ENVIRONMENTAL ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT

Green Livable Housing

BY:
SHREYA SUNIL SHIRSATH
SECOND YEAR M. ARCH
BATCH: 2018-2019

D.Y PATIL SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

DR. D.Y PATIL KNOWLEDGE CITY,
CHARHOLI-BK, LOHEGAON, PUNE

SAVITRIBAI PHULE PUNE UNIVERSITY

 CONTENTS
Acknowledgements

Executive Summary and Recommendations

Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Purpose and research question
2. Literature review
3. Study of policies
4. Chapter 2: Theoretical Foundations for affordable housing
Introduction
The city of Pune along with the growth in urbanization also sees the growth slums around the
city. The population that is living in slums implies the lack of affordable housing in the city, adding
to the responsibility of the local government to provide affordable housing to the slum dwellers.
The demand forecasting for this purpose is to be done by considering the ever-increasing
economic growth, employment opportunities and the rise in land and property market, since all
these factors make the city attractive for the immigrants, which is clearly visible in the graph of
slum population growth.
The demand and supply gap in terms of housing is especially prominent in the lower income
groups of the country. Sky rocketing land prices and ever-increasing cost of building materials
and labour have been some of the key challenges in bringing down the housing cost effectively
and make housing affordable. The government is taking several steps to catalyse the affordable
housing sector in India. Various working groups have been constituted under the PMAY to
develop policy templates for house ownership and rental models to be adopted by the states.
Schemes have also been launched to improve investment and provide financial support to low
cost housing sector. There is a technology sub-mission to promote innovative technologies for
low-cost and faster construction.
The construction activity though a necessity for the economic and social growth of the country,
does have a negative impact on the environment. Until recently, environmental sustainability
and affordable housing have been two separate policy objectives. However, the scenario is
changing and environment sustainability is being integrated in most of the affordable housing
policies globally. For instance, in the Sustainable Development, i.e. sustainable cities and
communities, strives to minimize the environmental impact while ensuring access for all to
adequate, safe and affordable housing. In the context of affordable housing, environmental
sustainability serves two objectives. On one hand the negative impact on the environment is
minimized and on the other hand adoption of green construction strategies significantly
improves the living conditions of the poor by ensuring better thermal and visual comfort.
Sustainable affordable housing thus is a habitat where the poor have the possibility and the
desire to reside beyond the short-term, which is conducive to their socio-economic development
and respectful of the natural environment.
Aim

To propose affordable- green livable housing in Pimpri Chinchwad Town/

Redevelopment of affordable housing in the core area of the Pune City

Objectives

- To identify steps taken by the government in affordable housing sector

- To propose guiding principles for sustainable development in affordable housing module.
- To document the Green Building Initiatives for Affordable Housing
- To analyse the efficacy of these policies in being able to provide sustainability in housing
sector
- To find the how sustainability achieved in affordable housingvaluate the costs and
benefits of greening in the affordable housing sector.
- To generate site specific or area specific sustainable policy guidelines
- To generate design intelligence and green initiatives for affordable housing
- To attain a theoretical base to the research including the conceptual understanding
between land cost, cost of construction, affordability, sustainability, economic,
environmental and social aspects and their allied issues in Pune;
- To study different case studies to identify and evaluate similarities and differences of
recent housing developments and to assess these case studies and to derive comparative
analysis in the form of an assessment framework. The basis for comparison will be the
extent to which the affordable housing and sustainable criteria had been addressed.

Purpose and research questions

 - MoHUPA has estimated the housing shortage of 18.78 million during the 12th Five Year
Plan (FYP) period of which over 95% of this housing shortage is estimated in the
Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) and Low Income Group (LIG) categories. To address
this shortage, intensive efforts are required to substantially increase affordable housing
stock. Most importantly, while creating housing for these sections of the society, they
need to be green too. The main purpose of this thesis is to find out some applicable
suggestions and policies for the re-development of PMC affordable housing sector by
comparing and analyzing the relevant experiences from other countries at global and
regional level in terms of affordability and sustainability.
- The thesis mainly focuses on answering the questions about affordable and Green livable
housing in Pune as below:
- what methods should be adopted to make affordable housing in PMC as an example of
green livable housing?
- What are various steps taken by government in affordable housing sector?
- Do these policies talk about sustainability initiatives taken by government or city
development if any? If not then proposal of policy or guidelines for the same.

Scope

To study the policies laid by the government in affordable housing sector and a parallel
study of GRIHA for affordable housing.

Limitations

This research is confined only to a particular area of Pune city where the proposed policy
shall be applicable in terms of affordability and sustainability. Since many market
conditions are not included in this research, the analysis or the result can be used in the
similar city having same climatic implications.

Methodology

• Study different affordable housing policies laid by the government

• Interaction with experts/ Interviews
 • Literature Review
• Case studies

Outcome

To propose affordable, climate resilient and sustainable design module for Green livable housing

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW AND CASE STUDIES

2.1 A CASE STUDY ANALYSIS OF SUSTAINABLE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Principal Authors- Stephen Pullen, George Zillante, Michael Arman, Wilson Lou, Jian Zuo, Nicholas
Chileshe
OBJECTIVE
- To identify a suite of built forms for housing that are both affordable and environmentally
sustainable
- A study carried out within the Ecocents Living project which was supported by the Department
of Families & Communities and Hindmarsh to investigate affordable and sustainable housing.
FINDINGS
- The development of a framework that enables the assessment of the overall performance
of various types of housing developments
- Assessment against the framework is voluntary but provides consumers with accurate
knowledge to compare different developments.
- A recent international study comparing housing affordability in the developed world ranked,
no Australian urban area as ‘affordable’ and 25 of Australia’s 28 urban areas as ‘severely
unaffordable’ (Cox and Pavletich 2008 in AMP.NATSEM 2008).
- Contemporary housing policy debate in Australia has emphasized the social and economic
sustainability implications of a growing housing affordability challenge, without addressing
environmental objectives.
- The process of developing an assessment framework covered three stages:
1. Analysis of existing literature and assessment frameworks for affordable and
sustainable housing
2. Development of an interim affordability and sustainability assessment framework
 3. Validation of this framework in an industry discussion forum.
- The literature review indicated that past research has predominantly looked separately at
the two aspects of affordability and sustainability.
- Paper has adopted a case study approach to identify and evaluate similarities and differences of
nine recent housing developments using a comparative analysis in the form of an assessment
framework.

RELEVANCE TO TOPIC
- Sustainable housing discourse and practice is largely focused on the physical application of well-
grounded principles in the design of homes and the methods and materials used in construction
(Randolph et al, 2008).
- The need to develop a comprehensive assessment framework which recognizes the importance
of all components of affordability and sustainability.
- Affordable and sustainable housing has been defined as: “Housing that meets the needs and
demands of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their housing needs and demands. Affordable and sustainable housing has strong and
inter-related economic, social and environmental components” (Arman et al, 2009b).
- At the level of design, construction and operation of a house, there is at least some common
ground where low energy materials, energy and water efficiency can be contributory factors to
greater affordability.
- A list of key characteristics or indicators was formulated which closely reflected the important
environmental, economic and social aspects of affordable and sustainable housing. These
indicators form the basis of the assessment framework and they are as follows.

1. Efficiency in the use of resources e.g. energy and water.

2. Construction, e.g. materials and methods

3. Financial procurement, e.g. government, private and public private partnership

4. Affordability, e.g. purchase and rent

5. Dwelling size, e.g. mixed sizes and subjective size assessment

6. Appropriate density, e.g. low, medium and high

7. Adaptability, e.g. adopting Universal Design Principles

8. Social acceptability, e.g. acceptability to surrounding community

9. Desirability, e.g. market value of dwelling

- A comprehensive range of indicators and benchmarks will enable the identification of housing
models which can provide affordable and sustainable outcomes across the full range of
requirements.

2.2 DEVELOPING AN ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK FOR AFFORDABLE AND

SUSTAINABLE HOUSING
OBJECTIVE
- Develop a conceptual assessment framework to link indicators of affordability with those of
economic, social and environmental sustainability

FINDINGS
- This section of the paper identifies key indicators of affordable and sustainable housing which form
the basis of an interim assessment framework
- In terms of integrated assessment frameworks, the most comprehensive research into affordability
and sustainability was undertaken by Blair et al., (2004). This project involved a triple bottom line
analysis of the sustainability of a ‘traditional’ regulatory subdivision compared with a master planned
community. The research identified the economic, social and environmental components of
 sustainable housing and in the process, developed a set of 37 equally weighted indicators which
were categorized as follows:
- Housing affordability (n=12)
- Sense of community, neighborhood safety, and satisfaction (n=8)
- Transportation (n=3)
- Environment – biodiversity (n=2)
- Environment – energy (n=6)
- Environment – resources consciousness (n=4)
- Environment – wastewater/stormwater control (n=2) (Blair et al., 2004)

RELEVANCE TO TOPIC
- The study highlighted that it is very difficult to develop a truly rigorous TBL assessment that
gives sufficient consideration to economic, social and environmental criteria as there are
often strong but difficult to quantify inter-relationships between these components (Blair et
al., 2004).
- VicUrban, the Victorian government’s urban development agency, has developed a
‘sustainable community rating system’ to provide a “common language” about sustainability
in the development of master planned, urban renewal and provincial (non-metropolitan)
communities (VicUrban, 2010). The sustainable community rating system is built around five
objectives, each of which has several priorities. Five objectives are:

• Commercial success;
• Housing affordability;
• Urban design excellence;
• Community well-being;
• Environment. (VicUrban, 2010)
- Before highlighting key indicators of affordability and sustainability, it is necessary to
understand at a broad level what constitutes ‘affordable and sustainable housing’.
Sparks (2007) defines green affordable housing as “housing that is better designed and built,
more durable, not significantly more expensive, cheaper to operate, healthier, more
environmentally sound, and less risky” (Sparks 2007 in Arman et al., 2009b, p.13).
Global Green USA (2007, p.1) also talks about green affordable housing and adds that such
housing “forges a strong link between social justice and environmental sustainability, and
connects the wellbeing of people with the wellbeing of the environment, thus building on the
core social and economic values of affordable housing”.
- The study arrived at ten ‘characteristics’ of affordable and sustainable housing. These broad
characteristics sought to reflect literature on affordability (characteristics 1-4) economic
sustainability (characteristics 5-6), social sustainability (characteristics 6-7) and
environmental sustainability (characteristics 8-10). Thus, an affordable and sustainable
dwelling is:
1. A product where the rent or mortgage repayments do not exceed 30% of household
incomes for the bottom 40% of income groups.
2. A product that is appropriately located.
3. A product that is of a suitable size and quality for its occupants.
4. A product that does not increase the incidence of housing stress over the lifecycle of
the house.
5. A product where individual and government financial obligations can be met on an
ongoing basis without policy change.
6. A product that is socially acceptable.
7. A product that does not increase social exclusion or polarization.
8. A product that is located on a site that minimizes biodiversity losses.
9. A product that is located on a site that maximizes low-energy transportation options.
10. A product that encompasses the following environmental features
- Energy efficiency;
- Passive solar design;
- Sun shading;
- Water conservation
Appropriate waste management during construction, occupation and deconstruction
(Source: Arman et al., 2009b, p.15)
 The work has identified the direction of future research which needs to adopt a more
integrated systems-based approach in striving for the goal of housing that is both
affordable and sustainable

2.3 THE COSTS & BENEFITS OF GREEN AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Principal Authors- William Bradshaw, Edward F. Connelly, Madeline Fraser Cook, James
Goldstein, Justin Pauly
OBJECTIVE

To provide recommendations for green affordable housing, developers and policymakers. To

informs the broad range of actors involved in developing affordable housing and provides a solid
starting point for a better understanding of the costs and benefits of greening these projects.

FINDINGS

Recent studies on the costs and benefits of green building in the commercial and institutional
sectors show that green buildings often cost 2-3% more in total up-front development costs, but
that the present value of operating savings over the life of the buildings more than offset the
incremental capital costs. While these life-cycle benefits are increasingly being recognized in the
commercial and institutional building market place as evidenced by the boom in the development
of green buildings. Recent studies have documented the costs and benefits of green building in
the commercial and institutional sector, reporting that green buildings have a modest initial cost
premium, but that long-term benefits far exceed the incremental capital costs. These findings
have bolstered green building activity in these sectors, but their applicability to affordable
housing development has been viewed with considerable skepticism.

Integrated design can use the savings from some strategies to pay for the incremental cost of
others. For example, energy-efficient building envelopes can reduce equipment needs –
downsizing some equipment, such as boilers, or in some cases even eliminating equipment, such
as perimeter heating.

RELEVANCE TO TOPIC

- According to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
affordable housing is housing whose cost (in rent or mortgage payments) does not exceed
30% of the gross monthly income of a low-income household.
- Whether a particular home is affordable for a given household is a function of price, area
income, the family’s income, and family size. Often, the term affordable housing is confused
with public housing, which is housing that is owned and operated by a public agency, usually
a local housing authority.
- According to urban economist Mark Smith and architect Deborah Weintraub, green building
“includes three important components: resource conservation during design and
construction; resource conservation during operations; and protection of occupants’
health, well-being, and productivity.”
- Though green buildings are often promoted as reducing impacts on the environment – fewer
natural resources and energy use, improved air quality through use of non-toxic materials,
lower greenhouse gas emissions – it is important to consider green building in the context
of the conventional goals for affordable housing: affordability, performance, and health.
- There are considerable opportunities for greening throughout the building process, from site
selection and design, to material selection and construction, to operations and maintenance.
Each building project, whether new construction or renovation, must identify those that are
most appropriate and feasible for the particular circumstances, while keeping in mind the
overall goals of affordable housing listed above. It is useful to think of greening alternatives
as a series of menu options that project developers (along with other project stakeholders)
need to review in the planning and design process.
- Affordable home ownership projects may require direct, up-front subsidy for greening,
because it is difficult for the developer to recapture the value in the initial sales transaction.
In market-rate green housing, the long-term benefi ts of greening (i.e. operating savings)
may be reflected in a higher sales price, allowing the developer to recoup any incremental
costs of greening

2.4 ON THE BENEFITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING

An Assessment of Recent Literature for Municipalities-2017
Principal Authors- Matthew A. Thomas

OBJECTIVE

This research is to explore not only beyond securing homes at affordable rates for households,
affordable housing policies but also to relate its benefits of social, health, developmental and
economic to qualify them and further an understanding of housing’s value for a municipality that
may be considering affordable housing policies. This document explores green affordability as a
significant development for housing and the specific context of a municipality in the Montreal region,
the City of Dorval, pairing its community’s concerns with potential benefits.

FINDINGS

The studies have shown that depending on location and access between home, workplace, and
services, such moves can lead to excessive costs on transport and additional commute time burdens
which can counteract the savings on housing. That problem has led some to instead prefer an
affordable-accessibility standard at no more than 45% of a household budget spent on transport and
housing combined (Litman 2011; 2017). However, as the 30% standard for affordability is the
benchmark most frequently used or mentioned in the literature, it will also be the standard and
reference point for affordability throughout this report.

There is a lack of studies overall and a general evaluative framework, or a set of common indicators
in the literature through which to approach or study the economic benefits and costs of affordable
housing (Buzzelli 2009; Frontier Economics 2014; Pomeroy and Marquis-Bissonnette 2016). Indeed,
just as providing affordable housing is “not an exact science” and that “there a one-size fits all
solution”, the literature is as varied in approach, methodology, and issue of interest (i.e. some are
broad general studies whereas some focus solely on the differing affect one organization type can
have vis-à-vis another). Crucially, this survey of the literature observed that despite those blind spots
in the study of affordable housing, most authors adamantly affirmed the importance of affordable
housing as a foundation for individual and societal success and emphasized the necessity to maintain
funding to programs that facilitate affordability. As a foundation, however, some benefits cannot be
achieved through “affordable housing alone” though they can be the “result of affordable housing
being better able to meet tenants needs than alternatives”.

Housing Unaffordability in Canada

For one out of every seven households in Canada, adequate housing is not available at the 30%
standard of affordability which “undermines their ability to improve their lives” and which impacts
“economic growth, labour markets, social service costs, and safety”. Furthermore, that
unaffordability is rising: the average rent for the “bottom 40% of rental units” is “equal to nearly half
of average income for the equivalent group of households.7 Beyond long-term cost burdens on
households and upon society because of “increased need for services” and the limitation of their
human capital growth, “at extremes” unaffordability can (and has) led to homelessness. In Canada,
unaffordability is not uniform for owners and renters as renter households are four and half times
more likely to be in housing need compared to owner counterparts.

RELEVANCE TO TOPIC

Affordable housing is defined by “the measure of ability to pay”. Affordability itself is defined as
a “measure of the cost of housing relative to the income of the household, expressed as the
shelter-cost-to-income ratio”. Traditionally, what is defined as “affordable” housing is spending
on shelter that does not exceed 30% of pre-tax household income and that is the standard that
is used as a reference point. Furthermore, affordable housing is a term often used
interchangeably with “social housing”. A household is said to be in core housing need when its
housing does not meet one of the three acceptability standards – adequate condition, suitable
size, or affordability – and if the household would have to pay over 30% to meet all those
conditions in its local market. The location of housing can have an impact on affordability and a
household budget. It is not an uncommon phenomenon for a household that finds itself paying
an excessive portion of their income on housing close to the center of a major urban area to seek
more affordable housing further away in the suburbs.

Social Benefits

Through reducing the shelter burden of a household, affordable policies can bring stability to the
household through improving its overall sense of wellbeing and housing and life satisfaction, as well
as potentially providing home security through mitigating the risk of financially induced negative
moves. Housing policy also as a significant role in facilitating community cohesion, particularly related
to social mix and social networks. Affordable housing options not only aid them economically, but if
housing emphasizes community, adaptability, and transportation, it can provide an important social
safety net.
Health Benefits

Though a move to affordable or social housing is often correlated with improved health outcomes,
improving housing affordability is no guarantee of improved physical health as underlying intervening
factors can be significant determinants on outcomes. If affordable housing policies result in access to
improved housing quality, such as newer or renovated lodgings, then benefits attributed to those
policies can include those related to: indoor environment quality, air quality, proper insulation, and
reduced overcrowding. Improved health has the secondary benefit of reduced absenteeism at school
and work, thus contributing to those outcomes and improved overall performance. Additionally, as
rent reduction improves the fiscal health of the household, it can also improve housing-related stress
and its negative impact on mental health and other areas such as cardiovascular health. Furthermore,
additional household budget alleviated by rent reduction can lead to improved diet as funds are made
available for better quality food. Finally, if affordability policies lead to improved quality housing and
thus improved health, it contributes to a spillover impact of reduced health costs for both the
individual and the state along with a lessened demand on healthcare services.

How are housing and health related?

Developmental Benefits

The housing quality has a significant impact on development outcomes especially for children as both
educational performance and future earnings can be negatively impacted by a lack of adequate
housing, housing instability, stress, and negative neighborhood environments. However, there are
intervening factors related to the family situation that can positively or negatively influence
outcomes. Finally, the literature notes the importance of combining providing homes at affordable
rates with integrative programs to provide employment resources. When that is done successfully,
employability and wages have been shown to increase.

Economic Benefits

A review of the literature finds that the introduction of affordable housing policies leads to generally
positive economic results at three levels of analysis. At the household level, the primary benefit
attainable through the introduction of affordable housing measures was the improved fiscal health
of the household. At the macro-societal level, affordable housing programs demonstrated their value
in two ways: first, as economic drivers in generating positive net returns on investment and job
creation and second, as proactive measures of cost avoidance, mitigating the costs of inaction
associated with unaffordability. Finally, this section’s examination of various policy-devoted works
revealed that to achieve economic benefits traditionally associated with affordable housing, it
requires a careful consideration of context, socioeconomic conditions, and location – particularly at
the individual level.

Figure 1 - The Housing Continuum

Subsidized housing includes programs like PSL or HLM which provide an option for low-income
households unable to afford market rental or homeownership housing. Supportive housing is housing
that includes services to support “special-need individuals” including support for the elderly, drug
addicts, those with mental health needs, and those dealing with mental disability.17 Transitional
housing is housing that “provides a temporary living environment” for those faced with short-term
housing needs induced by brief unemployment or low-income.18 Furthermore, transitional housing
plays a key role in “assisting individuals” make the move from shelters to stable, “self-contained”
residence and is a necessary part of successful Housing First programs.19 Due to the rising cost of
homeownership, increased numbers of renter households, and households’ needs not being
affordability needs not being met at market prices, investment into affordable housing initiatives is
necessary. As the remainder of this report will emphasize, that investment can be beneficial beyond
providing homes at an affordable price.

Affordable Housing and the Environment

This section of the research illustrated three major points for a reader with relatable and illustrative
examples from various regions, but significantly Canada and Montreal from a review of the literature.
First, the goals of sustainable community building and the goals of affordable housing are
irrevocably linked and as such, should be considered jointly in municipal policy outlays. Urban
sprawl – a detriment to sustainable community building – is precipitated by rising unaffordability as
households are forced by unaffordability to seek cheaper homes further from the city centre.
Awareness of that connection can allow cities to meet the challenges of housing unaffordability and
sustainability together with proper planning. Second, green-affordable housing provides a diverse set
of secondary benefits beyond the primary benefits of energy efficiency and monetary savings for the
household that extend to a community or society. Energy efficient homes have been shown to be
beneficial for the fiscal health of a household, guarding them from energy poverty as well as providing
secondary benefits such as improved quality of life and respiratory health achieved through improved
indoor air and indoor environment quality. Finally, this review demonstrated the cost-effectiveness
of green-affordable developments which were found to either demonstrate cheaper or on-par costs
with conventional counterparts in general, and marginally more expensive hard costs related to
construction. The Bois Ellen Residence in Laval, Quebec and the Coteau Vert Co-operative in
Rosemont are two such examples of successful green affordability in the metropolitan area of
Montreal.

In a period in which concerns for the Earth’s climate have risen to new heights, it is no surprise that
governments at all levels have increasingly integrated environmental sustainability strategies within
their public policy outlays. That recognition has led to the implementation of new green strategies
and studies in a variety of areas from urban planning to building design. In the interests of informing
municipal considerations for sustainability strategies, the environment, and affordable housing, the
following section will examine the potential benefits that can result from a combination of green
building and affordable housing. To those ends, this section will: explain the green building industry
in Canada, outline a necessary linkage between affordability and sustainability, present benefits of
green affordable housing from the literature, demonstrate its green-affordability’s cost-
effectiveness, and finally, explore cases from the Montreal metropolitan area.

Green Building in Canada

Green building, “recognized globally as a method and practice for addressing climate change,
minimizing energy and resource demands, and for building more resilient and healthy communities”,
has become a growing industry and important part of the Canadian economy .294The major presence
of green building standards comes in the form of LEED certification for buildings across multiple
industries including residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial. LEED certification
provides “third-party verification that a building, home or community” was designed to achieve
various “human and environmental health” goals including sustainable site development, energy
efficiency, and indoor environmental quality

Linking Affordability and Sustainability

Benefits of Affordable Green Housing

Among the many associated benefits of affordable green housing, the two most significant are the
improved fiscal health of the household - which can save a significant percentage of their income and
potentially invest it elsewhere - and energy conservation and emission reductions. The cost of energy
can have a significant impact on the fiscal health of a household and that is further reason to consider
green building as critically tied to affordability and the household (Trachtenberg 2016). The US
Department of Energy estimated between 8% and 14% of household income was spent on energy, a
third of which was dedicated to heating or cooling needs – 3-5% of gross annual income. Even at low
rates of gains, improved energy efficiency and cheaper homes can therefore proportionately aid a low-
income household and thus improve the overall fiscal health of the household. However, energy efficiency
rates tend to be quite significant; a comparative study of green in four US states found on average
residents spent 12% to 14% less on energy per square foot annually, which naturally translates into a
monetary savings.

In addition to energy related monetary savings, it has been show in cost-benefit analyses that
residents and homeowners can attain varying degrees of non-energy related savings as part of a set
of secondary benefits.312 An example of this is the Salus Clementine multi-residential building in
Ottawa – an affordable housing residence for those with mental illness – which was able to translate
savings in energy into more funds towards its services for residence.313 Additional benefits of green
affordable housing noted are the reduction of crime rates in communities, an improved sense of
security, less renter turnover, and improved mental (Charron 2017; Trachtenberg 2016). Finally, the
combination of affordable housing and energy-efficient, green-friendly construction appears to have
the potential second order effect of contributing to positive health changes for occupants. Evidence
would indicate that this is strongly related to a residence’s indoor environmental quality – warmth,
humidity levels, air quality - which has shown to lead to improved cardiovascular health (Charron
2017). A recent study which examined energy efficiency and ventilation in 123 modern homes built
between 2010 and 2012 in the same area and price range in Austria sheds light on this connection
(Wallner et al 2017).314 Across a series of 3000 measurements of indoor air quality, researchers found
that the air quality in the energy-efficient, mechanically vented homes had higher quality indoor air
than conventional counterparts.315 Those results were reflected in comparative occupant research
surveys examining the impact on the health of occupants for control and test groups across the move
to the new housing. Through 575 total interviews set three months and one year after the moves,
the post-occupancy study found that the test groups (in mechanically ventilated homes) reported
their health had improved significantly at greater rates than those in naturally ventilated homes.

The perceived health of inhabitants in highly energy-efficient homes”, these results provide some
useful insight into secondary benefits of affordable-green housing. Though the study touts
increased perceived health benefits, those perceptions – regardless of accuracy– are nevertheless
positive indicators of increased quality of life and comfort for a household in its home environment.

2.5 Criteria for sustainable housing affordability

Principal Authors- Emma Mulline, Vida Maliene

OBJECTIVE

The initial objective of the paper is to identify a system of criteria that represents sustainable
housing affordability. The paper seeks to draw closer links between affordability and
sustainability issues, rather than viewing affordability as a purely monetary concern. The research
aims to develop a criteria system that represents sustainable housing affordability.
FINDINGS

Research suggests that we need a “...broader discussion and refinement of the criteria by which
society judges the suitability of affordable housing...” (Fisher et al. 2009: 735).
RELEVANCE TO TOPIC

It is evident that providing affordable housing is not simply about cheap and decent homes, there
must be consideration for a broader range of factors, e.g. the sustainability of the housing and
the environments in which such housing is situated. Sustainability and affordability issues are
now often discussed mutually and are recognized as being important to one another (CLG 2007;
HM Government 2005; Maliene et al. 2008; ODPM 2005a; 2005b).

3.0 Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana

3.1 Introduction
In order to achieve this objective of Housing for All by 2022 when the Nation completes 75 years
of its Independence, Central Government has launched a comprehensive mission “Pradhan
Mantri Awas Yojana – Housing for All (Urban)”.
The Hon’ble President of India, in his address to the Joint Session of Parliament on 9th June, 2014
had announced “By the time the Nation completes 75 years of its Independence, every family
will have a pucca house with water connection, toilet facilities, 24x7 electricity supply and
access.”
The mission seeks to address the housing requirement of urban poor including slum dwellers
through following programme verticals:
• Slum rehabilitation of Slum Dwellers with participation of private developers using land
as a resource
• Promotion of Affordable Housing for weaker section through credit linked subsidy
• Affordable Housing in Partnership with Public & Private sectors
• Subsidy for beneficiary-led individual house construction /enhancement
“Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana – Housing for All (Urban)” Mission for urban area will be
implemented during 2015-2022 and this Mission will provide central assistance to implementing
agencies through States and UTs for providing houses to all eligible families/ beneficiaries by
2022.
Mission will be implemented as Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) except for the component of
credit linked subsidy which will be implemented as a Central Sector Scheme. Mission with all its
components has become effective from the date 17.06.2015 and will be implemented up to
31.03.2022.
Definitions for the purpose of the Mission
➢ Affordable Housing Project
Housing projects where 35% of the houses are constructed for EWS category
 ➢ Beneficiary
A beneficiary family will comprise husband, wife, unmarried sons and/or unmarried daughters.
The beneficiary family should not own a pucca house either in his/her name or in the name of
any member of his/her family in any part of India to be eligible to receive central assistance under
the mission.
States/UTs, at their discretion, may decide a cut-off date on which beneficiaries need to be
resident of that urban area for being eligible to take benefits under the scheme.
Central Nodal Agencies
Nodal Agencies identified by Ministry for the purposes of implementation of Credit linked subsidy
component of the mission

➢ Economically Weaker Section (EWS):

EWS households are defined as households having an annual income up to Rs. 3,00,000 (Rupees
Three Lakhs). States/UTs shall have the flexibility to redefine the annual income criteria as per
local conditions in consultation with the Centre.

➢ EWS House
An all weather single unit or a unit in a multi-storeyed super structure having carpet area of upto
30 sq. m. with adequate basic civic services and infrastructure services like toilet, water,
electricity etc. States can determine the area of EWS as per their local needs with information to
Ministry

➢ Implementing Agencies
Implementing agencies are the agencies such as Urban Local Bodies, Development Authorities,
Housing Boards etc. which are selected by State Government/SLSMC for implementing Pradhan
Mantri Awas Yojana – Housing for All (Urban) Mission.

➢ Low Income Group (LIG):

LIG households are defined as households having an annual income between Rs.3,00,001
(Rupees Three Lakhs One) up to Rs.6,00,000 (Rupees Six Lakhs). States/UTs shall have the
flexibility to redefine the annual income criteria as per local conditions in consultation with the
Centre.

➢ Primary Lending Institutions (PLI)

Scheduled Commercial Banks, Housing Finance Companies, Regional Rural Banks (RRBs), State
Cooperative Banks, Urban Cooperative Banks or any other institutions as may be identified by
the Ministry

➢ Slum
A compact area of at least 300 population or about 60-70 households of poorly built congested
tenements, in unhygienic environment usually with inadequate infrastructure and lacking in
proper sanitary and drinking water facilities.

➢ State Level Nodal Agencies (SLNAs)

Nodal Agency designated by the State Governments for implementing the Mission

➢ Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)

TDR means making available certain amount of additional built up area in lieu of the area
relinquished or surrendered by the owner of the land, so that he can use extra built up area
himself in some other land.
Coverage and Duration
All statutory towns as per Census 2011 and towns notified subsequently would be eligible for
coverage under the Mission. Note: States/UTs will have the flexibility to include in the Mission
the Planning area as notified with respect to the Statutory town and which surrounds the
concerned municipal area. The mission will support construction of houses upto 30 square meter
carpet area with basic civic infrastructure. States/UTs will have flexibility in terms of determining
the size of house and other facilities at the state level in consultation with the Ministry but
without any enhanced financial assistance from Centre. Slum redevelopment projects and
Affordable Housing projects in partnership should have basic civic infrastructure like water,
sanitation, sewerage, road, electricity etc. ULB should ensure that individual houses under credit
linked interest subsidy and beneficiary led construction should have provision for these basic civic
services.
• The minimum size of houses constructed under the mission under each component
should conform to the standards provided in National Building Code (NBC). If available
area of land, however, does not permit building of such minimum size of houses as per
NBC and if beneficiary consent is available for reduced size of house, a suitable decision
on area may be taken by State/UTs with the approval of SLSMC. All houses built or
expanded under the Mission should essentially have toilet facility.
• The houses under the mission should be designed and constructed to meet the require-
ments of structural safety against earthquake, flood, cyclone, landslides etc. conforming
to the National Building Code and other relevant Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) codes.
• The houses constructed/acquired with central assistance under the mission should be in
the name of the female head of the household or in the joint name of the male head of
the household and his wife, and only in cases when there is no adult female member in
the family, the house can be in the name of male member of the household.
• State/UT Government and Implementing Agencies should encourage formation of
associations of beneficiaries under the scheme like RWA etc. to take care of maintenance
of houses being built under the mission
• Implementation Methodology of the Mission
The Mission will be implemented through four verticals giving option to beneficiaries,
ULBs and State Governments. These four verticals are as below:
 • “In-situ” Slum Redevelopment using land as Resource
“In-situ” slum rehabilitation using land as a resource with private participation for providing
houses to eligible slum dwellers is an important component of the “Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana
– Housing for All (Urban)” mission. This approach aims to leverage the locked potential of land
under slums to provide houses to the eligible slum dwellers bringing them into the formal urban
settlement.
- Slums, whether on Central Government land/State Government land/ULB land, Private
Land, should be taken up for “in-situ” redevelopment for providing houses to all eligible slum
dwellers. Slums so redeveloped should compulsorily be denotified.
- Private partner for Slum Redevelopment would be selected through open bidding process.
State Governments and cities would, if required, provide additional Floor Area Ratio
(FAR)/Floor Space Index (FSI)/Transferable Development Rights (TDR) for making slum
redevelopment projects financially viable. Slum rehabilitation grant of Rs. 1 lakh per house,
on an average, would be admissible for all houses built for eligible slum dwellers in all such
projects. States/UTs will have the flexibility to deploy this central grant for other slums being
redeveloped for providing houses to eligible slum dwellers with private participation, except
slums on private land. It means that States/UTs can utilise more than Rs. 1 lakh per house in
some projects and less in other projects but within overall average of Rs. 1 lakh per house
calculated across the State/UT.
 - The per house upper ceiling of central assistance, if any, for such slum redevelopment
projects would be decided by the Ministry.
- “In-situ” redevelopment of slums on private owned lands for providing houses to eligible
slum dwellers can be incentivised by State Governments/UTs or ULBs by giving additional
FSI/FAR or TDR to land owner as per its policy. Central assistance cannot be used in such
cases.
- Beneficiary contribution in slum redevelopment project, if any, shall be decided and fixed by
the State/UT Government.
- Eligibility of the slum dwellers like cut-off date etc. will be decided by States/UTs preferably
through legislation.
- States/UTs may decide whether the houses constructed will be allotted on ownership rights
or on renewable, mortgageable and inheritable leasehold rights. States/UTs may impose
suitable restrictions on transfer of houses constructed under this component.
o Approach for slum rehabilitation with private partnership is outlined as below:
- As a first step, all tenable slums as identified in Housing for All Plan of Action (HFAPoA) of
the city should be analyzed with respect to their location, number of eligible slum dwellers
in that slum (refer 4.6), area of the slum land, market potential of the land (land value as per
ready reckoner can be used), FAR/FSI available and density norms applicable to that piece
of land etc.
- On the basis of analysis of slums, the implementing authorities should decide whether a
particular slum can be redeveloped with private participation or not using land as a resource
and to provide houses to eligible slums dwellers. For making projects financially viable, in
some cases, states and cities might have to provide additional FAR/FSI or TDR and relax
density and other planning norms. States/UTs may also allow commercial usage for part of
the land/FAR as mixed usage of the land.
- State/ULB can also consider clubbing of nearby slums in clusters for in-situ redevelopment
to make them financially and technically viable. Such cluster of slums can be considered as
a single project.
- A viable slum rehabilitation project would have two components i.e. “slum rehabilitation
component” which provides housing along with basic civic infrastructure to eligible slum
dwellers and a “free sale component” which will be available to developers for selling in the
market so as to cross subsidize the project.
- While formulating the project, the project planning and implementing authorities should
also decide the area of slum land which should be given to the private developers. In some
cases, the area of slum may be more than what is required for rehabilitating all eligible slum
dwellers plus free sale component for cross subsidizing the project. In such cases, project
planning authorities should give only the required slum land to private developers and
remaining slum land should be utilised for rehabilitating slums dwellers living in other slums
or for housing for other urban poor.
- Slum dwellers through their association or other suitable means should be consulted while
formulating redevelopment projects especially for the purpose of designing of slum
rehabilitation component.
- The private developers who will execute the slum redevelopment project should be selected
through an open transparent bidding process. The eligibility criteria for prospective
developers can be decided by States/UTs and ULBs. The scope of work of the prospective
developers should be to conceive and to execute the project as mandated by the
implementing agency using its financial and technical resources. The project developers
would also be responsible for providing transit accommodation to the eligible slum dwellers
during the construction period.
- All financial and non financial incentives and concessions, if any, should be integrated in the
project and declared ‘a priori’ in the bid document. These incentives and concessions should
also include contribution from beneficiaries/slum dwellers, if any.
- Sale of “free sale component” of project should be linked to the completion and transfer of
slum rehabilitation component to the implementing agency/state. Such stipulation should
be clearly provided in the bid document to avoid any complication.
- Slum rehabilitation component should be handed over to implementing agency to make
allotments to eligible slum dwellers through a transparent process. While making the
allotment, families with physically handicapped persons and senior citizens should be given
priority for allotment on ground floor or lower floors.
- Open bidding for the slum redevelopment project may result either into a positive premium
or negative premium. In case of positive premium, the developer who offers the highest
positive premium while satisfying all other conditions should be selected. In case of negative
premium, the implementing authority may select the bidder proposing lowest negative
premium. Funds required to make the project viable can be made available either from slum
rehabilitation grant of Central Government or own fund of States and ULBs as well as positive
premium received from other projects.

Strategy for Slum Redevelopment using Land as a Resource (Ref. Para 4 of the guidelines)
- Any private participation, that demands substantial grants from Government, may not be
encouraged. Slums can either be taken up later for development or Kutcha/ unserviceable
houses in such slums can be taken up under other components of the mission
- State Project planning and implementing authorities, ULBs should have a single project
account for slum redevelopment project where positive premium, slum rehabilitation grant
from Central Government, funds from State Government or any other source is to be
credited and used for financing all slum redevelopment projects with negative premium.
Such accounts can be opened city-wise.
- Slum rehabilitation projects would require various approvals from different agencies as per
prevailing rules and procedures in the State/UT. Project development may also require
changes in various development control rules. To facilitate such changes and for faster
formulation and approval of projects, it is suggested that a single authority should be
 constituted with the responsibility to change planning and other norms and also for
according approval to projects.
• Credit-Linked Subsidy Scheme
• The Mission, in order to expand institutional credit flow to the housing needs of
urban poor will implement credit linked subsidy component as a demand side
intervention. Credit linked subsidy will be provided on home loans taken by
eligible urban poor (EWS/LIG) for acquisition, construction of house.
5.1 Beneficiaries of Economically Weaker section (EWS) and Low Income Group (LIG) seeking
housing loans from Banks, Housing Finance Companies and other such institutions would be
eligible for an interest subsidy at the rate of 6.5 % for a tenure of 15 years or during tenure of
loan whichever is lower. The Net Present Value (NPV) of the interest subsidy will be calculated at
a discount rate of 9 %.
5.2 The credit linked subsidy will be available only for loan amounts upto Rs 6 lakhs and additional
loans beyond Rs. 6 lakhs, if any, will be at nonsubsidized rate. Interest subsidy will be credited
upfront to the loan account of beneficiaries through lending institutions resulting in reduced
effective housing loan and Equated Monthly Instalment (EMI).
5.3 Credit linked subsidy would be available for housing loans availed for new construction and
addition of rooms, kitchen, toilet etc. to existing dwellings as incremental housing. The carpet
area of houses being constructed or enhanced under this component of the mission should be
upto 30 square metres and 60 square metres for EWS and LIG, respectively in order to avail of
this credit linked subsidy. The beneficiary, at his/her discretion, can build a house of larger area
but interest subvention would be limited to first Rs. 6 lakh only.
5.4 Housing and Urban Development Corporation (HUDCO) and National Housing Bank (NHB)
have been identified as Central Nodal Agencies (CNAs) to channelize this subsidy to the lending
institutions and for monitoring the progress of this component. Ministry may notify other
institutions as CNA in future.
5.5 Primary Lending Institutions (PLIs) can register only with one CNA by signing MOU as provided
in Annexure 1.
5.6 CNAs will be responsible for ensuring proper implementation and monitoring of the scheme
and will put in place appropriate mechanisms for the purpose. CNAs will provide periodic
monitoring inputs to the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation through
regular monthly and quarterly reports as per Annexure 2.
5.7 State/UTs/ULBs/PLIs shall link beneficiary identification to Aadhaar, Voter card, any other
unique identification or a certificate of house ownership from Revenue Authority of Ben-
eficiary’s native district to avoid duplication.
5.8 Preference under the Scheme, subject to beneficiaries being from EWS/LIG segments, should
be given to Manual Scavengers, Women (with overriding preference to widows), persons
belonging to Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes/Other Backward Classes, Minorities,
Persons with disabilities and Transgender.
5.9 State Level Nodal Agency (SLNA) identified by State/UT for implementing the mission will
facilitate the identified eligible beneficiaries in getting approvals and documents, etc. to
avail of credit linked subsidy.
5.10 For identification as an EWS or LIG beneficiary under the scheme, an individual loan
applicant will submit self-certificate/affidavit as proof of income.
5.11 In case a borrower who has taken a housing loan and availed of interest subvention under
the scheme but later on switches to another PLI for balance transfer, such beneficiary will
not be eligible to claim the benefit of interest subvention again.
5.12 Under the Mission, beneficiaries can take advantage under one component only. Since other
three components are to be implemented by State Government through Urban Local
Bodies/ Authorities etc. and this component is to be implemented by PLIs, therefore, in
order that beneficiaries do not take advantage of more than one component, PLIs should
take NOCs quarterly from State/UT Governments or designated agency of State/UT
Governments for the list of beneficiaries being given benefits under credit linked subsidy.
For enabling this process, the beneficiaries should be linked to his/her Aadhaar/Voter ID
Card/Any other unique identification Number or a certificate of house ownership from
Revenue Authority of Beneficiary’s native district and State/UT Government or its
designated agency should furnish the NOC within 15 days of receipt of such request.
Till 30.06.2016, however, or until States/UTs sign MoA under the Mission, whichever is later,
instead of taking NOC from States/UTs, CNAs, on behalf of PLIs, would send list of beneficiaries
under CLSS on fortnightly basis to concerned States/UTs. Concerned States / UTs will consider
this list, while deciding beneficiaries under other three verticals of the Mission, so that no
beneficiary is granted more than one benefit under the Mission.
Affordable Housing in Partnership (AHP)
The third component of the mission is affordable housing in partnership. This is a supply
side intervention. The Mission will provide financial assistance to EWS houses being built
with different partnerships by States/UTs/Cities.
6.1 To increase availability of houses for EWS category at an affordable rate, States/UTs, either
through its agencies or in partnership with private sector including industries, can plan
affordable housing projects. Central Assistance at the rate of Rs.1.5 Lakh per EWS house
would be available for all EWS houses in such projects.
6.2 The States/UTs would decide on an upper ceiling on the sale price of EWS houses in rupees
per square meter of carpet area in such projects with an objective to make them
affordable and accessible to the intended beneficiaries. For that purpose, State and cities
may extend other concessions such as their State subsidy, land at affordable cost, stamp
duty exemption etc.
6.3 The sale prices may be fixed either on the project basis or city basis using following prin-
ciples;
6.4 An affordable housing project can be a mix of houses for different categories but it will be
eligible for central assistance, if at least 35% of the houses in the project are for EWS
 category and a single project has at least 250 houses. CSMC, however, can reduce the
requirement of minimum number of houses in one project on the request of State
Government.
6.5 Allotment of houses to identified eligible beneficiaries in AHP projects should be made fol-
lowing a transparent procedure as approved by SLSMC and beneficiaries selected should
be part of HFAPoA. Preference in allotment may be given to physically handicapped
persons, senior citizens, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes,
minority, single women, transgender and other weaker and vulnerable sections of the
society. While making the allotment, the families with person with disability and senior
citizens may be allotted house preferably on the ground floor or lower floors.
6.6 Detailed Project Report of such projects prepared by concerned implementing agencies
should be approved by SLSMC.
Beneficiary-led individual house construction or enhancement 7.
The fourth component of the mission is assistance to individual eligible families belonging
to EWS categories to either construct new houses or enhance existing houses on their
own to cover the beneficiaries, who are not able to take advantage of other components
of the mission. Such families may avail of central assistance of Rs. 1.50 lakhs for
construction of new houses or for enhancement of existing houses under the mission.
7.1 Beneficiaries desirous of availing this assistance shall approach the ULBs with adequate docu-
mentation regarding availability of land owned by them. Such beneficiaries may be
residing either in slums or outside the slums. Beneficiaries in slums which are not being
redeveloped can be covered under this component if beneficiaries have a Kutcha or Semi-
Pucca house.
7.2 The Urban Local Bodies shall validate the information given by the beneficiary and building
plan for the house submitted by beneficiary so that ownership of land and other details
of beneficiary like economic status and eligibility can be ascertained. In addition, the
condition of the houses e.g. Kutcha, semi-kutcha etc. of the prospective beneficiary
should be checked with SECC data to ensure beneficiary’s consequent eligibility for
construction of new housing. SECC data regarding number of rooms, details of family
members etc. should also be checked to ensure beneficiary’s eligibility for enhancement.
7.3 On the basis of these applications, ULBs will prepare an integrated city wide housing project
for such individual beneficiaries in accordance with the City Development Plan (CDP) or
other such plans of the city to ensure construction of proposed houses are as per planning
norms of the city and scheme is implemented in an integrated manner. Individual
applicants for assistance shall not be considered.
7.4 Such Projects would be approved by States in SLSMC.
7.5 While approving project for individual house construction, Urban Local Bodies and State/ UT
should ensure that required finance for constructing the planned house is available to the
beneficiary from different sources including his own contribution, GoI assistance, State
 Government assistance etc. In no case, GoI assistance will be released for house where
balance cost of construction is not tied up, as otherwise release of GoI assistance may
result into half constructed houses.
7.6 State/UT or cities may also contribute financially for such individual house construction.
Central assistance will be released to the bank accounts of beneficiaries identified in
projects through States/UTs as per recommendations of State/UT.
7.7 Though the funds from Central Government to State Governments would be released in
lump-sum including assistance for this component, State Government should release
financial assistance to the beneficiaries in 3-4 instalments depending on progress of
construction of the house. Beneficiary may start the construction using his own funds or
any other fund and GoI assistance will be released in proportion to the construction by
individual beneficiary. The last instalment of Rs. 30,000/- of GoI assistance should be
released only after completion of the house.
7.8 The progress of such individual houses should be tracked through geo-tagged
photographs so that each house can be monitored effectively. States will be required to
develop a system for tracking progress of such houses through geo-tagged photographs. Flow
chart showing steps in beneficiary-led construction or enhancement component of the
mission is as under:

Implementation Process
8.1 As a first step, States/UTs will sign a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) to participate in the
mission by agreeing to mandatory conditions and other modalities. A copy of the MoA to
be signed between State/UT and Centre is placed at Annexure 3.
8.2 States/UTs will send proposals to the Ministry for inclusion of cities in the mission along with
broad assessment of housing and resources requirement. Ministry will approve inclusion
of these cities considering availability of resources. The credit linked subsidy component
of the mission will, however, be implemented in all statutory cities/towns across the
country right from the launch of the mission.
8.3 State/Cities will undertake a demand survey through suitable means for assessing the actual
demand of housing. While validating demand survey, States/Cities should consider
possible temporary migration from rural areas to the city just to take advantage of
housing scheme and exclude such migrants from list of beneficiaries. On the basis of
demand survey and other available data, cities will prepare Housing for All Plan of Action
(HFAPoA). HFAPoA should contain the demand of housing by eligible beneficiaries in the
city along with the interventions selected out of four verticals mentioned in para 3 of the
guidelines. The information regarding beneficiaries should be collected by States/UTs in
suitable formats but must contain the information as in Annexure 4. While preparing
HFAPoA, State/UT and Implementing Agencies should also consider the affordable
housing stock already available in the city as Census data suggests that large number of
houses are vacant.
8.4 Jan Dhan Yojana/other bank account number and Aadhaar number/Voter ID card/any other
unique identification details of intended beneficiaries or a certificate of house ownership
from Revenue Authority of Beneficiary’s native district will be integrated in the data base
of HFAPoA for avoiding duplication of benefit to one individual family. Beneficiaries will
be validated by States/UTs and ULBs thereby ensuring their eligibility at the time of
preparation of the projects and approval of projects.
8.5 On the basis of HFAPoA, States/Cities will subsequently prepare the Annual Implementation
Plans (AIPs) dividing the task upto 2022 in view of the availability of resources and priority.
For larger cities, HFAPoA and AIPs can be prepared at sub-city (ward/zone etc.) level with
the approval of concerned State/UT Government.
8.6 The result of demand survey, draft HFAPoA and draft AIP should be discussed with the local
representatives including MLAs and MPs of that area so that their views are adequately
factored in while finalising the plans and beneficiary list.
8.7 Cities which have already prepared Slum Free City Plan of Action (SFCPoA) or any other
housing plan with data on housing, should utilise the existing plan and data for preparing
“Housing for All Plan of Action” (HFAPoA). Houses constructed under various schemes should
be accounted for while preparing HFAPoA & AIP. Flow Chart for preparing HFAPoA is placed
below. The formats for the HFAPoA and AIP are kept at Annexure 5 & 6 respectively.
8.8 The HFAPoA and AIPs should be submitted to the Ministry after approval of State level
Sanctioning and Monitoring Committee for assessment of the overall plan and required
central financial assistance. In view of availability of finance and upon assessment of plan,
CSMC may issue directions for change in HFAPoA and AIPs.
8.9 HFAPoA should be reviewed on a yearly basis to make changes in view of implementation of
Annual Implementation Plan (AIP) in the preceding years.
8.10 Based on HFAPoA and availability of resources, each city will prepare Detailed Project Report
(DPRs) under each component of the Mission except CLSS. All DPRs should be approved
by State Level Sanctioning and Monitoring Committee.
8.11 Urban Local Bodies should take into account the provisions of the City Development Plan,
City Sanitation Plan etc. in preparing HFAPoA for achieving synergy with other ongoing
programmes of both Central and State Governments.
8.12 A Beneficiary will be eligible for availing only a single benefit under any of the existing
options i.e. slum redevelopment with private partner, credit linked subsidy, direct subsidy to
individual beneficiary and affordable housing in partnership. It will be the responsibility of
 State/UT Government to ensure that the beneficiary is not given benefit under more than
one component of the Mission and all assisted families are part of HFAPoA.

Technology Sub-Mission 9.
9.1 A Technology Sub-Mission under the Mission would be set up to facilitate adoption of
modern, innovative and green technologies and building material for faster and quality
construction of houses. Technology Sub-Mission will also facilitate preparation and
adoption of layout designs and building plans suitable for various geo-climatic zones. It
will also assist States/ Cities in deploying disaster resistant and environment friendly
technologies.
9.2 The Sub-Mission will coordinate with various regulatory and administrative bodies for main-
streaming and up scaling the deployment of modern construction technologies and
material in place of conventional construction. Technology Sub-Mission will also
coordinate with other agencies working in green and energy efficient technologies,
climate changes etc.
9.3 The Sub-Mission will work on following aspects: i) Design & Planning ii) Innovative technolo-
gies & materials iii) Green buildings using natural resources and iv) Earthquake and other
disaster resistant technologies and designs. Simple concept of designs ensuring adequate
sunlight and air should be adopted.
9.4 Centre and State would also partner with willing IITs, NITs and Planning & Architecture
institutes for developing technical solutions, capacity building and handholding of States
and Cities.
9.5 State or region-specific needs of technologies and designs would also be supported under
this Sub-Mission
Slums on Central Government Land 10.
10.1 Central Government land owning agencies should also undertake “in-situ” slum redevelop-
ment on their lands occupied by slums by using it as a resource for providing houses to
slum dwellers. In case of relocation, a land should either be provided by the agency itself
or the agency may collaborate with the States/UTs for obtaining land from State/UT/City.
Central Government agencies should not charge land costs for the land used for the
purpose of housing the eligible slum dwellers.
10.2 Central Govt. agencies undertaking slum development in partnership with private
developers would be eligible for slum rehabilitation grant of Rs. 1 lakh per house on an
average for all slums on their land being taken up for redevelopment with private
partners.
Mandatory Conditions 11.
Availability of urban land is the biggest constraint in providing housing to all including
weaker sections. Therefore, to ease administrative and regulatory bottlenecks, a set of
 Mandatory Conditions has been included in the Mission to facilitate growth of housing
sector including affordable housing. For participating in the mission and to avail of
financial assistance from Central Government, States/ UTs should agree to fulfill following
Mandatory Conditions:-
11.1 States/UTs to make suitable changes in the procedure and rules for obviating the need for
separate Non Agricultural (NA) Permission if land already falls in the residential zone
earmarked in Master Plan of city or area.
11.2 States/UTs shall prepare/amend their Master Plans earmarking land for Affordable Housing.
11.3 A System should be put in place to ensure single-window, time bound clearance for layout
approval and building permissions at ULB level.
11.4 States/UTs shall adopt the approach of deemed building permission and layout approval on
the basis of pre-approved lay outs and building plans for EWS/LIG housing or exempt
approval for houses below certain built up area or plot area.
11.5 States/UTs would either legislate or amend existing rental laws on the lines of model
Tenancy Act being prepared by Ministry.
11.6 States/UTs shall provide additional FAR/FSI/TDR and relaxed density norms for slum
redevelopment and low cost housing, if required.

12. Capacity Building and Other Administrative Activities

5% of the allocation under the scheme is earmarked for capacity building, Information
Education & Communication (IEC) and Administrative & Other Expenses (A&OE). Allocation
available under this head will be utilised for carrying out various activities required for
effective implementation of mission. Illustrative activities under this component are as
below:
12.1 Capacity building activities like trainings, workshops, study/exposure visits, etc. would be
undertaken for enhancing the capacities of various stakeholders in implementation of the
mission. Research studies, documentations and dissemination of best practices,
preparation of other scheme related materials would also be undertaken for capacity
building.
12.2 Financial and other norms for various activities under capacity building will be decided by
CSMC. Till the time CSMC decides these norms, norms finalised under earlier schemes
such as RAY would be used.
12.3 Mission will empanel Resource Centres for providing training and to undertake other
activities. State may also empanel Resource Centres to develop training programmes
customised to its need with the prior approval of CSMC.
12.4 All capacity building activities approved by CSMC would be fully funded by Government of
India as per the norms decided by CSMC.
12.5 Under IEC, Mission will undertake activities for developing and dissemination of advocacy
material aimed at various stakeholders with the approval of competent authority. IEC
activities will also be fully funded by Ministry.
12.6 Social Audit: Mission, at its discretion, will also assist State/UT Governments in undertaking
social audit of the projects being implemented under the mission. Such social audit would
be carried out by State/UT Government and ULBs through credible institutions including
technical institutions (IITs, NITs etc.) and architectural and design institutes and through
students of such institutions. Mission will provide 100% financial assistance for social
audit with the approval of CSMC.
12.7 Administrative and other expenses of Mission would also be borne out of these earmarked
funds. The Ministry will create a Technical Cell, Project Management Cell etc. as required
for the Mission for effective implementation of the scheme including hiring of the services
of manpower on contract basis for short and longer duration.
12.8 Ministry will also require appraising agencies like BMTPC and HUDCO to assist the Ministry
in appraising HFAPoA and Annual Implementation Plans (AIPs). Services of these appraisal
agencies will also be required for checking projects randomly. The expenditure on such
activities will also be met from these funds. CSMC will decide the financial norms for such
activities.
12.9 A technology sub-mission is being formed under the mission. The activities of sub-mission
will be financed under capacity building allocation of the mission.
12.10 Third Party Quality Monitoring Agencies (TPQMA): It is envisaged that the States/UTs
would engage TPQMA to ensure quality of construction under various components of the
Mission. States/UTs should draw up their quality monitoring and assurance plans
involving third party agencies. Such plan will include the visits by third party agencies to
the project site and to advise State and Urban Local Bodies on quality related issues. On
the basis of quality assurance report by such agencies and also reports of their own
technical staff, States and ULBs should take both preventive and curative measures to
ensure that standard quality houses and infrastructure are constructed under the
mission. Ministry will provide assistance to implement third party quality monitoring
mechanism by sharing the cost on 75:25 basis; and in case of NE and special category
states on 90:10 basis. Ministry will share expenses for at the most three visits by TPQMA
to each project. Annual Quality Monitoring Plans should be submitted to Mission for the
approval of CSMC after taking approval of State Level Monitoring Committee.
12.11 Preparation of HFAPoA and Technical Cells in State & Cities
Preparation of HFAPoA requires number of activities by States and cities. Mission will
assist States/ cities in carrying out these activities for preparation of HFAPoA under
capacity building and A&OE funds. Many cities have already been given assistance under
RAY for preparation of Slum Free City Plan of Action (SFCPoA). States and cities should
utilise that amount for preparation of HFAPoA and claim next instalment when 70% of
the released funds have been utilised.
12.12 The activities required for preparation of HFAPoA will be funded by Ministry in the ratio of
75:25 and in case of North Eastern and special category States in the ratio of 90:10. The
unit cost/financial norms for different activities will be determined by CSMC and till then
the existing norms under RAY should be used.
12.13 For implementing “Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana – Housing for All (Urban)” states and cities
will require different competencies like planning, engineering, social mobilisation,
financial planning etc. Ministry will provide assistance to the states and city government
 for enhancing capacity of their employees/ officers in these operational areas. Ministry
will also assist city and state government in constitution of Technical and Project
Management Cell at state and city level. A State Level Technical Cell (SLTC) with 5-10
professionals will be supported with the approval of CSMC. CSMC can increase the size of
such cell on the requirement of State/UT.
12.14 City Level Technical Cell (CLTC) with 2-4 professionals depending on the size of the city and
quantum of work will also be supported by the mission with the approval of CSMC. In case
of big cities like metropolitan cities the number of professionals in CLTC can be more than
4 with the approval of CSMC.
12.15 The Ministry support for CLTC and SLTC will be in the ratio of 75:25 and in case of North
Eastern and special categories states it will be in the ratio of 90:10. The financial norms
for such Cells will be prescribed by CSMC and till the time CSMC prescribes these norms,
the norms already approved under RAY will be applicable.
12.16 Any other activities which are required for building the capacity for implementing the
Mission or in general for augmenting the capacity of Centre, States and ULBs in this sector
can be taken up with the approval of CSMC.
other Ministries 13.
13.1 Industries, through Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP), would be
requested to plan and make provision for housing facilities for all its employees whether
contractual or permanent. Housing for its employee should be an integral part of
industrial set up by Industry and planning by State Governments.
13.2 Ministry of Railways and other land owning Central Government agencies would be
requested to undertake “in-situ” redevelopment of slums existing on its land providing
houses to eligible slum dwellers.
13.3 Ministry of Urban Development would be requested to converge civic amenities and in-
frastructure development in outer areas of the cities under its proposed National Urban
Rejuvenation Mission (NURM) called Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transfor-
mation of 500 cities (AMRUT) so that more land with civic facilities can become available
and part of which can be used by cities for housing for weaker section. Ministry of Urban
Development would also be requested to make provisions for housing for weaker section
in its Smart Cities right from beginning.
13.4 The Construction Workers Welfare Fund is set up by States/UTs under the central law of
Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Conditions of
Service) Act, 1996. States/UTs collect cess on construction projects and transfer the
amount to the Welfare Fund for Construction Workers. Ministry of Labour will be
requested to ask States/UTs for creating rental housing stocks to workers as welfare
measure.
13.5 Government of India has been implementing various schemes such as National Urban
Livelihood Mission, National Urban Health Mission, Sarv Siksha Abhiyan, Solar Mission
etc. which target the urban poor. States/UTs are requested to ensure convergence with
relevant schemes in housing projects to be undertaken under this mission.
14. Mechanism for Release of Central Assistance except Credit Linked Subsidy
14.1 Indicative State/UT wise allocation will be made based on urban population and estimated
slum population or other criteria as may be decided by MoHUPA. The allocation will be
 made separately for each component. Ministry can change the inter-se allocation
between different components with the approval of competent authority.
14.2 Central Assistance under different components will be released to the States/UTs after the
approval of CSMC and with concurrence of the Integrated Financial Division (IFD) of the
Ministry. Central share would be released in 3 instalments of 40%, 40% and 20% each.
14.3 Mission, with the approval of CSMC, will release initial money for taking up preparatory
activities for formulating HFAPoA after taking into consideration of number of cities
covered under mission. States/UTs will submit HFAPoA for the selected cities as soon as
possible, preferably within 6 months of selection of city. On the basis of HFAPoA, the
requirements of financial assistance from GoI would be projected.
14.4 States/UTs will submit Annual Implementation Plan (AIP) each year for the next year in
prescribed format given at Annexure 6 so that Ministry can assess budgetary
requirement. AIP should be submitted each year.
14.5 After approval of Annual Implementation Plan (AIP) the State/UT will be required to submit
details of the projects approved by SLSMC under different components of the mission as
in prescribed format kept at Annexure 7. CSMC would consider the project-wise
information for releasing first instalment of 40% of admissible Central share for each
component. For considering the release of first instalment, CSMC may scrutinize the
selected DPRs with the help of technical/other institutions. For the year 2015-16 i.e. for
the first year of Mission, AIP will not be necessary. State/UT may seek Central assistance
on the basis of projects approved by SLSMC as per scheme guidelines by quarterly sending
details of approved projects in the prescribed format given at Annexure 7.
14.6 Second instalment of 40% would be released based on 70% utilization of earlier central
release along with State releases, and commensurate physical progress. Before releasing
2nd instalment CSMC may check the quality of the houses being constructed on random
basis or houses of specific project through technical institutions along with reports of
Third Party Quality Agencies selected by States for quality monitoring purpose. The
format of utilization certificate to be submitted is kept at Annexure 8.
14.7 States/UTs will further release the central grant to cities and/or other implementing
agencies. In order to provide flexibility, States/UTs are allowed to release funds on the
basis of actual progress of the projects, implying that for a project being implemented
faster, state/UTs can release more funds.
14.8 The final instalment of 20% of central assistance will be released subject to 70% utilization
of earlier central releases and completion of projects including construction of houses
and infrastructure, as may be applicable, in each project. The final instalment of 20% of
central assistance would also be contingent of achieving mandatory reforms. States/UTs
will be required to submit project completion reports for all approved projects as per
Annexure 9.
14.9 Under the component of Subsidy for beneficiary-led individual house construction or
enhancement/ central assistance transferred to States/UTs, the same shall be transferred
electronically to the beneficiary bank accounts. States/UTs shall prepare an electronic list
of eligible beneficiaries with Aadhaar/Voter ID Card/Any other unique identification
number or a certificate of house ownership from Revenue Authority of Beneficiary’s
 native district and valid Bank account numbers before sanctioning projects for individual
construction.
14.10 All eligible beneficiaries under all component of scheme should have an Aadhaar/Voter ID/
Any other unique identification document or a certificate of house ownership from Rev-
enue Authority of Beneficiary’s native district which should be integrated with the details
of beneficiary. In case, any eligible beneficiary does not have an Aadhaar card, State and
Cities should ensure that Aadhaar enrolment of such beneficiaries is done on priority.
14.11 Funds released to the city or any other implementing agency by State should be kept in a
separate account opened for this Mission. Any interest accrued in this account is to be
used for the mission purpose only.
15. Release of Central Assistance for Credit Linked Subsidy Component of the Mission
15.1 An advance subsidy will be released to each CNA at the start of the scheme. Subsequent
amounts of credit linked subsidy will be released to the CNAs after 70 % utilization of
earlier amounts, on quarterly basis, and based on claims raised by CNAs, as per prescribed
format Annexure 10.
15.2 Based on the loan disbursed by a PLI to EWS and LIG beneficiaries, the CNA will release the
subsidy amount to PLIs directly based on the claims submitted on the total loans
disbursed. Subsidy will be released to the PLI by the CNA in maximum of four instalments.
15.3 0.1% of total fund disbursement by the CNAs to the PLIs will be paid to the CNAs for their
administrative expenses.
15.4 Subsidy will be credited by the PLI to the borrower’s account upfront by deducting it from
the principal loan amount of the borrower. The borrower will pay EMI as per lending rates
on the remainder of the principal loan amount.
15.5 In lieu of the processing fee for housing loan for the borrower under the scheme, PLIs will
be given a lump sum amount of Rs. 1000 per sanctioned application. PLIs will not take any
processing charge from the beneficiary.
15.6 Beneficiary can apply for a housing loan directly or through the ULB or the local agencies
identified by the State/ULBs for facilitating the applications from intended beneficiaries. In
order to incentivize the designated staff of ULBs or NGOs a sum of Rs.250 per sanctioned
application would be paid out of CLS Scheme funds payable through State Governments.
16. Administration and Implementation Structure
The Programme will have a three-tier implementation structure.
16.1 An inter-ministerial committee viz. Central Sanctioning and Monitoring Committee (CSMC)
is constituted under the Chairpersonship of Secretary (HUPA) for implementation of the Mission,
approvals there under and monitoring. The constitution and indicative functions of CSMC is at
Annexure 11.
16.2 A Committee of Secretary (HUPA) and Secretary (DFS) in Government of India is also con-
stituted for monitoring the credit linked subsidy component of the Mission, giving targets
to PLIs etc. The Committee can co-opt other members as is felt necessary by it.
16.3 A Mission Directorate (MD) is also formed under the Ministry to implement the Mission. It
is headed by Joint Secretary (Mission).
16.4 States/UTs are required to constitute an inter-departmental State Level Sanctioning &
Monitoring Committee (SLSMC) for approval of Action Plans and projects under various
components of the Mission. The Committee should be headed by Chief Secretary and
 suggested composition of the Committee along with its indicative functions is at Annexure
12.
16.5 Each State/UT will identify a State Level Nodal Agency (SLNA) under the Mission wherein a
State Level Mission Directorate will be set up for coordination of the scheme and reform-
related activities.
16.6 State Level Appraisal Committee (SLAC) may be constituted by the State /UT for techno-
economic appraisal of DPRs submitted by ULBs/Implementing Agencies. SLAC will submit
their appraisal reports with their comments and recommendations to the SLNA for taking
approval of SLSMC.
16.7 State may nominate a separate State Level Nodal Agency (SLNA) under the credit linked
subsidy component of the Mission to identify, motivate and organize beneficiaries to seek
housing loans.
16.8 A city level Mission for selected cities should be set up under the chairpersonship of the
Mayor or Chairman of the ULB as the case may be.
16.9 Suitable grievance redressal system should be set up at both State and City level to address
the grievances in implementing the mission from various stakeholders.

17. Monitoring & Evaluation

Mission will be monitored at all three levels: City, State and Central Government. CSMC will
monitor formulation of HFAPoA, Annual Implementation Plans (AIPs) and project imple-
mentation. Suitable monitoring mechanisms will be developed by the Mission. States and cities
will also be required to develop monitoring mechanism for monitoring the progress of mission
and its different components.

SUBSIDY FOR BENEFICIARY-LED INDIVIDUAL HOUSE CONSTRUCTION OR ENHANCEMENT

The fourth component of the mission is assistance to individual eligible families belonging to EWS
categories to either construct new houses or enhance existing houses on their own to cover the
beneficiaries, who are not able to take advantage of other components of the mission. Such
families may avail of central assistance of Rs. 1.50 lakhs for construction of new houses or for
enhancement of existing houses under the mission.

• Beneficiaries desirous of availing this assistance shall approach the ULBs with adequate
documentation regarding availability of land owned by them. Such beneficiaries may be
residing either in slums or outside the slums. Beneficiaries in slums which are not being
redeveloped can be covered under this component if beneficiaries have a Kutcha or Semi-
Pucca house.
• The Urban Local Bodies shall validate the information given by the beneficiary and
building plan for the house submitted by beneficiary so that ownership of land and other
details of beneficiary like economic status and eligibility can be ascertained. In addition,
the condition of the houses e.g. Kutcha, semi-kutcha etc. of the prospective beneficiary
should be checked with SECC data to ensure beneficiary’s consequent eligibility for
 construction of new housing. SECC data regarding number of rooms, details of family
members etc. should also be checked to ensure beneficiary’s eligibility for enhancement.
• On the basis of these applications, ULBs will prepare an integrated city wide housing
project for such individual beneficiaries in accordance with the City Development Plan
(CDP) or other such plans of the city to ensure construction of proposed houses are as per
planning norms of the city and scheme is implemented in an integrated manner.
Individual applicants for assistance shall not be considered.
• Such Projects would be approved by States in SLSMC.
• While approving project for individual house construction, Urban Local Bodies and State
/ UT should ensure that required finance for constructing the planned house is available
to the beneficiary from different sources including his own contribution, GoI assistance,
State Government assistance etc. In no case, GoI assistance will be released for house
where balance cost of construction is not tied up, as otherwise release of GoI assistance
may result into half constructed houses.
• State / UT or cities may also contribute financially for such individual house construction.
Central assistance will be released to the bank accounts of beneficiaries identified in
projects through States / UTs as per recommendations of State / UT.
• Though the funds from Central Government to State Governments would be released in
lump-sum including assistance for this component, State Government should release
financial assistance to the beneficiaries in 3-4 installments depending on progress of
construction of the house. Beneficiary may start the construction using his own funds or
any other fund and GoI assistance will be released in proportion to the construction by
individual beneficiary. The last installment of Rs. 30,000/- of GoI assistance should be
released only after completion of the house.
• The progress of such individual houses should be tracked through geo-tagged
photographs so that each house can be monitored effectively. States will be required to
develop a system for tracking progress of such houses through geo-tagged photographs.
Flow chart showing steps in beneficiary-led construction or enhancement component of
the mission is as under:
Technology Sub-Mission

A Technology Sub-mission under the Mission has been set up to facilitate adoption of modern,
innovative and green technologies and building material for faster and quality construction of
houses. Technology Sub-Mission will also facilitate preparation and adoption of layout designs
and building plans suitable for various geo-climatic zones. It will also assist States/ Cities in
deploying disaster resistant and environment friendly technologies.

The Sub-mission will coordinate with various regulatory and administrative bodies for
mainstreaming and up scaling the deployment of modern construction technologies and material
in place of conventional construction. Technology sub-mission will also coordinate with other
agencies working in green and energy efficient technologies, climate changes etc.

The Sub-Mission will work on following aspects:

•Design&Planning

Innovativetechnologies&materials
• Green buildings using natural resources and
• Earthquake and other disaster resistant technologies and designs. Simple concept of designs
ensuring adequate sunlight and air should be adopted.

Centre and State would also partner with willing IITs, NITs and Planning & Architecture institutes
for developing technical solutions, capacity building and handholding of States and Cities.

State or region-specific needs of technologies and designs would also be supported under this
Sub-Mission
A technical cell has been setup in the Building Materials and Technology Promotion Council
(BMTPC) under the Ministry to support the Sub-mission

OPERATIONAL GUIDELINES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF DEMONSTRATION

HOUSING PROJECTS (DHPs) IN THE STATES USING GREEN AND EMERGING
TECHNOLOGIES UNDER THE CAPACITY BUILDING INITIATIVE OF PRADHAN
MANTRI AWAS YOJANA (URBAN)

• To achieve the goals of Housing for All by 2022 and also to address global commitment
on climate change, the Ministry is harnessing inhouse expertise as well as other national
level technology institutions so as to put in place an eco-system for free flow of
information and expertise on new/alternate technologies. The overall objective is to
enable States/UTs/ULBs to leverage these technologies in their mass housing schemes
including in those built with the support of PMAY(Urban) for which the Central
Government plays the role of a facilitator.
• As laid down in the PMAY(U) guidelines a Technology Sub-mission has been constituted
under PMAY(Urban), inter-alia, tasked with the mandate to facilitate adoption of modern,
 innovative and green technologies and building materials for rapid construction of quality
houses and also to facilitate preparation and adoption of layout designs and building
plans suitable for various geo-climatic zones. It also envisages assisting States/cities in
deploying disaster resistant and environment friendly technologies.
• In the first instance, it is important to train and acquaint municipal engineers, architects
as well as engineers and others associated with construction of houses promoted by
private builders on the new/alternate technologies. Secondly, one of the challenges in
mainstreaming new construction technologies and techniques is a perceived hesitation in
the acceptance of these new technologies by the ultimate end user, the house owner. In
order to alleviate such concerns, there is need to construct such houses as Demonstration
Housing Projects and to allot the houses to the beneficiaries, which would, over a period
of time, help in bringing about attitudinal change in favour of such houses.
• Building Materials and Technology Promotion Council (BMTPC) under the Ministry of
Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation is playing a pivotal role in propagating new
technologies and has the requisite expertise in the field. One of the objectives of the
Organization is to “promote development, standardization, mechanization and large-
scale field application of proven innovative and emerging building materials and
technologies in the construction sector”.
• The broad approach in constructing the Demonstration Housing Projects was outlined to
the States/UTs/ULBs earlier vide the D.O. letter No. I- 16016/5/2014-H dated 05.06.2015
from Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation addressed to Chief
Secretaries of States. The need for accelerating the Demonstration housing Projects have
also been emphasized in various National and Regional In the above background and, with
a view to delineating the overall approach that will guide the Ministry, BMTPC and the
State Governments, it has been decided to put in place broad operational guidelines in
the manner in which BMTPC will undertake construction of such Demonstration Housing
Projects, hereinafter referred to as DHPs. Workshops by the Ministry and BMTPC. The
Ministry has been receiving requests from various State Governments for constructing
Demonstration Housing Projects in their respective States. State Governments also
 perceive such projects as an important initiative in increasing acceptance of such
technologies among the people.
• In the above background and, with a view to delineating the overall approach that will
guide the Ministry, BMTPC and the State Governments, it has been decided to put in place
broad operational guidelines in the manner in which BMTPC will undertake construction
of such Demonstration Housing Projects, hereinafter referred to as DHPs.
▪ OBJECTIVE
i. To orient housing practitioners, both from public and private sectors, in field application of
new/alternate technologies for construction of houses.
ii. To create awareness among stakeholders (State/UT/ULB officials, technical professionals,
builders, development agencies, academic institutions and others) at the state/UT/ULB level on
new/alternate technologies being adopted in respective DHPs.
iii. To gather user feedback and enhanced acceptability with respect to houses built with
new/alternate technologies.
iv. Technical evaluation and documentation of the new/alternate technology adopted.
▪ SCOPE
These guidelines lay down the manner in which requests for construction of DHPs will be
processed based on requests received from States/UTs, the guiding principles involved, the roles
of the State/UT/ULBs, the role of the Central Government in the Ministry of housing and Urban
Poverty Alleviation and the operational and other responsibilities of Building Materials and
Technology Promotion Council (BMTPC) which has been entrusted with the task of construction
of the DHPs. As the DHPs are closely linked to the overall objective of the PMAY(Urban) Mission,
the projects will be located in urban areas identified by the States/UTs. As the DHPs have been
originally conceived keeping in view the expertise available with the BMTPC, the scope of these
guidelines is presently circumscribed and framed keeping in view the available mandate and
expertise of that organization. In future, as and when a need is felt to expand the ambit beyond
BMTPC to other organizations or entities with similar expertise, necessary
changes/modifications, if necessary, will be carried out of these guidelines, with the approval of
the Competent authority.
 ▪ THE CONCEPT AND SALIENT FEATURES OF DHPs
- A Demonstration Housing Project, conceptually speaking, will mean a model housing project
built with new/alternate technology that provides on-site orientation to practitioners in the
housing sector with knowledge on the application and use of such technology. It will,
simultaneously, provide end users the scope of residing in such houses so that acceptability
of such houses is ascertained enabling scaling up the use of such technologies.
- Each DHP will contain ordinarily around 40 houses using new emerging technologies suitable
to the geo-climatic hazard conditions of the region.
- The minimum size of houses constructed under DHP will be in accordance with the
prevailing guidelines of the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (Urban).
- Each DHP will include on site infrastructure development such as internal roads, pathways,
common green area, boundary wall, underground water tank, external electrification. Use
of non-renewable energy will be encouraged.
- Houses will be designed keeping in view the dimensional requirements laid down in National
Building Code (NBC) 2016 with good aesthetics, proper ventilation and adequate storage
space, etc.
- Disaster resistant features as per the requirements of existing NBC/BIS and applicable
international standards pertaining to earthquake, cyclone and flood, will be incorporated.
- Cluster design may include innovative system of water supply, drainage and rain water
harvesting, renewable energy sources etc.
▪ IMPLEMENTATION METHODOLOGY
- A State/UT, interested in a DHP, will make a formal request to the Ministry of Housing and
Urban Poverty Alleviation for undertaking the project using proven and emerging
technologies, after obtaining the approval of the SLSMC constituted under PMAY(Urban).
- The interested State/UT Government will identify and provide a suitable area of land free of
cost and without any encumbrances to BMTPC for construction of the DHP. All the costs
towards outside/external infrastructure development will be borne by the State/ULB.
BMTPC will be the implementing agency (IA) for the DHP unless decided otherwise, as stated
in paragraph III above.
- BMTPC, in consultation with the Ministry of HUPA, along with officials of States/UTs/ULB will
assess the suitability of the allocated land and discuss the further modalities for undertaking
the DHP.
- BMTPC will request the States/UTs/ULBs to earmark the land for DHP project and shall,
thereafter, submit a preliminary proposal to the CSMC in MoHUPA for PMAY(U) for ‘in-
principle’ approval of the project.
- On receipt of ‘in-principle’ approval from CSMC of PMAY(U), the State/UTs/ULB shall be
requested to provide site survey plan and to undertake soil investigation and other
preparatory activities. Alternatively, in the interest of timely execution, the competent
authority in the Ministry will accord ‘in principle’ approval and the decision will be placed
for ratification in CSMC.
- The State/UT Government/ULB will also identify the beneficiaries for the demonstration
houses to be constructed under the respective DHP, in accordance with the guidelines of
PMAY (Urban). It will be the responsibility of the State/UT Level Nodal Agency (SLNA)
identified under the PMAY(U) Mission in the State/UT to get list of beneficiaries in the
particular DHP validated and ratified by the SLSMC. The terms and conditions of allotment
to the beneficiaries will be decided by SLSMC.
- No subsidy will be payable to the beneficiaries under PMAY(U) if allotted under DHP.
Beneficiaries of the vulnerable category, such as, the differently abled, single women,
transgender may be given preference during such allotment. The SLSMC may decide on
beneficiary contribution to be made for such allotments. The contribution so received should
be retained by the State/ULB in a separate fund for maintenance of the DHP.
- The technology for the DHP will be finalized in consultation with the State/UT/ULB keeping
in view the geo-climatic, hazard condition and locally available materials of the region.
Design of the DHP will be undertaken by BMTPC keeping in view the local building bye laws
and regulations. The finalized design will be submitted to the State/UT/ULB for their
approval.
- After receipt of the finally approved dwelling unit plan and site layout, BMTPC will prepare
the Detailed Project Report and submit it to CSMC of MoHUPA for approval. Simultaneously,
 BMTPC will place the proposal for construction of the DHP for approval/ratification by its
Executive Committee and for information of Board of Management of BMTPC.
- After the approval of the project by CSMC, BMTPC will finalize and publish the tender
document for appointment of the contracting agency and all other necessary formalities as
per prescribed instruction in the GFRs-2017.
- BMTPC will organize need based sensitization/ capacity building programmes on emerging
technologies for the benefit of working professionals and local construction workforce in the
region.
- After completion of the project, the DHP will be handed over to the State/UT/ ULB for
allotment to the identified beneficiaries of PMAY(Urban) with the approval of SLSMC and
Ministry will be duly informed of such handing over of the DHP.
▪ Operation and Maintenance
- Acknowledging the fact that field level expertise on the new technologies may not be
available in the State/UT initially, any structural issues/distress occurring in the
houses/project under DHP will be taken up by the implementing agency for rectification for
a period of five years from the date of completion. It is expected that within the period of
five years, the State/ULB would have developed the necessary skill set to independently take
up such issues, if they occur, beyond the period of five years. Notwithstanding the above,
even beyond the period of five years, the technical expertise of BMTPC will be available to
the State/UT/ULB in an advisory/expert capacity. After completion of DHP, no expenditure
will be borne on the part of MoHUPA/BMTPC.
- All routine and daily maintenance issues arising out of normal wear and tear of items used
in the house in the DHP will be the responsibility of the State/UT/ULB. BMTPC will not be
responsible for such routine O&M tasks. A suitable budget may also be earmarked for the
recurring expenditure on this account by the State/UT/ULB.
- A set of rooms in the DHP may be earmarked dedicated staff of the State/UT/ULB for
attending to complaints of allottees as well as to respond to queries relating to capacity
building/orientation of practitioners.
▪ PROPOSED FUNDING PATTERN
 The cost of the DHP will be funded through PMAY(U) under the capacity building head as
decided in consultation with the Budget Division of the Ministry. The following procedure
will be followed for release of funds:
- The funds will be released to BMTPC in 03 installments. 1st installment of 50%will be
released on approval of the project by CSMC and 2nd installment of 40% based on utilization
of 70% of the earlier installment and commensurate
physical progress along with report of the evaluating agency as referred in
para VIII(ii) of the guidelines and UC in the prescribed format as per GFR 2017.
The final installment of 10% would be released on receipt on satisfactory
completion report.
- The entire project cost viz. the cost of housing along with internal Infrastructure including
other applicable charges would be considered for sanction and will be payable to BMTPC. As
per prevailing CPWD norms, these charges would include planning and design charges,
preparation of DPR including architectural and working drawings, preparation of structural
design, vetting of structural design, site visits, daily supervision and monitoring charges,
quality assurance of the DHP, contingency charges, etc. Other charges such as training cost,
cost of documentation and evaluation by reputed technical Institution, if any, will be
reimbursed as per rates approved for the respective items of PMAY (U).
- In case, BMTPC obtains alternate additional funding support then to that extent, the
funding support from the Ministry will be reduced.
- In case the tender award cost is more than the sanctioned Project cost, the award cost
shall be placed for consideration by the CSMC based on proper justification by BMTPC.
- On final completion of the project, if the project cost is increased due to any unforeseen
circumstances the same will be placed for approval of CSMC along with adequate
justification by the BMTPC.
▪ MONITORING & EVALUATION
i. A Technical Group comprising (i) Representative of BMTPC (ii) Representative
of SLNA (iii) Expert from local IIT/NIT/Research Institution, and (iv) Engineer
from ULB shall be constituted to oversee the progress of DHPs and also to
propagate emerging technologies used in the DHP for wider acceptability within
the State Government. This Technical Group may meet once in a month till the
handing over of the project and report progress of the project to the Ministry
through BMTPC.
ii. The project would also be evaluated and documented by reputed technical
- Institution such as IIT/NIT/ Government engineering college.
4.0 GRIHA FOR AFFORDABBLE HOUSING
Green Affordable Housing
Housing that is appropriate to the needs of a household and within their means to pay along
with being environment conscious. The means (or capacity) of a household to pay for their
housing depends on three primary factors:
• The income of the household;
• The cost of appropriate housing; and
• Other essential living costs to be met by the household, such as food and household
goods, transport, education and healthcare.
The influencing parameters for such housing will take into consideration various design
characteristics of the housing, alongside social, economic and cultural attributes of the
household. Some central indicators of green affordable housing would be:
• Standard and quality of housing
• Availability of basic amenities
• Located close to the services, jobs and community facilities
• Energy and water efficient
• Cost efficient in maintenance & operations

The overarching objective of the proposed rating would be to ensure a high degree of
sustainability with no/ meagre additional cost to the developer or the occupant. Therefore, the
approach would be to selectively adopt those measures that are simple and yet have profound
impacts in conserving the environment.
Few of the attributes that would define the success of implementing sustainability in this
segment are:
• Green measures should be easily implementable
• Easy to monitor and measure
• Operation & maintenance friendly throughout the life
• No / Meagre costs to end-user

National Benefits Anticipated

Green concepts and techniques in the affordable housing sector can help address the following:
• Reduction in energy and water consumption
• Improved health and hygiene
• Better sanitation
• Better ventilation and light in the dwellings
• Fuel savings in transit of people to work places & associated pollution

Implementability of Green features

To facilitate wider implementation, the rating system is made simple, practical and easily
implementable. The economic payback periods for various measures have also been
considered.
Applicability of Rating System
The Green Affordable Housing Rating is applicable for housing projects designed with carpet-
area less than or equal to 60 sq.M per dwelling unit, which constitutes to at least 70% of the
total project built up area.
Rating threshold GRIHA for Affordable Housing rating
List of criteria under GRIHA for Affordable Housing
ELIGIBILITY FOR AH RATING
1. Livability index (Affordable housing built-up area thresholds) - Essential
Approval letter issued by government agency (Central/State) confirming that the project is being
developed as per Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana scheme/guidelines must be submitted.
2. Site Selection - Mandatory
The site plan must be in conformity with the development plan/master plan/UDPFI guidelines.
Compliance must be demonstrated with the provisions of eco-sensitive zone regulations, coastal
zone regulations, heritage areas (identified in the master plan or issued separately as specific
guidelines), water body zones (in such zones, no construction is permitted in the water spread
and buffer belt of 30 meter minimum around the FTL), various hazard prone area regulations,
and others if the site falls under any such area.
3. Optimum availability of water - Indicative
Total water requirement estimation for the site and approval document (with assurance on the
supply of the required water quantity) from the local municipal authority highlighting the total
water which will be available for the development must be submitted.
 SECTION I

Site Planning

Sustainable site design imbibes the physical characteristics of the site, functional design
objectives and sensitivity towards the environment to ensure protection of existing natural
resources on site, manage the storm water runoff on site, reduce the pollution caused due to
construction activities, harness the micro climate of the surroundings and reduce the
contribution to the Urban Heat Island Effect. If site planning is done sensibly and the building
design respects the prevailing site conditions, it can save up to 40-50% of total project cost which
is incurred due to installation of equipment and their operation and maintenance.
This section suggests cost-effective guidelines to avail maximum advantage of the existing natural
site features while preserving them to the extent possible. It rewards measures promoting
building design according to the site conditions, balance of perviousness and imperviousness on
site to check heat gain and urban flooding, preservation of natural site features to maintain a
healthy ecosystem and better site management during construction to check any form of
pollution arising out of it. All these measures will have greater probability of providing occupant
comfort while encouraging interaction with the natural surroundings.
Criterion Criterion Name Maximum
Number
Points
1 Low-impact design 6
2 Design to mitigate UHIE 3
3 Preservation and protection of landscape during 3
construction
4 Storm water management 2
5 Reduction in air and soil pollution during 2
construction
Total Weightage 16
 Intent:
CRITERION 1- To adopt passive architectural design
LOW-IMPACT DESIGN strategies in the building design and
incorporate
natural site features
(topographical/microclimatic) to
create climate sensitive design with
reduced energy consumption while
maintaining occupant comfort Max
Points: 6
CRITERION 2- To ensure incorporation of site design
DESIGN TO MITIGATE UHIE strategies which assist in reduction of
hard paving
on site to mitigate Urban Heat Island
Effect (UHIE).
Maximum Points: 3
Appraisals
Demonstrate reduction in
environmental impact through
design by adoption of various
passive design and low-impact site
planning strategies.
No. of strategies adopted - Points
2 1
3 2
4 4
- More than 25% of the site
surfaces visible to sky
(including building roofs but
not the landscape area*) are
either soft paved/covered
with high SRI coating (SRI >
0.5)/shaded by trees/shaded
by vegetated pergolas/shaded
by solar panels or any
combination of these
strategies. – 1 Point
- More than 50% of the site
surfaces visible to sky (including
building roofs but not the
landscape area*) are either soft
paved/covered with high SRI
coating (SRI > 0.5)/shaded by
trees/shaded by vegetated
pergolas/shaded by solar
panels or any combination of
these
strategies. – 3 points
Compliances:
Submit architectural
drawings highlighting key
passive design measures
and active, lowenergy
cooling/heating systems
adopted in the building.
1.2.2 Submit narrative,
supported by calculations,
conceptual sketches, and
assumptions used
for the adopted strategies.
- Submit calculations to
demonstrate
compliance with
Appraisal
- Submit site plan, with
area statements,
highlighting the site
surfaces (as mentioned
in Appraisal which are
soft paved/covered
with high SRI
coating/shaded by
trees/ vegetated
pergolas/solar panels.
- Submit purchase orders
for high SRI paints/tiles
(if used in the project).
- Submit photographs,
with description, of the
measures
implemented.
5.0 NEWS PAPER ARTICLES
5.1 Redevelopment of old Wada’s: PMC to undertake impact assessment of proposed cluster
development project
There are 384 dilapidated structures in Peth areas, of which 111 were pulled down recently: PMC
administration.

An old Wada near Kasba Peth in Pune. Pavan Khengre

RAISING HOPES for the hundreds of dilapidated buildings, or wadas, in the heart of city, the Pune
Municipal Corporation (PMC) has decided to undertake an impact assessment of the cluster
development of the areas to prepare a redevelopment plan. The PMC has been facing problems
in redevelopment of the old buildings located in the heart of city. While the tenants occupying
the buildings are demanding their right on the redeveloped property, which the owners have
refused.
The civic administration had been issuing notices to the occupants to vacate dilapidated buildings
but did not receive any reply.
As a final solution, the PMC had proposed cluster development of the central part of the city,
which would enable redevelopment of old buildings by giving them additional Floor Space Index
(FSI) for construction, if the buildings in the area form a cluster and come together for
redevelopment. However, the state government, while approving the development plan for the
old part of the city, had kept the proposal in abeyance.
A civic official said, “The state has now asked the PMC to carry out the impact assessment of the
cluster development. Thus, the civic body has appointed a private agency for the purpose and
based on the impact assessment report the PMC would prepare the new cluster development
proposal and sent it to the state government for approval.”
He added that the agency would carry out a study of the area, taking into account the
implementation of cluster development. The same would then be compared with the cluster
development model implemented in other cities like Mumbai.
There are around 800 wadas, spread across 6.5 sq km of Kasba Peth, Rasta Peth, Sadashiv Peth,
Narayan Peth, Nana Peth, Ganesh Peth, Raviwar Peth, Somwar Peth, Mangalwar Peth, Budhwar
Peth, Gurwar Peth, Shukarvar Peth and Shaniwar Peth.
According to the PMC administration, there are 384 dilapidated structures in the Peth areas, and,
recently, 111 were pulled down as they were in “dangerous” conditions.
Prashant Waghmare, City Engineer of PMC, said, “The PMC could not succeed in its efforts, as
occupants of at least 113 dilapidated buildings failed to vacate the premises despite being served
notices.”
It was also observed that the occupants were poor and had been occupying the rented property
for years, he added. They cannot afford to move in a new property and, fearing that they would
not have the right over the redeveloped building, they refused to vacate, he said.

5.2 PMC sends cluster development policy to Pune government for approval

Jul 25, 2018, The Times of India

PUNE: The dilapidated wadas and old buildings in the core city areas can get a new lease of life
through the cluster development scheme. The Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) on Tuesday
sent the finalized policy to the state government for approval. Four floor space index (FSI) and
free homes up to 30sqm for tenants are some of the key aspects that can help speed up the
redevelopment in the old areas of the city. A ‘core area fund’ would be collected while allowing
cluster development. It will be used for providing facilities and infrastructure development in the
old city areas. A high-power committee will be formed to assess the cluster development
projects.

The development plan for old city areas of Pune was approved on January 5, 2017. The concept
of cluster development was introduced in the development plan. An impact assessment report
was sought before giving a green signal to the scheme. PMC officials said the PMC, in association
with a private agency, studied the old city areas and how the cluster development would affect
them following the directive of the state government. The existing redevelopment of old building
was also studied. There were also interactions with the stakeholders of dilapidated buildings.

According to the proposal, the minimum area needed for redevelopment should be 1,000sqm.
At least 10% space must be redeveloped and 25% of the area to be redeveloped should be
reserved for amenity spaces.

The entry road for the project should be at least 9-metre-long. Project on a 6-metre road can be
considered in special cases. Suggestion from the fire brigade department have been taken to
effect this change and it has been included in the policy.

Inspirational FSI is also in the offing to promote free rehabilitation of tenants. At least 300sqft
flat should be offered to them.

“The policy will speed up the pending development of the old areas. The free space and amenity
spaces will help in providing better facilities to the old city areas,” said PMC’s city engineer
Prashant Waghmare.

According to the civic officials, redevelopment of dilapidated buildings is a major problem for old
city areas. Most of these dangerous buildings are old wadas in Somwar Peth, Kasba Peth,
Ghorpade Peth, Mangalwar Peth and other nearby areas.
5.3 New affordable housing regulations introduced in Maharashtra

The Maharashtra State Government has finally given a mega boost to affordable housing by
introducing a landmark new regulation. This rule makes it compulsory for all real estate
developers and companies to develop 20% of affordable homes in case they are developing plots
that are sized at 1 acre or even more. The notification of the State Government has already been
officially issued and will be applicable for all cities with population exceeding 10 lakh citizens with
the exception of Mumbai.
This clearly indicates that this new regulation will be applicable in Pune, Navi Mumbai, Thane,
Nagpur and Nashik. The notification clearly states that real estate developers will have to develop
homes that measure between approximately 300-500 sq. ft. on an average. These flats will
compulsorily be sold to people who fall under the EWS (Economically Weaker Section) category
and also under the LIG (Low Income Group) category that has earned identification from MHADA.
The prices will be the accurate construction cost and 20% extra on the same. However,
companies which are building housing schemes for employees to reside in, will not come under
this particular regulation.
The MHADA is now the primary nodal agency for implementation of this project. Real estate
developers will have to inform the agency about the number of apartments that will be sold
under the 20% quota post receiving the commencement certificate from local urban
development and planning authorities. Within a period of 6 months, MHADA will be holding its
lottery and will be informing the names of beneficiaries to the real estate developer in question.
Maharashtra’s real estate sector is still cautious about this new development. They have sought
more incentives from the Government for executing this affordable housing scheme along with
greater clarity. Industry experts feel that there is greater clarity required for this new policy.
There will be difficulties linked to execution otherwise. The cost must be recovered by the real
estate developer once there is commencement of the 20% quota through installments. The State
Government and MHADA should also assure timely payment from all beneficiaries.
Other industry players also feel that extra FSI (floor space index) and other incentives should be
offered to real estate developers in order to successfully execute 20% public housing
reservations. In case the State Government can address these issues, it will be a major boost for
the affordable housing sector in general. Some industry players are also wary of catering to 20%
as a fixed quota since there are chances of facing high losses. However, they also feel that real
estate developers can move forward in case the Government assures compensation for their
losses.

5.4 1 crore homes to be sanctioned by Central Government prior to 2020

January 1, 2019, The Square Times

As per reports, the Union Housing & Urban Affairs Ministry is planning to issue sanctions for the
development of roughly 1 crore homes prior to the year 2020 under PMAY (Pradhan Mantri Awas
Yojana) (urban). This decision will be a major contributor towards the mission of Housing for All
by 2022. This ministry holds responsibility for the implementation of several schemes including
PMAY (U), Swachh Bharat Mission, National Heritage City Development and Augmentation
Yojana (HRIDAY), Smart City Mission and AMRUT (Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban
Transformation).

As per reports, from April 2018, 1612 cities have already been notified as ODF (open defecation
free) which takes the entire tally to 4124 throughout India under the Swachh Bharat Mission
(Urban). Close to 62 lakh household toilets have been built with another 5-lakh public and
community toilet seats completed or nearing completion. Urban areas in 21 States and Union
Territories have been notified as ODF which includes Chandigarh, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Andaman
and Nicobar Islands, Jharkhand, Haryana, Chhattisgarh, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh
along with Dadra and Nagar Haveli.

68.5 lakh housing units have got approval for development under PMAY (U) till now as per the
latest reports. 35.67 lakh homes are already in diverse construction stages and 12.45 lakh units
have already been finished out of this tally. The Government will be sanctioning 1 crore homes
prior to 2020 in order to realize the mission stated above. The investment for this purpose is
roughly Rs. 3, 56, 397 crore and Rs. 33, 455 crore has already been disbursed for Union Territories
and States out of the central assistance of Rs. 1, 00, 275 crore.

The development of 1 crore homes, if the Government realizes its target, will boost the affordable
housing sector greatly in the country. 100 cities have already been chosen under the Smart City
Mission. 5, 151 projects have been chosen for implementation by these cities which are valued
at more than Rs. 2 lakh crore. 536 km of metro railway lines are functional in 10 cities at present.
110 km of metro railway lines has been approved in 2018 for Hyderabad, Delhi-NCR and Chennai.
Three projects spanning 66 km have got approval for Indore, Bhopal and Delhi Metro Extension
to Noida Sector 62 from Noida City Centre. 20 HRIDAY projects have been executed this year in
various cities. Contracts have been given for 4, 097 projects under AMRUT while 965 contracts
have been issued in the water supply space. The dual emphasis on affordable housing and
infrastructure development will naturally boost the real estate market throughout the country,
not just in metro cities but also in Tier-II and Tier-III cities and towns across India.

5.5 3, 500 homes to be constructed under PMAY by Pune civic body

Citizens from the economically weaker sections (EWS) may get their own homes in 2019 as per
reports. More than 3, 500 homes may be built under the affordable housing scheme by
the Pune civic body after getting the nod from the State Government. The civic body will offer its
own land for developing these homes and most of them will be finished by 2019 according to
reports. These homes will be built as part of the PMAY (Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana) scheme.

There are open civic plots that will be provided for these homes. More than 3, 500 homes will be
built on the land owned by PMC as per reports. The Government in Pune has already given its
approval for this project. Along with plots owned by PMC, real estate developers will also be
constructing affordable homes on private plots of land. Close to 6, 000 homes are being planned
for needy citizens. The civic body has reportedly received close to 1.5 lakh applications as claims
on the homes. Applications were taken from both offline and online channels.

Home allotment will be done via the lottery system. The dates for the same will soon be
announced as per the authorities. Some homes under the scheme are expected to be ready by
next year. The Central Government under PMAY offers assistance for urban local bodies for
rehabilitating slum dwellers. Land is tapped as a resource via private participation, affordable
housing, CLSS and construction subsidy for individual homes. More than 2 lakh homes will be
constructed as part of this project throughout the country as per the target of the Central
Government.

Projects which are approved, will be implemented with assistance garnered from both State and
Central Governments along with beneficiary contributions. Construction costs for these homes
will range between Rs.15-30 lakhs with the average cost standing at roughly Rs. 18 lakh per home.
Around 352 housing projects will be developed across 53 cities and 17 states with the total
investment exceeding Rs. 38, 000 crore according to estimates. Pune needs more affordable
housing units to fill up the big gap in this segment which several studies and reports have
previously highlighted. The deficit of affordable units in Pune was earlier estimated at anywhere
between 2.5-3 lakh units and this could get doubled within the next 5 years.
5.6 PMC may propose more FSI for old buildings
Jul 6, 2011, The Times of India
4.8
4.9