-, FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA RURAL ACCESS AND MOBILITY PROJECT (RAMP)

FINAL REPORT CONSULTANCY SERVICES FOR STUDY TO PRIORITIZE INTERVENTION AREAS IN KADUNA STATE - 1AND TO SELECT THE INITIAL ROAD PROGRAM IN SUPPORT OF SUCH PRIORITIZED AREAS

STATE COORDINATING OFFICE: - NATIONAL COORDINATING OFFICE: Federal Project Management Unit (FPMU) State Project Implementation Unit (SPIU) 'Federal Department of Rural Development C/O State Ministry of Works & Transport Kaduna. - NAIC House, Plot 590, Zone AO, Airport Road Central Area, Abuja. 3O Q5 L Tel: 234-09-2349134 Fax: 234-09-2340802 CONSULTANT:. -~L Ark Consult Ltd Ark Suites, 4th Floor, NIDB House 18 Muhammadu Buhari Way Kaduna.p +Q q Tel: 062-2 14868, 08033206358 E-mail: [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction 1 Scope and Procedures of the Study 1 Deliverables of the Study 1 Methodology 2 Outcome of the Study 2 Conclusion 5

CHAPTER 1: PREAMBLE 1.0 Introduction 6 1.1 About Ark Consult 6 1.2 The Rural Access and Mobility Project (RAMP) 7 1.3 Terms of Reference 10 1.3.1 Scope of Consultancy Services 10 1.3.2 Criteria for Prioritization of Intervention Areas 13 1.4 About the Report 13

CHAPTER 2: KADUNA STATE 2.0 Brief About Kaduna State 15 2.1 The Kaduna State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy 34 (KADSEEDS) 2.1.1 Roads Development 35 2.1.2 Rural and Community Development 36 2.1.3 Administrative Structure for Roads Development & Maintenance 36

CHAPTER 3: IDENTIFICATION & PRIORITIZATION OF INTERVENTION AREAS 3.0 Introduction 40 3.1 Approach to Studies 40 3.2.1 Data Collection Approaches 43 3.2.2 Delineation of Intervention Areas 43 3.2.3 Computation of Criteria Values for Intervention Area 47 3.2.4 Description of Criteria for Scoring of Intervention Areas 65 3.2.5 Ranking and Selection of the Priority of Intervention Areas 72 3.3 The Participatory Planning Approach 76 3.3.1.2 Workshop Proceedings 77 3.4 Questionnaire Survey 77 3.5 Traffic Count Survey 77

CHAPTER 4: RURAL TRAVEL AND MOBILITY PATTERN 4.0 Introduction 78 4.1 Socio-Economic Characteristics of Rural Dwellers 78 4.2 Analysis of Existing Means of Rural Mobility 82 4.3 Rural Trip Purposes 83 4.4 Average Daily Cost for Various Travel Purposes 85 4.5 Visual Road Condition Survey / Road Access Safety Audit 85 4.6 Traffic Count 87

CHAPTER 5: IDENTIFICATION, SELECTION AND COSTING OF LINKS IN THE PRIORITIZED INTERVENTION AREAS 5.0 Procedure and Methods 90 5.1 Prioritization of Links in Intervention Areas and their Estimated Costs 90 5.1.1 Prioritization of Links 90 5.2 Road Pavement 91 5.3 Drainage Structures 91 5.4 Estimated Costs 91 5.4.1 Maintenance Costs 91 5.4.2 Estimated Total Costs 92

CHAPTER 6: RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION 6.0 Recommendations 102

ANNEXURES 103

1. Questionnaire 1 2. Questionnaire 2 3. Questionnaire 3 4. Traffic Survey Form 5. Proceedings of Stakeholders Workshop PLATES 104

* PLATE 1 - MALLAMAWA - KWATE - KAKURA ROAD

PLATE 2 - DOGO DAWA- UNGWAR DANKO ROAD

PLATE 3 - KAGARKO - AKOTU - KUSE MAKARANTA - DENDE - KUSIN - KUDIRI

PLATE 4 - FADAN KAGOMA - UrTSABTA - JAGINDI ROAD

PLATE 5 - UITSABTA - BAKIN KOGI - DANGOMA - GODOGODO ROAD

PLATE 6 - UNWAKILI- U/ROHOGO - SAGWAZA ROAD

PLATE 7 - FADAN KAMANTAN - ZUTURUNG - YANGAL RAOD

PLATE 8 - KUTUL CROSSING - MARO ROAD LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 - Map of Nigeria showing Kaduna State 15 Figure 2 - Map of Kaduna State showing the 23 Local Government Areas and their 17 Headquarters Figure 2.1 - Population and Population Density in LGAs of Kaduna State 21 Figure 2.2 - Number of Public Primary and Post Primary Schools and School 23 Enrolment in LGAs of Kaduna State Figure 2.3 - Number of Health Facilities in LGAs of Kaduna State 25 Figure 2.4 - Number of Boreholes in LGAs of Kaduna State 27 Figure 2.5 - Number of Markets in LGAs of Kaduna State 29 Figure 2.6 - Agricultural Outputs in LGAs of Kaduna State 31

- Figure 2.7 - Poverty Index in LGAs of Kaduna State 33 Figure 2.8 Organogram of Kaduna State Ministry of Works & Transport 38 Figure 2.9 KAPWA 39 Figure 3.1 Approach to Study 42 Figure 3.2 - Map of Kaduna State showing the Intervention Areas 46 Figure 3.3 - Population and Population Density in Intervention Areas 48 Figure 3.4 - Number of Public Primary and Post Primary Schools and School 50 Enrolment in Intervention Areas Figure 3.5 - Number of Primary Health Facilities in Intervention Areas 52 Figure 3.6 - Number of Boreholes in Intervention Areas 54 Figure 3.7 - Number of Markets in Intervention Areas 56 Figure 3.8 - Agricultural Output in Intervention Areas 58 Figure 3.9 - Kaduna State Poverty Index by LGAs (Baseline = 4.00) in 60 Intervention Areas Figure 3.10 - Fadama Farm / Irrigation Projects in Intervention Areas 62 Figure 3.11 - Number of Cottage Industries in Intervention Areas 64 Figure 3.12 - Map of Kaduna State showing the Seven Priority Intervention Areas 75 Figure 4.1 Current and Projected Traffic Volume for Randomly Selected 89 Links within the Prioritized Intervention Areas Figure 5.1 Map showing Intervention Area 13 (Priority 1) Figure 5.2 Map showing Intervention Area 4 (Priority 2) Figure 5.3 Map showing Intervention Area 16 (Priority 3) Figure 5.4 Map showing Intervention Area 3 (Priority 3) Figure 5.5 Map showing Intervention Area 15 (Priority 5) Figure 5.6 Map showing Intervention Area 10 (Priority 6) Figure 5.7 Map showing Intervention Area 9 (Priority 7) Figure 5.8 Map showing Intervention Area 14 (Priority 7) LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 - Summary of Completed and On-going Projects in Kaduna State 35 Table 2.1 - Projected Population and Population Density of LGAs in Kaduna State 19 Table 2.2 - No of Schools and Schools Enrolment 22 Table 2.3 - No of Primary Health Facilities 24 Table 2.4 - No of Boreholes 26 Table 2.5 - No of Markets 28 Table 2.6 - Agricultural Output (in metric tones) 30 Table 2.7 - Poverty index. 32 Table 3.1 - Delineation of Intervention Areas 44 Table 3.2 - Population, Land Area and Population Density of Intervention Areas 47 Table 3.3 - Number of Public Primary and Post Primary Schools and School Enrolment 49 In Intervention Areas Table 3.4 - Number of Primary Health Facilities in Intervention Areas 51 Table 3.5 - Number of Boreholes in Intervention Areas 53 Table 3.6 - Number of Markets in Intervention Areas 55 Table 3.7 - Agricultural Output in Intervention Areas 57 Table 3.8 - Poverty Index in Intervention Areas 59 Table 3.9 - Fadama Farm / Irrigation Projects in Intervention Areas 61 Table 3.10 - Number of Cottage Industries in Intervention Areas 63 Table 3.11 - Scoring of Population 65 Table 3.12 - Scoring of Population Density 66 Table 3.13 - Scoring of Land Area 66 Table 3.14 - Scoring of Educational Facilities 67 Table 3.15 - Scoring of Educational Facilities Enrolment 67 Table 3.16 - Scoring of School: Land Ratio 68 Table 3.17 - Scoring of Health Facilities 68 Table 3.18 - Scoring of Health Facilities Density 69 Table 3.19 - Scoring of the Number of Boreholes 69 Table 3.20 - Scoring of Borehole Density 69 Table 3.21 - Scoring of Number of Markets 70 Table 3.22 - Scoring of Agricultural Output 70 Table 3.23 - Scoring of Poverty Index 71 Table 3.24 - Scoring of Fadama Farms / Irrigation Farms 71 Table 3.25 - Scoring of Cottage Factories 71

*-7 Table 4.1 Rural Income Structure 80 Table 4.2 Occupation of Rural Dwellers 81 Table 4.3 Rural Means of Mobility 83 Table 4.4 Rural Trips Purposes 85 Table 4.5 Summary of Average Daily Costs for Different Travel Purposes 86 Table 4.6 Current Average Daily Vehicular Traffic Volume on Prioritized Links 88 Table 5.1 List of Links in Intervention Area 13 (1st Priority) 93 Table 5.2 List of Links in Intervention Area 4 (2nd Priority) 94 Table 5.3 List of Links in Intervention Area 3 (3rd Priority) 95 Table 5.4 List of Links in Intervention Area 16 (3rd Priority) 96 Table 5.5 List of Links in Intervention Area 15 (5th Priority) 97 Table 5.6 List of Links in Intervention Area 10 (6th Priority) 98 Table 5.7 List of Links in Intervention Area 14 (7th Priority) 99 Table 5.8 List of Links in Intervention Area 7 (7th Prionty) 100 Table 5.9 Summary of Estimated Cost 101 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction (RAMP) in the The Federal Project Management Unit of the Rural Access and Mobility Project Development Department of Rural Development of Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural to prioritize commissioned the firm of ARK CONSULT LTD for the consultancy services of such intervention areas in Kaduna State and to select the initial road program in support Mobility Project prioritized areas. The Federal Project Management Unit of Rural Access and referenced (RAMP) intent was conveyed by its letter dated 20th December 2005 and the African DRD/RAMP/FPMU/103/5.4/1/9. The project is supported by the World Bank and Development Bank.

Mobility Project This consultancy assignment constitutes the first stage in the Rural Access and Transport Policy (RAMP), in support of the implementation of governments' Rural Travel and and Local (RTTP). The major objective of the project is to assist the participating States in a sustainable Governments in the improvement of access and enhancement of mobility livelihood and manner in the rural areas, thereby contributing to the improvement of rural poverty reduction.

- Scope and Procedures of the Study The scope of the study covers the following broad sequential stages; namely:

- * Delineation of Intervention Areas * Prioritization of the Intervention Areas Intervention Areas Prioritization - . Organizing Stakeholders Workshop to confirm the Exercise. intervention areas - . Identification of Links / networks within the priority * Screening of Links / networks within the intervention areas * Prioritization of the selected Links / Networks.

Deliverables of the Study the main From the Scope of this component of Rural Access and Mobility Project (RAMP), deliverables of the study are: (1) Prioritized Intervention Areas (2) Analyzed Rural Travel Pattern (3) Recommended Initial Road Program (Links) for Intervention in order of priority (Al An;iIv7ed Vehicular Traffic Volume of Selected Links Methodology The following methodological approaches were adopted: review of all available (i) Collection of initial data through the secondary source and desktop and Development policy documents such as; the Kaduna State Economic Empowerment and other Strategy (KADSEEDS), Kaduna State 1991 National Population Census relevant research documents. the data collected from (ii) Field visits were also made to the Local Governments to verify necessary for the secondary sources and also to collect some primary data which are delineation and prioritization of intervention areas. the State into coherent (iii) The administrative map of Kaduna State was used to delineate intervention area as a Intervention Areas. For the purpose of the study, we define an well-being will be group of contiguous communities whose economic and social to basic access enhanced by the rehabilitation / upgrading of specified road networks corridors (that is standard. Intervention areas were delineated using the major traffic existing State and Federal Roads) as boundaries. scores / points to (iv) The delineated intervention areas were prioritized by attaching Primary Schools, population, Land area, Population Density, Number of Primary / Post Area, Number of Schools Enrolment, School to Land Area, Number of Boreholes to Land of Markets, Health Facilities, Health Facilities to Land Area; Poverty Index, Number Industries. Agricultural Outputs (in tons), Fadama / Irrigation farms and Cottage of the intervention (v) Participatory process by involving the stakeholders in the confirmation

- areas through Stakeholders Workshop. These surveys include (vi) Conducting Field Surveys to collect primary data for the study. Road Inventory of Socio-Economic Facilities Survey, Rural Travel Questionnaire, and Visual Road Inventory Survey and Intervention Required, Traffic Volume Count Condition Survey. / networks are Cost- (vii) The criteria for screening, prioritization and selection of links Volume along the Effectiveness criteria, population of communities along the Link, Traffic Link and Community Preference Analysis.

Outcome of the Study of priority as follows. * The following intervention areas were delineated and arranged in order

intervention areas were considered as candidate s - Links / Networks in the first seven prioritized for initial Road Program. Communities Intervention Prioritized Constituent LGA Constituent Areas Intervention Areas lyatawa, 13 PIA(1) Part of Giwa, Part of Birnin Yakawada, Gwari and Part of Igabi Kakangi, Karau Karau, Sabo Birnin, Kuyello Idon, Kurmin 4 PIA(2) Kaura and part of Zangon Maro, Kataf and part of Kauru Mazuga, Gidan Bako, and part of Kajuru Goragan, Gidan Dutse and Geshere, Mariri, Kiffin and Bakin Kogi. Sakun, Bali, 3 PIA(3) Part of Zangon Kataf, part Zonkwa, Fidan of Kagarko, part of Gidan Manu, Klmasa, Jema'a, part of Jaba Ayisan, Fai, Chori, Kamuru, Kwoi

16 PIA(4) Part of Makarfi, Part of Tungan-maikyasawa, Galadimawa, Gulbi, Iraba, - Kaura Rungu, Shaukukinkuna, Likugu. Jangolo, Duwali, 15 PIA(5) Part of Kagarko, Part of Jere, Kagani, Kagarko, Aribi, - Jaba, Part of Jema'a Koso, Gowi

Kataba, 10 PIA(6) Part of Soba, Part of Zaria, Jaji, Turunku, Part of Igabi, Dutse Mai, Farawui, - Part of Igabi and Kubau Farin Kasa, Soba, Danwata, Rahama, Kuzuntu, Panbeguwa. Part of Gades, Hanwa, Anchau, -9 PIA(7) Part of Kajuru, Chikun, Part of Kachia Dansu, Kan, Pambegua

14 PIA(8) Part of Birnin Gwari, Part Kusaya, Gwarso of Igabi and Part of Chikun

was carried out to After the prioritization of the intervention area, a comprehensive field survey program. All the links gather information on various rural road links that require intervention and evaluation. This results to selection of nhthortd- were subiected to various screening links in order of thirteen (13) Road Links, which are hereby recommended for intervention. The priority are provided in the table below:

LINKS RANKING Prioritized Current Traffic Intervention Area Volume 2,032 Rigasa - Mallamawa - 1st PIA(7) Kwate - Kakura 590 Dogon Dawa - U/Danko 2nd PIA(1) and PIA(3) - Birnin Gwari - Kurigi 939 Fadan Kamantan - 2nd PIA(3) Yangal - Walijo 1,033 Idon - Iri - Maro 4th PIA(2) 307 Giwa - Kakangi - Karau 5th PIA(1) Karau 914 Segwaza - UNVakili - 5th PIA(2) U/Ruhogo 51 Kurmin Ruwa - Bakin 7th PIA(2) Kogi - Geshere - Binawa Pilot 21 Kubau - Keffi - 8th PIA(6) Pambegua 309 Bakura - Belle 8th PIA(6) 217 Kagarko - Kudiri 10th PIA(5) 205 Janwuriya - Kasuwan 10th PIA(7) Magani 153 Kwoi - Fadan Kwarabe 12th PIA(5) - U/Tsabta - Fadan Kagoma 34 Kangimi - Borkono - 12th PIA(6) Gadan Gaya Conclusion the The results of this study are products of the secondary and primary data obtained through deployment of local enumerators / field assistants and information gathered from various stakeholders, both at State and Local Government levels.

We believe that further detailed rehabilitation programmes will be prepared by consultants handling subsequent phases of the project.

We wish to express the appreciation of the consulting team for the opportunity given to ARK CONSULT to be part of this laudable project. CHAPTER 1 PREAMBLE

1.0 Introduction 2005 and referenced By its letter of intent dated 20th December, Unit (FPMU) of the DRD/RAMP/FPMU/103/S.4/l/9, the Federal Project Management of Rural Development of Rural Access and Mobility Project (RAMP) in the Department commissioned the firm of the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development the study for identification of ARK CONSULT LTD for the consultancy services on in Kaduna State. intervention areas and selection of high priority rural roads

submitted an Inception Report Following the letter of intent, Ark Consult Ltd accordingly approach to carrying on 6 January 2006. The Inception Report detailed the consultant's to be undergone and the out the studies, the data being gathered and the processes proposed programme of works.

State Core Committee for the The consultant also held series of consultations with the where the approach to the Kaduna State Rural Access and Mobility Project (RAMP) highlighted and the criteria for studies was discussed, data, information and maps were prioritization presented.

before a mission from the Subsequently, the consultant made a preliminary presentation report was presented and World Bank on 21 January 2006, during which the interim discussed.

-1.1 About Ark Consult of Business Names Act, 1961 Ark Consult was registered in 1991 under the Registration quota to the infrastructure as No. 756812 in response to the desire to contribute our development industry.

has recently been In our drive to broaden our scope of services, ARK CONSULT CONSULT LIMITED with registered as a private limited liability company ARK registration No. RC. 4000193.

planning, facility A multidisciplinary consultancy firm engaged in projects management, the firm cover the full range of management and diversified consultancy, the activities of studies, outline services in engineering from initial investigation through feasibility audits. planning, designs, contract documentation and technical and management

management and The computerization of our operations has greatly enhanced the in-house quality of our projects. The computer department is also able to develop software customized for every project where desirable.

as members of a The firm and / or the principal partners have undertaken either solely or institutional / team, projects in the health and health systems industry, feasibility studies, roads studies residential buildings, water and water-related schemes, rural and urban services design, and design, sub-soil / geotechnical investigation, electro-mechanical etc.

parastatals, State The profile of Ark Consult's clients include Federal ministries and and individuals. ministries and parastatals, the World Bank country office, institutions

1.2 The Rural Access and Mobility Project (RAMP) and African The Rural Access and Mobility Project (RAMP) is a World Bank of government's Development Bank assisted project in support of the implementation coordinated by the Rural Travel and Transport Policy (RTTP). The project is being Rural Development Federal Project Management Unit (FPMU) under the Department of of the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development.

sector occupies The desirability of this intervention is due to the central position the rural presently lack the in the development strategy of Nigeria. Most rural areas in Nigeria enhancement of enabling infrastructure needed for their transformation and the has unfortunately productivity and the welfare of the rural dwellers. This situation accentuating the resulted in a rural urban drift in search of enhanced productivity, thus Economic and poverty of the rural populace. It is for these reasons that the National State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (NEEDS) and the Kaduna Empowerment and Development Strategy (KADSEEDS) both seek to ameliorate.

Committee According to the 2002 Report of the Transport Sector Reform Implementation Federal Roads, (TSRC), the entire road network in Nigeria comprises 32,100km of road density 30,500km of State roads and over 130,000km of rural roads. This is that of the lack of or notwithstanding, a major problem of road development in Nigeria at all levels of government. poor maintenance of the investment in roads development

Project is to assist the Thus, the major objective of the Rural Access and Mobility improvement of access and participating States and Local Governments in the areas, thereby contributing enhancement of mobility in a sustainable manner in their rural to the improvement of rural livelihood and poverty reduction.

The project has three broad components as follows: focuses on: (1) Institutional Strengthening and Capacity Building, which skills both at (i) Strengthening the project management and road management Federal, State and Local Government levels; and reporting systems (ii) Assisting with implementation of road management to assist with efficient management of rural transport infrastructure; Travel and Transport (iii) Promotion of the implementation of the RTTPS (Rural communities to Policy Strategy) to empower the Local Government and infrastructure participate in the management and provision of rural transport and services; and (iv) Capacity building in labour-based and small scale contracting; the national road (v) Participation in the process to define and implement stakeholder reform agenda currently being identified by the other transport Federal Ministries.

This will support the (2) Rehabilitation and maintenance of Transport Infrastructure: Government and access) rehabilitation and maintenance of rural (State, Local geographical areas in roads and other transport infrastructure in key strategic will be a mix support of the SEEDS of specific States. The planned interventions contracts to of contracts ranging from standard rehabilitation and maintenance and small-scale contracts supporting the development of labour-based contractors maintenance contractors.

the identification and (3) Rural Mobility Improvements: This will support of Transport (IMT) implementation of different options of Intermediate Means options. including both the provision and support of such preferred capabilities that could facilitate Poverty is about the "lack of or limited access to essential an adequate standard of long and healthy life, becoming knowledgeable, maintaining one's life". Thus the Rural living and participating meaningfully in decisions affecting poor condition of Rural Transport Access and Mobility Project recognizes that the like Nigeria, constitutes a major Infrastructure (RTI) in many developing countries, growth. This is largely due impediment to poverty reduction efforts by stifling economic will otherwise improve their living to the isolation of the rural dwellers from services which system goes beyond the mere conditions. Thus, an improved rural transportation include the provision of affordable improvement (or upgrading) of rural roads to also such as bicycles, motorbikes, transport services, intermediate means of transport (IMT), / facilities. animal-driven carts, and the location and quality of services

from community to community, Though the mobility patterns and access needs may vary people can be classified broadly the major reasons for access and mobility of the rural as: * Need for health care * Need for water for domestic purposes * Need for food and access to the farms to the markets * Need for farm inputs and evacuation of farm produce * Need for access to educational institutions and various communities * Need for interactions between various households

the attainment of the Millennium The project therefore seeks to move the nation towards in the rural areas by exposure to Development Goals (MDGs) by reducing poverty and mobility; enhancing access to economic activities through the promotion of access gender equality and women educational opportunities and the promotion of through improved access to empowerment; reduction of infant and maternal mortalities sources. health centres; and improving access to potable water

to the provision of reliable, least- The provision of basic access, where priority is given possible, is a primary outlook of cost, all season basic access to as many people as for a proper planning of Rural Rural Transport system. It is therefore a sine-qua non patterns and access needs of Transport Infrastructure (RTI) to understand the mobility to community, and then provide for rural communities, which may vary from community networks, access to local social passable routes with adequate linkage to higher level activities. :nnd pernnomic activities as well as to domestic 1.3 Terms of Reference 1.3.1 Scope of Consultancy Services will include visits to From the Terms of Reference, the Scope of Consultancy Services Local Government the Federal Project Management Unit (FPMU) and Kaduna State and the geographical Councils to collect all necessary information and data for determining networks. In size of the intervention areas and their respective transport infrastructure

particular, the consultant will execute but will not be limited to the following:

rural development (i) Review all planned and potential poverty alleviation and areas initiatives in the State and will divide the State into coherent key intervention In this task, based on the potential benefits to be achieved through this support. program the Consultant must review the SEEDS of the State and all relevant geographical initiatives and development plans. The result of this review will be a map of the State showing the different intervention areas. and social (ii) Prioritize the intervention areas within the State based on economic benefits and the size of population affected. the findings of the (iii) Undertake a formal workshop with all stakeholders to confirm

- prioritization exercise. detailed tasks for (iv) Based on the outcome of the workshop, undertake the following us with the each of the first seven areas with the highest priority. This will provide us one or two flexibility to determine the amount of funding per State and will give exercise on a parallel basis. ., intervention areas where the State can fund the same Government This will then transfer knowledge and management to the State intervention areas with the highest priority: infrastructure (a) Compile an inventory of the entire road and other transport roads network (including Federal, State, Local Government and all other farm that may be owned by other entities, feeder roads, community roads, the roads, jetties, waterways, etc. both classified, required to support initiatives included in (i) above. and potential (b) Within each intervention area execute a survey of existing in rural agricultural production, markets and other socio-economic facilities into areas (schools, health centres, etc.) and define and divide the network appropriate (type) links and features based on intervention area priorities. network, including an (c) Execute a visual condition survey on the identified (cracking, deformation, assessment of the condition of the pavement (bridges), condition of potholes, etc.), the underlying structure of the roads features, etc. the jetties, the drainage system, the signs and safety the entire priority network, (d) Execute a road access safety audit along features along the identify hazardous locations and spots and unsafe alignment. information is not available, the (e) Collect all available traffic data. Where basic traffic survey to Consultant would be required to undertake a to categorize road determine a reasonable estimate of the traffic volumes links in traffic volume ranges. with link-by-link traffic (f) Perform a traffic survey on the priority network, On selected counts, by type of vehicles (motorized and non-motorized). be executed to establish links 24 hour and one - week counts will need to daily and weekly variations. will execute the appropriate data (v) Based on the above surveys, the Consultant priority road networks in the analysis and carry out the following for each of the identified intervention areas. for each road link and the (a) Determine and define appropriate standards its features along the necessary actions to bring the road (and all alignment) to the defined appropriate standard. / upgrade and then (b) Preliminary estimate of the costs to rehabilitate broken down in the maintain for three years the identified road network example: different road link priorities with a table like this, for second Activity First Table km of intervention required and a similar table showing the costs based on the unit costs of (b) above Federal State Local Access / Other Government Farm to market

Rehab Regravel Bridge Repair Road Safety Blading Routine maintenance activities, etc

for each link, the (c) On the basis of these costs and the traffic survey access consultant will carry out the economic analysis for low volume road (particularly for traffic levels below 50 vehicles per day). It is suggested cost of that cost-effectiveness criteria (in particular, total life-cycle in investment per population served) should be used to rank investments design rural transport infrastructure, under the condition that least-cost is methods have been applied and the main objective of the intervention access poverty alleviation. In case of upgrading of an existing basic (roads) to a fully engineered road access, or the provision of an alternative, (between shorter access to a village, i.e. for intermediate levels of traffic tool is about 50 to 200 vehicles per day) an appropriate economic appraisal of the Road Economic Decision Model. It is suggested that the provision a certain basic access to communities with no or unreliable access (up to of cost per capita) should have priority over investments into upgrading existing basic access roads / waterways to a higher standard). physical (d) Based on the road access safety audit, the consultant will propose of the measures so as to improve the safety features along the alignment for the priority network and prepare respective cost estimates implementation of these measures. (e) The consultant will prepare a 5-year routine, recurrent, periodic maintenance and rehabilitation program, taking into account traffic growth patterns or other similar patterns and an optimal intervention scheme.

1.3.2 Criteria for Prioritization of Intervention Areas From the above Terms of Reference, the following criteria for the prioritization of intervention areas were developed in consultation with the FPMU and the State Core team: 1. Growth: current contribution of area to growth in the State (land use and production). 2. Development Potential: current and planned development supported by both government, donor interventions and private sector. 3. Agricultural Output: area with more agricultural output for the past five years and the crop type. 4. Population: define the population and its activities at present and in planned period using 2.83% growth rate. 5. Social benefits of the roads for communities in the area through improved connectivity with markets and social services such as schools, clinics, churches. 6. Benefits of having a good and quality road network to the community. 7. Current development potential such as agriculture, mining, tourism, education, health. 8. Poverty index vis-a-vis production potentials. 9. Define physical standards / status and present / projected traffic of the present road network serving the area under consideration.

1.4 This Draft Final Report is being submitted in fulfillment of one of the deliverables of the reporting requirements of the Consultancy Services for the Study to Prioritize Intervention Areas in KADUNA STATE and to select the initial Road Program in support of such prioritized areas.

The report is a follow up to the previously submitted Inception Report and Draft Report. In this report, various links have been selected, prioritized and ranked. This is subsequent to the previous delineation of the entire State into coherent intervention areas, and ranking of the Intervention Areas, using data on socio-economic and demographic data obtained for the various communities and local government areas of the State. It is worthy to state that the results of this delineation, scoring and ranking processes had been presented before an enlarged stakeholders workshop held in as this Kaduna on the 16th and 17th May 2006 for discussion, acceptance and ratification, is a demand-driven project. CHAPTER 2 KADUNA STATE

2.0 Brief About Kaduna State Kaduna State covers a land area of 46,020sq.km, representing about 4.6% of the total land area of Nigeria, the twelveth largest land area in Nigeria. The State is strategically placed, almost at the geographic centre of Nigeria. Kaduna, the seat of the state government, has the unique political history of being at various times, the seat of the defunct government of Northern Nigeria; then of the former North-central State; as well as the capital of the old Kaduna State when it comprised the defunct provinces of Zaria and Katsina. Today, however, Kaduna State coincides roughly with what used to be Zaria province only.

Figure 1 shows Kaduna State within the map of Nigeria bounded by Katsina, Zamfara and Kano States to the north; Bauchi State and Plateau State to the east; Nassarawa State and the Federal Capital Territory to the South and Niger State to the west.

NATIONAL CONTEXT OF PROJECT AREA:

-I MAP OF NIGERIA SHOWING KADUNA STATE t NIGER

, A --

d S F ~ -- = ) BAUCHI iOB J

NASSAR 0 ntratonlBondr Figure:a s Mapn K-ToB N

\ ,!TA<\ tt - KadunaState yDErAOHr LlState Boundary \9VER 2 | }International Boundary o- ,Km Figurel: Map of Nigeria showing Kaduna State The State is made up of 23 Local Government Areas as follows: Birnin Gwari, Chikun, Giwa, Igabi, Ikara, Jaba, Jema'a, Kachia, Kaduna North, Kaduna South, Kagarko, Kajuru, Kaura, Kauru, Kubau, Kudan, Lere, Makarfi, Sabon Gari, Sanga, Soba, Zaria and Zangon Kataf with headquarters respectively in Birnin Gwari, Kujama, Giwa, Turunku, Kwoi, Kafanchan, Kachia, Doka, Makera, Kagarko, Kajuru, Kaura, Kauru, Anchau, Hunkuyi, Saminaka, Makarfi, Sabongari, Gwantu, Maigana, Zaria and Zonkwa.

Figure 2 shows a map of Kaduna State and the 23 Local Government Areas and their headquarters.

Climatic Conditions Kaduna State experiences a typical continental climate with two distinct seasons, the dry and rainy seasons. These seasons reflect the influences of tropical continental and equatorial maritime air masses, which sweep over the entire country. However, the seasonality is pronounced with the cool to hot dry season being longer than the rainy season. The wet / rainy season is usually from May to October and varies as one moves northwards. It is very much heavier in places like Kafanchan and Kagoro in the southern parts of the State, which have an average of over 1,524mm, than parts of Makarfi and Ikara in the northern parts, which have an average of 1,016mm. On the average, the State enjoys a rainy season of about six months. The vegetation changes with the seasons so that during the wet season, the grasses and the leaves are green and fresh while during the dry season, they wither and die due largely to high evaporation, which creates water shortage problems especially in Igabi, Giwa, Soba, Makarfi and Ikara Local Government Areas.

The average yearly climatic indices of the State are as follows:

S/No Parameters Yearly Average 1 Average rainfall (mm) 1,272.5 2 Average Humidity (%) 56.64 3 Daily wind speed (knot) 176.12 4 Average daily min. temp (C) 15.1 5 Average daily max. temp. (C) 35.18

This climatic pattern is suitable for the cultivation of subsistence and cash crops round the year, although dry season farming is often complemented by irrigation. Kaduna State's topography is favourable for small, medium and large-scale farming as well as for FIGURE 2: MAP tD THEIR HEADQUARTERS

UBAU

iSAMINAKA LERE

A F LEGEND

--- ~ STATEBOUNDAF

~~-%~N LGABOUNDARY *KAURA KAURA LGAHEADQUAQ

MA'A

SANGA

GWA7NTUA Economic Potentials with a very Kaduna State is one of the most agriculturally endowed States in Nigeria as a major fertile soil. Majority of the people of the State therefore subsist on agriculture is attributed to economic activity. The large presence of textile companies in the State in the State include the high production of cotton in the area. Other cash crops produced State respectively. ginger and groundnut in the southern and northern parts of the guinea corn, etc. Virtually all the popular food crops such as maize, rice, yam, potatoes, of the State have are cultivated in the State. Various local government areas various cash crops comparative advantage over others in the commercial production of and livestock as follows:

S/No Produce LGAs 1. Cassava, Acha Kagarko, Jaba, Jema'a North, Jema'a, 2. Sugar Cane Makarfi, Kudan, Soba Zangon Kataf

3. Tomatoes Soba, Ikara, Kubau 4. Fruits (citrus, banana, pineapple) Sanga, Jema'a South 5. Oil Palm Sanga East 6. Ginger Kachia South, Jaba, Kagarko Giwa, Makarfi, 7. Maize Kauru, Lere, Ikara, Kudan Chikun, Jema'a, 8. Rice Giwa, Birnin Gwari, Kachia, Jaba, Kaura

9. Pepper Soba, Igabi, Kudan Jema'a 10. Yam Igabi, Soba, Sanga, Jema'a 11. Piggery Zangon Kataf, Kaura, 12. Livestock, Grazing Reserves Birnin Gwari, Ikara

various activities in A sizeable proportion of the State's population is also engaged in occupation of the manufacturing and service activities. Distributive trade is also a major tin, granite, people of Kaduna State. Minerals found in the State include gold, colombite, limestone, kaolin and marble.

Population National Population Kaduna State had a population of 3,935,618 according to the 1991 is projected to Census. Based on an annual growth rate of 3.2%, the State population laraest State in Nigeria. -k- Rr-1 1A -q9 in qnnfll m4kinn it the third The population density ranges from a high of 7,335 persons per square kilometre for Kaduna metropolitan area, to a low of 10 persons per square kilometre for Birnin Gwari Local Government Area. The average population density for the state as a whole in 2005 is estimated as 125 persons per square kilometre. It is estimated that about 1.5 million inhabitants of Kaduna State are in urban and semi-urban centres all over the State. This gives a 40%:60% ratio of population distribution between urban:rural areas respectively. The demographic pattern of Kaduna State follows closely that of the national structure in that the age group 0 - 14 years constitutes over 40% of the total population. A unique feature of the State's population is the near 1:1 male: female ratio for the State and the LGAs.

The People and their Ethnic Composition Kaduna State forms a portion of the country's melting pot with about 6 major ethnic groups and about 20 other smaller groups. Among the major groups are Hausa, Fulani, Kadara, Kagoro, Bajju, Jaba, Gbagyi, Kataf and Karama. The muslims predominate in the northern parts of the State while majority of the people in the southern local government areas profess Christianity.

2.1 Demographic, Socio-Economic Data of Kaduna State

Table 2.1: Projected Population and Population Density of LGAs in Kaduna State

Local Government Areas Land Area Projected Population Density (sq.km) Population (2005)

Birnin Gwari 6,170 222,367 36 Chikun 5,970 397,203 67 Giwa 2,041 265,868 130 Igabi 3,510 479,075 136 Ikara 1,614 215,762 134 Jaba 561 102,764 183 Jema'a 1,755 215,603 123 Kachia 5,101 180,516 35 Kaduna North 80 540,873 6,761 Kaduna South 66 608,598 9,221 Kagarko 2,502 140,761 56 Land Area Projected Local Government Areas Population Density (sq.km) Population (2005)

Kajuru 2,465 94,811 38 Kaura 623 157,685 253 Kauru 2,739 180,732 66 Kubau 2,291 275,736 120 Kudan 382 147,007 385 Lere 2,567 319,747 125 Makarfi 520 168,564 324 Sabon Gari 257 348,252 1,355 Sanga 1,402 124,328 89 Soba 2,146 270,774 126 Zangon Kataf 2,542 217,941 86 Zaria 387 441,896 1,142 Source: Kaduna State 1991 National Population Census Population and Population Density

o C) C) 0 El G 0 0 022,.6 0

-0 Br GwaR-Chikun3970203 0 0 00

0)13

Chikunz---7 Z o lggabi '4 -- 3 Ikara m -I11 fI- 134 1l l102,764Z 2572 > : ~Jaba----.---- > -~--- )25,603 7 5 E Jena's - O Su~, Kaar134076 123 l |8,1 0 Kachia 94,811z16 C:

4 ,761 1 , 9 KWSouthh 98 -- 0 Kajuru cn81 - - 381 la la K.uras7 685- 0 0 2ara-53

e s Kauru 8073 Makarko-fi0-1 6# - 7 1C 0 OO Kubau - 75,72r SaoKudan - >

4' Lore - 9,7Z

Makarfi 16>6 324 14 Sabon Gari -2 , C)

Sangs - -1 Sobs =Co Z/ Kataf -- - -2 217,941 > m Z-ri 0441,96 1,142 State Table 2.2: Number of Schools and School Enrolment in LGAs of Kaduna

Local Government Areas No of Schools School Enrolment Birnin Gwari 190 48,170 Chikun 225 42,471 Giwa 189 37,462 Igabi 190 62,289 Ikara 108 22,477 Jaba 105 45,057

Jema'a 169 50,047 Kachia 234 43,692 Kaduna North 63 40,527 Kaduna South 46 41,832 Kagarko 160 31,802 Kajuru 137 26,197 Kaura 95 38,712 Kauru 217 33,124 Kubau 197 38,153 Kudan 78 26,340 Lere 227 58,952 Makarfi 106 30,711 Sabon Gari 60 31,308 Sanga 185 32,702 Soba 171 33,903 Zangon Kataf 282 89,028 Zaria 122 58,724 Source: Kaduna State Universal Basic Education Board FIG. 2.2: NUMBER OF PUBLIC PRIMARY AND POST PRIMARY SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL ENROLMENT IN LGAs OF KADUNA STATE

2 - cmCJ 1 .3 d 9

0 000 0iA

0l 00, 02 000

z

* 0 . 4 1 1 ' a - 0:1~ t g R if- a C1 o to0 - - co P4C CZ a N Local Government Areas NofScol o3School Enrolment

23 Table 2.3: Number of Health Facilities in LGAs of Kaduna State

Local Government Areas Number of Health Facilities Birnin Gwari 82 Chikun 58 Giwa 29 Igabi 76 Ikara 44 Jaba 43 Jema'a 21 Kachia 42 Kaduna North 101 Kaduna South 71 Kagarko 20 Kajuru 29 Kaura 24 Kauru 31 Kubau 33 Kudan 0 Lere 57 Makarfi 37 Sabon Gari 38 Sanga 37 Soba 47 Zangon Kataf 44 Zaria 38 Source: Kaduna State Ministry of Health FIG. 2.3: NUMBER OF HEALTH FACILITIES IN LGAs OF KADUNA STATE

1202

101 100-

80--7 (71

60-

0 z 40-

20-

m IEIII II--

Local Governmewnt Areas 0O -NoOf Health Failte 25 Table 2.4: Number of Boreholes in LGAs of Kaduna State

Local Government Areas Number of Boreholes Birnin Gwari 91 Chikun 106 Giwa 83 Igabi 140 Ikara 84 Jaba 87 Jema'a 67 Kachia 72 Kaduna North 0 Kaduna South 5 Kagarko 64 Kajuru 60 Kaura 56 Kauru 72 Kubau 93 Kudan 67 Lere 116 Makarfi 62 Sabon Gari 50 Sanga 60 Soba 122 Zangon Kataf 85 Zaria 65 Source: Kaduna State Rural Water and Sanitation Programme (UNDP-assisted) and KADSEEDS FIG. 2.4: NUMBER OF BOREHOLES IN LGAs OF KADUNA STATE

140'

120 1

106

100-~ 91 886 80-

67 87

60-

40-

20-

Ii ii LocaGovernment Areas

27 Table 2.5: Number of Markets in LGAs of Kaduna State

Local Government Areas Number of Boreholes Birnin Gwari 4 Chikun 4 1 Giwa Igabi 3 Ikara 2 1 Jaba

Jema'a 6 Kachia 3 Kaduna North 2 Kaduna South 3 Kagarko 3 Kajuru 2 Kaura 2 Kauru 3 Kubau 3 Kudan 3

Lere3 3 Makarfi 2

- Gari2 Sabo Sanga 2 Soba 2 Zangon Kataf 6 Zaria 3 Source: Kaduna State Ministry of Trade, Industry and Commerce Number of Markets

-) Bimin Gwari

Chikun- Givva-Z z-

Jgabi c - - -w--mwOD Jemara Jaba

Kachia 3 > Kaduna North ~X X KadunaSouth 4 m Kagarko - -4 ° Kajuru = Z

C) Kaura 0 CG) eD ~Kauru

3Kubau (U) CA 00

X m Lere co C4 >

Z Sabon Gari Sanga-- - - c

Soba -- m Zangon Kataf - .. . -

Zaria CA Table 2.6: Agricultural Output in LGAs of Kaduna State

Local Government Areas Agricultural Output Birnin Gwari 125,083.26 Chikun 125,616.75 Giwa 317,054.38 Igabi 433,968.89 Ikara 193,944.79 Jaba 268,445.70 Jema'a 936,392.10 Kachia 404,551.32 Kaduna North 0 Kaduna South 0 Kagarko 674,375.75 Kajuru 185,495.97 Kaura 566,383.52 Kauru 214,172.95 Kubau 126,429.55 Kudan 71,128.68 Lere 157,663.59 Makarfi 102,388.56 Sabon Gari 171,301.78 Sanga 484,963.37 Soba 206,103.64 Zangon Kataf 299,481.36 Zaria 220,865.36 (KADP) Source: Kaduna State Agricultural Development Programme Agricultural Output -n G)

aaa CDaa0 C 0 C a go a a a a a a a oaoa

Bimin Gwari p 6 G5,083 Chikun 12$,616. 5 -

Giwa 317, 54.3E C

Igabi - 43 ,968.9 - -

Ikara 193, 479 C

Jaba 8,44 .70 > r- Jema'a - -h92O Kachia 0 404551.32 0C G) H- 0 Kaduna North O j

3 Kaduna South 0 O-

Kagarko - - 74,37 5.75 Z Kajuru5.97 1

Kaura n6;6,38 3.52 G)

Kauru 21 ,172.9 Cl)

Kubau 12 ,429.! i5 0

Kudan 71,1 8.68

Lere 157,66 .59

Makarhi 102388.5 C

Sabon Gari 171, 1.78 Z [zSanga | =484, 963.31 U)

( Soba 206 103.6 H 0> Zangon Kataf 299, 1.36 H i;I L _ m 0 Zaria l 2D865.6 Table 2.7: Poverty Index in LGAs of Kaduna State

Local Government Areas Poverty Index Birnin Gwari 1.86 Chikun 1.84 Giwa 1.61 Igabi 1.65 Ikara 1.61 Jaba 2.39 Jema'a 2.09 Kachia 2.14 Kaduna North 2.06 Kaduna South 2.04 Kagarko 2.14 Kajuru 2.19 Kaura 2.09 Kauru 2.08 Kubau 1.86 Kudan 1.42 Lere 1.99 Makarfi 1.75 Sabon Gari 1.76 Sanga 1.94 Soba 1.64 Zangon Kataf 2.2 Zaria 1.88 Strategy (KADSEEDS) Source: Kaduna State Economic Empowerment and Development [UNDP - IGSR 19991 FIG. 2.7: POVERTY INDEX BY LGAS (BASELINE = 4.00) KADUNA STATE 2.5 2.39

2.3 2-09 2-1 2 06 421 2-09 2.082.

1.86 1.84 .8

1.61.56

0

cu cu CU

- ociyy=yJ=3Xt n la - c m

X co N N Local Government Areas

33 and Development Strategy 2.2 The Kaduna State Economic Empowerment (KADSEEDS) Empowerment and Development Following the introduction of the National Economic Kaduna State formulated its Strategy (NEEDS) by the Federal Government of Nigeria, Strategy (KADSEEDS). own Kaduna State Economic Empowerment and Development strategies of the Kaduna State The KADSEEDS encapsulates the major developmental for mobilizing resources and Government through a medium term (3-years) framework provides a roadmap for the applying them for rapid development. The KADSEEDS State. Under the strategy which realization of various aspects of development within the enormous progress has been is directed at ameliorating poverty through wealth creation, and rural roads, rehabilitation and made in the State in the construction of urban health sectors as well as other expansion of infrastructural facilities in the education and poverty alleviation programmes for her teeming youths.

is to empower the people Under social and economic empowerment, the State's strategy from the current level of 70% to of the State with special emphasis on reducing poverty acquisition programmes, credit 50% by 2007. This is to be achieved through skill etc.) and provision of basic facilities and schemes for vulnerable groups (women, youths, education, amongst others. social services such as water, feeder roads, health and

State by the United Nations According to a comprehensive poverty study on Kaduna and Social Research Development Programme (UNDP) and the Institute of Governance for a number of sectors, (IGSR) in 1999, the State's poverty index was established was computed from nine including road accessibility. The Poverty Index (POVI) - Economic Status Index (ESI), composites and compressed into four major indicators (El) and Social Development Education Index (EDI), Environment and Infrastructure index measured the conditions Index (SDI), each having a total score of 1. The (POVI) on the basis of dry seasons; of roads across the LGAs, scoring the implied accessibility year round. It rightly identified not tarred but good or whether the roads were bad all it provides for the movement of road accessibility as central to poverty reduction as exchange of ideas. goods and people, access to market, hospitals and 2.2.1 Roads Development direct responsibility of the The provision and maintenance of road infrastructure is the Public Works Agency State Ministry of Works and Transport. The Kaduna State of the Ministry of (KAPWA), a recently established agency, complements the functions and construction / Works and Transport, in undertaking routine road maintenance rehabilitation of all State roads through direct labour.

include the upgrading The specific targets of KADSEEDS in the road development sector roads; upgrading of of 491km of surface-dressed roads to asphaltic concrete paved of 642km of 41km of township roads to asphaltic concrete surfacing; construction of surface-dressed local surface-dressed rural roads and construction of 15km government roads.

has invested enormous From May 1999 to December 2005, the State government construction of new ones financial resources in the rehabilitation of existing roads and summaries that a total while others are at various stages of activity. The following table and asphaltic-concrete of 820.52km and 402.80km respectively of surface-dressed km and 123km respectively of surfaced roads have been completed while 396.11 surface-dressed and asphaltic-concrete paved roads are on-going.

Projects in Kaduna State: Table I - Summary of Completed and On-going Road

May 1999 - December 2005

A. COMPLETED ROAD PROJECTS TYPE OF SURFACING SURFACE ASPHALT DRESSING SURFACING LENGTH (KM) LENGTH (KM) 279.20 1 RURAL ROADS 767.72 123.60 2 TOWNSHIP ROADS 52.80 402.80 TOTAL 820.52 B. ON GOING ROAD PROJECTS TYPE OF SURFACING SURFACE ASPHALT DRESSING SURFACING LENGTH (KM) LENGTH (KM)

1 RURAL ROADS 386.81 102.0 2 TOWNSHIP ROADS 9.30 21.00 TOTAL 396.11 123.00

In addition to these are various roads that have been undertaken under various funded projects such as the Fadama II assisted by the World Bank and the Rural Feeder Roads project executed by the Kaduna State Agricultural Development Project (KADP) with assistance by the World Bank.

2.2.2 Rural and Community Development The Kaduna State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy (KADSEEDS) also dwells on the strategy for rural and community development. The State Ministry of Rural and Community Development was established in 1999 to, among other duties, develop a hierarchy of rural feeder roads across the length and breadth of the State; mobilize the communities for effective participation in self-help projects and provide assistance to communities for the implementation of community development projects.

2.2.3 Administrative Structure for Roads Development & Maintenance

Generally, in Nigeria, roads development is stratified between the three tiers of government - Federal Government, the State Government and the Local Government.

At the State level, the Kaduna State Ministry of Works and Transport is traditionally saddled with the construction of roads and transport infrastructure across the State. The Ministry is headed by an Honourable Commissioner of Works and Transport, who is member of the State Executive Council. In hierarchy, the Permanent Secretary follows the Honourable Commissioner, below whom there are the Directors of six different directorates - administration and supply, building, civil engineering, finance and administration, mechanical engineering, and planning, research and statistics. Besides the directors are also zonal managers for the six zones - Birnin Gwari, Ikara, Kachia, Kafanchan, Saminaka and Zaria, that the state is subdivided into and the parastatals of Kaduna State Public Works Agency (KAPWA), Kaduna Authority (KSTA) State Property Development Company (KSDPC) and Kaduna State Transport headed by General Managers.

to roads The Director of Civil Engineering directly oversees all the activities related each of the development and construction with assistance from three Deputy Directors for State Ministry senatorial zones of the State - North, Central and South. The organogram of the of Works and Transport is shown in Figure 2.8

Edict has The Kaduna State Public Works Agency (KAPWA) which was set up in 2002 by an of roads specific responsibilities for the construction, maintenance, rehabilitation and upgrading is enabled and other related structures such as bridges and culverts. By the Edict, the Agency has to carry out its functions through direct labour and for this purpose, the State government Manager who procured some equipment for the Agency. The Agency is headed by a General is the Chief Executive under a Board of Directors.

Finance. The KAPWA has two major subdivisions - Operations, and Administrations and mechanical operations division is headed by a director below whom there are the civil and under the engineering division, electrical services division, and the building division, each is further supervision of an Assistant Director The civil and mechanical engineering division construction subdivided into the roads maintenance; planning, design and evaluation; and roads sections. The organogram of KAPWA is indicated as Figure 2.9.

an Executive At the local government level, there exists a local government council headed by supervisory Chairman. Below him is the legislative council and supervisory councilors. The Below councilors each oversee the works, administration, health and agriculture departments. whom the the supervisory councilor works is the head of department of works under construction, rehabilitation and maintenance of rural roads fall. GM (KAPWA)

GM KSPC) 'A1 1 GM (KSTA)

X D(DAS)

|-ROAD TRAF. DIV CIN STO & VER. UNIT m

AWS SCHOOL DAS - - -c A; m DD(WVV) 0 1 DD(CAPP.PROJ) D>Z

| DD(M) DD(NORTH) DD(CENTRAL) -rE DC DD(SOUTH) zI 0 CHIEF ACCT >FA DD(ELEC) (z> DD(ELEC M) {]M DD(MECH)

DD(ELEC M) O DD(MECH) 0 CIA 2'] | B/GWARI f [KARA 2

2c K-AFANCHAN 1 1 |SAMINAKA

| ZARIA FIGURE 2.9: MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE FOR KADUNA STATE PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY (KAPWA)

CHIEFEXECU E ITRAL AUDIT

OPERATIONSDEPARTMENT [.IITIADMINISTRATION (DIRECTOR)ANDFNANCE DEPARTMENT

and Finance and Acccunts Establishmentand |CVMechanical ElectricalServices AdministrationDivsion Divsion TrainingDivison lEgiednDvBilig in DiisoMio SCET"Personnel (Asst Director) AsstDrCDMsion (AsstDir. Elect) | (Asst.Dir Arch) SECRET(Asst Director) (AsstDimetor)

Store Resenarnch ucionTraficLtig/ht Services Design& aintenantaff fie SectionectonSection Section EvaiuatioaITni Scon OFFICES Ofc

Technical Technical Engine.(CVL Mechanicalln nt Enie(iI)(CIVIL) nie (Uetnc nie. (lctiaEngie SurveyorOuantiY TecniahnicaniOffiOfcrs ers ca TcnicalOfiers ExecutiveOfiesficr Admin. OfcrsOies

TecnlTechnicalTechnical Technical Technical Tcnai Techial Of icers OIIcers OOficersOfficers Officers Officers OIImcers Assistant > 39 CHAPTER 3

IDENTIFICATION AND PRIORITIZATION OF INTERVENTION AREAS

3.0 INTRODUCTION

3.1 Introduction (RTI) in many developing The deplorable condition of Rural Transport Infrastructure to rural poverty and countries no doubt is one of the main factors contributing studies have shown that underdevelopment. This is because available records and such as schools, health provision and availability of other social and economic facilities on the well being of rural facilities, water, farmland, etc. only cannot make much impact are not available. communities populace if the means of reaching such facilities access and mobility Transport therefore, is found to play a very crucial role of providing facilities that are provided for rural communities in order to enjoy the social and economic or available in the rural area.

be provided with It therefore becomes necessary that every rural community should of RTI network service basic access. Basic access is defined as the minimum level minimum level of RTI required to sustain socio-economic activity of a community. It is of transport with that guarantees reliable all-season access for the prevailing means context of this project limited periods of inaccessibility. A basic access intervention in the for ensuring is thus defined as the least cost (in terms of total life cycle cost) intervention transport. reliable, all-season passability for the locally prevailing means of

in developing The need to ensure basic access to rural communities particularly to embark on countries is the basis for various international development organizations is therefore part various access intervention projects. The commissioning of this project of the effort toward improving rural accessibility and mobility.

3.2 Approach to Study Area as a group of For the purpose of this project, we have defined an Intervention will be enhanced contiguous communities whose economic and social well being standard. In this by the upgrading of specified road network(s) to basic access delineated context therefore, an intervention area is different from an administratively of communities Local Government Area since an intervention area may consist However, since most of the secondary hni,nnrinn tn riiffprpnt I nocal Government Areas. and not disaggregated socio-economic data were available on Local Government Areas for the identification of the on community basis, we adopted the following procedures Intervention Areas. Areas from secondary (a) Collection of socio-economic data on Local Government sources. took inventory of rural roads (b) Through field survey and focus group discussions, be upgraded to basic network and priority Local Government Areas that need to of the areas. access standard and preliminary surveys on economic potentials areas are delineated. (c) Using the results of (a) and (b) above, the intervention

below: The above approach is presented graphically in Figure 3.1 FIGURE 3.1: APPROACH TO STUDY Visit to Relevant Organizations to collect Step 1 relevant data

Step 2 Identification of criteria

Evaluation of Criteria against various Draft Report interventions Step 3 * Computation * Scoring . Ranking

Step 4 Stakeholders Workshop for Confirmation of Prioritization Exercise

Selection of Priority Intervention Area Step 5 using Multi Criteria Analysis

Field SurveY * Rural Transport Demand Step 6 Survey * Transport Supply Survey . Traffic Survey

Step 7 Analyses of Data Collected

Identification of Links for Intervention Step 8 for Prioritization __ Draft Final Focus Group Discussion to Confirm Report Step 9 Links Identified for Intervention

Step 10 [ Selection of Links for Intervention _ -______Roads Condition Survey

Costing and Cost-Effectiveness Step 11 Analysis of Selected Links for Intervention Impact Assessment

S Phasing of Project Intervention Project --.Environment Soia StP 12 Linking

Step 13 Writinq of Draft Final Report _ SPIU & FPMU Comments Step 14 Submission of Draft Final Report _

Step 15 Amendments on Draft Final Report Final Report - and Submission of Final Report 3.2.1 Data Collection various types of data As it was earlier noted in the Inception Report and Draft Report, mainly through the were collected at the initial stage. The initial data collected were such as the secondary sources and desktop review of all available policy documents (KADSEEDS), Kaduna State Economic Empowerment and Development Strategy documents. Visits Kaduna State 1991 National Population Census and various research data collected from were also made to the Local Government Areas to verify the necessary for the secondary sources and also to collect some primary data which are under methodology. delineation and prioritization of intervention areas as discussed of primary data from From a detailed desktop review of the secondary data and collection Areas and visits made to relevant government ministries, agencies, Local Government focus group discussions, the following sets of data were collected: * Population data in each local government area, number - * Socio-economic data: number of schools of boreholes, number of health facilities, etc. of economic * Geographical data: These include land area, spatial distribution activities and land use. produce, the * Economic growth data: These are types and quantity of agricultural number of number of cottage industries, fadama / irrigation farms, and the markets, etc. State, Local . Road network: Road infrastructure network (including Federal, to basic Government and other roads), rural roads that needs to be upgraded standard including Road Complementary facilities that need to be repaired.

and qualitative The above data were subjected to various computation using quantitative of these techniques. The results of these analyses form the subsequent presentation reports.

3.2.2 Delineation of Intervention Areas corridors (that is The intervention areas were then delineated using the major traffic is the major existing State and Federal roads) as boundaries. The reason of this choice poverty and enhance the socio-economic well-being of - objective of the study to alleviate the people through the improvement of basic access.

encompass are The seventeen delineated intervention areas and the communities they listed in Table 3.1. and Figure 3.2. Table 3.1: DELINEATION OF INTERVENTION AREAS

Intervention Local Government Areas Communities Areas Ayu Gwantu, I Part of Sanga Local Government Wase, Mayir, Jekko, Area, part of Jema'a Agamati, Randa Kaura, 2 Part of Zangon Kataf, part of Fadagoma, Kafanchan, Jema'a, part of Kaura, and part of Agwafari, Kasumu, Tafun Dangiwa, Jaba Jagindi, Godogodo and Nitem. Bali, Gidan 3 Part of Zangon Kataf, part of Zonkwa, Fidan Sakun, Kagarko, part of Jema'a, part of Manu, Klmasa, Ayisan, Fai, Chori, Jaba Kamuru, Kwoi Mazuga, Gidan 4 Part of Zangon Kataf and part of Maro, Idon, Kurmin Dutse and Kauru and part of Kajuru Bako, Goragan, Gidan Geshere, Mariri, Kiffin and Bakin Kogi. Agwa ruwuda 5 Part of Kachia Ingili Ido, Bashini Kurmin Dodo 6 Part of Lere Federe, Kurama, 7 Part of Soba, Part of Kauru, Part Borkoni, Kwassam of Lere 8 Part of Chikun, Part of Kajuru, Alugo, Maraban, Kajuru Part of Igabi Dansu, 9 Part of Kajuru, Part of Chikun, Gades, Hanwa, Anchau, Part of Kachia, Igabi, Kaduna Kan, Pambegua North, Kaduna South Igabi, Dutse 10 Part of Soba, Part of Zaria, Part Jaji, Turunku, Kataba, Soba, of Igabi and Part of Kubau Mai, Farawui, Farin Kasa, Danwata, Rahama, Kuzuntu, Panbeguwa.

11 Part of Markafi, Part of Ikara, Part Makarfi, Ikara, Ricita of Soba, Part of Kudan, Part of Zaria Giwa 12 Part of Ikara, Part of Makarfi, Anchan, Paki Kudan and Part of Giwa Kakangi, Karau 13 Part of Giwa, Part of Birnin Gwari Yakawada, lyatawa, and Part of Igabi Karau, Sabo Birnin, Kuyello Communities Intervention Local Government Areas Areas 14 Part of Birnin Gwari, Part of Igabi Kusaya, Gwarso and Part of Chikun

Duwali, Kagani, 15 Part of Kagarko, Part of Jaba, Jere, Jangolo, Gowi Part of Jema'a, Part of Kachia Kagarko, Aribi, Koso,

Galadimawa, 16 Part of Birnin Gwari, Part of Tungan-maikyasawa, Kaura, Part of Giwa Gulbi, Iraba, Rungu, Shaukukinkuna, Likugu. Anchu, Hauwa 17 Part of Kubau, Part of Soba Kare, Damau, Gadas. AREAS 3.2.3 COMPUTATION OF CRITERIA VALUES FOR INTERVENTION collected on the basis Since most of the socio economic, geographic and road data were assumptions were of administrative Local Government Areas, plausible and reasonable is that there is even made to compute values for each intervention area. The assumption over the geographical distribution of population, economic activities and social facilities the proportion of space of each Local Government Area. Based on these assumptions, area was computed to each local government area that falls within each intervention socio-economic attributes. determine the size of various intervention areas and their the constituent Local Thus, the contribution (in terms of size and activities) of into consideration in the Government Areas to a given intervention area is taken are as presented in computation formula. The computations and graphical presentations 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, Tables 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10; and Figures 3.9, 3.10 and 3.11 respectively:

of Intervention Areas Table 3.2: Population, Land Area and Population Density Population Density Intervention Population of Land Area (Persq/km2) Areas Intervention Areas (sq.km) 89 1 62,164 701 109 2 151,390 1,385.5 104 3 285,745 2,741.75 109 4 327,639 2,989.6 35 5 90,258 2,550.5 125 6 106,582 8,55.7 7 253,963 2,462.9 103 121 8 143,149 1,180.1 39 9 129,097 3321.6 202 10 528,091 2,615.2 158 11 218,011 1,383.85 260 12 331,049 1,274.9 83 13 501,295 6,023.9 61 14 235,904 3,884 69 15 201,403 2,908.5 36 16 200,131 5,554.8 120 17 241,269 2,004.6 Population ana ropuiarion uensiiy

CD CD 00 - 0 0D 0 0 -

& 0C0 0 0 0 -o 62,164

0

3 z - 1090-

07 I-

71-I

143,1490 00 8 121Z -

9 29097 ni 269 - 17D 39 z W z I1.. CA

10 28,91 -I 202-

158 -*

12331,049 m

0 0

00

m c o9 > and School Table 3.3: Number of Public Primary and Post Primary Schools Enrolment in Intervention Areas Intervention No of Public Primary School Enrolment Areas and Post Primary Schools

1 93 16,351

2 141 42,830 3 299 173,131 4 283 95,873 5 117 21,846 6 76 19,650 7 196 44,754 8 77 21,676 9 107 21,596 10 204 61,465 11 110 50,577 12 189 54,930 13 243 57,244 14 142 32,429 15 216 62,873 16 165 43,353 17 172 33,384 FIG. 3.4: NUMBER OF PUBLIC PRIMARY AND POST PRIMARY SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL ENROLMENT IN INTERVENTION AREAS

1000000-,

to cm - ooo r 1 °£b cm- 1

2A

100000 | 0 0 00-

141co1 11420 in ant 0 lo *laS S < < CXto1 0 WI

Clo IN |U ofoScol 0

Intervention Areas

E No of Schools 03 School Enrolment

50 Areas Table 3.4: Number of Primary Health Facilities in Intervention Intervention Areas Number of Health Facilities

1 19

2 20 3 57 4 59

5 21 6 19 7 62 8 33 9 26 10 62

11 51 12 38 13 57 14 47 15 45 16 30 17 29 FIG. 3.5: NUMBER OF PRIMARY HEALTH FACILITIES IN INTERVENTION AREAS 70--

62 62

60-- 59 50X57 57 50

Cu 40 3

33

26 0 20

0

Intervention Areas 0 No of Health Facilities

52 Table 3.5: Number of Boreholes in Intervention Areas Intervention Areas Number of Boreholes

1 30 2 56

3 133 4 127

5 41 6 39 7 68 8 29 52 -9

10 129 11 63 12 135 13 127 14 72 15 117 16 82 17 81 FIG. 3.6: NUMBER OF BOREHOLES IN INTERVENTION AREAS

140-- 133 135 ^^. ~129| 12

120. 117

100-

u) 80-

0 868 0 63 60- 56_ o z

54 Table 3.6: Number of Markets in Intervention Areas Intervention Areas Number of Markets

2 3 3 6 4 6

5 2

6 1

7 2

8 2 3 -9 10 4

11 2

12 5

13 2 14 3

15 5

16 3

17 3 FIG. 3.7: NUMBER OF MARKETS IN INTERVENTION AREAS

_ _ 6 1 1- A_ -. - _- 4- .- _-___ -. -) 'I'^l -l *' -

2 - J = 3' -

I I -''1|l1|4

(IL I' 1 1 II . .- 3

Intervention Areas II I l I l III r I I lI

56 Table 3.7: Agricultural Output in Intervention Areas Intervention Areas Agricultural Output Level (MT)

1 242,481.7 2 568,023 3 172,2742.3 4 747,040 5 202,275.7 6 52,554.5

-7 145,815.6

8 77,290 9 127,410 10 301,616.3 11 458,917 12 209,010.9 13 429,860.4 14 116,540.1 15 1,495,291.1 16 112,574.9 17 110,625.9 FIG. 3.8: AGRICULTURAL OUTPUT IN INTERVENTION AREAS

N 1800000- N a, .0) 1600000-

1400000'

1200000-

1000000-,

I- 800000- o

600000- r., CD

NLO M 400000 -1-lq`tNf- CDN t. N 14C" N N 200000 La

0 - v- * l Intervention Areas oAgricultural0 Output

58 Table 3.8: Poverty Index in Intervention Areas of the constituent LGA) Intervention Areas Poverty Index (weighted average Pi = Population of constituent LGA x Poverty Index of LGA / Total Population of the intervention area

1.94 1 2 2.12 3 2.19 4 2.13 5 2.14 6 1.99 7 1.96 8 2.08 9 1.97 10 1.78

11 1.98

12 1.57 13 1.68 14 1.81 15 2.18 16 1.88 17 1.86 INTERVENTION AREAS FIG. 3.9: KADUNA STATE POVERTY INDEX BY LGAS (BASELINE = 4.00) IN 2.5 - .

L2.12 2.13 2.1422.18 2.08 -1.99 1.96 197 198 2 - I1.78 1.8

1.68 L 1.57 1.5 I

*0

0.5

0 IIF

Intervention Areas

60 Table 3.9: Fadama Farm / Irrigation Projects in Intervention Areas Intervention Areas No of FadamaI Irrigation Project

1 0 2 2

3 1

4 2

5 0

6 1

17 0

8 0 1 -9

10 1 0 -11

12 1 0 -13

14 0 0 -15

16 0 1 -17 FIG. 3.10: FADAMA FARM / IRRIGATION PROJECTS IN INTERVENTION AREAS

cm4

,@1.6-

0 1.2-

Cu I E ______-

CI m to7 z co CD o N X X n ZD r Intervention Areas I 0 Fadama / Irrigation Projec

62 Table 3.10: Number of Cottage Industries in Intervention Areas Intervention Areas No of Cottage Industries

1 0

2 3

3 0 4 2

5 5

16 2 7 0

8 0

9 1

10 1

1 1 0 1 -12

13 3 4 -14

15 0 0 -16

17 2 FIG. 3.11: NUMBER OF COTTAGE INDUSTRIES IN INTERVENTION AREAS

5-,

4.5- /

4--

0 2- 2 4

_ p

Intervention Areas

64 Areas 3.2.4 Description of Criteria for Scoring of Intervention Local Government Areas, the Since the intervention areas may consist of more than one up the pro-rated value value for each criterion variable is obtained by summing area. contributed by each Local Government Area to the intervention 1. Population poverty of the populace Since the main objective of the intervention is to alleviate infrastructure, then through the provision of basic access to social and economic the need for access. the larger the population of an intervention area, the greater the links suggest More importantly, the cost effectiveness criterion for prioritizing greater the justification sthat the greater the population to be served by a link, the populated an intervention to include that link for intervention. Thus, the more area, the higher the score assigned.

Table 3.1: Scoring of Population Population (1,000) Scores 60 - 153 1 154 - 247 2 248 - 341 3 342 - 435 4 436 - 529 5

2. Population Density in the intervention The purpose of introducing population density as a criterion of the rural road on area prioritization is to give an approximate idea of the impact area, the greater the area. The lower the population density of an intervention basic accessibility and intervention and the longer the road needed to provide mobility. The order of scores is provided in the table below. Table 3.2: Scoring of Population Density Population Density Scores 260 - 215 1 214- 169 2 168- 123 3 122 - 77 4 76-31 5

3. Land Area on one This criterion has implication for demand for accessibility and mobility For hand, and the potentials for economic development on the other hand. instance, an area with a larger land area will normally have greater opportunities Also, to expand its agricultural base than an area with a smaller, congested area. an intervention area with a large land area would require longer roads for basic to an access. Therefore, the larger the land area the higher is the score assigned intervention area.

Table 3.3: Scoring of Land Area Land Area (sq km) Score 700- 1765 1 1766 - 2831 2 2832 -3897 3 3898 -4963 4 4964 - 6029 5

4. Number of Primary and Post Primary Schools are This is considered as an important criterion because educational institutions important socio economic facilities to which basic access is needed for poverty alleviation and human enhancement. Therefore, the higher the number of schools the in an area the higher is the need for mobility. In this regards, the higher area. number of schools in an intervention area, the higher the score value for that For this criterion, the scoring scale is graded as follows: Table 3.4: Scoring of Educational Facilities Number of Primary and Post Score Primary Schools (Range) 75 - 109 1 110- 144 2 145- 179 3 180-214 4 215 and above 5

Post Primary Schools -5. Enrolment in Primary and a segment of the This criterion is included on the basis that students constitute the cost-effectiveness population that requires basic access to schools. Under road, the greater the principle, the greater the population to be served by a rural area to basic access justification to upgrade links serving such intervention enrolment of an standard. Thus, the scoring is such that the higher the schools intervention area, the higher the score.

Table 3.5: Scoring of Educational Facilities Enrolment Enrolment in Primary and Post Score Primary Schools (000) range 16.0 - 25.5 1 25.6 - 35.1 2 35.2 - 44.7 3 44.8 - 54.3 4 54.3 and above 5

6. School Density (Ratio of School to Land Area) is the link to access the The larger the land area served by a school, the longer land area the higher is facility (school). Therefore, the lower the ratio of school to the score assigned and vice- visa. Table 3.6: Scoring of School: Land Ratio School to Land Area Scores 1:7- 1:12 1 1:13- 1:18 2 1:19- 1:24 3 1:25 - 1:30 4 1:31 - 1:36 5

7. Health Facilities will No doubt, improving access to centres of social facilities like health facilities contribute towards reducing poverty of a people or a place. However, the provision of these facilities alone does not guarantee automatic access to them except adequate mobility is also provided. Therefore, places with greater number this of such facilities will require more mobility to gain access to them. Based on a premise, an area with a higher number of health facilities is scored higher than place with a lower number.

Table 3.7: Scoring of Health Facilities Number of Health Facilities Score 16 -25 1 26 - 35 2 36 - 45 3 46 - 55 4 56 - 65 5

8. Health Clinics Density The number of health facilities in an area cannot be considered in isolation of the health facilities density i.e. the health facilities over a land area. The intervention area with lower health clinics to land area will gain higher score for this criterion. Table 3.8: Scoring of Health Facilities Density Health Clinics :Land Area Scores Ratio 1:20- 1:42 1 1:43 - 1: 65 2 1:66 - 1:87 3 1:88- 1:110 4 1:111 - 1:200 5

9. Number of Boreholes as at 2005 that guarantee the This indicator shows the source and availability of the facilities The intervention need for mobility since it is a measure of social development. The score table is area that has highest number of boreholes is scored highest. as follows:

Table 3.9: Scoring of the Number of Boreholes Number of Boreholes Score 25 -50 1

51 -76 2 77 - 102 3 103- 128 4 129- 154 5

10. Borehole Density land area will gain higher The intervention area with lower number of boreholes to and mobility. score for this criterion as that implies a greater need for access

Table 3.10: Scoring of Borehole Density Borehole: Land Area Ratio Scores 1:9- 1:21 1 1:22- 1:34 2 1:35 - 1:47 3 1:48 - 1:60 4 1:61 - 1:73 5 11. Number of Markets economic This defines the level of commercial activities and the level of number of interactions that take place in an area. Thus, areas with a higher markets will need more accessibility and mobility to sustain the commercial an area, activities in such area. Therefore, the higher the number of markets of the higher the score assigned.

Table 3.11: Scoring of Number of Markets Number of Markets Scores

2 2

3 3 4 4 5 -6 5

12. Agricultural Output areas is One of the economic justifications for the provision of access in the rural regard, to move the local agricultural products to the markets and factories. In this the score the higher the agricultural output of an intervention area, the higher assigned.

Table 3.12: Scoring of Agricultural Output Agricultural Output (MT) Scores 70,000 - 218,000 1 218,001 - 350,001 2 350,002 - 482,002 3 482,003 - 614,003 4 614,004 - 1,860,000 5

13. Poverty Index is to Since the main objective of the rural access and mobility project (RAMP) relatively reduce or alleviate poverty in the State, the target group should be the in the disadvantaged communities. The overriding importance of this index the prioritization exercise is further justified on the basis that the imports to such as computation of the index were universally accepted indicators of poverty factors. tznvironmental, infrastructure, demographic, economic and social of The 1991 Kaduna State Poverty Index (POVI) study by UNDP has a Basic Limit our 4 with the poorest LGA rated 0 while the richest LGA is rated 4. Since in prioritization exercise, we aim at targeting the intervention in disadvantaged areas, this the lower the poverty index of an intervention area, the higher the score for criterion. The scoring table is as follows:

Table 3.13: Scoring of Poverty Index Poverty Index Range Score 2.45 - 2.30 1 2.29 - 2.14 2 2.13 -1.98 3 1.97 -1.82 4 Below 1.82 5

14. Fadama Farms / Irrigation Farms The intervention area with a higher number of these farms is scored higher.

Table 3.14: Scoring of Fadama Farms / Irrigation Farms Number of Fadama Farms Score

2 2

3 3 4 4

5 5

15. Cottage Factories The intervention area with a higher number of cottage factories is scored higher.

Table 3.15: Scoring of Cottage Factories Cottage Factories Score 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4

5 5 3.2.5 Ranking and Selection of the Priority Intervention Areas

Table 3.16 presents the summary of the value of these criteria, while table 3.17 shows the various aggregate scores assigned to each potential intervention area.

Based on the total aggregate scores under all the criteria for each intervention area, the intervention areas are ranked and prioritized as shown in Table 3.17 and Figure 3.12

From the rankings, the first seven priority intervention areas proposed for intervention are as follows in Table 3.18

Table 3.18 Position Intervention Areas 1st 13 2nd 4

3rd 3 3rd 16 5th 15 6th 10 7th9 7th 14 ble 3.16: Summary of the Values of Criteria

co1:01, 39 1,35.51:2 19 11 204,3 1u:69 2.2 3 58,2

19 1:45 1).99 1 52545 0,8 , 57 15 7 1965 :1-1 39 1:2 co 12E.6 24,1 7 25396 244. 103 19 4,5 :7 68 1:1 62

1.7 301,61.3 1 10 52,9 ,1. 02 =220 too u:414513 = 1:2 0 630 1:23 519 1:37 1.948 2 42458,17 0 11 621,016 138.57 58 193 16,3577 1:13 156 1:25 20 1:69 21257 5680,023. 2 3 12 151,304 1,385.5 2609 141 542,830 1:7 0 1:25 133 1:21 57 1:148 2196 6 1729,27042 0 13 250,745 2,741.75 104 299 173,131 1:24 59 1:83 2.813 6 116,040. 2 2 14 32736,90 2,98984 610 128 95,429 1:27 172 1:625 21 1:121 2.14 2 20,275,29 0 2 15 901,258 2,5508.5 35 117 621,846 1:22 41 7

1:64 26 1:127 1.97 3 1127,410 0 0 16 12900,13 3,321.6 39 107 21,3596 1:31 52

1:25 38 1:34 1.57 3 20110,2. 9 1 1 12 331,049 12,704.9 1260 187243,9384 1:71 813

73 4Z 1 __ I-A,1 -.XIo oI 91 o1 n rKl 11 1 -. 41 -I I cy-.n :WLKWJ r -----) -- X - -~ - -~ -~ - Co-~- Population - Land Area > sqlkm C

-o C 3 - pulation LC 0 (3 0 .i . -C -C N Density c of 0- CoCo L -- -- - 0101r Numberprimary IS

n- School - - - -C.n- - - -- 01 enrolment School: Land

Number of borehole /- CoC 01cN).-1N) Nm N ~ ~- 1 ~ Tube wells Number of- N)N boreholes co N).~ 1o )~ N - 01 Co -. n) 01 N)- :land area o No of Health m 2N)~0 N Co ~ 0 ) N) 0 C-~101 -n -n Facilities Health

C -~ facilities Co - 0 N)-~ Co~ ~ 0 -~-~ ) 01 N) ) :land area-

) C Poverty 0 1 0 wN Co 01 . o - o N)C ------.j r------jO@ indexRnin C Number of CoC No 101 N)-~ o ) N - 01Cn 01 markets Agricultural -n 01 01l " N outputs (ton) -c- 01 - Co N o -c-~- ~

Fadama farm N) 0 oc) ) oa oD ) - c0 0) 0 )- lirrigation farms Cottage

- N)N 0 Cow industries C)0 0) 0) 0) - 0Ci 0 )

D, p" m w cnTotalwW ~ ~ Ranking 4 -4 --

3.3 Participatory Planning Approach be achieved through - Meaningful participation of communities and organisations can sensitisation. The sensitisation and mobilisation of the communities was achieved through public enlightenment. The next step involved identification of leaders of the various communities within the project areas. After the leaders were identified, a workshop was organised for various categories of leaders.

Thereafter focus group discussions were organised for a group of selected individual community members, the product of which was the confirmation of some of the baseline data about the communities' perceptions and the links of preference. The idea for this level of consultation was to generate qualitative data which were combined with quantitative data derived from traffic counts, modal preferences, rural transport surveys, visual road condition surveys etc. This participatory planning approach generated responses to the following concerns: * Which community members desire the use of transport? * When is access required? * Why is access required? * Where do the rural dwellers travel to? * How is transportation paid for? * What mode of transport do people take or prefer?

3.3.1 The Stakeholders Workshop A stakeholders' workshop with the state and local government officials and community of the need members was organized from 16th to 17th May, 2006. This was in recognition to involve stakeholders and users of the intervention projects in the selection, preparation and implementation of the investment programme. The comments and contributions of stakeholders during the forum formed part of the inputs for the selection of the first seven areas with the highest priority.. Specifically, the workshop assisted to achieve the following objectives: * To validate the prioritization exercise already done using secondary data in each LGA. * To reveal qualitative criteria that might become evident as a result of this prioritization exercise. * Plan for detailed field surveys of the intervention areas. and review of the prioritized Intervention - The outcome of this stage was the confirmation Area (PIA) boundaries and constituent communities.

3.3.1.1 Participation of various The Stakeholders Workshop was well attended by representatives State and Local communities in the State, including traditional rulers, religious leaders, office of the project, Government officials, officials of the State and national coordinating sector. In all there members of Community Based Organisations (CBOs) and the private were a total of 165 participants for the two day workshop.

discuss the reports The participants were subdivided into three thematic groups to presented by the consultants.

3.3.1.2 Workshop Proceedings in Annexure The proceedings of the two day workshop were recorded and are presented

5.

3.4 QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY rural travel and socio- A questionnaire survey was carried out to elicit information on collected include trip economic characteristics of the rural dwellers. The information means of mobility purposes, origin and destination, travel costs, income and occupation, and links most often used.

questionnaires were The analysis of information generated from the responses to the used to determine the preferred links by the communities,

3. The questionnaires used are attached as Annexures 1, 2, and

3.5 Traffic Count Survey links to determine A 24 hour 7 day traffic count survey was conducted on the selected form is attached as the current volume of traffic flow on them. The traffic count survey Annexure 4. CHAPTER 4 RURAL TRAVEL AND MOBILITY PATTERN

- 4.0 Introduction The survival of economic and social activities in rural areas of developing countries largely depends on the adequacy and efficiency of transport system. This is due to the fact that hardly can any economic and social activities take place without movement. The spatial separation of economic resources can only be bridged by the provision of efficient and affordable transport system(s). The demand for transport facilities is usually a derived one, such that their non-availability often hinders the desired social and economic development of the rural areas.

In this chapter, we examine the basic travel and mobility patterns of rural dwellers in Kaduna State. The analysis of the rural travel pattern would help to appreciate the strategic role transport plays in the overall development of rural areas in the State. Rural mobility problems will also assist the policy makers and executors to have a deeper insight to the degree of these problems, how they adversely affect the quality of lives of rural people and the appropriate solutions to the perceived rural transport problems.

4.1 Socio-Economic Characteristics of Rural Dwellers The analyses of rural socio-economic characteristics are examined in order to have a picture of the condition of rural life quality. One very important index of quality of life is the income. Table 4.1 shows the income structure of the rural populace. From the analysis, majority of rural dwellers fall within the low income group, about 46.15% have monthly income less than N10,000 while 19.50% have monthly income not more than N20,000.00. Only about 6.32% earn monthly income of N50,000 and above. In this study, we used a threshold income of N20,000 to categorize the dwellers into poor and non poor.

The above analysis shows that majority (65.65%) of the rural populace, live below the poverty level. Improvement of rural access and mobility needs of these people will no doubt enhance their living conditions. However, in providing this improved access and mobility, the issue of affordability should also be put into consideration.

One of the purposes for rural mobility is the access to places of work, therefore, the occupational structure of the rural people would determine the type of mobility and the level of rural accessibility required. Table 4.2 shows the occupational structure of rural people in Kaduna State. As shown in the table, farming is the major occupation of the rural communities in the State. Over 51% of the people engage in farming activities followed by trading (11.47%). Trading and farming are in many cases combined together, constituting 62.84% of the occupation of the people in the area. After the harvest of the agricultural produce, the farmers also take the products to the markets for sale.

The proceeds from the sales of agricultural produce are then utilized to purchase other needs of the rural people, which they themselves cannot produce. For rural farmers to increase their profit margin on agricultural sales, there is need to provide accessibility to market centres and affordable means of mobility.

Poor accessibility and mobility have been observed as one of the major challenges confronting rural people in marketing their agricultural produce. - Table 4.1: Rural Income Structure Total S/N Prioritized N10,000 N10,000 N21,000 N31,000 N41,000 N50,000 Intervention per - - - - and Areas month N20,000 N30,000 N40,000 N50,000 above 1 PIA(1) 27 7 7 1 3 1

2 PIA(2) 19 8 4 3 4 5

3 PIA(3) 15 19 13 3 1

4 PIA(3) 17 7 14 13 2 7 3 5 PIA(5) 6 11 3 0 2

3 6 PIA(6) 7 2 1 1 1

7 PIA(7) 22 10 14 2 7 2

8 PIA(7) 55 7 4 - 1 2

Total 168 71 60 21 21 23 364

Percentage 46.15% 19.50% 16.48% 5.77% 5.77% 6.32% 100%

PIA = Priority Intervention Area Table 4.2: Occupation of Rural Dwellers Total S/N Prioritized Farming Trading Schooling Civil Servant Artisans Technicians Others Intervention Areas 1 6 1 PIA(1) 15 22 11 2 1

- 2 1 2 PIA(2) 27 2 6 10

2 1 6 3 PIA(3) 38 2 1 13 4 PIA(3) 33 10 10 4 - 1 -

- 6 5 PIA(5) 18 - 1 2

1 1 6 PIA(6) 13 - - -

1 7 PIA(7) 35 6 15 6 - -

- 23 8 PIA(7) 27 4 11 13 -

44 401 Total 206 46 55 40 4 6

10.97 100% Percentage 51.37% 11.47% 13. 7% 9.97% 0.99% 1.50%

PIA = Priority Intervention Area

81 -4.2 Analysis of Existing Means of Rural Mobility The means of mobility available to the rural community would affect the pattern of rural travel and types of transport infrastructure. A community that depends mainly on the use of bicycles and animals perhaps may not need bitumen surfaced road but an earth or surface- dressing road that is good enough for passage of bicycles and animals. However, the heavy rainfall pattern experienced in the State during the rainy season may require the adoption of surface dressed or asphalt finished roads so as to prevent the percolation of water into the road layers with the consequence of increased maintenance costs over time.

Our finding reveals that most rural communities rely on the use of bicycle, motor cycle and animal for mobility. About 44.74% of the rural populace use bicycle. The next highest group is those who use animals for carriage of goods and persons within rural localities. The. least transport mode used is lorry, only 1% of the people interviewed use lorry for carriage of goods to the markets or other distant locations. The low use of lorry is due to the poor condition of the rural roads in the State despite its advantage of moving a large volume of goods at a time to the market.

The dominance of non motorized transport for rural transportation is not due to efficiency of the mode but rather due to affordability and availability. In addition, non motorized transport is the only type that can be used for the type of transport infrastructure available in the rural areas. When motorable roads are provided, it will promote the use of motorized transport.

The rural communities expressed their preference for motorized transport over and above non motorized. For instance, more than 80% of the rural populace prefer the use of motor vehicle to bicycle or animals, which they are currently using. The implication of this is that, people are using what is available to them not necessarily what they would have loved to use. Table 4.3: Rural Means of Mobility 1N Prioritized Bicycle Animal Motor Tricycle Car Bus Lorry Total Intervention Cycle Areas 1 PIA(1) 12 57 - 21 8 6 2

2 PIA(2) 44 1 2 13 6 - -

I 3 PIA(3) 31 - 1 41 14

4 PIA(3) 18 31 - 4 - 1

5 PIA(5) 9 - - 3 2 -

6 PIA(6) 10 - - 3 - -

7 PIA(7) 15 40 - - 9 - 1

2 8 PIA(7) 82 - 29 - 4 2

494 Total 221 99 32 85 43 8 6

Percentage 44.74% 20.04% 6.48% 17.21% 8.70% 1.62% 1.21% 100%

PIA = Priority Intervention Area

4.3 Rural Trip Purposes Rural communities need improved mobility for various purposes. The rural populace move for various reasons. The various trip purposes made by the rural communities are analyzed in Table 4.4. From the table, it is revealed that trips to farm and market centres are the most dominant trip purposes in the rural areas. The two trip purposes constitute 38.88% of trips made by the rural communities. Trips to places of worship and social functions also record a significant proportion of trip purposes in the area. The two trips record altogether 33.1% of all trip purposes in the area.

The above implies that four major trip purposes could be regarded as being dominant in the rural communities of Kaduna State. These trips are: journey to farms, journey to market, journey to places of worship and journey to attend social functions. Any effort towards improving rural access and mobility should be geared toward meeting these mobility needs of the rural communities in the area. I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I Table 4.4: Rural Trips Purposes S/N Prioritized Farm School Trip to Market Work Trip Recreational Social Religious Total Intervention Trip Trip Health Trips other than Trip Trip Trip Areas Centres Farming 1 PIA(1) 16 11 18 19 14 - - -

2 PIA(2) 49 3 49 49 49 5 49 48

3 PIA(3) 26 3 2 26 5 - - 10

4 PIA(3) 48 4 23 22 41 12 26 41

5 PIA(5) 27 14 20 24 12 5 24 22

6 PIA(6) 15 1 12 12 5 1 14 13

7 PIA(7) 50 19 33 22 6 - 24 47

8 PIA(7) 77 16 80 78 40 27 79 80

308 71 147 250 131 50 216 262 1435

21.46% 4.95% 10.24% 17.42% 9.13% 3.48% 15.05% 18.05% 100%

PIA = Priority Intervention Area

84 - 4.4 Average Daily Cost for Various Travel Purposes As revealed in Table 4.5, the cost of movement by rural communities varies from one

- intervention area to the other and between one form of trip and another. Our analysis reveals that journey to health facilities records the least cost of movement of N245.83. Surprisingly, trips for social activities such as visiting friends and relations, attending social functions within and outside the rural areas record the highest average cost of movement of N681.03 for the entire State.

Prioritized Intervention Area 3 (PIA3) i.e. Intervention Area 3 has the highest cost of transportation in the State. This implies that transport cost is very high in that part of the State. For instance, the average cost calculated for recreational trips in that part of the State is not less than N1,846.00. This is extremely high. Improvement in transport infrastructure and provision of means of transportation would assist to reduce the exorbitant cost of transportation in the area.

4.5 Visual Road Condition Survey / Road Access Safety Audit Inorder to have a true assessment of the surfaces of the selected links, the consultant visited some of the roads. Though it was not possible to traverse the entire stretch of some of the links visited, the reconnaissance survey revealed the extent of disrepair of the links and the desirability for major improvement of both the riding surface quality and safety.

All the links visited traverse generally flat to gently sloping terrain passing through rural communities and connecting with either State or Federal roads.

In all of the cases, the existing road were earth roads, some having been started but abandoned under the then Directorate of Food, Roads and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI). The surfaces were poorly drained, some very badly leading to the presence of gullies on the road and medium sized ravines at the edges. In stretches where the road surface had become a drain, the road sections were deep-incised, below the natural surrounding area. This was largely due to an uncontrolled flow of run-off across and along the road.

In most cases, the horizontal and vertical alignments were fair, albeit requiring improvement, for which there are no natural constraints.

A pictorial presentation of some of the features found on the roads visited is shown in the plates. Table 4.5: Summary of Average Daily Costs for Different Travel Purposes Religious S/No Prioritized Farm Trip School Trip to Market Work Trip Recreational Social Trip Intervention (N) Trip Health Trips other than Trip Trip (N) Area (N) Centres (N) Farming (N) (N) (N) (4) 1 PIA(1) 433.75 178.18 212.11 230.00 176.67 -

348.55 2 PIA(2) 257.98 319 287.29 389 555.84 973 815.07

642.82 3 PIA(3) 375.95 637.50 376.82 596.00 967.69 1,846 1,230.43

- 141.25 4 PIA(3) 172.12 350.00 115.00 232.31 30.00 90.00

221 56 5 PIA(5) 178 133 217 253 154 575

77 6 PIA(6) 86.64 203.5 123.62 160 69.88 40 144.87

377.50 7 PIA(7) 433.75 582.14 395.71 922.86 514.29 - 150.00

8 PIA(7) 105 263.33 239.12 210.69 313.53 492.86 224.83 330.00

Total 255.40 295.33 245.83 374.23 339.06 669.47 681.03 281.87

PIA = Priority Intervention Area

86 4.6 Traffic Count A 24-hr 7-day traffic count was conducted on certain roads selected randomly from each of the prioritized intervention areas. The basis of this was to give an idea of traffic up volume on the links within the rural areas. The volumes obtained were then projected to year 2010 and 2015 as presented in Table 4.6 and Figure 4. 1. Table 4.6: Current Average Daily Vehicular Traffic Volume on Randomly Selected Links within the Prioritized Intervention Areas

S/No Links Trailer Lorry Pick- Taxi Big Midi Mini Motorcycle Bicycle Animal Total Projec up / Bus Bus Bus Traffi Van Car Grow 2006 2010 1 Dogon Dawa - U/Danko - 1 10 3 11 0 0 17 400 138 10 590 1,031 Birnin Gwari - Kurigi 2 Giwa - Kakangi - Karau Karau 0 5 2 6 0 0 9 208 72 5 307 537

3 Fadan Kamantan - Yangal - 1 15 5 17 0 0 27 638 220 16 939 1,641 Walijo

4 Sagawaza - UNVakili - 0 14 7 16 0 0 28 620 214 15 914 1,597 U/Ruhogo 5 Kwoi - Fadan Kwarabe - 0 3 1 3 0 0 4 103 36 3 153 267 U/Tsabta - Fadan Kagoma 6 Idon - Iri - Maro 2 17 6 19 0 0 29 701 242 17 1,033 1,805 7 Janwuriya - Kasuwan Magani 0 3 1 4 0 0 6 139 48 4 205 358 8 Kangimi - Borkono - Gadan 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 21 8 1 34 59 Gaya 9 Rigasa - Mallamawa - Kwate 3 33 11 37 0 0 58 1,380 476 34 2,032 3,551 1 - Kakura 10 Kurmin Ruwa- Bakin Kogi-- 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 34 12 1 51 89 Geshere - Binawa Pilot 11 Kubau - Keffi - Pambegua 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 14 3 2 21 37 12 Bakura- Belle 0 3 4 9 0 0 5 213 68 7 309 540 13 Kagarko- Kudiri 0 4 1 4 0 0 6 147 51 4 217 379

88

I I I I I l I I I t I t I l 4-0) 0) o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0o 00o 0 0 0 0 0

-n Dogon Dawa - U/Danko 5190 - - Bimin Gwari - Kurigi 1,03 3,01 | a

Giwa - Kakangi - Karau 0 537 Karau 1 571 CD

Fadan Kamantan- 1641 90

Yangal - Walijo - _ 4,805 .02. CD

Sagawaza - U/Wakili - 94 1 597DQ U/Ruhogo - 4,677 1

Kwoi - Fadan Kwarabe 153 - UrTsabta - Fadan 267 Kagoma 783 0

1,033 CD Idon - Iri - Maro ,805 O

______111 5,2 36

r anwuriya - Kasuwan 358 Magani 1,04

0 0 34 CD

Kurmin Ruwa - Bakin 51 l Kogi - Geshere - L89 Binawa Pilot j 261 t

Kubau- Keffi - 21 0-' 37 Pambegua 107 N (D 0.

Bakura - Belle 540 1 581

217 Kagarko - Kudiri 379 0 1,11B -I CHAPTER 5 IDENTIFICATION, SELECTION AND COSTING OF LINKS IN THE PRIORITIZED INTERVENTION AREAS

5.0 Procedure and Methods Having prioritized the intervention areas, the next crucial stage of this study is the identification of the links under the intervention programme. To do this, trained local enumerators were employed to collect data on the mode(s) and links frequently used to gain access to various services and facilities in the rural areas. Three (3) sets of questionnaires were designed and administered on rural communities including: * Inventory of Socio-economic Facilities Survey * Rural Travel Questionnaire

Copies of these questionnaires are contained in Annexures 1 - 4.

In addition to the use of questionnaires, a stakeholder's forum was organized through the State Project Monitoring Committee (SPMC) and State Project Implementation Unit (SPIU) as well as representatives of local governments within the prioritized intervention areas earlier selected.

The inputs generated from these two main sources (i.e. questionnaires and stakeholders) were used to identify and determine the number of links that require intervention programme in the prioritized intervention areas.

5.1 Prioritization of Links in Intervention Areas and their Estimated Costs.

5.1.1 Prioritization of Links With the successful delineation of the entire State into coherent intervention areas, and the selection of the priority intervention areas based on set criteria, links have been selected in

- all the intervention areas using the responses to the questionnaires administered in communities and the LGA councils in the intervention areas, the inputs from the State

- Project Implementation Unit (SPIU) and the State Project Monitoring Committee (SPMC).

It should be noted that the selection of links also took cognizance of the present various intervention in roads development under several other programmes, such as the Fadama II (World Bank-assisted) project and the State Ministry of Works. This was to prevent duplication of efforts and waste of resources.

The lengths of the links have been estimated from the available maps and the total distances of links in each intervention area is not necessarily equal. This is because some intervention areas are more in need having been neglected in the past.

Tables 5.1 - 5.8 show the list of prioritized links within each of the prioritized intervention areas, while Figures 5.1 - 5.8 show the maps for the respective prioritized intervention areas.

5.2 Road Pavement A pavement structure of 500mm (minimum) and 2 coats of surface dressing finish have been adopted for the purpose of estimating the costs of construction of all the roads. The cross section of road assumed is 7.3m carriageway and 1.5m of shoulders either side, and an earth drain.

5.3 Drainage Structures in single, - Various types of culverts have been adopted, mainly pipes and box culverts, double and multiple combinations, based on the assessment of the drainage requirements along the links.

Bridges have also been provided at river crossings in either single, double and multi-spans combinations based on the sizes of the rivers at the crossings.

5.4 Estimated Costs For the pavement, (including the culverts), an estimated cost of N15 million per kilometre of road has been adopted in estimating the cost of constructing the roads.

For the bridges, an estimated cost of N250,000.00 per square metre of bridge, using a bridge width of 8m, was adopted.

5.4.1 Maintenance Costs Maintenance constitutes a significant portion of roads cost especially in the long term, as it guarantees the consistent functionality of the facility as well as minimizes effect on road user costs. Maintenance can either be routine, recurrent or periodic. Routine maintenance activities are required whether the road is paved or not and do not necessarily depend on the traffic volume. They include grass cutting, drain clearing, maintenance / desilting of culverts, bridges and road furniture. The frequency of these activities could be once or twice a year, depending on their necessity.

Recurrent maintenance activities usually depend on traffic volume and may include potholes patching.

Periodic maintenance, on the other hand, consists of activities needed at intervals of greater than one year, and may consist of surface dressing, re-gravelling or even asphaltic concrete overlay.

Based on the above, an estimate of N500,000 / km has been adopted for the envisaged routine maintenance activities on the roads for the first 3 years of operation of the roads.

5.4.2 Estimated Total Costs Table 5.9 summarises the estimated costs for the construction of the pavement, bridges and maintenance for the first 3 years for each of the prioritized links in the eight intervention areas.

From the table, a total length of 1,146.30 kilometres of road have been selected from the 8 intervention areas. The selected road have been estimated to require N17,194,500,000, N2,460,000,000.00 and N764,250,000.00 respectively for construction of pavement, construction of bridge crossing and 3 year routine maintenance. TABLE 5.1: LIST OF LINKS IN INTERVENTION AREA 13 (1ST PRIORITY) S/No Links Length Current Drainage Estimated Cost of Construction / Rehabilitation Estimated R (km) State of Structures Cost of Link Maintenance for first 3-yrs Culverts Bridges Pavement Structures Total 1 Tungan 10.0 Earth 24 0 150,000,000.00 0.00 150,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 Maikyasuwa Road - Kwadaga 2 Kwadaga - 23.9 EarthRoad 49 1 358,500,000.00 60,000,000.00 418,500,000.00 11,950,000.00 Kuyello 3 Kuyello - 21.3 Earth 31 6 319,500,000.00 360,000,000.00 679,500,000.00 10,650,000.00 U/Danko Road - 4 U/Danko - 39.1 Earth 41 2 586,500,000.00 120,000,000.00 706,500,000.00 19,550,000.00 Kerawa Road - 5 Kerawa - 12.9 Earth 15 0 193,500,000.00 0.00 193,500,000.00 6,450,000.00 Gwada Road 6 Gwada - 22.4 Earth 36 1 336,000,000.00 60,000,000.00 396,000,000.00 11,200,000.00 Zangwan Road Aya- 7 Kerawa - 11.4 Earth 21 0 171,000,000.00 0.00 171,000,000.00 5,700,000.00 Murai Road 8 Murai - 9.5 Earth 14 0 142,500,000.00 0.00 142,500,000.00 4,750,000.00 Karaukarau Road 9 Karaukarau 28.1 Earth 45 0 421,500,000.00 0.00 421,500,000.00 14,050,000.00 - Kakangi - Road Giwa 10 Gwada - 15.2 Earth 16 0 228,000,000.00 0.00 228,000,000.00 7,600,000.00 Sabo Birnin Road - Saye - 11 Labar- 19.0 Earth 27 0 285,000,000.00 0.00 285,000,000.00 9,500,000.00 Tami Road Total 212.8 3,192,000,000.00 600,000,000.00 3,792,000,000.00 106,400,000.00

93

I X I I I I I I l l l I I I I I I 1 TABLE 5.2: LIST OF LINKS IN INTERVENTION AREA 4 (2N D PRIORITY) S/No Links Length Current Drainage Estimated Cost of Construction / Remr (km) State Structures Rehabilitation of Link Culverts Bridges Pavement Structures 1 Idon - Iri 28.0 Earth 38 2 420,000,000.00 120,000,000.00 540,000,000.00 14,000,000.00 Gida - Maro Road 2 Maro - 40.4 Earth 45 0 606,000,000.00 0.00 606,000,000.00 20,200,000.00 Anchuna Road 3 Kabiri - 27.4 Earth 33 2 411,000,000.00 120,000,000.00 531,000,000.00 13,700,000.00 Agam Road 4 Geshere - 12.0 Earth 26 1 180,000,000.00 60,000,000.00 240,000,000.00 6,000,000.00 Binawa Road 5 Kizaza - 15.6 Earth 27 1 234,000,000.00 60,000,000.00 294,000,000.00 7,800,000.00 Bakin Kogi Road 6 Binawa Pilot 22.4 Earth 25 1 336,000,000.00 60,000,000.00 396,000,000.00 11,200,000.00 - Bakin Road Kogi - U/Gaya 7 Kwassam - 15.2 Earth 28 0 228,000,000.00 0.00 228,000,000.00 7,600,000.00 Germadi - Road Galadimawa 8 Fadan Ikulu 16.8 Earth 32 0 252,000,000.00 0.00 252,000,000.00 8,400,000.00 - U/Rihogo Road Total 177.8 2,667,000,000.00 420,000,000.00 3,087,000,000.00 88,900,000.00

94

1 l l l I I l I l l I I I I I I I TABLE 5.3: LIST OF LINKS IN INTERVENTION AREA 3 (3RD PRIORITY) S/No Links Length Current Drainage Estimated Cost of Construction / Rema (km) State Structures Rehabilitation of Link

Culverts Bridges Pavement Structures 1 Segwaza 19.3 Earth 33 0 289,500,000.00 0.00 289,500,000.00 9,650,000.00 Road U/Ruhogo 2 Kurmin 55.9 Earth 65 2 838,500,000.00 120,000,000.00 958,500,000.00 27,950,000.00 Sidi- Road Walijo - Yangal - Fadan Kamantan Total 75.2 1,128,000,000.00 120,000,000.00 1,248,000,000.00 134,900,000.00

95

I 1 I I I l I I l l I I l I I I I I TABLE 5.4: LIST OF LINKS IN INTERVENTION AREA 16 (3RD PRIORITY) S/No Links Length Current Drainage Estimated Cost of Construction / Remark (km) State Structures Rehabilitation of Link Culverts Bridges Pavement Structures 1 Kurigi - 24.4 Earth 37 1 366,000,000.00 60,000,000.00 426,000,000.00 12,200,000.00 Shawaka Road - Iraba 2 Ukaga - 25.2 Earth 27 2 378,000,000.00 120,000,000.00 498,000,000.00 12,600,000.00 Bitari - Road Madangi - Sabon LaSyia° 3 Kuka - 34.1 Earth 41 2 511,500,000.00 120,000,000.00 631,500,000.00 17,050,000.00 Chidago Road -Bakwak Total 83.7 1,255,500,000.00 300,000,000.00 1,555,500,000.00 41,850,000.00

96

I I I I I I l I I l X t I l lI TABLE 5.5: LIST OF LINKS IN INTERVENTION AREA 15 (5TH PRIORITY) S/No Links Length Current Drainage Estimated Cost of Construction / Remar (km) State Structures Rehabilitation of Link Culverts Bridges Pavement Structures 1 Kalanga - 32.0 Earth 45 2 480,000,000.00 120,000,000.00 600,000,000.00 16,000,000.00 Kagani- Road Kudiri - Kagarko 2 Kagarko - 33.2 Earth 39 1 498,000,000.00 60,000,000.00 558,000,000.00 16,600,000.00 Akote - Road Kushe- Kahir - Kasaru 3 F/Kagoma 21.6 Earth 19 1 324,000,000.00 60,000,000.00 384,000,000.00 10,800,000.00 Road U/Tsabta - Jagindi____ 4 U/Tsabta 22.4 Earth 31 1 336,000,000.00 60,000,000.00 396,000,000.00 11,200,000.00 Road Dangoma - Bakin Kogi 5 Godogodo 9.6 Earth 18 1 144,000,000.00 60,000,000.00 204,000,000.00 4,800,000.00 Road

___ Dangoma ____ 6 Duran- 8.4 Earth 11 0 126,000,000.00 0.00 126,000,000.00 4,200,000.00 Ankung - Road

_ _ _ I n d o fa ______Total 127.2 1,908,000,000.00 360,000,000.00 2,268,000,000.00 63,600,000.00

97

I l I I I I I l l l ( I I I t I TABLE 5.6: LIST OF LINKS IN INTERVENTION AREA 10 (6TH PRIORITY) S/No Links Length Current Drainage Structures Estimated Cost of Construction I (km) State of Rehabilitation Link Culverts Bridges Pavement Structures 1 Kangimi - 29.8 Earth 21 1 447,000,000.00 60,000,000.00 507,000,000.00 14,900,000.00 Borkono - Gidan Road Gaya 2 Zangwan Aya - 15.2 Earth 17 0 228,000,000.00 0.00 228,000,000.00 7,600,000.00 Gadan Gaya Road 3 Bakura - Kinkiba 49.6 Earth 32 1 744,000,000.00 60,000,000.00 804,000,000.00 24,800,000.00 - Wanka - Road Richifa - Dinya - Turawa - Yelwa

4 Damau - Leren 10.9 Earth 11 1 163,500,000.00 60,000,000.00 223,500,000.00 5,450,000.00 Dutse Road 5 Damau - Banki 10.2 Earth 6 0 153,000,000.00 0.00 153,000,000.00 5,100,000.00 Road - 6 Kareh - Magami 44.6 Earth 33 2 669,000,000.00 120,000,000.00 789,000,000.00 22,300,000.00 - Anchau - Road Haskiya 7 Kareh - Nasari - 27.3 Earth 26 0 409,500,000.00 0.00 409,500,000.00 13,650,000.00 Damau - Anchau Road Total 187.6 2,814,000,000.00 300,000,000.00 3,114,000,000.00 93,800,000.00

98

I I I I I l I I I I I l I I l I I TABLE 5.7: LIST OF LINKS IN INTERVENTION AREA 9 (7TH PRIORITY) S/No Links Length Current Drainage Estimated Cost of Construction Rems (km) State Structures Rehabilitation of Link Culverts Bridges Pavement Structures 1 Kajuru - 34.9 Earth 51 2 523,500,000.00 120,000,000.00 643,500,000.00 17,450,000.00 Kutura - Road Maro 2 Kankomi 27.6 Earth 56 1 414,000,000.00 60,000,000.00 474,000,000.00 13,800,000.00 Station - Road G.Ango - Kabai - Nufununan - Gidan Barde 3 Gidan 17.6 Earth 28 1 264,000,000.00 60,000,000.00 324,000,000.00 8,800,000.00 Barde - Road

Total 80.1 1,201,500,000.00 240,000,000.00 1,441,500,000.00 133,850,000.00

99

I I l t t I I I l I t I ( I I l I TABLE 5.8: LIST OF LINKS IN INTERVENTION AREA 14 7TH PRIORITY) S/No Links Length Current Drainage Estimated Cost of Construction / Rem (km) State Structures Rehabilitation of Link Culverts Bridges Pavement Structures 1 Rigasa - 14.4 Earth 20 0 216,000,000.00 0.00 216,000,000.00 7,200,000.00 Kakura - Road Kwate 2 Rigachikun 35.2 Earth 26 0 528,000,000.00 0.00 528,000,000.00 17,600,000.00 - Tami - Road

___Birnin Yero 3 Kwater- 31.3 Earth 29 1 469,500,000.00 60,000,000.00 529,500,000.00 15,650,000.00 Kabala - Road Takka - Garu II 4 Garu II - 45.7 Earth 30 0 685,500,000.00 0.00 685,500,000.00 22,850,000.00 Garu I - Road Pyapei - Kauni- Rimi - Dabuka - Kwonai - 5 Takka - 32.2 Earth 17 0 483,000,000.00 0.00 483,000,000.00 16,100,000.00 Udawa - Road Tundun Kwarda - Dakwata - Udawa 6 Udawa - 43.1 Earth 27 1 646,500,000.00 60,000,000.00 706,500,000.00 21,550,000.00 Shadati - Road Ruman - Abu Total 201.9 3,028,500,000.00 120,000,000.00 3,148,500,000.00 100,950,000.00

100

I I I l I l I I l I l I I ( l l l Table 5.9: Summary of Estimated Total Costs

Estimated Total Total Total Estimated Cost of Construction I Rehabilitation Cost of Remarks S/No Links No of length No of Maintenance Links f(kin)ks bridges for first 3-yrs Pavement Structures Total

1 PIA 1 11.0 212.8 10 3,192,000,000.00 600,000,000.00 3,792,000,000.00 106,400,000.00

2 PIA 2 8.0 177.8 7 2,667,000,000.00 420,000,000.00 3,087,000,000.00 88,900,000.00

3 PIA 3 2.0 75.2 2 1,128,000,000.00 120,000,000.00 1,248,000,000.00 134,900,000.00

4 PIA 3 3.0 83.7 5 1,255,500,000.00 300,000,000.00 1,555,500,000.00 41,850,000.00

5 PIA 5 6.0 127.2 5 1,908,000,000.00 360,000,000.00 2,268,000,000.00 63,600,000.00

6 PIA 6 7.0 187.6 5 2,814,000,000.00 300,000,000.00 3,114,000,000.00 93,800,000.00

7 PIA 7 3.0 80.1 4 1,201,500,000.00 240,000,000.00 1,441,500,000.00 133,850,000.00

8 PIA 7 6.0 201.9 1 3,028,500,000.00 120,000,000.00 3,148,500,000.00 100,950,000.00

Total 46 1,146.30 39 17,194,500,000.00 2,460,000,000.00 19,654,500,000.00 764,250,000.00

101

I l I l I I I l l I l I I l CHAPTER 6

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

6.0 Recommendations

factor of the 1. The occupational structure of the rural people should be the determinant necessary type of mobility as well as level of rural accessibility required. This is be since the provision of rural access and mobility is an investment that must justified. of Kaduna State, it 2. As agriculture is the major economic activity of the rural populace of the is expedient to provide access and mobility that guarantees the evacuation from agricultural produce to commercial centres and conversely of agricultural inputs the commercial centres to the villages. by the projected 3. The desirability of surfacing for the roads should be determined traffic growth and the need to protect the road pavement layers from excessive be considered rainfall. In this guise, a phased programme of development may basic access inorder to cover as many areas as possible while fulfilling the need for and mobility. (councils) that can 4. There exists some level of capacity in the local government areas therefore be tapped for roads development and maintenance. The project may the consider the use of force account and labour intensive approach to maintaining roads upon completion. CHAPTER 6

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

6.0 Recommendations

the people should be the determinant factor of 1. The occupational structure of the rural accessibility required. This is necessary type of mobility as well as level of rural mobility is an investment that must be since the provision of rural access and justified. it activity of the rural populace of Kaduna State, 2. As agriculture is the major economic that guarantees the evacuation of the is expedient to provide access and mobility and conversely of agricultural inputs from agricultural produce to commercial centres the commercial centres to the villages. roads should be determined by the projected 3. The desirability of surfacing for the road pavement layers from excessive traffic growth and the need to protect the of development may be considered rainfall. In this guise, a phased programme while fulfilling the need for basic access inorder to cover as many areas as possible and mobility. can the local government areas (councils) that 4. There exists some level of capacity in The project may therefore be tapped for roads development and maintenance. intensive approach to maintaining the consider the use of force account and labour roads upon completion. ANNEXURES FACILITIES INVENTORY OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC 1. QUESTIONNAIRE 1 - SURVEY RURAL TRAVEL 2. QUESTIONNAIRE 2 - & INTERVENTION - ROAD INVENTORY SURVEY 3. QUESTIONNAIRE 3 REQUIRED SURVEY INSTRUMENT 4. QUESTIONNAIRE 4 - TRAFFIC WORKSHOP 5. PROCEEDINGS OF STAKEHOLDERS LGAs OF KADUNA STATE 6. LIST OF LINKS IN SOME PLATES

- KWATE - KAKURA ROAD PLATE 1 - MALLAMAWA - UNGWAR DANKO ROAD PLATE 2 - DOGO DAWA KUSIN - KUDIRI - KUSE MAKARANTA - DENDE - PLATE 3 - KAGARKO - AKOTU - U/TSABTA - JAGINDI ROAD PLATE 4 - FADAN KAGOMA ROAD KOGI - DANGOMA - GODOGODO PLATE 5 - UrTSABTA - BAKIN - SAGWAZA ROAD PLATE 6 - UM/AKILI - U/ROHOGO - ZUTURUNG - YANGAL RAOD PLATE 7 - FADAN KAMANTAN - MARO ROAD PLATE 8 - KUTUL CROSSING I1) ILIJ IUJ me f4 e OO ,i 4,

t-od min

I I I I I I C) elU C) 01u) U) rs

>.,

1- C) f. -l UJ ,L 4 z- r!;C;NC)) ZEn:1 Px e,

'- U

Gt

C.) [1 Is) Cr -11 U1 .011*

Fll- 1:.. "I

z-7 U,IC

1-4 z

C)

IJ) L, -I Cr

I I I I I I I l I I I I t QUESTIONNAIRE 2

RURAL TRAVEL QUESTIONNAIRE I- I village / Town) (To be filled in by the Field Assistants for each settlement

1.0 General Information 1.1 Name of Respondent ...... 1.2 Name of the village / town ...... 1.3 Local Government Area ...... 1.4 State ...... 1.5 D ate ......

2.0 Socio-Economic Data of Rural Travellers 2.1 Sex (a) Male (b) Female 2.2 Age (d) 41 - 50 yrs (a) Below 20 years (b) 21 - 30 yrs (c) 31 - 40 yrs (e) 51 - 60 yrs (f) 60 and above 2.3 Main occupation (civil servant) (e) Artisan (a) Farmer (b) Trader (c) Schooling (d) Teacher (f Technicians (g) Others (specify) ...... 2.4 Educational Qualifications School (a) No formal education (b) Primary School (c) Secondary (d) OND/NCE/HSC (e) BSCIHND/BA (f) Post graduate 2.5 Marital Status (a) Married (b) Single (c) Divorce (d) Widow / Widower 2.6 Income per month N30,000 (d) 31,000 (a) > N10,000 (b)N10,000- N20,000 (c) N21,000- N40,000 (e) N41,000 - N50,000 (f) N51,000 and above 2.7 Household Size 21 and above (a) 1 -5 (b) 6 - 10 (c) 11-15 (d) 16-20 (e) 2.8 Religion ...... (a) Christianity (b) Islam (c) Others (specify) the type you have and their number 2.9 Do you have a means of movement? If Yes, Indicate (a) Bicycle: Number ...... (b) Animal: Number ...... -QUESTIONNAtRE 3 - ROCA INVENTORY SURVEY &

INTERVENIu'OTN RFQUIRED I-.-

LU I-R

1-iJJ

,

a-) ?ll 11%'A) Orl. Qth1-1

1-4

w

1q

1-

'A) {l 5l ujl ll 1I

cxI-h QUESTIONNAIRE 4

RURAL ACCESS AND MOBILITY PROJECT (RAMP) RURAL TRAFFIC SURVEY INSTRUMENT

LGA Name of Field Assistant ...... LocationMillagetTown ......

Direction of Flow Intervention Area No ...... Date ...... Route Name ......

Time ...... Time S/No Types of Vehicle Time ...... Time ...... 1 Trailer / Tanker (2 axle) 2 Lorry (10 - 20 tons capacity) 3 Pick up van 4 Taxi / Car 5 Big Buses (50 seaters and above) 6 Midi Buses (25 - 49 seaters) 7 Mini Buses (8 - 24 seaters) 8 Motorcycles 9 Bicycles 10 Animal Porterage

11 Trecking

I I I I I l l I I I I A J . -8 Q- (KADRAMP) KADUNA STATE RURAL ACCESS AND MOBILITY PROJECT

STAKEHOLDERS MEETING HELD ON 16TH MAY 2006

PROCEEDINGS

2006 1.0 DAY 1: TUESDAY, 1 6 TH MAY Bank - assisted project in Kaduna * The Rural Access and Mobility Project (RAMP) is a World participatory planning process of the State. The Stakeholders' meeting is a critical aspect of the the identification and prioritization of project; a major requirement to present the findings of comments and contributions. intervention areas to stakeholders and get the benefit of their

after the arrival of the VIPs and The meeting began with an opening prayer and national anthem commissioners, permanent participants. The meeting was well attended by honourable community leaders, secretaries, traditional rulers, chiefs and / or their representatives, community-based organizations government representatives, local government chairmen and (CBOs).

Project Monitoring Committee The Opening remarks were given by the Chairman, State and Transport, represented by the (SPMC), the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Works pointed out that the objective of the Director of Civil Engineering, Engr. Aminu Umar. He project is geared towards self- project is to improve rural accessibility and mobility. The He saw the gathering as a fulfillment, poverty alleviation / reduction of the rural areas. people economically and socially. pragmatic approach that will bring changes to the life of the

Engr. Nwaezike, stated the need to In his own brief remarks, the National Coordinator of RAMP, / information on RAMP and its develop rural roads in the country and gave a brief origin are the beneficiaries of this World objectives. According to him, Kaduna State and three others Bank assisted Project.

Kaduna State Honourable Declaring the Stakeholders meeting formally open, the the need to sustain and Commissioner for Works and Transport, Engr. A. Baba, re-emphasized rural and urban dwellers. The maintain the rural roads which provide linkages between the key objectives of the project, essence of the workshop is to enlighten the rural dwellers on as well as providing basis for sustainability of roads. 1.1 FIRST PLENARY SESSION reports on identification, selection and This session consisted of presentation of consultants' objectives of the study, criteria and prioritization of intervention areas. These include selection of the intervention areas. The methodology used in the delineation, prioritization and Director in the State Ministry of Works session was chaired by Engr. Ishaya P. Yem, a Deputy and Transport.

and planners based in Kaduna. The The consultants are Ark Consult Ltd, a firm of engineers and economic values, inputs from focus consultants applied certain criteria based on social also informed that the Stakeholders group discussions, to come out with their findings. They inputs to the project implementation. meeting is organized to allow all the stakeholders make

1.2 PRESENTATION OF DRAFT REPORT introduced his team members in the The team leader of Ark Consult, Engr. Saliu Ahmed and Dr. J.A. Ojekunle, a rural transport persons of Mr. S.B. Akintayo, a transport economist the background information and expert. After the introduction, the team leader presented terms of reference of the project.

Project are: The main objectives of the Rural Access and Mobility mobility in rural areas 1. To assist in the improvement of access and enhancement 2. To contribute to improvement of rural livelihood 3. To reduce poverty.

are: The three broad components of the project identified at the Federal, State and LGA levels 1. Institutional strengthening and capacity building and 2. Rehabilitation and maintenance of transport infrastructure, 3. Rural mobility improvements.

domestic purposes, food and access to He further identified the desire for healthcare, water for Other reasons include need for farm farms, as some of the reasons for access and mobility. for educational institutions and the inputs and evacuation of farm produce to the markets, need communities. need for interactions between households and between

data were collected for all the 23 Following from the identified reasons for access and mobility, land area, number of public primary and local government areas in Kaduna State on population, of health facilities and distribution of post-primary schools and schools enrolment, number on the number of markets, agricultural boreholes and tubewells. Additional data collected were / irrigation projects, as well as output, number of cottage industries and number of fadama existing roads network, and poverty index.

the delineation and identification of Furthermore, Dr. J.A. Ojekunle made a presentation on The State was sub-divided into 17 intervention areas and project planning implementation. of contagious communities whose intervention areas; an intervention area being a group by the improvement of selected roads economic and social well-being would be enhanced area is distinct from an network to basic access standard. Thus, an intervention administratively delineated local govemment area.

ranking of the intervention areas, using Mr. S.B. Akintayo presented on the basis of scoring and and agencies for the LGAs. Thus the the secondary data obtained from the various ministries land area, number of public primary scoring was based on the population, population density, density. Other data used included and post primary schools, schools enrolment and schools density, number of markets, health facilities, health facilities density, boreholes, boreholes of fadama / irrigation projects and number of cottage industries, agricultural output, number intervention area were then used to poverty indices. The cumulative scores assigned for each rank the intervention areas in order of priority.

approach to the project planning The stakeholders' workshop also centred on a participatory of communities to enhance local process, necessary for sensitization and mobilization applied in data collection and criteria involvement in the project. Certain methodologies were findings, 8 intervention areas were for prioritization were also stated. At the end of the of the stakeholders' meeting, prioritized in order of most priority. In line with the objectives and make relevant suggestions to the participants were given the opportunity to ask questions up by participants, they were told that Interim Report. In answer to some of the questions put visited by the field teams during the they will be carried along as their communities will be On how long the research will administration of questionnaires and other survey instruments. that in the next one month, the entire be concluded, the team leader, Engr. S. Ahmed informed be completed. The National Project study, including the field survey and reporting shall are not to design bridges and Coordinator, Engr. L.C. Nwaezike explained that the consultants to the communities. roads, rather identify areas of access and mobility needs from Fadagoma to Fadan Kagoma, one A participant, Engr. Danjuma suggested the correction suggested the inclusion of Nok in Jaba of the communities, which was noted. Engr. Joshua LGA because of its historical / cultural and mining potentials.

the 5th point on criteria for prioritization of Another participant, Mr. Peter Umoru, suggested that instead of 'churches.' intervention areas should be changed to places of worship

Kauru not Kaura, while there was a Also, it was observed that Intervention Area No. 16 includes areas in intervention areas no. 9 and 10. mix up of the communities within the local government

leaders for their cooperation whenever At this point, the consultants appealed to the community their names, offices and phone numbers they visist them and that participants should register so as to serve as contact persons to the project.

formed as follows: In conclusion, three (3) thematic group discussion s were Group 1: Criteria for Selection, Methodology and Analysis; Infrastructire) and Traffic Counts; and Group 2: Data Collection, (Human Resources and Group 3: Mobilization, Research and Logistics..

the day's session was declared closed The group took time to discuss the above issues before by the Chairman at 4.00pm. 2.0 DAY 2: WEDNESDAY, 17TH MAY 2006 while Mr. Ishaya P. Yem chaired the The workshop began at 10.00am with an opening prayer proceedings of Day 1, Dr. Ojekunle read session. In order to cast participants' mind back to the out the Rapporteurs Report / Minutes.

Corrections Transport was represented by the * The Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Works and Transport. Director of Civil Engineering, State Ministry of Works and The participants unanimously accepted the report.

REPORTS 2.1 PRESENTATION OF THEMATIC GROUP DISCUSSION 2.1.1 Group I local government areas and other This group consisted of sixteen members from different and analysis applied by the agencies; and discussed on the criteria for selection, methodology most of the aspects of the report, most consultants. This group scored the consultants high in importance of some local importantly that the presentation has brought out the socio-economic necessary adjustments, though the government areas and has shown their readiness to make the areas under study. They also made group solicited for primary data and more knowledge of the following suggestions: Development Report of UNDP for (1) That there will be the need to use the 2005 Human more data. (2) Liaison with relevant government ministries and agencies officer and traditional rulers to be (3) Input from stakeholders, community development sought.

2.1.2 Group 2 different LGAs, government agencies, This group consisted of sixteen members from data collection (human and infrastructure consultants and traditional rulers. They discussed on discuss and suggest ways of collecting resources) and traffic count. They were expected to and infrastructure for the project. reliable and dependable information, both human resources

suggestions: After their deliberations, they came up with the following market days. (1) Field data collection periods should accommodate information e.g. KADP, Economic (2) Relevant ministries to be contacted for adequate Planning, Rural Community Development, etc. CDAs. etc. 1. A..J 1 .-. ;- ,. - ---I^h.r^fi.^n wuithrnOs sensitization of the people. (4) Traditional rulers should be part of mobilization and the project. (5) The LGAs to be fully involved right from inception of trained as ad-hoc staff in the (6) Indigenes with school certificate to be recruited and administration and retrieval of the questionnaires.

Road Traffic Count for traffic count. (1) Manual and Electronic Survey methods should be used be made. (2) Data collected not to be limited, projections should also local govemment areas, the (3) Areas where an intervention area affects more than two traditional rulers of both areas should be contacted. should be contacted for (4) The National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW) accurate data collection.

2.1.3 Group 3: on mobilization, research and The group was made up of 23 members. They discussed logistics. After their deliberations, they came out with the following: determine linkages. (1) The HOD / CODs to undertake a tour across the areas to (2) Identification of areas of economic relevance (3) Consultants at State officials to visit the LGAs. (4) Villages should be sensitized by the traditional institutions. committee to do this) (5) Selection of links should be on merit / needs (technical (6) Work plan that would involve LGAs to be designed.

National Coordinator of RAMP Responding to some of the questions and suggestions, the local government level, and that informed that the intention of the project is to anchor it at the that the required skills and logistics RAMP is a road job that has a time frame. He also stressed proper project implementation and would be provided by the local governments so as to enable are located will contribute financially training. He informed that the State where these projects Govemments participation and as well as the Local Govemment Areas and that the Local in such areas.. He further stated contribution will determine when the project will commence Toyota Hilux pickups by the World that the State Project Implementation Unit will be given 2 is being provided by the Federal Bank and intemet facilities for the State Project Office advised the stakeholders to Government which will come up in the next 2 weeks. He therefore and specific roles. inform their communities, local government heads on their involvement

if the consultant's draft report At this juncture, the Chairman of the session asked the meeting adopted as presented. - Ain- nr.-rnted and it was unanimously 2.2 SECOND PLENARY SESSION the participants on the technical The consultants' team leader, Engr. Saliu Ahmed enlightened explanations on the various survey aspect of this aspect and urged everyone to listen to the relay these to their communities. instruments and make useful contributions so that they can and information generated through the He stressed the vital importance the quality of field data the study, hence the dedication of a use of the questionnaires will have on the overall quality of before administration in the various full day to their presentation, discussion and finalization communities.

were developed and presented by In line with the objectives of the project, four questionnaires the consultants as follows:

Survey Questionnaire 1 - Inventory of Social / Economic Facilities Survey Questionnaire 2 - Rural Travel Demand and Supply Required Questionnaire 3 - Road Inventory Survey and Intervention Questionnaire 4 - Rural Traffic Survey Instrument Copies of each of the questionnaires were distributed to all participants.

2.2.1 Questionnaire I shall help to consolidate Dr. J.A. Ojekunle explained that the responses to this questionnaires amendments, if necessary, but the data already gathered from secondary sources and make be altered. that the scoring and ranking of the intervention areas may not

2.2.2 Questionnaire 2 of this questionnaire is to identify the Explaining further, Dr. Ojekunle said that the essence On rural travel data, he said that travel pattern, demand of the people and flow of movement. the cost, distance, condition of the the information is to know where the trip starts and ends, road and frequency of the trips, etc.

Yem suggested the inclusion of Contributing, the chairman of the Session, Engr. I.P. by the field assistant. This was respondent's name so as to avoid giving wrong information noted.

2.2.3 Questionnaire 3 and intervention required. He Mr. S.B. Akintayo made explanation on the road inventory survey technical support of the LGA town said that the purpose is to know the end-product and that r-oI nnmm...... innnmmpntiS man He I. -- - - :-- .-- personnel especially from the works also said the third questionnaire will require high caliber engineers. department, HODs, Community Development Officers and

2.2.4 Questionnaire 4 4 - Rural Traffic Survey - that the Mr. Ojekunle explained clearly the contents of Questionnaire flow and recorded on hourly basis. traffic count should be done in both directions of traffic

3.0 CONCLUSION for their contributions and stated that The chairman, Engr. lshaya B. Yem thanked participants the workshop was well attended.

3.1 CLOSING REMARKS thanked everybody present and that the The National Coordinator of RAMP, Engr. Nwaezike - Sabongari and Jaba [GAs - should two local government areas that were not represented to the SPIU. He also said that there is liaise with their traditional rulers so as to be the link men need for regular liaison between communities and SPIU.

for a job well done and bid everyone A representative from Kagarko thanked the organizers government made similar remarks but safe trip and also the representative from Kudan local be sent earlier in future; all the same, added that information regarding such workshops should he said the workshop is quite successful.

the quality of contributions and Thanking the participants, Engr. Saliu Ahmed commended send all the proceedings / communique enjoined them to tidy up their own ends and promise to On the logistics to facilitate the to the various addresses indicated by the participants. made and discussed with the head of questionnaire, he said necessary consultations will be the logistics for the administration of works of the LGAs. The Heads of Works shall coordinate local government areas. The LGA the questionnaires and other fieldwork in their respective activities of the Heads of Works and the Chairmen shall be implored to give support to the field Community Development Officers (CDOs).

3.1.1 Vote of Thanks thanked all the participants and the The State Project Monitoring Unit, Engr. David D. Kaura Coordinator of RAMP, Engr. L.C. Chairman for attending. He also thanked the National that the consultant, Ark Consult has Nwaezike and his team for being here and he concluded mercies and God's protection to all. The done a good and justifiable job. He prayed for journey meetina ended at 1 .0Opm. MOBILITY PROJECT (RAMP) STAKEHOLDERS MEETING OF RURAL ACCESS AND KADUNA STATE. 16TH - 17TH MAY, 2006

GROUP RAPPORTEUR'S REPORT - 16TH MAY 2006

/ ANALYSES GROUP I - CRITERIA FOR SELECTION / METHODOLOGY

MAIN POINTS OF CONSIDERATION FOR THE GROUP

1 Criteria 2 Methodology 3 Analysis

A. GOOD ASPECTS OF THE PRESENTATION 1. Scientific basis was used in generating reports 2. Data used is realistic of particular areas 3. Presentation brought out socio-economic importance simple and no ambiguity 4. Clear and straight forward presentation - very adjustments 5. Consultants showed readiness to make necessary 6. The Indices were properly used.

B. INADEQUACY OF PRESENTATION 1. Data used is not very current secondary data. 2. Should have used more primary data rather than 3. First hand knowledge of the areas is inadequate.

C. SUGGESTIONS the 2005 Human Development Report of 1. Need to apply more current data available in UNDP agencies to get latest data 2. Also, need to liaise with ministries and government grassroots. They should participate. 3. Get input from all stakeholders all the way to the Rulers should make inputs. 4. Community Development Officers and Traditional ATTENDANCE - GROUPI - Organization SiNo Name Kagarko Chiefdom 1 Alhaji B.T. Abubakar Bajju Chiefdom 2 John Bature Ark Consult 3 John Fwah MOA Kd 4 Engr. Joshua Shebi MOA Kd 5 Andrew Kantiok PC RAMP 6 Engr. David D. Kaura Gwang Palace 7 Mrs. Nyela Kogi Fantswam Palace 8 Sam lliya Ikara LGA 9 Habila Akat 10 Danjuma Gado Birnin Gwari LGA 11 Hamza S. Soba lkulu Chiefdom 12 Daniel D. Shekari FPMU RAMP 13 Baba Muhammed FPMU RAMP 14 Chief B.C. Agwu SPIU KADRAMP 15 Philip Yates K. Soba LGA 16 Barnabas Musa PROJECT (KADRAMP) STAKEHOLDERS MEETING OF RURAL ACCESS AND MOBILITY KADUNA STATE. 16TH - 17TH MAY 2006

GROUP RAPPORTEUR'S REPORT - 16 H MAY 2006

AND GROUP 2 - DATA COLLECTION (ON HUMAN RESOURCES INFRASTRUCTURE) AND TRAFFIC COUNT

on how to collect reliable and The group was assigned to discuss and suggest ways the project. dependable information, both human and infrastructure, for

The group after their deliberations suggested that: to accommodate market days (b) i. The period for data collection should be convenient (a) Easier accessibility. out ii. Location of places for survey should be properly spelt ministries or agencies e.g. KADP, iii. Information should be collected through relevant line Development, etc. Ministry of Economic Planning, Ministry of Rural and Community with CDOs, CDAs, etc. iv. Collection of information should be done in collaboration collection of information. v. Traditional Rulers should be involved in mobilization and and adequately sensitized on the vi. Community Development Leaders should be properly importance of the programme. areas right from preparation to vii. There should be full participation of the local govemment implementation for sustainability. should be recruited and trained as viii. Indigenes with minimum secondary school certificate ad-hoc staff for the administration and collection of questionnaires.

for roads traffic count. 2 Automatic and manual survey methods could be used get right people that will assist in - Community Development officers to be used to administering and collecting the questionnaires. to what we gather but should be projected. * - Data collected should not only be limited two or more local government areas, the - In cases where intervention areas affect traditional leaders of both areas should be involved. GROUP 2 - ATTENDANCE Organization Phone S/No Name LGA Head of Works 1 Philip M. Bayero Kajuru LGA Head of Works 2 Aminu Iro Paki Makarfi LGA Head of Works 3 Adamu Dogari Jema'a LGA CDO 4 Salama Y. Simon Lere LGA Head of Works 5 Jonathan Kolbe Sanga 6 Chunks Euwube Rappoteur of Rural Devt DRD 7 A.B. Mahamadu Ministry Kaura LGA HOD . 8 Patrick Y. Sidi & T 9 Henry K. Sambo MOW 10 K. Isa FPMU 11 Engr. G. Umo Ham Chiefdom 12 Dr. S.N. Sani Yaroson Partnership Ltd 13 Kelvin Ndukwu Consultant 14 Engr. Bemard U. Ovuarume RAMP Kaduna 15 A.T. Soba Devt Asst. Director (Secretary) 16 Yohanna Kabira Community MOBILITY PROJECT (KADRAMP) STAKEHOLDERS MEETING OF RURAL ACCESS AND KADUNA STATE. 16TH - 17TH MAY 2006

2006 GROUP RAPPORTEUR'S REPORT - 16TH MAY

LOGISTICS GROUP 3 - MOBILIZATION, RESEARCH AND local government area to determine 1. HOD Works / CDOs to undertake tour across the - either roads, bridges, etc. linkages i.e. collection of information for area of priorities 2. Identification of areas of economic importance. 3. Local Govemment to influence financially and otherwise. Government Areas. 4. Visit by the consultants and State official to the Local 5. Village orientation involving the traditional institution that flow into the market and 6. Market days could be used to determine the food resources that will determine which area requires what. influence. 7. Technical committee to do selection irrespective of political 8. Work plan that would involve local govemment to be designed. road to be executed but economic 9. That politics should not be involved in the selection of importance should be the criterion for the selection of roads. of skills to be involved for the 10. Involving the committees in the meeting of the types projects. GROUP 3 - ATTENDANCE Organization Phone S/No Name South 08028903205 1 Abdullahi I. Gagare Kadauna Zaria LGA 2 Dalhatu Ibrahim Awari LGA 08065559811 3 Mohammed Aminu Zubairu Kagarko LGA 080370044081 4 Abbas Ahmed Fatika Giwa LGA 08023729960 5 Abdurauf Idris Kauru LGA 08036826566 6 Isiyaku Abdullahi Ikara LGA 08045054034 7 Billy Graham Amos Kachia LGA 8 Kevin B.B. Aruna Jema'a FPMU 08044103775 9 Uhandora Ukaram RAMP, LGA 08036096825 10 Kabir Abdullahi Liman Kubau Kaduna North LGA 08042281901 11 Adamu Moh'd Lawal South 08057230766 12 Peter Audu Kwasau Kaduna LGA SPIU 08033699313 13 Engr. Musa Tete Kudan LGA 08033971023 14 Isaiah I. Bawa Lere LGA HWD 15 Usman 0. Dikko Chikun LGA Ag. HWD 16 Isah Mohammed Gbagyi Chiefdom 17 Samaila K. Sarki Giwa LGA HWD 18 Damilo Sheyai Zangon Kataf LGA CDO 19 Bakut Ahuwan Zangon Kataf LGA HWD 20 Pappara Yaro Kachia LGA CDO 21 Zakwoi Jacob Kaduna North HWD 22 Bala M. Wada Kagarko LGA 08054377802 23 Idris Audu KADUNA STATE RURAL ACCESS AND MOBILITY PROJECT (KADRAMP)

MAY, 2006 STAKEHOLDERS MEETING HELD BETWEEN 16TH AND 17TH

ATTENDANCE TELEPHONE ATTENDANCE TOTAL /S/NO NAME LOCAL GOVT AREA DESIGNATION DAYI DAY2 _ _ _ _ _ LS ______0802-6595632 2 2 4 1 Hamza S. Soba Bimin Gwari HOD Works 0802-4793002 L2 Umma U. AbdulHamid Bimin Gwari CDO

2 2 4 H1Binta S. Gajere Chikun CDO 0803-6045234 L_2 Isah Mohammed Chikun Ag. HWD

0803-7044081 3 2 5 HI Abbas Ahmed Fatika Giwa CDO ClMin 0803-7037337 _-2 Kabir Tsoho Y. Giwa 0803-5891494 3 Engr. S.A. Sambo Giwa HWD

I 0803-6078581 2 1 3 L 1 Yusuf Alivu Igabi Head of Works 0803-4517995 I 2 Habibu Sani Igabi Vice Chairman

0803-6826566 3 2 5 l Isiyaku Abdullahi Ikara CDO 0802-8411770 2 Habila Akut Ikara HOD Works Bala Noba Ikara Social Welfare 0804-3065425 ______Officer_ L_ _ _

CDO 0802-4775280 3 3 6 L Kevin B.B. Aruna Jama'a Unit Head L2 Nyela D. Kogi Jama'a Gimbiya Gweng __-- ____ . 3 Adamu Dogari Jama'a Head of Works

2 2 4 Zakwoi Jacob Kachia CDO 0804-5908525 LT 0804-5054034 2 Billy Graham Amos Kachia HOD Works

0803-3327766 2 2 4 ,Bala-- Musa Wada Kaduna North HOD Works 0804-2281901 2 Adamu Moh'd Lawal Kaduna North CDO

0805-4910245 3 2 5 HAtthiru Kaduna South Chairman

Abdullahi Ibrahim Kaduna South CDO 0802-8907205 ______Li G agan ______3 Peter A. Kwasau Kaduna South HOD Works 0805-7230766

0806-555981 1 3 4 ZubairuMhme Kagarko CDO

2 Yohana Aluwong Kagarko DH / Engineering 3 Idris Anou Kagarko DH / Land 4 Zubairu M. Lawal Kagarko HOD Works

0803-4531793 3 2 5 -- Philip M. Bayero Kajuru HOD Works J 0803-3013294 2 Samaila Maiyashi Kajuru Chairman j Mohammad Kabir Isa Kajuru Prin CDI 0806-3165968

0802-7942402 1 1 2 1 Patrick Y. Sidi Kaura HOD Works

0802-3729960 1 1 2 L Ahtiirraijf Idris Kauru C DO TOTAL I/NO NAME LOCAL GOVT AREA DESIGNATION TELEPHONE ATTENDANCE

I1 KabirAbdullahi Limau Kubau CDO 0803-6096825 2 2 4

L 2 Isa Shuaibu Kubau HOD Works 0802-8781116 _ T _____

1 1 2 11 Isaiah 1. Bawa Kudan HOD Works 0803-5971023 7 l L- 4 1 Usman 0. Dikko Lere HWD 0806-4681978 2 21 L2 Mrs. Salama Y. Simon Lere CDO 0802-4524159

4 1 1 Talatu Isa Shehu Makarfi CDO 0802-8411997 2 2 L_2 Amina Iro Paki Makarfi HOD Works 0803-4530017 2 L1 Jonathan Kolbe Sanga Director Works 0803-6947542 1 1

1 Bamabas Musa Soba Head of Works 0803-6523600 3 2 5 2 Engr. Sulaiman Soba Council Chairman 0806-3183956 lYahaya R. 3 Moh'd A. Kamfa Soba CDO_ 0802-065564 T_ T_I_

1 Papparo Yaro Zangon Kataf Head of Works 0803-4507871 2 3 5 1 2 Bakut Ahuwan Zangon Kataf Unit Head 0802-0652031 -3 Daniel D. Shekari Zangon Kataf Galadima Ikulu

Dalhatu Ibrahim Awai Zaria CDO 0805-9257310 2 2 4 2 Murtala Hussaini Zaria Head of Works 0803-3566096 Rabiu

9 1j Engr. L. C. Nwaezike FPMU National Coordinator 0803-4524580 5 4

Chief Engineer 0804-4103775 2 UkaramuEngr. Ubandoma FPMU______RAMPFPMU 0804___4103775_ 3 Baba Mohd FPMU RAMP Auditor 0803-6389718 4-4 Chief B.C. Agwu FPMU RAMP Auditor 0804-4183095 1 Engr. Uno G.U. FPMU Project Assistant 0803-5949354

6 15 1 A.B. Mahamudu Kaduna State SPIU / Member SPMC 0803-3203264 9

L2 Philip Yates K. Kaduna State SPIU / Dev. Coim. 0803-4501844 ______SPMC Specialist

3 Engr. Musa T. Tete Kaduna State SPIU / Procurement 0803-3899313 SPMCSpcast______

4 Engr. A.T. Soba Kaduna State SPIU / Infrastructure Engr. 0802-8192856 Eng.AT. oba SPMC ______

5 Engr. David D. Kaura Kaduna State SPIU / Procurement 0805-3643989 ___ ~~SPMCSecast___ 6 Edward Y. Bayei KadunaP State SPIU Project Coordinator 0805-0235310

7 David M. Turman Kaduna State SPIU / H.E.S 0802-3798339 DavdM Tuman SPMC ______

L 8 Victoria Y. Bobari Kaduna State SPIU / M.O.F 0802-2765868 _ _ Engr. Aa0SPM______C ______

9Engr. Aminu Umar KauaP tteSMC/ MO& 0803-3451919 ATTENDANCE TOTAL S/NO NAME LOCAL GOVT AREA DESIGNATION TELEPHONE DAY2 .DAYI 20 7 27 K. Shebayan State Ministries / Asst. Director PRSD 0803-7876649 1 Andrew ______A gencies_ 0803-6055698 Engr. Joshua G. Shebi State Ministries / D(MWDITHS) -2 Agencies

3 Henry Kulla Sambo State Ministries / PRO(MOW&T) 0802-5726934 - Agencies 4 Ahmad Yusuf State Ministries / Manager Progs 0802-8814289 Agencies 5 Murtala D. lyal State Ministries I DAF MFLG 0803-7017465 Agencies 16 Manzo Ezekiel State Ministries / Correspondent 0802-8419313 ______Agencies (NNN)

Bulus D. Emishe State Ministries / Perm. Sec. 0803-4515262 7 Agencies L-8 S.D. Sulaiman State Ministries / Env. Officer 0803-5894121 Agencies 0803-3345900 | 9 Dr. Abdallah Z. Bello State Ministries / GM

10 I.P. Yem DDCE 0805-34119050Aencies ______A gencies State Ministries I K Hon. Comm. Engr. Hon. Commissioner L11. Baba Usman Agencies 0803-6895605 1 Ismail Ibrahim Dutse State Ministries Reporter 12 R p re 1______Agencies 0806-5665248 13 RaboW Haladu ~AgenciesState Ministries / Reporter John J.S. State Ministries JA Engineer A gencies______

1 15 Ismaila Yusuf State Ministries / NAN 0802-8264783 I Agencies Macauley State Ministries / Nagarta Radio 0802-3667735 16 Okoma Agencies -77 Engr. Ahmed State Ministries / KAPWA 0803-7863717 Mohammed Agencies 18 Yohanna Kabirat State Ministries / Min. of Rural & 0802-4775540 Agencies Com. Devt / Min. of Economic 0803-3822743 19 Nuhu Moses State Ministries 0803_3822743 19-NuhuMoses _ Agencies Planning 2 Jhajiya Amina Salisu State Ministries / Ministry of Works ______Aa encies 1 David D. Kaura State Ministries / Proj. Coord. 0805-3643989 Agencies KADRAMP______

18 6 24 1 M. Nuhu Bature Traditional Institution Agwam Baiu 0802-3833394 L2 Ladan Adamu Traditional Institution Rep. Chief of 0806-2615092 L_ _ Kaninkon 3 M. lliya Ajiya Antang Traditional lnstitution Chief of Godogodo 0803-4737732 L4 M. Sam Maigida Traditional Institution Rep. Chief of _ _Fantswan 5 Ayuba Yaya Traditional Institution Fantswan Chiefdom L John N. Bature Traditional Institution Bajju Chiefdom 0802-9865111 7 Sam lliya Traditional Institution Fantswan Chiefdom 0802-0657696

- N. S. Bature Traditional Institution Baiiu Chiefdom *- I Trm,ifinnol Inctitimtinn I Raiij Cf.hiefdom S/NO NAME LOCAL GOVT AREA DESIGNATION TELEPHONE ATTENDANCE TOTAL - ______DAYI DAY2 11 Daniel D. Shekari Traditional Institution Ikulu Chiefdom

12 Dr. S.N. Sani Traditional Institution D/Head rep. Kpop

13 Sabo B. Dogo Traditional Institution Godogodo Chiefdom

14 Isah Adamson Traditional Institution Godogodo Chiefdom

15 Danjuma Gado Traditional Institution Gwong Trto Council 0802-3850463

16 Baela Yohanna Traditional Institution Godogodo Chiefdom

17 Alh. B.T. Abubakar Traditional Institution Kagarko Chiefdom 18 Samaila K. Sarki Traditional Institution Gbagyi Chiefdom 0803-3974375

-19 Yohanna Jatau Kabai Traditional Institution (Gbagyi Chiefdom) 0803-7018080

20 ChristopherGambo Traditional Institution

5 1 Engr. Bernard U. Private Sector Civil Engineer 0803-7034881 3 2 Ovuarume 2 Richard E. Okolo Private Sector P.T.O. (Civil) 0803-4704970 -3 Ndukwu Kevin Private Sector S.T.O. (Civil) 0803-4739893

2 1 Peter Umaru Religious Leaders Field Officer 0802-3086054 1 1

TOTAL 99 66 165 Ji) lU I-

mm)I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I IIIIII J) 0 *gctY 0:-"S

41I

,I

-'10

IC :1 '.] Ir lq;q uiILJ q:

11

Ili, 1-'

Z- Q.

I I I II I I I I I I I I , ! CA.,

04

r SL

e*

I-,-

'I ' I i

47 J

l I t I II II I I lI I l I I I l ,.1 X 1"'III1

9' 't

1 i . .4

"" . .. . ' ;K

U, , ;tn 4--

- ?IL., g

*t - -'

:

87:4,P ND IIIIIA , 1@,';L jk *I: IV1 r Id

''r% 2iS'' I: - ;'eC. W,it*t** o 'LC0)

OIL, 0:

2: ,C) 0:

%C. C1) .d

Z) .50 ,C

(aJ

(NIIJI- I.I.)

-. 1 a..

j 1 I I I I I I I II ROAD DOGON DAWA - UNGWAN DANKO

,> - :

'4

9 12:14 Pm

-

.7

4r.;

9 21m 9 12:15PM - - WdGEb:ZL 6

.9

P)~- ':=

Fr. .- 9

-} -r

*- tWr~ .- r

I iF ---

v P . 5-.~ .. -

f,z 7

-,-A I , i- -r

- - , ;;JA z VC4 i. * a.r )'#4 "47,1" , i , n

*4 rr

., 4 . ' ' 9'' -4 ,1-

J¶% * ,,.; t

4 : '1L* , dI s ~'

r . :';r '

. !

.1,'., ., '}- *" '.

IIIll I I I I I I I I Il 0S scm = V,.

it

- I.4

IIlI I I 1 I 1I II i "3Ws l; . BM 1.4 4

*0 - .f ;; n t: .

lr rI J

ar--3t, 1ITl *'. ,,. ;.-.:w !,.'kt1 F X': e--6; * r*g %';

1

I 'iiw

1 ^Awfl j

.;,. .; ''. iK'd.'',,I -' i- . .,

I1 I III I11 IROIQA- NISAI -

3%JNj'J-V±i'vd VA-AlWV i IA - - JA - t IC -Y KAGARKO - AKOTU - KUSE MAKARANTA - DENDE - KUSIN - KUDIRI ROAD (222km)

-~ C

- . : 4 -.

AA- z- - * 61 - r

-& i

*':s'~- t- 4 f r- rn .1101

.1111

).. z -4

11

.,,.

-.1,

*1

a)C-1

>1

t;Ir(7 FADAN KAGOMA - U/TSABTA - JAGINDI (=25km)

7? -. pp

.5. t

-.

-,

1.

1 1212:34PM

1,,

½s ?

:ii-A -- 311:-t§Al I I I I I I I I I I I I I

1 -. 1 rn

(31 --I

o t 0"21 0 >Z OD 11

7c z ;1r0

C7 $.-I (I

3.:

11 U/TSABTA - BAKIN KOGI - DANGOMA - GODOGODO ROAD (-22km)

t'a.

7, 7 , '

-tine-b6--4

a ,- :. .-

; ~~1 1 12: 36 PM"

4.4--

2 11 1Z:42BPM

- t2 ... -11

(1) ,II:

>4 d. -t01

-- p a.

z.,I-" L..

-112 ZW-. IC I'44(

1.,

I: D

-l all. fC)

C) a: C a:

(,op <1- ;Z 'It Ul)

11.E .C)

C-) i.

.- II

(0S11'

a-

I I f I I I I I I I KATUL CROSSING - MARO ROAD (238km)

; - 4L. -'2 -

- ' -;. ,4oW

-'a . -.-

=;- lt 4:15PM

~?J. 14 p-'

S-~ s V r4,

'-'-.i'--