh Experiment with Low Cost Housing
Ar. Jit Kumar Gupta
Abstract
Considering the criticality of shelter as a major determinant of quality of life providing shelter,
for all ,remains high on the agenda of all welfare states. With 99% of 24 million housing
shortage in India falling in the category of economically weaker section and low income groups,
low cost housing as an issue, as an option and as a strategy has assumed critical importance in
achieving the global target of providing affordable shelter to all.
Creating low cost housing has emerged as the most challenging and daunting task in the context
of rapid urbanization and growing poverty, for all professionals, administrators, community and
financial institutions due to complexity and enormity of factors involved in planning, designing
and construction of such housing.
Housing cost has been found to be closely linked to physical, economic, social & technological
factors. Major determinants of housing cost include cost of land, materials, finance,
technology, labor , design, structure, professional charges, transportation, levies and taxes etc. In
the face of large number of inputs governing the housing cost, optimizing and balancing these
costs emerges as the major challenge for the professionals for creating low cost housing solutions
without compromising with quality of housing and ambient environment.
Making available affordable and appropriate housing through low cost options is not a new
strategy. It has been followed on large scale in the creation of housing stock for the state
government employees who were to be housed in Chandigarh capital as part of the shifting of the
state capital from Lahore to Chandigarh. With very low budget allocated for the rental housing
sector, the only option available with the Chandigarh designers was to search for low cost
options for creating appropriate housing stock. These options included: Using Architectural
Design as a strategy to minimize cost ;Innovate use of locally available building materials;
Minimizing use of cement concrete ; Promoting local materials in their natural form,
Minimizing use of cost intensive materials including wood and glass; Using innovative
technologies involving pre-cast building components; Eliminating use of costly machinery and
promoting improved local technologies; Using vernacular architecture and promoting
standardization which bring out contribution of the capital city Chandigarh to low cost
housing.
Key words: urbanization, poverty, building design, local materials, technologies, low cost-
housing

3. Chandigarh Experiment with Low- Cost Housing
Introduction
The 21st
Century has been rightly called the century of urbanization, when the majority of the
developing countries will have more population living in urban areas as compared to rural
counterparts. Following this pattern, India is projected to be more urbanized in the second half of
the century. As per the 2011 Census, India had a population of 1,210.98 million, out of which
377.10 million (31.16%) lived in urban areas. During 2001-11, urban population of India grew at
a CAGR of 2.8%, resulting in increase in the level of urbanization from 27.81% to 31.16%.
However, despite rapid growth of urban population, cities and towns, India has been slow to
urbanize, when compared with the other major developing countries of the world including
China (45%), Indonesia(54%), Mexico(78%) and Brazil(87%). Urban India is projected to
reach 600 million by 2031. The large transition of population does not simply mark a shift of
demographics but places cities and towns at the centre of India’s development trajectory. With
urban areas contributing 62-63% of GDP(2009-10), coming decades will see Urban India
playing a critical role in realizing the structural transformation of the Indian economy and
sustaining a high rate of the economic growth.
An important feature of urbanization in India is the contribution of migration to the increase in
urban population, which was recorded as 19.9% (1971-81), 22.6% (1981-91) and 21.1% (1991-
2001). With rural-urban productivity differential widening, the pace of migration from Rural
India will be faster, to take advantage of higher productivity, non-agricultural sectors in Urban
India. With 70% of new jobs created in Urban India during 2010-2030 (Mckinsey Report-2010),
urban areas are going to witness large- scale migration to urban centers. The migration will have
its genesis in virtual transfer of rural poverty to urban areas. Thus, urban centers will house the
majority of rural poor, who will be requiring basic services and amenities to support them.
Looking at the existing pattern, it has been observed that urbanization, migration and
proliferation of slums are inter-related processes, with poverty as the common denominator.
With poverty driving the urban growth, India’s cities and towns are suffering under the
enormous pressure of fast growth of slums and squatter settlements.
According to “Report on India Urban Infrastructure and Services – March 2011”, with urban
poverty standing at 25.7% (2004-05) and the number of urban poor recorded at 80.8 million,
urban- services deprivation and shelter- poverty are assuming alarming proportions, which has

4. resulted in not only creating an environment of poor access to basic services, public health and
other inputs, but has also led to fast proliferation of slums and pavement dwellers, which are the
most visible manifestation of shelter poverty in Urban India. In 1991, every fifth (21.3%) urban
resident was a slum dweller, whereas in 2001, every fourth (23.07%) resident became a slum
dweller. Cities like Mumbai, Faridabad and Meerut had half of their population living in slums.
The Report further lists that major drivers of shelter poverty are the heavily distorted land
market, highly inadequate regime of protecting property rights, absence of well crafted strategy
for inclusion of economically and socially weaker sections in urban planning. Accordingly,
physical and social emancipation of Urban India would require provision of appropriate quantity
and quality of shelter , supportive infrastructures and amenities, to provide required quality of
life to the majority of urban residents, in order to enable them to make rightful contribution to
promote rapid economic growth on a sustainable basis. Accordingly, removal of shelter poverty
would require innovative, cost-effective and technology- driven strategies based on local
materials and ethos, in order to evolve low- cost and affordable solutions for creating large- scale
housing.
Housing Shortage
Indian urbanization is distinctly marked with duality and contradictions involving large
concentration of people in the existing urban centers, with very few new cities coming up to
accommodate the large growth of urban population. The growing concentration of population,
according to the report of Jones Lang LaSalle on “Affordable Housing in India-An Inclusive
Approach to Sheltering the Bottom of the Pyramid (2012)”, has led to problems of land shortage,
housing shortfall and congested transit. In addition, it has also severely stressed the existing basic
amenities including water, power, open spaces etc. The cumulative effect of the factors involving
large influx of population(such as high land prices and high degree of speculation, inefficient
land market, inadequate resources and funds available with parastatal agencies, stakeholders and
beneficiaries) has led to an ever -widening gap between demand and supply of affordable shelter,
in Urban India.
The Technical Group, constituted by government of India for the 11th
Five Year Plan (2007-12)
on “Estimation of Urban Housing Shortage”, has placed the housing shortage at 24.71 million
dwelling units at the end of 2006. The Group further estimated that 88% shortage pertains to
Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) and 11% to Lower- Income Group (LIG). For Middle-
Income and High- Income Groups, the estimated shortage was placed at merely 0.04 million
dwelling units. The estimated shortage at the end of the 11th
Plan period, i.e. 2012, has been

5. placed at 26.53 million dwelling units. At the current pace, the housing requirement by 2020 is
estimated to be 30 million additional dwellings.
Given the ever- rising shortage of housing, providing low- cost housing as an issue, as an option
and as a strategy, is assuming critical importance in achieving the national target of providing
affordable shelter for all. With shelter as the major determinant of quality of life and more than
99% of prevailing housing shortage falling in the low income categories, providing low- cost
housing appears to be the limited option for creating, augmenting and expanding the housing
stock in the country.
Low- Cost Housing
Major determinants of housing cost according to the Jones Lang LaSelle Report, are cost of land,
construction cost, cost of stamp- duty and registration of land, legal and approval costs, profit
margins of the developers, stamp- duty and registration charges of the finished units, among
others. With land and cost of construction taking away more than 70% investment on housing,
for making housing cost- effective, cost of land and construction have to be scaled down. In
addition, taxes, fees, duties charged by government have to be rationalized in order to make
housing more affordable. Government and other parastatal agencies have been making enormous
efforts in cutting down the cost of housing in order to overcome the shortage prevailing in low-
income groups, but these efforts have been largely limited and without focus. Subsidy has been
used as a major tool to lower down the cost of housing by asking promoters and developers to
construct a defined percentage of housing for this category and sell it to economically weaker
section beneficiaries on a predetermined basis. However, the percentage of such housing has
been hardly 15-20% as against the prevailing shortage of 99%. Thus, the supply of housing has
not kept pace with the actual demand in this category. In addition, even the subsidized cost of the
shelter is kept very high, which eliminates the major proportion of the population belonging to
the economically weaker section, due to lack of availability of adequate resource and low paying
capacity. The shelter requirements of the economically sensitive population would require
number of options to be explored in order to create a large housing stock. Such options could
include creating housing on ownership, rental or transit basis etc. With large options available,
this paper looks at the experiment made in the gamut of rental housing by the State government
in the capital city of Chandigarh, in order to demonstrate the role of professionals in
cutting/scaling down the cost and making housing more affordable.
Chandigarh Experiment
Conceptualized more than 60 years ago ( in the shadow of the partition of India in 1947, with the
creation of Pakistan and the State of Punjab losing the capital city of Lahore), Chandigarh- the

6. new capital city heralded a new era of city planning and architecture in India. In the words of Le
Corbusier, the Planner and Architect of the city,

7. ‘the city of Chandigarh is planned to human scale. It puts in touch with the infinite cosmos and
nature. It provides us with the places and buildings for all human activities in which the citizens
can live a full and harmonious life. Here the radiance of nature and heart are within our reach.’
Planned on a rigid, rectangular grid iron pattern of roads, half a mile apart in the east-west
direction and three-quarters of a mile in the north-south direction, Chandigarh capital city
promised basic amenities of life even to the poorest of the poor of its citizens to lead a dignified
life. Safe from fast traffic, in easy reach of all needs of material, mental and moral sustenance
and growth, surrounded by nature in an intimate community and yet part of a real city, this was

8. the life dreamed of for the half a million(0.5million) inhabitants to be brought into the city in
two distinct phases of development. A distinct quality of life was accordingly assured to a
distinct class of people to be housed in this capital city to be established on a terrain with great
mountains to the north, and two rivers flowing approximately 7-8 kms apart. The human life in
the city was proposed to be compartmentalized and put into air-tight containers of working,
living, care of body and spirit, known as SECTORS, each having human contents varying
between 5,000 and 25,000, separated by fast moving traffic arteries known as V2 and V3 and
connected with a central green flowing from south to north in the direction of great mountains.
The Master Plan of the city re-drawn by Le-Corbusier in four hectic days of inspired activity in
February 1951, was largely based on the well-advanced master plan prepared by Albert Mayer.
It changed the shape of the city from a leaf to a rectangle, reducing considerably the size of the
city in the process. The basic unit of planning was changed from a super-block to sector based
on the same neighborhood concept i.e. city within a city. The sector constituted an attempt to
create space, which provided for day-to-day material and social needs of the citizens in easy
reach of home, but at the same time linked to a larger scale of the city in terms of transport and
services. The entire network of sectors was woven with a so- called efficient system of traffic
and transportation governed by the rule of 7 Vs, changed by adding V8bc to suit the specific
needs of the city. Sector- planning was made introvert with no door opening on to V2 & V3.
The focus of life within the sector was V4 – the shopping street, which was to contain amenities
needed for catering to the material needs of the residents. The size and shape of the sector was
based on considerations with focus on human beings and their welfare. The industrial area was
placed on the south-east of the city to eliminate any possibility of heavy traffic entering the city.
A 500 feet wide green belt provided an organic green to seal the residential sectors from
industrial fumes and noise. Educational area occupied the north-west side with work centers
concentrated in the Capitol Complex, City Centre, and Sub-city Centre and along the major axis.
The Master Plan envisaged a distinct density pattern with density level much higher in the
second phase as compared to the first phase. An effective mechanism of controlling and
safeguarding the space around the new city from the onslaught of haphazard growth and
development was provided by declaring an area of 5 miles, which was subsequently increased to
10 miles, as periphery area. Tree Preservation Order and Advertisement Control Order were
issued to protect trees and to regulate the display area. These in nut-shell were the planning and
protective mechanisms evolved to safeguard the quality of life in the city of tomorrow’s India.
According to the Draft Chandigarh Master Plan-2031, provision of good quality housing was
envisioned to be key to Chandigarh’s planning objective of, ‘offering all amenities of life to the
poorest of the poor to lead a dignified life’. Two broad categories were planned with focus on
Public and Private housing. In the initial years, government rental housing formed the largest and
most innovative component of city due to absence of existing stock and urgency of housing
government employees who were to be brought to Chandigarh as part of the government
functioning. The entire government housing was divided into 13 distinct categories with the
largest house, Type-1 designated for the elected political head of the state( Chief Minister) and

9. smallest house Type-13 for peons and other officials drawing salary less than Rs.50(one U.S.
dollar ) per month. Later on, Type-14 was added, known as cheap housing, which was meant to
provide shelter to other low- paid workers who were not made part the earlier program. Initially
3,208 units were built to which later on, 4,000 more units were added to house more employees
and other categories including elected representatives.
In the face of limited resources available with the State for the construction of the new capital,
the greatest challenge to the Architects of Chandigarh in the initial years of planning the city was
how to design the houses, when site area, type of accommodation, specification and cost of each
category was fixed. In addition, Architects were faced with the dilemma posed by contradictory
demands of Chandigarh’s six climates, chasing one another, confusing social norms and aesthetic
discipline of the local brick (main building material dictated by compulsion of economy) and
need to create state- of –the-art buildings and city. With the norm for the minimum house placed
at two rooms, a private compound, an independent kitchen and water closet with piped water
supply and water- borne sanitation , according to Architect Jane Drew, “It became a struggle to
provide such a house within the defined cost”. With 80% of the government houses meant for
employees of lower categories, these became the major occupation of the Architects working on
the project. However, low- cost houses designed for the lower end of the State pyramid has
emerged as the most notable achievement of Chandigarh. It is this category of housing( where
Architects demonstrated their skill, expertise, experience ,innovations and experimentation to
create state- of – the-art low-cost housing) , which became the hallmark of the so-called,
Chandigarh Architecture.
In search of optimum solutions to create low- cost housing, without compromising with quality,
aesthetics and specified norms, the original team of Architects adopted a variety of strategies,
design options and innovations which included:
i. Planning the low- cost housing as Terraced Housing, this made two walls
common between adjoining houses. This led to not only saving space but also
materials, due to reduction in number of walls, had they been built as
independent/detached houses. This became a major cost-cutting and space
optimization strategy for low- cost housing.
ii. Art of Designing was leveraged to promote cost reduction by evolving compact
houses, minimizations of circulation space, promoting multiuse of living spaces,
provision of front and rear courtyards to promote natural air, light and ventilation and
outdoor sleeping , rationalizing sizes of doors, windows and openings, extensive use
of jalis, clubbing of various services, reducing height of rooms, using optimum
space- module based on structural economy, sharing a staircase between two houses
( in the case of multi-storied buildings), using walls as the structural elements to
support roof, replacing costly verandah with briese-soleil, reducing number of doors,
etc.

10. iii. Clubbing services of water supply, drainage and sewerage of adjoining houses to
reduce the length of services, in order to economize on the cost. The objective was
achieved by clubbing kitchens, baths and water closets. In case of multi-storied
buildings, services were planned one above other to achieve the economy.
iv. Using local materials including cost-effective and easily available brick and
stone for construction .All structural walls were made of bricks and in many cases
large openings were covered by perforation made of brick (jali) to enclose the space
and permit air, light and ventilation. Brick was extensively and innovatively used in
all manifestations and in all components of house construction.
v. Bricks and stones were used in natural form with no external covering to reduce
cost of houses.
vi. Minimizing use of expensive materials like wood and glass which were seven
times more expensive than brick , by rationalizing the sizes and numbers of openings
and windows.
vii. Dispensing with the earlier practice of having high roofs by reducing
/rationalizing the height of rooms to 9’-6” for reducing the quantity of materials
used , reducing the cost. In case of Baths/WC, the headroom was further lowered to
7’-6” for creating additional space for storage or placing of water tank.
viii. Prefabrication/Precast mechanism was used extensively to reduce cost and time of
construction to make houses cost- effective. Instead of using RCC , precast battens
and slabs were used for roofing. Pre-cast steps were used in the staircases. Rain water
was disposed of by precast gargoyles instead of rain water pipes. Efforts were made
to reduce use of cement and steel, which were expensive and had to be transported.
ix. Mechanism of promoting standardization of doors , windows, fixtures and
other components to be used in the house was adopted in order to produce them on a
mass scale and reduce their cost by promoting economy of scale.
x. Use of local materials, local technologies and local manpower without involving
any high-tech machinery also helped in reducing cost of construction.
xi. Research and Development/ Innovations were made part of the strategy to
improve quality of materials, upgrade local technologies and skill of manpower
available, to promote economy and efficiency. Testing of various geometric forms for
their suitability in terms of structural efficiency and economy of materials was also
made an integral part of the design process.

11. xii. Innovative Site Planning by adopting cluster approach, promoting
pedestrianization, reducing road width, clubbing of services and amenities was used
extensively at community level to reduce overall development cost.
xiii. In addition to reducing capital cost of houses, Architects ensured that recurring cost
of maintenance should also be minimized in order to make the houses really cost-
effective over the entire life- cycle of the building. This was achieved through using
the materials in natural form on the exterior which did not require any maintenance.
xiv. Group/Team approach, involving Architects, Civil/Electrical/Public
Health/Structural Engineers , adopted also helped in leveraging/ evolving optimum
options for cost reduction and making houses low- cost without compromising with
the quality.
In the context of the above -defined strategies, designs of Type 12 & 14 have been taken as
examples to detail out and demonstrate the salient features of design, services and construction
adopted for low- cost housing in Chandigarh. Despite the fact that basic features remain
common in these houses, variations in designs, planning of spaces and use of materials have
been made as the mechanism in scaling down the cost and making them low cost housing.
TYPE 12- HOUSING
This category of housing is meant to accommodate government employees having salary
between Rs. 50-100(1-2 US Dollars) per month. Accordingly, these were meant to be low- cost
housing. These houses formed the bulk of the housing stock created initially, considering large
number of employees in this pay- bracket. These houses were planned as single and double
storied housing.

12. SITE PLAN OF TYPE-12 JB HOUSES IN SECTOR 22-D CHANDIGARH
Both these categories have been planned as row-housing, providing for a living room and 2 bed
rooms, besides a kitchen and toilet. Bath and WC have been planned separately in order to cater
to multiple use. All services including kitchen, bath and WC have been clubbed in the design for
individual as well as adjoining houses in order to cut down on the cost of services. Position of
services has not been changed in upper floors, in the case of double- storied houses for reasons of
economy. Single- storied houses have been designed in a number of variants including compact
unit and in split- design where planning revolves around a courtyard. In all the houses, brick
remains the major building materials with pre-cast battens and tile creating the roof supported
on parallel load bearing walls. Most of the air, light and ventilation in the houses is achieved
through perforations made in the brick wall and extensive use of brick jalis. The staircase is
supported on adjoining structural walls and is meant to serve the adjoining houses in case of
double storied houses. Windows are small in size for reasons of economy. They are properly
shaded through an innovative system of sub-breakers to cut off the harsh sun. Cost -effectiveness
in these houses has been achieved by:
i. Adopting innovative design solution for :
- optimum utilization of space with high degree of design- efficiency;
- using row- housing as a strategy to minimize area under walls;
- using mechanism of common walls to economize on space and cost;
- using a modular system based on most optimum grid of 8’-3”;
- extensively using brick jalis to ensure air, light and ventilation;
- promoting variety in house design through recessed entrances/ small square windows,

13. projecting structural walls/ exposed roof battens;
- reducing heights with maximum height of room placed at 9’-6;
- bringing large area under exposed brick work in natural form on the facades.
ii. Materials/Technologies:
- using locally- available materials;
- using innovative construction technologies;
- using extensively brick- most economical building materials available;
- using brick walls as the structural elements;
- using pre-cast battens and tiles for the roofing ;
- using economical battened door with cross braces;
- using simple floors made of plain cement;
- minimizing size of openings to economize on cost of wood.
iii. Services
- clubbing of services within the house/ adjoining houses;
- using pre-cast gargoyles for draining rain water instead of rain water pipes.
FLOOR PLAN & SECTION OF HOUSING TYPE 12-JB, SECTOR 22
LAYOUT PLAN OF HOUSING TYPE 12-JB, SECTOR 22

14. FLOOR PLAN & SECTION OF HOUSING TYPE 12-D, SECTOR 23
TYPE 14- HOUSING
This is the lowest category of housing planned in the government sector, provided in the new
capital. It was introduced subsequently to accommodate all categories of employees, below the
rank of peons and those who were left out of the defined program of 13 categories of government
housing. The critical and underlying factors in designing these houses were to achieve the
highest degree of economy and to make them highly cost- effective, without compromising with
the quality of housing. These houses had a minimum standard of 2 rooms made applicable for
the first time in Chandigarh, besides providing separate toilets. In order to achieve the objective
of low- cost housing, economy in the housing in this category was achieved through:
i. Architectural Design:
- adopting a cluster approach by designing houses as row-housing;
- designing houses, as compact units with optimum area under rooms /minimum
area under walls and circulation;
- providing shared common walls on either side;

15. - making extensive use of brick jalis for air, light and ventilation;
- reducing height of rooms (9’6”) and providing lower height for bath/w.c. block
(7’6”), to economize on the quantity of material/labour;
- using street based system to minimize the cost of external infrastructure;
- creating a multipurpose verandah for cooking/eating and other family needs.
ii. Materials/ Technology:
- adopting a grid pattern of design for spacing the walls, based on most economical
spans of pre-cast battens;
- using walls as the structural/ load bearing;
- adopting pre-cast technology of battens and tiles for roofing;
- eliminating, the use of steel, concrete & R.C.C;
- supporting roof battens, directly on load bearing walls avoiding cost of shuttering
etc;
- using cost-effective brick as the main building material for construction;
- limiting the size and number of openings and doors/windows to minimize the
quantity of wood;
- standardization of doors and windows and other structural elements;
- using cost- effective specifications requiring minimum maintenance.
iii. Services
- sharing of services, i.e. toilets and baths of 4 houses to economize on service
network;
- using pre-cast gargoyles to drain off the rain water instead of rain water pipes.
FLOOR PLAN & SECTION OF HOUSING TYPE 14-D, SECTOR 15

16. Conclusion
Even after more than six decades of construction, these houses still stand testimony to the high
quality of design and construction. The quality of design and construction have made these
houses, as brand ambassadors of the city-beautiful. These low–cost houses have already
demonstrated that construction cost can be rationalized and scaled down without compromising
with the quality of built environment by adopting innovative design solutions, use of locally-
available building materials, using innovative building technologies, using pre-cast, locally-
made building components, clubbing services, adopting a cluster approach for grouping of
houses and economizing on external development, etc. These concepts hold a high degree of
validity, even in the present context, to achieve the cost- rationalization and create low- cost
housing. However, as listed earlier, there are large number of factors which impact the cost of
construction which require intervention at the level of parastatal agencies and other stakeholders
in rationalizing the inputs which add to the cost of housing. Land is now fast emerging as an
issue dictating the cost of low- cost housing. Making available developed land at affordable cost
will hold the key to promoting affordable and cost- effective housing. Development Control
Regulations need to be critically looked into to provide more FAR to create more houses on the
given land. Technological innovations will be an important element in promoting low- cost
housing. Involving the private sector will accelerate the creation of affordable housing. The role
of professional institutions (including Architects and Engineers) will be vital to make the process
simpler and speedier. Involving industry to produce low- cost durable building materials from
waste will make sure that we will achieve the universal/global objective of providing affordable
shelter to all to lead a dignified life on this planet.
BIBLOGRAPHY
• Joshi Kiran , Documenting Chandigarh- The Indian Architecture of Pierre Jeanneret,
Maxwell Fry, Jane B. Drew: Ahmedabad: Mapin Publishing Pvt Ltd,
1999,pp.27,43,116,117,120, 128
• Chandigarh Administration ,Draft Chandigarh Master Plan-2031: Chandigarh
Administration, 2013, p.1(6)
• Ahluwalia Dr Isher Judge, Report on Indian Urban Infrastructure And Services:
Government of India, Ministry of Urban Development, 2012, pp.3,10,11,16 ,17
• Jones Lang LaSelle , Affordable Housing In India- An Inclusive Approach to Sheltering
the Bottom of the Pyramid: Jones Lang LaSelle, 2012, pp 2,6
• Census of India, 2011, Provisional Population Totals, New Delhi: Government of
India(www.census.nic.in)
• McKinsey & Company, India’s Urban Awakening: Building inclusive cities, sustaining
economic growth: McKinsey & Company, 2010, pp 13,14.