Survey assesses cost and design issues in public housing, indicating potential improvements for future projects.
The construction of public residential projects in Kuwait started in the 1950s by the Public Authority of Housing welfare. Today, an approximate waiting period of 20 years is needed to obtain a house ready to live in. The major problem is that most of the owners of these public housing units are unsatisfied with the overall design and finishing. These public houses have one design and structure that does not fulfill the end users’ needs and aspirations. This leads to a long revamping process carried out by the units’ owners that provides end-users with all means of comfort and satisfactions. The repercussions that stem from this is a delay in moving time and the cost expenses that the end users have to suffer as the people in need of these homes have limited financial incomes and cannot afford these expenses. A survey assessing public housing design and cost are implemented for projects constructed by Housing Welfare. Additionally, personal interviews and questionnaires surveys for both public and private residential projects end users formed the data base for the study. The estimate of revamping expenses is determined along with identifying the reasons behind the changes. This paper presents the findings of a research project aiming to determine the cost comparison between private and public residential projects. The research shows that concrete costs are consistent across both types of housing, with the overall cost being primarily influenced by the quality of the finishing. Additionally, the paper investigates owner satisfaction with public housing to identify potential improvements in policies, plans, and procedures for future public residential projects. It is recommended that homeowners be given the option to either complete their own finishing or receive a house with finishing already done.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alia H Esmael (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: