Affordability : Quality of Living Housing is a major concern for all people in every corner of the world as the wellbeing of a country is reflected in its people enjoying a certain standard of living. Residential and neighbourhood satisfaction is an important indicator of housing quality and condition, which affects individuals’ quality of living. The factors, which determine their satisfaction, are essential inputs in monitoring the success of housing policies. Housing provision for all in any country is very crucial in order to ensure social-economic stability and to promote national development.
Prepared by Jong Kai Jie 1001645690
Research Question 1. Is current affordable public housing achieving the quality of life?
Research Objectives 1. This study aims to examine the issues and challenges in contemporary affordable public housing schemes and proposes an alternative affordable quality of living scheme for low-income households in Malaysia.
Quality of living
The Determination Indicator for Quality of Living
Physical Design Elements
Physical Environment Elements
Physical Design Elements
Size of Interior Division
The floor space of low-cost flats is 650 square feet and is small compared to other types of houses. On the other hand, the limited floor space in low-cost flats contains only a maximum of three rooms and combines the living room and the dining hall. Besides that, there is only one toilet to be shared among many people in the house.
Quality of Material
According to Faridah (2014), The quality of the materials in construction can also affect the quality of life. Poor quality material results in house defects, which increases costs for maintenance. Besides that, the occupants will feel uncomfortable staying and carrying out activities in that house.
Quality of Workmanship
Poor workmanship cause defects in the house which can incur costs for repair work. The implementation of low-cost housing schemes has changed the living patterns of the lower income group. They want a house that they can afford and want it to be in good quality.
Physical Environment Elements
Privacy
The limitation of space reduces the number of the activities that can be done in the house. According to Norhazlinah (1995), indoor activities are usually done in the living room which only measures 24.194 square meters in a low-cost unit. They spend their time watching television and have meals in the living room. In addition, the living room is also used for children to study.
Facilities provided
The provision of facilities and utilities can also be used to measure the quality of life. Areas around the residential block serve as a suitable unit for analysis of residential social life (Abdul Aziz, Ahmad & Nordin (2012).
Ventilation
Ventilation in the public low-cost area is very important for good ventilation can create a more comfortable environment for the occupants. Ventilation is very important since the floor space of flat units is limited. The interior design in a housing unit must ensure ventilation and daylight penetration into every major living area (Department of Town and Country Planning, 2002).
Lighting
Proper orientation of the building is the major factor which affects the performance of daylight penetration (Syed Husin and Hanur Harith, 2012). This is because the provision of the natural lighting for the house can give comfort to the occupants.
Humidity
According to Faridah (2014), Humidity is also important to indicate the temperature in public low-cost flats. The temperature depends on the location of the house and also the level of the house. High temperature results in an uncomfortable environment and decreases the quality of life. The occupants will feel uncomfortable staying in the house and carrying out their activities.
Unit Density
According to Nurizan (1998), unit density can affect the quality of life in low-cost flats. It refers to the capacity of a unit fitted the number of people in the limited size and number of rooms. High density in a house can cause congestion. However, Norhazlinah (1995) said that the number of people that can fit in the house is 7. Further, high density living creates discomfort among the residents.
Research Question 2. How is the evolution of public housing giving impact on socioeconomic of low-income group?
Research Objectives 2. To examine the socio-economical impact for low-income group on the evolution of public housing in Malaysia.
Evolution of Housing
Typical Low-Cost Flat Approximate Plot Ratio 1:1
Type of Building
Land Area
Type of Building
Number of Units Built Area / Percentage (%)
Low-Cost Flat (Sentul) Approximate Plot Ratio 1:1
Typical Low-Cost Flat
PPR (Sentul) Approximate Plot Ratio 1:3
Low-Cost Flat (Sentul)
Affordable Housing Approximate Plot Ratio 1:10
PPR (Sentul)
Affordable Housing
Meter Square
Acre
Meter Square
Acre
Meter Square
Acre
Meter Square
Acre
23923.25
5.9
129089.96
31.89
40921.7
10.1
20000
4.94
Typical Low-Cost Flat 10 units per floor
400
Typical Low-Cost Flat
Low-Cost Flat (Sentul) 6 units per floor
PPR (Sentul) 864
Low-Cost Flat (Sentul)
12 units per floor
Affordable Housing 1080
PPR (Sentul)
16 units per floor
2112
Affordable Housing
Private
18865.2
52.3%
123500
48.3
116370
76.5
254800
68%
Public
5669.7
15.7%
107048.7
41.8
17472.13
11.5
-
-
Vehicle Circulation (Include Parking)
10609.4
29.4%
16241.2
6.3
14833.34
9.8
111252
29.7%
Amenities
309.5
0.9%
7607.6
3
3101.8
2
5092
1.4%
Services
595.2
1.7%
1203.3
0.6
342.3
0.2
3221
0.9%
TOTAL
36049
100%
255600.8
100%
152119.6
100%
374,365
100%
Evolution of Housing
The Evolution Housing
of
Affordable
Public
Since the land in the urban area is limited, smaller plot of land is needed for the housing development.
Expensive land cost make the building density increase and it able to go for plot ratio 1:10 according to DBKL.
Limitation of typical layout does not have the integration spaces cause the community isolation.
Lesser common area on the ground floor the residents to socialize and mix around with their neighbourhood.
With evolution of housing, the residents unable to generate income around their compounds. Most of the public housing’s resident used to do their business around the common areas last time.
Low and median-income individuals and families cannot meet the financial demands of the city’s skyrocketing housing prices.
? ? Families in the low- and middle-income groups, young professionals, creatives, and key workers in industries like teachers or police tend to live far from the city center.
?
?
Research Question 3. The demand of adequate affordable public housing for low-income groups is yet to be fulfilled. With limited of land in urban area, what kind of housing scheme can improve the quality of life in term of affordability and flexibility?
Research Objectives 3. The architectural proposal must be flexible with the modular system and able to adapt the different needs from different groups. The quality of living is not the priority of the rich, thus the affordable quality of living is required for everyone.
Case studies
Case Study 1: Living in a park
Architect: BMS Progetti Srl, MAB Arquitectura Year: 2009 Location: Milan, Italy The intervention is located on a long and very narrow plot. The site face the residential neighbourhood Gallaratese on the south side and new development areas on north site and is limited by a periphery road characterized by intense car flow. The land was free and only occupied by temporary illegal kiosks. The plot area is 36.000 sqm : 3ha of park, public space and public facilities. The project, focuses on one of the most relevant issues regarding the city, particularly related to social living, public dimension and community neighborhood. The main aim was to establish places of new "urbanity" in marginal areas of the city .
The project is based on a new concept of social housing, a co-habitation concept between Housing and Public Space, where the tenants can live in a pedestrian environment while supported by a strong infrastructure, commerce and public services. These services are open also to the community of the existing neighborhood and will work as social connectors between the new and old community.
Case Study 2: Unite d' Habitation
Architect: Le Corbusier Year: 1952 Location: MARSEILLE, FRANCE Completed in 1952, the Unite d’ Habitation was the first of a new housing project series for Le Corbusier that focused on communal living for all the inhabitants to shop, play, live, and come together in a “vertical garden city.”
The Unite d’Habitation was a first, both for Le Corbusier and the ways in which to approach such a large complex to accommodate roughly 1,600 residents. Especially since Le Corbusier did not have many buildings of such a substantial scale when compared to the villas. When designing for such a significant number of inhabitants natural instinct is to design horizontally spreading out over the landscape, rather Le Corbusier designed the community that one would encounter in a neighborhood within a mixed use, modernist, residential high rise.
Le Corbusier’s idea of the “vertical garden city” was based on bringing the villa within a larger volume that allowed for the inhabitants to have their own private spaces, but outside of that private sector they would shop, eat, exercise, and gather. With nearly 1,600 residents divided among eighteen floors, the design requires an innovative approach toward spatial organization to accommodate the living spaces, as well as the public, communal spaces. Most of the communal aspects do not occur within the building; rather they are placed on the roof. The roof becomes a garden terrace that has a running track, a club, a kindergarten, a gym, and a shallow pool. Beside the roof, there are shops, medical facilities, and even a small hotel distributed throughout the interior of the building. The Unite d’Habitation is essentially a “city within a city” that is spatially, as well as, functionally optimized for the residents.
Case Study 3: housing estate La Hêtraie
Architect: BETCI Landscape Architect: Philippe Buisson Year: 1970s (Redesign: 2016) Location: MARSEILLE, FRANCE Forty years after its construction the social-housing landlord ‘Paris Habitat OPH’ decided to conduct an important renovation of the buildings and open spaces of La Hêtraie. The office Rethink and the landscape architect Philippe Buisson were selected in 2015 for this project in a team with Aleksandra Adyanska, architect, and the engineers Betci. The estate is composed of 209 apartments in 5 towers of 10 to 15 floors. The buildings have undergone different renovations since their construction, mostly concerning energy efficiency with the replacement of the windows and the installation of an exterior thermal insulation. This time the main objective of the building renovation is the improvement of the apartments and the redesign of the common spaces. The second part of the mission focuses on the requalification of the open spaces, that are still marked by their initial design of the 70th. The site had been planned according to the former interpretation of the principles of modern architecture applied on large housing estates. In this case buildings with orthogonal volumes, that are placed around a central pedestrian square in a larger open green space.
Unlike the surrounding urban fabric composed of the residential buildings and individual houses, the site of La Hêtraie is open without fences or other barriers. This allows everybody to cross between the buildings by different paths, instead of being obliged to walk around the site. A generosity of the site that we estimate as an urban quality and want to maintain. To enhance the qualities of the open spaces, with propose to restructure and to diversity the possible uses the site and to work with a new layer of trees, completing the existing. One focus is on the central square of the site situated between the five buildings. A square mainly composed by a concreted ground and obsolete urban furniture. The project proposes to reconsider the space in its whole. By planting a certain number of trees on this space we create a strong vegetal structure offering different spaces on the ground. This vegetal structure contribute to the aesthetic quality of the site and improves the microclimate regulation by for example lowering the festival temperatures. In dense urban fabrics, the development of solidary or community gardens, allocated to the residents of the neighbourhood, can create places for social interaction and awareness raising for environmental and nutrition questions. Currently neither the inhabitants of La Hêtraie, nor the inhabitants of the neighbouring residential buildings have their own gardens. To enhance contacts between the residents through common activities we propose to implement on the west part of the site solidary and community gardens on 5000 sqm. As different types of community gardens attract different users, we designed a site composed out of 40 family gardens, a collective garden of 800 sqm and an educational gardens to be managed by the nearby college. A short overview on the typology of solidary, community gardens.
Case studies from Master Thesis
Case Study 1
This thesis aims to redesign the rental housing situation in Singapore with the approach of a mixed income housing development model. The alternative solution will be proposed through the lenses of purposeful social mixing and building of social capital among the rental and owneroccupied residents to address the issue of inequality and stigmatization. Over the past 4 decades, little seems to have changed despite the constant fight for improvement by various members of the parliament regarding Singapore’s rental housing condition. The refusal to enhance the housing design has deprived many of dignity and a dignified living environment. Poverty to some is not by choice but by their living circumstances and one should not be further dehumanized by the poor living condition. This project is hence a fervent attempt to prevent the low-income community from suffering alone, trying to make ends meet in their own account. Therefore, through the approach of an (1) inter-reliant community structure, (2) enhancing familiarity among two communities and allowing for (3) growing in place for both communities, the design hopes to generate a resilient community.
Case Study 2
The Call to Recalibrate Our Living Environment As cluster-cases proliferated the local community, stringent social distancing measures infiltrated the neighborhoods. Soon enough, residents found themselves subjected to the confines of their homes as work-from-home and movement restrictions were enforced during the Circuit Breaker (Adrienne, 2020). The pandemic has undermined the meaning of public spaces which were intended for social cohesion (Stevens, 2018). On the other hand, residents living in the public housing development also known as HDB flats were mostly affected due to the fact that they lack access to immediate outdoor spaces and gardens in the form of balconies and terraces, otherwise seen in landed properties and condominiums (Hong, 2020). The time of isolation has also urged us to rethink the urban environment, emphasizing the eminent human need for open air spaces, parks, and gardens. This episode has certainly highlighted the inadequacies of the built environment pertaining to the outdoor public spaces and the home. “This thesis puts forth 3 key strategies – Redefining the components of a post-pandemic dwelling; The Park-House; Dwelling as instrument of income and refuge.”
Case Study 3
In Singapore, post-independent public housing is rarely perceived as built heritage, including Everton Park, a HDB estate which formerly served as housing for laborious port workers. Everton Park is of heritage significance in the landscape of Tanjong Pagar’s port. The housing estate represents the modernist and social achievements of laborious port workers who contributed to the commercial success of Singapore’s port. This thesis explores the role and response of modern public housing, in the curation of Tanjong Pagar as a heritage landscape of industrial relations for port workers. Using Everton Park as a vehicle, this thesis attempts to demonstrate the high potential for public estates to celebrate its difficult historical past while being a livable, regenerated estate that is socially integrated into its precinct and larger landscape, enabling public housing to serve as a complementary layer to a more inclusive heritage landscape. “The port heritage landscape of Tanjong Pagar consists of worker’s housing of various hierarchies, including Everton Park. The submerged history of Everton Park include difficult narratives surrounding port workers which should be revealed and celebrated as part of creating an inclusive history.”
Site Analysis
History of Sentul
Morphology of Sentul
Residential In Sentul
LOW-COST
MID-COST
MID-COST
HIGH-COST
LOW-COST
MID-COST
LOW-COST
SENTUL WEST
LOW-COST
RM200-400 psf
SENTUL EAST
MID-COST
RM401-700 psf
HIGH-COST
RM 701 & above psf
MID-COST
MID-COST
SENTUL
ACCESSIBILITY
SITE DISTRICT Sentul East consist of commercial, educational, and religious district effortlessly blend with the residential buildings, providing a sense of place.
The most prominent district in the site is the residential district which covers about 70% of Bandar Baru Sentul
POTENTIAL HUMAN MOVEMENT
Pedestrian Bridge from Titiwangsa
MASS RAPID DEVELOPMENT (MRT)
PUBLIC TRANSPORT NEAR TO LOW-COST HOUSING
The public transport is important for those living in the urban city without transportation, especially for the low-income group
LOW-COST HOUSING RESIDENT’S MOVEMENT
Most of the low-cost flat has their public facilities for leisure
The most food stalls at roadside are operating by the low-cost flat residents for generating income
SEGREGATION OF COMMUNITY Bandar Baru Sentul has most of the low-cost housings, the segregation of community is obviously seen
People who live in public housing complexes may be judged unfairly in their everyday lives and are not respected by those who live in private housing.
Due to the low rents of public housing projects, many low-income families unable to receive high incomes may gather in groups in certain locations. Besides that, in the long term, it can result in the making of deprived areas where people are only able to associate with their friends. And in such places, visitors from outside the city, state, or country may be afraid to enter. This may also contribute to the social exclusion of poor people.
ISSUE IN LOW-COST FLATS
Vandalism, low maintenance, social crime, drug addicted, low-educational group, undesirable for living
LAND SIZE
1 BLOCK = 50 UNITS . TOTAL 800 UNITS 1 BLOCK = 24 UNITS . TOTAL 864 UNITS
1 BLOCK = 24 UNITS . TOTAL 552 UNITS
Total of 55.1 acres land will be taken for the KL Urban Renewal Plan
POTENTIAL COMMUNITY & ACTIVITIES ART & PERFORMANCE
ACCESSIBILITY OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT
COMMERCIAL
DIFFERENT BACKGROUND OF COMMUNITY
CULTURAL & RELIGIOUS IDENTITY
PROPOSED SITE TO DIVERSE COMMUNITY FROM SENTUL EAST, BANDAR BARU SENTUL AND TITIWANGSA
Views Surrounding Proposed Site
Site Topography
Evolution of Low-Cost Housing In Sentul LOW-COST FLAT
-
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Resettlement of squatter Required large amount of land 5-strorey Blocks
-
Resettlement of Low-cost flat residents Developer and government subsidize Rm65,000
-
Moved the low-cost residents to place near to transit center Rental cost is subsidized by government
-
2000
FUTURE 2001-2020
1980
? ? -
Resettlement of squatter Required small amount of land, compared to Low-cost Flat > 10 storey Blocks
?
NEW SCHEME OF HOUSING
PPR
-
?
-
Urban Renewal of Kuala Lumpur Public Housing for Public, not only Residents New Style of Living
Schematic Design
Masterplanning 1
1
3
1
5 2
3
5
3 3
5 2
3 6
3
2
5 6
6
2 6
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
Evolution Dimension
With the rapid urbanization of the developing countries, the cities are constructed in certain dimensions, but it also brings destruction to local memories. The evolution of technology, economic, commercial, and residential are supposed to create a livable city, but it also impacts the segregation of community.
This artwork represented the connection of several dimension elements in Sentul, such as religion, culture, arts, commercial, residential and human behavior. The public realm is the main medium to connect a different group of communities, it allows interacting space and reduces the segregation of the local communities. Diversity of the human is a must to create bonding by providing human nodes. The level of different structural framing elements represent the evolution of low-cost housing. The evolution is to provide a better quality of living and reduce the impact on socioeconomic of low-income groups with the commercial district attached. With respect to different evolution dimensions, only the urban intervention to be achieved.
With limited of land in urban area, what kind of housing scheme can improve the quality of life in term of affordability and flexibility?
Limited of land and park in urban area. The future public housing should integrate with park which allow public to use it, the government able to achieve the goal of urban park while solving the public housing issue in the urban area. LIMITED OF GREEN PARK IN URBAN AREA
INTEGRATION OF URBAN PARK IN PROPOSAL
Facilities in the public housing should be able to share with the neighborhood. The initiative is to create bonding areas for the neighbourhood community while saving the cost of maintenance fees for the public housing. POOL FACILITIES
URBAN POOL
Consideration of ventilation, the huge block of concrete will block the wind diversion. The void in the building block allow to diverse the wind and penetrate through the site. Social activities can be happened at the void areas. POOR NATURAL VENTILATION
WIND DIVERSITY
The segregation of living in the building block can be improved by integration of sharing park and common area.
TYPICAL FLOOR
INTEGRATION OF ACTIVITIY SPACE
ISSUES OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Planning Ideas
Proposed Site Planning
a
9
8
4
5
4
5
1
1
5 7
2 6
3
1
4
2
3
7
3
6
c
5 b 7
1 Public Space
4
Resident Lobby
7
River Front
a Linkages from LRT SENTUL Station
2 Urban Pool
5
Multi-purpose Parking
8
Art & Craft Center
b Linkages from LRT TITIWANGSA Station
3 Commercial Lot
6
Local Food Street
9
Museum
c
Linkages from TITIWANGSA
The common facilities of residential part on the top, and the general public service and space on the ground, each building itself is the combination of residential as well as the provider of service provision. As a result, when these housing are built, the infrastructure and public facilities are built along with them, which will solve the problem of lacking infrastructure and services of a newly developed area.
Design development
Most of the typical affordable housing is built vertical upward, sense of community is lost, where they could not meet with the people who staying downstairs and upstairs.
Pushing the side which facing the east and west sun direction, to allow planting can be absorbed sunlight efficiently.
The building axis is taken according to the few important nodes which from the commercial district, residential district , linkages of LRT station, and access from Titiwangsa and Sentul West.
LINK FROM SENTUL LRT
ACCESS FROM TITIWANGSA WELCOMING ENTRANCE FROM COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
LINK FROM TITIWANGSA LRT
WELCOMING ENTRANCE FROM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
Stacking up with the module to create the form of the building.
ACCESS FOR RESIDENTIAL PARKING FROM EXISTING ROAD
The ground floor is served as public park with all most of the facilities and amenities, which allow the public to use it. The connection bridge of LRT Sentul Station is linked to the 5th Floor of the multilevel parking with integration of upper garden. The riverfront provide space for the residences to sell their food and hand-craft art for generating their incomes. According to Lincoln (2019), with the integration of park and greenspaces, it allow to prevent violence. When vacant lots and deteriorating urban spaces are transformed into more appealing and useful places for residents, violence and crime typically decline in the immediate vicinity.
Overview perspective
Integration of Urban Park
Integration of Urban Pool
Multipurpose Carpark Roof Garden act as linkages from LRT
Enhancing Social Economic Activities
Unit layout
TYPE 1
TYPE 2
TYPE 3
INTERMEDIATE
Unit Type Distribution TYPE 1 10%
TYPE 5 15% TYPE 4 15%
TYPE 2 30%
TYPE 3 30%
TYPE 1
TYPE 4
TYPE 5
TYPE 2
TYPE 3
CORNER
TYPE 4
TYPE 5
SCHEMATIC SECTION
Overview perspective