RP260 Volume 2 Government of Tanzania
SCANNED FILE COPY LAcce6ssin No. R2CP -COj 1o No: qFJ. E;P N i Date Kik,loL ILOg#
Public Disclosure Authorized AtCio -l I CC FILE(CohiphalPmrme or#)(1)iA1W ESWColhg AdmPrc P(070)73b
CIUP STAGE 3 REPORT Public Disclosure Authorized Resettlement Action Plan
Jully 2004
Community Infrastructure Upgrading Program in Dar es Salaam under LGSP Public Disclosure Authorized
Public Disclosure Authorized Financed by the World Bank
UC LAS DHV CONSULTANTS Universatv College of Lands THE and Archltectrural Studies NETHERLANDS TANZANI A iI E IrnDv Government of Tanzania l l l CIUP STAGE 3 REPORT
Resettlement Action Plan
JuLly 2004
Community Infrastructure Upgrading Program in Dar es Salaam under LGSP l I
Financed by the World Bank
UCLAS DHV CONSULTANTS University College of Lands THE NETHERLANDS and Arcliitecttiral Studies I TANZANIA l
3 Cornmuni-\ I1ntrastructure l'moradimng Program
Table of Contents
E x ecutive S um m ary ...... II Acrbnivm s and Abbreviations ...... V 1. In tro d u ctio 3 n ...... I Kev sections of the RAP ...... I.-' Principles governing the CIlP planning -- minimization of resettlement ... 2 I Overall extent of unavoidable resetltmcncnt and partial 4 impacts on property 4 1. Lessons learned in similar projects involving involuntary resettlement.. " .'. PnzjProect settingy ...... ,,,,, ,,,...... s I '.1 Brief description of the CIUIP ...... 8 2.2 ME1ap showing, tihe CHiP intervenitiorns .. 9 3. Community participation and establishment of local communities . . 10 I 3.1 Selecting community representatives ...... 3.2 10 Mlechanisms for community consuRtation and participation .10 4. On-site data collection - inventory of the affected households ...... I3 4.1 Household survey I and questionnaires ...... 13 4.2 Results: Project-affected persons by category of impact ...... Iii14...... 4.3 Extent of resettlement in each of the CIUP sub-wards ...... 14 5.Compensation for lost I assets and hardship due to demolition and relocation ... 18 5. 1 Groups eligible for compensation ...... 18 5.2 Compensation categories ...... 18 5.3 Compensation I packages ...... 19 6. Asset valuation process ...... 8 6.1 Procedure ...... 8 28 I 6.2 Documentation, contract agreement and dossier .29 7. Proposed grievance redress mechanisms .31 8. Institutional arrangements for the R3AP .3 I 8.1 Institutional actors .32 8.2 Organizational chart ----...... 33 9. Implementation schedule ...... 34 10. MNonitoring of the proposed resettlement actions . .37 10.1 Application of verifiable indicators .37 10.2 Determination of the monitors and implementation of monitoring .38 I 1. Cost estimates ...... I... 39 ANNEX 1: Itemized lists ot'affected properties and budgets in 16 sub-wards 41 ANNEX 2: Mlaps showing the affected properties in 16 sub-wards. 63 ANNEX 3: Resettlement Household Survey Questionnaires .79 ANNEX 4: Assessment of the '20.000 plot program' areas .86 ANNFEX 5: Public information meetings in the affected communities ...... 91 ANNIX 6: Community Resettlement Action Plan - Sub-ward Budgets ...... 93
I 3 Comn-um-.\ n`7astsruc:ure girading Program
Executive Summary
IThis RZesettlement AAction Plan (R.AP) is an input to the Community Infrastructure 'pezradinn Program (CIlP). The RAP takes into account all involuntarx resettlenment and compensation aspects that originate from the upgrading activities in the first phase of CLI JP which covers 16 unplanned settlements in the three municipalities of Dar es * Salaam. The upg,rading involves. among others, the construction of infrastructure such as access roads, drainage structures and public toilets. These construction works will 3 - necessarilv result in the demolition of existing houses and other structures.
Chapter I of the document describes the procedural approach to minimize unavoidable impacts resulting from the removal of houses and resettlement. It describes the result of *Ithe technical solutions to. realize these objectives, such as flexible ROW, and appropriate standards. Efforts to minimize impacts were combined with suggestions brought forward by the community at an earlv staige in the planning of CIUP in order to * ftirther reduce the number of aff'ected HH. As a result of this consultative planning exercise the extent of resettlement in the 16 sub-wards is limited in both scope and scale. Out of the total of 320 impacted properties, 22 will require resettlement of the af'fectcdl households (4 owners t 18 tenants).
The last section of this introductorv chapter describes the lessons learned in similar projects in Dar es Salaam involving involuritar-v resettlement. Key lessons are that community participation in decision making is essential to reduce hardship and complaints from the PAPs; customary land rights should be respected to the extent * possible; notification and compensation of tenant households is contentious but necessary. Another important lesson - followed bv the CIUP - is that the application of flexible planning- standards will result in minimal demolition of assets and hence reduced resettlement.
Chapter 2 gives an account on the project setting in the framework of the Local Government Support lProgram (1LGSIP), including an overview of the demographic situation in the 16 selected sub-wards.
ClCapter 3 outlines the procedures to ensure full and transparent information of the affected public and the establishment of consultation mechanisms. First, the selection process for community representatives is described, who constitute an important interface to all planning activities as well as a first hand address of affected persons to forward their concerns and aspirations with the forthcoming settlement upgrading investment. Second, the roles of the technical support team (TST) and the Community Planning Teams (CPT) are explained in view of ensuring public and household meetings to facilitate the survey and explain to the PAPs all details on resettlement (as necessary), valuation. compensation pavments, assistance and grievance resolution.
Chapter 4 accounts for the household surveys and applied methodologies to obtain a full picture about 3 the impacts on individual properties and residents, including, businesses. Questioninaires are instrumental in forwarding a wide spectrum otf options and responses that were taken into account in the RAP. In particular. the PAPs were oft'ered several op[ions in case of resettlement. It has been fully explained that the Government will pay (ne%v) mark-et value replacement costs for property (land and l
3 Coml-munit. Int(rastructure L'pgradcin Program
structures. etcj to ensure that affectei househiolds can aftfo-d to either bun or build nev. residunces or replace affected structures. Out of the 5/7 affected businesses. maink smail street-\endinz kiosk s, tearooms and charcoal-sellers. 54 will be able to arranme,'construct be re- newv rooms within the affected property. Therefore. the temporary impact on local businesses will be lirnited. The chapter finally describes the extent or properties bein_ affected in each of"the 16 sub-vards.
Chapter 5 describes the steps taken in preparing the compensation plan. First, those eligible for compensation in cash or kind are determined- i.e. affected houselholds (ownurs and tenants) rather than individuals. -The chapter then defiines the compcnsationi packages for the different categtories of impact. Each municipality has provided annjiually updated (market-oriented) standard compensation rates to pav replacement costs for land, structures and other items (graves, garden trees) Allowances to affected households are paid in cash and kind, for accommodation, disturbance, 'transport, and loss of (temporarv or permanent) profit from affected business. Vulnerable groups will receive additional allowances and assistance and the R,AP also recommends that moving assistance be provided to tenants living in the 18 properties that will be fully demolished in addition to compensation for disturbance and transt ort costs. Tenants who currently occupy rooms in properties that will onlv be partially affected will be surveyed at a date to be determined by the M/lunicipality and will also receive moving assistance to cope with 'inding temporary or domiciles and move their belongings there.
Chapter 6 explains the applied methods during the valuation process (PMlav to July 2004) for valuing and entering, into negotiations and agreement with the municipal valuing team. The process by which the PAPs were informed on their rights during the compensation process are described and the means by which the affected assets and eligible persons were documented, including the establishment of a dossier that will be eentered in a querv database stored at the valuation section in each municipality were described.
A monitoring database will be established to facilitate monitoring of the resettlement action plan, and will also be used to record information from the grievance redress system devised in the RAP, described in chapter 7. This section also gives an outline of the flow of information and responsibilities to address all cornplaints forwarded bv the PAPs with respect to the planned investment project in a correct and timely fashion.
lChapter 8 specifies the roles and responsibilities of the institutional actors relevant for this RAP. at municipal and other levels. Kev responsibilities are attributed to the SMunicipal Council's planning and coordination department from which the CIUP coordinator operates, while the urban planning and environmental committee of the N1C scrutinizes and approves the RAP. The chapter also outlines the roles of the ward executive officer and the communit planning team working under the sub-ward chairman' s conitrol.
Clhapter 9 provides the implementation schedule and the time chart for all major activities and events which are determined in this RAP. Timel planning of certain activities such as valuation, compensation agreement and payment has been scheduled to allows sufficient time for the project affected person to arrange for alternati;e housing or business premises. etc.. before actual demolition starts. As stated abovc. thc vast mnajority ot impacts on properties (298 out of 320) in the unplanned settlements are Communit\ Infrastructure L'pgradino Program
only of' small scale and temporar% nature that would allow adequate time for re- arranmement %%ithout major disruption of daily life or business ol the affected persons. T'he proposed monitoring of the resettlement actions is described in chapter 10. The nmain responsibilitv f'or overseeing this activity lies in the hands of the head of fhe plannin-g and coordination department in each municipalitv. A set of simple verifiable indicators is recommended to monitor and evaluate the success or irnplemllentation failure of the resettlement planning. The verification method will basically consist of household surveys. Community planning teams (CPT) will also be in conducting involved household survevs to assess the socio-economic situation of PAPs. The final chapter 11 provides cost estimates for compensation of the affected houses and private structures, and the costs associated with the relocation procedure. The estimates for compensation costs are based on the records provided by the househoid valuers and the survey team (records are detailed in annex 1). For-all 16 sub-wards the costs for compensation of 320 project affected households and the relocation of 150 graves amount to TSh 653.905.455.
A cost breakdown is provided for the monitoring activities, amountingy to 19,262,000. TSh Together with a 5%o contingency margin, the total costs for implementing this resettlement action plan amount to estimated TSh 706,8825.718. from the IApartdetailed household inventory and agreed compensation prices during valuation process the (Annex 1). other detailed information is attached to this document, such as
Annex 2: 16 maps showing the individual totally or partially affected properties in each sub-ward selected by CIUP Annex 3: An English template of the household questionnaires Annex 4: An assessment of the '20.000 plot program' areas that are proposed by the GoT to new settlers Annex 5: List of public consulkation mectings Annex 6: Community Resettlement Action Plan - sub-ward l budgets. l I I l l l 3 ComnIumxL lristructn,re U'Lorading Progoram
IAcronyms and Abbreviations
CBEO Communlity-based or-anizations CDA CommunitN Development Association (eg at Hanna Mlassif Sub- W ard) C EMi I Comm un irt Environmental Managernent Plan CIUP Communliliity Int'Iast-Lcturrc Upgrad ing Program cCP'F ComimilluInity Planniig I'Teamn CUP Community Upgrading Plan - | E.EA Environimental Impact Assessment ESNIF Environmental and Social Managemenit Framewvork (for the LGSP) GRC Grievance Redress Committee GoT Government of Tnzan7 a HH Household LGSP Local Government Support Program NMC M91unicipal CommTittee * MD iMlunicipal Director MV Municipal Valuer NEMC >National Environmental Mtlanagement Council ( 1983) I >NGO Non-governmental organization OP Operational Policy (of WB) O & !\ Operation and :9aintenance 3 PAF project-affected Families PAP(s) project-affected person(s) PO-RALG The President's Office - Regional Administration and Land Governmenit PWC Price Waterhouse Cooper (Consultant) RAP Resettlement Action Plan RoW Right of Way * Rl'F Resettlement Policy Framework THB Tanzaniia Housing Bank TSh Tanzanian Shilling TST Technical Support Team (for CIUP) UCLAS University College of L_ands and Architectural Studies, Dar es Salaam V/NvIC ViIlage/M/ItaaCounc I i te e | ~~~WB World Banik WUDC Ward Development Comm ittee WE() Ward Executive Officer U I I I l
3 Community Inrfrastructure Lipgradinc Pro_ram
| I Introduction
3 1.1 Kev sections of the Resettlement Action Plan
This document outlines a resettlement action plan (RAP) for phase I of' the Community Infrastructure Upgrading Program. The resettlement policytframework (RPF') for the Local Government Support Program (LGSP) which provides general guidance for the development of this RAP. has been disclosed separately for public discussion. Thlis R.N\P also serves as opcrational "uidance tor similar upralding programs in Tanzania. It is a model for the second phase of CIUP- a similar RAP will be prepared for all Phase 1I communities.
UThisresettlement action plan includes the following key sections:
3 - Description oftthe project setting; - Collection of technical information to identify the extent of unavoidable demolition of houses and structures, and the necessity for relocating affected 3 ffamilies or businesses, either permanently or temporarily; - Description of the nature and extent of community consultation and participation, including the establishment of sub-ward committees; * - On-site data collection by means of specific inventory of the affected households to obtain exact figures of project affected persons (PAPs) by 3 category of impact; - Development of compensation packages o'ffered for each type of impact - Description of the valuation process and the compensations given for each * property affected, itemized by asset - Implementation of grievance resolution procedures: - Institutional 3 arrangcments for payment of' comvpcnsation. allowances, assistances and monitoring; - Implementatiorn schedule; - Resettlement monitoring; - Fotal budget estimates for the RAP.
Prior to valuation field survevs have been conducted to record the features, dimensions and values of all affected properties. The results of the surveys detail all particulars of the affected I people and affected assets. The records are stored together with the household questionnaires (see Annex 3) as dossiers in the municipal planning and coordination department.
The proposed resettlement actions and measures will ensure: Fhe provision of 3|a timely and f`air compensation, with the ultimate goal that all project-affected persons wvould be compensated at least to restore their pre- project living standard levels;
* Compensation I will include loss of non-movable assets and structures (mark-et *alue l by the municipality's Chief V aluer), disturbance. vulnerability, 3 Cornmun,it\ Infrastructure l pgrading P-o-ram
accommodation. transport and loss ot profit (business) allowances. as applicable:
Necessary assist-ance for relocation to all P.APs whose property , homne w-ill be totally demolished. prior to displacemenit; includinr assistance for the selection of new resettlement sites with adequate facilities:
1.2 1 Principles governing the CIUPI plannino - minimization of resettlement
From the perspective of resettlement the major principle adopted for the CIUP has been to minimize the extent of demolition of existing residential and commercial structures or etffect on the structural integrity of individual properties. In this context it needs to be noted that partial demolition will be permitted under the CIUP investment project in accordance with two provisions made in the legislative framework'. In several cases the land owner and valuer have come to a mutual understanding that partial demolition of a house will be unacceptable, although it would structurally not affect the building's integritv: This procedural agreement related particularly to cases where the families claimed that the remaining property | would hardly serve as adequate homestead or, in case of small business, as basis for sustainiing the familv's livelihood. Consequently, such houses/structure would then be totally demolished and the corresponding reg,istration and compensation packages would applv. For reasons of easing and compensating for the hardship the R.AP theref'Ore has categorized any property as being totally demolished when at least 50%(°i of all build-up structures buildings were to be removed.
Engineering options and flexible design solutions:
| (On the engineering side the planning team adopted a more tlexible approach. The principle of minimization resettlement was pursued by the following steps: (i) To minimize the extent of involuntary resettlemerit specific technical options have been taken into consideration. Mvluch of the upgrading activity will focus on footpath, roads and storm water drainage improvements. In order to reduce the 3 number of potentially affected houses in certain cases the CIUP planners/engineers, in close consultation with the communities, opted to adopt levels of service that are technically and financially appropriate (basic 3 and intermediate service levels). (ii) Rather than opting for rigid technical standards with respect to ROW and more 3 or less straight geometrv of new roads the engineers designed meandering road and drainage structures to accommodate existing structures as much as possible, reduced carriageways and rights of way (ROW) to the minimum feasible width (to maintain unhindered traffic flow), and in some sections limited vehicular flow to one-wav traffic:
I(iii) Partial demolition of built structures has been taken into account. The potentially affected structures have been carefully surveyed by the engineers
One i. the Land Act 1999 and the re-ulations made under it. the other is the Land Acquisition Act 1(67 th;it explicitlv allo"s partial demolition ot privatic ly owncd structiures w)hent public prevails. tltereSt Cornmunit rirt'rstructur- -,r'adinen PLoramn
to determine w,hether the al'f'ected buildino vould remain structurally interal and safe -ronm I collapse after demolition of' part of the structure. In case such examination gave doubtful or negtive results. rull demolition has been a(greed.
(iv) Selecting location for- new w-aste collectioni structures in uninhabited spaces where surrounding impacts wvould be minimized, in contrast to other reflections that I would rather place the waste collection systems in closer vicinity to where (domestic) waste is generated and people would have short distances onl,v to deliver and store their garbage properly.
(v) In order warrant meaningful planning (e.g. to ensure safe emergencv evacuation lines and trafficable road conditions) each single location was carefulily screened I against the above, principle versus preparing for a functional road and drainage network..-
(vi') The plannino and ftinal dsin solut ee maps in Annex 2) have been done in close cooperation wvith the environmental teaml wvho assessed the EIA documented separately as the ENIP for ChiP.
Commlunitv involvement in minimization ot' resettlement:
| The coMmunity actively participated in efforts to minimize resettlement. In the sub- ward meetings headed by the chairman residents raised numerous concerns that were dulyv taken into account by the CIUP planners. The result of this consultation was further reduction I of potential project-induced impacts. For example, each potentiallv affected plot has been scrutinized in a joint survey with Communitv representatives (Community Planning Teams) and PAPs for possible solutions (e.g. options for accommnodating the re-arrangement/construction I of a new room or house). The technical expert gave, as applicable, advice on how such re-arrangements could be carried out without affecting the integritv and stability of the old structures. As a result. in most cases 3 where only single or annexed rooms, part of rooms. latrines, verandas, kiosks and fences were considered to be demolished. solutions that reducedl the impact to a short period were possible. In fact, in most cases if the * owners would start building/rebuilding the affected str-uctures by the time of receipt of compensation payment no temporary resettlement. loss of business or hardship would be encountered. 3 As outlined in the implementation schedule (section 9.1) there is a sufficient time between compensation payment and beginning of the upgrading construction activities to allow for all newlv re-arrange/construct residential rooms or new business annexes (e.g. kiosks) to be readv for occupation before demolition starts. This would result only in minor impacts on the dav-to-dav life or income situation of the affected HH.
Durin-g the consultations some residents indicated their reluctance to leave their habitual area and social. Some expressed concern about the prospect of finding * altemative housing within their neichborhood--- alternative re-settlement sites set aside under the 20.000 plot program such as MNbweni (see Annex 4) were too far away. Finallv, there was some anxiety over the extent and nature of compensation packages. although the TSTs did their level best to pro\ide a full and transparent picture of compensation standards and to provide fair treatment to all project- affected persons. | (Communlit\ Infrastructure Upgrading Programr
1.3 Overall extent of unavoidable resettlement and partial impacts 3 properties on
As a result of applying the principle of minimizing resettlement, the magnilude of expected impacts and hardship will he limited to a relatively small numnber of' * f'llailics. In total 320 properties will be aff'ected. of' which 3 house owners (and 18 of their tenants) will be fullv resettled and 3 business premises permanently dermolished; 291 house owners will have partial demolition of their structures (affecting an estimated2 I number ot' 80 tenants and 54 businesses which will be relocated withiln the housc owniers plot), and 15) graves which will need to be relocated within the community. In the majority of cases the CIUP will result only in partial demolition of I properties. often a portion of a room or secondary structures like steps. verandas and outside storerooms.
Overall, the CIUP I interventions that will result in relocation caused by unavoidable full demolition and removal of 22 properties. including 4 houses occupied by their owners, and 18 occupied 3 by tenants and 3 businesses; and 150 graves as follows:
* Kinondoni M4unicipality: 10 properties and 2 graveyards with 50 graves, . Ilala ŽvIunicipalitv: 3 8 properties and I graveyard with 75 graves; * Temeke Municipalitv: 4 properties and I graveyard with 25 graves.
A fair number of graves (150) will be affected, as the new int'rastructures will pass through cemeteries in four sub-wards. The issue of cultural and religious sensitivity has thoroughlv been discussed in the initial consultation meetings to avoid contlicts. * The sclection of these areas has been, in all four cases, the preferred option to otherwSise increase the number of houses for total demolition. It has been noted that there wNas no serious objection from the community to relocate the graves to nearby * cemetery's or within existing cemeteries. In fact, the relocation of graves for public works interventions is not uncommon in Dar es Salaam and therefore did not cause dissent among the families who were affected by this planning option. By law the municipality is obliged I to provide the affected f'amilies, free of charge, a new cemetery plot. In addition. there is a fixed compensation rate for this tvpe of impact 3 to be paid to the immediate familv of the dead.
As far as partial demolition is concerned, this will affect 298 properties without necessitating the resettlement of people (although 80 tenants and 54 businesses will be relocated elsewhere on the plot) in: *. Kinondoni 'Municipality: 84 properties I . Ilala MvIunicipalitv: 11 5 properties * Temeke Mlunicipality: 99 properties.
I3 2The exact number is still to be determined atter the RAP appraisal. The surveyor teamt informed tilat even a lower number might come torward as in manv czscs amcillolition otfr(oolis c=inprises less th:it1 halfoftthe affected structures (Annex 1) and if so. these roorns may even not fully be removed. C ommLnlni[t Inrrastructure I pgradimne Pro2ram
NMore inrormation on spec.r'ic impacts is provided in section 4.3 and in AAnnex 1. Detajis or' The survey records on the household structures. members. house conditions. household income situation and specitic demands of the affected households wkill be monitored (commencinc atfer the RAP appraisal) and dossiers prepared and Ciled at the municipal planning offices.
1.4 Lessons learned in similar projects involving involuntarv resettlement
In the past. Tanzania has gained valuable experience with resettlement. Some relevant examples' in infrastructure upgrading projects similar to the present one are: a) The Morogoro road expansion project (1995) In a top-down approach the Ministrv of Wv'ork just decided to publish a notice to the general public ordering all the people residingvwithin the road reserve of the Mlorogoro Road- o vacate the area in order to give wav for road widening. There was no consultation between the ministrv and the communities. The affected people in this area were upset and reluctant to have their houses demolished to pave the way for construction of the road and demanded compensation. In the end, only 9 households appeared to be eligible for compensation as thev had legal rights and were affected by the compulsorily acquisition of their land. A sum of TSh 77 million was paid eventually in 1997. The compensation went to people owning the houses, not to those who were tenants. House / land owners who were completelv affected by the project, i.e. total demolition of their home, were given by the local authorities, free of charoe. new residential plots in the Nlbweni - Ndalindi area.
Lcssonls learned from the NMorogyoro Road project: - A top-down approach without much consideration for the people affected by the project is likely to result in public resistance instead of cooperation. - Community consultation I may be time consuming but would result in less time needed for legal procedures, complaints and grievances. - Tenants of affected properties were not considered tor compcrisation or moving assistance.
b) The Songosongo 'Gas to Electricitv Project' (1996) This project resulted in large-scale resettlement of people from Gongo la Mboto, Ulongani, Kibada, and Kinyerezi to a planned resettlement site in Kinverezi. People from Kimara. Ubungo. Changanvikeni and Wazo were resettled in Salasala. The project resulted in resettlement of 230 families. Onlv land . house owners were considered eligible to partake in the resettlement program. Tenants and tenants were not included. In case of tenancv (rented rooms, houses, kiosks etc) in houses that had to be demolislhed the owners were stipulated to notifv the tenants 3 months in advance betoore evacuation.
The Songosongo project involved extensive consultations with stakeholders. The affected people were consulted throu_h various meetings carried out by the
In all quoted projects tirst-hand c\perience has been gamned bs the resettlement specialists trom UCLAS wvho are equally working on this RAP for CIUP l
Conm,munit% Int'frstructure U 'pcradinc Program
Songosongo conIsultanc:, zeam. Frequent tield %isits *~ere mzade and people cre invited for public meetings to infor-m them about the objectives and the benefits of' the projec: and the compensation that the! wnere entitled to receive.
The recipient communities of SalaSala and Kinyerezi were closely involved in the process and intensivelv- consulted to obtain their vievs and opinions. The SalaSala and Kinverezi areas were under the customarv Land Tenure Svstem. The landowners were rcquil-cd to lease part ot' their i'arms for people to be resettled in their neighborhood. It was thus important to make plot subdivisions based on the existing farm boundaries with provision of public space for roads, public facilities anfd infrastructure.
Lessonis learned from the Songosongo project are: - Project affected I people tind it easier to accept negative consequences of a project if they understand the objectives and the benefits for the community as a whole; - .Active involvement in the entire planning process of the project affected people and consultation with the community at large is indispensable; - Existing conditions. such as customarv (land) rights. should be respected as much as possible. l l l I l I l I l I l
Communi[%. nfrasrruc-ure L'pcradinc ProLram
C) Hanna Nassif communirv infrastructure upgrading (1993-2000) T'he Fianna N4assif communitv infrastructure upgrading project is a good example or how loss of assets and resettlement can be minimized or even completily avoided and compensation costs reduced: Experience in Hanna Nassif shows that this can be achie\ ed by: - Intensive community consultation, - \iNegotiation with at'fected people (only house owners were considered, no tenants); 3- Application of flexible planning standards. The budget available for upgrading included costs for compensation and resettlement. This arrangement made the communities to understand that payments for compensation or resettlement would reduce the scope of the inifrastructure upgrading. This was instrumental in achieving effective solutions and reducing the overall compensation and resettlement costs. Some residents (owners) were even willing to volunteer giving Up part ot their land for the benefit of the community without asking for compensation. I l l I I I l l l I I
3 Community- infrastructure Lpeuradincr Program
2 The project settina
2.1 Brief description of the Communitv Infrastructure Upgrading Program (ommunitv 3'lhe Int'rastructure Upgrading Prog!ram (CILUP.) is part of the w-ider Local Government Support Program (LGSP). intending- to enhance the delivery and mana_ement capabilities, productive efficiencies and financial sustainability of local government in Tanzania. 3 The CIUP will improve community infrastricture in 3, selected areas in Dar es Salaam to appropriate functional standards, affordable and responsive to communitv demand. CIUP will upgrade infrastructure and services for roads and fbotpaths. drainage. sanitation, solid waste, and streetlights. Upgrading of inifrastructure and urban services will take place in a period of 4 vears (2005-2008). The first phase of implementation starts in the year 2005, covers 16 unplanned areas. and benefits 167,000 people. For each ClUIP phase I area a comunIllity upgradiln;, plan (CUP) has been prepared in a demand responsive way (full CUPs are avail-able in the project office). The respective maps are appended (Annex 2) to this report. The basic demographic figures of the sub-wards that will participate in phase I ot the CTiP are given in Table 1. I 'Phase I CfUP sub-wards'. The map overleaf showvs the location of both the phase I and phase 11 CIUP areas.
Table 1.1 Demographic features of the CIUP phase I sub-wards
3 No PrPoject Are Population !Area (ha) |Density Mlunicipality: Kinondonii 3 1 I M\lanzeseUzuri 1 15.397 36 427 2 , Kilimani 1 3.523 47 1 287 3 Midizini 16.153 39 1 414 I 4 MnaziMmoja 9.189 26 1 356 5 Muungano 5.915 16 370 6 Mvuleni 6.689 15 446 Sub-total Kinondoni 66.866 L 179 1 _374 Municipalitv: llala 7 NMnvamanii 17.236 48 357 9 18 I Malapa 12.912 34 380 I.11 Madenige 9 I12.614 32 394 10 Mtarnbani 20.447 53 386 Sub-total llala 63.209 1 167 1 378 *Municipality: Temeke iI Chang-ombeA 4.009 1 573 12 Chang'ombeB 4.868 15 325 13 Toroli 7.984 17 - 70 I | 14 Sandali 11.713 3 335 15 .vlpoRo 1 3.624 15 1 242 16 1 'lwemrbeladu 5.206 18 289 Sub-total Temeke 37.404 107 350 _Grand total Phase I 167.479 453 370 I .S/7urce: Censzls 2002 I I I
3 ComrnunitCInfrastrucmirv LUpgradiniz Program
2.2 /laMp showving the location of the CliP interventions
Priority Sub- Wards in Phase I and 11- CIUP - Dar es Salaam City
;t 2 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.egenad \ / Fl~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ardpcunoary
Sub oVdtd B3ondary
Boundary
4 M\- 1-'(nhja 5Muong-no
\ , ____, / 9 ~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~Mal.ap| C oMadeng.
' ! * \ , S \ /~~~~~~~~~~ N 0 IA N 0 C E A N4 I2 Chang -omo .e / _ \ I 24Sand.fi
16 Mwerfbetadu
L ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~SelectedSettl-mnt
17 KmgogoKw,r 18 r 11M(gu-umrra-N A | -./ I _ - - I>- a0 1500 3000 I - Source Aerial photo. 1992 and Fieldwork, 2002 U . I l | C'ormrnunmv Infiastructure U'pLrading Program 3 3 Community participation and establishment of local committees Communit -participation in the CITJP was designed to ensure that an iterative process of consultation 3 and .feedback was undertak-en from the beginning of program preparation to the post-construction period. Te RAP has paid special attention to communitv participation seen as most critical in planning and decision-mnaking. in addrcssing 3 enivirotinmental and resettlement issues, and in devising responsibilities tor the monitoring of the outlined resettlement actions. 3.1 Selecting communitv representatives The focus of the participation process has been on the sub-ward level, both with respect to the entire community and the group of' representatives (CommIIunLity Planning Team - CPT) established at the beginningg of the project preparation period to guide the planning process. Communitv participation is regarded as crucial to the success of participatorv planning, communication, monitoring and supervision. and settling possible disputes within the community. In each of the 16 phase I CIUP areas community planning teams were established through direct election of representatives (typically 10 per sub-wards) of "housing clusters" or geographical zones in the community. This option (direct election) was considered by most sub-ward leaders as the most democratic solution-one which would ensure that the community's interests are adequately represented. With respect to the preparation of the RAPs, the role of the CPT or elected representatives is to - ensure the functioning of the public consultation process; - assist I Municipal Technical Support Teams (TSTs) established to prepare and manage CIUP, in arranging for community follow-up meetings; - act as resource information persons for the surveyors of the PAPs and their affected properties, - discuss issues raised bv affected persons and communicate them to the TST; - facilitate the assistance program (e.g. moving assistance, assistance to vulnerable groups); - cooperate with NGOs and CBOs involved in development programs; 3- assist in initiating the process of grievance resolution; - assist, as needed, in the resettlement monitoring activities. 3 3.2 MNIechanisms of communitv consultation and participation The following steps were taken to establish strong linkages between communities and municipalities for the purpose of community consultation and communication 3withregard to the CIUP in general and RAPs in particular: - Formation of Technical Support Teams (TST) for each municipality. consisting of municipal government staff and experts of the consultants 3 team: 3l_ _ _ l 3 Commmunit; Infrastructure Lporading Program I - Preparation of maps tor each area showing the foreseen investment structures and the individual properties that will become affected: Public announcement for meetings to iaunch the C;P project at wvard and sub-vward 4 levels , including presentation of the objectives, principles, roles and responsibilities of all actors in the participatory process, likelv impacts and impacts, implications on resettlement, budget ceiling, time frames, and institutional aspects of the CIUP. The public and the affected persons have also been informed about their contribution fees, their compensation rights, and about the registration procedures in line with notification times and the | . 'cut-off dates. The presentation was made by the TST: - Elections and actual formation of Community Planning Teams (CPT) for each CIUP area: The chairman announced a public meeting in each CIUP d area to elect community representatives for the CIUP. In the meeting the Community Planning Tearm (CPT) has been presented as the group of representatives. | - The CIUiP areas were subdivided in housing clusters (geographical zones) from where the residents had to elect representatives. Previous experience in Tabata and Kijitonyama had revealed that clusters of about 30 to 40 houses are I rather balanced and most suitable in practice. This procedure ensures equitv and eliminates favoritism to particular areas. It also facilitates direct communication between residents and representatives, because the clusters U are small enough to ensure that people know each other. - Housing clusters were defined in accordance with geographical features and existing street patterns and not by using the still existing ten-cell units system, which is more politically oriented. Gender equity has been achieved bv election of one male and one female from each housing cluster. - Subsequent 3 housing cluster meetings were held easy to obtain feedback. Such meetings were also the forum for disseminating information and receiving ideas and views on ways to prioritize community needs and to test 3 willingness of the community to pay for urban services delivery. - It was further decided that the sub-ward chairman and the sub-ward secretary participate in the process by virtue of their administrative position. The I various communities could opt to invite specific stakeholder representatives to participate in the process. such as N'0Os and CBOs. the business community or religious institutions. Once agreement has been reached otn how to select representatives from the I . community, the sub-sequent steps for planning were as follows: (i) Joint field visits (TST and CPT) for orientation, identification of priorities, identification of infrastructure deficiencies, proposed infrastructure interventions. identification of environmental issues and priorities and need for resettlement; (ii) Plotting 3 of the proposed interventions on the relevant map of the community area in order to give the CPT an idea of the extent of the impact and potential problems, such as demolitions; see Annex 5, list of organized meetings in the respective communities l Communit\ Infrastructure Upgrading Program Ii ii) Case-b\-case discussions between engineers. TSTs and CPTs to Find best solution to minimize structure demolition and resettlement and mitigate against negative environmental impacts: (in) Guided by the technical experts (including environmental and * *rsesettlement specialists) the CPTs and TSTs assisted in cost analysis and finalization of the initial investment programs; (v) Formal approval of the investment programs by the sub-ward committee and the ward development committee. With exception of stepT (iii) the entire planning exercise included continual internal consultations between representatives and residents of the respective housing clusters to obtain feedback on proposed interventions, as well as addressing complaints, priorities and preferences of the PAPs. In some instances. when crucial decisions had to be made the elected leaders were mobilized to participate in the process and to resolve initial disputes with PAPs. This facilitated not only the decision-making process but also demonstrated commitment and a sense of ownership on behalf of the elected leaders. The results of the planning process, including the respective detailed maps (Annex 2), arc incorporated in the CoMmunity Upgrading Plans (CUPs) that have been prepared for each CIUP area. l l l I l l l I l l 3 Communit% Infrastructure Lpgrading Program 3 4 On-site data collection - inventorv of the affected households 4.1 Household survey and questionnaires First. the TST code-marked' all houses and structures along the new irifrastructure upgrading access routes. The chairrnan assisted in identif'ication of the house owners who then were notified and a date for surveving the plot was agreed. The owners of affected properties and their household members were surveyed and (see household questionnaire Annex 3) to identify their aspirations, priorities and concerns in connection with I the anticipated partial or full demolition of structures. .More details about the discussed resettlement and compensation options are presented befow. I)During the survey 3 and questionnaire exercise the PAPs were explained the inmplications of impacts, their entitlements and registration requirements in linie with notification times. Tn accord w ith the RPF, the cut-off date has been established and communicated to the PAPS bv the date of the inventory of all affected propertv in thie communit'v. | Teniants were registered in name and number of people present at the time of survey | Resettlement options: During the household surveys all heads of the project-affected households who face full or partial demolition of their home were asked, among others, to make statements concerning the following options concerning their choice for future residence: * . within the plot, if adequate space available * within other sub-wards to be specified 3 . accept apreferential plot offered by the Government6 * wish to arrange future residential area at their own discretion. | Although the municipal authorities have land set aside for resettlement (Annex 4). the displaced persons are neither obliged to take that allocated plot, nor will thev have a preferential choice or expectation to receive a free plot. Therefore, all eligible PAPs will I receive compensation rates and allowance packages as fixed in standard procedures during the valuation process and remain completely independent in their 3 choice of further residence. The majority of the interviewed PAPs indicated (in the questionnaires) their wish to remain on plot" or "left to re-arrange on the same plot". According to the field It has been noted that the number of tenant household members often fluctuates. In some cases owners were already in the process of notifying their tenants to vacate their premises and some tenants have already left in anticipation of the imminent demolition of the rented premises. House owners are legally obliged to give a 3 month advance notice to tenants when thev want to use the 3 rented premises themselves or want to terminate the rent agreement for substantiated reasons. At the time of preparation of the questionnaires the valuers were not aware that the provision ot plots (instead of full compensation for land and asset losses) will be optional (decision communicated in May 2004). | Communitv infrastructure Upgrading Program surve%ors the connotation is that these project-affected persons. most of them facing only partial demolition of their house or part of a room would opt arranet/construct to re- the room or house wvithin the same plot beundaries when space allows. The same holds true for businesses- such as those vending their goods on the striet from a k-iosk U attached on the roadside of the house.' Detailed numbers ot the number o'f people who will re-arrange within their plot, as well as number and 3 tvpe ot'affected business are presented in A\nnex I Compensation options: There has been no choice offered to the PAPs with respect to cash or kind compensationi. The RAP follows the principle that all PAPs (owners) are treated | ~~equa]lyv with t'ull cash compensation t'or land and structures at undepreciated market- * price replacement costs. This compensation, without any further allocation of funds, is presumed to be sufficient for the purchase of a new house or alternatively a plot 3 on which to construct a new home. 4.2 Rtesults: Pro ject-affected persons by categorv of impact Table 4-1: Number of propertv owners and their resettlement options Type of Impact Number 3 * ~~~~~Tvpe of Imnpact Number of RH Opting for remaining on plot site 1 ______of WHHl .~_ . and re-arrangem ent Home fuliy affected 22 not applicable Business fully affected 0 not applicable I Home partly affected 298 298 Business 3 temporarily affecteds 7 54 9! Severe impact as PAPs belong I none to vulnerable group l l ! Tenants 5 (estimnation of RH) 80 not applicable Gravest affected I 5D0 not applicable 4.3 Extent of resettlement in each of the CIUP sub-wards many I -In cases the house owner will reconstruct rooms elsewhere on the plot and/or extensions trim their (verarndahs, bars, shops) in accordance with the new right of arran_ernents way limits. Similar re- will be used to handle roadside storerooms, veranda or steps. as Finally, businessmen such artisans (e.g. carpenters) who currently use the roads in the unplanned settlements storage place' as 'work and have been notified by the chairmen and agreed to shift their informal occupancy ROW to backyard spaces. of the It is unlikely that these types of artisans would be significantly affected by the project in the performance of their activities. ' Businesses like tood vending stalls. commercial stores, charcoal selling kiosks, tea rooms, etc. are generally integrated barbecues in house structures in the unplanned settlements; therefore there rinumerous cases are where one and the same affected properny falls under both categories of affected' and 'residential 'business rooms' affected. The valuation records do not distinguish between temporary, partly or fulling impact on a specific business. Three business 1 structures are located in full, affected propenies, i.e. thes will be replaced with the inhabitants together as chosen. All others have. according to the HH survey team's records, planned to shift their business structures in line with the determined ROW, 3 Comiirnmuti r Infrastructure Upgrading Program T lhe iocation of the properties affected by the CIL'P Mierventions is indicated on the 3 map t'r each sub-wvard in Annex 2. 3 k;%KIN'ONDONI NIUNICTPALITY (1) Uzu ri By adapting the designs to the local conditions, improvement of roads and storm water drains I affect 18 properties. including full demolition of 2 houses necessitating resettlement of the residents. The other 16 partially affected, property owners are willing and able to rebuild the demolished'part of their house on the same plot. (2) Kilimani Full demolition in this sub-ward has been limited to one house, affecting one household. Otherwise. 9 properties will be partiallv affected, among them one bar. (3) Mlvuleni Upgrading of some of the current footpaths into access roads, has led to widening ot' the ROW. Although the designs have been adapted in close consultation with the * community to avoid demolition, Two houses will be demolished and their occupants resettled elsewhere. According to the HH survey, the owners have indicated to prefer resettlement in Mbweni or Bunju (see Annex 4). 15 other houses will be partially affected, involving the removal of fences, walls, gates and verandas. These affected households have indicated to reconstruct the lost property within their plots. 1 (4) ?vnazi Moja Full demolition affects 3 properties and 13 others are to be partially demolished due to the fact that parts of the houses (rooms. verandas, shop kiosks) protrude into the road reserves. One house I owner who will loose his property completely opts for resettlement to lMbweni or Bunju. The other house owners intend to rebuild the demolished part of 3 their house on the same site. In this sub-ward 2 graveyard sites will also be affected by the project, resultino in relocation ot'50 graves. (5) Muungano In this sub-ward one house will be fully demolished due to the road rehabilitation works. 12 houses will be partially affected (mainly verandas). 1 (6) Midizini One house must be completely demolished and the inhabitants must be resettled. 19 other properties will be affected with partial demolition (verandas, side-rooms and kiosks), but this would not require relocation of people. TEM/IEKE MEUNICIPALITY (7) Chang'ombe'.A' One house will be demolished completelv necessitating resettlement and 22 properties will be partially affected (removal of side-rooms. verandas, staircases). In 3 some properties fruit trees need to be cut. (8) Chan-'ombe B' I 3 Commnunlt\ Infrastructure LUpgradine Program The planned upgrading vvOr.i will affect 20 properties. No house needs to be demolished I completely. The house owners opted for reconstruction of the part of their property that has to be demolished wvithin their current plot. A total of 25 graves will be affected as the inf'rastructure investment passes through the local Jgravevard. The araves (including tombstones. if present) will be relocated in accordance with the community norms. | (9) Toroli The area has fairly wide access roads measuring about 6 meters wide. improvement including provision of the storm water drains will partiallv affect 13 properties. (1 0) Sandali The n-main roads are currentlv 6 to 12 meters wide. Infrastructure upgrading will I result in partial demolition of 8 structures, inciuding the removal of verandas, rooms and walls. Accordingly, there is no need for resettlement of Sandali residents. 1 (II) i/pogo Infrastructure upgrading can be done without much demolition. Only one house will be demolished totally necessitating resettlement. 23 more properties will be partiallv affected, including the removal of one or two rooms, walls or verandas. Two mango trees will also be affected. Where rooms will be partially affected, the residents have decided to re-arrange new room constructions within their plot boundaries. (12) Mwembeladu Two houses will be demolished and the residents will need to be relocated. 13 other I properties will be partiallv affected (removal of walls, rooms, verandas). The owners of these 13 houses have indicated to prefer reconstruction of the property lost within their original plots. I ILALA\ INJINICIPALITY (13) Nlnvamani The main central access road is about 7.5 meters wide, and its improvement will * result in a limited demolition of properties. NMost of the existing road lack side drains and the construction of such structures will affect the workshops, kiosks, verandas 3 and rooms currently extending into the existing roadway. In this denselv populated area. 4 properties will have to be demolished completely while 22 properties will be partiallv affected. The 4 house owners who are fully affected have signaled their wish to be resettled in one of the areas chosen for the purpose. All others have decided to reconstruct new rooms within their current plots. (14) Mvalapa The CIUP interventions in this sub-ward will result in one house being completely demolished. 17 others will be partially affected. The affected structures consist ot 3 rooms. verandas and walls/fences. l 3 3 Conmrmunit\ Inmrastructure Upgrading Prograr (15) Mladenge Three houses are subject to be totallv pulled down and the affected families need to be resettled. 41 other properties will be affected with partial demolition without necessitatinQ resettlement. The gravevard in this sub-ward "ill equally be affected. requiring a total of 75 craves to be relocated. (16) Mtambani Partial demolition of 335 properties is needed to upgrade the infrastructure in M4tamrnani. 'No house will be -totally removed. All affected people opted for reconstructing the lost property on their current plot and thus nobody would be required to resettle elsewhere. l l l l l l l I I l l I l 3 Community Infrastructure lpgrading Program 5 Compensation for lost assets and hardship due to demolition and relocation 5.1 Groups eligible for compensation The groups eligible for specific compensation and assistance packages in the commTunity intrastructLire upg,rading program are: (i) .Affected houses and businesses (owners and tenants) suffering any direct loss, whether permanent or temporary, complete or partial, of assets or investment, land and property or access to natural or economic resources as a result of the sub-project activities; (ii) Vulnerable households - having special needs than other households. This category includes households and businesses that for various reasons" are unable to find replacement housing, pack their personal belongings or business inventory, move their belongings or stock and unpack them in the 3 new location. Personis or ag,encies eligible for compensation for inadvertent construction damage will hold the contractor liable. The CIUP does not impinge on the local community as no public and/or social and cultural common facilities will be affected. No community building, school, clinic, or other public structure, nor any infrastructure such as telephone poles and lines, electric poles and lines, water mains, sewer mains and the like is affected bv this 3 project. Compensation measures therefore do not apply. 5.2 Compensation categories Compensation for land, built-up structures, businesses and relocation actions will be based on the following categories of the impacts: - Replacement cost of propertv: mainlv residential and business structures. yvegetation: Property owners (houses and businesses) are entitled to I replacement costs for land and lost structural (unmovable) assets at mark-et values' l; - Compensation allowances for propertv owners: In cases where the impact on the property is (i) partial. i.e. will not require displacement and the affected property owner opts for re-arrange,'construct new structures within the existent plot. provisions are made for compensation terrmed in Tanzanian law as disturbance allowance. In cases where (ii) fuill relocation is unavoidable, | Typically,P0 people who need this additional assistance are: - aged people without dependences; - handicapped.' chronically ill, disabled persons without dependences; - single women with very poor status; I - people that are classified as extreme poor. She Chief Municipal Chief 'valuier deterimiined to use the municipality's annuallk updated compensation lists tor all items subject Cor replacement. l 3 CommunitN Infrastructure Upgradingz Program additional accommodation and transportation allowvance s will be paid (see 3 >ection 5.3.2 below). - \Assistance to vulnerable households: Special assistance and allowance will be 3 considered for this group. - .Assistance for tenants: Tenants will receii-e assistance (see note., below)- to the extent they are impacted- when the affected property is used by tenants * for residential or business purposes. All tenants will be assisted with moving and locating new housing or businesses and provided compensation in kind'2 , -i.e. assistance to pack up. to move the goods, to re-establish themselves in the I new places etc.) Tenants will also be assisted in lodging claims against house owners, that do not pass on the transport allowance allocated by the project to thiem. Shops and businesses: The owners of the affected business temporarily affected bv construction are eligible for compehsation in cash for the temporary loss of profit resulting from the period of the move. As applicable, wages of salaried employees will be paid for the time the business is closed. - (JGraves: Where the infrastructure upgrading requires the removal of a grave J (including a tombstone), the relatives of the respective dead will be given the riaht to remove the remains of their dead relatives and bury them in a cemetery close to the actual location. The municipality is responsible to allocate such I replacement plot. Standard municipal rates apply to compensate for costs for relocation, including possible exhumation rites. 3 5.3 Compensation packages This RAP follows the terminology of allowances as used in the Tanzanian Regulations of Land Act 4 of 1999 13. The compensation rates detailed below are mostly referring to the tables 5-1, 5-2 and 5-3 which list the standard compensation rates applied during the valuation process for replacement"' ot affected structures, utilities, horticulture, trees, graves ctc. Details oni the case-wise application of the rates for each affected property are given in Annex 1. | The rates are similar for all sub-wards within the mnunicipality. The actual value compensated has been the one determined during the final agreement between the 3 valuer and the property owner. Table 5-1 Compensation Standards applied for affected properties in Kinondoni Municipality r1Compensation Rate S/N Replacement Item Unit in TSh Land, unbuilt , m2 5.000 2 a House, block construction, floors doors, 10.000 windows, roof corrug. iron m °__ 12 This is in accord with the RPF *vhich stipulates that compensation should include any other immediate cost or capital expenditure incurred to the development of the subject land. I (,vt.G-' Notice of 4/4/2001 The Land Assessment of the Value of Land for Compensation 14 Replacement value is defined as cost of putting up an equivalent structure as the one existing at the time of valuation and making allowance tor age. state repair and economic obsolescence in the place. I | CommunitV Intras2tructurm Lpgrading Program House, lower quality ciock construction, 2 floors doors, winocws, roof corrugated 0 iron c ., House, constructed of mud &poles. m2 50 000 to 80.000 : Ron sheet roof, I cement screed floor ______to_80_OCO d House, constructed of mud &poles, m2 30.000 i Iron sheet roof, no cement screed floor | eI Water connection present 1 5% increase of house value I { I S electricity connection or 5% telephone increase of house value line i absent 5% increase of house value 3 a Kiosk or storage room, attached to m2 80.000 ,house structure good construction m quality/materials __j b Kiosk, attached 2 to house structure m | 60. 000 medium quality/materials I _ 3 { c , Kiosk, attached to house structure poor m2 20.000 uality/materials _ 4 a Veranda, roofed with concrete slab m2 40.000 3 r b Veranda, roofed wl iron sheet at high 2 K- tlevelF >30cm I d Veranda unroofed m2 15.000 e Steps (top surface) m 2 20.000 I 5 Latrine pit, medium quality 1.5 m 0 60.000 b ILatrine pit, poor quality 1.5 m 0 36.000 oc Inspection chamber iece 6.000 d Standard septic tank (1.8x3m) piece 900.000 6 Fence, cement block m 50.000 b Fence, blocks only 4 courses m 25.000 c Fence, barbed wire or poles m F 10,000 dFe-nce, other material (makuli) m 5.000 - Hedge m 5.o000 7 Mlimbitree, fully productive 100% 7.000 __ _ . _ _ _ .______.._ _ _ *b Coconut tree, fully productive 100% 122.000 Ic Eucalyptus tree, fully productive ! 100% 1 5.000 d Miarobaini tree, fully productive 100% 7.000 1e Ashoktree, fully productive 100% 5.000 f. Suqarcane _ frond 800 j fYams acre 7.000 38LkI_ Grave with or without tombstone per tomb 72.500 I I I I I I I 3 Communivy Intrastructure LUpgrading Prorarn 3 Table 5-2: Compensation Standards applied for affected properties in Ilala Mlunicipality * _ _ _ _ .______I S/I Replacement |tem SIN Replacement item Unit Compensationin TSh Rate 1* _ Land,t unbuflt r m2 _ _5_000__ 2 a House, block construction, floors doors, 2 I windows, roof corrug.i ron s ~~~~b!House, lower quality block construction, m2m 60.000 to 80.000 1 floors doors, windows, roof corrugated 0 iron __ _ I I House, constructed of mud &poles, 2 Ron sheet roof, cement screed floor 0 t d t House, constructed of -nud &poles, m2 30.000 Iron sheet roof, no cement screed floor 2 e Water connection present 5% increase of house value electricity connection or 5% increase of house value telephone line absent /5%increase of house value - 3 a Kiosk or storage room, attached to m2 100.000 house structure good construction L.. quality/materials b Kiosk, attached to house structure m2 a0.000 medium quality/materials c Kiosk, attached to house structure poor m2. 20.000 Z -quality/materials __ *4 _ _ a IVeranda, roofed with concrete slab M-_ 40000 b Veranda, roofed w/ iron sheet at high m2 20.000 level >30cm _ |d Veranda unroofed m2 15.000 e Steps (top surface) m2 20.000 5 a Latrine pit, medium quality 1.5 m 0 48.000 1 b Latrine pit, poor quality 1.5 m 0 36.000 Inspection chamber _iece 6.000 d Standard septic tank (1.8x3m) piece 900.000 6 a Fence, cement blocks w/ grill m 50 000 I r b Fence, blocks only 4 courses m * 30.000 | .ic Fence, barbed wire or poles m 10.000 -. dj Fence, other material (makulh F m 5.000 e Hedge F m - 5.000 |7 1 a Mlimbitree, fully productive 100% | 7.000 Coconut tree, fully productive 100% 22.000 c Eucalyptus tree, fully productive i 100% 5.000 1 d] Miarobaini tree, fully productive 100%/ 7.000 j I i e Ashoktree, fully productive 100% |5 000 f |Suqar cane frond 800j * I g j| Yams ____ace_ _7000 * 8 Grave with or without tombstone per tomb 72.500 I I I 3 Communit- InfrastrucTurt gpri-ading Program 3 Table 5-3 Compensation Standards applied for affected properties in Temeke Municipality _ _ I ______i__ r * S/N 4 ~~~~~~~~~~Compensation Rate | Replacement Item Unit i inCTSh R 2 1 Land, unbuilt m 3,750 2 a House, block construction, floors doors, m 130000 3 ' windows, roof corrug. iron r IbHouse, lower quality block construction, b i floors doors, windows, roof corrugated 60.000 to 80 000 I l Iron roof, IrIo C 2 House, constructed of mud &poles, m 50.000 to 80.000 Ron sheet roof cement screed floor m. .______to______d House, constructed of mud &poles, m2 30.000 Iron sheet roof, no cement screed floor | 3 * e Water connection present 5% ;ncrease of house vaiue electricity connection or 5% increase of house vaiue i -telephone line absent 5% increase of house vaiue 3 a 2 Kiosk or storage rocm, attached to m 1 80.000 house structure good construction quality/materials __ _ 2 -| b Kiosk, attached to house structure m 6 00 I I mediu ______nl5 c Kiosk, attached to house structure poor m2 40.000 I _quality/materials i I a2 Veranda, roofed with concrete slab m2 40.000 b Veranda, roofed w/ iron sheet at high I m2 40.000 _level >30cm , 40_000 Veranda unroofed 2 rm - 15.000 fStepse (top surface) [ m2 _ 20.000 a5 Latrine pit, medium quality 1.5 m 0 60.000 5I | b ELatrine pit, poor quality _ 1.5 m 0 36.000 c Inspection chamber piece 6.000 d Standard septic tank (1.8x3m) pece 900.000 6 a Fence, cement blocks w/ grill m 80.000 b Fence, blocks only 4 courses m 15.000 I I I c Fence, barbed wire or poles [ m 10.000 d Fence, other material (makull, I m 5.000 e Hedge m 5.000 ai IMlimbitree, L7 fully productive 100% TO7.000 Coconut tree, fully productive 1 100%/ 22.000 ci |Eucalyptus tree, fully productive 100% 5.000 Miarobaini tree, fully productive 100% 7 000 e Ashok tree, fully productive 100%/ 5.000 1 'Tf1 Sugar cane frond 1 800 1 3 i[ gq Yams acre i 7.000 8 LGrave with or without tombstone I ertomb 75.000 | 'Note: The rates for land in Teineke are lower in comparison to the other two municipalities. The reason is that businesspeople and residents of higher and medium income level f irst seek residence in Kinonidonii or Ilala, and Temneke would be the less preferable area. I Cornmunltt Inlnrastrucmure Upzradimn_ Prourarn The compensation allok\ances and assistanice activities adopted as in the valuation process w,ere the folloving: 5.3.1 Propertv Valuation For land (including non-agricultural ve2etation) This type of compensation applies to all affected households, regardless of whether there is need for resettlement or the PAP opts to re-arrange their structure on the remaining plot. In accordance with § 3 of the 2001 Regulations of Land Act 4 of 1999,'5 the basis for assessment of the value of lands affected by the project is the market value of the respective land. Land measurements were in m- . There was no land loss that would fall in the category of cultivated land. Horticulture items, vegetable garden, trees, hedges etc were calculated in accordance with the municipal list for standard compensating rates (tabies 5-1, 5-2 and 5-3). The valuers specified the market value (including unexhausted improvemenit) by using the standard rates provided by the municipality for land valuation. As a result, the value of land for these unplanned high-density settlements varies with location within the Dar es Salaam metropolitan area. For example, the Temeke municipality standard 2 rate for compensating land loss is TSh 3,750/in while for Kinondoni and Ilala this rate is TSh 5,000/m 2 (see tables 5-1 to 5-3) For non-movable built-up structures The valuer determined the compensation for all private buildings and structures affected by the project. Case-to-case agreements during the valuation were in relationship to the material and quality of the structure. These valuations use the annuallv updated standard compensation lists of the respective municipality. The same lists specify the compensation payment to the head of familv whose grave will be affected by the project. 5.3.2 Allowances in cash and kind a) Accommodation allowance: The accommodation allowance applies to all structures or portions of structures that are to be demolished, regardless of whether resettlement is required or not. The Tanzanian Law provides for an allowance which compensates the property owners for the costs incurred in the period when construction of new structures is underwav. In Tanzaniani legislative terminology this is defined as accommodation allowance. In accordance with § 8 of the 2001 Regulations of Land Act 4 of 1999, accommodation allovvances are calculated on the basis of' monthlv standard market rents 16 multiplied bv 36 (months). 15 Regulations. Gvt. Notice No 78 of 4-4,2001 The Land (Assessment ofthe value of Land for Compensation) 6 1 Current monthly 3 market rent for 1 room = TSh 10.000 for medium qualitv. TSh 15,000 for good *qualitv and kiosk-s, and TSh 5.000 for best quality material and finishing of walls. floors, windows etc or tor business structures other than street kiosks. If rooms are only partially demolished. the proportional rate applies. Community infrasTruclure L:pgrading Program b) Disturbance allowance: | The Tainzanian Law makes additionai provision for an allowance which compensates project-affected persons for impacts they experience during the process of Vdemolition and, as applicable, of relocation. This type of compensation is meant to I grive support to the family to alleviate any social problems or phvsical hardship that they might experience. In Tanzanian legislative terminology the compensation for the experienced- suffering is defined as disturbance allowance. In accordance with § )10of the 2001 Regulations of Land Act 4 of 1999' the disturbance allowance is calculated by multiplying the actual value of the land by the average percentage of interest offered by commercial banks on Fixed deposits for 12 months. The I Tanzanian legislation only considers propertv owners eligible for this type of compensation. c) Transport Nlovine Allowance: 3 Transport Allowance (for House Owners) In accordance with § I I of the 2001 Reoulations of Land Act 4 of 1999 a transport allowance is paid to all project-affected persons whether partially or fully affected. The payment is intended to meet transport cost incurred by property owners. It is specifically noted that the valuers applied this compensation to all properties. i.e. also to the vast majority of those who will not be resettled. The legal provision determines that the transport costs are compensated at fixed rates equivalent to the actual costs for transporting 12.000 kg of lu' 2 by road for a distance of 20 km. All three municipal authorities established the applicable rate at the time of evaluation being TSh 12,000 per household. N/Movingr assistance (for Tenants): In order to ensure fair compensation of tenants (residences and businesses), the RAP will provide a supplementary pavment- moving assistance to tenants (including businesses) in (i) all properties facing complete demolition and necessitating full resettleTment: and (ii) partially demolished structures in which tenants will be I relocated elsewhere within the plot. The survey team has currently identified 18 tenant households among the 22 properties that will be fully affected. Tenants in partially affected properties need only shift their belongings to the new structure I within the plot, assistance tor this move will be provided in kind. Tenants (household or business) will receive: 1 - timely notification (3 months) terminating the rental agreement as per Tanzanian regulations ': |- assistance to obtain anv refund of advance rent payments assistance in finding a new rental unit will be provided to any tenants in properties that will be follv demolished; i7Demolition ortrented premises, either partly or t'Lll. are amnone the sLubstantial rcasons to criinatc a | rental retationship. l Community In,frastructure Upgrading Progran I- assistance in moving7 'from current to new room on the respective plot will be provided to tenants on properties that will onln be partially affected. The new room wsill be built and the tenant moved before the old one is demolished: I - assistance in packing personal belonginas or business inventor<. transporting the same to a new location. unpacking and re-arranging. I The respective PAPs wvill be informed bv the survey team about the assistance offered by the project at an early stage after the approval of the RAP. The persons eligible and requesting this assistance will be registered at the Ward Executive Office (WEO). Disputes and claims will be settled bv the grievance addressing arrangements (see section 7). * TThe MSEO will help to forward Justified claims to the grievance settlement offices for resolving problems such as obtaining back pre-paid rental fees'8 . I The \VEO will determine the cut-off day for effecting the payment and assistances. The values of the compensation in kind are included in the resettlement budget 3 (section 10). e) Vulnerabilitv allowance: Although there are no provisions in the Tanzanian legislation for dealing with vulnerable groups, PAPS who require special assistance (e.g. elderly, handicapped), I in line with the CIUP policy that no PAP suffer undue hardship because of project investments, will be provided: * Full assistance to find and receive a new residential plot I . Provision of a new plot free of charge * Construction funds for a new residence that shall be in better condition than 3 the one previously inhabited, approved by the municipal authority The vulnerabilitv allowance is calculated at 5 % of the total value of the affected property to be calculated as lump sum allowance for a household that falls under the * said category. The allowance is paid to the head of household. At present stage, the resettlement survev team has identified only one family among the PAPs that would fall uncler this category. t) Loss of profit: In accord with § 9 of the 2001 Regulations of Land Act 4 of 1999 the net monthly profit obtained from the business associated with the affected properties is assessed 3 (for high incomes. evidenced by audited accounts1 9 where necessary and applicable. ilMost tenancies in the unplanned settlements are informal (i.e. they carry no documentation). Tenants pay their rents monthly or for longer periods (up to 12 months) and can move out any time they want. In those instances where the tenant had paid remt in advance, e.g. for the coming year. the landlord will rerund the arnount of the unused advance pavment. Audited account evidence shall be considered for claimed income 1 mmillion TSh,vyear: In case * such e',idence cannot be presented by the claimant, the municipal trade record list will apply and the valuer will decide the amount of profit loss. Il ComMunitV infrastructure lUpgrading Program for low i rne approved by the authorities' trade business list), and multiplied bN 36 months in order to arrive at the loss of profit payable. This calculation applies also for such businesses that are only temporarily affected during the project's I c construction phase. This compensation paTment will be made to all businesses regardless of the status (owner or tenant) of the user: As long as the respective business is affected by the *project the loss of profit shall be exclusively and directly paid to the person who loses hils/her business premises. ) Compensation for inadvertent construction damagre Persons or aoencies who suffer damage from inadvertent construction incidents are to be comnpensated by the-respective constructor at market-value plus replacement costs for the damage incurred. The CPT will assist in bringing claims forward to the municipality and/or the grievance resolution offices, as applicable. As precaution measures, the technical specifications in the contracts for the I contractors for the upgrading investments contain clauses that deal with inadverternt damage. The clauses are detailed in the CEiMIP for CIUP. I I l l l I l l 3 gCommuLnitj' ln ras[ructure LUpradirio Program 3 Table 5-1: Summarv matrix for eligibility and compensation Category Numnber of HH of Impact affecte Compensation *U! Package Loss of entire plot, built- o Compenisation at determineda up structures and garden replacement rates plants (residential and/or l Accommodation allowance business) o Disturbance allowance; !o Transportation allowance Partial loss of plot, built- o Compensation at determined up structures and garden - 98 replacement rates plants(residential and/or o Accommodation allowance business) o Disturbance allowance; $ Tenants 5 intotally affected 18 o vovini assistance properties _ _l__ 4 fTenantsdin partially 80 (estimate) o Moving assistance, if required * affected properties I _ I______e I o Assistance to receive a new Vulnerable residential houselholds I plot _ 3 ! i o Vulnerability allowance o Compensation for lost structure Businesses, is 57 included in the building Vendors compensation (operating inI (see above) permanent structures I such o Disturbance and transport allowance as kiosks! street shops, forI those vendors not residing in bars, charcoai-sellers the plot etc.) but using it for business ______o Loss of profit, as ap plicable Daily transient vendors 50 10(At fixed public announcement date (within (easilv movable premises 11 month before construction starts) the 3 | such as tables) number CPT provides alternative locations to tILuctuates) .vendors to sell their wvares or proffer _t services; no cash compensation Employed artisans (e.g., estimated 50 1o no specific compenisation during carpenters, furniture (almost all impact, as in most makers) cases (carpenters) belonging to there is option to shift open space _____- ______--____ carpenters) j workplace for short distances lI Graves _150 ~o compensation to family at rate set by ,the rnun icipal ity I ______3 Communlit Infrastructure (-poradin- Program 6 Asset valuation process 6.1 Procedure The valuation of aaffected assets eli-gible for compensation, as well as the identif'ication and ai(reement on compensation allowances has been embedded in the followin;, procedural scheme: (I ) All potential resettlement issues have been analyzed based on first hand information, i.e. from the survev of the affected households. This survey allowed identif'ication of the magnitude and impact of resettlement. The 3 survey and the answers retrieved from the questionnaires (Annex 3) substantially determined the planning for the resettlement actions. The individual household questionnaire responses are also an important source of information in settling possible disputes at later stage. (2) The land survev team then made demarcations in line with the technical designs. and the structural assets subject to demolition were marked with Iowner.code references along with the registered names of the affected property (3) The ward executive officer contacted and notified (using Land Forrm No 69, 'Notice to Land Occupier to apply for Compensation') in early M/lay 2004 each individual land owner / occupier to agree upon a date for valuation and filled in Land Form No. 70, 'Application for Compensation by Land Occupier'. (4) On the agreed date the appointed municipal valuers, accompanied bv the municipal coordinator and members of the planning team, v alued the property by discussing each single item eligible for compensation, as well as calculating, in presence of the owner, the respective compensation values. The negotiations included an agreement of temporary loss of benefit for cases where businesses will become affected. During the entire * valuation procedure the PAPs were fully informed about the use of established (standardized) criteria for compensation of lost assets as well for the allowable compensation packages. The valuers took care that the procedure was explained in a manner comprehensible to everyone being affected. (5) After the negotiation agreement with the affected owner the municipal valuer drew up a contract that lists all property and land being surrendered and the type of compensation to be given. In kind compensation was also recorded in an order form, which were signed by the respective parties and witnessed. The compensation contract was read aloud in the presence of the affected partv prior to signing. (6) The items eligible t'or compensation were documented in the owners' presence. Photographs were made of the signing party and of all major assets subject to compensation., and thev are kept in the Chief Valuers files. (7) The owners were informed about their rig,hts and the devised mechanisms to forward 3 complaints, and notified that thev must allow access to their property to the ward executive officer and the land officer of the respective municipalities for cross-checking their claims. (8) In addition, 3 the PAPs were informed that any of their complaints and claimns prior to payment will be forwarded to the Municlpal Director who is obligcd I ______3 Communlty Intrastructure LUperadine Program to investicate the case. All claims need to be resolved before comnpensation payments are effected. Any,, complaints advanced after a Fixed date (within x days orfreceipt of the finall claim k\ould not be entertained. (9) In accordance with the laid down procedures and notified schedules (still to be determined bv the MID). the local authoritv will pay the cheques to the entitled heads of households. (10) Thereafter, at a fixed and notified schedule. owners have the right to remove * all assets and structures. Should the owner fail to comply with this action, the contractor will be given in writing the perrnit to unconditionally demolish | and remove all structures as and when the 'vork progress would require. Note 1: The cut-off dates for eligibility for compensation under CIUP was not the asset inventoryv and valuation but the date of signing the agreement between valuer and the head of the PAPs. INote 2: The valuation process has bso far focused on owners of affected properties. The 18 tenant families currentlv residing in properties subject to full resettlement shall be included in the valuation process to grant them the compensation packages described in section 5.3.2. 3 6.2 I)ocumentation, contract agreement and dossier Written records and photographic documentation of holdings and assets is important to settle claims and to avoid later claims or fraudulence. Therefore, along with the * signing the agreement forms, people and assets (infrastructure) were photographed for documentation. The detailed records of the valuation are kept in the Chief Valuer 3 office in each municipalitv as dossier file. During the valuation process (May - July) all house owners worked with valuers and municipal CIUP coordinators and CPTs to establish Final compensation value of * assets affected by the project. After discussion and agreement for the total compensation value the municipal valuer drew up a contract listing all property and land heing surrendered and the type of compensation to be given. In kind compensation is also recorded in an order form, which was signed by the respective parties and witnessed. The compensation contract was read aloud in the presence of | the affected party prior to signing. For each valuation record a dossier will be prepared and entered into a municipal database which will have restricted access. The dossier will be prepared jointly by the municipal CIUP Coordinator and the respective CIUP Resettlement Monitoring Officer (see section 10.2). Each municipality office-0 will maintain such a database. The dossier will be entered in a query database that will contain inf'ormnatioln on: * site location with propertv and valuation codes ot the atfected propertv: * particulars of household members; * . relocation place. as applicable: . * total holdings and specificationriquanitification of lost , affected items 0 It is recommended to store this database In the municipality's Planning & Coordination CDepartment l 3 Communit-y Infrastruclure lpgradinr Program I* records of valuation and replacement compensation paid, I * records of compensation packages agreed * records of co mpensation payments effected; * 3 description of new domicile (including land holding and built structures); . photographic documentation (digital form) of the assets affected, as per valuation date; . results 2 I of the first household survey ' (questionnaire records, see Annex 3): * claims and grievances forthcoming;- 3 * claims and grievances resolved (including records for dispute resolution); * other information relevant for monitoring and verification purposes (see section 10. 1). A user-friendlv and tailored data base svstem with in-built security features will be developed by a local expert and communicated to all three municipalities via the existing wireless network.. The costs for an expert who will prepare the data base are included in the budget for the resettlement monitoring (section 11. table 1 1-2). l l l l I l l l l Ihe dalta hase shall also indicate and-use requiremerits and relocation particulars for all PAPs, .e those \ ho opted to stay and rearrange their home in the diminished plot as well as those who took residencc in a nc%wpiot aIter complete demolitiorn or the structure. I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 3 CommLnit[ Infrastructure tLpgrading Procram 7 F'roposed grievance redress mechanisms .At the time that the indi\iduai resettlement and compensation plans are approved and individual compensation contracts are signed. affected individuals were already been informed of the process for expressine dissatisfaction and to seek redtess. C'laims and complaints shall be brought to the attention of the sub-ward chairman who will forward all arievances concerninm non-fulfillment of contracts, level of compensation or seizure ot assets without compensation to the attention of the mnunicipal director: If no agreement can be reached, the cases will be taken to the * local court svstem. The basis for judging the claim will be the documentation provided in the municipality's individual dossiers for this RAP. The grievance procedure is simple, administered as far as possible at the local level to facilitate access, be flexible and open to any proofs. ~Care will be taken to recoenize the fact that most people are illiterate and poor. It is advocated that all attempts would be made to settle grievances at the local level. Those seeking redress and wishing to state grievances would do so bv notifying the municipal director. The latter will consult with the councilors, the ward/ mtaa and elders to determine the * justification of the claims. If valid. the municipal director will notify the complainant to settle the matter. If the complainant's claim is rejected, then the matter can be brought before the local courts for settlement. If the local courts cannot settle the *matter, it can go to the high court of Tanzania for resolution. The high court will be the highest appellate "judge" in this system. The decision of the high court would be tinal and all such decisions mlsSt be reached witlin a full growing season after the * complaint is lodged. It' a complaint pattem etnerges, the municipal director with the TST and CPT will discuss possible remediation. The director will be required to give advice concerning the need tor revisions to the procedures. Once the municipality and the communitv agree on necessary and appropriate changes a written description of the changed * process will be made. The ward executive officer and sub-ward chairman will be responsible for communicating the results to the complainant. U l l l l | Communit'; Infrastructure t'puradin- Program 38 8 Institutional arrangements for the RAP S. 1 Institutional actors The overall responsibility for the resettlement lies in the hands- of the local authorities under local government administrative and Financial management rules and manuals. In specific, the 3 head of the planning and coordination department in each municipality will be the main responsible official to oversee and coordinate the RAP. Funding will be processed and effected through the Ministry for Regional | Admrinistrationi and Local Governments (PO - RALG) through the decentralized local governments and will comply with the financial arrangements agreed upon at project appraisal. The finance administrative committee of the NIC maintains the overall budget responsibility for the resettlement costs and for comnpensation and claim pavments effected bv the municipality'5 finance department. This committee also oversees the collection of the resident's contribution for the CIUP. Compernsation and resettlernent activities envisaged. for the CIUP involve several stitutional actors, including the community. individuals. local authlorities and J ~~NGOs,iCB(Ds, such as: The consultant (DHV). along with its local counterpart institution (UCLAS) prepared the technical design for survey is responsible of elaborating the RAP in close consultation with all institutional actors described in this section. The consultant prepares the survey of affected households, the community participation process. the cost estimates and the implementation schedule for all activities described in the RAP. | Technical planninM team (TST): Responsible for the local surveys to design the urban infrastructure upgrading, maintains close linkage with the municipal planning and coordination department through the CIUP coordinator. CIUP coordinator: He/she ensures the functioning of the community consultation and participation 3 process. and the timelv launching of the project in community meetings Other tasks include the overseeing of the selection of communitv representatives and the establishment of the CPTs who will be, among other. engaged in moving assistance to PAPs. He/she also coordinates the set-up of a * g7rievance resolution mechanism at the ward executive office, the resettlement monitoring and the maintenance of the PAP record database. The valuation section of the municipal planning and coordination department provides annual lists for compensation standards. It determines the notification and registration of PAPs as well as the cut-off date for compensation carries out the property valuation (through officers from the valuation section), while the Land Officer is responsible for signing the transfer contracts for land-take. The urban planning and environmental committee of the N1C scrutinizes and approves the proposed resettlement action plan. 3 CommMUnit Infnrastructure Lperadin eProgram ITlhe %\ardexecutive office receives and makes all efforts to resolve community and I PAP issues and complaints. and forwards them to the MIC in case no consensus can be re-iched in the grievance resoiution mechanism at ward-lcvel. 8.2 Organization Chart for functions and responsibilities of institutions relevant to the CIUP resettlement action plan and COUNCIL Approve the resettlement program and ensure full participation by communities and control decdsion-making by people concerned W ' 'I~~~~~~~~ FINANCE ADMINISTRA- URBAN PLANNING AND TIVE COMMITTEE ENVIRONMENTAL MUNICIPAL DIRECTOR Scrutinize the budget for COMMITTEE resettlement activities In charge of the entire - Scrutinize the entire I Development Program in the upgrading program, Municipality - Approve action plans FINANCE DEPT. including the RAP * . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~paycompensation DISASTER PLANNING AND COORDI- MANAGEMENT _ NATION DEPARTMENT WARD EXECUTIVE OFFICE Advice the _ ~~~~Coorcdinate upgrading programs Project . Undertake task /ventures designed to Affected ensure welfare of the ward residents people or TOWNPLANNING ~~Monitor and coordilnate all activities Resettlement i TOWNPLANNING | of /in the sub ward. SECTION Receive complains and grievances Execute and submit them to the Municipal Regularization Director Proaram . .. COUNCILORS CIUP COORDINATOR Advice the Ensures participation SBWR CHIMNprogram RAP monitoring SUB-WARD CHAIRMAN office on Dossiers, database Resolving specific community issues Resettlement Records of project affected people with VALUATION Forward any complains to councilors L SECTION - Initial settlement of grievances and l Property valuation of disputes I affected people | 8 - -- ; j ~~~~~COMMUJNITY PLANNING TEAMa LAND OFF CER * dentify Affected )roperties | Aoministration of Plots J Advise tne PAP [ applications I Assist the PAP Signing transfer contracts 3 Community Intrastructure U:pgrading Program 1 9 Implementation schedule The rcsettlement action plan and compensation plan has to be approved by [he municipal governments. The resettlement sites. encompassing the 20.000 plot progr.am. have already met the approval of the local government councils. Timing of all resettlement activities. including land acquisition and demolition of houses etc., is linked with the scheduled start and progress of the construction works., Acquisition of land and assets mav be affected onlv after compensation has been paid anid, where applicable. resettlement sites and relocation allowances have been provided to displaced persons. I The implication 2 2 is that before anv construction activity is implemented, the PAPs entitled to compensation will need to be notifiedcand compensated in due time in accordance with the RAP. All measures required to assist households with relocation must be completed prior to displacement. The same holds true for timely compensation for all businesses that are required to shift temporarily. The I timing mechanism of these measures, as outlined in table 9-1 (Proposed schedule for implementing the RAP), will be essential. l l l I I_ 2_ The R.AP has. without pre-empting approval dates and other time-consuming procedures determined by both the GoT and the funding agency, assumed that the beginning ot construction activities mav be late in 2004, Notwithstanding>, the schedules for payment of compensation, settineg up of grievance redress schemes and signing contracts For handing over the atfected properties to the GoT will remain more or less the same and close to the date of approval of the RAP. - m m - - - - m - - Communuity Infrastructur-e Upgradinig Programii IFablc 10-1: Maliageirncnt and Monitoring Schedule for the CIUI' Wlesettlement Action P'lan PHASES DESIGN & PREPARATION CONSTRUCTION Activities Respon e 2003 2004 si'bility a 2005 2006 ______._____ r ______ 89 10111212 3 4 5 6:7 8 9i1011 12 1 2 3:4 5 6 7 8 9:101112 1 2A34 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 Prepare technical design for CIUP -Eng of interventions _onsultant Prepare the RAP ons, _ _ _ C~~PT,MPCD, _ _ Public notification, community IMPCD, RE, - consultation, community meetings, [TST, CPT . .. Approval of Resettlement Framework Plan _____.___._.___.::_._._.B._. HI-1 Survey and identification ST, RE, fPAPs _ PT_ __.- Official valuation of properties and MV, MD Cut-off date Negotiation, individual contracts & MVMD_ signinq and cut-off date ______=___----- := =___:..,___:--*_:=__ ,_:,__ _ :______:- RAP Approval MC, LGSP, . . - __---=------: _ _ _ _ _ . , e._ --- l f - -_ j , et-up grievance resolution schee C. _, , : ' _ ,h nd oftice _ _ Payment of replacernent MC Finan- : _ _ comperisation for lost land and assets| : . - - Resettlement Action P'lan 35 m m - - - - m- m -m - - Comminunity Infrastructure l]pgrading Progran Table 9-1 - cont. - PHASES DESIGN & PREPARATION | CONSTRUCT ION l~~ ______ Activities Respon e 2003 2004 2005 2006 sibility ra ______ _____ .8 9910112 1 2 3 4.5_6 7 8 9,10.11.12 1 234.5 6;7 891011.12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1112 ~Payment of allowances to IAPsMC, Finan- U Ej.. ec ept .. Resettlement assistance PTs, rogranm and resettlement |PCD orTencement of Demolishing MC: tructures _____ractor Monitoring the resettlernent acti TSTev ,_o, ______tvhe~T Evaluation of the effectivenessof the |LGSP, MC, 131...... _,2.. resettlement program of CIUP \B _ . ._'_-__.___ ,_*__ .-4l)ljevlalono (CPl- CominriiUit Pl'lanning leanm RE Resellernent Expert oJ)Design Consultoni AIC - Municipal Council IST-- Technical Support ieani AlL) - liunicipal DuteLcor .lP'CD - Mlunicipal l'lanniing atndl (Coordinalionl)epoartuieu All' AMunicipal I aluer Resettlement Action Plan 36 l Comrn-ii\ I nCrastructurc L'pTradinge Program 10 NMonitoring the proposed resettlement actions IThe mlonitorine of the RAP will be also the responsibility of the head of the planning I and coordination department in each municipalitv. 3 10.1 Application of verifiable indicators As stipulated by the resettlement policy framework, a set of simple verifiable indicators will be adopted to monitor and evaluate the implementation | of resettlement and compensation plans as given in the template below. Table 10-1: Matrix of verifiable indicators for monitoring the RAP Verifiable indicators to monitor pre- post resettlement situation 3 Monitoring Evaluation Nlumber / Percentage of PAP HH who Acceptance or rejection of new decided to re-arrange resettlement their structure on the area proposed by the government 3 F sameplot after partly demolition ___ Number / Percentage of PAP HH arranging Preference of (successful) re-adjustment of successfully their new homestead after re- residence after partly demolition and re- arangement in the partly affected plot structurng Number and reasons for failure of such re- Causes for failure, and lessons a_-rangernent learned for future resettlement actions to be planned Percentage of moving assistance Effectiveness of assistance measures Number / Percentage of payments for Effectiveness compensation * allowances allowances Number / Percentage of payments for Effectiveness of transport t allowance ~~~transport ailowance |arrangements Number / Percentage of payments for loss of Effectiveness of profitcompensation compensation arrangements for lost business profits Number/ Percentage of additional payments Effectiveness of compensation to vulnerable and groups assistance to vulnerable groups Number of grievance appeals Overall performance of the RAP, and lessons to be learned for future resettlement Number of successfully resolved appeals -ditto - Number of unsettled qrievance appeals - ditto - Ability of (number) )individuals and families to re-establish their pre-displacement d-itto - activities by cateqory of impact For displaced persons: Comparative Maintenance of better life percentage standards after of daily life costs (transport, resettlement; living standards market, at least equal utilities, school, medication) increase to pre-relocation situation in new resettlement area Number / percentage of PAPs in working Income situation at least equal or better after age who found adequate income opportunity relocation in new resettlement area Pre- project production and Income ( year All affected individuals and/or households before land used) versus present production compensated or resettled have at least and income of resettlers and affected maintained their previous standard of living persons (both for business and non- at final evaluation. business people) Number of impacted local residents Beneficial impacts generated ] empioved by the project 3 by civil works contractors for CIUP on resident's income opportunities l | Communin. Infrastructure Tipgradingj Program 1 10.2 Determination of the monitors ad implementation of monitoring scheme Consistent vith the environmental effectiveness monitoring procedures laid out in the CEMIP, the resettlement monitorincg will be carried out by analvzing household surveys in all families that were reg7istered during the process of notification and 3 valuation. A querv database will be maintained (see section 6.4) which contains all iridividual dossiers to keep track of the affected persons. This will ensure that also those families will continually be monitored who became resettled in other areas. | At the beginning of the monitoring scheme, a user-friendlv and tailored database will be dcveloped bv a local expert and housed in the Project Coordination Unit. The expert will also make provisions to develop security measures to protect misuse or unauthorized access to these confidential data. The database template will be communicated to all 3 municipalities to maintain uniformity in records and evaluation for the entire project. The data base should also be expandable and usable for the environmental M&E as designed in the CE?vlP for the CIUP. The survev will be primarilv assessingo the actual socio-economic situation through a structured household interview and questionnaire. The above-described indicators will serve as analytic tools. I The monitoring activities shall start at the date of the appraisal of the RAP, and will continue for 24 months. For this period, three CIUP Resettlement Monitoring Officer will be identified (or recruited if need be), one for each municipality. This * officer is responsible for all resettlement records in his/her municipality, as well as maintenance of the data base and repetitive household surveys. Each HH survey will be screened in line with the indicators determined in table 10-1. A schedule of about I 2)00 PAPs visits is foreseen in each municipality. This schedule would be suitable to visit each affected household in the 16 sub-wards as well as in the possible outskirts 3 where r PAPs may have settled. about 3 times over the 2-years monitoring period. l l 3 l I I I 3 Communit UprrgstructureLpgrading Pro-ram I I Cost estimates to implement the RAP A summarv 3 of the resettlemcnt plans costs (in Tanzanian Shilling) for compensation of properties affected and compensation packages payable to projeet-affected persons properties in each sub-wvard is provided in the following table: Table I1-1: Summarv cost estimation (in TSh) for the CIUP Resettlement | - Action Plan Affected properties I -I I Ttal Partial Total R | I Tz)tal Parti Replace- Compensat No CIUP Other Costs Total Area loss loss ment Value ion (5%) , ] (no | with- ~~~~~~~~Compen-Allowances ______TSh __ resett outsa TSh(Resett_oS tAK~ONDO1 lement) lement) graves aTS TS T S a) K_NN N vUNICIPALITY, , 1 MvIanzeseUzur, - 2 16 is 16,520,000 2,519,000 1,451,950 30,490,950 Kilimani 1 I -I2 I 9 10 36,960,000 22,069,000 2,951,450 3 ivlidizini 61,980,450 1 19 20 29,278.000 20,017,000 21464,750 51,759,750 4 N/inazi Mmoja a! 3 13 16 32,268,000 18,737.000 2,550_250 5 itiuongano 53,555,250 I 12 13 14,880,000 10,538,000 1,270,900 26,688,900 6 Nlvuleni 2 15 17 2 1'547,000 18,566,000 2,005,650 42,118,650 Totals Kinondini io 84 94 151,453,000 102,446.000: 694950 266.593.950 3 I b)ILALA MUNICIPALITY * Mnvarani 4- 2 26 45,514,000 17,961,000 3.173,750 8 Mlalapa 66,648,750 I 17 18 14,431,000 5,622,000 1,002,650 9 Mladenge 21,055,650 b/ 3 41 44 56,251,000 17,210,000 3,673,055 10 Nltambani 77,134,155 0 35 35 34,012000 11,438,000 212712500 47,722,500 Totals Ilala 8 115 123 150,208,000 521 31,000 10,121.955 2 12 561 055 c) TEMEKE MUNICIPALITY i11 Cian1'ombeA 1 I 22 23 F 28,458,000 5,166,000 1 1,681,200 35.305,200 12 Chang'ombeB Icl 0, 20 20 124.415,000 6,405,000 1,541,000 32,361,000 13 Toroli 0 | 13 13 9,781,000 ' 2,550,000 616.550 14 Sanda1i 12,947,550 0 8 8 14,922,000 2,377,000 864,950 18,163,950 15 Nlpogo 1 13 24 28,017.000) 7,730,000 r 1,787,350 16 Ivwembeladu 37,534,350 1 15 30.592,000 6,016,000 1,830,400 38,438,400 Totals Temeke 4 9 03 136,185,000 30.244,000 8,321,450 174,750,450 SUM4 a) c) 1 221 298 3201 |437.846,000 184,92 1,000 31,138,355 653,905,455 RESETTLEMENT MVONITORING (see breakdown table I1 -2) 19,262,000 3 ' Contingencies 5% 33,658.368 GRANI) TOTAL FOR RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN TSh 706,825,718 Ann.: In addition: two gravevard sites *vith 50 graves to be removed Ann.: '' In addition: one graveyard site with 75 graves to be removed In addition: one graveyard site with 25 graves to be removed I nadto:oelae'r iewt 5gae ob eoe I l 3 Communtt infr-astructure -porading Projram I The costs estimates for compensation of the affected houses and private structures are baLsed on a complete inventory and a subsequent valuation assessme-nt for all 3 properties that were either fully affected (22 of 320 = 7)o! or onlv partially (298 83 The comnpensation allowances are in line with the packages described in section 6 of this R-AP. The presented fitures reflect the actual agreement between the valuers and the a'f'ected person (usually the land owner). I An iciditional 5'%,tfor other costs has been added, calculated from both the compensation payment and the allowances, to make adequate provision for other costs related to settlement considered in this RAP, namely moving assistances)' and I assistance to vulnerable groups. This budget item also includes the operational costs for a urievances redress office. I1 In addition to the above total budget for the resettlement activities (TSh 653.905.455) there are the costs for the resettlement monitoring which are detailed in Table 1 I-2 and in Annex 6. Including these costs and a 5o contingency martgin. the (grand total for implementation of the RAP amounts to TSh 706,8825,718. Table I -2: Cost Estimate for Resettlement vMonitoring Duration Item Uinit Price TSh No of Units (months) Total TSh Personnel Resettiemnent Officer, one in each of I the 3Municipalities 150.000 3 24 10.800.000,00 Local Database Expert 1.600.000 I 0,5 800.000,00 Mlaterial & Equiment Office I furniture LS 200.000 3 600.000,00 Fan 40.000 3 120.000,00 Computer 600.000 3 I.800.000,00 Printer 300.000 3 900.000,00 * Scainner 180.000 3 540.000,00 Telephone 250.000 3 750.000,00 Operational Costs (per month) IMeetings(2 per year per Municipality) 50.000 6 300.000,00 Stationary & printing 100.000 3 300.000,00 Phiotocopies. Faxes i 0.000 3 24 720.000,00 Communication 15.000 3 24 1.080.000,00 TFravel Allowance (3 Site visits a 5 HH per month per officer) 3.500 3 24 252.000,00 Ln foreseen 100.000 3 300.000.00 3 StU NI 19.262.000,00 a articuIIar reterence to the vaiue of the novicin assisiance and transport allo wances described in sectioll 5.3.2 l 3 Communitx Infrastructure L'pgradilng Prog,-ram I ANNEX 1 DETAILED INFORMATION ON THE VALUATION AND CONIPENSATION NEGOTIATIONS FOR ALL PROPERTIES I BEING AFFECTED BY THE CIUP INTERVENTIONS 5 Notes; -This Annex provides the statistical records of the valuation process based on the 3 measurements carried out bv the valuation survev teams in each of the three C m~~nunmcipalities. 1) The figures were provided by the field survey team working under the direction of the municipal Chief Valuers and reflect the situation as per 27 July 2004. The reporting format varied between the three municipalities, and it was intendied to maintain the presentation to facilitate later reviewing works by the surveying and reporting team. The recorded data did not allow to make a disaggregate analysis of the allowmaces as these were recorded altogether. Therefore, the records do not allow to identify, for example, the calculated amount of loss of profit for businesses affected. 3) Businesspeople have not specifically been surveyed. Therefore, no data are available on employed service. 1 4) Thle total agreed amount of compensation for each entitled property owner do not reflect the exact amount of calculated measurements (e.g. area of affected structure multiplied bv the standard compensation rate) but the valuing team often rounded to the next thousand TSh. 5) In spite of the municipal standard compensation rates the applied rates sometimes differed, which has been explained by the degree of quality of the examined structure or crop. 6) Whenever the demolition of a property would reach 50% of the total area of the built-up structures, this propertv has been categorized as "fully affected". 3 . Record data on affected properties in Kinondoni Municipality: Page 42 - 47 Record data on affected properties in llala Mlunicipality: Page 48 - 53 . Record data on affected properties in Temeke Mfunicipality: Page 54 - 62 l ______mm - mnmm---m-mm--- KINONDONI MUNICIPALITY MUUNGANO SUB-WARD S/ PROPER VALUATION TYPE OF AFFECTED AREA RATE VALUE OF VALUE OF ALLOWAN- CROPS AGREED N TY CODE PROPERTY AFFECTED STRUCTURE LAND CES and COMPENSATION CODE S TREES _ 1 MGN/11 MGN/VAL/ Land 163.0 5,000 815,000 2,031,000 5,500,000 CIUP/01 Residential house 38.0 70,000 2,660,000 total demolition 2 MGN/009 MGNNAL/ Veranda rIId a 32.0 5,000 160,000 160,000 966,000 1,286,000 .__ CIUP/02 shop 3 MGN/01 MGNNAL/ Veranda fronting a 13.0 5,000 65,000 65,000 516,000 648,000 CIUP/03 stiop 4 MGN/164 MGNNAL/ Partial Building 14.0 100,000 1,400,000 110,000 892,000 2,300,000 CIUP/04 Standard Septic Tank 5 MGN/173 MGNNAL/ Building annex 17.0 110,000 1,870,000 85,000 1,644,000 - 3,600,000 .__ CIup/os_ClUP/05 6 MGN/174 MGN/VAL/ Partial Building 18.0 120,000 2,160,000 700,000 2,039,000 4 0,000 .. ____. CIUP/06, Land 140.0 5,000 _ . _ ___ 7 MGN/-292 MGNNAL/ Tank 900,000 1,230,000 240,000 442,000 7,500 1,920,000 CIUP/07 Retaining wall 22.0 15,000 Flower bed 24.0 10,000 8 MGN/168 MGNNAL/ Retaining wall 6.0 15,000 90,000 0 0 90,000 CIUP/08 9 MGN/082 MGNNVAL/ Partial Building 22.0 90,000 1,980,000 145,000 1,140,000 3,265,000 CIUP/09 _I 10 MGN/79 MGNNAL/ Veranda 6.0 5,000 30,000 42,000 146,000 -__ 218,0C00 CIUP/10 ______{ 11 MGN/78 MGNNAL! Veranda/siab - 27.0 5,000 135,000 189,000 89,000 - 413,000 _ __ _ _CIUP/1 1 1 ______MGN/78 MGNNAL/ Veranda/slab 27.0 6,000 135,000 189,000 89,000 - 413,000 CIUP/12 ______12 MGN/11 MGNNAL/ Unroofed Veranda 22.0 3,000 66,000 110,000 400,000 - 570,000 CIUP/13 with reinforced _ concrete columns __ _ _ _ 13 MGN/085 MGNNAL/ Step/Slab 6.0 3,000 18,000 30,000 144,000 - 192,000 __ t CIUP/14 _ SUB-TOTALS I11999,000 2,880,000 1 10,538,000 _ 25,315,000 42 - -- - m m m - m - - KILIMANI SUB WARD S/N PROPERTY VALUATION TYPE OF AFFECTED AREA m2 RATE VALUE OF VALUE OF | ALLOWAN CROPS AGREED CODE CODE PROPERTY AFFECTED STRUCTURES LAND CES andTREES COMPENSATION 1 SM/MZS/352 SM/MZSNAL Veranda 31.0 5,000 155,000 155,000 750,000-o1,060,000 /CIUP/15 2 SM/MZS/375 SM/MZSNAL Veranda 13.0 5,000 65,000 65,000 276,000 406,000 /CIUP/16 ______3 SM/MZS/383 SM/MZSNAL Charcoal store & san- 15.0 40,000 1,500,000 75,000 903,000 2,478,000 /CIUP/17 dard, septic Tank 900,000 4SMIMZS/110 SM/MZSNAL Building, = 126.0 1110,000 13,900,000 565,000 4,144,000 _ 18,600,000 0 /CIUP/18 total demolition - ___ Land 113.0 5,000 | 5 SM/MZS/905 SM/MZSNAL Part of Bar/Guest 64.0 150,000 9,600,000 655,000 -0,--000 20,385,000 /CIUP/19 House Land 131.0 5,000 6 SM/MZS/906 SM/MZSNAL Veranda /stepes 8.0 5,000 40,000 40,000 194,000 - 274,000 /CIUP/20 Unroofed _ 7 SM/MZS/84 SM/MZSNAL Pit Latrine 8.0 60,000 1,380,000 1,010,000 292,000 - 2,682,000 /CIUP/21 Std septic tank + 900,000 Inspection chamber Land 202,0 5,000 8 SM/MZSM8 SM/MZS/AL Toilet 12.0 100,000 1,360,00 336,000 630,000 - 2,326,000 /CIUP/22 Boundary Wall 16.0 10,000 9- SMMZS/146 SM/MZSNAL Partial Building/Shop 10.0 130,000 1,300,000 50,000 2,400,000 3,800,000 /CIUP/23 10 SMIMZS/75 SM/MZSNAL Partial Building and std 33.0 140,000 4620,000 1.449,000 2,350,000 | |,4600000| /CIUP/24 septic tank inclusive 290.0 I______Land _ _ _ _I i ____I_____ SUB-TOTALS ___ 32,560,000 4,400,000 22,069,000 _ L 60,411,000 43 - - - - - SUB WARD ______CROPS AGREED MANZESE MIDIZINI -- VALUE OF VALUE OF ALLOWAN- TYPE OF AFFECTED AREA RATE TREES COMPENSATION S/N PROPERTY VALUATION STRUCTURES LAND CES and CODE PROPERTY AFFECTED 00-42,0 CODE 12.0 5,000 600 400000 1SMIMDZ/65 SM/MDZNAL Veranda /CIUP/25 __ 195,000 1,600.000 21.0 60,000 1,260,000 147,000 2 SMIMDZ/39 SM/MDZNAL Parlia - - I7, _ . 3,477,000 / CIUP/26 2,070,000 115,000 1,292,000 'li - building 23.0 90,000 3__SMIMDZ1160 SM/MDZNAI 07 0 _____ /CIUP/27 ______9 2,728,000 15,000,000 108.0 105,000 11,300,000 945,000 __4 SM/MDZ/163 SM/MDZNAL residential house = ______I-_ . /CIUP/28 total demolition 1,210,000 2,920,000 ____ 18.0 90,000 1,620,000 90,000 5 SMIMDZI SM/MDZNAL Parts of building, foun- _7______/CIUP/29 dation & cinema hall .. __ 397,000 709,000 152/B 26.0 5,000 130,000 182,000 SMIMDZ/- SM/MDZIVAL Veranda __ _ /CIUP/30 __ 246,000 354,000 9.0 5,000 45,000 63,000 7 SM/MDZ/83 SM/MDZNAL Veranda -- /CIUPI31 I______.-_l 1,823,000 - 2,900,000 14.0 70,000 980,000 133,000 8 SMIMDZ/88 SM/MDZIVAL Partial Housb ______. /CIUP/32 _ 516,000 - 1,853,000 17.0 70,000 1,190,000 147,000 SM/MDZNAL Partial House 9 SM/MDZ/91 ______.______/CIUP/33 1,085,000 - 2,051,000 12.0 70,000 840,000 126,000 10 SM/MDZ/g9 SM/MDZNAL Partial House ______4,550,000 __+__-IC /CIUP/34 2,504,000 - - 23.0 80,000 1,840,000 203,000 11 SMIMDZ/817 SM/MDZNVAL Partial Building _ I ______/CIUP/35 ____ 2,734,000 - 4,800,000 21.0 90,000 1,890,000 175.000 112 SMIMDZ/805 SMIMDZNAL F -il;li Building 447.000 ___ /CIUP/36 ____ 243,000 - 17.0 5,000 85,000 119,000 SMIMDZVAL Veranda __ _ _ _ 13 SM/MDZ/445 ______/CIUP/37__ 573,000 - 1,343,000 10.0 70,000 700,000 70,000 Partial Building _ __ 14 SM/MDZ/- M I/MDZNAL _1_1____I ______/CIUP/38 300,000 - 432,000 I l_ _. _ 11.0 5,000 55,000 77,000 15 SM/MDZ/617 SM/MDZNVAL Veranda _ ___ 1 1 1 _ I _ __ . - 511,000 _f____ _ /CCIUP/39 5,000 65,000 91,000 355,000 SM/MDZNVAL Veranda 13.0 | 6SM/MDZ/132 ______1 . I - - 1,170,000 t___I__ /CIUP/40 900,000 900,000 0 270,000 171iSM/MDZ/226 SM/MDZNAL Standard Septic Tank - 1,800,000 /CIUP/41 0 400,000 1.368,000 Plot - - 18 SMIMDZ/161 SM/MDZNAL|Vacant I _ _ I_. I ~~~~ICIUP/42 0 1,708,000 - 2,700,000 11.0 80,000 880,000 r-1- 5,0o0 XSM/MDZ/15819 SMIMDZNAL Shop&Veranda /Cl UP/43 194,000 - 290,000 8.0 5,000 40,000 56,000 20 SMIMDZil59 SM/MDZNAL|Veranda ______20,017,000 ___49_327,000 - ~ ~ /C lU P /44 25,950,000 3,328,000 eSUB-TOTALS- < ______44 MVULENI SUB WARD______S/N PRO-0PERTY VALUATION TYPE OF AFFECTED AREA ml RATE VALUE OF VALUE OF 1ALLOWAN. CROPS AGREED - CODE CODE PROPERTY AFFECTEl ______STRUCTURES LAND CES and TREES COMPENSATION 1 SMiMVI02-7 SM/MV/VAL/ STEP[SLAB] 5.0 5000 25,000 25,000 226,000 -276,000 __ _ _ Cl UP/45______2 SM/MV/28 SM/MV/VAL/ VERANDA 8.0 5.000 40,000 40,000 360,00 440,000 ______Cl U P/4 6 ______ 3 SM/MV/55 SM/MV/VAL/ Partial dem-olition 90,000 28000 190,000 4,473,000 .. 7,542,000 ClUP/47 Tea & tailor room 32.0 ______Slab/steps, Land. 38 0 5,000 ______4 SM/MV/1l06 SM/MV/VAL/ Carpentry workshop 58.0 80,000 4,640,000 315,000 3,205,000 8,160,000 CIUP/48 Kiosk -total demolition 63.0 5,000 ______5 SM/MV/232 SM/MV/VALI Boundary wali 26.0 15,000 1,322,000 248,000 940,000 2,510,000 CIUP/49 paved yard 31.0O 8,000 ______~~~Borehole______6 SM/MV/227 SM/MV/VALI Traditional healers 1,394,000 265,000 779,000 2,438,000 CILUP/50 office. 17.0 80,000 ______Pole fenice 17.0 2,000 ______- _ _ _ _ j_ _ 7 SM/MV/309 SM/MV/VAL/ Residential building 14.0 80,000 1,405,000 130,000 989,000 2,520,000 CIUP/51 _Boudar wall 19,0 2,000 ______ 8 SM/MV/363 SM/MV/VAL/ Buildg. =total dem. 29.0 110,000 3,730,000 570,000 - 2,540,000 -~__-6,863,000 CIUP/52 Chiarcoal store 18,0 30,000 Land 114.0 5,000 9SMM /38 SM/MV/VAL/ 18.0 5,000 90,000 20,000 324,000 508,000 ______ClUP/53 Veranda 10 SM/TMV/351 SM/MV/VAL/ unfinished building 11.0 30,000 330,000 55,000 0 385,000 CIUP/54 11 SM/MV/348 SM/MV/VAL/ Veranda 13.0 5,000 65,000 65,000 234,000 367,000 __ ClUP/55 12 SM/MV/342 SM/MV/VAL/ Slab/step 4.0 2,000 8,000 0.000 72,000 101,000 CIUP/56 Land 4.0 5,000 13 SM/MV/341 SM/MV/VAL/ Shop room & 105,000 1,470,000 - 000 ,28003,068,000 ClUP/57 Veranda 14 0 14 It ~ SM/MV/VAL/ Part of a saloons wall 14.0 15,000 210,000 0 0 210,000 ___ ~~ClUP/58 15 SM/MV/99 SM/MVIVALi Veranda 105,000 105,000.0 256,000 466,000 CIUP/59 21.0 5,000 ______ 116 SMM/ MM/A/Vrna9 0 45,000 - 45,000 137,000 227,000 ____CIUP/60 ____5,000 17 SM/MV/102 SM/MV/VAL/ .Party of shops slabs 8.0 140,000.0 1,460,000 185,000 2,503,000 4,148,000 ClUP/61 roof grilled wall ______Land /lawn 17.0 20,0001 ______ ------SUB-TOTALS ______19,219,00 2,283,051 1856000______40,229,000 45 - - m - m -m ------MANZESE UZURI SUB WARD S/N PROPERTY VALUATION TYPE OF AFFECTED AREA m2 RATE VALUEOF 1 VALUEOF ALLOWAN. CROPS AGREED CODE CODE PROPERTY AFFECTED STRUCTURES LAND CES and TREES COMPENSATION 1 SMiMZSil80 SM/MZSI)AL Veranda fronting a 6.0 5,000 30,000 30,000 199,000 259,000 ICIUP/62 sho 2 SM/MZS/238 SM/MZS/NA Party Building 29.0 60,000 1,740,000 145,000 2,953,000 4,838,000 ______L/CIUP/63 two rooms 3 SMiMZS/316 SM/MZSNAL Building: 40.0 110,000 4,400,000 950,000 3,638,000 8,988,000 /CIUP/64 total Demolition Land 150.0 4 SM/MZSI237 SM/MZSNAL Building: 41.0 80,000 3,300,000 1,075,000 2,485,000 6,860,000 /CIUP/65 Total Demolition ______, Bare Land 195.0 _ 5 SM/MZS/245 SM/MZSNAL Pit Latrine 6.0 100,000 600,000 30,000 242,000 872,000 /CIUP/66 6 SM/MZS/415 SM/MZSNAL Kiosk 5.0 40,000 200,000 25,000 362,000 6,000 593,000 /CIUP/67 Coconut 7 SM/MZS/197 SM/MZS//VA Steps 11.0 5,000 55,000 55,000 232,000 34 2,000 L/CIUP/68 : 8 SMIMZS/361 SM/MZSNAL Side Step/Slab 2.0 5,000 10,000 10,000 8,000 180,000- 208,000 /CIUP/69 Medium hedge - 9 SM/MZS/006 SM/MZSNAL Retaining Wall 7.0 10,000 70,000 315,000 356,000 _741,000 /CIUP/70 Bare land 63.Om 5,000 10 SM/MZS/467 SM/MZSNAL Block Boundary Wall 102.0 10,000 1,020,000 0o 230,000 27,000 1,277,000 ___._ Mbilimbi,l Coconut _____/CIUP/71 11 SM/MZS/359 SM/MZSNAL Veranda 13.0 5,000 65,000 65,000 I 315,000 j 445,000 /CIUP/72 12 SM/MZS/356 SM/MZS/NA Inspection Chamber 200,000 200,000 0 80,000 280,000 L/CIUP/73 (partly) _ _ . _ _ _ -L_-_-_- 13 SM/MZS/166 SM/MZSNAL Retaining Wall 5.0 10,000 75,000 0 30,000 105,000 ______~/CIUP/74 ______14 SM/MZS/404 SM/MZSNAL Slab . 22.0 5000 110,000 110,000 532,000 5,000 760,000 /CIUP/75 15 SMiMZSi400 SM/MZSNAL Bare Land 90.0 5,000 0 500,000 261,000 32,000 | 743,000 /CIUP/76 Pole fence 25.0 2,000 16 SM/MZS/ SM/MZSNAL Bare Land 12.0 5,000 0 60,000 0 4500 65,000 /CIUP/77 CropsSu ar.Can) 800 -.-- __ 17 SM/MZS/606 SM/MZSNAL Bare Land witH Partial 242.0 5,000 | - 0 | 1,215,000 | 535,000 0 1,750,000 /CIUP/78 Foundation 18 SM/MZS/181 SM/MZSNAL Veranda 6.0 5,000 30,000 30,000 61,000 0 120,000 _ l~~/CIUP/79_III_I,II !p!UP179 SUB-TOTALS I 11,905,000 4,615,000 | 12,519,000 |L__i 929,344,0000 z46 MNAZI MMOJA SUB WARD OF ALLOWAN- CROPS AGREED m' RATE VALUE OF VALUE VALUATION TYPE OF AFFECTED AREA LAND CES and TREES COMPENSATION SIN PROPERTY AFFECTED STRUCTURES 518,000 CODE CODE PROPERTY 173,000 0 | 23.0 15,000 345,000 Boundary Wall __ 1 SMIMM/36N SM/MMNALI ______5,424,000 __CIP/80 1,854,000 _~d 80,000 3,120,000 450,000 Residential 39.0 _SMIMMI44 SM/MMNVAL/ ., House/Land __ ___ 2 __ 0__ CIUP/81 5,000 ___ Bare land 90.0 2,307,000 2,500;000 I __.______10,000 250,000 175,000 Shop Cuom Veranda& 25.0 3 SM/MMI37M SMIMMNALI 7,0001 Land _ CIUP/82, _ __ 25.0 _ 390,000 I ___ 75,000 90,000 225,000 15.0 5,000t 3600_ 4 SM/MM/29D SM/MMNAL/ Veranda& _0_ _ '_ __ Land 20,400 . 36,000 CIUP/83 5,0001 6,500 9,000 Veranda& 1.30m2 126_0_0 5 ,SMMMI33D SMIMMNAL/ _ CIUP/84 Land 0 36,000 - 126.000 6.0 15,000 90,000 173_0_0 SM/MMNAL/ Boundary Wall 72_0_0 6 SM/MM/2J 173,000 CIUP/85 ' 5,000 45,000 5 4,000 72,000 Veranda& Land 9.0 7--- SM/MM/291 SM/MMNVAL/ 6,000 - _ _- _ 9.0 1,062,000 2,260,000 CIUP/86 84,000 1,092,000 105,000 Residential House 13.0 8 SM/MM11OB SMIMMNAL/ 4_ ._.____ _ 5 0 9,633,000 ______CIUP/87 5,680,000 497,000 3,456,000 stall 71.0 80,000 9 SM/MMI9B SM/MMNAL/ Barbeque food 3___ | _4______- CIUP/88 __0 __ 4,080,000 602,000 4,536,000 Building& 31.0 120.000 10 SM/MMI17/0 SM/MMNAL/ Residential 2 _63_000 3_-_I __ _ 65__ 391,000 CIUP/89 Butcher shop 65,000 263,000 SM/MM/_/C 130 5,000 65,000 _. .SMIMM15/0 SM/MMNAL/ Veranda 0 0 _ 1,600,000 l __ ~~CIUP/90 900,000 1,800,000 0 SM/MMNALI Standard SepticTank 2No. 12 -SMIMM/18/0 ______600 CIUP/91 _ _ _ _ I __ 154,000 | 330000 1 22.0 5,000 110,000 SMIMM/6P SMIMMNAL/ 1,548,000 13 15,000 1,290,000 0 258,000 - 14 SMMMI S/ N /o6CIUP/92.0 ,2000SM/MM/V~AL/I - M --- Boundary~-o1500 ~Wall __-._-- _ __ 840,00 CIUP/93 60,000 - 0 9.0 80,000 760,000 SMIMMNAL/ Retaining wall 15 SMIMM/361 10,000 11,700,000 CIUP/94 6.0 540,000 4,318,000 76.0 90,000 6,840,000 |16 |SMIMMI131 SMIMMNAL/ - 1.450,000 CIUP/95 1,450,000 20 72,500 1 Graves 17 Cemeter | _ _ 2,175,000 30 72,500 | 2,175,000 50,714,000 e18metey graves 25,668,500 6,599,000 18,737,400 SUB-TOTALS 47 ILALA MUNICIPALITY 1. BUGURUNI WARD MADENGE SUB-WARD S/NO PROPERTY VALUATION TYPE OF Structure Compensation VALUE OF Land affectE LAND ALLOWAN- VALUED AGREED TOTAL CODE CODE PROPERTY Area m2 RATE STRUCTURE AREA m2 VALUE CES CROPS COMPENSATION 1 BG/MD/365 BG/VAL/CIUP/01 2 rooms 46.6 80,000 3,728,000 46.6 233,000 878,440 0 4,800,000 2 BG/VAL/CIUP/02 BG/VAL/CIUP/02 Block fence w/ grill 26,6 50,000 1,330,000 26.6 133,000 58,880 0 1,530,000 3 BG/MD/1076 BG/VAL/CIUP/O3 1 room 11.2 80,000 896,000 14.8 74,000 404,176 0 1,500,000 4 BG/MD/1026 BG/VAL/CIUPIO4 2 rooms 27.93 80,000 2,234,400 31,5 157,500 815,676 0 3,200,000 5 BG/MD/814 BG/VAL/CIUPIO5 4 rooms 70.76 50,000 3,538,000 121.68 608,400 925,856 0 5,100,000 ___ =totalz demolition 6 BG/MD/299 BG/VAL/CIUP/06 1 Shop unit 23.1 60,000 1,386,000 87.3 436,750 612,910 0 2,400,000 attached to house 7 BG/VAL/CIUP/07 BG/VAL/CIUP/07 Kiosk 10.92 100,000 1,092,000 22.2 110,000 408,120 0 1,600,000 8 BG/VAL/CIUP/08 BG/VAL/CIUP/08 Veranda in front of 8.4 20,000 168,000 8.4 42,000 368,400 0 580,000 business shop 9 BG/MD/116 BG/VAL/CIUP/09 2 rooms 18.6 80,000 1,488,000 22.8 114,000 604,080 0 2,200,000 10 Cemetary/BG/MD-1 Cemetery 75 72,500 5,437,500 0 5,437,500 11 BG/MD/726 BG/VAL/CIUP/11 Steps 6.44 15,000 96,600 6 32,200 5,152 0 134,000 12 BG/MD/886 BG/VAL/CIUP/12 Steps 10.34 15,000 155,000 10.34 51,700 8,272 0 215,000 13 BG/MD/887 BG/VAL/CIUP/13 1 room and 1472 80,000 1,177,600 18.48 92,400 410,800 0 1,680,000 veranda 14 BG/MD/877 BG/VAL/CIUP/14 1 room 20.16 15,000 302,400 27.8 139,000 37,816 0 480,000 15 BG/MD/774 BG/VAL/CIUP/15 Veranda 16.81 15,000 252,150 16,81 84,050 13,448 0 350,000 16 BG/MD/878 BG/VAL/CIUP/16 veranda 20.2 15,000 303,000 20.2 101,000 16,160 0 420,000 17 BG/MD/224 BG/VAL/CIUP/17 Block Fence 12.3 15,000 184,500 16.6 83,000 10,700 0 278,000 18 BG/MD/825 BG/VAL/CIUP/18 1 Shop 17.8 100,000 1,780,000 20.2 101,000 615,240 0 2,500,000 19 BG/MD/488 BG/VAL/CIUP/19 pole fence 10 20,000 200,000 10 50,000 10,000 0 260,000 RAP for CIUP, Annex 1 llala Municipality 48 m - - - - - m - m - - m m - 175,000 24 120,000 11,800 0 307,000 20 BG/MD/449 BG/VAL/CIUP/20 Block Fence 17.5 10,000 924,000 11.55 57,750 399,270 0 1,380,000 22 BG/MD/312 BG/VAL/CIUP/22 1room 11.55 80,000 2,419,000 24.19 120,950 1,721,598 0 4,261,000 23 BGNVAL/CIUPI2 BG/VALICIUP/23 3 rooms 24.19 100,000 3,155,200 39 44 197,200 1,574,096 0 4,926,000 24 BG/MD/484 BG/VAL/CIUP/24 4 rooms = total 3944 80,000 r_17_8_89_00_14_240451.9r: !,t 356,000 17.8 89,000 14,240 0 459,000 25 BG/MD/262 BG/VAL/CIUP/25 Block fence 17 8 20,000 2,132,000 100,000 1,427,000 20.82 104,100 601.244 0 26 BG/MD/261 BG/VAL/CIUP/26 1 commercial 14 27 305 09 005 room + veranda 0 655,000 18 30,000 540,000 18 90,000 25,200 27 BG/MD/68 BG/VAL/CIUP/27 Veranda 0 1,626,000 11.4 80,000 1,140,000 15.6 78,000 408,720 28 BG/MD/63 BG/VAL/CIUP/28 1room+veranda 0 1,846,000 100,000 1,340,000 17.75 88,750 417,150 29 BGIMD/20 BG/VAL/CIUP/29 1 room +veranda 13.4 1,040,000 17.7 88,500 405,140 0 1,533,000 30 BG/MD/57 BG/VAUCIUP/30 1 room+veranda 13 80,000 420,000 3.6 18,000 191,760 0 630,000 31 BG/MD/322 BG/VAL/CIUP/31 Toilet and block 3.6 80,000 6.6 20,000 fence 1,424,000 10 80,000 800,000 10 50,000 570,000 0 32 BGIMD/525 BG/VAL/CIUP/32 1room 740,000 15.8 40,000 632,000 15.8 79,000 28,440 0 33 BG/MD/522 BG/VAL/CIUP/33 veranda 1,080,000 12.6 50,000 630,000 12.6 63,000 387,720 0 34 BG/VAL/CIUP/3' BG/VAL/CIUP/34 1 room 0 1,000,000 11.3 50,000 565,000 11.3 56,500 384,860 35 GB/MDI514 BG/VALICIUP/35 Veranda 0 152,000 5.85 20,000 117,000 5.85 29,250 5,850 36 GB/MD/209 BG/VALICIUP/36 Veranda 880,500 9,1 50,000 455,000 9.1 45,500 380,020 0 37 BG/MD/26 BG/VAL/CIUP/37 small foodkiosk 628,000 50,000 535,000 13.91 69,550 24,182 0 38 BG/MD/970 BG/VALICIUP/38 Block fence 10.7 2,812,000 80,000 2,060,800 25,76 128,800 622,432 0 39 BGIMDG/602 BG/VALICIUP/39 1commercial w/ 25.76 'banda' 1,310,000 12.6 63,000 774,936 0 2,148,000 40 BG/MDGI313 BGIVAL/CIUP/40 2 rooms + 3.6 80,000 veranda 15.1 20,00_ 165,000 11 55,000 8,800 0 228,000 41 BGIMDG/40 BG/VALICIUP/41 veranda 11 15,000 330,000 11 55,000 15,400 0 400 000 42 BG/MDG BGIVALICIUP/42 veranda + 11 30,000 columns 885,000 16.7 88,500 48,675 0 1,020,000 43 BGIMD/591 BG/VAL/CIUP/43 Block fence 16.7 50,000 1,944,000 25.62 128,100 802,884 2,880,000 44 BG/MD/484 BG/VALICIUP/44 2 rooms 24.3 80,000 2,360,000 34.1 170,500 1,181,220 0 3,711,000 45 BG/MDG/374/37 BG/VAL/CIUP/45 3 rooms 29.5 80,000 ._____ .____ _total demolition 17,209,763 73,523,000 SUB-TOTALS 51,474,150 4,776,950 49 lIlaa Municipality RAP for CIUP, Annex 1 m m mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm - MALAPA SUB-WARD S/NO PROPERTY VALUATION TYPE OF Structure Compensation VALUE OF Land affecte LAND AL.LOWAN. VALUED AGREED TOTAL CODE CODE PROPERTY Area m2 RATE STRUCTURE AREA m2 VALUE CES CROPS COMPENSATION 1 BG/MLPJ451 BG/VAL/CIUP/46 Tea-room 7.8 40,000 312,000 7.8 39,000 374,040 0 730,000 2 BG/MLP/662 BG/VAL/CIUP/47 Veranda 6 15,000 90,000 6 30,000 8,400 0 128,000 3 BG/MLP/776 BG/VAL/CIUP/48 2 rooms 27 80,000 2,160,000 27 135,000 811,800 0 3,100,000 4 BG/MLP/796 BGIVAL/CIUP/49 2 rooms 30 80,000 2,400,000 30 150,000 822,000 0 3,372,000 5 BG/MLP/335 BG/VAL/CIUP/50 2 rooms 16.2 80,000 1,296,000 16,2 81,000 595,080 0 1,972,000 6 BG/MLP/535 BG/VAL/CIUP/51 Kiosk 5.2 20,000 104,000 6.4 32,000 365,000 0 500,000 7 BG/MLP/131 BG/VAL/CIUP/52 Veranda 7.56 30,000 226,800 7.56 37,800 10,584 0 275,000 8 BG/MLP/636 BG/VAL/CIUP/53 Veranda 7,75 30,000 232,500 7.75 38,750 10,850 0 282,000 9 BG/MLP/335 BG/VAL/CIUP/54 Veranda 8 20,000 160,000 8 40,000 10,000 0 260,000 10 BG/MLP/672 BG/VAL/CIUP/55 Block fence 8.2 40,000 328,000 8.2 41,000 14,760 0 383,000 11 BG/MLP/450 BG/VAL/CIUP/56 1 roorn and 8.98 80,000 718,400 11.5 57,500 931,036 0 1,700,000 ______tearoom 12 BG/MLP/732 BIG/VAL/CIUP/57 3 rooms = 24 80,000 1,920,000 24 120,000 1,161,600 0 3,200,000 total demolition . 13 OPP.BGIMLP/24 BG/VAL/CIUP/58 1 Residential 13.8 40,000 552,000 13.8 69,000 384,840 0 1,000,000 14 0.. BG/VAL/CIUP/59 Toilet, Kitchen+ 13.6 60,000 979,200 23.8 119,000 43,928 0 1,100,000 block fence 8.6 0000 15 BG/MLP/739 BG/VAL/CIUP/60 1room 17 40,000 680,000 17 85,000 30,600 0 800,000 16 BG/MLP/542 BG/VAL/CIUP/61 Veranda 18,6 20,000 372,000 18 6 93,000 18,600 0 480,000 17 BG/MLP/ BG/VAL/CIUP/62 Veranda 7.7 20,000 154,000 7.7 38,500 7.700 0 200,000 18 BG/MLP/ BG/VAL/CIUP/63 Veranda 15.4 30,000 462,000 15.4 77,000 21,560 0 560,000 SUB-TOTALS 13,146,900 1,283,550 5,622,378 20,042,000 RAP for CIUP, Annex 1 llala Municipality 50 -m m inminm - m - MNYAMANI SUB-WARD S/NO PROPERTY VALUATION TYPE OF Structure Compensation VALUE OF Land affectc LAND ALLOWAN- VALUED AGREED TOTAL CODE CODE PROPERTY Area m2 RATE STRUCTURE AREA m2 VALUE CES CROPS COMPENSATION 1 MNY/1407 BG/VAL/CIUP/64 Kiosk 11.6 80,000 928,000 11.6 58,000 579,440 0 1,565,000 2 OPP.MNY/570 BG/VALICIUP/65 2 rooms 16.1 100,000 1,610,000 161 80,500 787,620 0 2,500,000 3 MNY/524 BG/VAL/CIUP/66 Water tank 24.2 50,000 1,210,000 32 160,000 58,800 0 1,424,000 4 MNY/907 BG/VAL/CIUP/67 2 rooms 14.5 80,000 1,160,000 14.5 72,500 769,300 0 2,000,000 5 MNY/953 BG/VAL/CIUP/68 2 rooms 23.85 80,000 1,908,000 19.85 99,250 80,290 0 2,800,000 6 BG/MNY/977 BG/VAL/CIUP/69 1 room 6.11 80,000 488,800 6.11 30,550 200,774 0 720,000 7 BG/MNY/981 BG/VAL/CIUP/70 1 room + land 11.93 80,000 954,000 59.65 298,250 0 0 1,250,000 8 BG/MNY BG/VAL/CIUP/71 2 rooms 23.73 80,000 1,898,400 23.73 118,650 800,682 0 2,818,000 9 BG/MNY BG/VAL/CIUP/72 bare land 0 0 0 162.74 813,700 32,548 0 846,000 10 BG/MNY BG/VAL/CIUP/73 Veranda and 12.09 40,000 633,600 12.09 60,450 28,642 0 745.000 block fence 5.0 30,000 11 BG/MNY/895 BG/VAL/CIUP/74 3 rooms = total 35.4 100,000 3,540,000 35.4 177,000 1,228,680 0 4,945,000 ______demolition 12 BG/MNY/950 BG/VAL/CIUP/75 1 room 12.13 100,000 1,213,000 15.695 78,475 411,659 0 1,700,000 13 BG/MNY/955 BG/VAL/CIUP/76 1 Shop, 1 room, 20.79 100,000 2,079,000 20.79 103,950 807,318 0 2,990,000 14 BG/MNY/958 BG/VAL/CIUP/77 1 room 11.2 100,000 1,120,000 11.2 56,000 407,040 0 1,583,000 15 BG/MNY/973 BG/VAL/CIUP/78 3 rooms = total 37.2 80,000 2,976,000 37,2 186,000 1,206,480 0 4,368,000 demolition 16 BG/MNY BG/VAL/CIUP/79 2 rooms 27.06 80,000 2,164,800 27.06 135,300 1,301,892 0 3,600,000 17 BG/MNY BG/VAL/CIUP/80 1 room 9.24 100,000 924,000 9.24 46,200 427,720 0 1,397,000 18 BG/MY/981A BG/VAL/CIUP/81 4 rooms = total 46.125 80,000 3,690,000 46.125 230,625 1,596,825 0 5,517,000 demolition 19 BG/MNY BG/VAL/CIUP/82 6 rooms = total 99.37 50,000 4,968,500 102.39 511,950 2,379,218 0 7,860,000 demolition 20 BG/MNY BG/VAL/CIUP/83 1 annex room 18 80,000 1,440,000 18 90,000 777,600 0 2,307,000 21 BG/MNY BG/VAL/CIUP/84 3 small rooms 41.07 50,000 2,053,500 41.07 205,350 622,148 0 2,920,000 22 BG/MNY BG/VAL/CIUP/85 1room 13.14 100,000 1,314,000 19.57 97,850 438,277 0 1,850,000 23 BG/MNY BG/VAL/CIUP/86 Veranda 14.4 30,000 432,000 144 72,000 17,280 0 521,000 24 BG/MNY BG/VAL/CIUP/87 Block fence 3.5 30,000 105,000 3.5 17,500 4,900 0 127,400 25 BG/MNY/149 BG/VAL/CIUP/88 kiosk f structure 13.5 30,000 675,000 13 5 67,500 749,700 0 1,490.000 26 BG/MNY BG/VAL/CIUP/89 2 Shops 20.58 100,000 2,058,000 20.58 102,900 2,246,436 0 4,400,000 SUB-TOTALS 41,543,600 3,970,450 17,961,269 64,243,400 RAP for CIUP, Annex 1 Ilala Municipality 51 2. VINGUNGUTI WARD MTAMBANI SUB-WARD S/NO PROPERTY VALUATION TYPE OF Structure Compensation VALUE OF Land affectE LAND ALLOWAN- VALUED AGREED TOTAL CODE CODE PROPERTY Area m2 RATE STRUCTURE AREA m2 VALUE CES CROPS COMPENSATION 1 VNG/MTB VNG/VAL/CIUP/1 Canopy 9.4 40,000 376,000 11 55,000 17,240 0 450,000 2 VNG/MTB/302 VNG/VAL/CIUP/2 1 Shop +1room 19.2 100,000 1,920,000 19.2 96,000 979840 0 3,000,000 3 VNG/MTB/1/826 VNG/VAL/CIUP/3 Veranda 23.1 60,000 1,386,000 23.1 115,500 60,060 0 1,600,000 4 VNG/MTB/1827 VNG/VAL/CIUP/4 Veranda 11 15,000 160,500 10.7 53,500 8,560 0 223,000 5 VNG/VAL/CIUP/ VNG/VAL/CIUP/5 garden 3.2 20,000 64,000 3.2 16,000 3,200 0 83,000 6 VNG/MTB VNG/VAL/CIUP 1 room 17.6 80.000 1,408,000 30 150,000 422,320 0 1,980,320 7 VNG/MTB/1820 VNG/VAL/CIUP/7 garden 9.3 10,000 93,000 9.3 46,500 3,720 0 143,200 8 VNG/MTB/1407 VNG/VAL/CIUP/8 1 room 12.2 80,000 976,000 12 2 61,000 401,480 0 1,438,400 9 VNG/MTB/1506 VNG/VAL/CIUP/9 Butchery 15 80,000 1,200,000 15 75,000 771,000 0 2,046,000 10 VNG/MTB/600 VNG/VAL/CIUP/ 10 Veranda 11.6 80,000 928,000 11.6 58,000 39,440 0 1,025,400 11 VNG/MTB/607 VNG/VAL/CIUP/ 11 Steps 32.5 20,000 650,000 32.5 162,500 32,500 0 845,000 12 VNG/MTB/898 VNG/VAL/CIUP/ 12 Veranda 17.3 40,000 692,000 17.3 86,500 31,140 0 800,000 13 VNG/MTB/1271 VNG/VAL/CIUP/13 Block fence 8,9 20,000 178,000 15.2 76,000 10,160 0 260,000 14 VNG/MTB/1148 VNG/VAL/CIUP/14 1 room 16.13 80,000 1,290,400 23.44 117,200 416,304 0 1,823,000 15 VNG/MTB/655 VNG/VAL/CIUP/15 2 Shop + charcoal 34 80,000 2,720,000 29.42 170,000 655,600 0 3,500,000 store 16 VNG/MTB/1 175 VNG/VAL/CIUP/16 Hedge fence 13.5 5,000 67,500 23 115,000 7,300 0 189,000 incl.tree 17 VNG/MTB/1175 VNG/VAL/CIUP/17 Hedge fence aincl. 13 5,000 65,000 11 55,000 4,800 0 124,800 tree 18 VNG/MTB/188 VMG/VAL/CIUP/18 1comm. room + 1 22.61 80,000 1,808,800 22.16 110,800 976,784 0 2,896,000 room 19 VNG/MTB/254 VNG/VAL/CIUP/19 1 comm. room 15 80,000 1,200,000 15 75,000 771,000 0 2,046,000 20 VNG/MTB/269 VNG/VAL/CIUP/20 1 room 8.71 80,000 696,800 8.71 43,500 389,612 0 1,129,000 RAP for CIUP, Annex 1 Ilala Municipality 52 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5 - -m- - --- m m ------m 21 VNG/MTB/1395 VNG/VAL/CIUPI21 1room 18.48 80,000 1,478,400 21.4 107,000 423,410 0 2,008,800 22 VNG/MTB/304 VNG/VAL/CIUP/22 1comm. room + 1 14.4 80,000 1,152,000 14.4 72,000 588,960 0 1,812,000 . saloon 23 VNG/MTB/1261 VNG/VAL/CIUP/23 1 room 11,625 80,000 928,000 11.63 58,000 399.440 0 1,385,000 24 VNG/MTB/1261 VNG/VAL/CIUP/24 Hedged fence 10 20,000 190,800 9.54 47,700 369,540 0 600,000 25 VNG/MTB/297 VNG/VAL/CIUP/25 Veranda 10.2 30,000 306,000 15 75,000 15,240 0 400,000 26 VNG/MTB/2457 VNG/VAL/CIUP/26 1commercial + 21.75 80,000 1,740,000 21.75 108,750 613,950 0 2,462,000 veranda 27 VNG/MTB/898 B VNG/VAL/CIUP/27 1 room, 12.2 64,000 780,800 12.2 61,000 33,672 O 875,000 ______incomplete . . 28 VNG/MTB/916 VNG/VAL/CIUP/28 Kiosk 8.5 60,000 510,000 8.5 42,500 562,100 0 1,114,600 29 VNG/MTB VNG/VAL/CIUP/29 garden 7.5 20,000 150,000 7.5 37,500 7,500 0 195,000 30 VNG/MTB/1147 VNG/VAL/CIUP/30 1 coomercial room 18.9 80,000 1.512,000 18.9 150,000 606,480 0 2,268,000 + veranda 31 VNG/MTB/34 VNG/VAL/CIUP/31 1 Commercial 13.32 80,000 1,065,600 13 66,000 585,288 0 1,716,000 32 VNG/MTB VNG/VAL/CIUP/32 Steps 8 15,000 120,000 8 40,000 6,400 0 166,000 33 VNG/MTB/307 VNG/VAL/CIUP/33 1 room 9.3 100,000 930,000 9.3 46,500 399,060 0 1,375,000 34 VNG/MTB VNG/VAL/CIUP/34 2 rooms 26.1 80,000 2,088,000 26.1 130,500 808,740 0 3,030,000 35 VNG/VAL/CIUP/35 1 Soak pit 10.4 30,000 312,000 17.6 88,000 16,000 0 416,000 SUB-TOTALS 31,143,600 2,868,450 11,437,840 45,425,520 RAP for CIUP, Annex 1 llala Municipality 53 ' mm - - - - TEMEKE MUNICIPALITY 1.CHANG'OMBE WARD CHANG'OMBE A -SUBWARD S/NO PROPERTY VALUATION TYPE OF Structure Compensation VALUE OF Land affected LAND ALLOWAN- VALUED AGREED TOTAL CODE CODE PROPERTY Area m2 RATE STRUCTURE AREA m2 VALUE CES CROPS COMPENSATION 1 CHG/CHA/145 CHGA/VAL/ 1 room 9.7 150,000 1,455,000 15.00 56,250 32,400 0 1,579,000 CIUP/01 2 CHG/CHA/83 CHGA/VAL/ 1 room 635 130,000 826,000 10.00 37,500 415,000 0 1,241,000 CIUP/02 3 CHG/CHA/82 CHGA/VALI Residency- 5.7 130,000 741,000 1000 37,500 583,000 0 1 054,000 CiUP/03 extension 4 CHG/CHA/80 CHGAIVAL/ 1 room and 10.12 130000 1,316,000 20.00 75,000 248,000 0 1,564,000 CIUP/04 veranda . . 5 CHG/CHA/142 CHGAIVAL/ Wall fence with 6 2,8 35,000 98,000 3.40 13,000 16,000 0 127;000 CIUP/05 course 6 CHG/CHA/63 CHGA/VAL/ 1 room and 13.32 130,000 1,730,000 25.00 94,000 265,000 0 2,090,000 CIUP/06 Veranda 7 CHGICHA/88 CHGA/VALI 1 room 2.08 120,000 250,000 5.00 19,000 203,000 0 472,000 ____ CIUP/07 _ 8 CHG/CHA/90 CHGA/VAL/ Staircases 1.07 100,000 107,000 714 27,000 4,000 0 138,000 CIUP/08 9 CHG.CHG.A 92 CHGA/VAL/ 1.5room+ veranda 5 130,000 605,000 10.00 38,000 218,000 0 861,000 CIUP/09 __ 10 CHG/CHA/54 CHGA/VAL/ 1 room and 4.75 130,000 618,000 9 00 34,000 218,000 0 867,000 CIUP/10 veranda 11 CHG/CHA/192 CHGA/VAL/ Foundation /sand 7.81 130,000 1,000,000 53.00 200,000 48,000 0 1,248,000 CIUP/1 1 cement block 12 CHG/CHA/100 CHGA/VAL/ Land and crops 0 0 0 80.00 300,000 24,000 51,000 375,000 CIUP/12 13 CHG/CHA/4 CHGA/VAL/ Part of fence wall 22.9 20,000 458,000 36.00 135,000 24,000 0 617,000 CIUP/13 RAP for CIUP, Annex 1 Temeke Municipality 54 m m m ------ 14 CHG/CHA/5 CHGA/VAL/ whole house 77.81 130,000 10,120,000 389.00 1,458,000 657,000 44,000 12,141,000 CIUP/14 total jen,I,'.r, crops . 16 CHG/CHA/02 CHGA/VAL/ Part of resd-store 22.6 120,000 2,712,000 45.20 168,750 307,200 0 3,074,000 CUIP/16 17 CHG/CHA/26 CHGA/VAL/ Gate bay of 2.37 80,000 190,000 12.49 47,000 95,000 0 332,000 CIUP/17 concrete platform 18 CHG/CHA/25 CHGA/VAL/ Part of residency 3.33 130,000 434,000 7 41 28,000 570,500 0 1,033,000 CIUP/18 ______19 CHG/CHA/19 CHGA/VAL/ 1 room. 0.53 130,000 69,000 4.00 7,500 195,000 0 271,000 CIUP/20 20 CHG/CHA/23 CHGA/VAL/ 1 room +veranda 7.04 130,000 916,000 46.40 174,000 596,000 0 1,686,000 CIUP/20 21 CHG/CHA/21 CHGA/VAL/ Platform and 1.6 100,000 160,000 5.33 20,000 7,200 0 187,000 CIUP/21 veranda 22 CHG/CHA/30 CHGA/VAL/ Veranda and 8.88 100,000 888,000 22.00 82,500 39,000 0 1,009,000 CIUP/22 . latform . 23 C'HG/CHA/34 CHGA/VAL/ One room 5.15 130,000 670,000 14.00 53,000 401,000 0 1,123,000 CIUP/23 . SUB-TOTALS 25,363,000 3,105,000 5,166,300 33,089,000 RAP for CIUP, Annex 1 Temeke Municipality 55 ------im m - CHANG'OMBE B -SUBWARD S/NO PROPERTY VALUATION TYPE OF Structure Compensation VALUE OF Land affected LAND ALLOWAN- VALUED AGREED TOTAL CODE CODE PROPERTY Aream2 RATE STRUCTURE AREAm2 VALUE CES CROPS COMPENSATION 1 CH/B/207 CHGB/VAL/ Undeveloped 0 0 0 103.50 388,125 15,525 0 404,000 ._.____ CIUP/01 Land 2 CH/B/222 CHGB/VALI Front Veranda2 42.84 140,000 5,997,000 54.20 203,250 1,016,034 0 7,217,000 CIUP/02 rooms and shop _ 3 CH/B-CEM CHGB/VAL/ 25 Graves 75,000 1,875,000 0 1875,000 CIUP/03 I... 4 CIU/B CHGB/VAL/ Small stall 36 10,000 360,000 5720 214,500 22,980 0 598,000 CIUP/04 5 CH/B/218 CHGB/VAL/CIUP/0 2 rooms+veran-da 7.74 130,000 1,006,200 10.40 39,000 377,808 0 1,423,000 5 and shop 6 CH/B/219 CHGB/VAL/CIUP/0 1Veranda 0.76 130,000 98,000 6.50 24,375 88,927 0 212,000 6 7 CH/B/219 CHGB/VALI Kiosk 5.28 130,000 686,400 15.50 58,125 401,781 1,146,000 CIUP/07 . 8 CH/B/252 CHGB/VAL/ Part of resd +2 24.13 140,000 3,378,200 26.50 61,875 581,603 0 4,022,000 CIUP/08 rooms 9 CH/B/252 CHGB/VALI Side part of 5.47 150,000 820,500 10.20 38,250 478,350 0 1,337,000 CIUP/09 building 10 CH/B/252 CHGB/VALI Kiosk 4 130,000 520,000 8.10 30,375 394,015 0 944,000 CIUP/10 _ 11 CH/B/227 CHGB/VALI Crops 0 0 0 12.00 45,000 1,800 71,600 118,000 CIUP/ 11 12 CH/B/226 CHGB/VAL/ Crops 0 0 0 20 00 75,000 3,000 14,000 92,000 _ CIUP/12 13 CH/B/I135 CHGB/VAL/ Pole fence, crops 32.6 35,000 260.800 32.60 153,450 16,570 4,000 455,000 CIUP/1 3 14 CH/B/1 17 CHGB/VAL/ Part of Resd. 20.3 130,000 2,639,000 28.20 106,000 1,201,790 0 3,947,000 CIUP/15 15 CH/B/1 12 CHGB/VAL/CIUP/1 Veranda 2.03 140,000 284,200 6.20 23,250 96,298 0 404,000 6 RAP for CIUP, Annex 1 Temeke Municipality 56 -H------m - - 16 CH/B/138 CHGBIVAL/ Part of resd. 5 01 130,000 651,300 12 60 47,250 374,794 0 1,095,000 CIUP/14 17 CH/B/110 CHGB/VALI Veranda 4.32 150,000 648,000 6.20 23,250 110,850 0 782,000 CIUP/17 _ 18 CH/B/103 CHGB/VAL/ Part of resd. 11.79 150,000 1,768,500 26 60 99,750 806,730 0 2,675,000 CIUP/18 19 CHB/198 CHGB/VAL Veranda 6.3 130,000 819,000 16.80 63,000 119,280 0 1,001,000 CIUP/19 20 CH1/Bi217 CHGB/VAL/ Charcoal Store 7.56 100,000 756,000 16.80 63,000 297,000 0 1,116,000 CIUP/20 SUB-TOTALS 22,568,100 1,756,825 6,405,135 89,600 30,863,000 RAP for CIUP, Annex 1 Temeke Municipality 57 ------m - - TOROLI SUB-WARD S/NO PROPERTY VALUATION TYPE OF Structure Compensation VALUE OF Land affected LAND ALLOWAN- VALUED AGREEDTOTAL CODE CODE PROPERTY Area m2 RATE STRUCTURE AREA m2 VALUE CES CROPS COMPENSATION CHG/TRL/333 TRL/VAL/ CIUP/01 Food Stall 13.30 60,000 798,000 13.50 51,000 226,000 0 1,075,000 CHG/TRL/335 TRL/VAL/CIUP/02 Food Stall 4.93 40,000 197,200 4.93 18.750 201,000 0 417,000 2 CHG/TRL/573 TRL/VAL/ CIUP/03 Part of 1 room 7.56 130,000 982,000 800 30,000 233,000 0 1,245,000 CHG/TRL/576 TRL/VAL/ CIUP/04 2 rooms 11.03 130,000 1,433,000 11.03 41,000 431,000 0 1,905,000 CHG/TRL/578 TRL/VAL/ CIUP/05 Food Stall and 9.95 130,000 1,293,500 10.00 37,500 245,000 0 1,576,000 5 Latrine CHG/TRLI11 TRL/VAL/ CIUP/06 Veranda 8.07 60,000 484,590 10.00 37,500 21,000 0 543,000 6 CHG/TRL/16 TRL/VAL/ CIUP/07 2 rooms 11.22 130,000 1,459,000 11.22 43,000 612,000 0 2,054,000 7 CHG/TRL/99 TRL/VAL/ CIUP/08 Food Stall 3.52 60,000 211,200 4 00 15,000 201,000 0 427,000 8 CHG/TRL/378 TRL/VAL/ CIUP/09 Veranda 4.13 50,000 206,250 6.13 23,000 9,000 0 238,000 9 CHG/TRL/507 TRL/VAL/ CIUP/10 (Well) 12.60 130,000 1,008,000 4.00 21,000 40,000 0 1,060,000 10 CHG/TRL/506 TRL/VAL/ CIUP/1 1 Fence 0 56 35,000 24,500 1.00 3,750 1,000 0 30,000 11 12 CHG/TRL/511 TRL/VAL/CIUP/12 Latrine 5.72 80,000 457,600 6.00 22,500 103,000 0 583,000 CHG/TRLI13 TRL/VAL/CIUP/13 1 room + fence 2.66 30,000 855,400 7.00 26,250 227,000 0 1,109,000 13 SUB-TOTALS 9,410,240 370,250 2,550,000 0 12,262,000 RAP for CIUP, Annex 1 Temeke Municipality 58 ------m - - SANDALI SUB-WARD PROPERTY VALUATION TYPE OF Structure Compensation VALUE OF Land affected LAND ALLOWAN- VALUED AGREED TOTAL CODE CODE PROPERTY Area m2 RATE STRUCTURE AREA m2 VALUE CES CROPS COMPENSAIION 1 SAD.842 SAD/VAL/ CIUP/01 1 room + covered 5.7 150,000 855,000 10,00 38,000 340,000 0 1,233,000 veranda 2 SAD 847 SAD/VAL/ CIUP/02 1room + covered 14.6 130,000 1,900,000 25,00 94,000 380,000 0 2,374,000 veranda 3 SAD. 848 SAD/VAL/ CIUP/03 Covered Veranda 8.4 150,000 1,300,000 9.00 34,000 53,000 0 1,387,000 4 SAD. 840 SAD/VAL/ CIUP/04 1room 7.3 130,000 955,000 10.00 38,000 340,000 0 1,333,000 andVeranda 5 SAD. 882 SAD/VAL/CIUP/05 1room+ wall 4.9 130,000 642,000 26.79 100,000 150,000 0 892,000 fence 6 SAD. 908 SAD/VAL/ CIUP/06 2 rooms 40,2 150,000 6,027,000 34.00 130,000 473,200 0 6,630,000 7 SAD. 73 SAD/VAL/ CIUP/07 Foundation 2 15.9 100,000 1,600,000 192.00 720,000 321,000 0 2,641,000 course, small house partial 8 SAD. 35 SAD/VALI CIUP/08 Corrugated Iron 8.9 50,000 444,000 12.00 45,000 320,000 0 809,000 sheet fence& chips kiosk SUB-TOTALS' 13,723,000 1,199,000 2,377,200 0 17,299,000 RAP for CIUP, Annex 1 Temeke Municipality 59 m - m m m ------m- - m - MPOGO SUB-WARD PROPERTY VALUATION TYPE OF Structure Compensation VALUE OF Land affected LAND ALLOWAtl- VALUED AGREED TOTAL CODE CODE PROPERTY Area m2 RATE STRUCTURE AREA m2 VALUE CES CROPS COMPENSATION 1 SAD MPO. 01 MPG/VALI CIUP/01 Mango tree 0.0 0 0 0.00 0 0 16,000 16,000 2 SAD.MPO. 15 MPG/VAL/CIUP/02 1 room 12.2 130,000 1,592,000 14.50 54,000 618,000 0 2,263,000 3 SAD.MPO.16 MPG/VAL/CIUP/03 2 rooms 240.0 140,000 3,360,000 26.20 98,000 654,000 0 4,113,000 4 SAD.MPO.24 MPG/VAL/CIUP/04 1 Shop +1Room 31.8 140,000 4,458,000 35.10 132,000 808,000 0 5,391,000 5 SAD MBA 595 MPG/VAL/ CIUP/05 1 Veranda 2.7 150,000 405,000 11.30 42,000 102,000 0 549,000 6 SAD.MPO 596 MPG/VAL/ CIUP/06 1Veranda 6.4 140,000 1,347,000 24.60 92,000 142,000 0 1,581,000 7 SAD.MPO. 136 MPG/VAL/ CIUP/07 Crops 0.0 0 0 0.00 0 0 66,000 66,000 8 SAD.MPO. 166 CIUP/VAL/ MPG/08 Crops 0.0 0 0 0.00 0 0 34,000 34,000 9 SAD.MPO. 99 MPG/VAL/ CIUP/09 Crops 0.0 0 0 8.75 280,000 0 65,000 355,000 10 SAD.MPO 100 MPG/VAL/CIUP/10 Toilet+ Crops 2.4 80,000 192,000 6 20 23,000 165,000 16,000 396,000 11 SAD.MPO.98 MPG/VAL/ CIUP/11 Part of Resi-dence 20.3 130,000 2,633,000 24.40 92,000 481,000 0 3,206,000 12 SAD MPO. 36 MPG/VAL/ ClUP/12 Wall fence with6 13 3 80,000 1,064,000 30.16 113,000 59,000 C 1,250,000 Course . ._... 13 SAD.MPO 111 MPG/VAL/CIUP/13 1 room + Shop 10.7 150,000 1,600,000 13.10 49,000 618,000 0 2,271,000 frontage _ _ 14 SAD.MPO. 134 MPG/VAL/ CIUP/14 Front Veranda 1.8 130,000 234,000 8.60 32,000 95,000 0 361 000 15 SAD .MPO, 136 MPG/VAL/ ClUP/15 Land and crops 0.0 0 0 15.60 59,000 216,000 5,000 280,000 16 SAD.MPO. 183 MPG/VAL/ CIUP/16 Part of Resd. and 7 8 140,000 1,085,000 14.30 54,000 490,000 0 1,618,000 Veranda RAP for CIlJP, Annex 1 Temeke Municipality 60 m-m ------ 17 SAD.MPO. 184 MPG/VAL/CIUP/17 Veranda 3.3 130,000 426,000 12.10 46,000 103 000 0 575,000 18 SAD.MPO. 185 MPG/VAL/CIUP/18 Small food stall 1.1 100,000 106,000 5.60 21,000 377,000 0 505,000 19 SAD.MPO. 200 MPG/VAL/ CIUP/19 2 rooms 18.0 140,000 2,520,000 22.10 83,000 620,000 0 3,223,000 20 SAD.MPO 207 MPG/VAL/ CIUP/20 1 room and 8.3 150,000 1,242,000 18.50 69,000 496,000 0 1,807,000 ______veranda 21 SAD.MPO. 208 MPG/VAL/ CIUP/21 Veranda 5.1 130,000 662,000 13.70 51,000 392,000 0 1,095,000 22 SAD.MPO. 198 MPG/VAL/CIUP/22 Veranda support 5.3 130,000 685,000 20.10 75,000 112,000 0 874,000 w/ 2 bush poles 23 SAD.MPO. 360 MPG/VAL/ CIUP/23 2 mono-pitched 13,6 105,000 2,507,000 50.60 190,000 1,182,000 0 3,950,000 buildings = total demolition 24 SAD.MPO 88 MPG/VAL/ CIUPI24 Crops 0.0 0 0 0.00 0 0 42,000 42,000 SUB-TOTALS 26,118,000 1,655,000 7,730,000 244,000 35,827,000 RAP for CIUP, Annex I Temeke Municipality 61 - m - m ------m - - -m- MBWELADU SUB-WARD _ PROPERTY VALUATION TYPE OF Structure Compensation VALUE OF Land affected LAND ALLOWAN- VALUED AGREED TOTAL CODE CODE PROPERTY Area m2 RATE STRUCTURE AREA m2 VALUE CES CROPS COMPENSATION 1 M/LADU/131 MLD/VAL/CIUP/01 1 room 2.41 130.000 314,000 3 11,000 241,000 0 611,000 2 M/LADU/132 MLD/VAL/CIUP/02 Fence wall 10.1 35,000 375,000 15 56,000 209,000 0 640,000 3 M/LADU/168 MLD/VAL/CIUP/03 1 shop+ Veranda 12.31 130,000 1,600,000 15 56,000 438,000 0 2,095,000 4 M/LADU/163 MLD/VAL/ CIUP/05 1 Veranda 5.36 130,000 700,000 10 37,500 113,372 0 851,000 5 M/LADU/357 MLD/VAL/ CIUP/06 2 rooms 16 130,000 2,080,000 16 60,000 277,600 0 2,400,000 (a) 6 M/LADU/427 MLD/VAL/ CIUP/06 2 rooms 18.24 130,000 2,370,000 18.24 71,000 829,000 0 3,271,000 (b) 7 M/LADU/233 MLD/VAL/ CIUP/07 1 shop, 2 rooms 54.6 130,000 7,321,000 54.6 319,000 1,038,000 0 8,678,000 Fence, 1 Veranda total demolition 8 M/LADU/427 MLD/VAL/ CIUP/08 Coconuts and 24.94 40,000 998,000 160 600,000 256,000 30,000 1,884,000 fenced latrine 9 M/LADU/204 MLD/VAL/ CIUP09 Building under 70.2 60,000 4,215,000 238 893,000 1,296,000 44,000 6,448,000 construction, Crops 10 M/LADU/210 MLD/VAL/CIUP/10 4 courses 14 130,000 308,000 16 60,000 15,000 0 383,000 ._._foundation 11 M/LADU/69 MLD/VAL/CIUP/11 3 rooms = total 35.72 130,000 4,644,000 35,72 134.000 419,000 0 5,197,000 demolition 12 M/LADU/80 MLD/VAL/ ClUP/12 Building party 4.55 130,000 592,000 10 38,000 397,000 0 1,026,000 affected 13 M/LADU/81 MLD/VAL/CIUP/13 Veranda 5.45 130,000 709,000 14 53,000 114,000 0 876,000 14 M/LADU/67 MLD/VAL/CIUP/14 2roomsl Veranda 13,63 130,000 1,724,000 25 94,000 373,000 0 2,191,000 15 M/LADU/171 MLD/VAL/ CIUP/15 1coconut tree 0 0 0 0 0 0 22,500 22,500 _SUB-TOTALS 27,950,000 2,482,500 6,015,972 96,500 36,573,500 RAP for CIUP, Annex 1 Temeke Municipality 62 Mnyamani Subward :Property to be affected by the project \\\ -'- \" ' - '@"-J>iH362 ;' t-"0-' -I 4'< 9i X f . +: B U Q U~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ MNY.933 7 Partial . 2 - -, _|-i~~~~~~~~ Z , . . i', w , t4 MA plotYq6 t~~~~~~3Partial , 1 , [2L > < , 15~~~~ MNY 10223 Parfial ) \ 9 , -- ~~~~~~,.|; ~ ~ ~~~~~~~s4 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-1(7- 1 N Partial t < \ \ -1 { r; t . 9 ; , ' ; 0 ;00C j, * - =! 23MN1493 |r artja;~~~~~MNY.973 ToZ e 8/ * \ 1 * * J , ^1 . i t- - 4 ! , \ ' - | 25 MNY977MNY.524 Partial~~~~~~~~~arti $ i > '' ' ~. \ --' - -- x~~------' ~ ~ -L 1 : | | 1 I- 26 j Opp.MNY. 570MNY. Partial I~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4A plo PattA;\\\a \ V \\\\1 L 7>0 - \ 9VX ! \ Ir) r, 1 . - = -gnX.CWL3~3-<<<-1 I ;8- !rl|- ~URU 'UG Ii5MNu.sI022 Parti|l Totaldemolition~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 BK.273n Toa t/////~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~8Buligo Partialldmlto _0 . 7 J .~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 I ~~~~~Malapa Subward: Property to be affected by the project -; - FS/~No Prperty Code jlDe~mOfitficn Status- | 3 BG.MLP.70 PartiSal =l;- _-:00~2A\ t H ; 4B3G MLP 737 Partial 5 BG.MLP.732 Partiai l.,\G, .. \, _ * ~~~~~~~6IBG MLP.662 I Total_ .7 BG.MLP. Partial !2 ; 8 BG.MLP.672 Partial '- _ - ,--_I 1[.~~~~~~~~~~1o Pa r t i al C].L - ;X-J \I;-S--, J L~~~~~~~~~~~ 10 BG.MLP.33 Partial L- tD E t=-1-1 '''/^9 -L-' _ | +~~~~~~~~~~~GNILP.61, u-^^B * -=7I1Jl |~~~~~~~~~~~1 BG.MLP.776 FPnata , _ ir rl |I 1 15BG.MLP.S4 Frtil1|Pa t =_P 0 bG.MLP.796; i ;Partia tr:, X~~ | V * V k(:if , S ,,- adenge:= -l:O -.-.~~~~~~~~~4.r| =! 'c-; ' l i b--\'/,; < I D~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Legend N~~~~~~~~~~~~~-lp - Totaldemolition building ~ ~ ~ ~ pl-a ° 0.1 0.2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4 * Kilometers~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~zz | | Partial demolition building Prjc raLljeR rilnnnR1g220 n ilHrr 03 _ Madenge Subward :Property to be affected by the project -c C;tY Ceatre - SINo' Property Code Demolition Status E G.MDG 450 Rartal ~~ 2_8G_MDG_825 Partial- N 3 BG-MDG 450 Partial 4 BG.MDG.449 Partial IPartialJ - 9 eG.MDGA483 Partial 10EBG.MDG.1070 ___Partial I 716BMDG22 Partial __ 171 BG.MDG.051 Partial Niaeg 18 BGMDG.552 ~~~Partial 19 BG.MDG.535 __ Patl 20 BG.MDG.7740 Partial 261 BG.MDG.522 PartialD 1722BG.MDG.365 Partial ___ M re e 26 EBG.MDG.7526 _ _ PartialI :___. 270 BG.MDG.102 Partial 21 BG.MDG 602aria f iKi '~-"' i 29' 80MDG322 rPartial 30 BG.MDG.89026 Partial __ 361' BG.MDG.726 PaTotial I__Partial_ 327EG.MDG.2612 , a . a 2 9MD ~J~B 2 G22Partial 331 BG.MDG.262 Partial __ :, 34BG MDG.2613 Partial __ L ~ - -44---- 35BGMDG 312 Partial ~. A ,IJa TRotal __ - 3'BG .MDG.8 14 __ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Tallazn,,- 37 BMG29Total -. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\ ______i\ _ 38 BG.MDG ____. 41 E3G.MDG.7 Partial ______ 421 BG.MDG.20O Partial ______3 ~~~~~~~43BG.MDGC1il Partial 44 BG.MDG.63 Partial Lgn Total demolition building Partial demolition building 00 ~~Project . - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~area 3 Kilometers Source; Aerial photos, 1992, 2002 and Fieldwork 2003, by the project Mtambani Subward Property to be affected VVA 0 Z, ------S/No Property Code Demolition Status 1, VNG.MTS 254 Partial 2 VNG.MTB.308 Partial X i 0: VNG.MTB.1395 Parfial =7 Partial 4 VNG MTB.304 2 7, 5 VNG.MTB.302 Partial p 6 VNG MTB.295 artial Q', .7 7 VNG.MTB.411 a i'VNG.MTB.297 Partial i-- 97 VNIGMT B24S7 PlItial 10 VNG MTS 6M Partial :L L. 7' 11 TB.227 Partial j 12 VNG.MTS.898 Partial 13 VINIGMT13.898(adjaric i Partial 1 VNGMTS;;O Partial C I Partial M, t a'M b an 15 j VNG,MTB.916 71 IPartial 16, VNG .MTB.919 A I 7J VN G MiB.925 Partial --3 Partial 18 VNIGNTB.1261 7 19 VNG MTB 1271 partial 7-- 20 V NGAMTS-1273 Partial 21 VNG.MTB, 826 1 22 VNG MTB 1227 Partial A 23 1 VNG,MTB.1 883 IPartiial J v- 24 VNG.MTB. Partial 41 25 1 VNG.MTB.1820 Partial Partia 'o ,J x 26 VNG.MTB.1407 I Y, 27 VNG.MT6.15W Partial NG.MTS.1618 Partial 29 VNG.MTB.1175 Partial -1164 a 31 i VNG.MTB.1 148 1 Partial 32 VNG,MTB.1 147 Partial 33, VNG.MTB.607 Partial 34 VNG MTB.655 Partial Q 35 VNGMTB 34 Partial mot., 'Aa-f-Ml- Ltd', Legend Partial demolition building 0 0.1 0.2 Kilometers Project area 2003. Anri!:41 nhntnq 1 qq? )002 and Fieidwork _33 'Z7- = -E -E m m m M M ED M M Q_ a- 0- a- CL o- a- a- a- a- a- co < UN) cu) 00 nC)CD E N N n C"i : i 2 :E 2. 0I U). 0 0 v LT co U 0) U) U) U) U) U) N NIn N N N N N N N N N N 1 N N ia N _4 O -7 7- -J __ 0 10 U) U) 0 (n co U) U) co U) Co U) U) CD co v- Lo 0) co P'eb A -T CN n co a) 40 CL 'IT CD Li L A& >1 __3 Ql TG Lr CL) it Z CU L '-ZL _P CL 7 Cfi -E y (D 4-I I' 1 IS LL cc _T L) C) E5 cn c[t -- L Z- m e- - - - -m - -: - m m- -ly - U- Muungano Subward Property to be affected by the project /J ~~~~~+i-- / / JJ LIL,' J /II 'f1t' J/ ,_ L+' j'4 Ri + K i 71 ?- /fr 1J I I 'N / I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~_ ~N Li1/ ~ ~ J/~.i' .- JH N/ 'LI S i t 19I -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~N0N iN -$ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I 0 0 f + 0 Q fLI _ I ' - ,j NI-..NJJN IL 0 ff Bndi a+ , t ''I!'!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NI I/jf'IN I Li vu eni ~ I J- fL 71~~~~/~Muungaiio " J'Tiandale O ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~L'N | /N. /rpctNabe |>- 51 1u- __moiipl ' - k4 /,iX 0 \;i t8ft | 2 17M Z7 N '17 a LM fPa/ 0 \f . : 0 1N0j . ti'(-, I ~~ ' Vj ~~~~\ 'JII~~~~~~~l ':, ' ~~~~~~~l 1 1 To Tari caleN 5 SMMZS.MGN 168 Part~~~~ial I -rC , ';. -I - -' '1' 7~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SMMSMN8 ------r .ata -<_.e-_/ }X I z, ,-ri,, j/ ; 9 SM.MZS.MG~~~~~~~~~~~~,~N 07 P asia . ,. . -i ii' j,9 -ijl/ /l/-Tl1li 1~~~~~~J aDl12S.Z.G.(3 .-- | - 'j~' I i.13 SM M ZS M 0 0(ata NJ N .. -, ... - - : - - - - I 'N _JNL ./ I /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I Kilmeer ~~/I/!J 4 r IN/rJc } area. ~Propertyu ------!Ii'41-,rl- ~14' 1 It h/~ SIN SM MZS.MGN.292 Panoitipoal dUS . '.' 2 SM.MZS MGN.174 Partial-i - GI"J ~~Partial II.lN 4SM.MZS_MGI 1732 . I I J ' I 5 SM MZS.MGNl168 Partial. r'NIN \I 6SM,MZS MG 14 Partial 2-.>fJL ' 4[. 7SM.MZS MGN 1 082 jPartial ' ' - 7-/L 1 A_-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~( / I V N 8SMMZSMGN.081 Partial. '2 L,!i '/ 9SM.MZS.MGN.079 Partial - - T2/ . 10 SM MZS.MGN.078 Partial CN-eLI-&ritre ~ I 11SM.MZS.MGN,011 ~Partial -- f/ enr . /J' 12 SM.MZS.MGN.C)CD9 Partial L. 13SM.mzS.MGN 00 Paria____ Legend MEENVEA/.-Partial demolition building 0 0.075 0.1 5 Project area Klmtr Source: Aerial photos, 1992, 2002 and Fieldwork 2003 Uzuri Subward: Property to be affected by the project S/No Prop~~erty_Number JDIermolition Status 1SM.MZS.UZR.OCXJ partial Church~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~ U) 21 ~~~~~~~~~SM.MZSUZR 400 prta 3 SMMS UZR 191 partial r~SI.1 ZS UZRA415 Jpartial IAr.ZS UZR,404 _ partial _ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IA~~~~~~~~~~~-. fIAZS.UZR.CGBR 459 partial t.I.1!ZS.UZR.CGBR 467 partial j111IZS.UZRf CGBR.31 6 Total 7, rj P.~~~~~~~~~-IZS.UZR CGBR.245 partial - . I' . . Ii~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.U ZS UZR CGBR.238Ipatl I.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r j -R./'-I ao 'Fo - .-. P.1 MZ` I-IZFI 1-- .1 ill~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I,-(APl -F I I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~II J) I ~~~- 01-- r i -mqry~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i IIo I i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ,I I,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IJ .111,,ii' Iii ~~~~~~~~~~ -I hI Ii J I~~~~~J 'I I I . --- I ~~~~~~~Ii I 1/~~~~~~~~~ I Mociu Primary School 7"3 I,. I I I~- I H iii 13~~Cprl~ey LI ei -P'i d 'I II I I .* . 'i ,~~J// 7-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I Legend ~ ~Ii; Total demolitio~~~~~~~~~~~ii bY'ilding , Part~ial demoliion bildin 0 0. 0.2j-;' , ./ I Jil Ii I// I~KilometerciVie~~~ery~'K' Project area~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I Sore eil hts 92,20 nIiedok20 - - m - - m m - - - - Kilimani Subward : Property to be affected by the project I~~~~~~~~~--~~~- SNo | Property Number Demolotion Status F -- F 1 SM.MZS.KLN llO' Total 2 SM.MZS KLN.383 Partial - 3 SM.MZS.KLN375 Partial _ 4 SM.MZS.KLN 352 Partial _ -- > SM.MZS.KLN.146 Partial 6 SM MZS.KLN 84 Partial , 'K / , /. -; SM.MZS.KLN . 82 Partial 2 ' p I /4 8 SM.MZS.KLN 75 Partialj 9 SM.MZS.KLN.90)6 Partial I 2 Jzrf / in QMMZSI VLN Pti I * .I 4 2 ' 2 I Si r"z a k9 4 ~~~~~ 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'Ii~~~~J |~~ 0 ~~ 00 0I ; F. 0: ) S:fo; t02 :ttt Th / I /0 / ,{I -010|t14 /E I I 1 |~~~~~Saf tr ir 2 Url I i 24 2/i; ' , \2 /; | - t-- ~~~~~~l I I K.1i 424 ~~~~~~~~~~~i [ area t Project I 0:--) Urafihl / Kilometers StaffQual ; : Xrs) ~~~~~~~~~~~~-, ff f 750 ,N,t,' =CE X f_;f ;: ~ r - TUzi~ ; ;,\U t~~I .li; i <],,,,/)/ ) | , } Ji~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ '' iI'j 1, -; --,,l-, ,; - / |-\ J2~{~/1'j ' 1Ell1 1 ' J j 2I r F-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\',,1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2414- ) .' I . - . -- 2~~ , .. . I \~; ~ ~~ ~' ~ ~~~~-'' '' II ,21' Te:.JEp 0| $4 .. |00 0 },5i 0 }j l\ \i /r. .' I - -~~~~~~ I I ~~~~~~~~~~~I V~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ n I~~~~~~~~~I, 'A.,i - I f t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ K - I' . 4 i 42 14 /4 4 . U___bungo, ~-K '9~ K I' -- ~ ~7U / ~ ~ ~ .-- I 'M U I'PII 411/ / 2' f. 2 II - -~~~ 'To~~~~~~~ City ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~~ / ' -~~ '~J' 2JCentre -/ ;1/! rJ/ ~~_J J~-.~r- 7_2f _ - F- 4/ 'I 2 ''~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,~Iv I ______11 / / / :~~~~~~~~ . 2~~~~~~~~~~ I 'i Legend Total demolition building ~~ ~Partial deMolitionl building 0 0.1 0.2 Project area Kilometers Source: Aerial photos, 1992, 2002 and Fieldwork 2003 Chang'ombe A Subward: Property to be affected by the project Tabisco _ Twiga Cerrlint iCemnetery + L~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 3 /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ FIE I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ H~~~~~~ / r F i /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SJoProperty _]eliinStalus Code - 7 1 CHG.CHG A. 26 -~Partial -' I/ J7 2CHG CHG A25 Partial I/. 3 COIG CHG A 24 Partial I> / 4 CHG.CHG,A22 Partial 4-J1U-p -44~~~~~~~~~~F, 5 CVIG.CHG A 30 Partial L q~gobB 6 CHG CHG A.34 Partial- / 7l ClI-G CHGA 835 Partial , 71. 3 9 CHG CH-G.A.82 Partialf i. J l3- 1ocGcoHCHGASO Partial '~ L 11 [CHG CHG A.1 42 Partial 3 12 CHG.CHG A.63 PaFti2l1. -i i3 CHG.CHG A.88 Partial 154 CHG.CHG A90 Partial 'L "- - 1 5CFIG CH-GA592 Partial /~- 16 CHG CHG.A 54X Partial ,- .- .. 18CHG CF-G.A 192 -~Partial ,/ ' - 19 CHQ.CHGA.04 'Partial /-- /., 20 CHG.CHGA.05 Total v~--, - Fi~ 21 CHIG.CHG A.02 Partial 71ED' 22 CHG.CH-G.A 23 Partial Legend N Total demolition building + MENIMA Partial demolotion building 0 0.1 0.2 Project area Klm tr Source: Aerial photos, 1992, 2002 an'd Fieldwork 2003, Chang'ombe B Subward Property to be affected by the project -T 'd O C-'] J 7 0 ]F J L J 7 Q, % Cb.0 0 FC-'H A, G 0 M "B E, 'J _-T -J 4 hang'om b6 )V X, )-Chang'ombe B M A Y J iIji L-J. EJ _-Z 61 J 6'>1- L SiNo operty Code Demolition Status .4 1 CHG CHG B 252 Partial 2 CHG.CIAG.B.251 Partial 3 Cemetery Total 25 Graves 4 CHG.CI-qG.13 222 Partial 5 CHG.CHG.B.218 I Partial 6 CFIG CHG B.219 Partial 7 CHG C11G.B.207 Partial ------8 C HG Cl-lG.B1 17 Parlial 9 CHG CHG.B,103 Partial 1 0CHG.CHG.B,98 Partial 11 CHG.CHG.B Paffia 1 2CHG.CHG.B.227 Partial 1 3CHG.CHG B.126 Partial 14C HG CH G .B.135 Pa rAial 15 CIAG CHG.B 112 Partial 16 CHG CFIG.B.138 Partial Y O 17'CHG CHG B 1 10 Partial 18 HG.CHG.B 217 Partial Legend Total demolition building + Partial demolition 0 0.1 0.2 Project area Kilometers Source: Aerial photos, 1992, 2002 and Fieldwork 2003, Mpogo Subward: Property to be affected by the project J LII~~ 1 L~~~~~~~~~a I;~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~' 7 17-, ;j~;j I- ,'- I I --., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - -IY' - . Ii,~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ol~~~~~~~"b'Kilakata~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I~'I S/NoPro Slal,,s~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2 perty Cuilt- Dernolihon 8 SAD.MP(-F, 3, 1,~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~II i 9 SADF 5I MPC. i i i r '' . 10 SADMPC- I I ~rhj - 12 SAD MPG- i:1, - I? 35 SAD MPC' w IPi,i. 14~ SAD.MPC.~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - 6 SAD,MPC -i~Z Fa,iII-. - 'Ii 7SAD.MPC ,/ 'ri. 87SAD.MPcv-~ iL%* 98 SAD.MPAG 9( Ii Pata -- . 19 SAD.MPA 595 Partial 20 SAD.MPC 1• Parti1 - Ial 213 SAD.MPC'I'.18 ~/ -0r 172 SAD.MPOG85O 16 SADMBA 596 ~Partial 231 SAD MPO.1 16 Patlf i I Legend Total demolition building + M1111110Partial demolition buildinig 0 -0.1 0.2 Prjetarea Kilometers Source: Aerial photos, 1992, 2002 and Fieldwork 2003, Toroli subward :Property to be affected by the project SINo j rpryCd Dermolition Status 11 CHG.TRL.16 Partial 30 5o -2 CHG_TRL.13 Partial 4 Cl--GTRL 337 Partial >~- 5CHG.TRL.335 Partial__ _ ~- 6CIIGITRL378 Partial 7CGHG. [RL57 -Partial-Y 8_ CHG.TRL 506 Partial 9 CHG TRL 511 Partial- 10 CHG TRL 573 Partial C0 11CHG TRL,576 Partial -' 12 C1HG_TlL.578 Partial JI 13 CHG TRL 99 Partial ' ItOW~~~~~~~~~' T E I',I- i - L lij L J Ii if1,_ I ~~~~~~~IiI I - - I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~jT ,F In FIi ii .ilZ ~~~Cerrletery- I, ~ Ii- MIN N~~~~~~~~~~~~~I MEM I-i' C 111+I'EV ~ Project area 0 0.1 0.2 Kilometers Source:.Aerial photos, 1992, 2002 and Fieldwork 2003, Sandali Subward: Property to be afffected by the project |SINo Prop!er1y rde |Demyolitioti Statu s -\T azr t PartiaSAD 848 | 4 ~~~~~~~~~FootballPitch \J. ! 2_ SAD 847 Partial .. S AD.842 Plrartial TrainingR s a nd ;\i' ;! iSAD 882 Partial--..: j SAD-908B Partial.- P I i 6 Pattial' .A.7 Dtt7a; ;fiX alys;' l ,, ' ~~~~~~~~~ ~Sandali . - ' , ,. T> 0 0 t 1 g 0 V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~JI-. ) f I l ,1 2l, t . :0r i t 1 , ¢ I, j ! I 0 0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~: , g '. t; 0 ' : S i : w fi la U ]~~~~~~~~~ | To V J l.q S s7 , 0 '| : ; t' I ;} : J 0 t' Q W f 0 ': g fff f 0 ... i ]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Yombo~~~~~~~~~~~~t D l r 4 .t tt, 0\t- rX l--i[' t~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.'tI--l,-( ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'; \~~~~~- I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ . .. .. J .._...... _~~~~~~1~~ij ._ . . _ _ . _ _ _ __ t. _ .. _ . . Legend~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ m Pabuildingtial demoli(ion * elad - |~~Mwo IA rjetae. 0 5 1 52~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ IF-~ ~ ~ Kioetr Souce:Aeral hotsz 992 202 ad FeldorkJ00 Mwembeladu Subward: Property to be affected by the project. |S].]Propety coe j t_rl r < u T6>o T-a- 35r--X Rl' s`o kota '; SAD.MLD.67 I Partial /rj J - c -?. l -; -; I 8;SDML D 204 Partial 0/ * - 3 f !2 ; J2 3,O SAD MLD 171 Partial _ _g , *,' j , ,_, /'j,2 NurLilyakini 4 1SAD MLD.169 Partial = =t --- ;- 3 - | 2 SAD MLD2131 Partial i , 1 -1 -/ . -I -. \I 63 SAD ML-D.1327 Partial ' 9 D\a-|KI _| O ;\ Legend~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 8 ADML 0 Total dmlto)bidn 10SD L 11 Partial d m lto uligU)1t 1 SWD18 Paroetiare Ki-lo etr 12~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ MLDos ~ore Aeria 192 200 andFiedwrka00 I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1 l I ANNEX 3 PROJECT AFFECTED PEOPLE WITH RESETTLEMNENT HOUSEHOLD SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE N.B: Where there is more than one household living in the house, the surveyor has to interview each of the household living in the house separately. 1. LOCALITY AND IDENTIFICATION PARTICULARS I Municipality------Name of Interviewer ------Ward ------Sub-ward ------Date ------1) Land owner ------I i) Name of the first Head of family ------ii) Name of the second Head of family ------iii) Name of the third Head of family ------ 2. HOUSEHOLD MEMIBERS: Age Education and Employment 2.1 Demography and Education I S/ NAME OF 1.1 1 1.2 1.3 F 1.4 N FAMILY SEX FAMILY AGE EDUCATION MEMBER RELATION IN YRS LEVEL 3 __ __i__ 4 _ l ~ ~7 ______ ~~_ _= __ __ s ~~~~Coding 1.1 Sex of person =male or female I 1.2 Family relation (1I) Head of household (2) Wife or Husband in case wife is Head of HH | ~~~~~~~~~~(3)Son or daughter * ~~~~~~~~~~~(4)Other relative (5) Visitor | ~~~~~1.3Education Level I ~ ~~~~~~(I)Did not attend school (2) Uncompleted elementary school | ~~~~~~~(3)Completed elementary school (4) Uncompleted high school (5) Completed high school 3 RAP- ANNEX 3 79 I l l (6) Uncompleted higher technIcal/vocational school (7) Completed higher technical/vocational school (8) Uncompleted college education (9) Complete college I 2.2 Occupation and Employment (15 to 64 yrs) in Each Household |S/N OCCUPATION STATUS EMPLOYMENT PLACE OF !______CATEGORY EMPLOYMENT ___i______BY INDUSTRY 4'V I m -__ 8 | A~ _ _ ~~0 ______V _ _ _ _ 9.3 Applied to Head of Household (a) (i) How long have you stayed in the Project Area (sub-ward)? LO More than 10 yrs I OL 5- IOyrs LO Less than 5 yrs (ii) Reason for moving into this settlement? LO Employment opportunities LO Resettlement by the govemment | OLLive close to relatives LO Other reasons: Specifv ------ 3 (iii) Plans for possible resettlement LO move to new areas in the Municipality LO readjust in the same settlement L| move to other areas out side the municipality'? Specify ------ 3. HOUSING CONDITIONS (i) Type of house: single: Detached : Semi detached | : Arrow house : Apartment :. Others RAP-ANNEX 3 80 i I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (ii) Mlain Construction rnaterials for 3 Outer walls: Roof - Brick/concrete tile or concrete - Galvanized galvanized 3 - Wood palm leaves - Make ship make shift - Others (specify) (iii) Ownership of dwelling - Private owner/self owned * - Full rental Rented rooms - House owned by relative or friend | - Government owned house (iv) Number of habitable rooms U one, two, three, four, five, six + (v) Space of dwelling unit and yard - estimated total ------m2 (vi) Number of Habitable rooms | * House is for living only * Living is combined with shop or other comnmercial business * Living combined with workshop | * Living is combined with office * Others (specify ------) 3 (vii) In case the house is used for business purposes (shop, workshop and/or office) is the business officially licensed? YES / NO | 4. HOUSEHOLD ASSETS 4.1 Does you household possess one or more of the following assets'? 3 YES / NO (1) Radio/cassette/Cd player ------(2) TV * (3) Video / DVD-player ------(4) Fan ------(5) Air conditioner ------* (6) Refrigerator (7) Bicycle(s) ------(8) Car * (9) Pickup ------(10) Truck ------ 3 IVRP AP-NEX 3 81 l l 4.2 Does the Household possess other land or houses I (other land than this house plot) ' | ~~~~~YES NO Y ha. ha. Estimated/Value in TShs. (1) other land for housing YES ------ (2) Farmland YES ------ 1 (3)other house(s) YES ------ Total value (1) to (3) ------ 4.3 Does the household possess cattle/animals'? Number Estimated value in TShs I (1) Cattle ------(2) Poultry ------(3) Goats - sheep ------I (4) Others ------Total 1 -4 4.4 Is the house connected to the power suppiy lives? I YES/NO ------5. HOUSEHOLD EXPENDITURE 5.1 How much in cash did you household spent during last month on the I following expenditure items or categories. In kind means food and other items produced by your own household or collected from 3 ___ relatives/friends. S/N | ITEN I PER PER PER PER WEEK MONTH WEEK MONTH __1 Food and drinks _2 C_lothing + . __3_ Transport ____ 4 Education/school _ _ 5 House rent l 6 House maintenancel and repairs I 7 Water supply __ _ l ~~8 Electricitv 9 Fuels for cookino 10 i Garbage collection 11 NMedical expenses l _ - - 12 lRecreation j _ _ R-3 ATx X l l _ 8__ 1 4 1 | l Others _ _ _ _ _ 3 _ _ _ _ _ j _ _ _ _ I _ _ | RAP- ANNEX 3 82 l 1 6. HOUSEHOLD INCONIE 3 What is approximately the total monthly household income from the following income sources for the last month'? (Account for income of all contributing household wife others). Income sources: Total month lv Total monthly Cash income TShs. Value of income | (Mlonth) in Kind in TShs (MIonth) (1) From main work/Job As employee ------I (2) From other job(s) ------(3) From own production ------3 (4) Remnittance from abroad ------ 7. WATER SUPPLY INTO YOUR HOUSE | 7.1 Sources * | S/ AS YOUR MAIN AS SOURCE ITHE VOLUME N |SOURCEOF WATER SUPPLY SOURCE FOR FOR OTHER OF WATER FOR YOUR HOUSEHOLD DRINKING WATER ENOUGH WATER USES I Piped water house connection 2 Piped water but connected m through neighbor _ _ _ _ 5 3 Water from communal tap _ _ _ 4 Own dug well + electric pump l 5 Deep tube well + electric pump I _ _ ._ _ _ _ ._ _ _ _ ~ ~ ______6 Vendors (on the street) __ _ 7 Others (water from stream) __. _ _- 3 7.2 Is your house - connection provided with a water meter? (in case you have piped water) 3 YES / NO 7.3 Is the quality of the water good enough? (i) for pied water YES ------NO ------(ii) for other sources like wells YES ------NO ------I (iii) Indicate the quantity of each relevant source of water that your household in using last month: -> See next table ./. l | RAP- AVN>EX 3 83 I~f f X l I si *(SOURCE OF WATER QUANTITY: DISTANCE. WHO IS USUALLY SUPPLY FOR YOUR HOW .MANY FROM THE FETCHING THE HOUSEHOLD BUCKETS SOURCE TO WATER FROM (EACH 20 L) YOUR HOUSE THE SOURCE _ PER DAY IN ivIETRES I Piped water but connected' __ ,through neighbor _ _ 2 fatertrom communal tap _ .__ |~~- DOwn ~dug well + h'and * ipump __ 4 Deep tube well + electric I pump _ _ *5 IVendors (on the street) l 6 LOthers stream/river I -husband - wile - son/daughter * - other relative - hired person l (iv) Is your household also buving bottled water from shops/factory? YES ------NO ------ If ves what are the reasons for buying bottled water I 8. If you are a house owner, do you have right of occupancy? | YES ------NO ------ 9. If you have a right of occupancy: What is your leasehold? ------ 10. If you have business: Has vour business got a license? | (i) YES ------NO- (ii) What is your business: shop, kiosk or restaurant or genge? l RAP- ANNAEX 3 8 1 l 11. (as applicable) Your house/property is to be demolished for an infrastructure 3 provision, what preference do you have among options for resettlement package ? (i) Being compensated? ------How much ------ Il (ii) Get a new plot? ------where in particular ------3 (iii) Compensated but left to a new-location site for himself/herself (iv) Compensated but left to readjust in the same plot? ------ (v) Property location for business needs to be compensated? ------ (vi) New location should be of similar characteristics e.g. corner plot for business U e.t.c. 12. What are you going to miss if you are displaced far from your present area? (i I (ii) (iii) I (iv) 5 13. What assistance would you likce to have to shift to the new location'? I (ii) I (iii) (iv) 3 ~~~(v) Pref-erence time to shift------ I RAP- ANNEX 3 85 I, 1 11-11-1-11- 1_ 3 .X^ANNEX 4 Assessment of the environmental conditions in the prospective new resettlement sites I The preparation of the Resettlement Action Plan also included site visits and analvsis of the environmental and social conditions in areas that were formerly pre- selected by the Government to be proposed to the PAPs confronted with unavoidable * relocation. As stated in the main report. these plots are to be chosen by the PAPs themselves at their own discretion and cost, as the principle of compensating them the full replac-ement value for their lost land and structural assets shall enable them to purchase any of the proposed plots. Therefore, the following analysis of the said areas (called hereunder prospective new resettlement sites) has only record character to indicate that the RAP considers full relocation assistance to the PAPs in order to disclose to them the pros and cons for choosing this new resettlement area, without forestall their freedom for other resettlement options. Information for the PAPs on the prospective new resettlement sites 3 To assist the process of finding a new plot, the RAP survev team disclosed to the project-affected people (both land/ house owners and tenants) that there is an option to take part in the '20.000 plot' program offered by the Mfinistry of Lands and 3 Human Settlement Development within the boundaries of their respective municipalities. This assistance, provided by the CPTs and TSTs, had mere advisory character and does not oblige the Government to provide free plots, as contrasting to | previous projects where no full land compensation and market-value replacement costs for lost structures were considered but the relocated people were provided with new plots. Nearest locations: 3 The prospective relocation areas nearest to the project-affected persons are: - Those who are to be resettled from Kinondoni sub-wards may opt for new plots in Mbweni or Bunju. - Those from llala sub-wards may choose new. at their own discretion, new 3 plots in Buyuni; - PAPs from Temeke sub-wards may choose either Toa Ngoma or Kisota as nearest new resettlement area. Land availability and costs: | The new plots would be much larger than in the unplanned settlements where overcrowded conditions prevail. Thus the resettled families would have a more spacious living environment than thev have now. They would have sufficient space for construction of on-site sanitation facilities and for homestead gardening. RAP for CIUP, ANNEX 4 l 86 At present (March 2004'). the priees for the said plots vary between TSh.500.000 for a high densitv plot average )500m-and TSh.'.000,000 per low-density plot (average size J)00 m-). These purchase price should be possible to be met by ail PAPs as they Will-obtain full and fair compensation payment for their lost lands and assets. Their 3 actual compensation rate per m of land varies between TSh 3.750 and TSh 5D000. 3 Expectancy of improved living conditions By choosing -a new plots in the government's '20,000 plots scheme' the resettled | people can expect the following improvements of their living standards: The areas in Mslbweni. Bunju, Mbuyuni, Toa Ngoma and Kisota are furnished with I basic infrastructure including main storm water drains, roads with sides drain channels and water supply network. Reportedly, the local authorities plan to provide the entire area in the near future with electricity. The funds for electrification would come from the revenues of sold plots. | Environmental conditions in the resettlement sites The prospective areas are without risk for flooding and landslides. Air pollution is absent due to lack of industries and low traffic development that make the prospective new settlement areas are much less congested. The areas offer open space and healthy surroundings that are commonly not available in the present living * environment of the project affected people. Accordingly, the new settlers would not, or to much less extent, encounter the environmental problems as they face at present in the general unhealthy status in the unplanned areas where they live. Moving to a planned area would also considerably reduce the risk of being again affected by displacement due to urban upgrading development. 1 Comparison of the living standards between the existing residential and the | prospective new resettlement areas Infrastructure and utilities The prospective and recommended resettlement areas are former village settlements or farms. Infrastructure and narrow unpaved roads are available, although not yet of high standard. The areas offer municipal dispensaries and water wells. According to the inquiries of the field staff involved in the RAP the local authorities have already devised plans to upgrade the local roads. As for religious aspects it is noted that the PAPs belong to different religions. It is assumed that they may find appropriate religious facilities in the new areas. l | ~~RAP for CIUP, ANNEX 4 Health and education facilities In the unplanned settlements the healtlh facilities are sub-standard and the general health condition of the entire population suffers from chronic contamination of drinking water resources and inadequate sanitation facilities. The unplanned settlements have no proper stormn water drainage svstern. As a result nmost areas are exposed to health hazards, such as waterborne diseases. Pools of stagnant water are ubiquitous and serve as mosquito breeding grounds. The local authorities responsible for the recommended new resettlement areas have equally planrned for adequate water supply for all residents and the construction of appropriate storm water drainage. Nurseries and primary schools are already in place and in operation. While most of the education facilities in the informal settlements are overcrowded with over 100 pupils in one classroom, the situation is much better in the prospective new resettlement areas where the primary schools have 40 to 45 pupils per class. Job opportunities In the unplanned settlemenit marny people make a living in the informal sector. The informal activities that provide a living for the majority of the residents include selling of vegetables, fruit, food, running of retail and wholesale shops, selling of used garments, carpentry and hair care salons. In and around the proposed new resettlement sites informal business opportunities is likely to increase over time when more people will move in and demands raise. At present, farming enterprises prevail and occupy large areas. Thus, agriculture is for the beginning a potential source of finding local jobs for the new settlers. As the plots are relatively large in size, the new settlers are likely to find additional income opportunities from intensively farming or horticulture activities on their own land. Public security General security is presently a major concern in the existing living environment. at it is relatively low in the new proposed resettlement areas. This is attributed to the lower population density and the prevailing rural character of these areas which f'avours social relationships and control mechanisms. Police posts are not yet established in these areas. Ongoing and planned programs in the new resettlement areas The -Citv 20,000 Plots Proaram' is a new governmental project initiative for urbanisation of selected village settlements and individual farms in the outskirts of the city. namely in Mbweni, Bunju, Mbuyuni. Toa Ngoma and Kisota. People who have formerly been affected by other infrastructure upgrading programs (see section 2 of the main document) have been given plots in compensationi for the loss of their properties. Thev were also provided with assistance to build permanent houses in the new plots. ft was made conditional that people receiving plots were obliged to RAP for CIUP, ANNEX4 88 l conlstruct new houses Cor their own purpose and witlhlin a detemnned period after transfer. Sellin_ of the new plots was not permitted virhin a fixed period. The areas have been surveyed and sub-divided in biocks of about 200 plots each- Out of the 16.000 plots already surveyed. 4000 plots have been sold so far. Service provision and infrastructure construction is planned to start in 2004. At present, there are no NGOs active in the new resettlement areas. Road netvork development/transport improvement program In generalh the prospective new resettlement sites would be at much farther distance from the city center than the areas the PAPs would currently live. All five prospective resettlement areas are close to the public road transport network and are serviced by public transport (mini-buses). As the new sites will be developed in the near future the demand for public transport service will grow. Mbweni and Btnju are along Dar es Salaam Bagamoyo tarmac road about 20 km from the city centre. Bunju is within the 2 lkm distance both ways from the tarmacked road. NMbweni is also not far from this road (4 kin) and is already serviced by mini-buses and has a covernment institution. Mbweni already accommodates people resettled from the expansion of Dar es Salaam to NMorogoro (Ubungo section) road. Other local settlers are those who have been affected by floods in NMsimbazi valley. The Toa Ngoma and Kisota areas are about 40 krn from the city centre along Kongowe Kigamboni tarmac road. Kongowe is along Kilwa Road. Thus both areas have immediate access to major roads and regular transport services to downtown Dar es Salaam. The same applies to Buyuni area located about 40 km from the city centre along Pugu-Chanika tarmac road. The area is well serviced by mini-buses between Chanika and Kariakoo to Dar es Salaam city centre. Although the planned blocks extend about 3 km from the centre of the road they are still in walking distance to the nearby bus stops to the city centre. l Industrial development plans The five areas have been planned as residential areas. No industrial development I apart from service activities is expecting to be carried out in these areas. Conclusion and Recommendations Without anticipating the finding's and conclusion of the RAP. which is still under preparation, it is concluded at that stage that any PAP opting for purchasing one of | the newly offered plots in the investigated areas would ultimately benefit. All new settlers can expect to obtain titled plots that are significantly larger than the ones in their current settlement. and they are situated in a safer environment. Other benetits would include: | Z - The new plots will be serviced I - Land use. infrastructure and urban services are planned. RAP for CIUP, ANNEX 4 89 The disadvantages these people w-ould face are: - Thev wvill live far distances to their tormer settlement. which will possiblv affect social links - Transport costs will be higher as the distance to the citv centre is increased 3 - Rental prices will be higher in the new settlement areas. - There is a time frame determined with construction of houses on the new plot, and there are sales restrictions. Taking into account the pros and cons, it is recommended to provide full assistance during the resettlement procedure to any affected party that would be interested in 3 finding an adequate new residential area. In the new resettlement areas there is sufficient number ot adequate plots to absorb all anticipated displaced families. l l l l I l RAP for CIUP, ANNEX 4 90 lU ANNEX 5 PUBLIC INFORNIATION IMIEETINGS IN THE AFFECTED CONIMUNITIES . MNIEETING WITH THE LOCAL OFFICIALS AND THE PROJECT AFFECTED FAMILIES TO INFORM THEM WHAT IS GOING ON AND HOW THEY ARE 3 GOING TO BE AFFECTED WITH CIUP PROJECT. 3 ATTENDANTS: 1. Technical Team from UCLAS 2. Councilors from the Wards 3 3.Executive Wards Officers 4. Sub-Ward Chairpersons and their Sub-Ward Committee 1 5.Community Planning Teams 6. Sub-Ward Community Members | 7. Municipality CIUP Coordinators 3 PROGRAMME: TEMEKE MUNICIPALITY 3 DAY rDATE SUB-WARD PLACE TIME -l -- Toroli Sub-Ward Office I 1.00am - 1.00pm Saturday 17/1/2004 Chang'ombe 'B' Sub-Ward Office 2.00pm - 4.00pm Chan2'ombe 'A' Sub-Ward Office 11.00am - 1.00pm Sunday 18/1/2004 _ I______Mpogo Sub-Ward Office 2.00pm - 4.00pm 2Mwembeladu Sub-Ward Office 10.30am - 1.0Opm Slaturdav 24/1/2004 ______Sandali Sub-Ward Office 2.OOpm - 4.00pm I R l RAP for C11;P. .ANNEX 5 91 I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Ao 1'..NE I ILALA NIUNICIPALITY 3 I'DAY DATE SUB-WARD I PLACE TIME Buguruni - Malapa Sub-Ward Office 10.00arn - 1.00pm { ~~~Saturday 31/1I/° 004,_ 3 Saturday 31/1/2004 Buguruni- Madenge Sub-Ward Office 2.00pm - 4.OOpm I~~~~~F Saturday 1/02/2004 Buguruni-Mnyamanil Sub-Ward Office 11.00am - 1.00pm Saturdav /0/2004 _ Vingunguti -. Mwembeladu Sub-Ward Office 2.00am - 4.OOpm KINONDONI MUNICIPALITY DAY I DATE SUB-WARD PLACE TIME Saturday i7/02204 Manzese-Uzuri Sub-Ward Office 10.00am - 12.00noon *_,__ Manzese-Ki limani Sub-Ward Office 2.OOpm - 4.OOpm Manzese-Muungano Sub-Ward Office I 1.00am - 12.00pm SSundav 8/02/2004 _ - Manzese-Mvuleni Sub-Ward Office 2.00pm - 4.OOpm _ _ _ _ _ I'______Manzese-INInazi Mmoja Sub-Ward Office 10.00am - 12.00pm SatLurday l14/02/2004 .. Saturday 14/02/ 4 Manzese-Md Sub-Ward Office 2.00pm - 4.0(pm Source: Survey Team / UCLAS July 2004 I3 !! !! ! g ~~~RAP for CIUP. ANNEX 5 9- m m - m m mmm m - m m- m m -m m - -l ANNEX 6 COMMUNITY RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN - SALIENT FIGURES AND SUB-WARD BUDGETS MUNICIPALITIES REPLACEMENT ALLOWANCES OTHER TOTALS Business total partly properties Sub-Wards COSTS affected demolition demolition affected KINONDONI 1 Manzese - Uzuri 16,520,000 12,519,000 1,451,950 30,490,950 1 2 16 18 2 Manzese - Kilimani 36,960,000 22,069,000 2,951,450 61,980,450 3 1 9 10 3 Manzese - Midizini 29,278,000 20,017,000 2,464,750 51,759,750 2 1 19 20 4 Manzese - Mnazimoja a/ 32,268,000 18,737,000 2,550,250 53,555,250 3 3 13 16 5 Manzese-Muungano 14,880,000 10,538,000 1,270,900 26,688,900 0 1 12 13 6 Manzese - Mvuleni 21,547,000 18,566,000 2,005,650 42,118,650 5 2 15 17 151,453,000 102,446,000 12,694,950 266,593,950 14 10 84 94 ILALA 7 Mnyamani 45,514,000 17,961,000 3,173,750 66,648,750 4 4 22 26 8 Malapa bl 14,431,000 5,622,000 1,002,650 21,055,650 3 1 17 18 9 Madenge b/ 56,251,000 17,210,000 3,673,050 77,134,050 7 3 41 44 10 Mtambani 34,012,000 11,438,000 2,272,500 47,722,500 11 0 35 35 150,208,000 52,231,000 10,121,950 212,560,950 25 8 115 123 TEMEKE 11 Chang'ombe'A' 28,458,000 5,166,000 1,681,200 35,305,200 1 1 22 23 12 Chang'ombe'B' c/ 24,415,000 6,405,000 1,541,000 32,361,000 6 0 20 20 13 Toroli 9,781,000 2,550,000 616,550 12,947,550 4 0 13 13 14 Sandali 14,922,000 2,377,000 864,950 18,163,950 2 0 8 8 15 Mpogo 28,017,000 7,730,000 1,787,350 37,534,350 3 1 23 24 16 Mwembeladu 30,592,000 6,016,000 1,830,400 38,438,400 2 2 13 15 Sub-Total 136,185,000 30,244,000 8,321,450 174,750,450 18 4 99 103 SUB-TOTALS 437,846,000 184,921,000 31,138,350 653,905,350 57 22 298 320 Resettlement Monitoring 19,262,000 Contingencies 5% 33,658,368 GRAND TOTAL COSTS FOR RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN 706,825,718 Ann a) Two graveyard sites with 20 graves to be removed Ann: b) One graveyard site with 75 graves to be removed Ann: c)One graveyard site with 25 graves to be removed 93