Issue

Brief 2011

CITIZENS REPORT ON THE STATE OF PUBLIC TOILETS, WALKABILITY OF SELECTED ROADS AND EXTENT OF SURFACE GARBAGE IN WARD 176 INTRODUCTION: Citizens in most Indian cities live with a multitude of civic problems - poor garbage collection, waterlogging, broken sidewalks, and poorly maintained public toilets to name a few. Unfortunately, regardless of the seriousness of these problems, it is still difficult to hold local elected representatives and bureaucrats accountable for making improvements. In part, this is because there is a lack of pertinent information available to citizens on these issues that allow them to make informed demands of those responsible, as well as monitor their performance. This is especially true at the ward level, where there is a real disconnect between the data collected by the government, and the kind of information that can describe problems in the way that citizens experience them. Data is needed that can help citizens understand local problems on

an aggregate level, prioritize interventions, and hold local elected representatives and bureaucrats responsible for making change.
With the belief that the local councilor elections provided a good opportunity for citizens voices to be heard, Transparent Chennai along with Ethiraj College, Madras Christian College, Centre for Environmental Education (CEE), Institute of Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP), Rotaract Club of Madras, Concern Awareness and Responsibility for the Environment (CARE), Reclaim Our Beaches (ROB) and The Madras School of Social Work (MSSW) conducted a ward-based, citizen-driven intervention that created information about the state of public sanitation, the walkability in the pedestrian environment and the extent and spatial concentration of surface garbage in Ward 176. The information was shared in a public meeting one week prior to the elections and was attended by councilor candidates who were asked to make commitments to improve conditions in the ward based on the data gathered. WHAT CAN WARD COUNCILORS DO TO IMPROVE LOCAL URBAN SERVICE DELIVERY? The responsibility for local urban services falls to a number of government departments and agencies. Ward councilors, as local representatives of residents in their ward, have the power to directly address many issues by passing resolutions, which can be brought up in monthly Zonal level Ward Committee and Corporation Council meetings. Each Councilor is also allotted a discretionary fund known as the Ward Development Fund that has steadily increased from Rs. 7 lakhs in 2007 to Rs 15 lakhs in 2008, and Rs 25 lakhs in 2009, which can be used for improving local infrastructure.1
1

For more information please s ee our issue brief Municipal Councilors: Roles, Responsibilities and performance available at http://www.transparentchennai.com/research/municipal- elections/publications/

Issue Brief 2011

HOW IS THIS DATA USEFUL? This data was gathered, analyzed and visualized using easy mapping and survey techniques by our core volunteer base, which were mainly students from our eight partnering institutions. This information provides residents of this ward a more comprehensive understanding of the problems they face with respect to public sanitation, walkability and garbage. More importantly, this information can be used to provide a stronger impetus for improving conditions in the ward by helping residents make better and more informed demands of their local elected representatives. Finally, it provides a baseline to gauge councilor and local official performance; this exercise can be repeated cyclically to monitor improvements made in the ward. The following section provides targeted recommendations to improve conditions in the ward based on data analysis and observations made during data collection. It also provides a brief explanation of the methodology used. A NOTE ON THE DATA: The 2011 elections saw the number of wards in Chennai increase from 155 to 200 to accommodate the expansion of the Corporation of Chennai boundary. However, the exact boundaries of the new wards were made available to the public only on 22nd September (less than a month before the elections). Since data collection began in late September, the older ward (ward 152) base map was used. Because of this, data collection for ward 176 (which has the same boundary as ward 152 plus an addition of area in the western section) is partially incomplete.2

Map 1: Corporation of Chennai map of old ward number 152

2

To loook at the new ward boundaries and compare them to the old ones please see http://www.transparentchennai.com/buildamap/

Issue Brief 2011

Map 2: Area added to ward 152 to make w ard 176, w hich was not s urveyed (shaded red) MAPS, METHODOLOGY, AND ANALYSIS: 1. STATE OF PUBLIC SANITATION IN WARD 176

Map 3: Usable and Non-usable toilets in Ward 176

Issue Brief 2011

METHODOLOGY: Four criteria were used in classifying toilets as useable or non-usable: - Did the toilet have taps with running water or another water source? - Did the toilet have lights that worked? - Were there any visible leakages or blockages? - Was the toilet clean? Failure to meet any of the four criteria resulted in the toilet being classified as non- usable. ANALYSIS AND OBSERVATIONS: 1. Out of the 11 public toilets only 2 were deemed usable based on our criteria, which were the toilets on Besant Nagar 6th Avenue and Kakkan Colony. 2. The mens toilet at Ramaswamy Avenue Junction 31st Cross Street was locked. 3. The Urur Kuppam toilet has not been repaired since it was damaged by the tsunami in 2004. 4. Lack of lights is a serious problem that affects many of the toilets.

Table 1: Classification of toilets in w ard 176

Issue Brief 2011

2. WALKABILITY IN THE PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT:

Map 4: Ranking of roads based on w alkability in ward 176

METHODOLOGY: 20 roads were chosen and ranked on the following three categories, which was based on a survey methodology developed by ITDP: - Comfort - Safety - Pedestrian Facilities Each category had around 10 questions and every question was scored based on a single point system (for example- is the lighting on the street adequate at night? Yes- 1, No- 0). Based on the total score the road was classified as being highly walkable (above 70%), moderately walkable (between 45% - 70%), or poorly walkable (less than 45%).

Issue Brief 2011

ANALYSIS AND OBSERVATIONS: 1. Most streets scored an average of only 51% on these parameters with only 3 roads scoring above 70%. 2. The best roads were 16th cross street and 17th cross street, both internal residential streets, and Durga Deshmukh Street. 3. The worst roads were 7th Avenue and 1st Avenue, both of which require immediate attention.

Table 2: Individual percentage rating of roads ranked in w ard 176

Issue Brief 2011

3. EXTENT OF SURFACE GARBAGE:

Map 5: Small, medium and large trash sites in Ward 176

Map 6: Locations of all dumpsters in Ward 176

Issue Brief 2011

Map 7: Map of usable and non-usable dumpsters

Map 8: Garbage density map based on s mall, medium and large trash site information

Issue Brief 2011

METHODOLOGY: To assess the extent and issues connected to surface garbage in the ward, the following data was collected: - Small, medium and large trash sites (piles of trash not in trash receptacles) - Dumpster locations - Overflowing or broken dumpsters (which were classified as non-usable) - Trash and sewage areas of influence3 Based on the trash sites, point density heat maps were also generated to visualize hot spots in the ward, which help locate areas that contain the maximum amount of garbage. ANALYSIS AND OBSERVATIONS: 1. Total number of trash sites found: - Small- 244 - Medium- 211 - Large- 233 - Trash Areas of Influence- 125 - Sewage Areas of Influence- 38 2. Total number of dumpsters- 111 3. A significant number (36%) of the total dumpsters (40 out of 111) were broken, overturned or overflowing. 4. A large number of the trash sites (34%) of the trash sites were Large. 5. 4 roads account for 56% of the Sewage Area of Influence (Shastri Nagar Ist Main Road, Vasantha Press Road North, Ramasamy Garden Street, Urur -Olcott Kuppam). 6. 5 roads account for 53% of the Trash Area of Influence (Besant Nagar 3rd Main Road, Besant Nagar 7th Avenue, Shastri Nagar 1st Main Road, Ramasamy Avenue). 7. 8 roads account for 50% of the large trash sites (Besant Nagar 7th Avenue, Olcott Kuppam, Arunachalapuram Main Road, Arunachalapuram 11th Street, Shastri Nagar 1st Main Road, Shastri Nagar 11th Cross Street, Ramasamy Avenue, Shastri Nagar 31st Cross Street). 8. 46 roads don't have any dumpsters at all. 9. All the 8 dumpsters in Urur and Olcott K uppam are damaged or overflowing. 10. There is only one functional dumpster for every 10 trash sites. ROADS/AREAS THAT REQUIRE IMMEDIATE ATTENTION: 1. Besant Nagar 7th Avenue, which is a long road that had 9 small, 17 medium and 12 large trash sites. 2. Ramasamy Avenue, which is a small road but had 2 Small, 4 Medium, 10 Large Trash areas and 7 Trash Areas of Influence.
3

Area of Influence is used to define the area that is negatively affected due to the presence of trash or sewage s ites. For example obstruction of pedestrian access to a sidewalk due to trash or sewage.

Issue Brief 2011

Shastri Nagar 8th Cross Street A small road with a relatively large number of trash sites for a road of its size - 2 Small, 3 Medium, 6 Large & 3 Trash Areas of Influence. Shastri Nagar 1st Main Road- Large number of Trash sites- 5 small, 3 medium, 9 large apart from 14 Trash Areas of Influence & Sewage Areas of Influence. Shastri Nagar 1st Avenue- 12 Small, 6 Large & 2 Trash Areas of Influence. Arunachalapuram Main Road, which is a small road but had a large number of trash sites- 9 medium and 12 large. Roads at Urur /Olcott-Kuppam, which had a total of 13 small, 30 medium and 47 large trash sites.

3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

By visualizing the point densities of large trash sites alone, it is possible to locate areas in the ward that require immediate attention, which is shown in the following map. The areas identified through this analysis corresponded to the lower socio-economic areas of the ward with 10 out of the 11 declared slums in the ward within these areas, or in very close proximity to them.4 This indicates that there is inequitable service provision with regards to solid waste management within this ward, with poorer areas being badly serviced by the Corporation of Chennai relative to the rest of the ward.

Map 9: Garbage density map based on large trash site information showing areas that need immediate attention
4

Information about the number of slums within the ward was extracted from annexures to a 2005 report titled Pre-Feasibiltity Study for Identification of Environmental Infrastructure Requirements in Chennai Metropolitan Area, which was carried out by Indian Resources Information & Management Technologies Limited (IN-RIMT), Hyderabad, in association with Community Consulting India Private Limited (TCG India), Chennai, on behalf of the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board.

Issue Brief 2011

WHAT YOU CAN DO: Get involved in citizen monitoring! The methodology devised to obtain this information was made as simple as possible so that ordinary citizens could participate in data collection. By repeating this experiment every six months we can track improvements made in local urban service delivery and use it to gauge the performance and follow-through of our Corporation officials and councilor. Contact us! Want to know more? Want to get involved in a bigger way? Have questions about our methodology? Then give us a call! We can be reached through our landline at 44.6668.7264, or alternatively call SIDDHARTH HANDE, Researcher, Transparent Chennai at 98402.95081. ABOUT TRANSPARENT CHENNAI: Transparent Chennai (www.transparentchennai.com) is a government accountability project housed at the Centre for Development Finance, IFMR. Transparent Chennai collects, creates, and disseminates maps, data, and research about important civic issues, and works with citizens to create data to aid their advocacy. The project has collected and mapped both government and citizen generated data on public sanitation, solid waste management, informal settlements, road safety and pedestrian infrastructure, electoral and administrative boundaries, and much more. Its maps and research studies are widely disseminated through issue briefs, publications in newspapers and blogs, and through public meetings.