fiji: greater suva urban profile

8/13/2019 Fiji: Greater Suva Urban Profile

1/49


2/49

2

Copyright United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat), 2012All rights reserved

United Nations Human Settlements Programme publications can be obtained fromUN-Habitat Regional and Information Offices or directly from:P.O. Box 30030, GPO 00100 Nairobi, Kenya.Fax: + (254 20) 762 4266/7E-mail: [email protected]

Website: http://www.unhabitat.org

HS Number: HS/066/13E

ISBN Number(Series): 978-92-1-132023-7

ISBN Number (Volume): 978-92-1-132593-5

DISCLAIMER

Te designation employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of anyopinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory,city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries, or regarding its economic systemor degree of development. Te analysis, conclusions and recommendations of the report do not necessarily reflect the

views of the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat), the Governing Council of UN-Habitat or itsMember States. Tis document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. Te views expressedherein can in no way be taken to reflect the official opinion of the European Union.

Excerpts from this publication may be reproduced without authorization, on condition that the source is indicated.

Photo credits: SCOPE

ACKNOWLEDGEMENS

Te Greater Suva Urban Profile was prepared by the Ministry of Local Government, Urban Development, Housingand Environment with information collected through interviews with key urban stakeholders in Lami own, Suva City,Nasinu own and Nausori own local government areas. We wish to thank them for their time, efforts and contributions

towards this report. Tis project and report were coordinated by the Department of own and Country Planning with theassistance of Strategic Consultants on Planning and Engineering Pacific Limited with constructive inputs provided by SarahMecartney, UN-Habitat Pacific Programme Manager based in Suva, Fiji, and Chris Radford, Senior Human SettlementsOfficer, UN-Habitat Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Fukuoka, Japan.

Editing: Rowan Fraser

Design and layout: Kenan Mogultay


3/49

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD 5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6

INTRODUCTION 8

BACKGROUND: GREATER SUVA URBAN AREA 9

KEY THEMES

URBAN GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE 12

URBAN PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT 16

LAND DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION 19

URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES 22

URBAN HOUSING AND SHELTER 26

CLIMATE CHANGE AND DISASTER RISK REDUCTION 28

STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES AND THREATS (SWOT) ANALYSIS

PROJECT PROPOSALS

URBAN GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE 30

URBAN PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT 33

LAND DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION 34

URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES 39

URBAN HOUSING AND SHELTER 41

CLIMATE CHANGE AND DISASTER RISK REDUCTION 44

ACRONYMS AND REFERENCES 47

FIJI: GREAER SUVAURBAN PROFILE

UNITED NATIONS HUMAN SETTLEMENTS PROGRAMME


4/49

4

GREATERS

UVAURBANPROFILE

FOR

EWORD


5/49

5 5

GREATERS

UVAURBANPROFILE-FOREWORD

According toresearch publishedin UN-Habitatsflagship report, TeState of the WorldsCities 2010-2011,developing regionsincluding Africa,the Caribbean andthe Pacific, will havemore people livingin urban than ruralareas by the year2030. With half the

worlds population

already living inurban areas, the challenges we face in the battle againsturban poverty, our quest for cities without slums, forcities where women feel safer, for inclusive cities withpower, water and sanitation, and affordable transport,for better planned cities, and for cleaner, greener citiesis daunting.

But as this series shows, there are many interestingsolutions and best practices to which we can turn. Afterall, the figures tell us that during the decade 2000-2010, a total of 227 million people in developingcountries moved out of slum conditions. In other

words, governments, cities and partner institutions have

collectively exceeded the slum target of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals twice over, and ten years ahead ofthe agreed 2020 deadline.

Asia and the Pacific stood at the forefront of successfulefforts to reach the slum target, with all governmentsin the region improving the lives of an estimated 172million slum dwellers between 2000-2010.

In sub-Saharan Africa though, the total proportionof the urban population living in slums has decreasedby only 5 per cent (or 17 million people). Ghana,Senegal, Uganda, and Rwanda were the most successfulcountries in the sub-region, reducing the proportions ofslum dwellers by over one-fifth in the last decade.

Some 13 per cent of the progress made towards theglobal slum target occurred in Latin America and theCaribbean, where an estimated 30 million people havemoved out of slum conditions since the year 2000.

Yet, UN-Habitat estimates confirm that the progressmade on the slum target has not been sufficient tocounter the demographic expansion in informalsettlements in the developing world. In this sense,efforts to reduce the numbers of slum dwellers areneither satisfactory nor adequate.

As part of our drive to address this crisis, UN-Habitatis working with the European Commission and theBrussels-based Secretariat of the African, Caribbean

and Pacific Group to support sustainable urbandevelopment. Given the urgent and diverse needs, wefound it necessary to develop a tool for rapid assessmentand strategic planning to guide immediate, mid- andlong-term interventions. And here we have it in theform of this series of publications.

Te Participatory Slum Upgrading Programme isbased on the policy dialogue between UN-Habitat,the African, Caribbean and Pacific Secretariat and theEuropean Commission which dates back to the year2002. When the three parties met at UN-Habitatheadquarters in June 2009, more than 200 delegatesfrom over 50 countries approved a resounding call onthe international community to pay greater attention

to these urbanization matters, and to extend the slumupgrading programme to all countries in the African,Caribbean and Pacific Group.

It is worth recalling here how grateful we are that theEuropean Commissions 9th European DevelopmentFund for African, Caribbean and Pacific countriesprovided EUR 4 million (USD 5.7 million at June 2011rates) to enable UN-Habitat to conduct the programme

which now serves 59 cities in 23 African countries, andmore than 20 cities in six Pacific, and four Caribbeancountries.

Indeed, since its inception in 2008, the slum upgrading

programme has achieved the confidence of partners atcity and country level in Africa, the Caribbean and inthe Pacific. It is making a major contribution aimedat helping in urban poverty reduction efforts, as eachreport in this series shows.

I wish to express my gratitude to the EuropeanCommission and the African, Caribbean and PacificSecretariat for their commitment to this slum upgradingprogramme. I have every confidence that the resultsoutlined in this profile, and others, will serve to guidethe development of responses for capacity building andinvestments in the urban sector.

Further, I would like to thank each Country eam fortheir continued support to this process which is essentialfor the successful implementation of the ParticipatorySlum Upgrading Programme.

Dr. Joan Clos

Executive Director, UN-Habitat

FOREWORD


6/49


7/49

7 7

GREATERSUVAURBANPROFILE-EXECUTIVESUMMARY

access to municipal urban services, although this policyis under review and likely to be revoked for public healthreasons.

Despite ongoing upgrades, water supply shortages andmaintenance issues across the GSUA are calling forattention. Waste management and sewerage has been

a focus on GSUA municipal policies since the 1990sand sanitation in the urban area is now well-managed.Solid waste management also needs improvement,

with councils considering waste transfer stations, anda possible second landfill site. Roads need repair andimproved maintenance, as well as expansion to cope withhigher traffic loads.

URBAN HOUSING AND SHELTER

Housing development in the GSUA includes formaldetached dwellings and multi-unit apartments.

Increasing demand for housing and reduced supplyof land is leading to the production of higher densityhousing, especially in the centre of Suva. Similarly,

within the informal sector, the number and density ofinformal settlements has increased.

Te National Housing Policy, formulated in 2011, hasresulted in increased provision of affordable housing, withthe Housing Authority undertaking multi-phase housingprojects. Affordable housing projects are also supportedby a number of national and international agencies.

CLIMATE CHANGE AND DISASTER RISKREDUCTION

While the GSUA is located on the coast, it is not asexposed to climate-related hazards as urban areas onthe west coast. Nonetheless, it does suffer from naturalhazards including coastal and riverine floods, earthquakesand landslides. Mangrove deforestation has increased theGSUAs vulnerability to the adverse effects of climatechange by removing an effective storm surge and floodbarrier. However, an extensive amount of wetland hasbeen retained around the coast and river which reducesflood risk and facilitates adaptation to climate change.


8/49

8

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION

Rapid Urban Sector Profiling for Sustainability isan action-oriented assessment of urban conditions

which focuses on priorities, capacity gaps, and existinginstitutional responses to key themes at the local andnational levels. Te purpose of the assessment is todevelop urban poverty reduction policies at local,national and regional levels through an assessment ofneeds and response mechanisms, and as a contributionto the wider-ranging implementation of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals.

Te study is based on an analysis of existing data and aseries of interviews with relevant stakeholders, includinglocal communities and institutions, civil societies, theprivate sector, development partners and academics.

Tis consultation typically results in collectiveagreement on priorities and their integration into urbanpoverty reduction projects, including proposed capacitybuilding projects.

Urban profiling is being implemented in over 20African, Arab, Caribbean and Pacific countries, offeringan opportunity for comparative regional analysis. Oncecompleted, this series of studies will provide a blueprintfor central and local authorities and urban actors, as

well as donors and external support agencies.

METHODOLOGYUrban profiling comprises three phases outlined below:

i. Phase One: involves a rapid participatoryurban profiling at national and local levels,focusing on land and land administration,governance, informal settlements, urban health,infrastructure and services, gender, environment,disaster management, economy, urban-rurallinkages and proposed interventions.

ii. Phase wo: identifies priorities through a pre-

feasibility study to develop detailed priorityproposals, capacity building and capitalinvestment projects.

iii. Phase hree: implements the projects withemphasis on skills development, institutionalstrengthening and adaptation.

STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT

Tis report consists of three main sections:

1. Background

A general background of the GSUA is provided withinthis profile and is based on municipal council reports,strategic plans, desk reviews of past reports, and

interviews through survey questionnaires conducted aspart of the profile exercise. Te background includes

data on administration, urban planning, economy,the informal and private sectors, urban poverty,infrastructure and basic urban services, public transport,energy, social services, linkages between urban and ruralareas, linkages between town and traditional urbanvillages, land tenure and administration, health andeducation.

2. Synthetic Assessment

Te second section is structured around an assessmentof six key themes: urban governance and finance;

urban planning and management; land developmentand administration; urban infrastructure and services;housing and shelter; climate change and disaster riskmanagement. Tis section also provides an overviewof the existing institutional set-up, the regulatoryframework, as well as resource mobilization andperformance. Tis section also highlights agreedpriorities and includes a list of identified projects.

3. Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities andTreats (SWO) Analysis

A basic SWO analysis and an outline of priority projectproposals for each of the six key themes are providedin the third section. Te project proposals includebeneficiaries, partners, estimated costs, objectives andactivities.

Omkar settlement

DTCP


9/49

9 9

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE-BAC

KGROUND:GREATERSUVA

URBAN

GEOGRAPHY

Te GSUA is located on a peninsula along the Suva-Nausori Corridor and its geography ranges fromundulating lands to the west of Lami own to theeastern delta of Nausori own. Te geographicalfeatures have influenced the urban growth, characterand management of each of the urban centres of theGSUA.

Te small centre of Lami own lies on the westernside of the peninsula and rises towards the north.Conversely, Suva City and Nasinu own contain avaried topography of both hilly areas and flatter lands,

which encourage growth along the Kings Highway. Atthe eastern end of the GSUA lies Nausori own. Tisurban centre is divided by the Rewa River, which playsa critical role in the infrastructural system and servicesof the town and constitutes its main physical feature.In contrast to the dry Lautoka City and the wet Nadiown, the GSUA experiences high and constant rainfalldue to its location. Within the GSUA, Suva City andLami own are particularly wet. Tey are also exposedto earthquake due to the fault line which runs fromVeisari in Lami to Walu Bay in Suva. In addition, their

coastal location makes them extremely susceptible toclimate change.

In 2007, Fiji had a national population of just over837,000 people, of which approximately 51 per cent

were living in urban areas. Considering currentgrowth rates, the urban population of Fiji is likely toreach 61 per cent of the total population by 2030.Of the total urban population, an estimated 57 percent (244,000 people) lives in the GSUA. Te GSUAcomprises Suva City and three municipal towns calledLami, Nasinu and Nausori. Officially, the GSUA hasan annual growth rate of 2 per cent. However, theGSUA also contains a large transient population madeup of commuters, vendors, tourists and businessoperators who move through the GSUA on a daily

basis.

he GSUA is the primary urban centre of FijisCentral Division, with the national capital, SuvaCity, lying to the south-west. Suvas geographicalcoordinates are 181416S and 1784419E. hecity is approximately 30 minutes by car from theNausori International Airport. he GSUA coversan area of over 4,000 hectares and includes iaukei(Indigenous Fijian) land, as well as state andfreehold land. he GSUA, and in particular Suva

City and Nausori and Lami owns, all experiencehigh rainfall.

SECTION ONEBACKGROUND: GREATER SUVA URBAN AREA

Source: DTCP

MAP 1: Greater Suva Urban Area


10/49

10

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE

BAC

KGROUND:GREATERSUVA

URBAN

0

POPULATION

An estimated 29 per cent of Fijis national population(i.e. approximately 256,000 people) reside within theGSUA. Tis population accounts for 57 per cent ofthe total urban population. Te GSUA is shown in thetable below based on the population census of 2007 and

annual projections by Fiji Bureau of Statistics.

Te GSUAs current population has surpassed theprojected population of 213,545 people based on theUrban Growth and Management Plan prepared in 2006by Asian Development Bank. Importantly, this figuredoes not account for residents of traditional villageslocated within the GSUA as these are excluded frommunicipal boundaries in accordance with the LocalGovernment Act (Cap. 125).

able 1. Population growth in GSUA

Fijis overall annual population growth rate is 0.7 percent while the national annual urban population growthrate is 1.5 per cent and 1.7 per cent per annum in theGSUA. Within the GSUA, Nausori own is the fastestgrowing urban area with an annual population growthrate of 4 per cent.

GOVERNANCE

Te GSUA is administered separately by the fourmunicipalities, each headed by a government appointeeknown as a Special Administrator (SA) under theLocal Government Reform (2008). Te councils of themunicipalities are mandated under the Local Government

Act (Cap.125) to observe, deliver and enforce laws relatingto urban management. Tese include the maintenanceof basic urban services such as public health, garbagecollection, recreational areas, roads and drainage systems.

However, a recent change in legislation, effective from 1January 2013, has transferred maintenance responsibilityof all roads previously maintained and upgraded by thecouncils, as well as new roads, to the Fiji Roads Authority.

able 2. GSUA rate collection 2011-2012

Te aggressive revenue (rate) collection required by thecouncils as part of the Local Government Reforms exposedthe limited capacity, poor financial management and weakgovernance of the councils. Poor financial management hasseriously affected the delivery and standard of services in theGSUA. Further, the replacement of the councils by Special

Administrators in 2009 created tension and subsequentconfusion amongst council workers as to whether the Special

Administrator or the Chief Executive Officer was in charge ofthe council. Te period 2009-2011 saw numerous changesor personnel replacements at the executive management

level, which further impacted the councils service delivery.However, the peri-urban areas, where most urban growthtakes the form of informal settlement, are governed separatelyby local area advisory authorities under the Central Board ofHealth. Tere is some expectation that the councils garbageservices be extended to these areas despite their locationoutside the councils ratable property boundary.

Furthermore, five iaukei (Indigenous Fijian) villages alsoexist within the GSUA and are exempted from the LocalGovernment Act, having traditional status under the iaukei

Affairs Act. Terefore, as these villages are under a differentjurisdiction and governance structure they are not subjectedto council rates. Tey nonetheless rely on some of the servicesprovided by council such as market and public health services,

with the exception of garbage collection services.

ECONOMY

Contained within the Suva City municipal boundaries arethe National Government, the headquarters of governmentministries, the banking and financial institutions, and the

headquarters of a number of regional and global organizations.In this way, Suva is the economic centre of the Pacific region.Te GSUA is also a transport hub, having both air and seaports - the Suva Wharf and the Nausori Airport. Land for

MUNICIPALCOUNCIL

2011 2016 2021

Suva City 75, 980 77,900 79, 470

Lami Town 11, 060 11,450 11, 860

Nasinu Town 82, 980 90, 720 98, 210

Nausori Town 26, 970 29, 200 31, 610

Total GSUA 196,990 209,270 221,150

GSUA population projection.

Source: DTCP

Total Rates as of

31/12/2011

Total Rates as of

1/7/2012

TOTALRATES

COLLECTED

($)

MUNICIPALITIES

16 000 000

8 000 000

12 000 000

4 000 000

0

NAUSORI NASINU SUVA LAMI

GSUA rate collection as at 1 July 2012 (in Fijian dollars).

Source: DTCP


11/49

1111

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE-BAC

KGROUND:GREATERSUVA

URBAN

future development in close proximity to the Suva Wharf islimited. Tere is therefore increasing interest in establishingindustrial tax-free zones in the Nausori area in anticipationof the proposed Nausori airport runway extension. About 60per cent to Fijis gross domestic product is generated in urbanareas, and of this 40 per cent is generated in the GSUA.

INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS AND HOUSING

An estimated 17 per cent of the GSUAs population, some44,000 people, lives in 86 informal settlements located acrossthe area. Tese informal settlements thrive on both publicand iaukei (indigenous Fijian) lands. Land for housing islimited and the supply of housing is slow and simply cannotkeep up with the high demand fuelled by growth in theGSUA. Over the last five years, the slow implementationof housing projects or residential subdivisions by majorhousing providers, such as the Housing Authority, havebeen due to either financial or infrastructural constraints orlegal battles with contractors. Various forms of housing existin the GSUA, from social and public housing to rentableunits and housing under private ownership. Due to landshortages, there is also an increasing number of multi-storyapartment buildings promoting inner-city living around thecentral business district of Suva City.

Te high cost of land and the under-provision ofinfrastructure in the GSUA is a significant cause of theslow delivery of housing stock, particularly affordable

housing for those who have moved into or close to theGSUA. One of the main factors drawing people intothe GSUA and stimulating growth is the higher level ofsocial services provided in the GSUA. At the same time,changes in the Northern and Eastern Divisions haveencouraged families to move to the Central Division insearch of better education and health facilities.

BASIC URBAN SERVICES

Urban development and urban infrastructure in Suva

City began based on a concentric model. However, thecurrent trend sees development sprawling in a linearpattern along the Suva-Nausori Corridor. Populationgrowth and higher demand for housing is also placinga higher demand on urban services. In the past, thesehave been developed and upgraded on an ad-hoc anddemand-driven basis, with urban services maintenanceprogrammes being reactive as opposed to proactive, andnot guided through strategic infrastructural planning.Infrastructure projects have tended to focus on theprovision of new extensions rather than on the upgrading

and management of existing infrastructure systems.Tis has been mainly due to poorly kept asset registersand inadequate managerial and technical capacity toimplement maintenance programmes.

In this regard, the critical issues in terms of infrastructureand urban services in the GSUA include inadequate watersupply and sanitation services; inadequate roads; poor solid

waste management systems; and poor management of coastaldevelopment in relation to existing coastal settlements. Tereis also growing need for an expanded port and developmentand extension of the town centre. Such undertakings willmost likely be achieved through public private partnerships

which foster economic growth for the GSUA region.

What is now being acknowledged is the fact that the existingurban infrastructure is simply unable to meet the demands andpace of urban growth, and the biggest urban challenge is thehigh competition over the limited land available in the GSUA.

EDUCATION

Te GSUA has over 120 schools providing both primary

and secondary education, vocational and special trainingsincluding commercial schools offering English lessons forinternational students from Asia, particularly China andKorea. Te headquarters of most higher education providerssuch as the University of the South Pacific and Fiji NationalUniversity are based in Suva and Nasinu respectively.

HEALTH

Tere have been major improvements to health facilitiesin the GSUA thanks to better equipment and resources

being allocated by Government. Tese higher qualityhealth facilities encourage migration from rural areas intothe GSUA, as well as provide care services to neighbouringcountries. In addition to public health services, there is alsoincreasing private health care and specialized private facilitiesenhancing the GSUA as a major service centre for Fijispopulation. Te Wellness Programme, launched in 2012 bythe Ministry of Health, is successfully addressing public andenvironmental health issues and most importantly reducingthe spread of non-communicable diseases. Te Ministry ofHealth with support from the municipal health departments

and the Office of the Commissioner Central is also involvedin disaster management. Such activity usually focuses oninformal settlements where typhoid can spread due to poor

water quality and unhygienic conditions following disaster.

Pedestrian bridge access to Vatuwaqa settlement

DTCP


12/49

12

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE

URB

AN

GOVERNANCEAND

FINANCE

2

URBAN GOVERNANCE

GOVERNANCEAND FINANCE

Te GSUA consists of four municipalities, namely SuvaCity, Lami own, Nasinu own and Nausori own.Each municipality is managed by a council governedby a SA, a government appointed official replacing theelected-council system under the Local Government Actas part of the Local Government Reform in 2008. Teobjective of the Reform was to create local governmentbodies that are apolitical, practice good governanceand achieve effective and efficient service delivery asdemanded by ratepayers and residents.

Close to 200,000 people live within the boundaries ofthe GSUA. However, the official population count doesnot include those who travel into the GSUA daily fromnearby peri-urban and rural areas for work or commercialreasons, or to access services such as hospitals, schools,sporting facilities, and financial institutions.

able 3 shows the total land area of each municipalitywithin the GSUA and the associated peri-urbanareas beyond the municipal boundaries that are alsodependant on the municipal councils resources.

able 3. Overview of councils in the GSUA

for these services, the village populations are reliant oncouncil resources. Similarly, councils have to extendurban services to those living in squatter settlements

within municipal boundaries, despite an absence of ratecollection in these settlements.

Each of the municipal councils is required to have itsown strategic plan approved by the MLGUDHE. Testrategic plans are supported by annual and corporateplans and budgets as required by MLGUDHE inaccordance with the Local Government Act.

Each of the four councils in the GSUA also issuesquarterly publications aimed at ratepayers in orderto keep them informed of local government matters,including rate collection initiatives and buildingprojects, public health matters, and services andamenities offered by the council. Such communicationinitiatives have been encouraged in an effort to increasetransparency and accountability of all municipalcouncils to their ratepayers.

Council revenue within the GSUA is derived from rates,municipal markets, and minivan, taxi and car parkingfacilities. Rate collection has been a particular strengthof the councils in the GSUA, with the exception ofNasinu own Council. While Suva City and Nausoriown have improved rate collection capacity overthe last three years, with more that 50 per cent ofoutstanding rates now being collected, both Lami ownand Nasinu own still suffer from significant arrears inrate paying, particularly for rates on large parcels of landoccupied by informal settlements such the settlementsat Qauiya in Lami, and at Caubati in Nasinu.

Based on principles of good governance, the LocalGovernment Reform of 2008 brought about both positivechanges and numerous challenges to the administrationand management of municipalities in Fiji. One of the keychallenges is the sustainability of the reform initiatives,as some issues have begun to arise since the Reformcame into effect in 2008. Across the GSUA, urbanmanagement systems have undergone multiple changes.Te following are contributing factors to the growingchallenges faced by municipal councils in the GSUA as a

result of modifications inspired by the Reform: Te ambiguities with regards the roles and

responsibilities of the SAs and Chief Executive

SECTION TWO - KEY THEMES

MUNICIPAL

COUNCIL

POPULA-

TION

STAFF

CAPACITY

APPROX.

MUNICIPAL

AREA

PERI-

URBAN

AREA

Suva City 75, 980 407 2,489 ha Nil

Lami Town 11, 060 50 727 ha 1,691 ha

NasinuTown

82, 980 145 1,298 ha 4,816 ha

NausoriTown

26, 970 34 419 ha 3,184 ha

Total 196,990 636 4,933 ha 9,691 ha

Council population, staffing and land area

Source: DTCP and Bureau of Statistics

Tere are a few iaukei villages within the GSUA.All iaukei villages as gazetted in the iaukei AffairsAct are exempted from paying rates under the LocalGovernment Act (Cap. 125). Nevertheless, thesevillages are an integral part of the urban area and

therefore require the provision of urban services,including garbage collection and health services, forproper functioning. In this way, despite not paying


13/49

1313

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE-URBAN

GOVERNANCEANDFINANCE

Officers (CEOs). Such ambiguities have arisendue to differences of understanding within theMLGUDHE and have resulted in elevated staffturnover in these roles. Te SAs are appointed bygovernment and must respond to government needs.However, as public officials they are subjected topublic scrutiny and complaints on their performancehave resulted in resignation or dismissal. With theexception of Nausori own, SAs and CEOs for allother councils in the GSUA have undergone changesdue to MLGUDHE intervention particularly inmatters relating to finance and governance. Tesesudden changes in leadership affect the decision-making process required by Local Government Act.

Te continued improvement in rate collection. Onthe one hand, this has boosted the financial positionand strength of the councils, however it is alsoleading to issues related to management of the fundscollected. Councils have pursued various initiativesfor improving rate collection, including publishingthe names of its defaulters in local newspapers,formulating discount incentives and exemptionperiods and collaborating with the Data Bureau sothat non-payment of rates can worsen individualcredit rating held by the Bureau. Tese municipalfinancial initiatives affect relationships between thecouncils and its ratepayers. However, the linkagesand understanding between councils and the publicon these issues have remarkably improved since

the 2008 Reform, with the imposition of stricterpenalties such as repossession of properties throughthe court system.

While collection of current rates has beenprogressive, the pace of receiving rates in arrears hasbeen slow. Over the past few years, the MLGUDHEhas been frequently requested by property owners to

waive significant number of rates in arrears. Tishas strained the councils who have little controlover which rates in arrears are waived, even if such

waivers have direct impact on council budgets and

financial position. Te number of skilled workers or officers within

local government is a contributing factor to theeffective administration of the councils. Suva CityCouncil has a range of departments including bothmanagement to technical functions such as health,engineering and environment. Conversely, thesmaller councils of Nausori, Nasinu and Lami ownshave a reduced capacity and are staffed mainly bymanagement and accounting officers and health andbuilding inspectors to carry out the technical works.

Efforts by the councils to recruit professional staffhave always been a challenge, as applicants are notmeeting the minimum qualification requirements.

Additionally, the councils management and human

resources departments provide limited support forinstitutional strengthening through staff training,provision and updating of equipment, andtechnology for improving operations and services.Tere are no qualified town planners, nor are thereany town planner positions with the small towncouncils of Nasinu and Lami owns. Suva CityCouncil sustains both City Planner and AssistantPlanner positions and Nausori own Councilincludes a own Planner position also.

Over the past three years, the MLGUDHE throughits Department of Local Government (DLG)has coordinated trainings on urban finance andmanagement, including improved accountingpractices, ethics and benchmarking. echnicaltraining is provided by the Department of own andCountry Planning (DCP) to guide the councils onthe delegation of powers by the DCP on certaindevelopments. In order to foster capacity buildingand knowledge sharing the Nausori own Councilis currently discussing the possibility of attachingsome of its officers to Suva City Council. Inaddition to building the capacity of Nausori ownCouncil staff, this arrangement would encouragea more collaborative relationship between the twocouncils, and help build a common vision of growthin the GSUA.

Tere is little commitment to or acknowledgementof the need to engage qualified technical staff in

order to effectively and efficiently carry out thetechnical tasks required for good functioning ofthe GSUA. In general, the councils of the GSUAstill rely heavily on the MLGUDHE, whose DCPprovides technical guidance particularly on planningand development issues. For this reason, theinvolvement of the Commissioner Centrals Officein council affairs (as required by Government) hasbrought about a far more integrated approach togrowth and development both within the GSUA,and throughout the peri-urban areas and provinces

which make up the Central District. Tis is dueto the fact that the Commissioner is tasked withcoordinating matters of national importance,including large capital projects, within themunicipalities, and within the GSUA in particular.

THE INSTITUTIONAL SET-UP

As noted, the GSUA consists of the councils ofSuva City, Lami own, Nasinu own and Nausoriown as established under Section 5 of the Local

Government Act (Cap.125). Tese councils areresponsible for the administration and managementof the urban areas within their respective urbanboundaries and are responsible to the MLGUDHE.


14/49

14

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE

URB

AN

GOVERNANCEAND

FINANCE

4

As per the Local Government Reform, the SAreplaces the elected councillors which comprisedthe council. In this way, the SA has all the powersof the council stipulated by the Local Government

Act (Cap. 125). Te SA can also receive additionalpowers as delegated to the SA by the MLGUDHE.

Decision-making is characterized by strong politicalwill with little political interference as all powers areheld by the SA. Decision-making is driven by theneeds of the city economy and associated investmentsbecause the SAs objectives and responsibilitiesare aligned to erms of Reference prepared by theMLGUDHE. However, existing capacities may beaffected in terms of urban management whereby thelack of professional expertise to deliver the neededservice is prominent.

Tere is potential for public-private partnership

or joint ventures between the council and privatestakeholders or investors. However, councils areencouraged to pursue revenue collection and befinancially strong so as to attract potential partners.

Te involvement of NGOs, the private and businesssector and civil society in council-led urbanmanagement affairs is not extensive though it isnotable. However, such partners are more directlyinvolved with the residents and communities withinthe urban areas of the GSUA, than with the municipalcouncils. In this way, partners tend to have a betterunderstanding of the needs of the ratepayers. Tereis a need for better coordination between partnersand stakeholders in order to collectively engage withlocal communities. Better coordination will help tofoster goodwill within the GSUA and create a senseof civic pride to nurture positive relations betweenthe four municipalities of the GSUA.

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

Te councils of the GSUA are under the directsupervision of the DLG under the MLGUDHE.

Te own Planning Act (Cap.139) gives planningresponsibility and obligations for enforcement tothe council. However, there is a greater emphasisplaced on development and regulatory controls, andstrategic physical planning is considered somewhatsecondary.

Each of the strategic plans (2010-2014) of the fourcouncils provides a vision, policies and proposals forthe municipalitys urban centre.

Suva City is currently partially reviewing its current

town planning scheme. A town planning scheme isa plan with the general objective of controlling thedevelopment of land. Nasinu and Nausori ownsare currently preparing new town planning schemes

as part the implementation of their respectiveStrategic Plans (2010-2014). Both Suva City andNausori own are focusing on extending areas oftheir respective urban centres, with extensive areasbeing planned on the boundary of Nausori own inanticipation of the extension to Nausori Airport andthe completion of the Kings Road along the north-

west coast towards Lautoka.

PERFORMANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Te SA is appointed by the government throughthe MLGUDHE and therefore is accountable to theMinister of MLGUDHE. Te CEO of the counciland the council staff are all accountable to the SA.

As the CEO and the council staff are paid by thecouncil they are also accountable to the ratepayers.

Monitoring is the core function of the DLG underthe Local Government Act and as per the StrategicFramework for Change Coordinating Office.Tis office is an independent government agencythat monitors the performance of all governmentbodies, statutory organizations and governmentcompanies.

Currently, community consultation relates to ratecollection and neighbourhood meetings in whichthe council disseminates information about thevarious services if offers. Tese meeting also providethe council with an opportunity to consult residentson council plans and programmes. Residentsand ratepayers are also informed via a quarterlypublication and can use a complaints register systemto address any grievances that they have with thecouncil. Te DLG also receives complaints directlyat the MLGUDHE, though there have been fewcomplaints received regarding council services a good indication that councils are adequatelyaddressing issues.

RESOURCE MOBILIZATION

Te efficiency of the council in revenue collectioncould be improved by the introduction of a databasethat coordinates properties and rates (i.e. anelectronic valuation roll).

Council expenditure has not been cost-effectivebecause it has not given the best return on investmentto the community. While the formulated strategicplans and corporate plans are linked to urban,environmental and social planning processes, theylack implementation plans and strategies as well as

the capacity to deliver. Tere is potential for broader stakeholder partnershipwhich promotes group investment opportunities in


15/49

1515

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE-URBAN


AGREED PRIORITIES

Each council undertakes strategic

planning through its five year StrategicPlan, Annual Corporate Plan andDevelopment Plan. Te key outputs andstrategies are monitored on a quarterlybasis during a three-day consultativemeeting. Participants of the meetinginclude MLGUDHE representativessuch as the Minister, the SAs and CEOsof the 13 city and town councils in Fijiand other relevant stakeholders. In themeeting, each council is required topresent a report on its progress in terms

of outputs achieved. Each council operates on an annual

budget using cash accounting practices.However, councils are required to changeto an accrual accounting based system.

Tere are no training policies thatexist within the councils. Currently,staff training is undertaken on an ad-hoc basis as an initiative by the staffnot management. Te exception tothis is when a training request comesfrom the MLGUDHE or Public

Service Commission for which councilmust nominate a representative. Acomprehensive training policy needs tobe adopted on a needs basis and regularcapacity building of council staff shouldbe undertaken.

Te community is considered to beheavily involved in local governance viaregular community meetings betweencouncil and residents, the media andthe complaints system. In this way,ratepayers are becoming more aware ofthe services offered by council and thestandards required.

PROJECT PROPOSALS

PROJECT 1Urban Governance

and Finance

Formulate training policies,staff succession plans andstrategic workforce training anddevelopment plans.

PROJECT 2Urban Governanceand Finance

Transit from cash accountingto accrual accountingpractices. Strengthen financialmanagement policies andpractices.

PROJECT 3

Urban Governanceand Finance

Formulate and clearly demarcatepowers of SAs and CEOs

in the administration andmanagement of the council andits environment.

order to achieve implementation. However, this hasnot been adequately explored or pursued due to alack of knowledge on how to initiate and implementsuch an approach.

Tere is no need for a village court system withinthe urban villages or traditional villages within the

cities or towns of the GSUA, as there is already aformal structure in place through the councils andgovernment. Tere is a need for information andcommunication to iaukei landowners on the subjectof urban development, management and expansion,as well as on the formal land development processesthat exist.

Tere is a vigilant revenue collection system inplace. However the number of rate collectors islimited and this constitutes a major constraint asvisiting each property and property owner. Teissue of absent property owners due to migrationor when the property is placed under rent is also

affecting the capacity of council to recover rates.Tere is a need to review the Local Government

Act (Cap. 125) in order to better empower thecouncil in the recovery of outstanding rates. Areview of the fines applicable under enforcementshould also be considered.

Tere is a need for better participation of NGOsin urban issues through partnership projects forcapacity building of community leadership andempowerment programmes.

Partnership with private stakeholders in urban

development is limited due to a lack of councilknow-how as to actual process and mechanics ofsuch partnerships. Better incentives for privatestakeholders to invest are also needed.


16/49


17/49

1717

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE-URBAN


17

GREATERS

UVAURBANPROFILE-URBANPLANNINGANDMANAGEMENT


Te municipal areas in the GSUA are under thesupervision of the DLG under the MLGUDHE.

Te own Planning Act (Cap.139) gives the councilplanning responsibilities but there is more emphasisplaced on controlling and regulating developmentrather than on strategic physical planning.

While acknowledged as being overdue, the actualreview of the town planning scheme for Suva CityCouncil has been extremely slow. Te four councils inthe GSUA are all pursuing revisions to include growthareas and areas earmarked for boundary extension asstipulated in the respective strategic plans of the fourcouncils.


Councils demonstrate a proactive approach tocommunication by disseminating information toresidents and key stakeholders. All councils distributequarterly newsletters addressed to their ratepayers and thegeneral public.

Te GSUA councils have been able to carry out someurban planning and management functions, particularlyin the application of development controls and regulation.Te growing importance of the linkages between urbanplanning and urban management has meant thatsmaller councils are focusing increasingly on strategicmanagement policy with specific themes. One example

of this from Lami own has seen the incorporation ofclimate change adaptation strategies into the councilscoastal development management system.

Tere are public consultation mechanisms in place formajor or significant developments that allow residents toparticipate as part of effective decision-making.


Te efficiency of all four councils in effectivelyimplementing their town planning schemes is highlydependent on their commitment to strengthen their

individual town planning units, which are currentlylimited in resources and capacity. Acquiring budgetprovision for a full-time or part-time town planner(shared between the councils within the GSUA) wouldboost this commitment.

Setting up a geographic information system (GIS)section within the town planning unit would potentiallystrengthen the councils, especially through supportingmapping, data recording and digitizing of the townplanning schemes and approved plans and policies forease of access and for awareness raising programmes.

town planners to advance and guide the implementationof approved town planning schemes. Such schemesare therefore either managed by engineers or buildingand health inspectors. Due to their small size, thetown planning units are focused more on day-to-day development control issues rather than strategicplanning or efforts directed towards achieving the mainobjectives and policies of the plans which accompanythe town planning schemes.

While the policy directions as described in theapproved town planning schemes are sometimesutilized by council, there is very limited knowledgeand understanding of the background of these policiesas the schemes are out dated. In this context, givenchanging trends in development, it is difficult to justifythe use of such policies. Tese general conditions havemeant that town planning schemes are under-utilized

or not used at all.

Tere is a need for the town planning schemes andtheir policies to be revived through awareness raisinginitiatives. Furthermore, schemes should be reviewedto integrate the management of peri-urban growth areason the peripheries of the municipal boundaries. Teseareas are currently subject to separate planning policiesand regulations such as the Greater Suva UGMAP(2006), the Suva Foreshore Master Plan, the PublicHealth and Building Regulations, the National BuildingCode, the Environmental Management Act (2005)

and the Environment Impact Assessment Regulations(2007).


Tere are three councils in the GSUA with approvedtown planning schemes (i.e. Suva City, Lami ownand Nausori own) under Section 18 of the ownPlanning Act (Cap.139). Such approval confersupon the council the powers of consenting authorityfor certain land and building developments. Nasinuown Council is currently pursuing approval of itsdraft town planning scheme, in order to facilitate thedelegation of powers by the DCP in compliance

with the statutory requirements of the ow PlanningAct (Sec. 18).

Decision-making on land and buildingdevelopments, as well as urban planning andmanagement, is undertaken through a partnership

which comprises the Building Unit, the Healthand Environment Unit, and the Engineering Unitof the council. On matters relating to relaxationof general conditions and on issues of nationalimportance the decision-making partnershipconsults the DCP.


18/49

18

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE

URB

AN

GOVERNANCEAND

FINANCE

88

AGREED PRIORITIES

Build capacity for planning because atpresent only one of the four councils

within the GSUA has a town planningunit. Te town planning unit should havea training programme and attachmentprogramme with the DCP. Similarly,each town planning unit needs to establisha GIS section.

Revise the councils town planningschemes by engaging a short-termconsultant or town planner to carry outthis work using a participatory approach.

Increase awareness and understanding ofurban planning and management in allcommunities through a comprehensivelong-term awareness raising programme,

including stakeholders in urban villages

PROJECT PROPOSALS

PROJECT 1Urban Planningand Management

Establish a town planning unitin each council with sufficienttechnical staff to run the unit.The unit should also set up a GISsection and undertake training

programmes with the DTCP

PROJECT 2

Urban Planningand Management

Create standard operatingprocedures (SOPs) for all activitiesrelating to urban planning andmanagement. Formulate acorresponding town planningmanual.

PROJECT 3


Establish a Local Government

Services Body (to provide sharedtechnical staff such as a townplanner, engineer, surveyor, etc.)to be jointly funded by the fourcouncils.

PROJECT 4


Revise the councils townplanning schemes and theGreater Suva Urban GrowthManagement Plan (2006) inpartnership with DTCP, the LocalGovernment Service Body orthrough the engagement of

Consultant Planner.

Downtown in Suva City

SCOPE


19/49

1919

GREATERS

UVAURBANPROFILE-LAN

DDEVELOPMENTANDAD

MINISTRATION

LAND DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

Te GSUA covers an extensive urban area of almost 5000hectares. Tis area contains three classes of land tenure:

crown or state owned land, iaukei land and freeholdland. Private individuals administer freehold properties,the Department of Lands and Survey administers crownor state property, under the Crown Lands Act, and theiaukei Lands rust Board (LB) administers iaukeilands following the iaukei Lands rust Act. Te LBis charged under this act with the administration ofiaukei lease land and the reservation of land under thecommunal ownership of indigenous Landowning Units(LOUs). Te LOUs in iaukei villages do play a majorrole in determining land utilization and administrationin their villages, in consultation with the LB. Tecurrent government system sees LOUs engaged ineconomic and development ventures and this isencouraged by the MLGUDHE in line with the UrbanPolicy Action Plan in addressing the ad-hoc release ofprime iaukei land.

Development in the GSUA has spread, creating corridorsprimarily along Kings Road to the east and Queens Roadto the west. Growth and development clearly followsinfrastructure and basic services provision in the GSUA,

with only limited development taking place in areas lacking

utilities such as sewerage. Other influences on urbangrowth include restrictions on development due to thevulnerability of certain areas such as those close to rivers oron steep slopes, as well as issues of accessibility, uncertaintenure or land insecurity. None the less, some vulnerableareas have become heavily developed which in turn requiresrigorous land and environmental management.

Since 2010 there has been an increase in the number ofLOUs pursuing land developments in the formal sector.Such developments may involve the Housing Authority orthe LB as partners, in order to develop residential land

with basic infrastructure services along the Suva Corridorand following proper subdivision processes. Nevertheless,there is still a notable percentage of iaukei land withincouncil boundaries that is occupied by informal settlementsas a result of LOUs releasing land for housing at an affordablelevel to the urban poor. Tis release of land culturallycomplex, being understood by the iaukei as providingfor those most in need, but being perceived as illegal by

western standards of urban administration. Unfortunately,the cost of infrastructure provision to these released landshas been borne by the informal settlers themselves and often

installed on an ad-hoc basis. Such installation is takes placewhen settlers can afford it, but when they cannot they turnto alternative systems which raises serious public healthconcerns and risks for the councils.

Since 2011, the DCP has noted an increase in thenumber of LOUs pursuing land developments on their

own. Tis is opposed to previous practices where theLB would issue development leases to the HousingAuthority. Tere has been exponential growth informal housing, stimulated by the Nausori Airportextension, the high cost of living and elevated real estateprices. Such growth has mainly taken place within theSuva-Nausori Corridor and across the Nausori flatsand is stimulated by the awareness of and build-upto the National Housing Policy, which has now beenendorsed. Based on formal land development processes,this policy seeks to mobilize stakeholders towards acoordinated supply of better serviced residential lotsfor low and middle income earners. Due to interimapplication of land controls, housing developmentsoften take place on peri-urban land not designatedfor residential or housing development. Tese areasmaybe zoned road reserves, parks or nature reserves.Tese areas are targeted by settlers. It is extremelydifficult for the Department of Housing, to undertakeresidential upgrading works, due to the zoning of theland and the high cost of upgrading. At the same time,the Department of Housing is compelled by socialresponsibility to not forcibly remove the settlers.

Te land development agencies such as the LB,the Housing Authority, or the Ministry of Lands andMineral Resources have been guided by the townplanning schemes in the three councils of the GSUA.It is nonetheless clear that the level of knowledge andtechnical capacity is insufficient to fully understand thetown planning schemes.


Land within the GSUA boundaries and itsperipheries are administered under the CrownLands Act, the Lands ransfer Act, the Subdivisionof Land Act and the Native Lands rust Act.Land development is demand-driven and normalapplications for leasing of state lands pass throughthe office of the Department of Lands and Surveyor the Divisional Surveyor Central Eastern. In theGSUA, development proposed on iaukei landsare pursued via leasing arrangements made withthe LB Regional Offices Central Eastern. Initial

Agreement for Leases are granted according to theprocess identified in the Subdivision of Land Actwhich is administered by the DCP, and are issuedas registered 99 year leases. All physical and built


20/49


21/49

2121

GREATERS

UVAURBANPROFILE-LAN

DDEVELOPMENTANDAD

MINISTRATION

AGREED PRIORITIES

Increase awareness of procedures andprocesses involved in land administrationas this is either overlooked or ignored bymembers of the public leading to illegaldevelopments occurring within the urbanand peri-urban areas of the GSUA.

Improve information systems and makethem available in iaukei, English andHindi.

Establish environmental management unitsin the three land administration agenciesespecially the LB and the DivisionalSurveyor Central Eastern Office.

PROJECT PROPOSALS

PROJECT 1LAND DEVELOPMENTAND ADMINISTRATION

Implement extensiveawareness raising programmesusing media, education-expos, brochures, workshopsand seminars to build a

better understanding of landdevelopment procedures andprocesses in the GSUA.


Improve land informationmanagement systems with areliable database using GIS,for better decision-makingand management of landdevelopment. Make thedatabase accessible to all keystakeholders.


Establish environmentalmanagement units inDivisional Surveyor CentralEastern Office under theDepartment of Lands andSurvey and TLTB.


22/49

22

URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES

Te provision of urban infrastructure and services inthe GSUA is the shared responsibility of both nationaland local governments. Provision of roads, water and

sanitation is overseen by the Ministry of Works throughits statutory authorities, mainly the Water Authorityof Fiji and Fiji Roads Authority. Drainage and natural

water ways, solid waste, street lighting, parks andcommunity facilities are all managed by the councils.

All residents have direct access to these services exceptthose in the informal settlements. However, councilsare re-evaluating this policy of exclusion in the interestsof public health and safety and now provide solid

waste management and street lighting services in someinformal settlements, such as Naisogowaluvu in Lamisettlements, for a nominal or subsidized fee.

Over 60 per cent of the countrys population has directaccess to clean drinking water through a reticulated

water system administered by the Water Authority ofFiji. Te Government of Fiji has been slowly upgrading

water schemes throughout the GSUA corridor based onthe Suva-Nausori Water Supply and Sewerage MasterPlan (1999). Tis has involved both the maintenanceand upgrading of pipelines, as well as the establishmentof new reservoirs to meet increasing demand in theGSUA due to population growth.

Te GSUA contains two centrally located watertreatment plans and three reservoirs which provide goodcoverage of water supply. However, major strategicupgrade and maintenance issues persist and Water

Authority Fiji is working towards their resolution. Tekey issues to be addressed include old and undersized

water pipes; constant cuts and intermittent watersupply especially in Lami and Delanivesi and Nasinu,as well as in elevated areas of Suva City; increased illegalconnections to main supplies especially in informalsettlements and by large industries; poor strategic

planning and forecasting of demand, particularly withrecent major housing developments such as Waila City,acirua East, and Wainibuku and Nepani subdivisions;inadequate maintenance leading to deterioratinginfrastructure; high maintenance cost and seriouspublic health concerns; limited pressure and loss oftreated water through a high number of undetectedleaks within the reticulation system and at the watermeters.

Residents in the GSUA are encouraged to installrainwater tanks or water storage tanks to supplementthe reticulated water supply system in the event offailure or during periods of intermittent supply. TeGSUA region experiences high rainfall throughout

the year with an average annual precipitation of 3000mm, and downpour rates as high as 50 mm per hour.However, maintenance of water tanks needs to be better

understood by residents in order to avoid public healthrisks and disease.

Since the 1990s, there has been an increased focus onimproving urban waste management such that all newsubdivisions must be connected to reticulated seweragesystems while older subdivisions in the GSUA continueto rely on septic tanks. With higher urban populationdensities comes a higher production of waste, andconsequently the Suva-Nausori Water Supply andSewerage Master Plan (1999) concentrates on the Suva-Nausori Corridor where urban growth is highest. Te

aim of this policy is to allow for increasing density ofdevelopment. Te absence of reticulated sewerage systemsin prime urban locations has either hindered or delayeddevelopment. Tis was the case in Sakoca Heights andacirua East in Nasinu own. Such an absence can alsolead to regulations for higher minimum site areas, such asin the Millennium Subdivision in Nausori own wherethe minimum site size for residential lots is 800-1000square metres. New alternative systems for managingliquid waste have been adopted around the GSUA inorder to allow for increased density.

Implementation of Water Authority Fijis seweragereticulation programmes has been slow, but steadyprogress is being made in unsewered areas in SuvaCity such as oorak, Vatuwaqa Domain and parts ofSamabula and amavua. In these locations pipes havebeen laid but the commissioning of their connection tothe rest of the system is likely to take a few more years.Other areas being connected include parts of Nausoriown, though Lami is still unsewered and plans to havethis municipality connected are yet to be implemented.In this way, connectivity to reticulated sewerage systems

is broadly encouraged, and the authorities now requireall new developments including informal settlementupgrading projects within the GSUA to be connectedto a reticulated system. Te sole exception to this is Lamisettlement. Such upgrades and the general shift towardsa reticulated sewerage system will cater for increaseddevelopment densities and population growth, as wellas improving the urban environment and addressingpublic health issues associated with septic tanks and pitlatrines. However, most informal settlements withinthe GSUA are still not yet connected to the reticulated

system due to the high capital outlays required and thefact that many do not see connection as an immediateneed despite, the health issues associated with thetemporary systems currently in operation.


23/49

2323

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE-URBAN

INFRASTRUCTUREAND

SERVICES

All municipal waste from the GSUA extending to Navuais disposed off at the Naboro Landfill which is 24kmfrom the centre of Suva City. Te landfill is owned bythe national government and operated by H. G. Leach(Fiji) Limited, a New Zealand owned company. Telandfill was opened in 2005 and is Fijis first and onlysanitary landfill whereby all waste placed is covered

within soil and biomass such as green wastes at the endof each day. Te table below shows the amount of wastethat is generated by each of the councils in the GSUA.

able 4. Waste generation per GSUA council

Recently, the councils of Nasinu and Nausoriowns in consultation with the Department ofEnvironment and the DCP initiated discussion ona possible waste transfer station in order to reducethe high transport costs associated with deliveringrefuse to the Naboro Landfill. his option is still at

a preliminary stage as each municipality within theGSUA seeks to identify its own landfill or transfersite. Other options being pursued include recyclingcentres though this is limited to paper and bottles.

Waste collected includes household garbage, usedtyres, solidified paint, expired drugs, dead animalsand condemned fish, as well as industrial andcommercial waste.

he Fiji Electricity Authority is looking at viablerenewable energy projects to generate electricity

at the Naboro Landfill using either landfill gas ora waste to energy approach or a combinationof the two. he gas emissions from decomposingmunicipal solid waste in the landfill contributesignificantly to air pollution and pose a risk topublic health.

he entire GSUA has access to a main electricitysupply provided by Fiji Electricity Authority. It alsoenjoys access to various communication servicesincluding cellular phone services. Interest inpursuing alternative energy sources is low. Councils

are encouraged to pursue energy-saving initiativesin line with the Urban Policy Action Plan thematicarea of urban environmental management. BothSuva City and Lami own have adopted energy-

saving initiatives in terms of streetlights, solar anddaylight switches. In the same way, council vehiclesare now being encouraged to run on bio-fuel.

he establishment of the Fiji Roads Authority in 2012saw this agency assume the authority and responsibilityfor all matters pertaining to the construction,maintenance and development of roads in Fiji,including those within the municipal boundaries. Temain roads and arterial roads suffer congestion andextended peak hours. Consequently, the Fiji Roads

Authority is revisiting regional road proposals and re-examining the need for an improved urban transportsystem in the GSUA.

Prior to the establishment of the Fiji Roads Authority,councils were tasked with maintaining roads within themunicipal boundaries. However, most roads withinthe GSUA, including main and sub-arterial roads,maintained by the Department of National Roads,Ministry of Works, were in bad repair due to poormaintenance and management plans and poor budgetallocations despite increased traffic.

MUNICIPALCOUNCIL

MONTHLY AVER-AGE (TONNES)

DAILY AVERAGE(KILOGRAMS)

Nausori 360 12,000

Nasinu 830 27,000

Suva 2,000 65,000

Lami 160 5,000

Waste per municipal council.

Source: Department of Environment (MLGUDHE)

Sewerage disposal in Sasawira squatter settlement

SCOPE

Naboro Landfill

Department of Environment (MLGUDHE)


24/49

244

Under the Greater Suva Urban Structure Plan (1975) aSuva-Nausori Regional Road Reserve of 30 metres wasdescribed but never been pursued. Despite this, theconstruction of a four-lane highway to speed travel throughthe GSUA, improve efficiency and ease congestion alongthe main trunk road (Kings Road) of the Suva-NausoriCorridor remains a strategic priority. In the interim, the FijiRoads Authority has focused its efforts on upgrading and

widening the current two-lane carriageway of Kings Roadto a four-lane carriageway between Valelevu and Nausori

Airport. Tis will bring a number of benefits, includingimproved accessibility and use of public transportationsuch as buses, taxis and minivans within the GSUA.

THE INSTITUTIONAL SET-UP Te basic infrastructure of water and sanitation is

provided by the statutory authority Water Authorityof Fiji. Energy and telecommunications are providedby corporate companies and service providers.

Te establishment of the Fiji Roads Authority byGovernment gazette in 2012 means that all roads inFiji, including roads within municipalities, are nowunder the jurisdiction of this agency.


he councils within the GSUA provides municipalservices as required under the Local Government

Act (Cap.125). Councils must also ensurecompliance with engineering and infrastructureprovisions as part of the subdivision process as

required under Suva City Councils subdivisionby-laws and as per the Subdivision of Land Act

when it concerns subdivisions in Nasinu, Lamiand Nausori own. Peri-urban areas are provided

with services under the Public Health Act, withthe Central Board of Health under the Ministryof Health overseeing solid waste management.


Given the different levels of urban services that

are provided both by the councils and variousstatutory authorities, the services provided by thecouncils are subject to monitoring by the DLG,the Office of the Auditor General when auditingits financial reports, and the ratepayers and generalpublic through the dissemination of informationvia the quarterly council publications.QuarterlyLocal Government Forums conducted by the NCreveal 100 per cent success in meeting set targetsand outputs for each quarter.


Te basic urban infrastructure of water and seweragereticulation services is provided by Water Authority Fiji.Tere are areas which do not receive these services dueto limited infrastructure development by governmentand the high capital costs of such infrastructure. As aresult, developments in these areas reply upon septictank systems for sanitation. Tis is the case in informalsettlements within the GSUA, where illegal connectionsto the reticulated water supply constitute anotherproblem. Tere is a need for better strategic planning toascertain more accurate demand for these services so asto plan and put in place better supply mechanisms.

Roads, drainage systems and electricity are providedand maintained jointly by the councils and statutoryauthorities such as the Fiji Electricity Authorityand Fiji Roads Authority, as noted. Overall, bettercommunication and coordination between all utilityand service providers is needed, as often planning andimplementation programmes are disjointed resulting induplication of resources and longer delays in services.

Power and telecom lines at Sasawira

SCOPE

Poor road maintenance

SCOPE


25/49

2525

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE-URBAN

INFRASTRUCTUREAND

SERVICES

AGREED PRIORITIES

Establish a database to inventory all urbanservices and utilities within the municipalboundaries of the GSUA including theproposed boundary extension areas.

Incorporate Water Authority Fijis MasterPlan for Water and Sewerage Reticulationinto the Greater Suva Urban GrowthManagement Plan.

Establish better coordination betweenall utility providers to avoid wastage andduplication of resources, and seek a morestrategic approach to services delivery.

Incorporate information on infrastructureand services into the councils GIS section.

PROJECT PROPOSALS

PROJECT 1Urban Infrastruc-ture and Services

Establish an information hubfor all urban infrastructureand services provided by thecouncils.

PROJECT 2

Urban Infrastruc-ture and Services

Incorporate up-to-dateinfrastructure information intothe revised Greater Suva UrbanGrowth Management Plan.

Roadside drains

SCOPE


26/49

26

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE

URB

AN

HOUSING

AND

SHELTE

R

6

URBAN HOUSING AND SHELTER

Te GSUA provides various housing types, structuresand standards ranging from single detached dwellings to

multi-unit residential apartment complexes. Housingtype is determined by zonings in the councils townplanning schemes. A high demand for housing coupled

with shortages of land is producing areas of increasingdensity in Suvas inner city. Housing in these areas isusually multi-story executive apartment blocks, multi-unit rental flats and extensions to residences. Similarly,in the informal sector, the number and density ofinformal settlements has increased. In 2011 the GSUAhad over 100 informal settlements, increased from 50identified in the 2006 UGMAP. Most of these newsettlements are located along the GSUAs main linkroads. Informal settlements in the GSUA contain morethat 90,000 residents, some 30 per cent of the totalGSUA population, and are of varying size and density

with limited access to basic urban infrastructure.

Since the formulation of the National Housing Policyin 2011, an aggressive approach is being taken towardshousing provision, especially affordable housing for theurban poor. Efforts are being made by all stakeholders toimplement the policy recommendations. Te Housing

Authority has completed the first stage of acirua East

and has begun the second stage as well as tackled issuesof infrastructure capacity and upgrading. Te absenceof a surveying and land development unit within theLB has pushed the agency into issuing expressionsof interest for development leases for housing projectsin accordance with the LB Land Use Master Planfor the Lami-Nausori Corridor. Other land projectsfor housing included those being pursued by the majorLOUs in Nasinu own, reflecting a shift amongst theLOUs towards pursuing formal housing processes forland development rather than releasing land in aninformal way.

Te Housing Authority has continued itsimplementation of residential subdivisions within theurban corridor. Similarly, the MLGUDHE is activelycarrying out its commitment to settlement upgrading.In 2011, the ministry completed settlement upgradingprojects in Nakasi and Lakena, in Nausori own, andresidents, armed with secure tenure, are now pursuinghome improvements. Furthermore, the MLGUDHEin partnership with the Asian Coalition for HousingRights (ACHR) of Tailand and the Peoples Coalition

Network (PCN), has began a pilot in-situ housingupgrading project called Lagilagi with the residents of

Jittu Estate. Te upgrading is supported through theresidents savings scheme and will see the development

of multi-story units similar to those used by the PublicRental Board in Raiwai, Suva City. Te housing units

will be strata titled enabling those that have beencontinuously saving to hold a title to the units and payoff the subsidized cost of the unit over a 12-year period.

High housing prices in Suva City is driving manyresidents and would-be home owners in Suva City topurchase in Nasinu or Nausori owns where land andhouses are more affordable. Tis in turn is stimulatingnew residential subdivisions in peri-urban areas. Tefirst stage of the proposed Waila City is expected toprovide housing units for 3000 people, with unitsranging from duplexes and detached dwellings to multi-

story complexes.

While peri-urban areas have high development costslinked mainly to the cost of providing basic infrastructureand utilities to these areas, they are still attractive andaffordable to many. In part, the affordability of houseand land packages in peri-urban areas is due to theabsence of council rates. However, annual sub-leasecharges payable to the Housing Authority or the LBare rising, and it is expected that extensions to councilboundaries will soon allow councils to start chargingrates on these lands. Notable increases in cases ofhomelessness and begging on the streets of the GSUAare highlighting the lack of housing and shelter optionsavailable to the urban poor. Te GSUA councils withthe local police are attempting to reduce the casesof homelessness and begging, though with limitedsuccess. Councils are investigating improving access toaffordable housing and social services and employmentgeneration as alternatives avenues by which to reducehomelessness and begging.

THE INSTITUTIONAL SET-UP Councils do not provide housing or shelter nor

are they engaged in the provision of housingdespite allowance for such activity under the LocalGovernment Act (Cap.125). Housing and shelterare provided by housing providers, both privateindividual and the statutory bodies including theHousing Authority, the Public Rental Board andthe Housing Assistance Relief rust. Tere are othernon-government organization includes Habitat forHumanity and RotaHomes who similarly contribute

to housing provision.

In 2011 the councils in the GSUA acknowledgedthe need to participate in implementing


27/49

2727

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE-URB

AN

HOUSING

AND

SHELTE

R

improvements to informal settlements withintheir municipal boundaries. Trough a three-yearcitywide consultation programme, the councils willfacilitate improvements to informal settlements byidentifying key capital projects and investmentsin consultation with the Department of Housingof the MLGUDHE. Te citywide programme

will concentrate on two areas, namely CaubatiSettlement in Nasinu own and Vunivivi Settlementin Nausori own.


Due to the absence of a National Housing Act, thecouncils have a limited regulatory support through

which to control housing issues. Following the 2011National Housing Policy, the possibility of a NationalHousing Act is being explored. Te only current

relevant legislation addresses residential subdivisionstandards governed under the own Planning Act, theSubdivision of Land Act and the Public Health Act,

though these are for development control purposes.


Within the GSUA councils, there is no budgetprovision for the creation of housing and shelter. Tecitywide consultation allows the council to engage inidentifying infrastructure improvement projects for

informal settlements within municipal boundaries.However, such identification is used to attract donorsor private investment in order to finance these capital

works projects.

AGREED PRIORITIES

Establish a database of all rateableproperties in the GSUA. In particular,all residential properties and settlementsshould be mapped out using GIS,including those within peri-urban areasand proposed boundary extension areas.

Coordinate the main land developmentplayers in the GSUA with the use ofhousing and infrastructure investmentstrategies, particularly in the peri-urbanareas, in order to enable the timelyprovision of affordable land and housingproducts.

PROJECT PROPOSALS

PROJECT 1Urban Housingand Shelter

Revise the databaseof existing shelter andsettlements within GSUA

PROJECT 2

Urban Housingand Shelter

Undertake the citywideconsultation for CaubatiSettlement and VuniviviSettlement in order toidentify projects for

improving infrastructure,services and security oftenure in these settlements.Prepare a manual for citywideconsultation and settlementimprovement in order toprovide guidance in termsof development upgradingworks.

PROJECT 3Urban Housingand Shelter

Review all planning and

subdivision standards with aview to providing acceptablereduced standards for housingand settlement upgrades.

Omkar settlement

DTCP


28/49

288

CLIMATE CHANGE AND DISASTER RISK REDUCTION

Te physical geography of the GSUA plays a majorrole in determining its vulnerability to climate change

and natural hazards. Despite Suva City, Lami ownand Nausori own all being located on the coast,and vulnerable to rises in mean sea level and coastaland riverine flooding, the GSUA is not as vulnerableto climate change as urban areas in western Fiji. Inaddition to climate-related hazards, other naturalhazards to which part or all of the GSUA is exposedinclude earthquakes and tsunamis (low-lying areasof Suva City and Nasinu own); landslides (in areasin Lami own and Veisari due to geology and soilstructure); and riverine flooding in areas along theRewa River in Nausori own.

Vulnerability to climate change in coastal Lami ownhas increased due to mangrove deforestation andcontinued coral extraction to make way for urbandevelopment and for income generation. Of criticalconcern is the fact that urban poor are settling in highlyexposed and vulnerable areas such as amongst themangrove forests and along riverbanks where they areparticularly exposed to flood. In addition, the chronicunder provision of urban services to these settlementsmeans that they pose serious environmental and health

concerns.Following a Vulnerability and Adaptation Assessment(VAA) funded by the UN-Habitat through its Citiesand Climate Change Initiative (CCCI), the Lami ownCouncil has embarked on a series of climate changeadaptation activities. Tese include the establishmentof a mangrove nursery as well as mangrove replantinginitiatives in order to protect the coastline. Te VAAalso identified low-lying areas adjacent to reclaimedland that are negatively affected by flooding. Tis isdue to backflow from poorly maintained drains, run

off from elevated areas and changes in natural watercause due to poor upper catchment and solid wastemanagement by the council. Te VAA identified theneed for better coordination and communicationbetween the council, local communities and thenational authorities during natural disaster events.Te assessment also highlighted the need for councilsto facilitate local community actions plans in orderto proactively address climate change issues at locallevel, rather than relying on national governmentand council. Most importantly, the VAA revealed

the need for greater awareness of the impacts ofclimate change, and encouraged awareness raising onthis issue, particularly targeting local communitiesand highlighting the need to consider the long-

term implications of community actions. Tis hasparticular reference to the destruction of mangroves

and coral reefs for income.Te Suva Foreshore Master Plan (1998) has beeninstrumental in protecting selected areas of mangrovein the GSUA. In particular, extensive mangroveand wetland areas have been retained in the southof the GSUA, and around the mouth of the RewaRiver. Nonetheless, these ecosystems are threatenedby development on a daily basis and it is thereforecritical that the councils support the draft MangroveManagement Plan that is currently awaiting approvalby the cabinet. Te Nausori own Councils town

planning scheme clearly demarcates all areas subjectedto flooding with corresponding development controlsas mechanisms for adaptation. In addition, the climatechange study of Nausori own funded by ADB in2011 validated the zoning scheme and also noted thetowns vulnerability to sea level rise by 2025.


Te Department of Environment under theMLGUDHE and the Climate Change Unit under

the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and rade is mandatedto implement the National Climate Change Policy

which includes awareness and capacity building.

Te National Disaster Management Office is thecoordinating body in the event of a disaster in theGSUA.

Tere is no set budget within the councils financialsystem dedicated to climate change initiatives or torehabilitation and reconstruction following disasterevents. In part, this is because reconstructionhas always been the primary responsibility of the

national government. Tis attitude needs to change local communities and businesses should alsobe encouraged to participate in climate changeinitiatives facilitated by the councils.


Projects and development should comply with theEnvironment Management Act with regards toenvironmental management and protection andsustainable development initiatives.

Te National Climate Change Policy needs to bettercoordinate and record all climate change programmesin the GSUA in order. Such coordination will enable


29/49

2929

GREATERS

UVAURBANPROFILE-CLIMATECHANGEANDDISAS

TERRISKREDUCTION

more effective action plans and reviews and avoidduplication of activities, particularly data gatheringand awareness raising.

Te National Disaster Management Office is themain coordinating office responsible for disastermanagement in Fiji. Te task force for disaster

management during disaster events includes thecouncils.


Te councils need to review their annual budgetsto ensure that appropriate allocation is made forclimate change and disaster management initiatives.

Resources could be accessed through UN-HabitatsCCCI programme. Joining the CCCI wouldgenerate VAA reports and documentation on

green house gases for Suva City, Nasinu own andNausori own. Tis would enable the councilsto better incorporate climate change adaptationstrategies into their planning process, as well asinduce proactive engagement in these issues fromlocal communities. Trough the assessments, eachcommunity can ascertain its vulnerability to climatechange and identify key adaptive and mitigationmeasures which can be implemented.

AGREED PRIORITIES

Te GSUA councils should fix 10 per centof their budgets for climate change anddisaster management projects focusing onpreparedness and adaptation.

Te GSUA councils should preparedisaster management action plans andassociated trainings for communitycommittees. Tis would requirecollaboration with Disaster ManagementCommittee and the Commissioner EasternOffice and be based on wider GSUAdisaster management plans.

Tere needs to be increased awareness bymajor landowners, administrators and thecommunity of land development processes,and in particular, the vulnerability of lands

close to rivers and along the coastline.User-friendly publications and brochureson land development in the three officiallanguages should be produced.

Identify an area within the GSUA as apilot for implementing climate changeadaptation measures.

PROJECT PROPOSALS

PROJECT 1CLIMATE CHANGEAND DISASTERMANAGEMENT

Prepare a coordinated disastermanagement action plan for theGSUA and establish disaster riskreduction and risk managementplans for Lami, Nasinu and NausoriTowns.


Revise development controlsfor all town planning schemesso that flood risk and climatechange adaptation andmitigation measures are

considered and included inall new developments andsubdivisions.


Undertake disaster managementawareness raising and capacitybuilding initiatives at communitylevel.

Squatters in the Mangroves in Lami

SCOPE

Squatters along Tamavua River

SCOPE


30/49

30

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE

URB

AN

GOVERNANCEAND

FINANCE

0

URBAN GOVERNANCE AND FINANCE

SECTION THREE - STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES,OPPORTUNITIES AND THREATS (SWOT) ANALYSIS

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

COMMUNICATION, AWARENESS AND TRANSPARENCY

Long-serving middlemanagers and staff.

Absence of politics withinthe local government as perLocal Government Reviewand Reform.

Each municipality within theGSUA has its own Five Year

Strategic Plan.

Increasing awarenessof and contribution tomunicipal Strategic Plans bystakeholders from both thepublic and private sector.

Overlapping of powers withinthe councils managementstructure leading to confusionby staff, affecting moraleand leading to negligence ofprotocols.

Community involvementand contributionto decision-makingin the GSUA throughcommunity meetings andneighbourhood watchzone programmes.

Changes in leadershipsubjective staff todifferent leadershipstyles.

FINANCIAL CAPACITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Good cross-section ofpersonnel with a mixture ofboth young and mature staff.

The SA is well-versed andknowledgeable of theregion and provides stronglinkages between the fourmunicipalities and thecommunities.

Code of Conduct in place.

Large number of rates inarrears and poor rate collectionmechanisms.

Potential additional ratesand revenue.

Implementation of theAccrual Accounting BudgetSystem by 2013.

Resource sharing andcapacity building in terms ofurban management.

Change in leadership andexecutive managementcould trigger allegiance

issues amongst the staff.

High turnover of staff.


31/49

3131

GREATERS

UVA

URBAN

PROFILE-URBAN


URBA

fiji: greater suva urban profile

Documents