“I’ve seen this neighbourhood grow — and outgrow itself,” said Arif, a resident of Paposh Nagar in Karachi’s Central district, during a recent group discussion. What was once a vibrant, tightly knit area where neighbours knew each other by name and children played freely in open streets, now feels suffocated.
“Water barely reaches our taps, and the streets that once bustled with life are too cramped to even walk properly,” he shared. Over the last two decades, rapid urban densification has quietly chipped away at the liveability of many such neighbourhoods of the port city, forcing families like Arif’s to consider relocating in search of the basics: clean water, reliable electricity, and access to open spaces and parks.
As Karachi’s population grows, so does the pressure on those already struggling to find a place within it. With no coherent policy or planning framework in place, the city’s increasing demand for affordable housing — especially among low- and middle-income groups — is colliding with a harsh urban reality. An overwhelming 68 per cent of Karachi’s population falls into the low-income bracket, with another 22pc in the middle-income tier, yet rising property prices are pushing these groups into increasingly cramped and compromised living conditions.
Unsustainable reality
Discussions with real estate agents, builders, and local residents — conducted as part of a research project at NED University — have uncovered the complex web of interactions driving housing trends in Karachi’s lower-middle-income areas. The study explores the mechanisms of urban densification and its impact on low-income communities, focusing on areas such as Delhi Colony, Punjab Colony, Paposh Nagar, Lyari, Paharganj, and Taiser Town.
According to the latest census, the average household size in Pakistan stands at 6.4 members, and 55pc of households are multi-generational, per a 2019 United Nations (UN) report. While the joint family system remains the cultural norm, urban centres have seen a shift toward nuclear living arrangements. However, among middle- to low-income groups, this trend is reversing — families that once lived separately are now merging back into joint households, as children or younger siblings get married but cannot afford independent housing due to financial constraints and rising property prices.
To cope with the growing demand for space, families in urban neighbourhoods are adding floors or extending their homes — often informally and without regulatory oversight. These unplanned expansions may be a practical response to pressing needs, but they also contribute to overcrowding, overstretched resources, and a steady decline in living conditions.
This brings us to critical questions: What housing options are truly available to these families and what quality of life do they offer? Are residents simply adapting to an unsustainable reality, or is there still a path forward — one that leads to more inclusive and well-planned housing solutions?
Our research has revealed various forms of rising densification, particularly in older neighbourhoods near economic hubs. Plot sizes in these areas typically range from 40 to 133 square yards, with some larger plots of 240 and 400 sq-yds. As space tightens and families grow, residents are finding creative yet often improvised ways to meet their housing needs. The study identified several common strategies:
-
Adding lightweight floors to existing structures to make room for expanding households.
-
Financing these expansions through personal savings or loans,
especially among families unable to afford relocation. -
Selling plots to builders — often as a way to resolve inheritance disputes — who then construct multi-storey buildings and sell off individual floors to nuclear families.
-
Subdividing plots among family members. For example, in Delhi Colony, plots originally measuring 120 sq-yd were subdivided into 40 sq-yd sections, later developed into multi-storey units with narrow staircases and compact bathrooms.
The economic and structural toll
The pursuit of affordable housing in Karachi is riddled with soaring property prices, shrinking living spaces, poor construction quality, and widespread bribes to authorities for infrastructure access and unauthorised additions.
At the same time, despite the clear strain on infrastructure, utility connections, whether for electricity, gas, or water, are extended without penalty. Authorities base approvals on the covered area of a plot rather than the number of housing units, allowing builders to add floors with minimal scrutiny. When additional units are built, monthly charges may increase according to informal rules, but no official objections are raised.
In a city where owning a home is deeply tied to dignity, security, and social identity, the desperation to secure housing has reached critical levels. Overcrowded living conditions, poor construction, and lack of oversight have made urban poverty not just visible but normalised.
Numerous incidents of collapsing walls, roofs, and entire buildings have also been reported in some settlements. In September 2024, the wall of an adjacent building collapsed onto the temporary roof of a neighbouring plot in Paposh Nagar, killing one person. In another case from August 2024, the roof of a 60-square-yard plot in Lyari collapsed after heavy rain, resulting in two deaths and five injuries.
Risk of poor construction practices
In most cases, the responsibility for reconstruction or additional construction falls to the builder, contractor, or local mason. Focus group discussions with local communities highlighted that prospective property owners often lack awareness of structural safety, with many expressing sentiments like, “It’s good as long as it’s standing” or “…at least it’s our shelter.” These statements reflect desperation, naivety, limited choices, and a willingness to compromise safety for the sake of having a home.
For low-income families, owning a house carries immense value — not just as shelter, but as a form of economic security, often used as collateral to navigate financial and social instability. Yet, the focus on immediate need frequently overshadows critical concerns like structural integrity and long-term safety. This trade-off is deeply concerning.
Contractors and masons, aware of the owners’ limited knowledge and tight budgets, often exploit this gap, cutting corners for profit. Regulators typically intervene only when buildings become visibly oversized, by which time much of the construction (rushed and without proper curing) has already compromised safety. In pursuit of quick solutions and short-term gains, lives are being put at risk — a price far too high for a home meant to provide protection.
While financial constraints may lead residents to overlook safety, the ultimate responsibility for enforcing structural standards rests with regulatory bodies. However, weak enforcement, irregular inspections, and gaps in monitoring have allowed unsafe construction practices to become common.
Arif Patel, Chairman of the All Nazimabad Builders and Developers Association, stated that the association has a clear policy — any building with three or more floors, approved by the SCBA, must undergo regular inspections and comply with all safety regulations. On paper, the responsibility is acknowledged. However, he admitted that in practice, these inspections are often poorly conducted, and construction quality frequently falls short of required standards.
Structural instability is one of the most primary concerns in poorly constructed buildings. Walking through these neighbourhoods, one can often observe buildings swaying vertically, indicating misalignment or structural tilt. Upon closer inspection, the flaws become even more alarming: reinforcement appears minimal, with low-grade steel bars used sparingly, and horizontal ties either inadequate or entirely missing. Concrete blocks and plaster contain a higher proportion of sand than certified, and the concrete is inadequately watered and cured, compromising its binding strength.
Although many of these structures begin as low-rise buildings, additional storeys are often added without reinforcing the foundation, risking long-term stability. Residents reported that new constructions, often completed in haste, show significant water leakage during rains — a result of poor materials, inadequate insulation, and flawed plumbing. “This and poor insulation are the second most pressing issues faced by these buildings,” said Arif Hasan, architect, urban planner and an advisor to this research.
Final-year architecture students from NED University, while documenting Delhi Colony, came across a collapsed corner building. Upon further investigation, they learned that many adjacent buildings in the area share structural loads with neighbouring aligned structures, often causing them to tilt. In this particular case, the corner building had borne the combined load of multiple structures and had collapsed more than once. The area’s construction is critically unstable, and much of it is at risk of collapsing in a domino effect during a natural disaster, such as an earthquake.
In contrast, recent commercial buildings in these areas tend to have better construction quality, driven by higher rental and ownership prices.
Both Delhi Colony and Paposh Nagar were originally planned as settlements but have since undergone informal developments, leading to narrower streets, increased building densities and heights, above-ground extensions, and a decline in housing quality. As the floors rise, the building’s structural stability becomes a concern. With each added floor, walls and roofs tend to become thinner, compromising insulation. While taller buildings receive ample breeze, they may be structurally unsafe and accessible only via long, narrow staircases, making them inconvenient.
Increased density and infrastructure strain
On a 40 or 60 sq-yd plot, initially intended to house a single family of six, there are now often four or more families living in vertically expanded buildings. This dramatic increase in occupancy places strain on essential services such as water, gas, and electricity, often multiplying the original requirements fourfold and extending the pressure to surrounding areas as the trend spreads.
In many cities around the world, property and infrastructure taxes are calculated based on the number of families occupying a property. However, in these densely populated residential neighbourhoods, the lack of such regulation is creating serious challenges in maintaining consistent access to basic services, compounding the daily struggles of residents.
Access to water is often constrained, with the availability of safe drinking water emerging as the most urgent concern among broader infrastructural challenges. As new buildings rise and permissions are obtained from the SBCA, additional floors are often approved following the payment of penalties. However, what the SBCA overlooks in this changing morphology is the increasing number of families and individuals residing on the same plot. Despite these approvals, the capacity of utility services — particularly water and sewerage pipelines — remain unchanged, resulting in mounting pressure on already overstretched systems.
The deterioration of our built environment — seen in both crumbling buildings and failing infrastructure — is not a coincidence but a consequence. Limited housing options, inadequate financial support for low-income populations, neglect in urban planning, and the unchecked pursuit of profit have all converged to erode the quality of life in underserved neighbourhoods. Without intentional reform and inclusive planning, these communities will continue to bear the cost of a system that has long ignored their needs.
Header Image: A dense cluster of compact housing in Paposh Nagar
