Site visit : Changjiji Housing Complex

Like many other developing nations, Bhutan is undergoing a phase of rapid urbanisation. This is clearly visible in its capital city of Thimphu. Along with a horde of other issues, housing has come to be one of the most prominent evidence of this process of modernization. The Changjiji housing complex is perhaps the most fragile neighbourhood in the city, falling victim to general issues such as gang violence, poverty, youth problems, drugs, vandalism, etc...problems which didn’t used to exist before. It has become a constant highlight in the media, mostly for its failure to achieve its objective of a “healthy and happy community” for the low income group in the city.

Upon visiting the colony, one would see its strong visual presence haphazard along the sloped surface which earlier used to be paddy fields. The complex consists of 676 units built on 50 acres of land, and today is home to an estimate of 5000 residents with an average of 7 people per unit. Over its span of nine years, it has seen constant wears and tears of its infrastructure, services and thus the quality of living standard of the residents. This only indicates a flaw in the whole process of policy making, design and implementation, subsidization and management of the project itself.

The complex consists of basic amenities including a basketball court, multipurpose hall, clinic, ATM machines, internet cafe, a police headquarter, and a vegetable market. Some of the buildings have commercialised ground floor with shops providing convenience household items. A large open space serves as a ground for various group activities that may take place at times such as religious congregations. Often times it is inhabited by children playing or groups of youth hanging out. Roads move about within the complex as and wherever is needed to provide direct connectivity to all buildings, and this interlinking of roads seems to have destroyed any space left for greeneries within the compound.

A typical block is a G+2+attic structure with 3 units per floor with each unit that comprise 2 bedrooms, a living room, a kitchen and a toilet. An average income person visiting these household would notice at first glance the compactness of the rooms. And with the family size of almost 8 members, the amount of space available is almost claustrophobic. But accepting the fact that space cost them money, having larger rooms or more toilets is hardly their concern when compared to lack of basic necessities such as adequate water supply. Thus, a lower rent for the flats is but little consolation.

This shortage of water supply has been there since its beginning, and the city municipality has pointed to the internal system leading to this problem. For allocating water, the colony is divided into five zones and water is provided accordingly to each of the tenant once a day. Also since there is no water storage tanks on the attic of the buildings the water will flow to the upper floors only after the demand on the ground floor is met. This causes upper floor tenants to usually face this crunch. Another reason that was pointed out was that in the infrastructure plan, the buildings were constructed before any water supply system.

Another complaint that has caused confusion is regarding the type of residents that live in the complex. The government’s intention of providing affordable homes for the low income group (earning a monthly salary of less than Nu. 10,000) is being questioned as the genuine low income residents start to see expensive cars and other luxury dwellers living in the apartments. Although the recent reallocation of the tenants has resulted in removing some of the higher income dwellers, it is still not clear whether one could live in these homes under the name of their spouses who’s income falls under the criteria. The government and policy makers are yet to address this issue conclusively.

To top all the loopholes in policies, design and construction, management is another big issue and this is where the whole aspect of sustainability is under question. The roads have to be constantly repaired of potholes, the building plinths crack due to bad construction whatsoever and despite the ornamentation with traditional features the houses seems to have lost its aesthetics to untidy facades. The sanitation level is below par and continues to degrade. All this culminating in a lower standard of living conditions for the urban poor.

 

Perhaps, it is not so surprising that the colony is rife with crime and violence. The community does not foster interaction among residents and thus they lack a sense of responsibility. On the contrary it seems to facilitate negative activities especially with the number of youths who have dropped out from schools. There seems to be a disconnect between the developer and people actually living there, and also between the young and the old as a community. This story of Changjiji is a sign of a larger picture of an urban Bhutanese society where equity and justice may be put to test. Developers, architects, policy makers and all stakeholders generally need to get over their lack of will act towards this malaise.