RESEARCH

Sustainability of Large Scale Urban Sanitation Projects :

Calcutta Case Study

-A Report­Volume I

Submitted to

Regional Water & Sanitation Group UNDP- Wodd Bank Water & Sanitation Progrant

Asian Information Marketing & Social Research (P) Ltd Calcutta

January 1997

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

BOP BI BIP CD CD\V CIT CMC CMDA CMPO CPI(M) CUDP Dl FGD HH ICDS IDA MAIDP MDP MNP NGO QS RWSG SA SSA SSEP

ABBREVIATIONS

Basic Development Plan Bustee/Basti Improvement Bustee Improvement Programme Community Development Community Development Centre Calcutta Improvement Trust Calcutta Municipal Corporation Calcutta Metropolitan Development Authority Calcutta Metropolitan Planning Organisation Communist Party Of India (Marxist) Calcutta Urban Development Project Depth Interview Focus Group Discussion Households Integrated Child Development Scheme International Development Association Municipal And Anchal Development Programme Municipal Development Programme Minimum Needs Programme Non Governmental Organisation Quick Survey Regional Water And Sanitation Group South Asia Strategic Sanitation Approach Small Scale Entrepreneurs Programme

RESEARCH

RESEARCH

CONTENTS Page No

CHAPTER l Introduction 1

CHAPTER 2 Project Process 6

CHAPTER 3 Reconaissance Survey Findings 14

CHAPTER 4 : Choice, Payment & Local Management of 28 Service : The Calcutta Case

CHAPTER 5 : Conclusions 36

TABLE 8 39

RESEARCH CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Sanitation services delivery to the urban poor has emerged as a problematic task and past approaches towards solutions have been unsatisfactory. The Strategic Sanitation Approach (SSA) has evolved as a response to unsatisfactory performance of existing policies. The approach is built upon the core belief that provision of sustainable sanitation to urban areas is only possible by a demand oriented service delivery system. The SSA constitutes a set of three core hypotheses and a set of rdated assumptions to choice of service, user payment for service and local management of service (For details see the Terms of Reference in the Appendix).

ln the context of the above, the UNDP/World Bank Water Sanitation Program through the Regional Water & Sanitation Group for South Asia (RWSG) has initiated a comparative study of three large scale Urban Sanitation Projects covering a population exceeding fifteen thousand to gain inputs that would help refine and develop more region-specific formulation of the SSA.

The projects under study are:

a) The Calcutta Urban Development Project, Calcutta b) The Orangi Project, Karachi (;) Hyderabad Slum Development Project

R WSG has deputed AIMS Research, a market and social research organisation to work in collaboration with them for the Calcutta case study. This report presents the findings of the study.

The Calcutta Case

Sanitation services delivery under the Bustee (Slum) Improvement Program (BlP) of the Calcutta Urban Development Project (CUDP) taken up by the Calcutta Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA), is one of the largest projects ever undertaken for the urban poor in South Asia.

Divided in three phases ( CUDP I, 1970-71 to 197 6-77; CUDP II, 1977-78 to 1982-83 and; CUDP Ill 1983-84 onwards), the project which has evolved as the primary urban development project to be executed by CMDA has received funding mainly from the Government of India, World Bank (two phases) and Overseas Development Administration (ODA).

Initiated nearly twenty-five years ago, the project continues as one of the longest government run centralised norm driven projects in the region. Till date the project has covered nearly two­thirds of the 1.3 million people living in two thousand four hundred shims of Calcutta. Five basic facilities namely, sanitary latrines, potable water through taps, drainage, pavements and street lights are provided as part of the program. Moreover, in 1983 a health care program and in 1991 an integrated community development program were introduced (Calcutta's Urban Future, Annexure 4:435-38).

RESEARCH Goals of tbe Study

The study aims at a systematic analysis of sustainability of sanitation service delivery and usage in Calcutta's slums with a view towards exploring the relationship between the dynamics of this sustainalbility with the core hypotheses of the SSA regarding choice, payment and management of service. Specifically, the study has looked at the operational dynamics of the sanitary latrines built by CMDA in these slums. Consequently, the concept of sustainability has been operationalised from the perspective of functional usage of the latrines throughout the year. The primary objective is to find out how this functional usage has been made possible, how it has continued, what are the cost compon1ents involved, what has been the dynamics of people's participation in the management of

· this service, the overall performance of the project, the intended and actual rules of the project and deviations if any from them.

Methodology and Sampling

The methodology of the study was designed keeping the above goals in view. Both secondary and primary methods were applied. The former facilitated review of extant literature and documents that provided information on the background, formal history and documented perceptions about the project. The primary method on the other hand, provided a current situational profile of the working of the project, the dynamics of its usage, oral histories, views of its implementors at different levels and perspectives of other persons related to the project and involved in planning and implementing projects.

A. The secondary method which helped to establish the context of the study, involved a review of published and unpublished official and private documents covering the following issue areas :

I. Nature of Calcutta's urbanity II. Calcutta's slums Ill. Evolution of planned intervention in the city dwelling specifically on the agencies

involved IV. Slum improvement programs specifically those implemented under the Calcutta Urban

Development Program (CUDP) scheme V. Deliberations within agencies regarding the planning, achievements and overall status of

interventions in slums and VI. Evaluation of agency performances, both from the perspective of outsiders and the

agency personnel themselves

B. The primary research involved:

I. Community and II. Institutional level data collection.

RESEARCH The community level analysis in the slums was carried out in two phases:

i) Phase I

This phase involved:

a) A period-wise (pre-World Bank, post World Bank, Minimum Needs program and ODA) listing of slums covered under CMDA' s 'sanitization' program, specifically those where toilets were constructed (numbering to about two thousand four hundred) and second

A random selection of one hundred and twenty four slums from among the above mentioned list for a reconaissance survey that would help establish the overall condition of latrines in the slums. Of course before the random selection weightage was given to those slums where toilets were built in the seventies followed by those in the eighties and nineties respectively.

The quick survey sifted information at two levels:

General : Including data on slum profile, sanitization intervention, toilet technology, condition of toilets and drains and water supply

Cluster (term used for a group of households usually set around a courtyard sharing toilet facilities )/Single Household : Including data on maintenance status and condition of toilets and drains, tenancy structure and interaction with agencies like Calcutta Municipal Corporation (CMC). CMDA and so on vis-a-vis maintenance

ii) Phase II followed the reconaissance survey. At this stage an in-depth surveyed was carried out and field observations of investigators noted. This was done mainly to seek explanations about the conditions found. Nineteen slums were selected out of the one hundred and twenty four originally surveyed for this purpose. The basis of selection was condition of toilets, technology and phase of construction. The following table (Table A) gives a brief profile of the slums selected.

RESEARCH Table A : Slums Selected for Case Study, Year, Technology,

on I IOD 0 annes, um ero ouse 0 s opu a ton C d"t" f L t . N b fH h ld & P I t" NAME OF SLUM WARD YMROF TOILET GENERAL NUMBER POPU-

NO CONS- TECHNO- CONDITION OF ROUSE LATION TRUCTION LOGY OF TOILETS HOLDS

BA1TI KAL BUSTEE 133 1986-96 SEPTIC :rvrrx 2,000 20,000

MIANBAGAN 35 1975 SEPTIC GOOD 2,500 8,000-10,000

BARISH NIOGI ROAD 14 I978 MAJORITY MIX 540 3,200 1989-90 SEPTIC

5 ANDUL RAJ ROAD 84 1972-76 SEWER GOOD 22 230 I

3 ANJUMAN ROAD 60 1977-78 SEWER BAD 100 1,000

KAUMUI>DIN 34 1975-77 SEPTIC GOOD 180 2,500 SIRCARLANE

KESI-IAB CH. SEN 40 1983 .•

SEWER MIX 385 3,500 STREET

76 TOLLYGUNGE 81 1971-72 MAJORITY MIX 80 750-800 ROAD SEWER

BELGACHIA 3 1977-78 SEWER MIX 2,750 50,000

MONMOHAN 118 1985 SEPTIC BAD 127 300 BANERJEE ROAD 1996 • MUKUNDAPUR 109 1995 2PIT GOOD 1,500 8,000

LATRINE

CANAL ROAD 75 1971-72 MAJORITY :rvrrx 600 7,000-SEPTIC 7,500

SATISH MUKHERJEE 84 1976 SEWER GOOD 6 41 ROAD

MAN1KTALA 29 1981 SEPTIC GOOD 2,500 3,500

SWINWHOE LANE 67 1993 SEPTIC MIX ISO 1,000

BENIAPARA 60 1985-86 SEWER GOOD 40 300

SHY AMBA.ZAR 10 1977-78 SEP'llCCON. GOOD 300 40000 SEWER

DARAI'ARA 59 1977-78 SEPTIC BAD 6,000 30,000

CHF.TLA !WAD 82 1976-78 SEWER GOOD 170 800

RESEARCH Case Study: The case study of the slums contained the following components:

A schedule for detailed background information on the selected slums (for all slums)

Focus group discussions with residents (for all slums)

In-depth individual interviews of either owners or tenants (in varying combinations depending upon significance in all slums)

In-depth individual interviews of either community leaders or party workers (in varying combinations depending upon significance in all slums)

In-depth individual interviews of councilors, CMC maintenance staff and executive engineers and local cleaners in communities where their roles appeared interesting and worthwhile for focused study

II. At the institutional level, primary research which would help establish project rules, consisted of in-depth individual interviews of:

Calcutta Metropolitan Development Authority (CMDA) policy makers and implementors

Calcutta Municipal Corporation (CMC) policy makers and implementers and

NGO representatives working among slum residents in the city

All questionnaires, slum schedule, depth and focus group discussion·guides and transcribed interviews are annexed.

RESEARCH CHAPTER 2

PROJECT PROCESS

The Beginning

CMDA took up conversion of service privies to sanitary toilets in slums right from its inception in 1971, as part of the Bustee (Slum) Improvement Program (BIP) that marked the beginning of its operations as the city's development and planning authority.

'Nest Bengal, specifically Calcutta in 1970~ 71 was a hot bed of political turbulence, with anti-government demonstrations, violence, and the Naxalite movement at its peak. The slums too, according to Dr. Purnendu Jha (Mayor-in-Council, CMC, 1985-95, political activist} were centers of Naxalite activities and consequently police targets. In his view the slum improvement program was initiated to appease slum residents weary of police interference and state dominance.

ln fact, leftist thinking at the time, and even currently, ascribe the formation of CMDA and immediate initiation of slum improvement work as a politically motivated strategy of the ruling Congres.s government in view of the forthcoming assembly elections in 1972. Also, during this period the state was under the last of the three spells of Presidential rule in a short period of less than three years (Banetjee, 1991). According to Banerjee (1991:34), the Government of India (GOl) at this juncture felt it imperative to sanction grants for the city's development along the lines of the n~commendations of the Basic Development Plan (1966-86) made in 1966. CMDA was also formed in a hurry as a metro level development agency that would implement the Rs.l50 crores project schemes. A grant of Rs.lO crores was allocated for slum development (according to Mr. A.J. Ghosh, ex-directort Bustee Improvement cell, CMDA).

Extant literature reveals, however, that slum development has been in the agenda of metropolis development planning in the city since the drafting of the Basic Development Plan (BDP, 1966-86) by the Calcutta Metropolitan Planning Organization (CMPO) founded in 1961. lt may be worthwhile to mention here that the formation of CMPO was an outcome of a World Health Organisation report following a review of a cholera epidemic in Calcutta in 1958. The report emphasized that improvement of the sanitary environment of the city was the only solution to the problem. CMPO was formed to plan services that would help undermine these problems.

ln 1966, CMPO published the Basic Development f.lru.! that outlined a strategy for development and and action program relating to the improvement of civic infrastructure (Calcutta's Urban Future, Annexure 4:429). According to Dr. Moitreyee Bardhan Roy, an academician studying Calcutta's slum development, CMPO had also done a survey, prioritising fifteen slums for immedia~te development.

Prior to CMPO (which was sponsored by the Ford Foundation), there was no other organized multisectoral body to engage in comprehensive planning for the city. The Calcutta Improve:ment Trust (CIT) which existed since 1911 was perhaps the first major intervention in Calcutta's development. But CIT 's role, as Mr. Prasanta Sur (Mayor of CMC, 1968-70; Urban Development Minister, 1977-87 and Health Minister 1988-95) commented, was confined to 'beautifkation' and its renewal programs aimed at eviction of slums, rather than developing them.

RESEARCH Mr. Sur's interview also revealed that compared to CIT, the Calcutta Municipal Corporation

(CMC) founded in 1924, had more of an orientation towards slum development. The agency began its first slum development work in 1969 (in fact, Dt.Jha felt that CMDA was formed to curb the role of the left dominated CMC, the existing development agency responsible for whatever little infrastructure that existed in the slums till then). CMC, however, always faced a fund crunch and in 1969-70 the organization had a deficit budget of Rs.5 crores for the first time since its inception. This according to Mr.Sur was an indication that the municipal corporation alone could not handle the demands of a growing metropolis and required a body to handle both project planning and implementation.

Neither the CIT which was created with the primary objective of taking over the authority and responsibility of capital works form Calcutta Corporation without much concern for the economically weaker sections (Banerjee, 1991:3 0), nor the CMPO which was primarily a research­oriented planning institution were equipped to do this. CMDA was the answer.

Irrespective of the politics of the timing of CMDA 's formation, the fact remains that the Rs.IO crores project of slum 'sanitization' which CMDA began in 1971 has continued and grown. And despite many alterations, limitations, realizations of mistakes and policy changes it has evolved as perhaps the largest and longest running goverhment projects of sanitation services delivery to the urban poor.

Getting Started

CMDA distributed the Rs. 10 crores grant it received from the centre among CMC, PWD, CMPO and CMDA to 'sanitize' Calcutta slums. According to CMDA functionaries implementing the proj(~ct at the time, there was a strategic difference in implementation among the agencies in that CMC worked only in pockets, while PWD, instead of working inside slums developed roads, drains and so on outside slums leaving their schemes incomplete. CMDA on the other hand completed their projects ward-wise.

Vihen the money came in 1970-71 CMDA had no listing of exact number of slums in the city. This was a time when unemployment was quite widespread in the state. So it was not difficult for CMDA authorities to locate a group of unemployed engineers and engage them in a reconaissance survey of slums. Based on their survey a listing of slum clusters in each ward was made and the worst affected wards prioritized for work. There was, of course, some amount of political pressure in detennining the selections. But according to Mr. D.K.Roy (former Director General, Operations, CMDA)~ CMDA may have been given names of slums to work in but never asked illll to work in any. So when the wards were selected CMDA personnel made sure that all slums in that ward were covered. There is, however, some difference of opinion regarding the selection procedure and both an academician and NGO activist interviewed that preliminarily only slums in wards which had strong connections with the ruling Congress government were selected for development. Official statistics of CMD A reveal (Figure 1) that the highest number of latrines were built in the years between 1971-74 and the wardwise coverage quite comprehensive.

YEAR WISE LATRINE CONSTRUCTION BY CMDA ("1970 - 1 993)

Latrines ('000)

. a1ms

Research

7 ~------------------------------------~-----------------,

6

5

4

3

2

\ \ \ ------

\

0 ~

70-71-72-73-74-75-76-77-78-79-80-81-82-83-84-85-86-87-88-89-90-91-92-93

Year ~ource : CMDA Records

""" -"'' ~ \'

All . . . hCMDAfu . . . 1 d' . l . h RESEARCH our mtervtews wtt nct10nanes mvo ve m tmp ementat10n at t e tlme revealea that when CMDA began work in the initial phases, it mostly met with a group oflargely antagonistic and suspicious slum residents who sensed an ulterior motive in this governmental demonstration of benevolence. They were driven either by a fear of eviction or else by the doubt that CMDA represented police authorities who were collecting details of the slums to locate Naxalite hideouts. In fact implementation could not start for a year especially in areas of North Calcutta and Kidderpur in West Calcutta.

Both Mr. D.K.Roy who headed the group of engineers working for slum improvement in the seventies and Mr.Nikhilesh Bhattacharya, yet another executive engineer working in the slums at the time commented that when the surveys and mapping were on, it required a lot of convincing, explaining and introduction of bread and milk schemes through social workers and then slum representatives in several slums before one could actually do the engineering estimations. In many slums even that was not possible. ·

Then there was the problem of materials pilferage, which had to be handled sometimes by 'unofficiallly' paying off local Mafia groups. This 'teething trouble' continued through the seventies but development activities in the slums did not stop.

Mr. D.K. Roy also recollects that in the seventies, the BI cell was the only functioning sector of the CivlDA. He felt that the fact that CMDA' s BI work was emerging as the only developmental activity being initiated in West Bengal after a prolonged gap also gave a renewed verve to the employees. He proudly recollects that the enthusiasm was so intense that "no one left office before eight in the evening."

By 1977-78 about 9.62 lakhs slum population had been covered (CMDA Evaluation Report No. 132, 1981). By the 1980s, CMDA had become a familiar word in the slums and officials reportedly faced no more problems getting into them. Rather, according to functionaries interviewed. they were welcome. Additionally, politicians tried to capitalize on CMDAs positive image by being seen with them. Dr. Bardhan Roy also corroborated this aspect.

Changing Along The Way

While the project had a fixed set of norms vis-a-vis what was to be done (latrines, water points, roads, electric polls and so on), the process of execution, according to the CMDA functionaries interviewed, continually underwent changes as both practical and administrative problems were encountered. The following section provides a brief account of some of the significant changes introduced:

Initially contractors were tendered separately for different parts of the project. So, while one contractor would be commissioned for laying sewer lines another would be commissioned for doing the sam~~ for water. As a result when one contractor finished work, the next one shovelled up the roads leaving the slum lanes dug out almost perpetually and causing immense inconvenience to. the residents. As a remedy geographical tendering was introduced for all work except latrines so that a single contractor would systematically complete all the tasks in a slum.

. RESEARCH As far as latnne superstructures are concerned, the first few structures were made widi bricK:

and cement. This however, became problematic as:

With different contractors building the superstructures in different places spread across the city, monitoring and quality control could not be done easily

i i . Materials pilferage was rampant

The solution came in the shape of prefabricated hexagonal latrines designed by CMPO (Source: Mr.D.K.Roy's interview). It was decided that a set of contractors with factories which enabled pre­casting would be assigned the job. They would build the toilet superstructures in their factories which would then be loaded on trucks and set up in the slums. The fact that the toilet superstructures were being built in a few· selected factories, facilitated better monitoring and quality eontrol. The problem of materials pilferage was also tackled. Moreover, prefabricated superstructures turned out to be cheaper than brick and cement ones.

About 80% of the latrines built were septic tanks. The usual practise is to build the tanks on a space adjacent to the latrine superstructure. Septic tanks, of course take up substantial space which understandably is in short supply in the slums. The engineers decided to tackle this space problem by building the latrine superstructure on top of the septic tank in many places.

Initially the water pipes laid underground were made from PVC. As a result when the cast iron sewer pipes were laid beside the comparatively more fragile PVC, the latter cracked and leaked easily since within the narrow space available in the slum lanes the two types of pipes were bound to come in contact. Consequently, the material of the water pipe was changed to the more durable Cast Iron type.

Public standposts were initially set-up within clusters. Then CMC informed that it would be unable to supply such huge volume of water. Consequently, public standposts were installed in common spaces in the slums within the prescribed norm of ninety litres per capita per day.

With World Bank funding in 1977, one of the most significant changes took place in implerne:ntation in the form ot 'offsite development'. This involved integrating the slum level services, with the rest of the city. This involved broadening of pipes, augmentation of deep tube wells and so on. Prior to this, development was only onsite in that only the slums were being develop1ed in an isolated manner. Offsite linkage ensured more efficient functioning of the services. It also, however, raised the per-capita cost of the project.

By policy, CMDA was a Developing Authority responsible only for building the facilities which would be maintained by CMC. CMDA went ahead with the task, thinking, according to Mr.D.K. Roy, that CMDA was doing a favor to CMC by completing their tasks. In reality CMC' s tasks had only doubled. While CMDA came into being, CMC' s structure had remained the same. Within the given structure and funding situation, CMC was expected to start maintaining the huge number of capital assets that had suddenly been created. CMC of course, as Mr. Sur and Mr.A.J. Ghosh asserted did not comply.

RESEARCH · So when it came to handing over the assets created to CMC for maintenance, CMC refused to do so. CMC asserted that they would be unable to take over since:

1 . they had not been consulted when the assets were being created and had no idea of the details of the work that CMDA had done and

2. had no existing funds nor any possibility of getting much more (Dr. Purnendu Jha's interview and extant literature revealed that the slums had a three tier ownership structure wherein moneyed landowners leased out their land to intermediaries called Thika tenants. These thika tenants in tum, built the structures on the leased land and rented it out to the slum residents. With the Calcutta Thika Tenancy (Acquisition and Regulation) Act, 1981 introduced by the Left front government, private land ownership was abolished and the Government became the owner of the land. Also, while the Thika tenants continued to own the structures the actual resident's, that is tenants were protected against eviction and raising of rent. A property tax structure was also introduced. This tax structure evinced that when a Thika tenant's property valuation was less than Rs.300/- slhe did not have to pay any tax to CMC. Moreover, in slums with no infrastructural development activities, the tax payable would not exceed 15% of the total valuation. In slums which had undergone improvement through municipal agencies, the tax payable would not exceed 18% of the total valuation. Moreover, CMC sources reveal that the annual city budget of Calcutta is Rs.400 crores out of which Rs.l4 crores is spent on slum maintenance only. Again, while amount receivable from non slum areas is much higher than slum areas, taxable amount which can be collected from non slum areas in a financial year is 60% of the total amount which in slum areas come down to 40% (see Appendix for details on Taxation)) since at any given time, CMC can receive a maximum amount of 18% only on a valued property in a city slum.

Both Mr. D.K.Roy and Mr.Prasanta Sur recollected that in 1983, the CMC take over was orchestrated in a meeting by the then Urban development Minister (Mr.Prasanta Sur himself) to meet a precondition of loan sanctioning of the World Bank. But, consequently a practice evolved of consulting CMC on the task and officially documenting CMC's approval on the plans.

As far as technology is concerned, CMDA in the seventies and early eighties had no option other than septic tank construction in places where sewer connection was not possible. Later, many of the septic tank outlets were connected to sewers as and when possible. The septic tank technology did evolve as problematic mainly due to lack of maintenance, misuse (one borough engineer commented that some slum residents had built bathing areas on the septic tank causing soapy water to enter into the tanks and consequently killing the bacteria which activates decomposition of sludge) and expiry of design life.

RESEARCH In this context, connection of septic tanks to sewers evolved as one viable alternative while the

other was a change in technology in the early nineties to two-pit pour flush latrine.

Over the years as funding agencies changed from World Bank to ODA, there was a perceptible change in project planning and implementation. With ODA funding from 1991~92 service delivery through decentralised planning and implementation through local bodies gained primacy. Consequently, participatory planning and implementation and an integrated community development component was more formally introduced and incorporated in the project design. Local level reprsentatives like Coutlcilors and local political party units began to interact much more than before with CMOA, from the initial planning stages. According to Mr. Amit Mukherjee (Ex Community Development Co-ordinator) the community development aspect did not affect the speed of the infrastructural work in the slums. The participatory planning and implementation of infrastructure development however did take more time according to Mr. D.K.Roy.

But in general beneficiaries of the ODA phase seemed to be more aware of the technological functioning of their latrines than their counterparts from the earlier phases.

Overall, a review of the project process reflects that :

a) The project intended to sanitize slums through infrastructure building and actually did so, albeit some initial problems pertaining to slum entry.

b) The project design could not consider any existing role-model when it initiated infrastructure planning.

c) Scope of discussions with beneficiaries was not in-built in the project design up to the seventies and mid-eighties. But some informal discussions did take place. This was mainly dependent upon the individual engineers working in the respective slums. Later on, of course, a discussion process was in built into the project design.

Although still centralized, top-down and nann-driven, CMDA showed considerable flexibility in innovating ways and means to work in slums, adopt corrective measures when possible and evolve as a participatory implementing agency. According to Mr.D.K. Roy, having a semi-autonomous status helped, along with the fact that the secretary of CMDA, in the beginning years was a very dynamic and open person who could rise above formal rules to get work done.

CMC which now plays a significant role in maintaining the services particularly at the community and city levels, has been ridden with problems of under-staffing and fund-crunch compared to CMD A. The condition has remained relatively unchanged. According to a Borough engineer, CMC' s functioning has been undermined by its centralised structure and red-tapism, especially at the city level. Only the appearance of an elected official like the Councilor has induced some flexibility and space for local level decision-making in the linkage of household and community level activities.

RESEARCH

Briefly, the emerging Project rules are as follows:

*

*

*

*

Initiation in 1971 with Central Government funding as a centralised semi~autonomous government agency to execute five types (cemented roads, public standposts for potable water, street lights, sewer and sanitary latrines) of infrastructure development activities in the slums

Infrastructure development made possible with adoption of ice-breaking methods resulting in some deviating from formal project rules to gain entry into slums

World Bank funding received in 1977 and continued till 1988. Project rules changed to accommodate off-site along with existing on-site development along with geographical tendering and introduction of he8lth component in 1983. Also assets built till the early eighties formally handed over to CMC and the latter consulted before execution of project as a mle, from this stage

Funding received from the Central Government sponsored Minimum Needs Program from 1989-91. Slum development activities slowed down

ODA funding received from 1991. Community Development program, decentralised and participatory planning and implementation formally incorporated in project rules. Also a new te:chnology of two~pit pour flush latrines introduced

RESEARCH CHAPTER 3

RECONAISSANCE SURVEY FINDINGS

I. SLUM LEVEL

(A) Socio-economic & Ethnic Profile

In all, 124 slums spread across different parts of Calcutta metropolitan area were cowred in the survey. The population in these slums added up to 2, 33, 944 and the number of households to 24, 019. So the average number of persons per household is 9.74. Since, the basie objective of the study was to evaluate the sustainibility of CMDA built latrines, more latrines built in the earliest phase of the program (1970-1980) were selected. These were followed by those constructed in the second phase ( 1980-1990). Minimum number of latrines were chosen from the post 1990 phase because they were built too recently to warrant any evaluation (Table B gives a detailed profile of the 124 slums). The following sections elaborate our findings (Note that in all the Tables that are shown, the numbers given below are percentages).

Similar to mainstream profile in Calcutta, the predorrtinant group of people found were Hindus, and those originally from West Bengal. About a quarter were migrants from Bihar, whil,e a minority also came from Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Orissa and countries like Bangladesh and Nepal. The slums defined as Hindu or Muslim was on the basis of the religion of majority of residents dwelling there. Irrespective of their religion and place of origin however, most of the population fell in the lowest income category followed by the medium income group (Table 1). The income categories were defined on the basis of observations of living standards, for instance when a family owned a motor cycle and/or television and family members were in somt;, kind of service or business, it was defined as falling in the high income category, when it had very sparse belongings and the family members mainly earned from low paid casual jobs it was defined as being in the low income group.

T bl a r ' PI e 1 : Re i~ton, aceo ro · · &I rl~m ncome L eve RELIGION ORIGIN INCOME LEVEL Hindu 107 West Bengal 89 Low 61

86.3 71.8 49.2 Muslim 16 Bihar 29 Medium 41

12.9 23.4 33.1 Others 1 Others Others High 22

0.8 4.8 17.7 Total 124 Total 124 Total 124

100.0 100.0 100.0

1 Ll

B) Housing Type and Materials RESEARCH

The predominant housing type found was what is described as 'Classic' in official parlance. This housing type is defined by a group of huts/rooms sharing a courtyard, latrines and occasionally public standposts. Other types found were either single multi-family houses or else row housing. (Table la). Majority of the houses had brick walls and tiled roofs.

Table la : Housing Type & Materials

HOUSING TYPE MATERIALS Classic Cluster 107 Brick Wall & 86

86.3 Tiled Roofs 69.4 Row Housing 4 Brick Wall & 3

3.2 Concrete Roofs 2.4 Single Multi-Family Houses 11 Bamboo Walls & 11

8.9 Tiled Roofs 8.9 Others 2 Others 24

1.6 19.4 Total 124 Total 124

100.0 100.0

C) Intervention Pattern & Type

As mentioned in the previous section slums in the early years of intervention were selected by design to facilitate evaluation. Understandably, this is also revealed in the sample where majority of the slums had latrines built in the years between 1971-81. However, since the project was implemented in phases, majority of the slums also experienced a second intervention. (Table lb).

Table lb: Intervention Pattern INTERVENTION YEARS 1st INTERVENTION 2nd INTER VENTI ON Before 1971 12 -

9.7 1971-76 49 8

39.5 6.5 1977-81 23 12

18.5 9.7 1982-90 29 25

23.4 20.2

1991-96 11 23 8.9 18.5

Not Applicable - 56 45.2

Total 124 124

15

RESEARCH Typically, intervention involved construction of latrines, sewers, drains, public stand

posts for water, paved roads and electric posts. Second intervention took place when the building of these infrastructure were either incomplete due to lack of money in a particular phase, or else when some renovations were made in the form of widening pipes, connecting septic tank outlets to sewer line, augmenting deep tube-wells and so on.

A general observation of the level of latrine service found revealed that the majority of the latrines found were shared facilities built around classic' clusters and used by either landlords and/or tenants. The generic 'public' latrine was rarely found. Private latrines were found in houses where the landlord had not allowed CMDA either in fear of eviction, or else rebuilt CMDA latrines after finding them unsatisfactory. Service privies were also found in thn~e of the slums surveyed

D) Latrines: Technology & Access

In the 1970s, when the CMDA intervention started the technology of sanitary latrines were defined by two factors :

• A major part of the city was not sewered and • Slums were being developed as island, without integrating them with the city system -

since, the later aspect was more time-consuming and expensive.

As a result, in most cases septic tank emerged as the chosen technology in the conversion of service privies to sanitary. Later many of the septic tank outlets were connected to sewers as

a) the city sewerage system expanded and also b) as World Bank which funded the project from 1977, emphasized that the slum

infrastructure had to be integrated with the city system.

Consequently, 61.3% of the slums surveyed had septic tank technology although many of these has been connected to sewer lines in later years. Out of the 124, about three slums were found where service privies still existed in some household. Upon enquiry, residents replied that CMDA had left their work incomplete in these households promising to build the latrines later. In :some of the cases the owners did not fit in the target group as defined by CMDA.

16

RESEARCH

Overall however, majority of the households have access to latrines with the exception of few cases eg. Manmohan Bannerji Road (prohibition by landlord & bad engineering), Darapara and Canal Road (blocked pipes & overcrowding) and people rarely defecate in the open. In cases where access was less than 100%, the reasons were either incomplete construction, blockage, crowding or else prohibition of landlords. Also practice of open defecation was prevalent among small children (less than 5 years) in 43 (34%) slums. This however, was partly a matter of habit and not entirely dependent on latrine accessibility. Given this, one cannot discount the fact that there is considerable pressure of crowding as the ratio of latrines per person in the sample come to 1:39, exceeding the CMDA set norm at 1:25. Table 2, gives a profile of the technology, accessibility and level of open defecation in the slums.

Table 2 : Technology, Access to Latrines, Open Defecation

TECHNOLOGY

Septic Tank

Sewer

2 Pit Pour Flush

Total

76 61.3

41 33.1

7 5.6

124 1oo.o I

% HH WITH LATRINE ACCESS

100%

90%

80%

70%

50%··

<50%

99 79.8

18 14.5

2 1.6

1 0.8

3 2.4

1 0.8 124

100.0

OPEN DEFECATION Lot 2

1.6 Little 8

6.5 None 71

57.3 Only 43 Small 34.7 Children

124 100.0

1 7

RESEARCH E) Condition of Latrines, Drains & Water Supply

Given that sustainability of services is a crucial issue in this study, the working conditions of latrines and drains and the availability of water in the slums covered become largely significant. Our findings show that :

I. In about 50% of the slums latrines and drains work well, almost throughout the year (Table 3). This however, contradicts, the findings of the cluster level sample where 473 latrines were actually visited and 79.5% of them were found to be working fine. (Table 6). The former data is based more on the impressions of slum residents while the latter is recorded on the basis of actual visits. This discrepancy may be considered as an indicator of how people themselves hold impressions that undermine positive aspects of reality.

II. In general latrine buildings, pans and doors are in working condition and many of the latrines are reasonably clean. There were however several latrines which had bad odour, uncleaned pans and floor, broken doors and ceilings .

III. 97% of the household have access to water through public stand posts, although water is supplied only between two to six hours in majority of the households (Table 4).

IV. Low pressure and quality of water is a recurrent problem.

V. Non-working condition of septic tanks, blockage of pipes due to small diameter and inadequate water supply are also three of the other voiced grievances.

Table 3: Working Condition of Latrines & Drains: Overall Slum Profile

LATRINES DRAINS All Work Fine 62 All Work Fine 66

50.0 53.2 Some Work Fine 27 All-Work But Not Always 37

21.8 29.8 Some Do Not Work 26 Some Work Fine 6

21.0 4.8 None Work 9 Some Do Not Work 10

7.3 8.1 All Do Not Work 5

4.0 Total 124 Total 124

100.0 100.0

1 R

RESEARCH Table 4: Source & Supply of Water

SOURCE HOURS OF SUPPLY Public Stand Post 69 24 Hrs 5

55.6 4.0 Public Stand Post 52 12-6 Hrs 26 in Courtyards 41.9 21.0

3 6-2 Hrs 88 2.4 71.0

Not Applicable 3 2.4

Total 124 124 100.0 100.0

II. CLUSTER I HOUSEHOLD DYNAMICS OF LATRINE MAINTENANCE

While the slum level data provided more of a general level impressionistic description of the situation, the cluster/household level data was gathered to elicit more concrete dynamics of the working of latrines as shared facilities. The survey was conducted in slum clusters/households at the rate of two clusters/households per slum. One cluster was covered in slums which had less than five hundred residents.

A) Occupancy Structure and Location of Latrine

The occupancy and locational pattern of latrines found at the cluster/household level were as follows :

• Majority of the clusters were occupied by both landlords and tenants and the latrines located within clusters.

• The average years oftenancy of majority ofthe tenants exceeded 25 years (Table 5).

Overall, then landlords and tenants in our sample were mostly seen to have a long association with each other.

1 9

RESEARCH

Table 5: Landlord's Residence in Cluster, Average Years of Tenancy & Location of Latrines

LANDLORD'S RESIDENCE

Landlord lives in 171 cluster 73.1 Landlord does not 38 live in cluster 16.2 Landlord Stays 25 Nearby 10.7

Total 234 100.0

B) Condition of Latrines within Clusters

AVERAGE YEARS OF TENANCY 5 yrs

10 yrs

15 yrs

20 yrs

25 yrs

> 25 yrs

Not Applicable

Total

5 2.1

5 2.1 10

4.3 13

5.6 13

5.6 178

76.1 10

4.3 234

100. 0

LOCATION OF LATRlNES

Attached 212 to Cluster 90.6 Outside 20

8.5 Others 1

0.4 Not 1 Applicable 0.4

Total 234 100.

0

a) Majority ofthe latrines (79.5%) were found to be in working condition throughout the year (Table 6). Although older latrines (those built in 1970-1980) are inoperable for more number of days in a month, than the ones built in later years (Table 8).

b) However, blockage of pipes inside clusters was the most recurrent problem in cases of sewered latrines, followed by problems with overflowing septic tanks. These difficulties are most prevalent in latrines built in the decade between 1970-1980 (Table 7).

RESEARCH

c) Newer latrines built during the ODA phase have regular problems with breakage of the soft plywood doors.

CONSTRUC-TIONYEAR

1970-80

1981-85

1986-90

1991-95

1996+

Table 6 : No. of Days Latrines Remain Inoperable due to Blockage

DAYS FREQUENCY ·> 15 2

0.9 10- 15 4

1.7 5- 10 2

0.9 1 - 5 38

16.2 None 186

79.5 Not Applicable 2

0.9 Total 234

100.0

Table 7 : Maintenance Problems By Year Of Construction

LATRINES LATRINE CHAMBER PIPES BUILDING PAN FULL BLOCKED

INSIDE 31 43 58 66 22.6 31.4 42.3 48.2 5 6 6 12 14.7 17.6 17.6 35.3 1 4 7 21 2.9 11.8 20.6 61.8 4 2 6 3 40.0 20.0 60.0 30.0

2 13.3

PIPES BLOCKED OUTSIDE 10 7.3 1 2.9 1 2.9 2 20.0

. RESEARCH Table 8 : Latrme not Used due to Blockage by Year when Constructeu

YEAR > 15 DAYS 10-15 DAYS 5-10 DAYS 1-5 DAYS NONE TOTAL 1970-80 2 4 1 29 101 137

. 1.5 2.9 .7 21.2 73.7 58.5 1981-85 1 3 30 34

2.9 8.8 88.2 14.5 1986-90 3 31 34

8.8 91.2 14.5 1991-95 3 7 10

30.7 70.0 4.3 1996+ 14 15

93.3 6.4 Not Applicable 3 4

75.0 1.7 Total 2 4 2 38 186 234

.9 1.7 .9 16.2 79.5 100.0

C) Cleaning & Maintenance of Latrines

There are two facets to cleaning and maintenance oflatrines.

i) One refers to the usual frequent cleaning of the floors and pans of the latrines with water, broom, acid, bleaching powder, phenyl and so on.

ii) The other is related to superstructure repair and maintenance and technical cleaning tasks (septic tank, pipes) whi9h are done less frequently.

As far as cleaning and maintenance is concerned, the following findings ensue :

• Majority of the latrines are cleaned either daily or weekly by hired sweepers who are usually paid by both landlords and tenants.

• Hired sweepers also clean most ofthe septic tanks and blocked pans. CMC staffs reportedly cleaned septic tanks in only 1. 7% of the clusters. This is surprising since septic tank cleaning is a technical task and requires some tools and training to do the job. On in-depth probing it was found that, CMC staff in many instances clean the tanks privately and get paid for the service at arbitrary rates fixed by them.

• CMC personnel cleaned blocked pipes inside and outside the clusters most of time.

(Table 9)

RESEARCH • Coming now to the cost components, we found that while residents found it easy to report the monthly toilet cleaning cost, it was very difficult for them to account for annual maintenance cost of latrines since there was no such practice of annual maintenance. Instead rresidents could recall the expenditure last made on the latrine for maintenance within the last three years. Our findings on maintenance reveal this figure. We found that for all latrines covered the average daily cleaning cost per month came to Rs.41.74/- per latrine and the maintenance cost per toilet was Rs.259/-. When we differentiate the latrines on the basis of sewer and septice technologies, we found that cleaning and maintainenance of sewered latrines was less expensive (Rs.40.65/ for cleaning per latrine per month and Rs. 258/- for maintenance per latrine) than septic tank latrines (Rs.42.42/- for cleaning per latrine per month and Rs.297.11/ for maintenance per latrine). Of course, out of the 248 septic tanks found, 60 of them had never been cleaned. When questioned r.esidents replied that they either did not 'know' that they had to clean it, or else, they found it too expensive to clean .. The payment is mostly made by either both landlords & tenants or else only tenants.

• While more hired sweepers clean septic tanks, blocked pans and pipes inside clusters, CMC personnel do the same for pipes outside clusters (Table 10). Of course, here, many of the 'hired sweepers' cleaning septic tanks were also CMC personnel working privately after duty hours to make some extra money from cleaning of septic tanks.

As far as payment for these services are concerned, in most cases both o~ners and tenants pay for cleaning of septic tanks and blockage of pans, while the service for cleaning pipes inside and outside clusters is mostly provided free (Table 11).

• As far as ownership is concerned, majority of the respondents felt that landlords 'owned' latrines, although maintenance was done more often by tenants (Table 12).

• However, payment for cleaning and sense of ownership seem to be correlated in that when both tenant and landlords are perceived to have a sense of ownerhip they also pay for latrine maintenance together. When either of them are thought to be so the payment pattern is also similar (Table 13).

• Again, when landlords live within clusters, they are much more likely to pay for maintenance, while the tenants are more likely to pay on their own when landlords are not present.

RESEARCH

Thus, evaluation of the payment, ownership and usage pattern reveals that in most cases usage infuses a sense of ownership which in turn defines payment pattern.

Table 9 : Frequency of Usual Cleaning, Cleaning & Paying Agents

CLE~NGFREQUENCY CLEANED BY PAID BY Daily 75 Hired Sweeper 130 Landlord 61

32.1 55.6 26.1 Weekly 109 Self 40 Tenants 79

46.6 17.1 33.8 Monthly 41 Both 59 Both 89

17.5 25.2 38.0 >A Month 4 Not Applicable 5 Not 5

.•

1.7 2.1 Applicable 2.1 Not Applicable 5

2.1 Total 234 234 234

100.0 100.0 100.0

"}/J

RESEARCH

Table 10: Cleaning Agents for Septic Tanks, Pans, Pipes & Drains

EMPTYING SEPTIC TANK CLEANING BLOCKED PAN CLEANING DRAINS & PIPES INSIDE OUTSIDE

CMC 4 CMC 8 CMC 48 CMC 73 2.6 3.4 20.5 31.2

Hired 51 Hired 78 Hired 57 Hired 29 Sweeper 33.6 Sweeper 33.3 Sweep 24.4 Sweeper 12.4

er Sellf 15 Self 34 Self 31 Self 12

9.9 14.5 13.2 5.1 Hired 21 Hired 2 Hired 5 Hired -Sweeper & 13.8 Sweeper & .9 Sweep 2.1 Sweeper Self Self er& & Self

Self CMC & Self CMC & Self 1 CMC 1 CMC& 1

.4 & Self .4 Self .4 -CMC, Self& CMC, Self& 1 CMC, - CMC, -Hired Hired .4 Self& Self&

Hired Hired Not 61 Not 110 Not 92 Not 119 Applicable 40.1 Applicable 47.0 Applic 39.3 Applicab 50.9

able le Total 152 Total 234 Total 234 Total 234

100.0 100.0 100. 100.0 0

RESEARCH

Table 11 : Paying Agents for Cleaning of Septic Tanks, Pans, Pipes & Drains

EMPTYING SEPTIC TANK CLEANING BLOCKED PAN CLEANING DRAINS & PIPES INSIDE OUTSIDE

CMC 1 CMC 6 Free 40 Free 64 0.7 2.6 17.1 27.4

Landlord 18 Landlord 23 Landi 17 Landi 7 11.8 9.8 ord 7.3 ord 3.0

Tenant 22 Tenant 38 Tenan 35 Tenan 11 14.5 16.2 t 15.0 t 4.7

Both 48 Both 44 Both 34 Both 22 31.6 18.8 14.5 9.4

Not 63 Not 123 Not 108 Not 130 Applicable 41.5 Applicable 52.6 Applic 46.2 Applic 55.6

able able Total 152 Total 234 Total 234 Total 234

100.0 100.0 100. 100. 0 0

RESEARCH

Table 12 : Perception of Ownership & Maintenance of Latrines

LATRINE OWNERSHIP LATRINE MAINTAINER Landlord 148 Landlord 100

63.2 42.7 Tenant 137 Tenant 120

58.5 51.2 CMC 4 CMC 8

1.7 3.4 CMDA 56 CMDA 23

23.9 9.8 Note: these figures are based on the multiple responses of residents in the 234 clusters/households VIsited

Table 13 : Perception of Ownership by Paying Agents for Cleaning

OWNERSHIP LANDLORD TENANT BOTH Landlord 33 3 16

63.5 5.7 30.8 Tenant 1 59 3

1.6 93.7 4.8 Both Landlord & Tenant 8 4 41

15.1 7.5 77.4 CMDA 19 8 28

34.5 14.5 51.0 CMC - 2 2

50.0 50.0 Not Applicable - - 7

7.0 Total 61 76 97

100.0 100.0 100.0

?7

CHAPTER 4

CHOICE, PAYMENT AND LOCAL MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE : THE CALCUTTA CASE

RESEARCH

We have already mentioned that as part of our goal to understand the sustainability dynamics of latrines, we would also test the core hypotheses and some related assumptions of the SSA, related to choice, payment and local management of service at the community level. In order to achieve this, we presented a situational analysis of extant conditions of latrines in the 124 slums covered in the reconaissance survey in the previous chapter. An attempt to find explanations for these conditions, specifically, in the context of the core hypotheses of SSA brings us to this chapter where we present our findings mainly from the 19 slums studied for detailed explanations.

A) Choice of Service

With regard to choice of service, our case-studies dwelt on the following query areas:

1. General demand for the service 2. Design of toilets 3. Type of toilet technology 4. Number oftoilets 5. Location of toilets

In the context of the above, the following findings ensue:

a) All slums except two which had pre-existing sanitary toilets had service privies existing in them. Residents almost unanimously agreed that sanitary toilets were preferable to the stink and filth of service privies. Even in the 2 slums where sanitary toilets pre­existed, they had been in very bad condition both in terms of superstructure and drainage. So, when CMDA came in to built the toilets and sewers, the service was accepted after some initial apprehensions. It was clear, however, that the residents had never 'voiced' their demand in an organized manner. But once they received the service they were not opposed to using them.

b) Users were hardly ever consulted regarding technology, design and maintenance mechanism of toilets, especially with those made in the seventies and eighties.

c) Only in one slum in Kalimuddin Sarkar Lane, Ward 34 a model latrine was built first and people were told to use that and affirm their choice. However, there were no alternatives given.

28

RESEARCH

d) The only 'choice' that some residents exercised was refusal to accept the service. This happened mostly with landlords - who had their own sanitary facilities and did not think too highly of the subsidized service. In one instance, in Manmahon Mukherjee lane, landlords 'chose' to use the latrine exclusively, excluding the tenants who had to defecate in the open. During the reconaissance survey also, some clusters were found where landlords were either using the newer CMDA latrines or else keeping more latrines to themselves leaving the older and fewer ones for the tenants. Under these circumstances, the tenants could not exercise any choice regarding the type and number of latrines they could use.

e) Interestingly, although no choice oftechnology was given in the initial stage, some users in Darapara and 76 Tollygunje road where the septic tank technology has faltered considerably, have innovated an effective method of technology repair by connecting the over-flowing septic tank eftluent channel to the rain-water channels.

f) With emphasis on participatory planning under ODA, there seemed to be some talk with residents of slums covered (Mukundapur in our case study) in this phase regarding technology, although the technology that would be provided was pre-decided. Consequently, some residents voiced an option for septic tanks. But they were given to understand that two-pit pour flush would be better in the area (east Calcutta) they were settled in.

g) Perhaps the only element of 'choice' emerged vis-a-vis number and location oflatrines, especially the latter.

Of course, the number and location of the latrines were somewhat predetermined by the fact that : i) majority of the time existing service privies were being converted into sanitary ones ii) the intense scarcity of space in the slums hardly facilitated construction of additional latrines even when required and iii) CMDA had a prefixed norm of building one toilet per 25 persons.

Given that, some residents did report that CMDA had built 'extra' latrines for them on request provided it was technically feasible. Residents' choice of location was more frequently elicited. Of course there were exceptions, wherein some residents complained that their latrines were built in one place while they wanted them in another. CMDA representatives asserted their technical difficulties in doing so which, however, did not pacify these residents.

h) There was an instance, in Battikal slum, Ward 133 of individual slum residents paying CMDA extra money to make bigger septic tanks. But this was an exception rather than a norm.

29

RESEARCH

The findings on choice of service enumerated above revealed that:

a) Virtually no demand for sanitary service was voiced by the users and virtually no choice was given them vis-a-vis type and level of service (except location and in some instances number oflatrines). Yet we have found that 79.5% ofthe toilets sampled in clusters work. It seems therefore that sanitation services can sustain even without exercise of choice and consultations with users in situations where options are almost non-existent (in this instance, open defecation, service privies and/or non-working sanitary latrines).

b) Individual initiatives of executive engineers at the slum level facilitated exercise of user choice and some space for adaptibility and flexibility in terms of location, and number of latrines even within a strictly norm-driven set-up where certain conditions like design oflatrines, technology and number were fixed.

c) The users were not given a choice about service type and level, yet an overwhelming majority of the latrines surveyed were being used. It is not possible to establish whether the residents would have used the latrines more - had they been consulted about service type and level. Lack of choice, however, did not seem to affect usage, performance and consequently, sustainability.

Besides, serious maintenance problems like blockage and incomplete construction no other factors seemed to voluntarily deter residents from usage. In some cases, however, landlords, prevented tenants from using the latrines. Exercise of landlord's exclusive right of ownership by virtue of his/her status as landlord, in this case, determined usage.

30

I.

RESEARCH User Payment for Service

As far as payment for service was concerned, the study explored issues related to payment for:

1.

11.

Ill.

lV.

v. Vl.

Construction of latrines Day-to-day maintenance oflatrines Upkeep oflatrines superstructure and Sewer and water pipes within and outside household clusters Agents/ Agencies paying for service and maintenance Indirect payment

The findings related to the foregoing query areas reveal :

a) Latrines in the slums were constructed as part of a project whose policy was geared towards delivering sanitary services to the poor free of cost. This was implemented with the larger objective of 'sanitization' of slums considered environmentally threatening for the slum population and the city as a whole. Consequently, as Mr. D.K. Roy and Mr. Prasanta Sur both asserted, eliciting any payment from slum residents for construction of latrines or else, arranging for cost-recovery later was never a part of the project rules. In fact, as Mr. A.J. Ghosh, observed when services privies were being converted into sanitary ones throughout the city, beneficiaries of 'non-slum' areas, paid 25% of the construction cost. The slum residents, however, were exempt.

b) Usage of the service more or less ensured daily/weekly maintenance of the latrine. Consequently, the most recurrent pattern of payment emerged in the day-to-day maintenance of latrines. As discussed in Chapter 3, hired sweepers played a major role in this set up with latrine sharers contributing on a monthly basis to pay him/her to clean and sweep their latrines either daily or weekly and in some cases once a month. The regularity of the sweeper's visit was dependent upon affordability of the users. In some instances, residents themselves were found to clean the latrines when they were too poor to hire sweepers. Interestingly, however, in Canal road one of the slums included in the case study, majority of the residents used a set of community latrines which had residential CMC caretakers assigned to do the cleaning. Here, the residents did not arrange for cleaning since CMC was present, as per norm CMC personnel cleaned the latrines free of cost. These latrines were very dirty and unkempt and the caretaker complained of misuse. She also commented that upon asking the residents to keep the latrines clean, she had been told that, 'cleaning was the caretakers' job not the residents.' In fact, a tenant interviewed in this slum even suggested that since their community latrine was in such a dismal condition they were ready to pay some money and have a set-up like Sulabh Sauchalay. Thus it seems that payment for cleaning is much more regular and organized when a group of sharers use a latrine and/or a group of latrines. It is less likely to be so if the latrines are community I public latrines.

31

;_-_

~

RESEARCH c) Upkeep of septic tanks, also plays a vital role in enhancing the sustainability of latrines. Our

findings revealed that residents were hardly informed about the maintenance mechanism of septic tanks and the required frequency of cleaning them. Given that, there were distinctly two categories of users: those who cleaned septic tanks and those who did not. Among those who did clean septic tanks three types of cleaning agents were identified: a) Hired sweepers b) CMC staff c) CMC staff working privately out of duty hours in exchange of payment. Here too, among users who cleaned septic tanks, sharers of latrines were mostly ready to pay for cleaning of the tanks.

d) Two types of maintenance jobs were identified. The small maintenance jobs involved door repair work and cementing of pans while the big jobs entailed pan and door replacement, ceiling, wall and floor fixing. Residents were much more likely to pay for the small jobs than the big ones. Affordability was one factor inducing this behavior. Moreover the fact that CMC also replaced pans and doors at times, created an expectation of the same.

e) The other element at work in terms payment for superstructure was of-course the owner­tenant dynamics. Both owners and tenants were much more likely to pay for small jobs and day to day cleaning. This was also true for tenants, living in clusters with absentee landlords. But ' when it came to big repair jobs like replacing doors, making new latrines and so. on both tenants and landlords were much more reluctant to pay. Each had their own reasons for doing so. Tenants felt that big jobs would only enhance the landlords' assets and they did not care too much about doing so. The landlords too were not to interested since they a) either did not stay in the cluster or else b) they felt that the rents they were receiving were too low to deserve such investments.

f) More often than not CMC cleaned pipes inside and outside clusters. Consequently the service was free and residents reported paying only for a cup of tea for the CMC personnel who did the job. CMC was irregular in six out of the nineteen slums case-studied. In these places when the problem was small in that it required only prodding of choked pipes - hired sweepers were sometimes paid to do the job. If the problem was bigger than that, for instance, incorrect leveling, leaking pipes and so on, no investment was made. This was primarily due to the fact that residents did not think it affordable even at the level of collecting money from the slum as a whole.

g) Under a climate of free service and wide disparity of income levels, residents did not seem to be inclined to spend more than what they were doing now. According to landlords they were already paying taxes to CMC (CMC records revealed that in the slums surveyed, landlords paid at a rate not exceeding 18% of the valued price of the property. Also, as Annexure XVI will show, only 40% of the taxes receivable can be collected from slum areas). While tenants felt that they did not 'own' the toilets legally and consequently could not 'pay' more than wh~t they were doing now.

32

RESEARCH

These findings show that :

a) Even though the communities received services without paying for them, they have developed a sense of "ownership" which is not necessarily 'legal' ownership. It is a sense of ownership that comes from regular usage of a service facility, within ones cluster. This sense of 'ownership from usage' is also likely to induce proper use and maintenance of the facilities. Moreover, this sense of ownership was more prevalent in case of toilets located within clusters, compared to community toilets which did not have fixed and identified number of users. Thus community latrines in Keshab Chandra Street, Tollygunje Road and Canal Road were much less maintained than the cluster latrines.

i

b) We sampled 10 non-slum households in wards where slums had been s~rveyed to find out differences in costs of septic tank cleaning if any between slum and non-slum households. No difference was found in the costs. So at least from this finding we have no space to assert that it is feasible to charge the service irrespective of what is being charged for the rest of the city.

c) Undoubtedly, CMC operated with the tax-payers money, but hardly anything came from the slums (Appendix XVI) whose tax rates were also subsidized. Besides, most of the CMC services are free (like in cases of cleaning pipes). Overall, then, only limited payment was received by CMC, indirect taxation from property was subsidized and not properly enforced. Formal septic tank cleaning by CMC was also rare. Yet CMC seemed to be responsive to maintenance needs of most slums. Thus lack of user payment did not seem to affect accountability of the agency.

d) When it comes to major technical and engineering operation and maintenance task, sustainability of service is largely dependent on agency performance.

C) Local Management of Service

With regard to local management of service, we identified managerial operations at the following levels:

a) Toilet cleaning b)Toilet Repair c)Septic tank cleaning and d)cleaning of pipes inside clusters at the cluster level and e)cleaning of pipes outside clusters at the community level the following factors were considered.

a) Incidence of community level management b) Aspects, level and nature of local management c) Political dimension of slum level management d) Key actors involved in local management e) Future possibilities of local management

33

RESEARCH The following findings emanated from analysis of the above issues:

a) Before delving into the issue oflocal management of (latrine) services in the slums, we will first discuss the operational dynamics of"community" which evolved in the study. There are two facets to this dynamics. At one level, the slum operates as a community in times of ad hoc exigencies like death of a resident, wedding ceremony, etc. However, when it comes to daily management and/or maintenance of the services, the sharers of the facility (usually, cluster residents), rather than the entire slum, emerged and acted as a 'community'. In fact, the incidence of the slum acting as a community as a whole in the management of services is quite rare.

b) Management of latrine services at the cluster level generally involved: a) daily/weekly cleaning either by residents or hired sweepers, b) paying of the hired sweepers, c) buying/paying for cleaning equipment like broom and acid, d) organizing mason/carpenter to repair toilet building, floor, pan or door, e) requisitioning CMC or hiring sweeper to clean up the septic tank, or clear an internal drain blockage, etc. or else, residents arranging to clean the tanks on their own, in a few cases.

c) The ward councilor, local political party unit or else party worker are the political representatives found to be involved, although indirectly, in the local management of sanitary services in the slums. Though the councilor is a ward representative, his/her role often emerged crucial in slum level maintenance. In 12 out of the 19 case-studied slums the ward councilor was easily accessible to the residents. However, more than accessibility, the effective performance, specifically the lobbying and fund-raising ability of the councilor vis­a-vis his/her borough, was more important. A number of cases revealed that the councilor's enthusiasm and sincerity contributed to his/her efficacy as a catalyst between the CMC and the residents. Also, in five instances, residents only reported to the party worker/unit instead of going directly to CMC as per rule. The party worker/unit did the needful at the CMC level. As CMC consists of elected officials, this political dimension often . proved advantageous for the maintenance of services to the beneficiaries.

d) Thus there is evidence to suggest that a relatively semi-autonomous local management of services exists in the context of Calcutta slums. However this management has different levels and nuances. At the cluster and/or household level the units seem to function autonomously in the daily/weekly upkeep of the sanitary services. This is a common feature in the slums. Here, the sharers of services come together to play the key role.

e) At the community level, the local councilor, political party worker and/or unit play significant roles in the management of services. Among these, the Councilor's role emerges the most crucial as he/she can exercise autonomy and use the discretio1;1ary fund available to hi~ for any slum level development that he thinks is required and lob\)y at the borough for funds for his ward.

34

RESEARCH

t) The study further reveals that the community level management (i.e. councilor's or political party workers' roles) assumes greater significance in the context of heavy maintenance tasks.

g) The borough level functioning of CMC in the management of services is found to be the more centralized than its ward level structure.

h) Only persons with political affiliations played significant roles in management particularly at the community level.

The above findings show that:

a) A household/cluster level management structure of shared facilities could be identified and it was found to be relatively uniform across different parts of the city.

b) Community level management emerged successful only when the Councilor and/or local political party worker and/or the local political party unit could effectively lobby CMC.

c) Slum residents themselves, did not seem too enthusiastic to take up community level management of sanitary services. In all cases they reported lack of time to do so. Shared toilet facilities functioned well only when the cost of maintenance was relatively low, engineering more or less accurate and paid external help was easily available.

35

RESEARCH

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS

This study had set out to analyze the dynamics of sustainability of sanitary latrines built by CMDA in about 2400 slums of Calcutta under the CUDP program which has been ongoing for the past twenty five years. Our aim was to test the core hypotheses and some of the related assumptions of the SSA regarding the relationship between sustainability of sanitation service for the urban poor and choice, payment and local management of the service. We felt that an understanding of the dynamics of sustainability of CMDA built latrines in the slum of Calcutta would help us address the above issues.

In order to attain these objectives, we designed both Project and Community level analysis. At the project level, we conducted Interviews with functionaries of CMDA and CMC involved in planning and implementation along with NGO representatives and academicians knowledgeable about the project. At the community level we carried out a reconaissance survey of 124 slums whe:re CMDA had build latrines over-representing those slums where work was carried out in the sevcmties. Additionally we conducted case studies of 19 slums selected from the 124 preliminarily surveyed.

When a latrine could be used throughout the year we took it as an indication that the service was sustaining. This was found in 79.5% of the 473 latrines surveyed. Of course, the fact that the latrines were being used throughout the year does not indicate that they were found to be without problems of cleanliness, overflowing sewers and pans, broken doors, walls and ceilings, over-filled septic tanks and inadequate water supply. With a 1 :40 toilet to user ratio these problems are perhaps bound to surface.

Nevertheless, given the sustainability (within our definition) of majority of latrines surveyed, we explored the dynamics of choice, payment and management of the toilets and the project rules, which, we assume affect the former elements.

Our main findings are as follows:

* As far as project rules are concerned, both CMDA and CMC have centralized and norm driven structures in which delivery of subsidized services to the slum residents is an integral aspect

* CMDA plans and implements its slum development activities in a target-oriented and supply drive:n set up. At the same time however, the agency has provided space for its implementors to innovate and exercise flexibility when the situation demanded. Also, throughout the period of proje:ct implementation in slums, the agency has tried to learn from past mistakes and introduce new changes based on this learning. Moreover, over the years, CMDA has also made policy changes and is currently trying evolve as a participatory planning and implementing agency.

36

RESEARCH * With regard to choice our findings revealed that users had virtually no control over decisions regarding type and level of service. · The decisions taken were mostly centralized and norm based. Yet this did not seem to affect sustainability in this case mainly due to the fact that existing alternatives to CMDA built latrines were open defecation, service privies and non-working sanitary latrines. Compared to these, CMDA latrines were the best possible option.

* As far as payment is concerned, users did seem to pay substantially for cleaning and maintenance. But the fact that they were paying did not seem to increase sense of ownership. Rather the need to use the facility and consequently continuous use of the facility seemed to generate payment and in many cases a sense of ownership.

Also, there was no evidence to substantiate that user payment for service was positively related to agency performance. Users did not pay during construction of latrines, nor were there any mechanism for cost recovery. · CMDNs service had been provided free of cost. Moreover, except for septic tank cleaning, CMC which is the agency responsible for maintenance of community level facilities also provided service free of cost. Of course, CMC ·received indirect payment through taxes. But that too is subsidized and not fully recoverable.

In this case, positive agency performance seemed to be mostly related to the effective role of the Councilor an elected official of CMC and/or the local political party/leader in close touch with the Councilor. An effective Councilor, we found, is instrumental in making CMC work in slums in his/her ward.

* The SSA hypotheses on local management of service states that independent management structures at the household, community and city levels increases sustainability while a unified and centralized management structure does not.

We did find a relatively autonomous management structure at the household level in tasks related to maintenance. Here the nature of relationship between owners and tenants and relationship among tenants where landlords were absent were the important factores determining effective maintenance. However, there was some confusion regarding the concept of ownership of latrines. According to slum residents when CMDA built the latrines they were not clearly told who should maintain them. So even when tenants were paying for maintenance in many cases it was done grudgingly and the notion that 11CMC should have done it" is still quite prevalent. This notion is further strengthened by the fact that some Councilors were found paying for fixing new toilet doors and pans in cluster latrines. This raised expectations, created confusions about ownership and perpetuated the notion that CMC was responsible for cluster level toilet maintenance and repair.

37

RESEARCH

At the community level however, no such management structures were found. Rather an effective Councilor and a vocal political party/leader seemed to be crucial for management at this level.

Overall, we found that CMDA's project has sustained under conditions that do not entirely vallidate the SSA hypotheses. The Calcutta case therefore reveals aspects which would help refine th(~ SSA.

Given these findings we must also mention here that the service faltered substantially in three slums and moderately in seven slums selected for the case study. The mains reasons behind the failure of services were:

a) Faulty engineering typified ·by installation of too narrow sewerage pipes causing frequent blockage.

b) Usage of septic tanks after expiry of design life and absence of cleaning of the same. c) Ineffective Councilor failing to expedite CMC's arrival in the slums when required and d) Conflict between owners and tenants affecting maintenance and usage

Thus the Calcutta case reveals that when norm-driven agencies become flexible within a given rule regime and political representatives are vocal, a sanitation delivery service is likely to become more sustainable. When it is a complete failure, there are likely to be major technical loopholes, dearth of good water supply and apathetic political personnel.

38

TAIIE I RESEARCH

WAD IIIII IIIIEIIIII PIIPII liCINiliCY ISHmDDI WIAJ liNE

34 I U.N. SING lANE 7i w IEWEI-P.II 1111 1111 112 f/IAI.ItPR lANE 1 Iii IIPTICJANI lilt -73 3111110 CUIEIJII SJ.W.-21 ;a IU IEWEI·P•u 1111 TBEI.WATEI.IDT 14 5 ANIII UJ UAI 2 111 IEWEI-PIU 1111 TIIEJ.WATEI.UCIJ 11 1a1EJ SliM Ul 310 IEPJICTANI 1111 TIIEIJIAit IIU.IITIANE 2 211 IEWfi-Pm 1111 11m li 31/IC lliiAlftiNCE liT IANE.CAl-11 1 41 IIPTICTANI 1111 TIIEI I~ MlllAIIAD Ui 1111 IEPTICTANI 1111 TII.EI If 11 CIEIIA lUI. W.-27 Iii 1111 IEWEI-PIEI 1171 TIIEI.UHT I! IHCIOIAU 4i ill IEWEI- PIPEI 1171 TIIEI IH 11TIUYCINCEUtiiTU 71 ill IEPTICTANI 1111 TIIEI,WAIEI 74 8 PIJAMIAI UITU lANE Ill .I IEWEI-P.EI 1111 TIIEI 71i CANR IUIIIITU 141 iiU IEPliCTANI 1111 TllEI n 4•111lllllCil-H 14 4il IEWEI-PIEI 1172 TIIEI.WiliUIIJ II! UNIIUAIIITEE D. W-21 n 311 IEPJICTANI 1172 PUIMBfUIIT 4 li/2 IRIA PAU Ill 1211 IEWEI-PIU 1112 TIIEI 717IWI UIINII.ANE 13 II IEPliCTINI 1m TIIEI.Wilii 71 UnlltiiiiElANE.Cil-fi il 3il IEPliCJANI 1172 TBETBIT 11114/IITill_.D.CII.-= • a IEWEI-Pm 1112 TllEI.WITWIIEMEIIl U WITIUYHNCfD.CII.-H II II IEWEI-PIU 1172 TIIEI II UJ lUIAilDPAliANWEE lAND 11 11 IEPliCTANI 1m TIIET.Wilii II 112 TIUYIRE D. CAl-21 il w IIPTICTANI 1112 TIIEI.Wilii li 73 UZIIIUI. W-21 il 251 IEWEI-PIU 1112 TIIEI.WAJEI.PIIIMINJ 7i IIIPIJAli.ANE IIITU u ... IIPTICTINI 1112 11m 7i NIIYI BUIST. MINIIME 311 1111 IIPTICTINI 1m TIIEI 71 D MAYIIIANJ II lUI Iiiii IEPJICTANI lm TlllT.Wilii 77 111111111 u 1111 IIIII IEPTITINI 1173 TIIEI.Wilii 71 IBM PIU lANE • 711 IIPTICTANI II]; DIR.WITEI I l!7 /llTJUI. CAl-f a 2il IEPTITINI 1113 TllEI I I UUIIICAN liHl W-2 47 2H SEPIITINI 1113 TIIEI li 2411111CUNIIUIIW.IN.W-f Ul IEII IEPTITINI. 1m TIIEI.WITEI.I.IIT ammcac.u.w-v

Hll -· IEPllCTINf 1173 NICIMMOO

U4711ZUII Ill 141 IEWEI- PIPEI 1174 PIIDBJBIT 111/H.MINIIUPIIII!NilANE.W-H a m IEWEI- PIPEI 1174 TIIET.WI11l.LIIT a Ia IIIWAll MINIII. D. W-H 47 • IIPTICTINI 1114 TIIEf.WilD 141/IIIDCIAIIIPI.UD.W-2 II m IIPTICTINI 1m 1111 II W4111tPII.U.W-ft II n IEWEI-PIU ll7i 11l£f 21lliMIUINIImli_,.UIANE I 211 IEWEI-flfl 117i NICIBENT a :r Nl811CAN limE HI - IEPmTANI 117i -IIUU..UMBIIUf lANE.CII.-2 i D IEPTITINI 1m TIIEI II 47/1/A UYIMIIZAIIT. W-4 • 4IH lfPIIliNI ll1i Tllfl.PimtfNf a 2: IIUYCiftCE PIICf Elll. W -II Iii 4il .DEI-PIEI ll7i 11l£f A U/1-IIAUICIUYII.INUil-H 12 71 IEWEI-PIU ll7i TIIITBIT

39

WIIU SliM IIISEIIliS PIIPLE liCINiliSY IST-INliiiiN WUTIINI RESEARCH

=14 11!/1/!llllliSUTA MAIN II !I Ill SEPTICTANI 1175 TIIO 35 NAUIIAUN IISTII.IIlMD HI 1111 SIWII-P.EI 1175 TIRO a 1/IIITAN llllllCAU u VI SIPTICTANI 1171 TIIO 35 Ill PANCUNAN IIIII lANI 41 ~II SEPTITANI 1171 NICIMMENT II !t'llTJIAUAl-! i5 ill SEPTITINI 1171 TIIO 4 11/U.TJIU.W-! ii 41il SEPTICTANI 1171 TlllOIAIIIENT 7! 41 CIIII.IIII.IEE II. Cll-H II 41il SEWEI-.. EI 1171 Tlm.WATWAIEMENT 117 ~~.lM.NAIIAIII. Cll-41 ! II SEPTICTANI 1171 Tlm.WATII II !fi IIMIIPAII lANE [USIAJ Cll-41 n 171 SEPTICTANI 1171 TIRO li ~51ANAMAU CIITTIIJH H.CIH 41 ~~~ SEPliCTANI 1171 TlllOJU 14 14 WIMAN Ill IICIIII. W-H II II! SEWII-PfU 1171 TIIO 114 15 ANJIMIN Ill IECIM II. W -H 4 !I SEPTICTANI 1171 Tim II 7111SINAllllll lUI. CIH 141 ifill IEPTICTINI 1111 TIIO •• I PAUliNO 1111. W-lfi fill filii IEPTITINI 1111 IIIlO il a -IIIII. W-JI H IU SEPTICTINI 1111 TIILO ;r II UIAW MHU STIHT. W-J Ill •• SEWII-P.U 1111 Tlm.WA1WIUT 87/IPUIIPURlANE.W-H lfi 411 IEWII- PIPEI 1111 TIIO.WITEI.I.UT l1l D MNNAUIIIQ W-14 Vi ~Ill SIWII-PfU 1111 Tlm.IU 1141/IITIHYUNCEIIQW-H !I l!fi SEPTITINI 1117 TIIO,WITII !I I UIINATIIEY liD !II !fill SEWII-PIU 1111 Tim Ill I lillY -·lANE. Cll-4 141 711 SEPlJCTANI 11n um K IIIIMINIIAZill!! IELniTA MJI !il 1!11 SEPlJCTINI 1111 Tim 17IMIINANIICILINY lfi lfi SEPlJCTINI 1171 DllO,WITII u 1!11 CIETlA liD ~· I. SEPlJCTINI 1111 DIO,WilD II !UINNIUIIIQ W-17 71i 711 IEWII-PfEI 1111 um II ~WIMANII.W-14 175 !Ill SEWII-PIU 1111 DllO.WilD II 4111 UTII-111& U Iii • SEWII-PfEI 1111 TIIO,WilD 1i !II~ MAIM IIllO H. CIHI 41 ID SEWII-PfU IIU Tlm.WITWIIEMENT 1m WI~ SIIIAI ST,W-4 IU lUI SEWEI-PIU lUI um Iii IUIAPIIA IUTEE I IIi. IEPTITINI I. um 1'1. 41i/lll CIUIAIIIIA 11. Cll-H Iii • IEWII-,.u 1111 DllOJ.IIT IIIRUPR CILINY Iii 151 SEWEI-PfU 1111 TlllO.WilD D !II UIINATIIEY U Iii !il SEWEI-P.U 1111 Tim 1'1. WllliWIIIINIE II. W-17 II iii IEPTITINI 1111 um II ~/4 MBIWH Pill lANE. W-H I ~I SEPlJCTINI 1111 Dm.Willl !I lUDWlN Ill MIRITl MINIDII !ill - SEPliCTINI 1111 um IIi WI IIllA 1111. W-21 II • IEWII-PfU lUI um ~~ UUIIUTEE !MilANI lfi - SEPlJCTINI 1111 -411! IWI SEN ST. W-1 H !II SEWII-PfD lUI um Ill IIIli STIHT, Cll-11 II Iii SEWEI-P.U 1111 Dm,WilD fl H/1/HISWUUNULYLINE ~ H SEPlJCTINI 1111 Dm,Willl 17 2111111 Dill liNE il !II SEPTICTINI 11ft Dm AI I CINil EDT U,CII.-Ii ill - IEPTITINI IU! Dm U IDNIIIEI.IANUMDII.W-11 • -· SEPTITINI 11ft Dm

40

WAD SliM IIISEIIliS PEIPIE JECIIIliCY ISHtmnll WUIUII RESEARCH

15 25111111 A.P llUUAl-1 u 151 SEPliCIANI Ill! Iliff II CIYAUCAN ill !ill SEPIJ:TANI Ill! Iliff !I 41 CANAl EAST lUI M lUI SEmCTANI Ill! lUI 34 UliMUIIf WUiliNE Ill 4il SEPllCTANI Ill! nm M IA.N.SINU liNE II Ill SEmCTANI IU! Tim 41111/11ESAI SEN ST. CAl-l ali ~- SEWEI-"0 Ill~ WATEI.llfE ;; ! UMMIUN MAUICI C. liNE. CAI-14 !II I!D SEPTICTANI 111; Iliff II I UYIMPIIR mm Ill ID SEWEI-PII'O 1114 lUI Ill AUIWAI DilEN limE IU !II SEPTICTANI llli Tim IIIMR-RCII.INY 15D I. TWI PIJ liTH« IIIIi PAIEMINT.IIIT ! OPAl CUNIU DIE liNf. CAI-il 1!1 lUI SEPTICTANI 1111 -14 141 IAMIIIUI Z! 151 SEPTICTANI 1111 11I.ET II !VIIIAMINI 01111111, CAl-liZ 141 751 SEWEI-PII'O ,,. lUI A CANAl um 1111 Ill iii SEPIJ:TANI 1111 Iliff 31 PANCUNAN Dill liNE !II I!U SEPTICTANI 1111 Iliff A • MIIAI All liNE 411 Dll SEPIJ:TANI 1111 Iliff II U PINCIANAN .IAIAII. CAI-!1 1!1 I. SEPTICTANI 1111 TIIET 34 i! CIAI.Pim 1111 CAI-11 H 151 IEPTICTANI 1111 Iliff 33 ZiA IIIESI 11111111. CAl-14 HI liD SEPTICTANI 1111 Tllff 34 H CIAIIPIM lUI. CAl-li 57 • SEPIJ:TANI IU7 Iliff 114 34 CANAl WI IUl CAl-54 IU I5U SEPTICTINI 1111 Tllff 31 H NUIDJANCI MAIN 1111 CAI-11 II! Ill IEPTICTANI 1111 TIIIET :JI 41 NUIEIJANCI Mllfltll CAI-11 211 7A IEPTICTANI 1111 Tllff U IIM8IINMilliCI CIDIN IN. CAI-14 12 ~II SEPIICTANI 1111 TIIET

1117 CllllatllllmE, CAl-53 141 • IEPIJ:TANI 1111 TIIET 14 !liP IARINIICIII. Cll-17 1!1 Ill JWI PIJ liJIINE .I PAVEMENT.UCIT Jl4 II NlllmE 411 HH IEWEI-,.0 IHI TIIET munmwm !Ill HID IEPJITINI 1111 TlllR Ill • TlllB-11. CAI-!1 Ill 411 IEPTICTANI -~ Tllff.WilWIIT • PIIIICULCAI-71 I I TWI PIJ 111111 lift WATWN 17 114 SWRBEI.ANf. CAI-4! Ill IHI lWIPIJllllll - TIIIET.WA1WIIEMENT • IIIIJI PIIIICIAl CANEI.II. CAI-71 HI lUI lWI PIJ llllltE IU4 WITEI,llfE 1114 A.IINJIII, CAI-75 I H IEWEI-PJO - WAlD.lll 111 PUWIIISTEEITIIIIUW limE II 511 IEPIJ:TINI IIIIi WITEIJIOID 11 H/1--TIIA D. CAI-4! g H IEPliCTANI - Tim .PAIEMENT U U/3 IUENIII DYI.ANf. CAI-41 I I Tfll PIJ llllll - Tim Ill EAST PIIIICIAI CANEID. CAI-71 I I lWI PIJ llllltl - TIID

41