REPUBLIC OF LIBERIA INFRASTRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION UNIT MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS P. O. BOX 9011 SOUTH, LYNCH STREET MONROVIA Final Version July 3, 2020 Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction (4.0 km) Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................. 4 I- Chapter One: Introduction, Description of Project and Project Area 7 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 Project Location, Description and Components.......................................................... 8 1.3 Project Area .................................................................................................................. 11 1.4 Project Sub-components .............................................................................................. 13 1.5 Objectives of the Resettlement Action Plan ............................................................... 15 1.6 Methodology ................................................................................................................. 15 1.6.1 Socioeconomic Assessment ................................................................................................ 15 1.6.2 Eligibility, Census and Valuation ......................................................................................... 15 1.6.3 Consultation ........................................................................................................................ 16 II-Chapter Two: Socioeconomic and Census Studies .......................... 17 2.1 Socio-economic Studies ................................................................................................ 17 2.2 Household Characteristics ........................................................................................... 17 2.3 Census within the 4.0-km Road Section (Phase II) ................................................... 19 2.3.1 Outcome of Census Exercise and Magnitude of Expected Impacts .................................... 19 2.3.1.1 Private Properties ..............................................................................................................................20 2.3.1.2 Public Properties ...............................................................................................................................21 2.3.1.3 Formal Businesses .............................................................................................................................22 2.3.1.4 Vulnerable Groups .............................................................................................................................22 2.3.1.5 Tenants and Landlords ......................................................................................................................23 2.4 Other Studies ................................................................................................................ 23 2.4.1 Land Tenure and Land Transfer System .............................................................................. 23 2.4.1.1 Patterns of Social Interactions in Affected Communities ..................................................................24 III- Chapter Three: Policy, Regulatory and Institutional Framework ... 25 3.1 Liberian Legal Framework ......................................................................................... 25 3.1.1 Land Right Policy of Liberia (2013) ...................................................................................... 25 3.1.2 The Liberian Constitution 1986 ........................................................................................... 25 3.1.3 Aborigines Law of 1956 ....................................................................................................... 25 3.1.4 Property Law of 1976 .......................................................................................................... 26 3.1.5 Revised Rules and Regulations Governing the Hinterland of Liberia (2001) ...................... 26 3.2 World Bank Operational Policy 4.12-Involuntary Resettlement ............................ 27 3.2.1 Policy Objectives ................................................................................................................. 27 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 1 3.2.2 Impacts Covered ................................................................................................................. 27 3.3 Comparison of Liberian Legislations with World Bank Resettlement Policy ........ 28 3.4 Institutional Framework ............................................................................................. 32 3.4.1 Ministry of Public Works ..................................................................................................... 32 3.4.2 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)............................................................................. 32 3.4.3 Ministry of Finance and Development Planning (MFDP) .................................................... 32 3.4.4 Liberia Revenue Authority (LRA) ......................................................................................... 32 3.4.5 General Auditing Commission (GAC) .................................................................................. 32 3.4.6 Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy .................................................................................. 33 3.5 Institutional Capacity and Role .................................................................................. 33 IV- Chapter Four: Entitlement and Eligibility ........................................ 34 4.1 Entitlement.................................................................................................................... 34 4.2 Eligibility ....................................................................................................................... 38 4.2.1 Definition of PAPs ............................................................................................................... 39 4.2.2 Cut-off Date......................................................................................................................... 39 V- Chapter Five: Valuation and Compensation for Losses .................. 41 5.1 Valuation Methodologies ............................................................................................. 41 5.2 Revised Compensation and Resettlement Assistance ............................................... 42 5.2.1 Private Structure ................................................................................................................. 44 5.2.2 Public Structures ................................................................................................................. 44 5.2.3 Businesses ........................................................................................................................... 45 5.2.4 Vulnerable Persons ............................................................................................................. 45 5.2.5 Tenants and Landlords ........................................................................................................ 46 VI- Chapter Six: Resettlement Measures .............................................. 46 6.1 Description of Compensation Packages and Impacts Covered ................................ 47 6.2 Magnitude of Impacts .................................................................................................. 47 VII- Chapter Seven: Public Participation and Consultation ................. 49 7.1 Consultation with Stakeholders .................................................................................. 49 7.2 Consultation Strategy .................................................................................................. 49 7.2.1 Focus Groups Discussion ..................................................................................................... 49 7.2.2 Informal Interview .............................................................................................................. 49 7.2.3 Public Consultations ............................................................................................................ 49 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 2 7.2.4 Gender Involvement ........................................................................................................... 50 7.2.5 Summary of Views Expressed ............................................................................................. 50 7.3 Resettlement Alternatives ............................................................................................ 52 7.3.1 Alternatives Offered............................................................................................................ 52 7.3.2 Choices Related to Compensation and Resettlement Assistance ................................. 52 7.4 Provision for Updating Information on PAPs ........................................................... 53 7.5 Grievance Redress Mechanism and Procedures ....................................................... 54 7.5.1 Project-level Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) .......................................................... 54 7.5.2 IIU/MPW Level Grievance Redress Mechanism.................................................................. 55 7.6 Grievance Procedures .................................................................................................. 56 VIII- Chapter Eight: Organizational Responsibilities for RAP Implementation ....................................................................................... 57 8.1 Institutional and Implementation Arrangements ..................................................... 57 8.2 Infrastructure Implementation Unit (IIU) ................................................................. 57 IX- Chapter Nine: RAP Implementation Schedule ................................ 61 9.1 Objective of the RAP Preparation and Implementation Timeline .......................... 61 9.2 Implementation Phase.................................................................................................. 62 X- Chapter Ten: Cost and Budget .......................................................... 63 10.1 Budget............................................................................................................................ 63 10.2 Items Covered by the Budget ...................................................................................... 63 XI- Chapter Eleven: Monitoring and Evaluation ................................... 66 11.1 Monitoring .................................................................................................................... 66 11.2 Evaluation ..................................................................................................................... 67 XII- Conclusion........................................................................................ 69 Annexure ................................................................................................. 70 Annex 1: Private Properties to be affected along the 4.0km ................................................... 71 Annex 2: Affected Public Properties by Type and by Compensation Amount ..................... 86 Annex 3: Loss of Business Income............................................................................................. 87 Annex 4: Tenants and Landlords .............................................................................................. 92 Annex 5: Special Assistance to Vulnerable Groups ................................................................. 97 Annex 6: World Bank Policy on Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12) ................................ 100 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 3 Annex 7: Minutes of the Consultation Meetings .................................................................... 107 Annex 8: Consultative Meetings Attendance Logs ................................................................ 153 Annex 9: Unit Rate of Structure Types................................................................................... 154 Annex 10: Revision of Real Estate Tax, Ministry of Finance ............................................... 157 Annex 11: Public Service Announcement ............................................................................... 160 Annex 12: Property not Affected by the Realignment .......................................................... 161 Annex 13: Data Collection Tool ............................................................................................... 162 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 4 List of Figures and Tables Figure 1. 1: Map of the Project Area ................................................................................................. 12 Figure 8. 1: IIU Organizational Chart ................................................................................................. 58 Table 2. 1: Household Characteristics by Gender ............................................................................... 17 Table 2. 2: Educational Status .......................................................................................................... 18 Table 2. 3: Livelihood Activities ........................................................................................................ 19 Table 2. 4: Gender Distribution Per Livelihood Activities .................................................................... 19 Table 2. 5: Summary of Impacts by Type before and after Design Change ........................................... 20 Table 2. 6: Private Properties by Type and Compensation Amount ..................................................... 21 Table 2. 7: Public Properties to be Affected ...................................................................................... 22 Table 2. 8: Categories of Vulnerable People ...................................................................................... 23 Table 3. 1: Comparison of OP4.12 Requirements with Liberian Legal Framework ................................ 29 Table 4. 1: Entitlement Matrix.......................................................................................................... 35 Table 5. 1: Comparison of Original and Revised Rates for Private Structures ....................................... 42 Table 5. 2: Potential Impacts before and after Realignment ............................................................... 43 Table 5. 3: Private Properties to be Impacted.................................................................................... 44 Table 5. 4: Public Structures to be Impacted ..................................................................................... 45 Table 5. 5: Businesses ...................................................................................................................... 45 Table 5. 6: Vulnerable Persons ......................................................................................................... 46 Table 5. 7: Tenants and Landlords .................................................................................................... 46 Table 6. 1: Compensation Packages by Categories of Impact on Various Assets................................... 47 Table 6. 2: Magnitudes of Impacts by Categories of Impact................................................................ 48 Table 7. 1: Summary of PAPs’ Views ................................................................................................. 51 Table 7. 2: GRM Representatives at Project Level .............................................................................. 55 Table 7. 3: GRM Representatives at IIU/MPW Level........................................................................... 56 Table 9. 1: Tentative Implementation Schedule................................................................................. 61 Table 10. 1: The RAP Budget ............................................................................................................ 64 Table 11. 1: RAP Monitoring Indicators ............................................................................................. 66 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 2 Acronyms & Abbreviations DPs Displaced Persons EMP Environmental Management Plan EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment FRTUL Federation of Road Transport Union of Liberia GAC General Auditing Commission GoL Government of Liberia GRM Grievance Redress Mechanism IIU Infrastructure Implementation Unit IIU/MPW Infrastructure Implementation Unit/Ministry of Public Works IOL Inventory of Losses LIBRAMP Liberia Road Asset Management Project LMA Liberia Marketing Association LMU Liberia Motorcycle Union LRA Liberia Revenue Authority LRRRC Liberia Refugees Resettlement and Reintegration Commission LWSC Liberia Water and Sewer Corporation MFDP Ministry of Finance and Development Planning MLME Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy MPW Ministry of Public Works NGOs Non-governmental Organizations OPRC Output and Performance-Based Road Contract PAA Project Affected Area PAHs Project Affected Households PAPs Project Affected Persons PCC Paynesville City Corporation PFMU Project Financial Management Unit PRS Poverty Reduction Strategy RAP Resettlement Action Plan RoW Right-of-Way RPF Resettlement Policy Framework WB World Bank Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Liberia Road Asset Management Project (LIBRAMP) is financing the rehabilitation of the entire 253.1-km road corridor, from Monrovia through Gbarnga and Ganta, and ending at the Guinean border outside of Ganta. Of this total length, the rural segment covers 247 km, while the urban segment covers 6.1 km. This urban segment is in the Municipality of Paynesville, an eastern suburb of Monrovia. Rehabilitation of the rural section has already been implemented and is now on maintenance phase. Rehabilitation of the 6.1 km is divided in two phases. Phase I of the rehabilitation work covers 2.1 km, while Phase II covers the 4.0 km of the 6.1 km of the urban section of LIBRAMP. Rehabilitation work on the 2.1 km is in progress while rehabilitation for the 4.0 km is planned for 2020. The RAP for the rural segment of LIBRAMP is completed. The RAP for Phase I of the urban section (Coca Cola Factory to Red Light), which is 2.1 km in length, has been cleared by the World Bank (June 2018), and implemented by the Project. A Completion Report was submitted to the World Bank in September 2018. The RAP for the remaining 4.0-km section (Phase II, which commences at the Red Light and ends at the ELWA Junction) is the subject of this RAP. However, the activities of this project could have a negative impact on the environment, especially the socioeconomic environment. This is what justifies the implementation of this Resettlement Action Plan (RAP), the evaluation of which is the subject of this report. A socioeconomic survey was conducted on the entire (6.1-km) road section, completed in February of 2017 and covered a total of 3,962 people – including 2000 petty traders. Items covered by the survey included means of livelihood, household characteristics and educational level of PAPs. The survey exercise focused on the socioeconomic characteristics of the sample population in the entire 6.1km of the urban section of LIBRAMP. The preliminary road design was presented on February 12, 2017, a census and inventory of assets for the entire 6.1km were also carried out on February 12, 2017, and all assets to be impacted were valued at the prevailing official rate at the time of the census. Following the completion of the census and the asset valuation exercise in February of 2017, the GoL found it necessary to revise the old property valuation rates and introduced new rates in December 2017. The introduction of the new property valuation rates has led to another asset valuation and a re-verification exercise. This exercise was carried out on March 30, 2019, and the purpose was to ensure that all structures within the 6.1 km were revaluated based on the new rates. This exercise led to adjusting the compensation amount from USD 1,798,480.62 to USD 2,093,540.76 for affected private and public structures. This adjustment brought the new value of the affected structures in line with the new property valuation rates, and confirmed that the totals of 344 properties and 497 PAPs, respectively, to be impacted under the original design and census, are valid. The revaluation exercise increased the total compensation amount by USD 295,060.14. In December 2018, the road design was revised to avoid affecting the water main located within the 4.0-km corridor. The original design was modified to avoid impact on the existing 36-inch Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 4 LWSC pipeline that supplies water to the capital Monrovia. The revised design was presented to the IIU, and final decision to go ahead with the revised road design was made in April 2019. As a result of this design change, additional census was required and carried out in the realignment section of the 4.0-km section on August 30, 2019. The census revealed that the realignment will impact additional 37 properties and 30 PAPs. It is expected that a mix of partial and full impacts will be experienced by PAPs for properties used for residential, business and rental purposes. In parallel with the census exercise, consultations with all the 696 PAPs potential PAPs were conducted on August 30, 2019. Of the total 696 PAPs attended, 381 are female while 315 are male. The forum was used to inform PAPs of their rights and choices and to further enlighten them about the adjustment made in the original engineering design and why it is necessary to adjust the alignment of the road from that originally done, i.e., to avoid impact on the crucial 36-in water main which supplies potable water to the city of Monrovia and parts adjacent. Focus group discussions and individual consultation were used to disseminate resettlement/entitlement information and to obtain PAPs’ views. The Infrastructure Implementation Unit/Ministry of Public Works (IIU/MPW) RAP team, including estimators, auditors, a structural engineer, social and environmental specialists addressed issues raised by the PAPs. The IIU has informed PAPs about the impacts and the compensation and assistances proposed for them, and informed participants that Grievance Redress Committees have been constituted at project and national levels to respond to their concerns. If a PAP is not satisfied with a decision of the Project level committee, he/she is entitled to escalate his/her grievances to the higher-level committee. Valuation and verification of assets to be impacted have been completed. A team of qualified valuators surveyors, social safeguard staff and engineers from IIU and Ministry of Finance and Development Planning (MoFDP) conducted the asset valuation exercise and confirmed that the rates used to calculate compensation amount are in conformity with current market rates for construction materials and labor costs, and the compensation amounts are in line with the full replacement cost principle. The GoL has accepted the asset valuation report and committed to compensating each PAP the full replacement cost/value of his/her affected property as per this RAP, which will be disclosed formally through public service announcements on both print and electronic media upon receipt of the Bank’s clearance. Simultaneous disclosure will be on the Bank’s infoshop. Payment will be done by check which will be cashed at designated local commercial banks, and the payment shall be made in USD. The GoL has agreed to complete implementation of this RAP by late October 2020. The GoL confirmed that it has the amount of USD 3,027,595.89 needed to pay compensations, entitlements and other costs stated in this RAP report. This amount includes compensation payments for affected structures, business restoration allowances, assistance to tenants and landlords and vulnerable persons and contingency provision for unforeseen factors. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 5 Internal and external monitoring for RAP implementation will be carried out during the entire project period. Regular monitoring of resettlement progress will identify potential difficulties and problem areas, on a continuous basis. The IIU will undertake internal monitoring and submit reports which will be used for regular reviews and mid-stream alterations. To ensure site handover to the Contractor as scheduled, the GoL agreed that: i) entitlement delivery is fully completed by late August 2020, ii) Post-compensation payment for RAP audit should be completed by mid-September 2020, iii) affected people will have vacated the impact corridor in an orderly fashion by mid- to late October 2020, and iv) site is handed over to the contracting entity by late October 2020 after completion of compensation payments, provided there are no outstanding or unresolved claims. This RAP presents social risks and mitigation measures to be implemented by the IIU/MPW in order to minimize adverse impacts on PAPs. It has been prepared based on the principles and objectives of OP 4.12. This RAP also takes in to account the relevant Liberian laws and policies on compensation and land acquisition. If there are any additional impacts identified subsequent to this RAP, it will be modified or adjusted to address those impacts in accordance with the policies, principles and objective of OP 4.12 and the relevant GoL legal provisions or laws. The IIU under the umbrella of the MPW and the PFMU under the umbrella of the MoFDP are responsible for implementing this RAP. The IIU/MPW is responsible for the overall implementation of this RAP and the PFMU/MoFDP is responsible for safeguarding financial resources including processing and making compensation payments. Each of these institutions has committed to executing their respective roles and responsibilities for this RAP, which is estimated to cost USD 3,027,595.89. In addition to what is discussed in this section (introduction, description of project and project area), subsequent sections of this document will discuss and present the following key elements of this RAP: • Socio-economic and census studies, • Policy, regulatory and institutional framework, • Entitlement and eligibility criteria, • Valuation and compensation methods, • Resettlement measures, • Public participation and consultation, • Organizational responsibilities, • RAP preparation and implementation timeline, • Cost and budget, • Monitoring and evaluation. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 6 I- CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION, DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND PROJECT AREA 1.1 INTRODUCTION The Government of Liberia (GoL), as part of a 253.1-km Liberia Road Asset Management Project (LIBRAMP) rural and urban road rehabilitation undertaking, plans to rehabilitate and expand the 6.1-km section of road spanning from 100m from ELWA intersection towards SD Cooper road on Tubman Boulevard to the Coca Cola Factory in Paynesville City (totaling 6.1 km). As part of the 6.1-km urban road section of LIBRAMP, various studies, including project design, conceptual report, socio-economic survey of project-affected area, census of affected people and inventory of assets to be affected by Component I were carried out in 2017 for the entire 6.1-km distance, Coca Cola Factory - ELWA intersection in Paynesville City. These studies mainly focused on: i) identification of impacts, ii) census to establish eligibility for entitlement, iii) baseline information on affected building structures and iv) information for designing a feasible resettlement plan. An additional preliminary exercise was also carried out from February 20-26, 2019 to determine the likely impact of design change or road realignment based on the design to avoid impacting the existing 36-inch LWSC pipeline that supplies water to the capital, Monrovia. Civil works under the 6.1-km urban section of LIBRAMP is being implemented in two phases. Phase I started in January of 2019 and covers the 2.1-km distance from Coca Cola Factory to the Red Light intersection, while Phase II will be implemented covering the remaining 4.0-km distance from Red Light to ELWA Junction. Phase II will begin late October 2020. Two cut-off dates were established for the entire 4.0-km section of the road. The first cut-off date was on February 12, 2017. This cut-off date was used to conduct census of affected PAPs and properties to be impacted under the original road design. The second cut-off date was established on August 30, 2019 and was used to capture PAPs and properties to be impacted under the revised road design to avoid impacting the LWSC main water pipeline. It is also important to note that the census exercise carried out in February 2019 captured a total of 344 properties, including 339 private and 5 public structures. The census undertaken on August 30, 2019 indicated that the design change or realignment to avoid the LWSC main water pipeline will impact an additional 37 private properties - which resulted in an increase in the number of private properties from 344 prior to design change to 381 after design change. The property marked SDC/CF-115A (Ducor Water Factory), which is in close proximity to the LWSC water main, will also not be affected due to the realignment. The information gathered during the two census (February 2017 and August 2019) exercises was used to determine the applicability of OP 4.12 to the 4.0-km urban corridor of LIBRAMP. The IIU team had also conducted consultations with potential PAPs to be impacted by Phase II civil works. Consultation with affected structure owners and other stakeholders was conducted on August 30, Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 7 2019. This consultation updated the one that was held on February 12, 2017. The forum was used to inform PAPs of their rights and choices and to further enlighten them about the adjustment in the width of the Right of Way (RoW) from 75 ft. to 85 ft. on the left-hand side, in the ELWA Junction - Red Light direction. Focus group discussions and individual consultation were used to disseminate resettlement/entitlement information and to obtain PAPs’ views. 1.2 PROJECT LOCATION, DESCRIPTION AND COMPONENTS The project is located in Montserrado County, one of 15 counties that comprise the first level of administrative division in Liberia. The county has four districts. Bensonville serves as the capital with the area of the county measuring 1,909 square kilometers (737 sq. mi), the smallest in the country. As of the 2008 Census, it had a population of 1,144,806, making it the most populous county in Liberia. Ethnicity The ethnicity of the project area like the rest of Monrovia is largely heterogeneous with all indigenous tribe represented in different proportions. However, for the proposed project area the Lormas, Krus and Mandingoes form the majority, Kissi, Bassa, Mano are also in appreciable proportions.1 Marital Status As of available census data (Population and Housing Census, 2008) 50.8 % of Montserrado County’s population is female, whilst 49.2 % is male. Also, according to the ESIA report for the S. D. Cooper to Coca Cola Factory (CEMMAT Group Ltd., November 2016), 68 % of the respondents were married, of which 30% was single and less than 1 % divorced. Education As reported in the project’s ESIA Report of 2016, there exists a low level of education in the city among both female and male respondents. Nevertheless, men have a huge advantage in average educational attainment, having completed a median of 6.5 years of schooling compared with 3.4 years among women. The difference in median years of schooling is partially explained by the huge differential observed in the total proportion of females with no education compared with males (33 percent and 13 percent, respectively). The proportion of women who have completed primary or secondary school, or who have attained schooling beyond secondary school, lags behind men. For example, only 39 percent of women have completed primary school compared with 62 percent of men; likewise, 10 percent of women have completed secondary school 1 Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Study for the Construction of a Four-Land Arterial Road from SD Cooper (Through ELWA and Red Light Intersection) to Coca Cola Factory – November 2016 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 8 compared with 23 percent of men. The general problems that the city faces in the educational sector are summed up in the following points: • High rate of dropout of the youth population; • Overcrowding in public schools - high pupil/teacher ratio, low pupil performance; • Inadequate technical vocational institutions; • Inadequate trained and qualified teachers; • Inadequate school structures, lack of maintenance of school buildings; • Low community participation; • Inadequate furniture teaching and learning materials in schools; • Inability of a number of parents to pay school fees; • Influence of traditional beliefs; and • Poor condition of teachers. Common Illnesses and Diseases in the Project Area In the household survey2 of the sample communities, several illnesses and diseases were found to affect the residents within the project area. These diseases were confirmed from the health department, whose report summarized them as the top five diseases: malaria, diarrhea, skin diseases, ulcer and hypertension. The causes and prevalence of the above diseases include the breeding of mosquitoes in stagnant waters, poor sanitation, improper disposal of water and refuse, the use of contaminated water, unhealthy dietary habits and lack of preventive personal health care by most residents. With regard to knowledge about HIV/AIDs, most respondents showed some awareness of HIV/AIDs. Primary Occupation and Average Income of Respondents As stated in the project ESIA Report of 2016, more than two-third of respondents, (74.8%) are traders (shop owners and petty traders), it is not surprising that trading represents the major occupation of respondents, as the project area passes through a densely populated market; this is followed by those that claim to be self-employed (18%). Those that are engaged in private businesses such as garages, tyre maintenance, transporters and artisans, administrator accounted for 4.5%. The reported average monthly income by respondent is generally low. About 15% of respondents can only earn as low as $ 100 or less monthly, 18% earn between $150 and $ 200 and slightly more than this same proportion (18.5%) earn between $601 and $ 1000. Only 6% earn up to $ 2000 and above monthly. These findings are consistent with those if this RAP. Households with Children Attending School 2 Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Study for the Construction of a Four-Land Arterial Road from SD Cooper (Through ELWA and Red Light Intersection) to Coca Cola Factory – November 2016 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 9 Four out of every five persons in the project area have children of elementary school-going age (6 to 13 years old). When asked whether the children attend school, nine out every ten of the more than 222 households and traders with children of elementary school going-age confirmed that their children do attend primary school. Water and Sanitation The main drinking water source in the study population is the river, used by more than one third of households; this is followed by water well (accounted for by more than one-fourth of the respondents), hand pump well (one-fifth), pipe-borne water (less than one-fifth), while pond and spring accounted for less than 3 percent of respondents. Results on the main type of toilet facility used by households in the study area showed that the majority (more than four-fifths) of households pointed to traditional pit latrine as their main toilet facility. This was followed by improved ventilated pit latrine (less than 10%), bush (less than 5%) and stream (less than 1%). Food and Nutrition A highly significant proportion of respondents in the ESIA Report of 2016 reported that they consume two meals per day, while a small proportion of the respondents (slightly more than one- tenth) consume three square meals per day and an almost equal proportion (one-tenth) can only afford a meal a day. Morbidity According to the results of the survey 3 , malaria was recorded as an extremely serious health problem, affecting at least four out of every five respondents; next is respiratory tract infection, otherwise referred to as cold, cough and flu, reported by half of all households, and diarrhea and dysentery, affecting nearly half of households. Other relatively less serious ailments, but affecting a considerable proportion of households, include (in ranking order) vomiting/stomach ache, skin diseases and typhoid. Anemia was reported by a fairly significant proportion of households (one out of every ten), while eye infection, tuberculosis and river blindness are much less of a health issue. Respondents were asked about the primary means of seeking treatment for members of their household. Community health centers are the most common source of treatment for households in the study communities (normally accessed by three out of every five households). next is Government hospital accounted for by more than one third of all households. The fact that not many respondents indicated the use of drug peddlers (1%) and none reported the use of traditional healers or other means of cure, is an indication that the community hospitals are doing very well (more or less effective and affordable) in providing health care to household members in the study population. 3 Environmental and Social Impact Assessment Study for the Construction of a Four-Land Arterial Road from SD Cooper (Through ELWA and Red Light Intersection) to Coca Cola Factory – November 2016 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 10 1.3 PROJECT AREA This project, which begins from the ELWA Junction and ends at the Red Light Intersection, is one of the outlets from Monrovia into the hinterland, and passes through the Paynesville suburb. This route gives access to central Liberia, through Margibi County. From Margibi, the route leads through Bong and Lofa Counties, from which Sierra Leone in the east and Guinea in the northeast can be connected. This urban link also connects through the rural sections of LIBRAMP (Red Light - Gbarnga - Ganta) to Nimba County in the north. Further, through this link, access to the southeastern region of the county, including Grand Gedeh, River Gee and Maryland Counties can be gained. From the southeast, the country’s eastern border with the Ivory Coast can be accessed. This 4.0-km road link, which represents Phase II of the 6.1-km road, runs through the densely populated suburb of Paynesville City located on the outskirts of the country’s capital Monrovia. As Paynesville continues to expand in all directions, there is rapid development within the project area. Thus, areas adjacent to the project site are increasingly being built up. PAPs (Project-affected Persons) have engaged in the construction of residences, as well as a variety of petty trading and other businesses. Consequently, much of the civil work activities will impact these PAPs. Impacted PAPs will also include vulnerable groups, tenants and landlords and the business community in general. Some owners of these businesses have built their structures within the Right of Way (RoW). The ELWA Junction end of the project is characterized by a heavy concentration of multiple-level buildings. These include one major government facility which houses the Liberia Revenue Authority (LRA), and a modern medical facility. Other facilities in this category include supermarkets, gas stations and other large business entities. There is heavy concentration of petty traders at all the intersections and road junctions, including the ELWA Junction, the LBS Junction, the Total Gas Station area, the ELWA junction market area, the Duport Road Junction, the Police Academy Junction, and the Red Light intersection. All of these areas named are marked by the presence of hawkers and other business people. Component 1 civil works in the 4.0-km section of the road in Paynesville City involve road upgrading activities including: i) site clearing/grubbing, ii) earthworks, iii) drainage works, and iv) road pavement. These activities are expected to involve civil works that will entail clearing of the RoW. Public and private structures, businesses, tenants, and informal traders whose livelihoods are dependent on activities carried out within the RoW mentioned above will be impacted. Potential impacts in the corridor have been identified during the conceptual design stage. The conceptual design looked into various design alternatives to avoid, and where avoidance was not possible, alternatives were considered to minimize, impacts on people and properties. While implementing the 4-km urban road corridor, the GoL will expand the road to a dual carriageway from Red Light intersection to ELWA intersection, including 100 m towards SD Cooper Road on Tubman Boulevard. The approved alignment design takes into consideration the avoidance of impact on the LWSC 36-inch main waterline. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 11 The project is in the City of Paynesville in the eastern suburb of Monrovia, Montserrado County (Figure 1.1). The 4.0-km (Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction) section of the 6.1-km road (Coca Cola Factory - ELWA junction) is within the jurisdiction of the City of Paynesville. The 4.0-km section of the road is populated with diverse forms of business enterprises (shops, stores, bars, restaurants, pharmacies and entertainment places). Red light ELWA Junction Figure 1. 1: Map of the Project Area As part of its city beautification plan, the GoL in collaboration with the Paynesville City Corporation had cleared the road between SD Cooper Road and Coca Cola Factory Corridor in 2008 and had established 75-ft Right of Way (RoW) for the entire corridor. However, the GoL, following clearing of the corridor, has not been successful in enforcing and maintaining the 75-ft RoW. Business owners and residents have encroached into the RoW and have been carrying out commercial and livelihoods activities within the RoW for the last eleven (11) years. This development has necessitated a slight modification of the RoW, which now includes the following: 85 ft. on the left-hand side from the centerline of the existing road (in the ELWA – Red Light direction), while on the right hand side, the original 75 ft. from the centerline has been maintained as the RoW. The increase in width to 85 ft. on the left-hand side was applied to eliminate impact on the LWSC 36-inch main pipeline located on the right-hand side. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 12 Under Phase II, the project will carry out road rehabilitation and upgrading activities in the remaining 4.0-km distance (Red Light - Du Port Road - ELWA intersections). This will be implemented starting late October 2020. Scattered businesses and trading activities, water main lines, water factories and critical private and public infrastructures are key characteristics of the 4.0-km corridor. As per the World Bank policy on involuntary resettlement BP/OP 4.12, the Government of Liberia (GoL) has decided to: a) prepare Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for the 4.0-km urban road corridor and ii) implement mitigation measures adequately addressing social and economic risks associated with this corridor. 1.4 PROJECT SUB-COMPONENTS The proposed 4-km sub project of the urban section of LIBRAMP has four components: Component I (Design, Rehabilitation and Maintenance of the Road); Component II (Consultancy Service, Operating Cost and Training); Component III (Road Safety Activities and Right-of-Way Preservation); and Component IV (Involuntary Resettlement). The sub project will upgrade the section of the road from single to dual carriage road. The section of the road between Red Light Intersection and ELWA Junction will impact properties and livelihoods. This section within the Red Light Intersection of the road is over-congested with commercial and vehicular traffic. Petty traders who are carrying out commercial activities within the RoW will be accommodated behind a fence reserved from the RoW for them by the GoL. This has been agreed with the GoL. The zone provided for petty traders’ activities will increase by a 10-ft. width on the left-hand side at Red Light, because of the increment to 85 ft. Efforts to Minimize Project Impact Design alternatives considered by GoL to avoid or minimize project impacts on properties and livelihoods include: i) Construction of separate grade/interchange ii) Construction of intersection at-grade, iii) Construction of dual-carriageway road throughout the 4.0 km. iv) Construction of dual carriageway in the 4.0 km of the road as well as construction of fence between the 50-ft. RoW and have 25 ft. reserved for traders to keep businesses and carry on their commercial activities. v) Avoidance of impact on the LWSC 36-inch main waterline Options i - iii were dismissed due to cost to the project, land requirement and disturbance on livelihood activities. Option iv, which involves construction of a dual carriageway in the 4.0 km of the road as well as construction of a fence 50-ft from the centerline in order to reserve a 25ft zone for traders to keep businesses and carry on their commercial activities, was adopted. The Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 13 Red-Light intersection is the meeting point of the two project phases: the 2.1-km section (Coca Cola Factory to Red Light) and the 4.0-km section (Red Light ELWA Junction). At this point and parts adjacent, there is a heavy concentration of petty traders. Thus, the fence is intended to make provision for continuation of petty traders’ activities on both phases of the project, in this area. In case of unavoidable realignments that may emerge during the civil works phase, it is clearly indicated in the Contractor’s Contract that realignment must be avoided or minimized as much as possible and where realignment is unavoidable, impacts would be evaluated, and this RAP would be updated. It is also the responsibility of the Contractor to identify and secure storage, quarry sites and borrowing pits. The cost of these sites and borrowing pits shall be covered by the Contractor. Land for this purpose shall be acquired commercially. In addition to technical measures considered to avoid and minimize social and economic hardships, the project has: • Consulted and obtained the views of Petty Traders Associations regarding the Government’s proposal to reserve 25 ft. on the right-hand side and 35 ft. on the left-hand side of the carriageway of the established 75-ft. RoW for petty traders in order to enable them to continue their trading activities. This proposal has been incorporated into the project design which includes erecting barriers to separate an area for livelihood activities of petty traders. Because of adjustments in the width of the RoW made to remove impact on the LWSC water main, a width of 25ft. on the right-hand side and 35 feet on the left- hand side will now be available for the petty traders to operate. • Installation/erection of the proposed barriers shall be completed at least one month ahead of commencement of the road civil work. During the barrier installation process, representatives of petty traders shall participate and the 25ft. and 35 ft. reserve areas on the right and left side, respectively, of the RoW, agreed with petty traders, shall be adhered to. • As indicated in the Contractor’s Contract, the road rehabilitation works shall remain within 50 ft. and 75 ft. of the single and dual carriage way, respectively, as discussed in the design option section of this RAP. • Where an unavoidable need for realignment and expansion arises, impacts must be evaluated, and this RAP will be updated accordingly. • There will not be camps, quarry sites and storages within the entire 6.1-km of the corridor. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to identify and secure storage, quarry sites and borrowing pits. The cost of these sites and borrowing pits shall be covered by the Contractor. The GoL shall assist the Contractor in verifying the rightful ownership of the land and in processing the documentation. These requirements shall be reflected into the Contractor’s contractual agreement. The process will not cause involuntary land take or displacement of squatters. If involuntary displacement is to take place, the Bank’s policy on involuntary resettlement shall apply and the Contractor or the GoL shall be responsible to comply with OP/BP 4.12 policy and principles. • The IIU in collaboration with the monitoring consultant who is responsible to carry out the quality assurance role on behalf of the GoL and in partnership with local communities shall monitor the implementation of social and economic risks mitigation measures in place to Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 14 ensure that the Contractor remains within the established RoW and is fully complying. This shall be reflected in the Contractor’s contract and sensitization shall be conducted prior to commencement of road work. • The GoL in collaboration with the World Bank is committed to sensitizing local communities and to building GRMs’ capacities. 1.5 OBJECTIVES OF THE RESETTLEMENT ACTION PLAN The primary objective of this RAP is to identify and adopt measures for mitigating social and economic risks and impacts associated with Phase II of the project’s Component I (civil work activities). The objective is to avoid or minimize direct social and economic impacts on PAPs; where it is not possible to avoid or minimize impacts on PAPs, the goal is to restore PAPs’ livelihoods to pre-project level or better. This RAP is therefore geared toward providing cash compensation and assistances to PAPs with the ultimate goal of mitigating social and economic impacts of the project on assets and livelihoods. The specific objectives of this RAP are to: • Identify persons (individuals or groups) who will be affected by Component I activities; • Consult and inform PAPs about their right and choices, and • Craft a process for delivering compensation and special assistance to PAPs consistent with the World Bank policy on involuntary resettlement and the relevant Liberian legal provisions. 1.6 METHODOLOGY 1.6.1 Socioeconomic Assessment In order to identify PAPs for this project, a socioeconomic survey of the project area was carried out. This entailed the use of structured questionnaires to obtain socio-economic information of people within the project area. Pre-coded multiple-choice questions were used during the interviews. The socioeconomic survey covered household characteristics, level of education, and means of livelihood and sources of income of residents within the project area. See section 2.1 – 2.3 for more details. A copy of the socioeconomic questionnaire form can be found in Annex 12. 1.6.2 Eligibility, Census and Valuation To determine eligibility and specify PAPs, a census was conducted, guided by the eligibility and entitlement matrix presented in section IV- Chapter Four: Entitlement and Eligibility. Structures within the RoW of 85 ft. on the left-hand side from the centerline of the existing road (in the ELWA – Red Light direction), and the original 75 ft. from the centerline were coded, recorded, and marked. As guided by the entitlement matrix, the PAPs were categorized for compensation. The affected structures were valued by considering the characteristics of the material of the main outer wall, window, floor and ceiling and door type. The size of each structure was measured in feet and inches and the area was calculated to determine the compensation amount using the Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 15 appropriate rate for each structure type. The approved rates are presented in Annex 9: Unit Rate of Structure Types. Other compensation included loss of business income, disturbance allowance for tenants and landlords, and for vulnerable groups. The activities covered under this updated RAP include the following: • Reverification of structures covered under the original RAP (completed by Aurecon/Cemmats Group in August 2017); • The capture of new structures affected by realignment to avoid impact on the LWSC 36-in pipeline; • Valuation of the new structures; and • Application of new property valuation rates to project-affected structures (both original and those affected by the realignment). It is important to note that the reverification activities carried out under the current RAP did not include socioeconomic studies, as this activity was covered under the previous RAP, completed by Aurecon/Cemmats Group. 1.6.3 Consultation • During various consultation meetings, PAPs were made aware of how compensation and resettlement assistance payments would be carried out for structures and for livelihoods that would be impacted. In addition, this RAP will be disclosed formally through public service announcements on both print and electronic media upon receipt of the Bank’s clearance. Simultaneous disclosure will be on the Bank’s infoshop. The various stakeholders consulted included: • the residents of Paynesville City who live near and do business on the project route (ELWA to Red Light Intersections); • Some stakeholders who are expected to be directly impacted include all marketers through the Liberia Marketing Association (LMA) which include hawkers and other petty traders; • Individual operators of commercial transport vehicles through their umbrella federation (Federation of Transport Unions of Liberia, which consist of operators of motorbikes, motorized rickshaws, taxies minibuses and trucks; • The Government of Liberia (GoL) through the Project Financial Management Unit of the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Paynesville City Corporation; and • The World Bank. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 16 II-CHAPTER TWO: SOCIOECONOMIC AND CENSUS STUDIES 2.1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC STUDIES A socioeconomic survey for the entire 6.1 km was conducted between November 2016 and April 2017.The survey covered a total of 3,962 people who are residing in Phases I and II of the project area. Structured questionnaires were used to obtain socio-economic information of people who are living within the entire 6.1 km of the road. Pre-coded multiple-choice questions were used during the interviews. The socioeconomic survey covered household characteristics, level of education, and means of livelihood of people who are residing in the entire 6.1 km of project jurisdiction. The census exercise focused on direct social and economic impacts of Phases I and II of the project. 2.2 HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS As shown from Table 2.1 below, a total of 3,962 people were surveyed in the entire 6.1-km project area, of which 1,783 are males, while 2,179 are females. Table 2. 1: Household Characteristics by Gender Gender Number of Male and Female Male 1,783 45% Female 2,179 55% TOTAL 3,962 100% Age, Marital status and average monthly income: Age of Respondents Age range across the project route shows that more than one third (39%) of household heads fall in the 30 to 39 broad age bracket; this is followed by the 40 to 49 age group (35.6%) and 50 to 59 (12.6%) as well as 19 to 29 (8.6%); and less than four percent of households are headed by people aged 60 plus. This supports the view that Liberia has a youthful population, with the majority of the population under 50 years old. Marital status of Respondents The study revealed that the overwhelming majority of respondents in the study population, 151 (68%) are married, slightly less than 30% are single, the divorced category is very low (less than one percent). This is surprising, as one would expect a high divorce rate among a predominately monogamous society as can be observed in some western societies. Of those that claimed to be married, 82% have one wife followed by 12% with two wives and 6% with three wives. The polygamous union rate is very small, which could be attributed to their predominantly Christian religious life. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 17 Primary Occupation and Average Income of Respondents Primary Occupation In line with expectations, more than two-third of respondents, (74.8 %) are traders (shop owners and petty traders), it is not surprising that trading represents the major occupation of respondents as the project area passes through a densely populated market; this is followed by those who claim to be self-employed (18 %). This category includes those engaged in private businesses such as mechanic and tyre maintenance shops, transporters and artisanship. Administrators accounted for 4.5%. Income from Primary Occupation This is reflective of the relative poor economic status of several households/respondents in Liberia, more so among petty traders and consistent with the primary occupations of petty trading (where most of the people tend to engage in the sale of basic food ingredients and household items), the reported average monthly income by respondent is generally low. About 15 % of respondents can only earn as low as $ 100 or less monthly, 18 % earn between $150 and $ 200 and slightly more than this same proportion (18.5%) earn between $601 and $ 1000. Only 6% earn up to $ 2000 and above monthly. Secondary Occupation and Average Income from Secondary Occupation An overwhelming majority (85%) of the respondents do not have a secondary occupation. These respondents relay on only one source of income for their livelihood. However, the few respondents (about 6%) who have a secondary occupation claim to be engaged in some self-employed job. Trading (both petty trading and shop business) account for 2.8%. Daily labor and teaching accounted for less than 1% each. The implication here is that 85% of respondents are either satisfied with income from primary source or they cannot find a secondary job even if they need one. Education Of the total number of 3,962 people surveyed, 16% never attended school; 8% have attained primary education, 23% junior high school education, 22% senior secondary school education, 16% tertiary education, 7% vocational education, and 8% Arabic and French Language education. Table 2.2 below shows the educational status of the PAPs. Table 2. 2: Educational Status Population by Education Status Number and % Never attended school 678 16% Primary/Elementary School Level 313 8% Junior High School Level 899 23% Senior Secondary School Level 860 22% Tertiary Level (University) 626 16% Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 18 Vocational School 273 7% Arabic/French Language Education 313 8% Total 3,962 100% Livelihoods: People within the 6.1-km road section are engaged in variety of livelihood activities. Majority (88%) are shop/store owners and traders. Of the remaining 12%, 7% are self-employed (garage, tyre maintenance shop and public transport operators and artisans), while 5% are employed in the civil service and private companies. Tables 2.3 and 2.4 below show the livelihood activities of the PAPs and gender distribution for each livelihood activity, respectively. Table 2. 3: Livelihood Activities What do you do for a living? Number and Percent of PAPs Shop/store owners and petty traders 3,487 88% Garage, tyre, maintenance shop and public 277 7% transport operators and artisans Employed as civil servants and private 198 5% company workers Total 3,962 100% Table 2. 4: Gender Distribution Per Livelihood Activities Livelihood Shop/store owners Garage, tyre, maintenance Employed as civil Activities and petty traders shop and public transport servants and private operators and artisans company workers Gender Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total Distribution 1395 2902 3487 235 42 277 149 49 198 Percentage 40% 60% 100% 85% 15% 100 75% 25% 100% 2.3 CENSUS WITHIN THE 4.0-KM ROAD SECTION (PHASE II) 2.3.1 Outcome of Census Exercise and Magnitude of Expected Impacts The preliminary road design was presented in February 12, 2017 and a census and inventory of assets were carried out based on the preliminary design. Following the introduction of the new property valuation rates, another asset valuation and a re-verification exercise were carried out in March 2019 to confirm that all structures are revaluated based on the new rates. This exercise confirmed that the totals of 344 properties and 497 PAPs, respectively, to be impacted under the original design, are valid. The final alignment design of the 4.0-km corridor was completed in December 2018. It modified the preliminary design in order to avoid impact on the existing 36-inch LWSC pipeline that supplies water to the capital Monrovia. As a result of this design change, additional census was required and carried out in Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 19 the realignment section of the corridor on August 30, 2019. The census revealed that the realignment will result into additional impacts on 37 properties and 30 PAPs. The result of the two census exercises indicated that civil work activities within the 4.0-km road - including the realignment section - will result in losses of: i) shelters, ii) income sources, and iii) access to assets or incomes. RoW clearing exercise and Civil works are to be implemented commencing late October 2020. Of the total of 381 properties to be impacted, 344 are under the original design and 37 are under the modified design. Of the total 696 PAPs, 666 PAPs under the original design and 30 PAPs under the modified design will be affected by civil work in the 4.0-km road corridor and in the realignment section as shown below. Table 2. 5: Summary of Impacts by Type before and after Design Change No Type of impact Preliminary design Final design Grand Total Properties Impacted 1 Private properties 339 37 376 2 Public Properties 5 0 5 Total properties impacted 344 37 381 PAPs impacted 1 Loss of properties/Private 320 30 350 2 Loss of properties/Public 5 0 5 3 Loss of income 155 0 155 4 Means of livelihood 22 0 22 5 Tenants 82 0 82 6 Landlords 82 0 82 Total PAPs impacted 666 30 696 As shown in the table above, a total of 376 privately owned and 5 publicly owned properties will be affected by the project. Of the overall 381 properties, a total of 269 will be fully affected while 112 will be partially affected. These properties are used for: i) residential, ii) business and, iii) rental purposes. They will suffer loses of shelters, rental incomes, business incomes and convenient locations. The total verified value of private and public properties to be impacted is estimated respectively to be USD2,067,286.46 and USD26,254.30. Breakdown for the costs for private and public structures are detailed in Tables 2.5 and 2.6. 2.3.1.1 Private Properties A total of 376 private properties will be impacted by the civil work under the subproject. Of the 376 private properties, 37 are found in the realignment locations while the remaining 339 are spread throughout the 4 km of the urban road corridor. The total cost of compensating affected private properties is estimated at USD2,067,286.46. Mitigation measures: To mitigate social and economic impact associated with loss of 376 private structures, the GoL agreed to compensate full replacement cost of the affected properties to PAPs with legal title to the land and with no legal or customary title to the land but with Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 20 occupancy prior to the census cut-off-dates. The GoL also committed and agreed that all compensation payments to PAPs will be completed prior to commencing civil works in the 4.0- km section of the corridor (ELWA Junction to Red Light Intersection). Table 2. 6: Private Properties by Type and Compensation Amount No. Type of Property No. of Total(US Properties Dollars) per Type 1 1-Storey Building 4 194,672.19 2 Basement 1 14,520.00 3 Bill Board 12 9,400.00 4 Chain Link 5 11,795.70 5 Concrete 114 891,458.73 6 Concrete Porch Slab 1 4,160.00 7 Concrete Slab 2 33,365.00 8 Concrete with Slab 17 458,117.15 9 Concrete, gutted by fire 1 1,080.00 10 Concrete/Mudbricks 2 4,616.00 11 Concrete/Shelter 1 1,240.31 12 Container 96 23,400.00 13 Fence 36 136,400.68 14 Monument 2 350.00 15 Mudbricks 10 38,050.62 16 Pavement 18 111,115.50 17 Pillar 1 3,486.00 18 Pumping Station 6 16,873.20 19 Retaining Wall 7 64,423.25 20 Shelter 25 33,635.84 21 Summer Hut 1 504.00 22 Water tower 1 3,000.00 23 Wooden 10 5,432.29 24 Zinc Framing 1 490.00 25 Hand Pump 1 4,200.00 26 Well with Culvert 1 1,500.00 Total Impact 376 2,067,286.46 2.3.1.2 Public Properties A total of 5 public structures will be affected by the project. All five public properties will be fully affected. There will be no interruption of public services. For example, there are galvanized steel structures (reservoirs) which separate pedestrian traffic from vehicular traffic at the ELWA Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 21 Junction. After construction, they will no longer be relevant. Similarly, the fountain at the same location is not currently functional and will be removed. Also, at the Watchtower junction, the galvanized steel reservoirs, owned by the LWSC, are no longer serving the community with water. This reservoir was used in the past to supply water, but since the civil crisis subsided, it is no longer in use. The total value of these properties is estimated to be USD 26,254.30. See Table 2.6 below. Table 2. 7: Public Properties to be Affected Type of Public Properties and Impacts No. of Properties Total US Dollars Affected 1 Galvanized Steel Structures (LWSC reservoir) 3 22,607.30 2 Welcome signboard (Paynesville City Corp.) 1 350.00 3 Fountain (Paynesville City Corp.) 1 3,380.00 Total 5 26,254.30 Mitigation measures: The GoL will compensate each affected entity with full replacement cost of the affected public properties. The GoL has committed and agreed that payment for all public structures will be completed prior to commencing civil works on the road corridor. 2.3.1.3 Formal Businesses A total of 155 formal businesses (see Annex 3) found within the RoW and within the area affected by the road realignment will be impacted. These businesses are expected to generate a total revenue of USD 134,550.00 in three months’ period during which their business will be temporarily interrupted. Mitigation measures: To mitigate social and economic impacts associated with loss of businesses and income interruption, the GoL will compensate each affected business owner the value of the business’ monthly net income for a three-month transition period. The monthly net income reported by each business owner is used to arrive at the three months’ revenue loss allowance. The GoL also agreed to compensate all affected business owners or traders for loss of their revenues with and without legal title but with occupancy prior to the cut-off date. The GoL has committed and agreed to pay all shop/store businesses and ensure full accommodation of petty traders within the reserved 25-ft space prior to commencing civil works from the Red Light to the ELWA Junction. 2.3.1.4 Vulnerable Groups A total of 22 potential PAPs in the project area are considered vulnerable people. Groups of vulnerable PAPs include: i) the elderly (65 years and older), ii) the disabled, iii) the sick and iv) female household heads. Vulnerable people will be exposed to more vulnerability as the shelters/buildings in which they are living and making livelihood will be affected by the project. The elderly, the women head of households, the sick and disable will face more vulnerability as they will depend on others to cater to their needs. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 22 This group of vulnerable people will be provided with a three-month special package allowance to cover rental, living expenses during the three-month transition period. The total special package for vulnerable people is estimated to be USD 13,200.00. The special package is calculated on the basis of monthly rent for a transition period of three months, supplementary living, and transportation allowances. In addition to the financial provision made under special package, vulnerable people will be assisted with support that will include: i) arranging priority access to local heath posts for the sick and the needy, ii) providing seed money for the elderly, iii) helping them open Bank accounts, iv) assisting in obtaining documentation needed for processing and completing their compensation. Table 2. 8: Categories of Vulnerable People Category Gender Total M F Elderly (over 65 years old) 4 18 22 Female household heads (elderly ) 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 18 22 Mitigation measures: To mitigate vulnerability risks associated with disturbance, permanent and temporary displacement of the 22 vulnerable people, the GoL shall give special attention to the wellbeing of the elderly, the sick, and female household heads affected by the project. It will give priority access to public services such as health. The GoL has committed and agreed to paying all vulnerable groups their special assistance and compensation packages prior to commencing civil works on the road corridor. 2.3.1.5 Tenants and Landlords The project will impact a total of 82 tenants and 82 landlords. Landlords will lose their rental incomes while tenants will lose their rental shelters. To mitigate adverse impacts associated with incomes and permanent shelters loses, the project will pay PAPs restoration and transition allowances for a period of three months. A total of USD 33,783.00 is allocated in this RAP to offset impacts associated with rental incomes and shelters lost (Annex 4 provides a list of tenants and landlords with corresponding amounts allocated to them). 2.4 OTHER STUDIES 2.4.1 Land Tenure and Land Transfer System Liberia has three land tenure systems, namely: i) Customary Tenure, ii) Freehold Tenure and iii) Lease Hold Tenure. Customary tenure involves the use of land which the government has granted to people in the rural space. Acquiring customary right is a bottom-up approach. The process starts with the lower level Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 23 of the country’s administrative structure. The Town Chief is responsible for initiating the customary right process, from the Township it goes to the Clan or Paramount Chief, from the Clan or Paramount Chief the process moves to the District Commissioner who finally prepares customary land grant certificates which are subsequently approved by the President of Liberia. However, it is important to note that the bottom-up approach may not be the one that is always practiced on the ground to process and get approval of customary right. The freehold tenure involves holding land in perpetuity or for a term fixed by a condition and enables the holder to exercise, subject to the law, full powers of ownership. The lease hold tenure is created either by contract or by operation of the law. Under the tenure the landlord or lesser grants the tenants or leaser exclusive possession of the land, usually for exclusive possession of the land, for a specific period in return for a grant, granting the tenants security of tenure and a proprietary interest in the land. 2.4.1.1 Patterns of Social Interactions in Affected Communities The communities along the 4.0-km corridor are comprised of different languages, cultural and religious groups and nationalities. As such, there are different social and religious associations and clubs to which PAPs hold membership. Intermarriages are also common in this urban project area. All these enhance social cohesion and solidarity. The project will not disrupt or negatively impact these social and cultural associations or networks and structures such as churches, mosques and schools. There will not be relocation impact. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 24 III- CHAPTER THREE: POLICY, REGULATORY AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK 3.1 LIBERIAN LEGAL FRAMEWORK This section presents a description of the legal framework for involuntary resettlement in Liberia. The following Liberian Laws comprise the overall legal framework: 3.1.1 Land Right Policy of Liberia (2013) The Land Right Policy of 2013 provides policy recommendations for land rights in Liberia, centered on four basic types of rights: Public land, Government land, customary land and private land. The policy also fosters equal protection of all, relative to all land matters. The policy recognizes that since the founding of Liberia, the lands of customary communities have been less secure than private lands. This must end such that land under customary practice and norms are given protection equal to that of private land, i.e., the land rights of men and women. In addition to this policy, the Constitution of Liberia and the Land Acquisition Act of Liberia are the laws covering land/property rights. 3.1.2 The Liberian Constitution 1986 Article 22 (a) and (b) of the constitution gives the right to all individuals who are citizens of Liberia to own property, either on an individual basis or in conjunction with other individuals. The right to ownership of property however, does not extend to mineral resources on or beneath the land. Article 24 indicates that the state guarantees the inviolability of property rights but then provides for the expropriation of property for public purposes. It requires prompt payment of just compensation where this occurs. However, there is lack of procedural provisions. Article 24 of the 1986 Liberian Constitution further provides the basis for compensation for acquired land. It states that expropriation may be authorized for national security issues, or where public health and safety are endangered, or for any other public purposes, provided: • That reasons for such expropriation are given; • That there is prompt payment of just compensation; • That such expropriation or the compensation offered may be challenged freely by the owner of the property in a court of law with no penalty for having brought such action; and • That when property taken for public use ceases to be so used, the republic shall accord the former owner, the right of first refusal to reacquire the property. Article 65 also contains provision that the courts shall apply both statutory and customary laws in accordance with the standards enacted by the Legislature. This provides the constitutional basis for the application of the customary land tenure rules under which many rural Liberians hold their land. 3.1.3 Aborigines Law of 1956 Chapter II of this Act states that each tribe is entitled to the use of as much of the public land in the area inhabited by the tribe, as is required for farming and other enterprises essential to tribal Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 25 necessities. It shall have the possession of such land as against any other person. It goes further to say that the omission of a tribe to have its territory so delimited shall not however, affect in any way its right to the use of the land. While this Act allows tribal people to own and use the land for living and productive activities, it does not allow the individuals or groups using the land to transfer the land to another user. 3.1.4 Property Law of 1976 This law established the conditions under which a Liberian can own real property and dispose of same. It states that one must hold title document for such land and when transferring same, it shall be done by title, duly registered. Land acquired under this law allows the owner to convey or transfer it to another person(s) or entity through a legal process. The difference between Aborigines and Property Laws is the right of land user to transfer or not, to another land user. 3.1.5 Revised Rules and Regulations Governing the Hinterland of Liberia (2001) These rules are a successor to the earlier laws and regulations on the hinterland. These rules apply not only to the hinterland, but also to land in other counties, under the customary land tenure system. Articles 66 and 67 of the rules grant tribal people in the rural area the right to utilize land in their locale. They also provide that any stranger wishing to utilize such land as against their usage, such stranger shall compensate for the use of the land. The Land Acquisition Act of 1929 provide detailed steps to be taken for land acquisition and payment of compensation for claimants, whether in cash or land for land. Two other relevant laws that relate to the resettlement of people to be affected by infrastructure development are the Zoning Law and the Real Property Law. The 1958 Zoning Law prescribes designated sites for construction of specific structures. Construction of unauthorized structures is a violation under this statute. Section 102 of the Law requires that a Zoning Permit be obtained prior to construction of any structure. However, section 72 of the same statute also provide that a Temporary Permit could be obtained from the Zoning Council for a period not more than one year, to construct a non-conforming structure. The Real Property Law of Liberia is based upon the doctrine of Eminent Domain. As far as eminent domain is concerned, Article 24 of the constitution of Liberia stated that expropriation may be authorized for the security of the nation in the event of armed conflict or where the public health and safety are endangered or for any other public purposes, provided: i) that reasons for such expropriation are given; ii) that there is prompt payment of just compensation; iii) that such expropriation or the compensation offered may be challenged freely by the owner of the property in a court of law with no penalty for having brought such action; and iv) that when property taken for public use ceases to be so used, the Republic shall accord the former owner or those entitled to the property through such owner, the right of first refusal to reacquire the property. The Government of Liberia is the original granter of land in Liberia. Under the Real Property Laws of Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 26 Liberia, the only instrument of Title is the Deed. Squatter Right is a right granted to an individual or group to use a specified land space for a specified period without ownership. Squatter Right is granted by municipalities and are covered by city ordinances. Originally, the Government of Liberia granted land to the settlers and aborigines based upon the doctrine of pre-emption, the measure in which prior occupancy accompanied by improvement gives superiority in ownership to land (see Supreme Court’s opinion case number 8LLR 4`6). This law is based on Aborigine Law. Pre-emption has been abolished with the growth of population and now public land must be purchased from the Government to have Title. Reference is also made to the Supreme Court opinion case reference number 15LLR4243YLL, when this precedent was established. The pre- emption is a law under Real Property Law and the owner. 3.2 WORLD BANK OPERATIONAL POLICY 4.12-INVOLUNTARY RESETTLEMENT 3.2.1 Policy Objectives Involuntary resettlement may cause severe long-term hardship, impoverishment, and environmental damage unless appropriate measures are carefully planned and carried out. For these reasons, the overall objectives of the Bank's policy on involuntary resettlement are the following: a. Involuntary resettlement should be avoided where feasible, or minimized, exploring all viable alternative project designs. b. Where it is not feasible to avoid resettlement, resettlement activities should be conceived and executed as sustainable development programs, providing sufficient investment resources to enable PAPs displaced by the project to share in project benefits. Displaced PAPs should be meaningfully consulted and should have opportunities to participate in planning and implementing resettlement programs. c. Displaced PAPs should be assisted in their efforts to improve their livelihoods and standards of living or at least to restore them, in real terms, to pre-displacement levels or to levels prevailing prior to the beginning of project implementation, whichever is higher. 3.2.2 Impacts Covered This World Bank policy OP 4.12 covers direct economic and social impacts that both result from Bank-assisted investment projects, and are caused by: • The involuntary taking of land resulting in o relocation or loss of shelter; o loss of assets or access to assets; or o loss of income sources or means of livelihood, whether or not the affected persons must move to another location; • The involuntary restriction of access to legally designated parks and protected areas resulting in adverse impacts on the livelihoods of the displaced persons. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 27 While policy objectives and impacts covered by the policy highlighted in the above paragraphs are meant to provide brief information on the scope of policy objectives and the extent of policy coverage, the entire Bank’s Policy (OP 4.12) is presented in Annex 6 of this RAP. The GoL is fully committed and agreed to comply with policy objectives and requirements of OP 4.12 while implementing this RAP in the 2.1km of Coca Cola Factory and Red Light intersections. 3.3 COMPARISON OF LIBERIAN LEGISLATIONS WITH WORLD BANK RESETTLEMENT POLICY The table below provides a summary comparison between OP 4.12 requirements and the Liberian legal framework, highlighting key differences. Table 3.1 below illustrated that there are differences between the Bank OP 4.12 requirements and existing Liberian Legislations. Considering the above-mentioned differences, World Bank policy complements the existing Liberian legislations with additional requirements related to: ▪ the economic rehabilitation of all affected persons and affected families (AP/AF), including those who do not have legal/formal rights on assets acquired by a project; ▪ the provision of indemnities for loss of business and income; ▪ the provision of special allowances covering PAP expenses during the resettlement process or covering the special needs of severely affected or vulnerable PAPs. A summary of the differences and similarities between OP 4.12 and Liberian Legal Framework is shown in Table 3.1 below. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 28 Table 3. 1: Comparison of OP4.12 Requirements with Liberian Legal Framework World Bank Safeguards / OP 4.12 Liberian Laws/requirements Measures to Bridge Gaps Requirements The preparation of a resettlement plan There is no Liberian law mandating project In the absence of Liberian Laws to address involuntary cleared by the Bank prior to the proponents to develop resettlement action plan resettlement, the Bank’s policy shall prevail. Affected implementation of the resettlement people should be offered various options for resettlements activities (not only one option) at least equivalent to the old property or site. Gap measures will be discussed between the client’s and Bank’s teams during preparation and appraisal phases and, the outcome will be captured in the project agreement/legal document Involuntary displacement/ resettlement There is no Liberian law mandating project In the absence of Liberian Laws to address involuntary of people should be avoided or proponent to develop resettlement action p resettlement, the Bank’s policy shall prevail. Affected minimized where possible, because of its people should be offered various options for resettlements potential to cause disturbances and (not only one option) at least equivalent to the old property disruption in income generating or site. activities. Gap measures will be discussed between the client’s and Bank’s teams during preparation and appraisal phases and, the outcome will be captured in the project agreement/legal document However, where it is not feasible to avoid Constitution, Article 24a,I, ii, iii, iv: While the Since common good is subject to different interpretations, resettlement, resettlement activities inviolability of private property shall be guaranteed it is important that land acquisition consultations are done should be conceived and executed as by the Republic, expropriation may be authorized for under Bank financed projects observe that. affected groups sustainable development programs, the security of the nation in the event of armed should get access to full information about the resettlement providing sufficient investment resources conflict or where the public health and safety are process and options for compensation. to enable the persons displaced by the endangered or for any other public purposes Participatory planning and decision making should be project to share in project benefits provided: applied in resettlement options and compensation i. that reasons for such expropriation are given; ii. that there is prompt or just payment; iii. that such expropriation or the compensation offered may be challenged freely by the owner of the Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 29 property in a court of law with no penalty for having brought such action; and iv. that when property taken for public uses ceases to be used, the Republic shall accord the former owner or, the right of first refusal to reacquire the property.� Displaced persons should be Constitution, Article 24 In the absence of national law and lack of clarity on how meaningfully consulted and should have compensation for various property on land to be opportunities to participate in planning acquired through the eminent domain law shall be and implementing resettlement handled, it is recommended that the Bank’s provision on programs. compensation criteria and full replacement cost principles are considered. Displaced persons should be assisted in Constitution, Article 24 (as quoted above) does not Thus, the need to supplement national law with the their efforts to improve their livelihoods extend to this aspect of the bank’s safeguards Bank’s policy Gap measures will be discussed between and standards of living or at least to requirements the client’s and Bank’s teams during preparation and restore them, in real terms, to pre- appraisal phases and, the outcome will be captured in the displacement levels or to levels project agreement/legal document. prevailing prior to the beginning of project implementation, whichever is higher. Relocated to as close as possible to Not covered by existing Liberian laws Thus, the need to supplement national law with the original site if possible Bank’s policy Gap measures will be discussed between the client’s and Bank’s teams during preparation and appraisal phases and, the outcome will be captured in the project agreement/legal document. Compensated for losses at replacement The Constitution mandates just compensation costs. Compensations and other assistance to Constitution, Article 24 does not extend to this aspect In the absence of national law and lack of clarity on how project affected people must be done of the Banks Safeguard (quoted above) compensation for various property on land to be prior to the displacement of the people acquired through the eminent domain law shall be for the purpose of restoring their handled, it is recommended that the Bank’s provision on livelihoods, if significantly affected. compensation criteria and full replacement cost principles are considered. Sites intended for the resettlement of Constitution, Article 24 in a way touches on this In the absence of national law and lack of clarity on how project affected people, new homes and point (also as quoted above) compensation for various property on land to be related infrastructures, public services and acquired through the eminent domain law shall be moving allowances must be provided to handled, it is recommended that the Bank’s provision on the affected persons in accordance with compensation criteria and full replacement cost the provisions of the resettlement plan principles are considered. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 30 Particular attention should be paid to the No mention of vulnerable groups is given particular In the absence of legal provision in Liberian Law to needs of the attention. support vulnerable people, the Bank’s policy shall be poorest groups to be resettled. applied. The IIU/MPW shall pay special attention to vulnerable people in impact corridor. Gap measures will be discussed between the client’s and Bank’s teams during preparation and appraisal phases and, the outcome will be captured in the project agreement/legal document Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 31 While the above are gaps between the Liberian legal provision and the Bank’s policy on involuntary resettlement, the GoL has agreed that when and where there are variances between the World Bank’s Policy on Involuntary Resettlement and that of Liberia’s Law, the one that is superior and provides better and fairer entitlement benefits to PAPs shall be applied. 3.4 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK The institutions responsible for RAP implementation, along with their mandates, are highlighted below. 3.4.1 Ministry of Public Works The Ministry of Public Works has the responsibility for the design, construction and maintenance of roads, bridges, storm sewers, public buildings and other functions including urban and town planning, provision of architectural and engineering services, and zoning regulations. The Ministry has an Infrastructure Implementation Unit (IIU) charged with the implementation of World Bank and other donor-funded projects. The MPW through the IIU provides overall leadership for the preparation, implementation, monitoring and reporting of all RAP activities. The IIU has a Social Safeguards Officer who is responsible for overseeing social safeguards-related issues. Overall safeguards capacity needs to be strengthened. 3.4.2 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) The EPA is mandated to set environmental quality standards and ensure compliance with stipulated environmental standards. The EPA is responsible for the provision of guidelines for the preparation of Environment Assessment and Audits, and the issuance of environmental permits. These may include certification procedures for road projects and other activities potentially dangerous to the environment. From time to time EPA is involved in RAP field verification exercises, and they are a natural partner. 3.4.3 Ministry of Finance and Development Planning (MFDP) Ministry of Finance and Development Planning (MFDP) is the agency of Government responsible for the allocation of funds for the RAP implementation. It also carries out the processing and payment of resettlement compensation through its Public Financial Management Unit (PFMU). 3.4.4 Liberia Revenue Authority (LRA) The Liberia Revenue Authority is the agency of Government responsible for the valuation of structures and land mainly for tax purposes. It is also responsible for the collection of Government revenues such as taxes. 3.4.5 General Auditing Commission (GAC) The General Auditing Commission is the agency of Government responsible for ensuring accountability and transparency. The entity will ensure that the funds provided are expended for the intended purposes as stipulated in the RAP. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 32 3.4.6 Ministry of Lands, Mines and Energy This Ministry supervises the development and management of minerals resources and conducts scientific and technical investigations required for environmental assessments. The Ministry, besides its pivotal role in mineral sources development, is also in charge of regulating public and private lands. This includes land tenure, land policy, land reform, land use, planning, and other aspects of land administration. The MLME plays role and is responsible to resolve land disputes arising among PAPs and helps the GoL to establish the rightful land owner during RAP verification exercises and throughout the RAP implementation period. 3.5 INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY AND ROLE The RAP implementation will involve various agencies. However, the overall responsibility lies with the Infrastructure Implementation Unit of the Ministry of Public Works (IIU/MPW). While well-defined organizational structure exists within the MPW, there is a strong need to strengthen RAP preparation, supervision and implementation capacity of the IIU. Equally, the level of awareness and understanding of MPW of OP 4.12 policy is extremely low. Sensitization and awareness workshops on the Bank’s involuntary policy and on RAP preparation and implementation processes for MPW are very critical and shall be implemented. A total of about 60 policy makers, planning and technical department staff, district, and local level officials as well as MPW resident engineers, property valuators and Contractors should be targeted. The training is estimated to cost USD60,000. This provisional budget will cover local participants’ costs including per diem and transportation costs. The training will be conducted outside of Monrovia. The GoL is committed to ensuring the implementation of this training as planned. To strengthen existing weak capacity, the GoL will continue to utilize the service of Monitoring Consultants in order to ensure proper supervision and monitoring of RAP implementation. The GoL has committed and agreed to hire a monitoring consultant before the implementation of the RAP. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 33 IV- CHAPTER FOUR: ENTITLEMENT AND ELIGIBILITY This Resettlement Action Plan is designed to meet Liberian legal provisions and the World Bank’s policy on involuntary resettlement (OP 4.12) on entitlement and compensation. In case of conflict between the Liberian legal provisions and those of the World Bank’s Policy, the legal provision or policy that offers better and fair entitlement benefits to PAPs shall prevail. The IIU/MPW in collaboration with the World Bank shall be responsible for ensuring that the appropriate legal provision is applied in all cases where gaps have been identified between the Bank’s Policy and the Liberian Legislation. The GoL is committed and agreed to implement this RAP as a binding instrument as stated in this paragraph and other sections of this document. This agreement and provision will be reflected in the project agreement document. 4.1 ENTITLEMENT The entitlement matrix below (Table 4.1) defines the criteria for qualification to receiving compensation for assets and means of livelihoods that will be affected by civil work activities to be undertaken within the Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction corridor. It outlines: i) description of loss, ii) category of affected persons, iii) type of impact, iv) number of assets to be impacted, iv) entitlement for each category of impact, and v) special assistance that will be offered. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 34 Table 4. 1: Entitlement Matrix No. Assets or Special means of Assistance Description of Loss Category of Affected Type of Impact livelihoods Entitlement Persons impacted PAPs with legal or Full or partial losses Full Replacement Cost for structures Not eligible customary ownership of Private Building structures/properties If building structure is affected partially and the structures used for: remaining part of the structure is not usable, the owner/PAP will receive full replacement compensation • Residential for the entire structure. • Business 376 structures • Rental PAPs with no legal or Full or partial losses Full replacement costs for structures only Not eligible customary title but with of occupancy prior to the structures/properties cut-off date If building structure is affected partially and the Drainage-Affected remaining part of the structure is not usable, the Structures owner/PAP will receive full replacement compensation for the entire structure. 0 Structures Vulnerable Groups Full or partial losses 22 vulnerable Full Replacement Cost for structures Three-month with legal or customary of rental, living and title structures/properties other supplementary If building structure is affected partially and the allowances per remaining part of the structure is not usable, the persons as well as owner/PAP will receive full replacement compensation priority access to for the entire structure. health and other Vulnerable Groups Full replacement costs for structures only public services. with no legal or Assistance customary title If building structure is affected partially and the moving if remaining part of the structure is not usable, the required Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 35 owner/PAP will receive full replacement compensation for the entire structure. Tenants Loss of residence 82 tenants Three months’ rental allowance based on rent paid for a Eligible place occupied before the project. Drainage-Affected Landlord Loss of income of 82 Landlords Three months’ rental income based on rent received for Eligible Structures rental a place occupied before the project. Public Properties used Local Full or partial losses 5 structures Full Replacement Cost of public Not eligible for: government/communit of y structures/properties If building structure is affected partially and the • barricades, remaining part of the structure is not usable, the entity • water supply, will receive full replacement compensation for the • sign boards and entire structure. fences Business Owner of business – Loss of 155 owners Three months’ net income for each affected business Eligible both formal and income/revenue or based on monthly net income loss. Full replacement informal means of cost of structure and land livelihoods Drainage-Affected 0 owners Eligible Structures Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 36 Person with no legal or Three months’ net income for each affected business customary title but with based on monthly net income loss occupancy prior to the cut-off date Squatters are not compensated for land, but must be compensated for loss of structures they have built Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 37 4.2 ELIGIBILITY PAPs qualified for compensation are classified as: a) PAPs who have formal legal rights to land or assets (i.e. title deed, crown grant, and lease) b) PAPs who do not have formal legal rights to land or assets but have a claim to land or assets that is recognized or recognizable under national law (such claims could be derived from adverse possession or from customary or traditional tenure arrangements); or c) PAPs who have no recognizable legal right or claim to the land or assets they occupy or use (i.e. farm dwellers and squatters), vulnerable people (squatters or petty traders, including persons using or occupying existing right of way for existing infrastructure). Persons under category (a) are PAPs who have formal legal rights to land or assets and are those who have formal documentation under Liberia national law to prove their rights or are specifically recognized by Liberia national law as not requiring documentation. In the simplest case, an area is registered in the name of individuals or communities. Persons under category (b) are PAPs who do not have formal rights to land or assets, but who have a recognized or recognizable claim under Liberia national law, and can fall into a number of groups. They may have been using the land for generations without formal documentation under customary or traditional tenure arrangements that are accepted by the community and recognized by Liberia national law. In other cases, they may have never been provided formal title or their documents may be incomplete or lost. They may have a claim for adverse possession if they have occupied land for a certain period of time as defined by Liberia national law, without the formal owner contesting the occupation. Persons under category (c) are affected persons who have no recognizable legal right or claim to the land or assets they occupy but are eligible for assistance under OP4.12 (for example street vendors/petty traders, squatters). These can be seasonal resource users, such as herders, grazers, fishers, or hunters (although if the rights of such users are recognized by national law). PAPs in category (c) are not eligible for compensation for land but are eligible for resettlement and livelihood assistance and compensation for assets over the land. PAPs with recognizable rights will be provided compensation for the land they lose, as well as other assistance as per OP 4.12 requirements. Those without recognizable rights would be provided with resettlement assistance in lieu of compensation for the land they occupy, or other assistance, as necessary, if they occupy land earmarked for the project prior to the cut-off date, which is established prior to the census which is conducted as a key part of the RAP. All PAPs will be provided compensation for assets other than land. The GoL has committed and agreed to compensate full replacement cost for assets or structures to those PAPs who have legal title to the land, and those who do not have legal title to land but reside in the project affected area before the cut-off date. The GoL agreed to follow the compensation matrix provided in this RAP while paying entitlement to eligible PAPs. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 38 Structure owners will have the option to demolish their own structures and salvage the value that will be useful to them once compensation payments have been received by PAPs. PAPs will have the right to salvage materials without reduction in their compensation amount. 4.2.1 Definition of PAPs PAPs under this RAP are defined as: i) Those who are residing within the Red Light Intersection and ELWA Junction corridor and those found within the defined RoW as discussed in the design options of section 1.4 of this RAP; ii) Those who have suffered direct economic and social impacts resulting from land acquisition, partial or full demolition of structures, permanent or temporary impacts and site clearing exercises for advancing the project objective; iii) Those vulnerable group residing within the Red Light Intersection and ELWA Junction corridor and who are directly affected by the project; and iv) Those who are qualified for special assistance or packages; In line with above-listed criteria, census exercises were carried out on February12, 2017 and on August 30, 2019. These censuses determined that a total 696 project affected persons will be directly affected and shall be eligible for compensation and resettlement assistances as sown by table 4.2 below: • 350 Private Properties Owners • 5 Public Properties Owners • 155 Businesses/Shops Owners • 82 Landlords • 82 Tenants • 22 Vulnerable people 4.2.2 Cut-off Date The cut-off date of the census for the entire Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction corridor was on February 12, 2017. However, due to the road realignment, a new cut-off date for properties affected by the realignment was set at August 30, 2019. Prior to the cut-off date, public notice announcing the project intention to undertake a census of potential assets to be affected by the project in the Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction corridor was given. Persons who encroached into the project affected area after the cut-off date are not entitled to compensation or any form of assistance. An August 30, 2019 additional consultation meeting was held with project-affected residents within the 4-km section from Red Light to ELWA junction. The meeting was held at the Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 39 Paynesville City Hall. PAPs were notified on the resumption of activities within the 4.0-km corridor, and clarity was provided on how compensation would be carried out for structures having the potential to be impacted, based on the new design, brought about by the need to avoid the LWSC water main. After the Cut-off date, two training exercises of community leaders and other stakeholders were conducted, including (i) the training of 10 community leaders (September 5, 2019), and (ii) the training of stakeholders (September 10, 2019). The latter event brought together the Project Financial Management Unit (PFMU) of the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning (MoFDP), Petty Traders’ Association, Liberian Marketing Association (LMA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Motorcyclists’ Union. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 40 V- CHAPTER FIVE: VALUATION AND COMPENSATION FOR LOSSES This chapter discusses methodologies used in: i) valuing assets impacted by Phase II of the project and, ii) determining their full replacement cost4. It provides a description of proposed types and levels of compensation to achieve full replacement cost for lost assets. 5.1 VALUATION METHODOLOGIES The asset valuation exercise was guided by valuation methods currently used by the Liberia Revenue Authority (LRA), the Real Estate Surveyor (property valuator) valuation rates for land and structures and the World Bank’s Policy on Involuntary Resettlement – the principle of full replacement cost. Table 5.1 below shows a comparison between the original and revised rates. These rates were revised in December 2017. For structures, the mitigation method consists of field measurement of lengths and weights to determine areas of structures, and applying by appropriate cost rates to obtain present value of structures. These rates are dependent on type of materials, including concrete masonry blocks, cast concrete, mud-dub or mud brick walls, finish materials including tiles, ceiling materials, roofing material, etc. In Table 5.1 below, unit cost rates per square foot are given in ranges for different categories of structures. The structure evaluation method in short consists of determining the category of structure/material and multiplying by the appropriate rate to determine overall structure cost. As mentioned above, full replacement cost at present market value is applied. Depreciation is not considered. For businesses, estimates were made, based on records, registration and tax documents. The business income determined per month was multiplied by three to arrive at a three-month income period, which corresponds to the time businesses could take to relocate and reestablish after demolition. For vulnerable groups, a minimal figure of USD 200.00 across the board per person per month was estimated, which multiplied by 3 gives a total of USD 600.00 per vulnerable person for relocation within 3 months. Similarly, for landlords and tenants, based on receipts showing rent paid, tenants would be given a figure equal to three times their rent amount for one month. Please see Annexes 1 – 5 for a breakdown of derivation of costs, as well as the compensation amount for each PAP for Private Properties (Annex 1), Public Properties (Annex 2), Loss of Business Income (Annex 3), Tenants and Landlords (Annex 4) and Vulnerable Groups (Annex 5). 4 "Replacement cost" is the method of valuation of assets that helps determine the amount enough to replace lost assets and cover transaction costs. In applying this method of valuation, depreciation of structures and assets should not be considered. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 41 Table 5. 1: Comparison of Original and Revised Rates for Private Structures Structure Roof Wall Floor Storey Original Rates Revised Rates5 Types Unit cost Average Unit cost Average per 2 ft range per per ft2 range per (USD) ft2 (USD) (USD) ft2 (USD) Concrete Zinc Concrete Concrete Single 15.00 10:00- 25.00 20.00- Flat 20:00 30.00 Mud Zinc Mud- Concrete Single 6.00 4:00-8:00 11.00 10.00- Bricks brick 12.00 Mud Thatch Mud- None/soil Single 4.50 4:00-5:00 7.00 6.00-8.00 Bricks brick Mud-Dub Zinc Mud- None/soil Single 4.25 4:00-4:50 6.00 5.00-7.00 Dub Mud-Dub Thatch Mud- None/soil Single 3.50 3:00-4:00 4.50 4.00-5.00 Dub Wooden Zinc Round None/soil Single 3.50 3:00-4:00 3.00 2.50-3.50 frame Pole Wooden Thatch Round None/soil Single 2.50 3:00-4:00 3.00 2.50-3.50 frame Pole Container None None None None None None None None moveable moveable moveable moveable Section 6.2 0f this report gives more details of the categories and magnitudes of project impacts on PAPs. Categories of impact in terms of the extent of impact (i.e., whether a structure is fully or partially impacted, and whether impact is permanent or temporary), are also considered in this same section. 5.2 REVISED COMPENSATION AND RESETTLEMENT ASSISTANCE As depicted in Table 5.2 below, the application of the new property valuation rates has increased the total compensation amount for private and public properties by 22% over and above the 5 The rate was revised by GoL in 2017. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 42 original compensation amount estimated before the introduction of the new rate in December 2017. While 21% of the increase is on private properties, the remaining 1% is an increase of compensation amount on public properties. However, it is important to note that the amount for resettlement assistance remains unchanged. Notwithstanding this, the contingency amount allocated in this RAP will be used if the resettlement assistance provided under the original estimate proves to be insufficient to cover income loss. Table 5. 2: Potential Impacts before and after Realignment No. Type of Structure No. of Structures Restoration Value in USD Original Revised Variance Original Revised Variance Compensation for structures A.1 Private Structure/Original 339 339 0 1,427,670.70 1,707,162.58 279,491.88 A.2 Private Structures/ 37 37 0 341,954.54 360,123.88 -8,169.34 Realignment A.3 Public Structures 5 5 0 28,855.38 26,254.30 2,601.08 A4 Total Structures (A1+A2+ A3) 381 381 0 1,798,480.62 2,093,540.76 295,060.14 Resettlement Assistances for Loss of Means of Livelihood B.1 Formal Business (Shop/Store) 155 155 0 134,550.00 134,550.00 0.00 B.2 Vulnerable 22 22 0 13,200.00 13,200.00 0.00 B.3 Landlord 82 82 0 16,891.50 16,891.50 0.00 B.4 Tenant 82 82 0 16,891.50 16,891.50 0.00 B.5 Total (B1+B2+B3+B4) 341 341 0 181,533.00 181,533.00 0.00 C. Total Cost (A.4 +B.5) 1,980,013.62 2,275,073.76 -295,060.14 The estimated costs of structures are shown in Table 5.2 above and detailed unit rates of structure types are provided by Annex 9. The LRA periodically reviewed, revised, and updated market value based on prevailing material market price and labor cost. The prevailing market construction material price and the labor cost needed are used to calculate the actual cost to reconstruct the affected asset to its pre-project level or better. This methodology is used to determine the rates to be applied for arriving at full replacement cost for affected structures captured in this RAP. In events where Liberian legal provisions do not meet the principle of full replacement cost as required by the World Bank’s policy on involuntary resettlement, compensation amount under this RAP is supplemented by the Bank’s OP 4.12 provisions. The objective is to achieve the principle of the World Bank’s policy of full replacement cost. To that end, the GoL is committed and has agreed to honor the principle of full replacement cost for affected properties/assets as required by the World Bank’s Policy on Involuntary Resettlement. This requirement will be incorporated into the project legal agreement between the Bank and the GoL. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 43 5.2.1 Private Structure A total of 376 private properties with a total full replacement cost of USD 2,067,286.46 are expected to be impacted by the project. Valuation for structures followed the principle of “Full Replacement Cost.� Full replacement cost for these properties is calculated using market cost of the materials to build a replacement structure with an area and quality similar to or better than those of the affected structure, or to repair a fully or partially affected structure, plus the cost of transporting building materials to the construction site, plus the cost of any labor and Contractors' fees, plus the cost of any registration and transfer taxes. The total compensation amount for private properties prior to the introduction of the new properties valuation rate was estimated to be USD 1,707,162.58. Following the introduction of the new properties valuation rates, which were introduced in December, 2017, affected private properties have been revalued, and the result was a net increase in the total compensation amount by USD 360,123,88. This net increase has also resulted in the overall increase of private properties compensation amount from USD1.707, 62.58 prior to the change in properties valuation rate - to USD 2, 067, 286.46 after the introduction of the new properties valuation rates as shown by Table 5.3 below. (also see Annex 1 for details of rates and derivation of costs). Table 5. 3: Private Properties to be Impacted No. Type of No. of Structures Restoration Value in USD Structure Original Revised Variance Original Revised Variance 1 Private 339 339 0 1,427,670 1,707,079.54 279,408.84 Structure/ Original Private 37 37 0 341,954.54 360,123.88 18,169.34 Structure/ Realignment Total 376 376 0 1,769,625.24 2,067,203.42 297,578.18 Note: The variance is an increase in the compensation amount resulted from the revised new properties valuation rates 5.2.2 Public Structures A total of 5 public structures at the cost of USD 26,254.30 in the project area are expected to be affected by the project. Compensation for public structures followed the principle of “Full Replacement Cost.� The compensation amount was calculated using market cost of the materials to build a replacement public structure with an area and quality similar to or better than those affected by the project, or to repair fully or partially affected public structure The total compensation amount for public properties prior to the introduction of the new properties valuation rate was estimated to be USD$ 15,933. Following the introduction of the new properties valuation rates, which was introduced in December 2017, the affected public properties have been revalued and; the result was a net increase in the total compensation amount by USD 10,404.30. This net increase has also resulted in the overall increase of public properties compensation amount from USD 15,933 prior to the change in properties valuation rate to USD 26,254.30 after the introduction of the new properties valuation rates as shown by Table 5.4 below. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 44 Table 5. 4: Public Structures to be Impacted No. Type of Business # Businesses Restoration Value in USD Original Revised Variance Original Revised Variance 1 Public Structure 5 5 0 28,855.38 26,254.30 2,601.08 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 5 5 0 28,855.38 26,254.30 2,601.08 Note: The variance is an increase in the compensation amount resulted from the revised new properties valuation rates 5.2.3 Businesses A total of 155 shops/stores/ businesses are expected to be affected by the project within Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction project length. Compensation for losses of income to businesses is determined by multiplying the monthly net income of each business by a three-month income stream to arrive at the total business restoration allowance for each business owner. See Table 5.5 below. Table 5. 5: Businesses No. Type of Business # Businesses Restoration Value in USD Original Revised Variance Original Revised Variance 1 Formal Business 155 155 0 134,550.00 134,550.00 0.00 (Shop/Store) 2 Informal Business (Petty 0 0 0 0.00 00.0 00.0 Traders) Total 155 155 0 134,550.00 134,550.00 0.00 The total compensation to be paid for affected businesses is USD 134,550.00. This amount represents loss of revenue suffered by businesses. 5.2.4 Vulnerable Persons A total of 22 vulnerable persons are expected to be affected by the project within Red Light Intersection and ELWA Junction. Compensation for losses of income to Vulnerable Persons is determined by multiplying the restoration allowance of each Vulnerable Person by a three-month income stream to arrive at the total Vulnerable Persons’ restoration allowance (Table 5.6). Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 45 Table 5. 6: Vulnerable Persons Vulnerable # Vulnerable Restoration Value in USD Person Original Revised Variance Original Revised Variance Vulnerable 22 22 0 13,200.00 13,200.00 0.00 Total 22 22 0 13,200.00 13,200.00 0.00 The total compensation to be paid for Vulnerable Persons is USD 13,200.00. This amount represents restoration allowance for Vulnerable Persons. 5.2.5 Tenants and Landlords The project will impact a total of 82 tenants and 82 landlords. Landlords will lose their rental incomes while tenants will lose their rental shelters. To mitigate adverse impacts associated with incomes and permanent shelters loses, the project will pay PAPs restorations and transition allowances for a period of three months. A total of USD 33,783.00 is allocated in this RAP to offset impacts associated with rental incomes and shelters lost (Table 5.7 ). Table 5. 7: Tenants and Landlords No. Landlord and No. of Landlord/Tenant Restoration Value in USD Tenant Original Revised Variance Original Revised Variance 1 Landlord 82 82 0 16,891.50 16,891.50 0.00 2 Tenant 82 82 0 16,891.50 16,891.50 0.00 Total 164 164 0 33,783.00 33,783.00 0.00 VI- CHAPTER SIX: RESETTLEMENT MEASURES This Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) is prepared in line with OP 4.12 stipulations as well as the Liberian legal provisions. In accordance with these provisions: i) each affected PAP was informed about his/her options and rights pertaining to affected asset and compensation offered, ii) all PAPs in the project area have been consulted and were requested to propose/suggest resettlement, or entitlement options that are feasible and acceptable to them, iii) all PAPs have been informed that they shall be provided prompt and effective compensation at full replacement cost6for losses of assets7 attributable directly to Component I activities. All PAPs were informed or consulted on the values of their assessed/valuated properties and methods used to arrive at 6 "Replacement cost" is the method of valuation of assets that helps determine the amount sufficient to replace lost assets and cover transaction costs. In applying this method of valuation, depreciation of structures and assets should not be taken into account. 7 If the residual of the asset being taken is not economically viable, compensation and other resettlement assistance are provided as if the entire asset had been taken. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 46 full replacement compensation amounts. During individual PAP interviews as well as during consultation sessions, all property owners indicated their preference for cash compensation. In view of the cash preference expressed, the compensation package for affected properties shall be paid out to PAPs in cash. 6.1 DESCRIPTION OF COMPENSATION PACKAGES AND IMPACTS COVERED The total compensation and assistance package for impacts associated with road works on the 4.0- km section of the project is estimated to be USD 2,275,073.76. This covers all categories of compensation relating to structures within the 4-km section. The compensation package is geared toward mitigating the direct economic and social impacts associated with Component I (civil works), as shown in Table 6.1. Of the USD 2,275,073.76 allocated for compensation and resettlement assistance, 92% of the amount will be used to pay for private and public properties, 7% will be used to pay for income losses while the remaining 1% will be used to provide special assistances. Table 6. 1: Compensation Packages by Categories of Impact on Various Assets Compensation and Entitlements for Road Works No. Categories of Affected Assets Full Replacement Cost Special Total Income loss for Structures Assistance USD 1 Private and Public Structures 2,093,540.76 0 0 2,093,540.76 2 Loss of Business Income 0 134,550.00 0 134,550.00 Disturbance Allowance for Tenants 3 16,891.50 15.891.50 33,783.00 and Landlords 13,200.00 4 Vulnerable Groups 13,200.00 151,391.50 29, 091.50 2,275,073.76 Total Compensation 2,093,540.76 6.2 MAGNITUDE OF IMPACTS This project has the likelihood to impact individuals and residents on project-related land acquisition and restrictions and land use which can have adverse impact on communities and persons. Based on this impact, project-related acquisition or restriction on land use may cause the following: (1) physical displacement which describes the relocation of residents to a place separate from their original location, and may result into loss of residential land or loss of shelter; (2) economic displacement, which describes the issue of loss of land asset or access to assets, loss of income sources or other means of livelihood or both. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 47 The term involuntary resettlement refers to these impacts. Resettlement is considered involuntary when affected persons or communities do not have the right to refuse land acquisition or restriction on land use that result in displacement. It is expected that for this project, based on the data in the table below, there will be physical and economic displacement, which will result into involuntary resettlement. Magnitude of impacts and impacts covered by compensation and assistance packages are presented in Table 6.2 below: Table 6. 2: Magnitudes of Impacts by Categories of Impact Magnitude of Impact No. Categories of Total Compensation Impacts USD Fully Partially Temporarily Permanently Impacted Impacted 1 Private 232 107 0 0 339 1,707,162.58 Structures Original alignment 2 Private 32 5 0 0 37 360,123.88 Structures Realignment 3 Public 5 0 0 0 5 26,254.30 Structures 4 Shop/store 0 0 0 155 155 134,550.00 businesses 5 Disturbance 0 0 0 82 82 16,891.50 Allowance for Tenants 6 Disturbance 0 0 0 82 82 16,891.50 Allowance for Landlords 7 Vulnerable 0 0 0 22 22 13,200.00 Groups Total 269 112 0 341 2,275,073.76 As illustrated in the table above, the magnitude of the project’s impacts will include: • 376 private properties, of which 232 will be fully impacted and 107 will be partially impacted, • 5 public properties, all of which will be fully impacted, • 155 businesses/shops, all of which will be permanently impacted, • 82 landlords will lose rental income permanently, • 82 tenants will lose their shelters permanently and physically relocate themselves and will have to find new rental places, • 37 properties will be affected as a result of the road realignment. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 48 VII- CHAPTER SEVEN: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND CONSULTATION 7.1 CONSULTATION WITH STAKEHOLDERS Stakeholders for this road project include the following: residents of Paynesville City who live near and do business on the project route (ELWA to Red Light Intersections); road users, students, skilled and semi-skilled workers; Liberia Marketing Association (LMA); individual operators of commercial transport vehicles, their various unions and their umbrella federation (Federation of Transport Unions of Liberia, or FTUL); all marketers (predominantly females), hawkers and other petty traders, operators of motorbikes, motorized rickshaws, taxies minibuses and trucks, the Government of Liberia (GoL) through the relevant ministries and agencies, the Paynesville City Corporation (PCC), the World Bank and other international partners. Kindly see Annex 8 for more specific details on all consultations. 7.2 CONSULTATION STRATEGY During consultations with stakeholders, various consultation methods were used, including: i) focus group discussions, ii) informal interviews and, iii) public consultations. In each of these consultation sessions, question-and-answer sessions were used to obtain their views, and efforts were made to ensure that everyone’s voice was heard, responded to and recorded. 7.2.1 Focus Groups Discussion As part of the focus group discussions, the field visit also included interviews and discussions with various groups of PAPs, local authorities and other stakeholders along the ELWA Junction to Red Light intersection. Their views have been accommodated, attempts have been made to give appropriate responses to their concerns, and these concerns have been recorded and addressed in this RAP. 7.2.2 Informal Interview In addition to focus group discussions, numerous informal interviews with individual PAPs were conducted to supplement information obtained from other sources. This, to some extent, has helped to eliminate misinformation about the project. The interviews with individual PAPs were also used as an opportunity to clarify to each PAP the goal of resettlement and the intention of compensation for assets to be impacted by the project. 7.2.3 Public Consultations In addition to the first consultations conducted between December 2016 and June 2017, another consultation meeting was held on August 30, 2019 with project-affected residents within the 4.0- km section from Red Light to ELWA junction. The meeting was held at the Paynesville City Hall. The purpose of the meeting was to remind PAPs on design modification and the planned civil work activities within the 4.0 Km corridor, and provide understanding and clarity as to how Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 49 compensation and resettlement assistance payments would be carried out for structures and for livelihoods that would be impacted. PAPs who have attended the meeting and are residing within the Red Light to ELWA intersections were informed on the following: • The full replacement values of their properties and methods used to arrive at full replacement cost; • Availability of cash option for PAPs who prefer cash compensation for their affected properties; • Provision of three months’ transition allowances for losses of: a) rental income (landlords), ii) business income, iii) rental shelter (Renters); • Provision of assistance packages for a three-month transition period to vulnerable people; • Information on their right to be informed about their choices and their right to make free and informed choice as well as their right to accept or reject what is offered to them by GoL (project); and • Availability of GRMs to file dispute and seek remedy when PAPs are not satisfied with entitlements and assistance packages offered to them, 7.2.4 Gender Involvement Concerning gender involvement in consultation, during the re-verification process, a total of 153 PAPs comprising 53 are females and 100 males attended and contributed to the consultation meeting. During the consultation exercise all stakeholders, including males and females, meaningfully participated and indicated their full support for the project and their willingness to cooperate in its smooth implementation. 7.2.5 Summary of Views Expressed Generally, PAPs’ concerns were centered around the following issues: • Whether compensation would be fair and timely; • Whether compensation in cash, which was the general preference, would be the mode of compensation; • How changes in the status of impact (whether a structure would be fully or partially affected) would affect their levels of compensation; • Whether landlords would be responsible to reimburse paid rent to tenants; • Concerns about relocation inconveniences, including loss of livelihood; and • Whether relocated businesses would be fully restored. Views expressed by PAPs and responses given are listed in Table 7.1 below: Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 50 Table 7. 1: Summary of PAPs’ Views No. View Expressed Response 1 Lease of land and construction of structure: Once the structure is constructed within the RoW, PAP will be Will the lessor be compensated for both land compensated for only the structure. If it is out of the RoW, the structure and structure? owner will be compensated for the structure, while the landowner will be compensated for the land 2 Initially, my structure was marked as partially- The reasons are (1) Due to the extent and usefulness of the partial section, affected. Currently, it’s marked as fully- that will render the affected structure to be fully or partially affected. (2) affected. Based on the new design, structures that were marked partially affected may now be considered fully-affected. All structures will be compensated based on the impact. All structures will be compensated based on the magnitude of impact, Fully affected structures shall be compensated for the entire structure while partial affected structure shall be compensated for the portion affected if the remaining part of the partially affected building render useful to the property owner. 3 Land owners who lease land out for others to The exercise only covers those who have structures or have built the construct: will they be compensated? structures. 4 Will landlords be responsible to pay the rent of Landlords and tenants will be compensated separately for a period of 3 tenants? months. 5 Affected people are concerned about the There will not be relocation. inconvenience of potential relocation, if any, and loss of livelihoods 6 Will our businesses be restored to their original Three months’ revenue loss will be paid to business owners. It is state as part of the resettlement plan? anticipated that businesses will restore their operation within the three months transition period. 7 Will the GoL make fair and timely In line with OP 4.12 full replacement cost for lost assets shall be applied compensation available for our affected assets? and the amount shall be paid to PAPs prior vacating the site or before demolishing the affected property.. 8 Will compensation be provided for There will be no compensation for structures after the cut-off date! improvement of my structure after the cut-off date? 9 Many PAPs indicated that they prefer cash Cash compensation shall be considered for a majority of the PAPs. over the project taking responsibility for However, the PAPs were encouraged to invest wisely in order to improve replacing fully- and partially- affected their lives. structures. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 51 7.3 RESETTLEMENT ALTERNATIVES During the consultation exercises as well as during face-to-face meetings, PAPs were offered the following alternatives, including choices related to forms of compensation and resettlement assistance: 7.3.1 Alternatives Offered In line with OP 4.12 requirement as well as the national provision, PAPs have been offered the following alternatives: i) cash compensation for affected structures using full replacement cost of the affected structures; ii) project take the responsibility for replacing the fully or partially affected structures; iii) Paying three months’ net income loss for businesses that may be partially or fully affected; iv) Paying three months’ rental/lease allowance for tenants who will be affected, v) Allowing 25 ft. and 35 ft., respectively, on right- and left-hand sides of the RoW for petty traders to carry on their activities without being relocated to another location; vi) Providing three months’ rental, living and supplemental allowances to vulnerable people; vii) Allowing vulnerable people to have priority access to public services; and viii) Allowing petty-traders to move to Omega Market as proposed by the GoL. This option was rejected by petty-traders. Option ‘v)’ above, increasing the width of the RoW on the left-hand side automatically increases space allowed for petty trading to 35 ft. in the Red Light area. 7.3.2 Choices Related to Compensation and Resettlement Assistance Following the consultation processes carried out at various locations, PAPs have indicated their choices to the following, and these choices are incorporated into this RAP compensation and resettlement assistance package. 1. Cash Compensation: Cash compensation will be paid to land owners and users, with consideration to the following: a) Where land or property is not the preferred resettlement option for the affected persons; b) Where livelihoods are land based, but the land taken for the project is a small fraction of the affected asset and the residual is economically active; c) Where active markets for land, housing and labor exist, and there is sufficient supply of land and housing; or d) Where livelihoods are not land-based, cash compensation for loss of non-moveable assets is given preference for this form of compensation. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 52 2. Special assistance: In addition to the compensation, special assistance allowances will be paid to PAPs. These allowances will cover rent of temporary accommodation, where necessary. The cost of moving all household items and any salvageable materials to new location, or from the rented house to a new house (i.e. moving allowance) will also be paid. These allowances will be payable in lump-sum to the PAP. 3. Compensation for Loss of Business: In a situation where the PAPs incurred losses of income from business, the compensation method should be the following: • Estimate of net monthly profit of the business based on records if any, on operator’s statements, cross-checked by an assessment of visible stocks and activity. • Application of these net monthly profits to the period during which the business is prevented from operating; . 4. Vulnerable Households: Special attention will be paid to vulnerable groups defined as those already experiencing some form of hardship (e.g. because of extreme poverty, sickness, handicap, female-headed households, the aged, etc.) and for whom loss of land/property/income sources could lead to further hardship. To ensure that resettlement does not further exacerbate the conditions of these groups, additional assistance such as special access to health centers, opening of bank account or helping to process document relevant to their compensation payment will be provided for their households. The GoL through IIU is responsible for these tasks and committed to carrying them out as stated in this paragraph. 5. Forms of payment: Payment will be made by bank check to each PAP. In case an individual is absent during payment, the IIU/MPW will immediately communicate a new date of payment to such individual. In the meantime, the amount will be deposited in escrow account that will be opened for this purpose. All PAPs will present passport-sized photographs of themselves along with a clearance or proof of ownership to the IIU/MPW in order to qualify for payment or assistance, and serve as a means of identification. Notification of compensation payment will include locations where payments will be made, the time and date of payment and the beneficiaries of such payments. 7.4 PROVISION FOR UPDATING INFORMATION ON PAPS The Infrastructure Implementation Unit of the Ministry of Public Works (IIU/MPW) is responsible for conducting public consultations and disclosure. RAP will be disclosed formally through public service announcements on both print and electronic media upon receipt of Bank clearance. Simultaneous disclosure will be on the Bank’s infoshop. The goal of consultations and disclosure shall be to inform affected people and to solicit feedback that will assist the implementation of the RAP. It shall include: • Creation of multi-stakeholder committees to identify and address project impacts on an ongoing basis and bring forward community concerns including compensation and resettlement progress, Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 53 • Devising communication strategy on an ongoing basis to ensure that affected persons are informed and kept knowledgeable of resettlement policies and can ask and respond to questions/ comments appropriately in local dialects or English, • Hosting regular meetings of PAPs and their representatives, • Maintenance of an open-door policy through which PAPs can seek advice and lodge complaints. The contact cell phone for clarification on safeguards issues is 0777206635 (IIU/MPW, Monrovia). • Creation of GRMs at different levels. 7.5 GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM AND PROCEDURES Many grievances/complaints originate from misunderstanding of compensation issues and procedures. Grievance Redress Mechanisms (GRMs) at various levels shall be established. GRMs will provide opportunities and venues for PAPs to file complaints related to compensation. It will also be open to people who believe they have erroneously been left out of the census. It shall be provided with the requisite funding in order to offset its operational and administrative cost. A grievance redresses mechanism committee of knowledgeable persons experienced in the area of conflict resolution shall be constituted at all levels. PAPs have been informed about the role of GRMs and the procedures to access the committees at each level. The committees will be established prior to the implementation of RAP. Rapid training shall be offered to GRMs members before the start of RAP. The IIU/MPW will, on an ongoing basis, inform PAPs on the existence of GRMs and will track cases on a monthly basis. PAPs shall be informed of the members of the different committees through radio announcements, newspaper publication, a prepared flyer given to the PAP during the disclosure process of the full compensation, and benefit amount due. The Ministry of Public Works and its Infrastructure Implementation Unit (MPW/IIU), in collaboration with PAPs, is responsible for establishing the GRMs as described below: 7.5.1 Project-level Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) A project-level GRM is a system of dispute resolution that shall be established within the 4.0 km of the Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Corridor. Its objective is to bring GRM closer to PAPs. First instance dispute/grievances shall be handled at the project level where the impact of the project area is. All effort shall be made to resolve issues at the first instance. If the project level committee is unable to resolve the issues, the case will be transferred to MPW-level GRM. The project-level GRM shall have the following members: • Paynesville City Corporation (PCC), Member • Liberia Marketing Association (LMA) • Petty Traders Association, Member • Transport Union, Member • PAPs’ representative (male) • PAPs’ representative (female) • IIU Project Safeguards Officer • Property Valuator (MPW), Member Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 54 Table 7. 2: GRM Representatives at Project Level No Name Position Cell # Email 1 Augustus W. Nelson Social Safeguards 0777206635 Officer, IIU awilmont69@yahoo.com 2 Stanley Zahn PCC 0886515854 Zahnstanley5@gmail.com 3 Alice Yeebahn LMA --- 4 Theodore G. Lymas Jr Petty Trader 0886589171/ Tlymasjr85@gmail.com 0775291946 5 Emmanuel S. Johnson Transport Union 0886851609 --- 6 Cynthia T. Bropleh Safeguards Office 0886940175/ cynthiatorhbropleh@gmail.com 0777938101 7 Marway O. Davis PAP 0886581496/0 --- 775320086 8 Cynthia T.Bropleh Safeguard Office 0886940175/0 cynthiatorhbropleh@gmail.com 777938101 9 Wilton Kilby Property Valuator 0777680412 --- The Project-level GRM committee shall resolve or reach a decision five (5) days from the date the complaint is received. The chairperson of the GRM committee shall communicate the committee’s decision to the aggrieved PAPs in writing and keep a record of all decisions related to each case. The committee will have a registration log of complaints and the log shall be kept in a place accessible to the public. 7.5.2 IIU/MPW Level Grievance Redress Mechanism A committee of knowledgeable persons, experience in the subject area, shall be constituted at the IIU/MPW to handle complaints that have not been addressed or resolved at the project level. All efforts shall be made to resolve issues at the IIU/MPW level. This is the last level of appeal and the decision at IIU/MPW level shall be the final stage of the mediation effort. The chairperson of the GRM committee shall communicate the committee’s decision to the aggrieved PAPs in writing and keep a record of all decisions related to each case. The committee will have a registration log of complaints and the log shall be kept in a place accessible to the public. The IIU/MPW-level GRM shall be comprised of the following members: • Deputy Minister for Administration, MPW, Chair person • MPW Legal Counsel, Member Internal Audit, Member • PAPs’ representative (male) • PAPs’ representative (female) Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 55 The IIU/MPW-level Grievance Redress Mechanism committee (see Table 7.3 below) shall do everything possible to resolve issues within fifteen (15) days from the date the case has been transferred to it from the Project-level GRM committee. The chairperson of the committee shall communicate the committee’s decision to the aggrieved PAP(s) in writing. The decision reached at the IIU/MPW GRM committee level will be the final stage of the mediation efforts. If PAP is not satisfied with the GRM processes set for the project, the PAP will have the right to seek remedy through the court. The committee shall keep record of all decisions related to each case. Table 7. 3: GRM Representatives at IIU/MPW Level No. Name Position Cell # Email 1 Hon. Joseph P. Todd DMA(M3)- 0776512150 josephptodd@yahoo.com Chair 2 Atty. B. Rancy Ziankahn Legal/MPW 0776056654 zbtompoe@yahoo.com 3 Sangai Hoff MPW 0886875560 Hoffss40@yahoo.com 4 Johnny Boakai PAP 0775149395 --- 5 Mary Tuwazama PAP 0886573210 --- 7.6 GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES The following procedures shall be followed while filing and processing complaints: • Grievance Register Book: A grievance register book shall be opened and kept in the office of each GRM committee. All grievances shall be registered upon the receipt of complaints from the aggrieved. The book shall have: i) case reference number, ii) the aggrieved name, iii) the date the case is received, iv) the date the case is resolved and, v) a remarks column. • Responsibility for Registering Complains: The Monitoring Consultant in the project area shall register in the Grievance Register Book all written complaints received. • Case Receipt: Within 24 hours of receiving complaints, the Monitoring Consultant shall issue a letter to the aggrieved acknowledging receipt of the case and providing a date when the case will be reviewed along with the venue. • Public Access to the book: The book shall be accessible to the public. • PAPs: All PAPs who have issues with their compensation and assistances are required to submit written complaints to the appropriate level of GRM. • Mediation meetings and outcomes will be recorded and kept in a safe places at each of the Grievance Redress Mechanism Committee’s locations. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 56 VIII- CHAPTER EIGHT: ORGANIZATIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES FOR RAP IMPLEMENTATION 8.1 INSTITUTIONAL AND IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS In order to ensure compliance with the Bank’s involuntary resettlement policy and the relevant Liberian legal provisions and policies, the following national level and departmental arrangements shall be used to connect and mobilize resources and capabilities of all relevant institutions who will be involved in the preparation and implementation of the 4-km urban road corridor RAP. Where necessary, Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) will be entered, as required, among or between the relevant institutions as conditions of effectiveness to make sure all non-project entities have agreed to play their respective roles in a timely manner, and if any costs are involved the necessary arrangements can be made. 8.2 INFRASTRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION UNIT (IIU) The IIU located at the MPW will execute project activities and will have an overall Project Coordinator who will be responsible for overall coordination and oversight of the project and consolidation of the information related to project implementation. The IIU will be responsible for executing the project’s day-to-day activities (including subproject screening and RAP implementation). Within the IIU, there will be Social Safeguards Officer assigned to the project under the responsibilities of the IIU. The Social Safeguards Officer in IIU will report to the Head of Engineering. As shown by the chart below, the IIU will have the following staff: i) project coordinator, ii) Social Safeguards Officer (s), iii) Environmental Officer, iv) Engineers, v) Procurement Officer. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 57 Figure 8. 1: IIU Organizational Chart 8.3 Role and Responsibilities of the Social Development Officers The Social Safeguard Officer who will be the staff of IIU will be part of and shall be embedded in the day-to-day implementation of the LIBRAMP. Under the supervision of the IIU Coordinator, he/she will be responsible for overseeing the overall preparation and implementation of social safeguard instruments as well as lead the broader social development works for LIBRAMP respective Components. Major responsibilities to be performed by the Social Safeguard/Social Officers includes managing all social development aspects, including (i) ensuring the highest standard of quality in social impact assessment and mitigation activities including screening of subprojects in accordance with the ESMF and this RPF, (ii) engagement of all stakeholders, (iii) project disclosure and outreach, (iv) grievance management, (v) implementing resettlement and compensation and livelihood restoration plans and measures and, (vi) providing intensive support to Consultants involved in resettlement studies or preparation and implementation of RAP, ESMPs, LMP, and SEP. Specific role and responsibilities of Social Safeguard/Social Officers are: • Ensuring that their respective Components are in full compliance with objectives and policy principle of OP 4.12 and other applicable policies, • Ensuring that sub-project design and site selection include all considerations and options to avoid and minimize land acquisition by the sub-projects, • Where it cannot be avoided, conduct a socioeconomic study targeting potential PAPs as well as carry out census surveys to: a) identify Project-affected Persons (PAPs) in the affected area, b) establish characteristics and typology of affected households, carry out consultations, d) provide information on vulnerable groups and people, e) determine the magnitude of potential losses – partial or full and, f) establish communication systems to Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 58 ensure a two way communication channel from PAPs to the LIBRAMP and from LIBRAMP to PAPs, • Ensuring that compensation and resettlement assistance cover all permanent or temporary physical and economic displacement resulting from land acquisition or restrictions on land use in connection with components 1 and 2 activities of the LIBRAMP, • Preparing, with the assistance of IIU engineers and consultants, Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs) and ensuring their clearances and disclosures, • Ensuring that funding for RAPs is made available and deposited in a special and separate account, and track and maintain compensation and resettlement assistance payments, • Ensuring prompt compensation and resettlement assistance payments to PAPs are made well ahead of civil work commencement, • Ensuring no civil works shall commence unless at least 95% of PAPs are fully paid their compensation and resettlement assistances and any missing actions are justified and integrated in a follow-up plan, • Monitoring and overseeing the performance GRCs, work on the broader social issues including ensuring that contractors’ workers are fully sensitized on HIV/AIDs, STDs, GBV/SEA and are in compliance with the Code of Conduct (CoC) they signed, • Prepare monthly and consolidated quarterly RAP implementation reports and social safeguards performance reports, 8.4 National level Institutional Arrangements The key organizations responsible for RAP implementation, their role and responsibilities are summarized below: i. Ministry of Public Work: The MPW is the executive agency and is responsible for ensuring the upgrading of the Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Road Corridor. Under the umbrella of the MPW, the IIU is responsible for coordinating and supervising the implementation of the RAP. ii. Ministry of Finance and Development Planning: The MFDP is responsible for providing safeguards for the project financial resources. Under the MFDP umbrella, the “RAP Pay Team�, under the supervision of the PFMU, is responsible for preparing compensation payments, for supervising compensation payments, and for ensuring period financial reporting. iii. Liberia Revenue Authority: This Agency is responsible for validating market values of affected properties that will be paid for by the Government; iv. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): is responsible for regulating the sustainable management of the environment and its natural resources, ensuring sound environmental management and establishing measures to avoid irreparable damage to the country’s natural resources. It establishes a legal framework for the sustainable development, management and protection of the environment. v. Local Authorities at various levels are responsible for: identifying legitimate project- affected property owners, providing clearance including affidavit of proof-of-ownership Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 59 to PAPs, and for helping to resolve conflicts related to ownership claims and compensation. 8.5 Paynesville Municipality The City of Paynesville is a Municipal Corporation existing, functioning and operating under the laws of the Republic Liberia, located outside Monrovia. The PCC is responsible to ensure clean and sanitary environmental. It is thus responsible for sanitation activities including the cleaning, collection and disposal of generated solid waste. The Paynesville Municipality in relation to the Supplementary RAP for the 4Km will identify and issue out attestations to affected structure owners and serve as a member on the GRC. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 60 IX- CHAPTER NINE: RAP IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE 9.1 OBJECTIVE OF THE RAP PREPARATION AND IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE The objective of the RAP preparation and implementation schedule is to ensure that all RAP- related activities are fully completed before commencement of component 1 civil works. As shown in Table 9.1 below, the entire RAP preparation and implementation activities are scheduled to be completed by late October 2020, after which component 1 4.0-km works civil works are expected to commence. Table 9. 1: Tentative Implementation Schedule Phase II July 1 – October 28, 2020 No. Activities W10 W11 W12 W13 W14 W15 W16 W17 W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 W6 W7 W8 W9 Public Service 1 Announcement/Disclosure Processing of payments 2 for PAPs 3 Entitlement Delivery Post RAP compensation 4 Audit PAPS relocation from 5 affected properties 6 Dispute resolution if any Demolition of affected 7 properties Site handover to 8 contractor Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 61 9 RAP Report preparing 9.2 IMPLEMENTATION PHASE Public Service Announcement/Disclosure: This activity is planned for early July 2020. Processing of payments for PAPs: This activity will be completed by late July 2020. Entitlement Delivery: This activity will be implemented commencing late August 2020, and Post RAP compensation Audit: scheduled to be completed by late mid-September 2020. PAPs’ Relocation from affected properties: is planned to commence late July 2020 and continue up to late October 2020. Completion of entitlement delivery and the outcome of post entitlement payment audit (mid-September 2020) will lead to the process of vacating PAPs and handing over the site to contracting entity late October 2020. Site Handover: Following the site vacating exercise which is scheduled to be completed by late October, site handover is expected to take place by the end of October 2020. Full compliance to OP 4.12, which requires that no civil works shall commence prior to making prompt payment to PAPs for affected structures, shall be observed. To ensure compliance to the policy requirement, all entitlements or compensation must be paid to PAPs by late August 2020 as stipulated in the entitlement delivery section of this RAP. The GoL has committed and agreed to follow on the implementation schedule shown in this section. As shown in the schedule, monitoring exercises shall be done throughout the RAP implementation phase. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 62 X- CHAPTER TEN: COST AND BUDGET 10.1 BUDGET The overall RAP budget is estimated at USD 3,027,595.89. As shown in Table 10.1 below, this amount is composed of: a) compensation for affected structures, ii) resettlement assistances and, iii) RAP implementation and other related costs. Of the total estimated budget, compensation represents 69 % of the budget while resettlement assistance represents 6 % and implementation and other related costs represents 25 % of the budget. The budget breakdown is shown in section 10.1. 10.2 ITEMS COVERED BY THE BUDGET The overall RAP implementation cost and budget is USD 3,027,595.89. As shown in Table 10.1 below, the amount includes the following items: • Private properties: USD 2,067,286.46. This compensation payment is to be made to PAPs for their affected properties at full replacement value. • Public properties: USD 26,254.30. This compensation payment is to be made to PAPs for their affected properties at full replacement value. • Business/Loss of income: USD 134,550.00.00. This compensation payment is to be made to PAPs whose businesses are affected along the 4.0 km. The compensation amount covers three months of net income loss for the transition period. • Tenants: USD 16,891.50. This compensation payment is to be made to PAPs who are tenants and affected by structure loss. The compensation amount covers three months of rental cost for the transition period. • Landlords: USD 16,891.50. This compensation payment is to be made to PAPs who are landlords and affected by structure loss. The compensation amount covers three months of rental revenue loss for the transition period. • Special assistance to vulnerable Groups: USD 13,200.00. This compensation payment is to be made to PAPs who are vulnerable. The compensation amount covers three months of rental cost, livening and other allowances. • List of properties affected as a result of road realignment is USD 360,123.88. This compensation payment is to be made to PAPs for their affected properties at full replacement value. • Safeguards training and sensitization for MPW staffs, GRM members and District authorities USD 60,000. • Post compensation payment of RAP audit allocation of USD 10,000. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 63 • Provision for RAP implementation USD 227,507.38. This amount represents 10% of the compensation cost which is earmarked for supporting RAP implementation related to supervision and GRMs activities. • Contingency allocation of USD 455,014.75. This amount represents 20% of the compensation cost which is earmarked for addressing unforeseen factors. Table 10. 1: The RAP Budget Direct Impacts Item N° Item USD COMPENSATION AND SPECIAL A ASSISTANCES: A.1 Private Properties before Realignment 1,707,162.58 A.2 Private Properties Due to Realignment 360,123.88 A.3 Public Properties 26,254.30 A.4 Business Loss of Income 134,550.00 A.5 Tenants 16,891.50 A.6 Landlords 16,891.50 A.7 Special Assistance to Vulnerable Groups 13,200.00 A Total (A1:A7) 2,275,073.76 Allocations for Social Safeguards Training and 60,000.00 B Sensitization Post RAP Compensation and Implementation 10,000.00 C Audit TOTAL RAP IMPLEMENTATION 227,507.38 D (Supervision and GRMs 10%) E CONTIGENCIES 20%* 455,014.75 GRAND TOTAL (A+B+C+D+E) 3,027,595.89 * This amount represents 20% of the compensation cost which is earmarked for addressing unforeseen factors such as price. The funding for the overall RAP is to be provided by GoL. The funds for this RAP will be deposited into special accounts two month ahead of civil works commencement. A separate special account for financing compensations and resettlement assistances shall be opened under the IIU/MPW’s name. All compensation and resettlement assistance payments will be made from the special account designated for implementing this RAP under the 4km of the urban road corridor. Disbursements for compensation and resettlement assistances shall be authorized by the PIU coordinator and will be channeled through existing payments processing and approval arrangements. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 64 The RAPs implementation costs related to Social Safeguards Staff salaries in IIU, supervision, monitoring, logistics and administrative, GRCs operating costs and, trainings will be covered by resources from the resettlement component. An estimate of USD297,507.38 is provided under items B, C and D in the budget table above and shall be adjusted to incorporate Social Safeguards Staff salaries as it may be required. Availability of qualified and competent Social Safeguards Staff(s) in PIU will be key requirement and is critical for ensuring full compliance to all social safeguards’ requirements. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 65 XI- CHAPTER ELEVEN: MONITORING AND EVALUATION Monitoring and Evaluation are key components of the RAP. The IIU is responsible for ensuring its implementation. 11.1 MONITORING While taking the lead responsibility, the IIU shall track the preparation and implementation of this RAP and shall closely monitor the following indicators (Table 11.1): Table 11. 1: RAP Monitoring Indicators No Monitoring Specific indicator Frequency . 1 Social and On the basis of pre project’s baseline survey, provide number Annual economic of PAPS: i) whose livelihoods have been restored to pre-project monitoring level, ii) whose livelihoods have improved beyond pre-project level, iii) whose livelihoods are worse than pre-project level. 2 Private Provide number of PAPs: i) whose livelihood have been restored to pre- Monthly structures project level, ii) whose livelihoods improved beyond pre-project level, iii) whose livelihood are worse than pre-project level 3 Public Provide number of PAPs: i) whose livelihoods have been restored to pre- Monthly Structures project level, ii) whose livelihoods have improved beyond pre-project level, iii) whose livelihoods are worse than pre-project level 4 Assistance to Track progress on: i) number of affected businesses that have resumed Monthly Businesses business operation, ii) number of businesses that have restored their net income to pre-project level, iii) number of businesses that have restored their net income beyond pre-project level, iv) number of affected businesses that have not resume operations. 5 Vulnerable Provide number of vulnerable PAPs: i) whose livelihoods have been Monthly Groups restored to pre-project level, ii) whose livelihoods have improved beyond pre-project level, iii) whose livelihoods are worse than pre- project level, iv) who have received assistance from the special package, v) who are sick and who benefited from health service in the project area, vi) number of disable friendly facilitates constructed by the project such as access ramp from main road to their living quarters or neighborhood, 6 Tenants Provide number of affected tenants: i) who have found new rental places, Monthly ii) who reported that the rental allowance is inadequate, iii) who showed satisfaction over their new rental places compared to the ones they occupied before the project, iv) number of tenants who have not yet found rental places. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 66 7 Grievances Track grievances and report: i) number of cases at each impact location, Monthly and grievance ii) the number of cases resolved, iii) number of cases pending, iv) management reasons for pending cases, v) frequency of GRMs meetings, vi) system description of compliance to GRM procedures 8 Post RAP On the basis of the census and entitlement matrix, the post RAP Compensation compensation payment audit exercise will verify and confirm: i) overall Payment Audit total number of PAPs paid full compensation on or before August 2019; ii) total number of private structure owners (PAPs) paid full compensation on or before August; iii) total number of public structures (fences and signboards) paid full compensation on or before August 2019; iv total number of business owners (loss of income/revenue) paid compensation on or before August 2019; v) total number of tenants paid three months’ rental assistance on or before August 2019; vi) total number of landlords paid three months’ rental losses on or before August 2019 vii) total number of vulnerable people paid full special assistance (3months rental, living and transitional allowances) on or before August 2019; viii) number of PAPs who are not paid full compensation on or before August 2019; ix) compensation cases disputed channeled to GRMs and status of each case; x) potential and actual residual social risks and proposed mitigation measures. 11.2 EVALUATION The evaluation exercise is aimed at ensuring that this RAP is fully implemented. The exercise shall provide feedback needed for adjusting plans and for taking corrective actions. The evaluation shall have the following specific activities: • General assessment of the implementation of resettlement activities under RAP; • Examination for compliance of the implementation of resettlement activities with national laws, regulations and the World Bank policy on involuntary resettlement; • Assessment of resettlement and compensation procedures as outlined in the RAP and OP4.12; • Evaluation of the impact of the resettlement and compensation programs on PAPs’ incomes and standard of living, with focus on the “no worse-off if not better-off� requirement; and • Identification of actions to be taken as part of the on-going monitoring exercises to improve RAP implementation, if any. While conducting the evaluation process, the project shall utilize: Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 67 • This RAP as its guiding instrument as well as the RPF; • The Liberian laws and regulations as described in Chapter Three; and • OP 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement, also described in Chapter Three. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 68 XII- CONCLUSION The project for which this RAP is being prepared is located in an urban area. Most PAPs are either resident within the project site, or are engaged in petty or more substantial business ventures. Although many have built structures within the RoW, which constitutes encroachment into government facilities, a combination of World Bank safeguards policies and Liberian laws dictate that project impact on these individuals is limited or eliminated altogether, wherever possible. In preparing this RAP, a full consideration of these guiding principles has been made. Activities leading up to and including the construction and maintenance phases, and even extending throughout the lifespan of the project, have been taken into account, and the various aspects of expected impacts have been projected and costed. The hierarchy of mitigation has been employed, with due consideration given to the various options: avoidance; mitigation and compensation. This is an existing road which is to be upgraded. While it is true that avoidance was not possible in most cases (because the road is an existing one, for which the original alignment has been adhered to as much as possible), there were several notable instances where the option of avoidance was employed. For example, the very crucial 36- inch water main which supplies potable water to the cities of Paynesville and Monrovia was avoided. Secondly, impact to the Paynesville Community School was reduced to the bare minimum. As a result of various exercises, all aimed at delineating the route, determining numbers and characteristics of Project-affected People, and compilation of this data into one consolidated table, a RAP Budget has been derived. The various components of this table comprise the RAP Budget, which is the tool to be used for the execution of the RAP. This estimated amount is USD 3,027,595.89. This RAP is instrumental in ensuring timely site handover to the Contractor for this project, in order that construction works can proceed. In order for this activity to be effected, the following activities must have been completed: full completion of entitlement delivery; a post-RAP payment audit; compensated PAPs must vacate the site in an orderly fashion. It is expected that the site will be handed over by late October 2020. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 69 ANNEXURE Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 70 ANNEX 1: PRIVATE PROPERTIES TO BE AFFECTED ALONG THE 4.0KM Previous Verification Current Verification Structure Name of Width/ Square/F Width/ Dimension Reappraise No. Code Principal Contact Category Kind of Structure Length Height t Rate Appraised Value Length Height Sqft Rate d Value Variance 1 SDC/CF-106CE Kenneth Odjugo PA 1 Storey concrete 31.00 25.50 790.50 30.00 23,715.00 31.00 25.50 790.50 60.00 47,430.00 23,715.00 2 SDC/CF-035C Raynold A. Mitchell PA 1-Storey Building 18.00 32.00 576.00 25.00 14,400.00 18.00 32.00 576.00 25.00 14,400.00 - SDC/CF-043B Emmanuel Bailey PA 1-Storey Building 5.00 31.25 156.25 30.00 4,687.50 28.67 31.25 895.94 70.00 62,715.63 58,028.13 3 SDC/CF-043B Emmanuel Bailey PA Fence with Galv. Pipe 46.83 4.00 187.32 5.00 936.60 46.83 4.00 187.32 5.00 936.60 - 4 SDC/CF-174 PA Basement 44.00 44.00 1,936.00 7.50 14,520.00 44.00 44.00 1,936.00 7.50 14,520.00 - 5 SDC/CF- B016 FA Bill Board 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 - 6 SDC/CF-B-016 FA Bill Board 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 - 7 SDC/CF-B-026 FA Bill Board 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 - 1,500.0 8 SDC/CF-B-027 FA Bill Board 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 1,500.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 - 9 SDC/CF-B-035 FA Bill Board 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 - 10 SDC/CF-B-040 FA Bill Board 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 - 11 SDC/CF-B-11A FA Bill Board 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 - 12 SDC/CF-B-172A FA Bill Board 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 (250.00) 13 SDC/CF-131 Sherlock B. Mahn PA Chain Link 137RF 7.00 959.00 2.50 2,397.50 137 7.00 959.00 3.50 3,356.50 959.00 14 SDC/CF-145 PA Chain Link 75.00 4.00 300.00 3.50 1,050.00 75.00 4.00 300.00 3.50 1,050.00 - 15 SDC/CF-146 PA Chain Link 113.00 4.00 452.00 3.50 1,582.00 113.00 4.00 452.00 3.50 1,582.00 - 16 SDC/CF-034SA FA Concrete 36.00 13.00 468.00 10.00 4,680.00 36.00 13.00 468.00 10.00 4,680.00 - 17 SDC/CF-034SB FA Concrete 36.00 11.00 396.00 10.00 3,960.00 36.00 11.00 396.00 12.00 4,752.00 792.00 18 SDC/CF-036 FA Concrete 16.50 73.00 1,204.50 10.00 12,045.00 16.50 73.00 1,204.50 10.00 12,045.00 - 19 SDC/CF-041C Jamal Jallah FA Concrete 6.25 12.00 75.00 10.00 750.00 6.25 12.00 75.00 10.00 750.00 - Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 71 20 SDC/CF-045B FA Concrete 15.00 16.50 247.50 10.00 2,475.00 15.00 16.50 247.50 10.00 2,475.00 - Emmanuel N. Okafor/Christian 21 SDC/CF-046 Ubah FA Concrete 11.00 22.50 247.50 10.00 2,475.00 11.00 22.50 247.50 10.00 2,475.00 - 22 SDC/CF-046A Chukwuma T. Mbah FA Concrete 15.00 22.50 337.50 10.00 3,375.00 15.00 22.50 337.50 10.00 3,375.00 - 23 SDC/CF-047A FA Concrete 18.00 20.00 360.00 10.00 3,600.00 18.00 20.00 360.00 15.00 5,400.00 1,800.00 24 SDC/CF-047B FA Concrete 8.00 20.00 160.00 10.00 1,600.00 8.00 20.00 160.00 15.00 2,400.00 800.00 25 SDC/CF-049 Philip B. Nathan FA Concrete 26.00 14.00 364.00 10.00 3,640.00 26.00 14.00 364.00 15.00 5,460.00 1,820.00 26 SDC/CF-050 Philip B. Nathan FA Concrete 42.00 12.50 525.00 10.00 5,250.00 42.00 12.50 525.00 15.00 7,875.00 2,625.00 SDC/CF-051A Belinda S. Yahwon FA Concrete 18.00 11.00 198.00 10.00 1,980.00 18.00 11.00 198.00 15.00 2,970.00 990.00 27 SDC/CF-051A Belinda S. Yahwon PA Concrete 16.83 8.00 134.64 10.00 1,346.40 16.83 8.00 134.64 15.00 2,019.60 673.20 28 SDC/CF-051B Belinda S. Yahwon PA Concrete 14.00 25.00 350.00 10.00 3,500.00 14.00 25.00 350.00 10.00 3,500.00 - 29 SDC/CF-052 Cecilia S. Nepe FA Concrete 53.00 56.00 2,968.00 10.00 29,680.00 53.00 56.00 2,968.00 15.00 44,520.00 14,840.00 30 SDC/CF-054 J. Thomas Beyan FA Concrete 50.00 58.50 2,925.00 20.00 58,500.00 50.00 58.50 2,925.00 20.00 58,500.00 - 31 SDC/CF-055 Bernice Smith Fiske FA Concrete 26.25 45.00 1,181.25 15.00 17,718.75 26.25 45.00 1,181.25 15.00 17,718.75 - 32 SDC/CF-056 Matu Lloyd FA Concrete 50.00 15.00 750.00 10.00 7,500.00 50.00 15.00 750.00 10.00 7,500.00 - Shem Diaseth Tartu/Sameria SDC/CF-062A Nyemah FA Concrete 26.00 15.50 403.00 15.00 6,045.00 26.00 15.50 403.00 20.00 8,060.00 2,015.00 33 Shem Diaseth Tartu/Sameria SDC/CF-062A Nyemah FA Shelter 15.50 15.00 232.50 2.00 465.00 15.50 15.00 232.50 3.50 813.75 348.75 Shem Diaseth Tartu/Samuel B. 34 SDC/CF-062B Briggs FA Concrete 26.00 15.50 403.00 15.00 6,045.00 26.00 15.50 403.00 20.00 8,060.00 2,015.00 35 SDC/CF-063 Daniel S. Brewer FA Concrete 23.00 15.83 364.09 10.00 3,640.90 23.00 15.83 364.09 10.00 3,640.90 - 36 SDC/CF-064 FA Concrete 18.50 9.67 178.90 10.00 1,788.95 18.50 9.67 178.90 10.00 1,788.95 - Fato A. 37 SDC/CF-065 Wheremonger FA Concrete 33.00 48.25 1,592.25 15.00 23,883.75 44.33 48.25 2,138.92 20.00 42,778.45 18,894.70 38 SDC/CF-067A FA Concrete 33.00 24.00 792.00 10.00 7,920.00 17.00 43.83 745.11 15.00 11,176.65 3,256.65 K-Mohammed 39 SDC/CF-067B Sheriff PA Concrete 20.00 32.33 646.60 10.00 6,466.00 20.00 32.33 646.60 15.00 9,699.00 3,233.00 Henry Teah 40 SDC/CF-068 Sherman PA Concrete 22.00 18.50 407.00 10.00 4,070.00 22.00 18.50 407.00 15.00 6,105.00 2,035.00 Henry Teah Sherman/Martha F. Korpu 41 SDC/CF-069 /Abu A. Kamara PA Concrete 19.00 14.00 266.00 15.00 3,990.00 19.00 14.00 266.00 20.00 5,320.00 1,330.00 42 SDC/CF-073A FA Concrete 14.00 25.00 350.00 10.00 3,500.00 14.00 25.00 350.00 10.00 3,500.00 - Amos Cole / Shirley 43 SDC/CF-075 A. Dennis Sonah FA Concrete 19.00 20.50 389.50 10.00 3,895.00 19.00 20.50 389.50 10.00 3,895.00 - Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 72 Jenebah M. L. F. 44 SDC/CF-077A Yeebahn FA Concrete 21.25 20.00 425.00 10.00 4,250.00 21.25 20.00 425.00 10.00 4,250.00 - 45 SDC/CF-078F Weeks Thomas FA Concrete 10.00 12.00 120.00 10.00 1,200.00 10.00 12.00 120.00 10.00 1,200.00 - 46 SDC/CF-080A Etta M. Snorton FA Concrete 21.00 16.00 336.00 10.00 3,360.00 21.00 16.00 336.00 15.00 5,040.00 1,680.00 47 SDC/CF-080B Etta M. Snorton FA Concrete 29.00 31.00 899.00 15.00 13,485.00 29.00 31.00 899.00 15.00 13,485.00 - 48 SDC/CF-080E Etta M. Snorton FA Concrete 22.00 14.00 308.00 15.00 4,620.00 22.00 14.00 308.00 20.00 6,160.00 1,540.00 Kanda Golafale, 49 SDC/CF-080F II/Etta M. Snorton PA Concrete 22.00 15.00 330.00 15.00 4,950.00 22.00 15.00 330.00 20.00 6,600.00 1,650.00 50 SDC/CF-081 Jonathan Morris FA Concrete 16.00 27.00 432.00 15.00 6,480.00 16.00 27.00 432.00 15.00 6,480.00 - 51 SDC/CF-082 PA Concrete 41.50 26.00 1,079.00 15.00 16,185.00 41.50 26.00 1,079.00 20.00 21,580.00 5,395.00 52 SDC/CF-085 FA Concrete 25.50 14.83 378.17 15.00 5,672.48 25.50 14.83 378.17 15.00 5,672.48 - Soulemane Dialo/Mohammed 53 SDC/CF-085A Sheriff PA Concrete 21.00 17.00 357.00 15.00 5,355.00 21.00 17.00 357.00 15.00 5,355.00 - 54 SDC/CF-085B Mohammed Sheriff PA Concrete 20.00 20.00 400.00 15.00 6,000.00 20.00 20.00 400.00 20.00 8,000.00 2,000.00 55 SDC/CF-095 FA Concrete 20.00 38.00 760.00 10.00 7,600.00 20.00 38.00 760.00 15.00 11,400.00 3,800.00 56 SDC/CF-095A Daether Mulbah PA Concrete 16.00 16.00 256.00 10.00 2,560.00 16.00 16.00 256.00 15.00 3,840.00 1,280.00 SDC/CF-100A Louise Edna Carter PA Concrete 17.25 72.00 1,242.00 10.00 12,420.00 17.25 72.00 1,242.00 10.00 12,420.00 - 57 SDC/CF-100A Louise Edna Carter FA Pavement 19.00 48.00 912.00 1.50 1,368.00 19.00 48.00 912.00 1.50 1,368.00 - 58 SDC/CF-100C Louise Edna Carter FA Concrete 26.00 29.00 754.00 15.00 11,310.00 26.00 29.00 754.00 15.00 11,310.00 - 59 SDC/CF-102A David T. Sumo FA Concrete 8.00 14.00 112.00 10.00 1,120.00 8.00 14.00 112.00 15.00 1,680.00 560.00 60 SDC/CF-102B Theresa David FA Concrete 20.00 17.00 340.00 7.50 2,550.00 20.00 17.00 340.00 7.50 2,550.00 - Kenneh Omo Odjugo/Alfred G. 61 SDC/CF-103A Saye FA Concrete 22.00 33.00 726.00 10.00 7,260.00 22.00 33.00 726.00 10.00 7,260.00 - 62 SDC/CF-105 FA Concrete 75.00 46.50 3,487.50 10.00 34,875.00 75.00 46.50 3,487.50 10.00 34,875.00 - 63 SDC/CF-105D FA Concrete 41.00 50.00 2,050.00 15.00 30,750.00 41.00 50.00 2,050.00 15.00 30,750.00 - Eddie Kojo Ledlum/Moses S. 64 SDC/CF-106A Korvah FA Concrete 36.00 22.00 792.00 10.00 7,920.00 36.00 22.00 792.00 15.00 11,880.00 3,960.00 65 SDC/CF-106BA Eddie Kojo Ledlum FA Concrete 9.00 13.00 117.00 10.00 1,170.00 9.00 13.00 117.00 15.00 1,755.00 585.00 66 SDC/CF-106BB Eddie Kojo Ledlum FA Concrete 24.50 40.00 980.00 10.00 9,800.00 24.50 40.00 980.00 15.00 14,700.00 4,900.00 67 SDC/CF-106BC Eddie Kojo Ledlum FA Concrete 11.00 13.00 143.00 10.00 1,430.00 11.00 13.00 143.00 20.00 2,860.00 1,430.00 68 SDC/CF-106CB PA Concrete 15.00 27.00 405.00 10.00 4,050.00 15.00 27.00 405.00 15.00 6,075.00 2,025.00 69 SDC/CF-106EA Evelyn B. Smith FA Concrete 30.00 32.00 960.00 15.00 14,400.00 30.00 32.00 960.00 15.00 14,400.00 - 70 SDC/CF-107DB Mack A. Kollie FA Concrete 23.00 13.00 299.00 10.00 2,990.00 23.00 13.00 299.00 10.00 2,990.00 - Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 73 Jefferson K. Dolo/Mack A. 71 SDC/CF-107DD Kollie,II FA Concrete 27.00 16.00 432.00 10.00 4,320.00 27.00 16.00 432.00 10.00 4,320.00 - 72 SDC/CF-107G FA Concrete 27.00 23.00 621.00 10.00 6,210.00 27.00 23.00 621.00 10.00 6,210.00 - 73 SDC/CF-107I Wilba J. Giddings FA Concrete 42.00 28.83 1,210.86 15.00 18,162.90 42.00 28.83 1,210.86 20.00 24,217.20 6,054.30 Cornelius A. 74 SDC/CF-107J Porte/Aaliyah Harris FA Concrete 10.00 14.50 145.00 10.00 1,450.00 10.00 14.50 145.00 10.00 1,450.00 - Cornelius A. Porte/Lucy Daiwoo 75 SDC/CF-107JA Clinton FA Concrete 19.50 11.00 214.50 10.00 2,145.00 19.50 11.00 214.50 10.00 2,145.00 - Nyenekon B. Snoh 76 SDC/CF-107JB Barcon FA Concrete 29.00 20.00 580.00 10.00 5,800.00 29.00 20.00 580.00 10.00 5,800.00 - 77 SDC/CF-107JC Cornelius A. Porte FA Concrete 19.50 11.00 214.50 10.00 2,145.00 19.50 11.00 214.50 10.00 2,145.00 - 78 SDC/CF-107JD Cornelius A. Porte FA Concrete 15.00 9.00 135.00 10.00 1,350.00 15.00 9.00 135.00 10.00 1,350.00 - 79 SDC/CF-107JE Cornelius A. Porte FA Concrete 19.50 16.00 312.00 10.00 3,120.00 19.50 16.00 312.00 10.00 3,120.00 - 80 SDC/CF-107JF Cornelius A. Porte FA Concrete 35.00 18.00 630.00 7.00 4,410.00 35.00 18.00 630.00 7.00 4,410.00 - 81 SDC/CF-108 FA Concrete 24.50 40.00 980.00 10.00 9,800.00 24.50 40.00 980.00 10.00 9,800.00 - Feredica F. 82 SDC/CF-108A Gibson/Zaza Pewee FA Concrete 47.00 19.00 893.00 15.00 13,395.00 47.00 19.00 893.00 15.00 13,395.00 - 83 SDC/CF-108B Nehemiah T. Sylain FA Concrete 32.00 19.00 608.00 15.00 9,120.00 32.00 19.00 608.00 15.00 9,120.00 - 84 SDC/CF-109 Nehemiah T. Sylain FA Concrete 38.00 35.00 1,330.00 15.00 19,950.00 38.00 35.00 1,330.00 25.00 33,250.00 13,300.00 85 SDC/CF-110A Melvina J. Oliver PA Concrete 25.00 47.00 1,175.00 10.00 11,750.00 25.00 47.00 1,175.00 20.00 23,500.00 11,750.00 86 SDC/CF-111 PA Concrete 16.00 21.00 336.00 10.00 3,360.00 16.00 21.00 336.00 15.00 5,040.00 1,680.00 87 SDC/CF-112 Jacob S. Stewart FA Concrete 23.50 18.00 423.00 10.00 4,230.00 23.50 18.00 423.00 25.00 10,575.00 6,345.00 88 SDC/CF-112A Jacob S. Stewart FA Concrete 24.5 12.25 300.13 10.00 3,001.25 24.5 12.25 300.13 25.00 7,503.13 4,501.88 89 SDC/CF-112B Jacob S. Stewart FA Concrete 24.5 10 245 10.00 2,450.00 24.5 10 245 15.00 3,675.00 1,225.00 SDC/CF-114A FA Concrete 19.00 26.91 511.29 10.00 5,112.90 19.00 26.91 511.29 10.00 5,112.90 - 90 SDC/CF-114A PA Fence 112.00 6.00 672.00 5.00 3,360.00 112.00 6.00 672.00 5.00 3,360.00 - SDC/CF-118B FA Concrete 10.83 12.17 131.80 15.00 1,977.02 10.83 12.17 131.80 15.00 1,977.02 - 91 SDC/CF-118B PA Chain Link 158.67 7.00 1,110.69 3.50 3,887.42 158.67 7.00 1,110.69 3.50 3,887.42 - 92 SDC/CF-119B PA Concrete 30.00 14.00 420.00 10.00 4,200.00 30.00 14.00 420.00 10.00 4,200.00 - 93 SDC/CF-122 PA Concrete 33.25 17.67 587.53 15.00 8,812.91 33.25 17.67 587.53 15.00 8,812.91 - 94 SDC/CF-127 Maude C. Smith FA Concrete 21.00 45.41 953.61 12.00 11,443.32 21.00 45.41 953.61 12.00 11,443.32 - 95 SDC/CF-128 Christopher Swaray FA Concrete 11.83 16.83 199.10 10.00 1,990.99 11.83 16.83 199.10 10.00 1,990.99 - 96 SDC/CF-132A FA Concrete 23.00 25.00 575.00 15.00 8,625.00 23.00 25.00 575.00 15.00 8,625.00 - 97 SDC/CF-133A J. Francis Borley FA Concrete 11.00 21.50 236.50 15.00 3,547.50 11.00 21.50 236.50 15.00 3,547.50 - Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 74 98 SDC/CF-137B PA Concrete 7.60 14.00 106.40 10.00 1,064.00 7.60 14.00 106.40 10.00 1,064.00 - Emmanuel 99 SDC/CF-142 Gonwokay PA Concrete 22.41 20.00 448.20 10.00 4,482.00 37.00 22.60 836.20 10.00 8,362.00 3,880.00 100 SDC/CF-151 Juwof D. Corlon FA Concrete 17.5 60 1050 10.00 10,500.00 17.5 60 1050 10.00 10,500.00 - 101 SDC/CF-169 FA Concrete 14.00 16.83 235.62 10.00 2,356.20 14.00 16.83 235.62 10.00 2,356.20 - 102 SDC/CF-169A FA Concrete 13.00 15.00 195.00 10.00 1,950.00 13.00 15.00 195.00 10.00 1,950.00 - 103 SDC/CF-170 FA Concrete 21.00 8.00 168.00 10.00 1,680.00 21.00 8.00 168.00 10.00 1,680.00 - 104 SDC/CF-170A FA Concrete 21.00 10.00 210.00 10.00 2,100.00 21.00 10.00 210.00 10.00 2,100.00 - 105 SDC/CF-171 FA Concrete 13.00 12.00 156.00 10.00 1,560.00 13.00 12.00 156.00 10.00 1,560.00 - 106 SDC/CF-171D FA Concrete 15.00 8.83 132.45 10.00 1,324.50 15.00 8.83 132.45 10.00 1,324.50 - 107 SDC/CF-173A FA Concrete 14.00 25.00 350.00 10.00 3,500.00 14.00 25.00 350.00 10.00 3,500.00 - 108 SDC/CF-178A FA Concrete 22.00 12.00 264.00 15.00 3,960.00 22.00 12.00 264.00 15.00 3,960.00 - 109 SDC/CF-41A P.A.'s Rib House PA Concrete 9.00 59.50 535.50 25.00 13,387.50 9.00 59.50 535.50 30.00 16,065.00 2,677.50 110 SDC/CF-45A FA Concrete 13.00 10.00 130.00 10.00 1,300.00 13.00 10.00 130.00 10.00 1,300.00 - 111 SDC/CF-47A FA Concrete 9.00 18.00 162.00 10.00 1,620.00 9.00 18.00 162.00 10.00 1,620.00 - Alexander Konkai 112 SDC/CF-103 Freeman PA Concrete Porch Slab 26.00 8.00 208.00 20.00 4,160.00 26.00 8.00 208.00 20.00 4,160.00 - 113 SDC/CF-053 PA Concrete Slab 8.00 39.00 312.00 20.00 6,240.00 8.00 39.00 312.00 20.00 6,240.00 - 114 SDC/CF-106CA Kenneth Odjugo PA Concrete Slab 31.00 25.00 775.00 35.00 27,125.00 31.00 25.00 775.00 35.00 27,125.00 - Angela Caroline SDC/CF-033A Edmonia Butler PA Concrete with Slab 11.00 59.00 649.00 35.00 22,715.00 11.00 59.00 649.00 35.00 22,715.00 - 115 Angela Caroline SDC/CF-033A Edmonia Butler FA Fence 13.00 35.33 459.29 2.00 918.58 13.00 35.33 459.29 2.00 918.58 - 116 SDC/CF-034D FA Concrete with Slab 30.75 30.17 927.73 25.00 23,193.19 30.75 30.17 927.73 25.00 23,193.19 - Precious Eugenia 117 SDC/CF-041A Andrews PA Concrete with Slab 9.00 59.50 535.50 30.00 16,065.00 9.00 59.50 535.50 30.00 16,065.00 - 118 SDC/CF-044 Cecelia Mensah FA Concrete with Slab 36.00 27.00 972.00 30.00 29,160.00 36.00 27.00 972.00 30.00 29,160.00 - 119 SDC/CF-100B Louise Edna Carter PA Concrete with Slab 17.25 45.00 776.25 20.00 15,525.00 17.25 45.00 776.25 20.00 15,525.00 - 120 SDC/CF-107JG Sonie Kolu Chedid FA Concrete with Slab 41.00 59.00 2,419.00 25.00 60,475.00 41.00 59.00 2,419.00 30.00 72,570.00 12,095.00 SDC/CF-143A FA Concrete with Slab 16.00 9.75 156.00 30.00 4,680.00 16.00 9.75 156.00 30.00 4,680.00 - 121 SDC/CF-143A PA Fence with grill 356.00 9.00 3,204.00 5.00 16,020.00 356.00 9.00 3,204.00 5.00 16,020.00 - SDC/CF-152 FA Concrete with Slab 6.00 80.41 482.46 30.00 14,473.80 19.00 80.41 1,527.79 30.00 45,833.70 31,359.90 122 SDC/CF-152 FA Shelter 5.00 80.41 402.05 2.00 804.10 5.00 80.41 402.05 3.50 1,407.18 603.08 SDC/CF-163 FA Concrete with Slab 21.00 54.67 1,148.07 25.00 28,701.75 21.00 54.67 1,148.07 25.00 28,701.75 - 123 SDC/CF-163 FA Shelter 54.67 12.00 656.04 2.00 1,312.08 54.67 14.00 765.38 3.50 2,678.83 1,366.75 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 75 124 SDC/CF-175 PA Concrete with Slab 8.00 10.00 80.00 25.00 2,000.00 8.00 10.00 80.00 25.00 2,000.00 - 125 SDC/CF-176 FA Concrete with Slab 10.00 13.83 138.30 25.00 3,457.50 10.00 13.83 138.30 25.00 3,457.50 - 126 SDC/CF-084 Weeks Thomas FA Concrete/Mudbricks 8.00 15.00 120.00 15.00 1,800.00 8.00 15.00 120.00 15.00 1,800.00 - Christopher E. 127 SDC/CF-092 Maximore, Sr. FA Concrete/Mudbricks 16.00 22.00 352.00 8.00 2,816.00 16.00 22.00 352.00 8.00 2,816.00 - 128 SDC/CF-048 Mohammed Konneh FA Concrete/Shelter 15.75 15.75 248.06 5.00 1,240.31 15.75 15.75 248.06 5.00 1,240.31 - 129 SDC/CF- C-003 William Reeves FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 - 130 SDC/CF- C-007 Prince M. Chiewolo FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 131 SDC/CF- C-134 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 132 SDC/CF-C 54A FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 133 SDC/CF-C-001 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 350.00 350.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 350.00 350.00 - 134 SDC/CF-C-002 William Reeves FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 135 SDC/CF-C-002A FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 136 SDC/CF-C-002B FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 137 SDC/CF-C-002C FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 138 SDC/CF-C-002D FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 - 139 SDC/CF-C-004 Bettina Mulbah FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 - 140 SDC/CF-C-005 Tina D. George FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 141 SDC/CF-C-006 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 142 SDC/CF-C-008 Maconee James FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 143 SDC/CF-C-009 Cecelia Kamara FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 144 SDC/CF-C-010 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 145 SDC/CF-C-011 Aro Olubunmi O. FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 146 SDC/CF-C-012 Aro Olubunmi O. FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 147 SDC/CF-C-013 Elaine Cox FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 (100.00) 148 SDC/CF-C-014 Rebecca Paye FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 149 SDC/CF-C-015 Alice Wee FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - Fabian S. 150 SDC/CF-C-016 Okeanyanwu FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 151 SDC/CF-C-017 Ansu Kamara FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 152 SDC/CF-C-018 Korpo Flomo FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 153 SDC/CF-C-019 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 76 154 SDC/CF-C-020 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 155 SDC/CF-C-021 Divis S. Tulay FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 156 SDC/CF-C-022 Hawa Siaway FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 157 SDC/CF-C-023 Fatumata Fofana FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 158 SDC/CF-C-024 Sarah Markai FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 159 SDC/CF-C-025 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 160 SDC/CF-C-026 Elizabeth J. Weay FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 161 SDC/CF-C-027 Sarah Markai FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 162 SDC/CF-C-028 Irene Jallah FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 163 SDC/CF-C-029 Irene Jallah FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 164 SDC/CF-C-030 Irene Jallah FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 165 SDC/CF-C-031 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 166 SDC/CF-C-032 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 167 SDC/CF-C-033 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 168 SDC/CF-C-034 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 169 SDC/CF-C-035 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 170 SDC/CF-C-036 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 171 SDC/CF-C-037 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 172 SDC/CF-C-038 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 173 SDC/CF-C-039 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 174 SDC/CF-C-040 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 175 SDC/CF-C-041 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 176 SDC/CF-C-042 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 177 SDC/CF-C-043 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 350.00 350.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 350.00 350.00 - 178 SDC/CF-C-044 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 179 SDC/CF-C-046 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - Mohammed S. 180 SDC/CF-C-047 Konneh FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 181 SDC/CF-C-048 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 182 SDC/CF-C-049 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 183 SDC/CF-C-050 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 77 184 SDC/CF-C-050A FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 185 SDC/CF-C-050B FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 186 SDC/CF-C-051 Alvina Roberts FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 187 SDC/CF-C-052 Mai Oldlady Siaway FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 188 SDC/CF-C-053 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 189 SDC/CF-C-054 John Okpala FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 190 SDC/CF-C-055 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 191 SDC/CF-C-056 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 192 SDC/CF-C-057 Nimely Farleh FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 193 SDC/CF-C-058 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 194 SDC/CF-C-059 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 195 SDC/CF-C-060 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 196 SDC/CF-C-061 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 197 SDC/CF-C-062 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 198 SDC/CF-C-063 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 - 199 SDC/CF-C-064 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 200 SDC/CF-C-065 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 201 SDC/CF-C-066 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 202 SDC/CF-C-067 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 203 SDC/CF-C-068 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 204 SDC/CF-C-069 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 205 SDC/CF-C-070 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 206 SDC/CF-C-071 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 207 SDC/CF-C-072 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 208 SDC/CF-C-073 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 209 SDC/CF-C-074 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 210 SDC/CF-C-075 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 211 SDC/CF-C-076 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 212 SDC/CF-C-077 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 - 213 SDC/CF-C-078 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 - Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 78 214 SDC/CF-C-079 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 215 SDC/CF-C-081C FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 216 SDC/CF-C-100D FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - Yatta James/Mack 217 SDC/CF-C-107A A. Kollie, II FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 218 SDC/CF-C-117C FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 219 SDC/CF-C-131B FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 150.00 150.00 - 220 SDC/CF-C-170B FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 221 SDC/CF-C-170C FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 222 SDC/CF-C-54A FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - 223 SDC/CF-031 PA Fence 99.00 4.00 396.00 7.50 2,970.00 99.00 4.00 396.00 7.50 2,970.00 - Precious Eugenia 224 SDC/CF-041 Andrews PA Fence 145.00 7.00 1,015.00 5.00 5,075.00 145.00 7.00 1,015.00 5.00 5,075.00 - 225 SDC/CF-058 Sonia H. Borrough PA Fence 144.00 6.00 864.00 5.00 4,320.00 144.00 6.00 864.00 5.00 4,320.00 - 226 SDC/CF-095B Daether Mulbah PA Fence 56.00 16.00 896.00 5.00 4,480.00 56.00 16.00 896.00 5.00 4,480.00 - 227 SDC/CF-097 PA Fence 46.00 4.00 184.00 5.00 920.00 46.00 4.00 184.00 5.00 920.00 - 228 SDC/CF-098 J. Francis Borley PA Fence 58.00 9.00 522.00 7.50 3,915.00 58.00 9.00 522.00 7.50 3,915.00 - 229 SDC/CF-102 George M. Lahun PA Fence 282.00 5.00 1,410.00 7.50 10,575.00 282.00 5.00 1,423010.00 7.50 10,575.00 - 230 SDC/CF-107 James Goffa PA Fence 35.00 7.00 245.00 5.00 1,225.00 35.00 7.00 245.00 5.00 1,225.00 - 231 SDC/CF-110B Melvina J. Oliver PA Fence 25.00 5.00 125.00 5.00 625.00 25.00 5.00 125.00 5.00 625.00 - 232 SDC/CF-139 PA Fence 47.00 5.00 235.00 7.50 1,762.50 47.00 5.00 235.00 7.50 1,762.50 - 234 SDC/CF-147 PA Fence 52.00 5.00 260.00 5.00 1,300.00 52.00 5.00 260.00 5.00 1,300.00 - SDC/CF-149 Jartu Dixon PA Fence 219.00 3.00 657.00 3.50 2,299.50 219.00 3.00 657.00 3.50 2,299.50 - 235 SDC/CF-149 Jartu Dixon FA Summer Hut 12.00 12.00 144.00 3.50 504.00 12.00 12.00 144.00 3.50 504.00 - SDC/CF-149A Melisa Emeh PA Fence 129.00 5.00 645.00 5.00 3,225.00 129.00 5.00 645.00 5.00 3,225.00 - 236 SDC/CF-149A Melisa Emeh PA Concrete 6.00 7.58 45.48 15.00 682.20 6.00 7.58 45.48 15.00 682.20 - 237 SDC/CF-150 Melisa Emeh PA Fence 156.00 5.00 780.00 5.00 3,900.00 156.00 5.00 780.00 5.00 3,900.00 - 238 SDC/CF-154 PA Fence 76.00 4.00 304.00 5.00 1,520.00 76.00 4.00 304.00 5.00 1,520.00 - SDC/CF-158 Mator Reeves PA Fence 230.00 5.00 1,150.00 5.00 5,750.00 230.00 5.00 1,150.00 5.00 5,750.00 - 239 SDC/CF-158 Mator Reeves FA Concrete, gutted by fire 12.00 18.00 216.00 5.00 1,080.00 12.00 18.00 216.00 5.00 1,080.00 - 240 SDC/CF-34V PA Fence 167.00 6.00 1,002.00 5.00 5,010.00 167.00 6.00 1,002.00 5.00 5,010.00 - Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 79 241 SDC/CF-41B PA Fence 80.00 7.00 560.00 5.00 2,800.00 80.00 7.00 560.00 5.00 2,800.00 - 242 SDC/CF-093 Miata Beslow PA Fence 196.00 7.00 1,372.00 5.00 6,860.00 196.00 7.00 1,372.00 5.00 6,860.00 - 243 SDC/CF-114B PA Fence 196.00 7.00 1,372.00 5.00 6,860.00 196.00 7.00 1,372.00 5.00 6,860.00 - Fence with 2" Galv. 244 SDC/CF-140 PA Pipe Chain Link 75.00 4.00 300.00 5.00 1,500.00 75.00 4.00 300.00 5.00 1,500.00 - SDC/CF-094 PA Fence with concentrina 226.00 7.00 1,582.00 5.00 7,910.00 226.00 7.00 1,582.00 5.00 7,910.00 - 245 SDC/CF-094 FA Water towel 10.00 10.00 100.00 30.00 3,000.00 10.00 10.00 100.00 30.00 3,000.00 - 246 SDC/CF-31 PA Fence with Galv Pipe 70.00 5.00 350.00 7.50 2,625.00 70.00 5.00 350.00 7.50 2,625.00 - 247 SDC/CF-32 PA Fence with Galv Pipe 70.00 5.00 350.00 7.50 2,625.00 70.00 5.00 350.00 7.50 2,625.00 - Amandeep Sharma/Lokesh 248 SDC/CF-034K Lalwani PA Fence with Grill 383.00 5.00 1,915.00 5.00 9,575.00 383.00 5.00 1,915.00 5.00 9,575.00 - 249 SDC/CF-035B Raynold A. Mitchell PA Fence with grill 120.00 4.00 480.00 5.00 2,400.00 120.00 4.00 480.00 5.00 2,400.00 - SDC/CF-042A PA Fence with Grill 54 RF 5.00 270.00 5.00 1,350.00 54 RF 5.00 270.00 5.00 1,350.00 - 250 SDC/CF-042A PA Pavement - - - 1.50 - 136.00 60.00 8,160.00 1.50 12,240.00 12,240.00 SDC/CF-086 Marthaline Mathis PA Fence with pavement 70 RF 5.00 350.00 5.00 1,750.00 70 RF 5.00 350.00 5.00 1,750.00 - 251 SDC/CF-086 Marthaline Mathis Concrete with Slab 40.00 15.00 600.00 20.00 12,000.00 40.00 15.00 600.00 5.00 3,000.00 (9,000.00) 252 SDC/CF-B 017 FA Momument L/S L/S L/S 150.00 150.00 L/S L/S L/S 150.00 150.00 - 253 SDC/CF-B 018 FA Momument L/S L/S L/S 200.00 200.00 L/S L/S L/S 200.00 200.00 - 254 SDC/CF-066 Authur Togbah FA Mudbricks 23.00 20.00 460.00 8.00 3,680.00 23.00 20.00 460.00 8.00 3,680.00 - 255 SDC/CF-072 FA Mudbricks 14.00 18.00 252.00 3.00 756.00 14.00 18.00 252.00 3.00 756.00 - 256 SDC/CF-073B FA Mudbricks 16.00 30.00 480.00 8.00 3,840.00 16.00 30.00 480.00 8.00 3,840.00 - 257 SDC/CF-077B Safiatu James FA Mudbricks 14.00 12.50 175.00 8.00 1,400.00 14.00 12.50 175.00 8.00 1,400.00 - 258 SDC/CF-100D FA Mudbricks 42.00 20.00 840.00 8.00 6,720.00 42.00 20.00 840.00 8.00 6,720.00 - SDC/CF-123 FA Mudbricks 22.00 12.17 267.74 8.00 2,141.92 22.00 12.17 267.74 8.00 2,141.92 - 259 SDC/CF-123 FA Shelter - - - 3.50 - 25.00 15.00 375.00 3.50 1,312.50 1,312.50 260 SDC/CF-124 Paulita M. Coleman FA Mudbricks 41.75 14.00 584.50 8.00 4,676.00 41.75 14.00 584.50 8.00 4,676.00 - Paulita M. Coleman/Maude S. 261 SDC/CF-125 Smith FA Mudbricks 41.75 16.33 681.78 8.00 5,454.22 41.75 16.33 681.78 8.00 5,454.22 - 262 SDC/CF-126 Maude C. Smith PA Mudbricks 20.41 41.00 836.81 8.00 6,694.48 20.41 41.00 836.81 8.00 6,694.48 - 263 SDC/CF-133 Joseph Dougbeh FA Mudbricks 24.00 14.00 336.00 8.00 2,688.00 24.00 14.00 336.00 8.00 2,688.00 - Amandeep Sharma/Paynesville 264 SDC/CF-034 City Corp. PA Pavement 109.00 36.00 3,924.00 1.50 5,886.00 109.00 36.00 3,924.00 1.50 5,886.00 - Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 80 265 SDC/CF-034V Fadi Eid PA Pavement 165.00 43.00 7,095.00 1.50 10,642.50 165.00 43.00 7,095.00 1.50 10,642.50 - SDC/CF-035B PA Pavement 121.00 34.00 4,114.00 1.50 6,171.00 121.00 34.00 4,114.00 1.50 6,171.00 - 266 SDC/CF-035B PA Pillar with Galv. Pipe 249.00 4.00 996.00 3.50 3,486.00 249.00 4.00 996.00 3.50 3,486.00 - Christopher E. 267 SDC/CF-038 Maximore, Sr. PA Pavement 30.00 76.50 2,295.00 1.50 3,442.50 30.00 76.50 2,295.00 1.50 3,442.50 - SDC/CF-096 PA Pavement 126.00 60.00 7,560.00 1.50 11,340.00 126.00 60.00 7,560.00 1.50 11,340.00 - 268 SDC/CF-096 Fence with grill 36.00 6.00 216.00 3.00 648.00 36.00 6.00 216.00 3.00 648.00 - Jeanette Ebba Davidson/Jessie 269 SDC/CF-099B Ebba Duncan FA Pavement 32.00 103.00 3,296.00 1.50 4,944.00 32.00 103.00 3,296.00 1.50 4,944.00 - 270 SDC/CF-113B Jacob S. Stewart PA Pavement 34.00 59.00 2,006.00 1.50 3,009.00 34.00 59.00 2,006.00 1.50 3,009.00 - 271 SDC/CF-138 PA Pavement 32.00 120.00 3,840.00 1.50 5,760.00 32.00 120.00 3,840.00 1.50 5,760.00 - 272 SDC/CF-171A PA Pavement 50.00 49.00 2,450.00 1.50 3,675.00 50.00 49.00 2,450.00 1.50 3,675.00 - 273 SDC/CF-171B PA Pavement 44.00 23.00 1,012.00 1.50 1,518.00 44.00 23.00 1,012.00 1.50 1,518.00 - 274 SDC/CF-182 PA Pavement 46.00 41.00 1,886.00 1.50 2,829.00 46.00 41.00 1,886.00 1.50 2,829.00 - 12,710.0 275 SDC/CF-34L PA Pavement 310.00 41.00 0 1.50 19,065.00 310.00 41.00 12,710.00 1.50 19,065.00 - Christopher E. 276 SDC/CF-38 Maximore, Sr. PA Pavement 30.00 76.50 2,295.00 1.50 3,442.50 30.00 76.50 2,295.00 1.50 3,442.50 - 277 SDC/CF-39 PA Pavement 29.00 86.00 2,494.00 1.50 3,741.00 29.00 86.00 2,494.00 1.50 3,741.00 - 278 SDC/CF-162 PA Pavement and Stairs 50.00 90.00 4,500.00 2.00 9,000.00 50.00 90.00 4,500.00 2.00 9,000.00 - 279 SDC/CF-162B PA Pavement and Stairs 39.00 39.00 1,521.00 2.00 3,042.00 39.00 39.00 1,521.00 2.00 3,042.00 - 280 SDC/CF-057 FA Pumping Station 15.00 6.00 90.00 10.00 900.00 15.00 6.00 90.00 20.00 1,800.00 900.00 281 SDC/CF-079 Abu F. Donzo PA Pumping Station 19.00 14.00 266.00 10.00 2,660.00 19.00 14.00 266.00 20.00 5,320.00 2,660.00 Dominic 282 SDC/CF-121 Onwunyiloku FA Pumping Station 17.00 5.00 85.00 30.00 2,550.00 17.00 5.00 85.00 30.00 2,550.00 - 283 SDC/CF-137A FA Pumping Station 5.50 20.00 110.00 10.00 1,100.00 5.50 20.00 110.00 10.00 1,100.00 - 284 SDC/CF-164 Abdullah Sirleaf FA Pumping Station 18.00 6.00 108.00 10.00 1,080.00 18.00 6.00 108.00 10.00 1,080.00 - 285 SDC/CF-159 PA Retaining Wall 102.00 4.00 408.00 1.50 612.00 122.00 4.00 488.00 1.50 732.00 120.00 Retaining Wall and 286 SDC/CF-157 PA Pavement 52.00 88.00 4,576.00 3.50 16,016.00 52.00 88.00 4,576.00 3.50 16,016.00 - Retaining Wall and 287 SDC/CF-165 PA Pavement 46.00 78.00 3,588.00 3.50 12,558.00 46.00 78.00 3,588.00 3.50 12,558.00 - Retaining Wall and 288 SDC/CF-166 PA Pavement 46.00 70.00 3,220.00 3.50 11,270.00 46.00 70.00 3,220.00 3.50 11,270.00 - Retaining Wall and 289 SDC/CF-168 PA Pavement 39.00 48.00 1,872.00 3.50 6,552.00 39.00 48.00 1,872.00 3.50 6,552.00 - Retaining Wall and 290 SDC/CF-172 PA Pavement 27.00 45.50 1,228.50 3.50 4,299.75 27.00 45.50 1,228.50 3.50 4,299.75 - Retaining wall, 291 SDC/CF-161 PA Pavement & Stairs 47.00 79.00 3,713.00 3.50 12,995.50 47.00 79.00 3,713.00 3.50 12,995.50 - Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 81 292 SDC/CF-003A FA Shelter 5.00 20.33 101.65 3.50 355.78 5.00 20.33 101.65 3.50 355.78 - 293 SDC/CF-063A PA Shelter 48.67 30 1460.1 2.00 2,920.20 48.67 30 1460.1 2.00 2,920.20 - 294 SDC/CF-065A Teta Smith FA Shelter 25.00 13.00 325.00 2.50 812.50 25.00 13.00 325.00 2.50 812.50 - Henry Teah 295 SDC/CF-069A Sherman PA Shelter 33.00 18.00 594.00 2.00 1,188.00 33.00 18.00 594.00 3.50 2,079.00 891.00 296 SDC/CF-074 FA Shelter 22.00 20.00 440.00 2.50 1,100.00 22.00 20.00 440.00 2.50 1,100.00 - 297 SDC/CF-075A PA Shelter 27.00 10.00 270.00 2.00 540.00 27.00 10.00 270.00 3.50 945.00 405.00 298 SDC/CF-076 Molley B. Johnson FA Shelter 14.00 20.00 280.00 2.00 560.00 14.00 20.00 280.00 3.50 980.00 420.00 299 SDC/CF-081C FA Shelter 33.00 9.50 313.50 3.50 1,097.25 33.00 9.50 313.50 3.50 1,097.25 - 300 SDC/CF-081C FA Shelter 33.00 9.50 313.50 3.50 1,097.25 33.00 9.50 313.50 3.50 1,097.25 - 301 SDC/CF-083 Veronica P. Monger PA Shelter 15.00 24.00 360.00 3.50 1,260.00 15.00 24.00 360.00 3.50 1,260.00 - 302 SDC/CF-091 PA Shelter 22.00 49.00 1,078.00 3.50 3,773.00 22.00 49.00 1,078.00 3.50 3,773.00 - 303 SDC/CF-101 FA Shelter 15.00 13.00 195.00 2.00 390.00 15.00 13.00 195.00 2.00 390.00 - 304 SDC/CF-103B Kenneth Odjugo PA Shelter 21.00 25.00 525.00 2.00 1,050.00 21.00 25.00 525.00 3.50 1,837.50 787.50 305 SDC/CF-103C Alvin M. Kanneh FA Shelter 13.00 62.00 806.00 2.00 1,612.00 13.00 62.00 806.00 3.50 2,821.00 1,209.00 306 SDC/CF-113A Jacob S. Stewart PA Shelter 8.00 23.00 184.00 2.00 368.00 8.00 23.00 184.00 2.00 368.00 - Charlesline D. 306 SDC/CF-134A Mayson PA Shelter 10.00 10.00 100.00 2.50 250.00 10.00 10.00 100.00 2.50 250.00 - Charlesline D. 307 SDC/CF-134C Mayson PA Shelter 8.00 19.00 152.00 2.50 380.00 8.00 19.00 152.00 2.50 380.00 - Charlesline D. 308 SDC/CF-134CA Mayson PA Shelter 8.00 18.50 148.00 2.50 370.00 8.00 18.50 148.00 2.50 370.00 - Charlesline D. 309 SDC/CF-134CB Mayson PA Shelter 10.00 31.91 319.10 3.50 1,116.85 10.00 31.91 319.10 3.50 1,116.85 - 310 SDC/CF-141 Rebecca Zogia FA Shelter 18.00 44.25 796.50 3.50 2,787.75 18.00 44.25 796.50 3.50 2,787.75 - 311 SDC/CF-136 PA Shelter with Tarpaulin 13.00 15.00 195.00 3.50 682.50 13.00 15.00 195.00 3.50 682.50 - 312 SDC/CF-081A FA Wooden 11.00 12.00 132.00 3.50 462.00 11.00 12.00 132.00 3.50 462.00 - 313 SDC/CF-081B FA Wooden 8.50 8.50 72.25 3.50 252.88 8.50 8.50 72.25 3.50 252.88 - 314 SDC/CF-098A FA Wooden 12.00 21.00 252.00 3.50 882.00 12.00 21.00 252.00 3.50 882.00 - 315 SDC/CF-098B FA Wooden 8.00 12.00 96.00 3.50 336.00 8.00 12.00 96.00 3.50 336.00 - 316 SDC/CF-100E FA Wooden 10.00 20.00 200.00 3.50 700.00 10.00 20.00 200.00 3.50 700.00 - 317 SDC/CF-122A FA Wooden 17.33 14.75 255.62 3.50 894.66 17.33 14.75 255.62 3.50 894.66 - 318 SDC/CF-131A FA Wooden 5.00 8.00 40.00 3.50 140.00 5.00 8.00 40.00 3.50 140.00 - 319 SDC/CF-131C FA Wooden 6.00 10.00 60.00 3.50 210.00 6.00 10.00 60.00 3.50 210.00 - 320 SDC/CF-081C Jonathan L. Morris FA Zinc Framing 10.00 14.00 140.00 3.50 490.00 10.00 14.00 140.00 3.50 490.00 - Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 82 1,707,079.5 SUB TOTAL (for private structures) 1,427,670.70 4 279,408.84 List of Affected Properties as a Result of Road Realignment Current Private Land Verification Acquisition Name of Final Width Total Cost Structure Principal Kind of Width/ Dimension Reappraise Length Dimension Rate Appraised /Height for Land No. Code Contact Category Structure Length Height Sqft Rate d Value Value 1-Storey 351 SDC/CF-134G FA Building 27.00 42.00 1,134.00 60.00 68,040.00 27.00 42.00 1,134.00 1.84 2,086.56 70,126.56 352 SDC/CF-B-011A FA Bill Board 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 - - - 500.00 353 SDC/CF-B-013 FA Bill Board 1.00 1.00 1.00 3,500.00 3,500.00 - - - 3,500.00 354 SDC/CF-B-016A FA Bill Board 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 - - - 500.00 355 SDC/CF-B-023 FA Bill Board 1.00 1.00 1.00 500.00 500.00 - - - 500.00 356 SDC/CF-134H PA Chain Link 44.75 7.00 313.25 3.50 1,096.38 44.75 10.00 447.50 1.84 823.40 1,919.78 357 SDC/CF-042B FA Concrete 6.67 7.00 46.69 10.00 466.90 6.67 10.00 66.70 1.84 122.73 589.63 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 83 SDC/CF-042B PA Fence 82.50 7.00 577.50 5.00 2,887.50 82.50 10.00 825.00 1.84 1,518.00 4,405.50 358 SDC/CF-044B FA Concrete 32.00 30.00 960.00 15.00 14,400.00 32.00 10.00 320.00 1.84 588.80 14,988.80 Marketta 359 SDC/CF-044C Scott FA Concrete 13.00 16.50 214.50 10.00 2,145.00 13.00 10.00 130.00 1.84 239.20 2,384.20 360 SDC/CF-045A FA Concrete 12.00 13.00 156.00 10.00 1,560.00 12.00 10.00 120.00 1.84 220.80 1,780.80 361 SDC/CF-055A FA Concrete 10.50 9.00 94.50 10.00 945.00 10.50 10.00 105.00 1.84 193.20 1,138.20 362 SDC/CF-056A FA Concrete 15.00 13.00 195.00 10.00 1,950.00 15.00 10.00 150.00 1.84 276.00 2,226.00 SDC/CF-056B FA Concrete 12.50 13.00 162.50 10.00 1,625.00 12.50 10.00 125.00 1.84 230.00 1,855.00 363 SDC/CF-056B FA Wooden 12.50 13.00 162.50 3.50 568.75 12.50 10.00 125.00 1.84 230.00 798.75 364 SDC/CF-059 FA Concrete 7.67 6.00 46.02 15.00 690.30 7.67 10.00 76.70 1.84 141.13 831.43 365 SDC/CF-059A FA Concrete 7.00 24.00 168.00 10.00 1,680.00 7.00 10.00 70.00 1.84 128.80 1,808.80 Isaac S. 366 SDC/CF-071 Yorcee FA Concrete 16.75 17.00 284.75 7.00 1,993.25 16.75 10.00 167.50 1.84 308.20 2,301.45 SDC/CF-117A PA Concrete 8.00 44.00 352.00 20.00 7,040.00 44.00 10.00 440.00 1.84 809.60 7,849.60 367 SDC/CF-117A PA Fence 44.00 8.00 352.00 5.00 1,760.00 - - - - - 1,760.00 Concrete 368 SDC/CF-117C FA with Slab 51.00 58.00 2,958.00 35.00 103,530.00 51.00 58.00 2,958.00 1.84 5,442.72 108,972.72 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 84 369 SDC/CF-117D FA Concrete 27.41 10.41 285.34 20.00 5,706.76 27.41 10.41 285.34 1.84 525.02 6,231.78 Concrete 370 SDC/CF-117E FA with Slab 40.00 23.41 936.40 35.00 32,774.00 40.00 23.41 936.40 1.84 1,722.98 34,496.98 Abdullah 371 SDC/CF-161A Sirleaf FA Concrete 23.50 14.00 329.00 10.00 3,290.00 23.50 10.00 235.00 1.84 432.40 3,722.40 Elwood D. Sorbo Jr./Henry Concrete SDC/CF-106D Chus FA with Slab 15.00 41.00 615.00 30.00 18,450.00 - - - - - 18,450.00 372 Elwood D. Sorbo Jr./Henry SDC/CF-106D Chus Concrete 41.00 22.00 902.00 15.00 13,530.00 41.00 10.00 410.00 1.84 754.40 14,284.40 Elwood D. Concrete 373 SDC/CF-106DA Sorbo Jr. FA with Slab 15.00 41.00 615.00 30.00 18,450.00 15.00 10.00 150.00 1.84 276.00 18,726.00 374 SDC/CF- C-134 FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - - - 250.00 375 SDC/CF-C-54A FA Container 1.00 1.00 1.00 250.00 250.00 - - - 250.00 Melisa SDC/CF-149A Emeh PA Fence 129.00 5.00 645.00 5.00 3,225.00 - - - - - 3,225.00 376 Melisa SDC/CF-149A Emeh FA Concrete 6.00 7.58 45.48 15.00 682.20 6.00 10.00 60.00 1.84 110.40 792.60 377 SDC/CF-044A FA Hand Pump 1.00 1.00 1.00 4,200.00 4,200.00 - - - 4,200.00 Pumping 378 SDC/CF-134E FA Station 23.00 20.00 460.00 10.00 4,600.00 23.00 10.00 230.00 1.84 423.20 5,023.20 379 SDC/CF-134D FA Concrete 30.75 13.75 422.81 15.00 6,342.19 30.75 10.00 307.50 1.84 565.80 6,907.99 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 85 Concrete SDC/CF-134D FA with Slab 30.75 13.75 422.81 25.00 10,570.31 - 10,570.31 Well with 380 SDC/CF-066A FA Culverts 1.00 1.00 1.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 - - - 1,500.00 381 SDC/CF-071A FA Wooden 12.00 18.00 216.00 3.50 756.00 - - - 756.00 SUB TOTAL (for structures as a result of Road Realignment) 341,954.54 9,874.64 18,169.33 360,123.87 ANNEX 2: AFFECTED PUBLIC PROPERTIES BY TYPE AND BY COMPENSATION AMOUNT Previous Verification Current Verification Dimensi Structure Cate Kind of Width/ Square/ Appraised Width/ on Reappraised No. Code gory Structure Length Height Ft Rate Value Length Height Sqft Rate Value Variance SDC/CF- 1 034Z FA Fountain 13.00 13.00 169.00 20.00 3,380.00 13.00 13.00 169.00 20.00 3,380.00 - SDC/CF- 2 Galvanize 2 119C FA Tower 13.17 19.75 260.11 50.00 13,005.38 13.17 19.75 260.11 40.00 10,404.30 (2,601.08) SDC/CF- Pillar with 1,380.0 3 034Y FA Galv. Pipe 345.00 4.00 0 5.00 6,900.00 345.00 4.00 1,380.00 5.00 6,900.00 - SDC/CF- Pillar with 4 34X PA Galv. Pipe 190.00 4.00 760.00 7.00 5,320.00 190.00 4.00 760.00 7.00 5,320.00 - SDC/CF- 250.0 5 092A FA Monument L/S L/S L/S 0 250.00 L/S L/S L/S 250.00 250.00 - Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 86 TOTAL 28,855.38 26,254.30 (2,601.08) ANNEX 3: LOSS OF BUSINESS INCOME MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS- INFRASTRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION UNIT List of Businesses to be Affected (Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction) Total Average Monthly Net Restoration No. Structure Code Business Owner Type of Business 3-Months income Allowances USD (3months) 1 SDC/CF 132A Mamaka Bility-Ajavon Cook Shop 100.00 3 300.00 2 SDC/CF 137B Emmanuel S. Cooper Barbing Shop 100.00 3 300.00 3 SDC/CF 138 NP Filling Station 500.00 3 1,500.00 4 SDC/CF-C-62 Mamie Cement 150.00 3 450.00 5 SDC/CF 142 Emmanuel Gonwokay General Merchandise 500.00 3 1,500.00 6 SDC/CF-C-66 Sam Linus Tyre Shop 150.00 3 450.00 7 SDC/CF-C-67 Abass Kamara Auto Parts 150.00 3 450.00 8 SDC/CF-C-68 Amara Dorley Auto Parts 350.00 3 1,050.00 9 SDC/CF 163 Mohammed Kamara Auto Parts 350.00 3 1,050.00 10 SDC/CF 163 Abraham Kenneh Auto Parts 350.00 3 1,050.00 11 SDC/CF-163 Osita Ezeamakam Pharmacy 400.00 3 1,200.00 12 SDC/CF 174 Teta Smith Saloon/Hair Shop 100.00 3 300.00 13 SDC/CF 174 Weedor Jallah Saloon/Hair Shop 100.00 3 300.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 87 14 SDC/CF 174 Ozor Stephen Saloon/Hair Shop 100.00 3 300.00 15 SDC/CF 171B Sunday Eze Phone Accessories 300.00 3 900.00 16 SDC/CF 171B Marian Forkpah Mini-Boutique 400.00 3 1,200.00 17 SDC/CF 171B Ndubuisi Eboh Electronics 200.00 3 600.00 18 SDC/CF-174 Sunday Egbogu Electronics& Cosmetics 1,200.00 3 3,600.00 19 SDC/CF-174 Chinedu Obiora Saloon/Hair Shop 300.00 3 900.00 20 SDC/CF 174 Doris Gaye Saloon/Hair Shop 500.00 3 1,500.00 21 SDC/CF 174 Aisha Jabateh Slippers, Ear rings, etc. 250.00 3 750.00 22 SDC/CF 174 Anthony Okpala Slippers 150.00 3 450.00 23 SDC/CF 176 Emmanuel Quannah Foreign Exchange 200.00 3 600.00 24 SDC/CF-055 Princess Somah Saloon/ Sales Hair 175.00 3 525.00 25 SDC/CF-055 Eric T. Johnson Taylor Shop 225.00 3 675.00 26 SDC/CF-055 Alpha Baah Provision Shop 250.00 3 750.00 27 SDC/CF-056 Gayduobah Johnson Sefrental/ Photocopy 150.00 3 450.00 28 SDC/CF-056 Malu Lloyd Restaurant 400.00 3 1,200.00 29 SDC/CF-056 Marcus Wolo Photocopy/Printer 150.00 3 450.00 30 SDC/CF-062B Faith Kannah Boutique 200.00 3 600.00 31 SDC/CF-062B Ruth Mobil Money 200.00 3 600.00 32 SDC/CF-062A Sameria Nyemah Saloon, Bar & Restaurant Shop 450.00 3 1,350.00 33 SDC/CF- C-046 Christain Ubah Spare Parts 350.00 3 1,050.00 34 SDC/CF-063 Estella Williams Saloon 150.00 3 450.00 35 SDC/CF- C-047 Mohammed Konneh Tyre Sale/Storage 100.00 3 300.00 36 SDC/CF- C-048 Mohammed Konneh Tryes 100.00 3 300.00 37 SDC/CF-064 Gaye & Tenneh Jackson Refrigerator Repair 125.00 3 375.00 38 SDC/CF-064 George Diakpo Carpentry 100.00 3 300.00 39 SDC/CF-065 Fato A. Wheremongar Arts School 1,000.00 3 3,000.00 40 SDC/CF-065A Varney Karmara Building Material 1,500.00 3 4,500.00 41 SDC/CF-066 Arthur Spare Parts 350.00 3 1,050.00 42 SDC/CF-067A Rexton E. Mulbah Beauty Saloon 200.00 3 600.00 43 SDC/CF-069 Marthan Bioform Clinic 1,500.00 3 4,500.00 44 SDC/CF-069A Taylor Shop/Cloths Sale 250.00 3 750.00 45 SDC/CF-080 A Mamadou Jollos Provision/ Dry Goods 200.00 3 600.00 46 SDC/CF-080G Mohammed Sheriff Mobil Exchange 200.00 3 600.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 88 47 SDC/CF-080F N/A 100.00 3 300.00 48 SDC/CF-080F Forex Brown 200.00 3 600.00 49 SDC/CF-081 100.00 3 300.00 50 SDC/CF-081A Johantha Tamba Food & Drinks 300.00 3 900.00 51 SDC/CF- C-081 Kumba Tamba Cook shop 150.00 3 450.00 52 SDC/CF-083 Kadi Porte Bar / Entertainment 750.00 3 2,250.00 53 SDC/CF-084 Veromea Mongar Drinks/ Retant 500.00 3 1,500.00 54 SDC/CF-085A N/A Forex Bureau 200.00 3 600.00 55 SDC/CF-085A Souleymane Jlloh Provision Shop 350.00 3 1,050.00 56 SDC/CF-085B Obass Drug Store 400.00 3 1,200.00 57 SDC/CF-041 PA Rib House Entertainment/Restaurant 1,000.00 3 3,000.00 58 SDC/CF- C-003 William Reens Money Exchange 200.00 3 600.00 59 SDC/CF- C-002 Money Exchange 200.00 3 600.00 60 SDC/CF- C-004 Bettinas Mulbah saloon/ Sales Hair/ Bread 175.00 3 525.00 61 SDC/CF- C-005 Tina Diamond George Rubber Dishes 100.00 3 300.00 62 SDC/CF- C-006 Kumba Slippers 100.00 3 300.00 63 SDC/CF- C-007 Diana Tamba American Goods/ Hair 150.00 3 450.00 64 SDC/CF- C-008 Margoni Barrow Goods/ USA 150.00 3 450.00 65 SDC/CF- C-010 Johana Empty/Sells Coal 75.00 3 225.00 66 SDC/CF- C-011 Photo Studio 150.00 3 450.00 67 SDC/CF- C-012 Café 225.00 3 675.00 68 SDC/CF- C-014 Alice Wee USA Goods 150.00 3 450.00 69 SDC/CF- C-015 General Merchandise 150.00 3 450.00 70 SDC/CF- C-016 Fabiiah S. Okeanyanwu Used Tires 200.00 3 600.00 71 SDC/CF- C-017 Ansu Kamara Spare Parts/Oil 350.00 3 1,050.00 72 SDC/CF- C-018 Korpo Flomo Barrow Goods/ USA 200.00 3 600.00 73 SDC/CF-041C Jamal Nazzer Building Material/ Spare parts 1,500.00 3 4,500.00 74 SDC/CF- C-023 Fatumata Fofana USA Goods 200.00 3 600.00 75 SDC/CF- C-024 Fatumata Fofana Tyres 150.00 3 450.00 76 SDC/CF- C-025 Janet Rice & Oil 200.00 3 600.00 77 SDC/CF- C-026 Elizabeth J. Wlay Sells African Cloths/Hair 150.00 3 450.00 78 SDC/CF- C-027 Sarah Markai Rice & Oil. Soft drinks 200.00 3 600.00 79 SDC/CF- C-028 Irene Jallah USA Goods /Rice 250.00 3 750.00 80 SDC/CF- C-029 Irene Jallah Ice boxes / Dry Goods 200.00 3 600.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 89 81 SDC/CF- C-030 Irene Jallah Drinks, Furniture, Mathes 175.00 3 525.00 82 SDC/CF- C-031 Meme Mulbah Mallus, Oil, Sack / USA 150.00 3 450.00 83 SDC/CF- C-032 USA Things 150.00 3 450.00 84 SDC/CF-C-052 Cecelia Nepes Children Things/ Food/ Bar 150.00 3 450.00 85 SDC/CF-053 Jagbeh Bropleh Boutique 200.00 3 600.00 86 SDC/CF-054 Mwma Metzer Bar & Restaurant 500.00 3 1,500.00 87 SDC/CF-054 Guweh Bar 350.00 3 1,050.00 88 SDC/CF-085 Elizabeth Peters Provision Shop/ soft drinks 200.00 3 600.00 89 SDC/CF-092 Coco Nest Entertainment 400.00 3 1,200.00 90 SDC/CF-035 Wilson T. Nyanneh Drinks Wholesale/ Retail 200.00 3 600.00 91 SDC/CF-100B Matilda Wreh USA Goods 200.00 3 600.00 92 SDC/CF-100B Edith Smith Saygeb Office Space 200.00 3 600.00 93 SDC/CF-100B Amb. Latum Datong Starz Computer School 1,500.00 3 4,500.00 94 SDC/CF-100B Thelma Saye Office Space 200.00 3 600.00 95 SDC/CF-100B George Lahun Construction Office 200.00 3 600.00 96 SDC/CF-102 Jammes Massaboi Trade School 450.00 3 1,350.00 97 SDC/CF-102 Nelson Nah Forex Brueau 200.00 3 600.00 98 SDC/CF102A Thhresa Cook Shop 150.00 3 450.00 99 SDC/CF-103B John 100.00 3 300.00 100 SDC/CF-105 Tummu Trueh Motel 450.00 3 1,350.00 101 SDC/CF-123 Jartu C. Barclay Entertainment/Wholesale drinks 250.00 3 750.00 102 SDC/CF-123 Jartu C. Barclay Saloon 150.00 3 450.00 103 SDC/CF-133 Winston Goe Forex Bureau 200.00 3 600.00 104 SDC/CF-133A Spare parts 350.00 3 1,050.00 105 SDC/CF-137A Samuel Brown Gas Station 750.00 3 2,250.00 106 SDC/CF-C56 Obina/Peter Tyres 100.00 3 300.00 107 SDC/CFC57 NimleyFarleh Tyres 150.00 3 450.00 108 SDCC/CFC58 Tyres 150.00 3 450.00 109 SDC/CFC60 Torkon Vonziah Gas 750.00 3 2,250.00 110 SDC/CF-177D Simone Nwojon Phones 200.00 3 600.00 111 SDC/CF-177D Bill Delumon Internet Café' 200.00 3 600.00 112 SDCC/CF-177D Francis Obianyo Phone/Electronics 350.00 3 1,050.00 113 SDC/CF-177E Lovetee Gborah Saloon 150.00 3 450.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 90 114 SDC/CF-175 Mohanmmed Alie Warehouse 100.00 3 300.00 115 SDC/CF-036 Fashion Design 175.00 3 525.00 116 SDC/CF-036-A Drinks whole sale 200.00 3 600.00 117 SDC/CF-C-001 Grace Above 100.00 3 300.00 118 SDC/CF-44B Foreign Exchange 200.00 3 600.00 119 SDC/CF-044 Cecelia Mensah Rubber Dishes/ Gods wonder 125.00 3 375.00 120 SDC/CF-050 Philiph Nathan Destine Beauty Place 100.00 3 300.00 121 SDC/CF-051-A Jeslinda Investment 450.00 3 1,350.00 122 SDC/CF-049 Philiph Nathan 100.00 3 300.00 123 SDC/CF-057 Mrs. Barclay Perpetual Incorporated 300.00 3 900.00 124 SDC/CF-C-50 Owner/Cephaus Gawah Cecal Business Center Depot/ 250.00 3 750.00 125 SDC/CF-073A Owner/Joseph S. Lobou Electroinic/ Hair shop 400.00 3 1,200.00 126 SDC/CF-134-G Owner/Equa H.Davies Drug store/ Jonathan 400.00 3 1,200.00 127 SDC/CF-134-F Owner/ Equa H. Davies 100.00 3 300.00 128 SDC/CF-134-H Owner/ Equa H. Davies 100.00 3 300.00 129 SDC/CF-075 Christian Ndorbor The point Comestic Center 150.00 3 450.00 130 SDC/CF-076 Molley Johnson Monicah Business center/ Sells LEC Current 175.00 3 525.00 131 SDC/CF-077A Jebebah MLF Neebhn All folks food & Drinks center 225.00 3 675.00 132 SDC/CF-77B Safiatu James Safie Beauty Saloon 175.00 3 525.00 133 SDC/CF-107-G Chedid George Mulbah Yorgbor 500.00 3 1,500.00 134 SDC/CF-107-G Chedid George Building Material Store 1,000.00 3 3,000.00 135 SDC/CF-107-G Chedid George Building Material Store 1,000.00 3 3,000.00 136 SDC/CF-117A Alahjah Abuduliah Sannoh Ducor Water 150.00 3 450.00 Foley CommunicationLink/ Money 137 SDC/CF112B jJacob Steward 200.00 3 600.00 Exchange 138 SDC/CF-112B Jacob Steward Angles' Kitchen/ Sells food & Drinks 250.00 3 750.00 139 SDC/CF-112B Jacob Steward Boutique/ Davies Kids 150.00 3 450.00 140 SDC/CF-109 Lawerence Entertaiment 200.00 3 600.00 141 SDC/CF-108B Clayude Sylain Barber Shop/ Business center 150.00 3 450.00 142 SDC/CF-149 Jartu Dixon Fence in with Carpenter shop 100.00 3 300.00 143 SDC/CF- 149 Jartu Dixon Abraham Sarnoh/ Carpenter Shop 100.00 3 300.00 144 SCD-CF-149 Jartu Dixon Fallah Saah/ Carpenter shop 100.00 3 300.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 91 145 SDC/CF-149 Jartu Dixon Sumelia Durmuyan/Carpenter shop 100.00 3 300.00 146 SDC/CF-149 Jartu Dixon Morris Karmara/ carpenter shop 100.00 3 300.00 Martor R. Reeves/ Victory Chapel 147 SDC/CF-158 100.00 3 300.00 Fence 148 SDC/CF-157 Mr. Abubor Bah 100.00 3 300.00 149 SDC/CF-105 Sessay Pewee 100.00 3 300.00 150 SDC/CF-122 Christian Benson 100.00 3 300.00 151 SDC/CF-122 Christian Benson 100.00 3 300.00 152 SDC/CF-122 Christian Benson 100.00 3 300.00 153 SDC/CF-122 Christian Benson 100.00 3 300.00 154 SDC/CF-106CE Mr.Kenneth Odjugo 1,200.00 3 3,600.00 155 SDC/CF-106CA Mr. Kenneth Odjugo Store 450.00 3 1,350.00 Sub Total for Affected Businesses (4.0 km) 134,550.00 ANNEX 4: TENANTS AND LANDLORDS MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS- INFRASTRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION UNIT List of Tenants to be Affected (Red Light Intersection-ELWA Junction (4.0 -km) Partially / Fully Yearly Rental Amount per Month Total amount (3 No. Structure Code Tenant Type of Structure (A) Affected (B) month) 1 SDC/CF 132 N/A Concrete FA N/A 50.00 150.00 2 SDC/CF 137 B Emmanuel S. Cooper Concrete FA N/A 115.00 345.00 3 SDC/CF 141 N/A Shelter FA N/A 50.00 150.00 4 SDC/CF 142 N/A Concrete FA N/A 50.00 150.00 Mbadiushu Casmir 5 SDC/CF 153 Concrete FA 1,000.00 USD 83.30 249.90 Chukwuku 6 SDC/CF 153 Christian Onyebu Concrete FA 1,000.00 USD 83.30 249.90 7 SDC/CF 153 James Sorsor Concrete FA 2,000.00 USD 166.60 499.80 8 SDC/CF 153 Philip Obi Concrete FA 1,000.00 USD 83.30 249.90 9 SDC/CF 163 Mohammed M. Kamara Concrete FA 3,0000.00 USD 250.00 750.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 92 10 SDC/CF 163 Abraham Kenneh Concrete FA 3,000.00 USD 250.00 750.00 11 SDC/CF 174 Teta Smith Concrete/Basement FA N/A 50.00 150.00 12 SDC/CF 174 Weedor Jallah Concrete/Basement FA N/A 50.00 150.00 13 SDC/CF 174 Ozor Stephen Concrete/Basement FA N/A 50.00 150.00 14 SDC/CF 171B Sunday Eze Concrete/Basement FA 1,500.00 USD 125.00 375.00 15 SDC/CF 171B Marian Forkpah Concrete/Basement FA 1,500.00 USD 125.00 375.00 16 SDC/CF 171B Ndubuisi Eboh Concrete/Basement FA 1,500.00 USD 125.00 375.00 17 SDC/CF 174 Sunday Eggbogu Concrete/Basement FA 5,000.00 USD 416.00 1,248.00 18 SDC/CF 174 Chinedu Obiora Concrete/Basement FA 2,500.00 USD 208.00 624.00 19 SDC/CF Doris Gaye Concrete/Basement FA 50.00 150.00 20 SDC/CF 174 Aisha Jabateh Concrete/Basement FA 600.00 USD 50.00 150.00 21 SDC/CF 174 Anthony Okpala Concrete/Basement FA 600.00 USD 50.00 150.00 22 SDC/CF 176 Emmanuel Quannah Concrete/Basement FA 1,800.00 USD 150.00 450.00 23 SDC/CF-133 Winston Goe 50.00 150.00 24 SDCCF-133A 50.00 150.00 25 SDC/CF-137A Samuel Brown 50.00 150.00 26 SDC/CF-140 50.00 150.00 27 SDC/CF149 Alice 50.00 150.00 28 SDC/CF-149A 50.00 150.00 29 SDC/CF-159 50.00 150.00 30 SDC/CF-158 50.00 150.00 31 SDC/CF-177D Simone Nwojon 50.00 150.00 32 SDC/CF-177D Bill G. Delanmou 50.00 150.00 33 SDC/CF177D Francis Obianyo 50.00 150.00 34 SDC/CF-177E Lovetee Gborah 50.00 150.00 35 SDC/CF-177E Mohammed Alie 50.00 150.00 36 SDC/CF-069 Biofom Clinic 50.00 150.00 37 SDCCF069A Famata Freeman 50.00 150.00 38 SDC/CF-O80 Mamadu Alpha Jalloh 50.00 150.00 39 SDC/CF-080B Mamadu Alpha Jalloh 50.00 150.00 40 SDC/CF080E Mohammed Sherrif 50.00 150.00 41 SDC/CF-081A Kumba Tamba 50.00 150.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 93 42 SDC/CF-082 Kadi Porte 50.00 150.00 43 SDC/CF-083 Veronica Mongar 50.00 150.00 44 SDC/CF-084 50.00 150.00 45 SDC/CF-085A Soulemane Jalloh 50.00 150.00 46 SDC/CF-085B Obass 50.00 150.00 47 SDC/CF-085B Obass 50.00 150.00 48 SDC/CF-0885 Elizabath Paters 50.00 150.00 49 SDC/CF-086 Coco 50.00 150.00 50 SDC/CF-087 50.00 150.00 51 SDC/CF-092 50.00 150.00 52 SDC/CF-035 Aminata Gas Station 50.00 150.00 53 SDC/CF100 wilson T. Nyanneh 50.00 150.00 54 SDC/CF-100A Matilda Wreh 50.00 150.00 55 SDC/CF-100B Edith Smith Sayseb 50.00 150.00 56 SDC/CF-100C Thelma Saye 50.00 150.00 57 SDC/CF-102 George Lahun 50.00 150.00 58 SDC/CF-102 James Massaboi 50.00 150.00 59 SDC/CF-102A Nelson Nah 50.00 150.00 60 SDC/CF-102B Theresa 50.00 150.00 61 SDC/CF-117A Tummu Tryeh 50.00 150.00 62 SDC/CF-123 Jartu C Barclay 50.00 150.00 63 SDC/CF-123 Jartu C Barclay 50.00 150.00 64 SDF/CF-075 50.00 150.00 65 SDC/CF-0107JG 50.00 150.00 66 SDC/CF-0107JG 50.00 150.00 67 SDC/CF-0107JG 50.00 150.00 68 SDC/CF112B 50.00 150.00 69 SDC/CF-112 50.00 150.00 70 SDC/CF-112A 50.00 150.00 71 SDC/CF-108A 50.00 150.00 72 SDC/CF-105D 50.00 150.00 73 SDC/CF-105 50.00 150.00 74 SDC/CF-C001 50.00 150.00 75 SDC/CF-044 50.00 150.00 76 SDC/CF-057 50.00 150.00 77 SDC/CF-ca-106CA 50.00 150.00 78 SDC/CF-106 CA 50.00 150.00 79 SCD/CF- 106-CA 50.00 150.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 94 80 SDC/CF-106 CA 50.00 150.00 81 SDC/CF-105 50.00 150.00 82 SDC/CF-105 50.00 150.00 SUB TOTAL FOR AFFECTED TENANTS 16,891.50 MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS- INFRASTRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION UNIT List of Landlords to be Affected (Red Light Intersection-ELWA Junction (4.0 -km) Partially / Yearly Rental Amount per Totat amount (3 No. Structure Code Landlord Type of Structure Fully Month (B) month) Affected (A) 83 SDC/CF 132 Mamaka Bility-Ajavon Concrete FA N/A 50.00 150.00 84 SDC/CF 137 B Andrew Gardea Concrete FA N/A 115.00 345.00 85 SDC/CF 141 Rebecca Zogia Shelter FA N/A 50.00 150.00 86 SDC/CF 142 Emmanuel Gonwokay Concrete FA N/A 50.00 150.00 87 SDC/CF 153 John Saah Concrete FA 1,000.00 USD 83.30 249.90 88 SDC/CF 153 John Saah Concrete FA 1,000.00 USD 83.30 249.90 89 SDC/CF 153 John Saah Concrete FA 2,000.00 USD 166.60 499.80 90 SDC/CF 153 John Saah Concrete FA 1,000.00 USD 83.30 249.90 91 SDC/CF 163 Osita Ezeamakam Concrete FA 3,0000.00 USD 250.00 750.00 92 SDC/CF 163 Osita Ezeamakam Concrete FA 3,000.00 USD 250.00 750.00 93 SDC/CF 174 Samuel Lomax Concrete/Basement FA N/A 50.00 150.00 94 SDC/CF 174 Samuel Lomax Concrete/Basement FA N/A 50.00 150.00 95 SDC/CF 174 Samuel Lomax Concrete/Basement FA N/A 50.00 150.00 96 SDC/CF 171B Gbolo Forkpah Concrete/Basement FA 1,500.00 USD 125.00 375.00 97 SDC/CF 171B Gbolo Forkpah Concrete/Basement FA 1,500.00 USD 125.00 375.00 98 SDC/CF 171B Gbolo Forkpah Concrete/Basement FA 1,500.00 USD 125.00 375.00 99 SDC/CF 174 Samuel Lomax Concrete/Basement FA 5,000.00 USD 416.00 1,248.00 100 SDC/CF 174 Samuel Lomax Concrete/Basement FA 2,500.00 USD 208.00 624.00 101 SDC/CF Samuel Lomax Concrete/Basement FA 50.00 150.00 102 SDC/CF 174 Samuel Lomax Concrete/Basement FA 600.00 USD 50.00 150.00 103 SDC/CF 174 Samuel Lomax Concrete/Basement FA 600.00 USD 50.00 150.00 104 SDC/CF 176 Milad Hage Concrete/Basement FA 1,800.00 USD 150.00 450.00 105 SDC/CF-133 Joseph Geebo 50.00 150.00 106 SDCCF-133A 50.00 150.00 107 SDC/CF-137A Andrew 50.00 150.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 95 108 SDC/CF-140 50.00 150.00 109 SDC/CF-143 50.00 150.00 110 SDC/CF149 50.00 150.00 111 SDC/CF-149A 50.00 150.00 112 SDC/CF-159 50.00 150.00 113 SDC/CF-158 Martor Raymond Reeves 50.00 150.00 114 SDC/CF-177D 50.00 150.00 115 SDC/CF-177D Hage 50.00 150.00 116 SDC/CF177D 50.00 150.00 117 SDC/CF-177E Aisha Siafa 50.00 150.00 118 SDC/CF-177E 50.00 150.00 119 SDC/CF-069 50.00 150.00 120 SDCCF069A Patience Dean Cooper 50.00 150.00 121 SDC/CF-O80 Etta 50.00 150.00 122 SDC/CF-080B Etta 50.00 150.00 123 SDC/CF080E Ma. Bendu Johnson 50.00 150.00 124 SDC/CF-081A Mary Gweah 50.00 150.00 125 SDC/CF-082 Mr. gaga 50.00 150.00 126 SDC/CF-083 Leo Banks 50.00 150.00 127 SDC/CF-084 50.00 150.00 128 SDC/CF-085A Sheriff 50.00 150.00 129 SDC/CF-085B Sheriff 50.00 150.00 130 SDC/CF-085B Sheriff 50.00 150.00 131 SDC/CF-0885 Sheriff 50.00 150.00 132 SDC/CF-086 50.00 150.00 133 SDC/CF-087 50.00 150.00 134 SDC/CF-092 50.00 150.00 135 SDC/CF-035 50.00 150.00 136 SDC/CF100 Louise Edna Taylor 50.00 150.00 137 SDC/CF-100A Louise Edna Taylor 50.00 150.00 138 SDC/CF-100B Louise Edna Taylor 50.00 150.00 139 SDC/CF-100C Louise Edna Taylor 50.00 150.00 140 SDC/CF-102 George Lahun 50.00 150.00 141 SDC/CF-102 George Lahun 50.00 150.00 142 SDC/CF-102A George Lahun 50.00 150.00 143 SDC/CF-102B 50.00 150.00 144 SDC/CF-117A 50.00 150.00 145 SDC/CF-123 Christain Benson 50.00 150.00 146 SDC/CF-123 Christain Benson 50.00 150.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 96 147 SDF/CF-075 50.00 150.00 148 SDC/CF-0107JG 50.00 150.00 149 SDC/CF-0107JG 50.00 150.00 150 SDC/CF-0107JG 50.00 150.00 151 SDC/CF112B 50.00 150.00 152 SDC/CF-112 50.00 150.00 153 SDC/CF-112A 50.00 150.00 154 SDC/CF-108A 50.00 150.00 155 SDC/CF-105D 50.00 150.00 156 SDC/CF-105 50.00 150.00 157 SDC/CF-C001 50.00 150.00 158 SDC/CF-044 50.00 150.00 159 SDC/CF-057 50.00 150.00 160 SDC/CF-ca-106CA 50.00 150.00 161 SDC/CF-106 CA 50.00 150.00 162 SCD/CF- 106-CA 50.00 150.00 163 SDC/CF-106 CA 50.00 150.00 164 SDC/CF-105 50.00 150.00 SUB TOTAL FOR AFFECTED LANDLORDS 16,891.50 ANNEX 5: SPECIAL ASSISTANCE TO VULNERABLE GROUPS MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS- INFRASTRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION UNIT List of Vulnerable Person to be Affected (Red Light Intersection-ELWA Junction (4.0 -km) Total Restoration Restoration No. Structure Code Vulnerable Person (s) Sex 3-Months Allowance Amount USD (3months) 1 SDC/CF-065 Fato Wheremongar Female 200.00 3 600.00 2 SDC/CF-038 Christopher Maximore Male 200.00 3 600.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 97 3 SDC/CF-068 John Kolie Male 200.00 3 600.00 4 SDC/CF-C004 Bettina S. Mulbah Female 200.00 3 600.00 5 SDC/CF-100C Edna Louise Taylor Female 200.00 3 600.00 6 SDC/CF-105D Ma Fatu Female 200.00 3 600.00 7 SDC/CF-059 Aaron Male 200.00 3 600.00 8 SDC/CF-038 John Kollie Male 200.00 3 600.00 9 SDC/CF-C13 Eline Cox Female 200.00 3 600.00 10 SDC/CF-C14 Aice Wee Female 200.00 3 600.00 11 SDC/CF-053 Cecelia Nepe Female 200.00 3 600.00 12 SDC/CF-C005 Tina Diamond George Female 200.00 3 600.00 13 SDC/CF-134H Victoria Zoe Kandakai Renner Female 200.00 3 600.00 14 SDC/CF-134H Cecelia Mensah Female 200.00 3 600.00 15 SDC/CF-C23 Fatumata Fofana Female 200.00 3 600.00 16 SDC/CF-C27 Sarah Markai Female 200.00 3 600.00 17 SDC/CF-149A Melisa A. Emeh Female 200.00 3 600.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 98 18 SDC/CF-C03 Irene Jallah Female 200.00 3 600.00 19 SDC/CF-C26 Elizabeth Weay Female 200.00 3 600.00 20 SDC/CF-C32 Memie Mulbah Female 200.00 3 600.00 21 SDC/CF-041-C Korpo Flomo Female 200.00 3 600.00 22 SDC/CF-C010 Johana Female 200.00 3 600.00 SUB TOTAL FOR VULNERABLE PERSONS ALONG THE 4.0KM 13,200.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 99 ANNEX 6: WORLD BANK POLICY ON INVOLUNTARY RESETTLEMENT (OP 4.12) Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 100 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 101 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 102 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 103 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 104 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 105 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 106 ANNEX 7: MINUTES OF THE CONSULTATION MEETINGS 1. Meeting at the Marketing Superintendent Office Minutes of Meeting at the Marketing Superintendent Office in November 2016 Number of people present - 50 people Categories of people represented at the meeting Gorbachop Market Red Light Liberian Marketers Association Paynesville City Cooperation Federation of Road Transport Nimba Field Pipeline Bright Light Purpose of the Meeting This was a follow up meeting with the previous one held several weeks ago pertaining to compensation and relocation of the market at the red light market The audience was further informed that under the World Bank regulations, resettlement is not supposed to make the affected persons worse off when they are removed because of the road construction and resettled elsewhere. The national law may vary and may not cover illegal settlers but since the World Bank is the main financier of the SD Cooper road, its concern payment of all categories of affected people must be respected. The meeting was called to address all the concern of the affected people. In the meeting, resolutions were put forward by the affected people about alternative market relocation, type of market, facilities that must accompany the market and other forms of compensation for various categories of affected people. The meeting was democratic as all invited members were allowed to speak The lead consultant stated the purpose of the meeting and at this time final decision must be taken on major issues pertaining to the market location and type. A number of resolutions were voted upon to arrive at concrete decisions. The following are summary of conclusions arrived at: 1. All those who favour the Omega market as a suitable alternative market for traders along the Coca Cola / S.D. Cooper road were asked to indicate by show of hands up. Nobody shows hand up and therefore there was no support for the Omega market location. The entire audience did not support moving to Omega. All present unanimously rejected the Omega market for the following reasons: The distance of 3km from the Red Light location is considered too far Secondly, the Omega environment is swampy and unhealthy for human location Traders will lose customers and price benefits from wholesales. At Omega one cannot sell at the same price at Red Light due to transport cost Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 107 They prefer Gorbachop market location as an alternate location for the market firstly because it is within the environment in which they live. Distance is therefore not a factor. All present at the meeting voted to support the Gorbachop market location as the best for them They identified land with an area of 8 lots (1 lot is 132 feet by 85 feet) or approximately 2 acres for the location of market. On this land, an all-purpose market with all facilities can be constructed. If necessary they claim to provide additional land for the market of their choice. Key Remarks from representatives at the meeting 1. Marie Smith from Gorbachop market - Stated that Omega market is not conducive because of the distance and simply the nature of the market 2. HenriathaZarkpo from Nimba Field – Stated that Omega is in a deplorable condition for marketing. Surrounding is poor 3. LubethaWeah from Liberian Marketing Association – She said that market should go with facilities and Omega does not have such facilities. So she is advocating that the new market should have facilities such as car park, Vocational Training for women, Tie dye activities, storage facilities. 4. Emmanuel Lavalah from Transport Union – Suggested that a terminal be built for the market, Office facilities etc. 5. Francis Sinyon from Transport Union – He advocated for garbage dump to be built for garbage management. The major concern for the majority was the speedy construction of the market and this should be done well before the road construction begins. This will allow the traders to move in to the new market in time and avoid forceful eviction/confrontation with the authorities. They were also concerned that sufficient information and time should be given to move smoothly and speedily. A further concern by the majority of the people was that they desire a quick payment of compensation which will allow them to make meaningful invested in the new market. In conclusion, the people supported the project as a development enterprise which will be beneficial to them, the city and the country as a whole. Views on Compensation 1. GbaylleWeah from Liberian Market Association - Recommended $500 for 500 marketers who were removed from the road as disturbance allowance 2. YagahKromah, vice president of Transport Union - Requested that market contractors should involve the union during the construction stage of the market or at least discuss the drawings with them. The reason being that they will be using the market and they should influence the type of market being built for them. He further recommended a market that can accommodate 5000 traders. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 108 Photos of Meeting at the Marketing Superintendent Office in November 2016 Dr. Joe Lappia explaining the ESIA process to Cross-session of Stakeholders Cross-section of Participants Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 109 A visit to the Proposed Gobachop market Site Cross-section of Participants Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 110 2. Meeting with the World Bank representative and other stakeholders in the PCC conference room Agenda of meeting with the World Bank representative and other stakeholders in the PCC conference room Minutes of the meeting with stakeholders in the PCC conference room Introduction of project: Mr Rashidu Sinnah updated the participants on the status of the project starting with the planned extension of the road from single to dual carriage. That the client, the MPW hired the services of a South African based consultancy firm, Aurecon, which subcontracted CEMMATS Group Ltd from Sierra Leone to carry out an EIA and RAP study of the impact of the project on the environment and society as a whole. He went on to state that there were gaps in the RAP study, which was why the CEMMATS team has returned to complete the study and fill out the gaps. RAP Preparation: Dr Bona displayed and explained the planned schedule for the benefit of all present. The World Bank representative, Mr Safey cautioned that the project affected persons be given sufficient time to prepare for various stages of the project, whilst also provided with adequate information to make sound decision on matters relating to their welfare. He therefore advised that the start date of for the marking and valuation of structures be postponed by at least 3 days, and that public service announcement should be sent out immediately in order to prevent further loss of time. Dr Bona stated that the preparation of the RAP involves a number of steps that includes the marking and valuation of structures within the 75ft ROW, market survey and registration of petty traders, both stationed and mobile operating regularly or intermittently on the ROW; and also, stakeholder consultations involving government officials, and project affected persons (PAPs). The data obtained from both surveys were planned to be communicated to the relevant government officials at a later meeting prior to the departure of the CEMMATS team. The IIU representative, Mr Kolee highlighted the challenges that included unavailability of data on the structures and people affected by the previous demolition of structures on the ROW of the road in question and the failure to register traders on the road. He stated that new structures emerged on the road that was cleared and that these would need to be assessed this time around. Another challenge, according to him, was that traders are refusing to be relocated to Omega market, as they preferred their present location at Gorbachev: he went on to say that traders were asking for huge compensation. He discussed the anticipated benefits and impacts of the expansion of the road from single to dual carriage to enhance movement of people and goods by decongesting traffic. Benefit: facilitates easier traffic and quick movements, promotes business, less fuel consumption; Negative effect: move people and break structures; that’s why we need the RAP He mentioned the purpose of the ROW as the part of the road system reserved for utilities and safety, and for further improvement by government. Now that people have moved into the ROW and would have to be moved away, the question is how could this be done? He further stated that the RAP involves studies; socioeconomic issues, livelihood, market stalls, schools, clinics; marking of the structures and costs; number of people that will be affected and have to move; men, women, children; then proposal on how these people will be resettled; when to resettle? He asserted that the meeting is preliminary as there would be a bigger meeting with the project affected people. He joined the WB representative to categorically state that the final document should be ready by end of month in order to be able to secure WB funding. Matters arising from the meeting Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 111 • It will be difficult to get information from the people on a short notice; • The structures are not the business of the marketing association; these are private structures; so we will have to deal with the owners and tenants, themselves. • World bank policy on resettlement requires that people have the right to information, people are informed ahead of time to start; the rightful owner of the house should be there, rightful owner of the business should be there; • 2nd principle is the right of free choice; we would need to inform the people in a meeting about their rights, e.g., full compensation with evidence of ownership; e.g., transportation cost for movement; they have the right to refuse; if they refuse, we go through a grievance redress mechanism; if that fails, government can do a forceful resettlement, according to the ‘Imminent domain’ policy; • We should agree on a cut-off date on the cessation of any further development along the ROW; • Announcement for cut off should be prepared today and sent to the radio; • Content of the announcement: who owns the project, what would be the ROW? It must state that people within the ROW will be affected, and should be present for property marking at a stated date. Owner of property should stand by their property; • Marking and valuation should be done by the consultant at the same time, preferably on the 11 th and 12th February; • Verification will be the responsibility of the MPW; • Community leaders will be summoned to a consultative meeting post verification; this is where the people will be informed of their rights and how they would be compensated; • The issue with the previous resettlement work was the failure by the consultant to provide evidence of property marking and valuation; • What alternative roads did the project consider? The World Bank has requested that the engineers explore all options; • People must understand that although the WB is guiding the process, the WB is not paying for the project; the government of Liberia owns and is paying for the project; • Concerns were raised by the bike riders on the possibility of being moved from the road, when the project is completed, a separate lane for bikers was therefore suggested; • expanded; suggesting a lane for the bikers; • The Transport union claimed they already have a place at Omega market; and that all that is needed is to rehabilitate the road leading to that market, which has a capacity of over 800 acres; Soliciting solutions 1) The LMA is suggesting that Gorbachev is a better option; claiming they own Gorbachev 2) If Omega is chosen, the LMA representative cannot state a position in the absence of their leaders; 3) According to PCC, moving to Gorbachev would require major demolition of existing structures; 4) Hence it was clear there was a major contention over market location; 5) Transport Union backed the PCC’s position that Gorbachev is too small to accommodate all the marketers; 6) It was also suggested that those dealing with perishable goods move to Omega market; whilst those trading in non-perishable can stay at Gorbachev; 7) Another suggestion was that there should be no blanket movement of marketers 8) The TU highlighted the synergistic relationship between their institution and marketers, that they believe should be exploited; 9) The road from ELWA to red light has no hard shoulder for parking, especially for commercial motorists; 10) There were design issues relating to route for bikes and parking for vehicles going to Omega market 11) Another suggestion was to enlarge the entrance to Omega market Next step for communities: • Announcement/community announcement by radio and bikes must commence immediately • The local authority must Assist with planning for market survey and structures Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 112 • The issue of choice of market must be resolved. Photograph of meeting with stakeholders at the PCC conference room, 8th February, 2017 stakeholder consultative meeting with World Bank rep making a point in the PCC,LMA , MPW and the World bank consultative meeting representative CEMMATS lead consultant making a point PCC Rep. making a statement Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 113 CEMMATS Consultant giving project up MPW rep. making a point 3. Meeting with property owners and renters at Crown Hotel Minutes of meeting with property Owners and Renters at Crown Hotel, 18th February, 2017 Present at the meeting were 210 affected property owners on the SD Cooper road to Coca Cola Road project as shown in the attendance list in Appendix VC. The meeting started with opening courtesies of Muslim and Christian prayers and self-introductions, Mr.JohnasenVoker the head of the Environmental Department at the Ministry of Public Works Said that they had invited Affected Property Owners (APO) on the SD Cooper road to Coca Cola Road to tell them why their properties (Houses, business places etc) had been marked within the last five days and to initial formal consultations with them. He briefed the property owners as follows: “The Government of Liberia has received grants from the International Development Association (IDA) for the preparation of conceptual design support in the procurement of civil works contract and monitoring supervision services for the construction of a 6.7 km four lanes arterial road from SD copper intersection (through ELWA and Red Light intersection) to Coca Cola factory. The Government of Liberia through the Infrastructure Implementation Unit (IIU), Ministry of Public Works (MPW) intends to upgrade the Road from its current condition that has a deteriorated bitumen surface. The road to be upgraded will enhance smooth traffic flow and improve traffic movement linkages with major corridors. The road corridor is highly built-up with residential, petty traders, low to medium commercial features and artisans. The proposed road project is an important road connecting SD copper intersection and Coca Cola factory. The road starts at SD Copper and end at Coca Cola factory. The road traverses through GSA road, Duport road and Police Academy road with densely concentrated petty traders and business houses. To commence the proposed road project, like any other project that may affect the environment and communities, it is mandatory that the Ministry of Public Works (MPW) through Infrastructure Implementation Unit conducts an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) study and to prepare a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for those whose properties fall within the 75 feet Right of Way on either side of the road. AURECON/CEMMATS Group Ltd. have been contracted by (MPW), to carry out these assessments. He continued that those whose properties had been mark will be compensated according to the government of Liberia and World Bank guidelines. He then requests the lead consultant to make a statement. In his opening remarks Dr Ralph Bona thanks the APO’s for honouring thei r invitation at short notice and went on to explain why their property had been mark and how the calculation for compensation will have to be done. He continued that their property had been marked because those properties fall within the 75ft Right Of Way as indicated by the GoL and the World Bank. He went further to explained that if 20% or more of the total property fall within the ROW, then the entire property will be compensated for and demolished and if less than 20% of the entire property is affected only the affected area will be compensated for and demolished. He said the consultants will ensure that they submit an independent and unbiased report. Dr. Bona said that consultation with APO is key in any resettlement programme and that their inputs, suggestions and recommendations will be treated with all Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 114 seriousness. He continued that there will a resettlement committee and a grievance redress committee at the MPW that will be implementing the RAP. He encourages any aggrieved persons or party to channel their concerns to the IIU at the MPW. Following these remarks, the meeting went into an open forum in which the affected property owners asked both the MPW and consultants. The answers given were documented by the consultants, which formed the basis of this minute. Q1 AngelleKpaka: whether compensation would be done for both house owner and tenant Response Mr.StephenKolee (MPW): We will compensate the house owner for his house and if the tenant had outstanding refund that will be settled between the house owner and the tenant Q2. Charles S Songor: My property is not on the ROW but i constructed drainage to prevent my house, that drainage is on the ROW. Removing the drainage during construction would adversely affect my house. What will I do in that situation? Response Mr.StephenKolee (MPW): We will take your concern to the engineers. Q3. William James Kolie; If I am leasing for 10 years and just two years into the lease the property is assessed and demolished, who will get the compensation. Response Mr.StephenKolee (MPW): We will pay the compensation for the structure to the ultimate property owner. The lessee will have to settle all matters with the property owner according to the agreement made between the two parties. Q4. YesindorGraye: Did the MPW look at the original plan of the road? This is because the original plan of the said road was four lane, two lanes were constructed on the left hoping that in the future the other two lanes will be constructed on the right. My property is not supposed to be affected if the MPW had followed the original plan. It is unacceptable that the MPW had abandoned the original plan and had now taken 75 feet from either side of the road. We will have to take this up with our lawyer. Q5. Shankar Thamnani (Lucky Pharmacy): how would Lucky pharmacy supply drugs to the hospitals and other health facilities if you demolish the structure that had all the modern medical storage equipment? Also if someone lease for 50 year and spend like $ 1 Million to construct a house and just less than 10 years into the lease the house is affected by the road project and demolished, who will claim the compensation package? Response Mr.StephenKolee (MPW): It is unfortunate that such an important structure is on the ROW; however, we will all have to find another location to continue the business. As for lease agreement, we will always pay to the ultimate owner as lease ownership is a temporal ownership Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 115 Q6. Cecilia F Kamara: if my container is on the ROW, will it be pushed behind the ROW or removed to a new location Response Mr. Stephen Kolee (MPW): all businesses along the project road will have to be located elsewhere Q7. Samuel K Quainoo: What will be the payment for the land that the structure is built on? Response Mr. Stephen Kolee (MPW): The compensation package will include payment for the land Q8. Harris G Kollie; What if a person lease a land and put a container, now the container cannot be moved back because there is no space, will the container owner be refunded and by whom?. Response Mr. Stephen Kolee (MPW): Our legal people will look into it. Q9. Mohamed Sheriff: After the demolition exercise will the remaining property be developed? Response Mr. Stephen Kolee (MPW): Yes, Q10. Fato A. Wheremongar: We will have to go the MPW to tell them that we have a deed that any future road construction will take place on the left hand side. We will not allow any ‘’butterfly project’’ to destroy our houses and business places. Q11. AlieJalloh: Do we need to come with all our document for the properties when coming for negotiation? Response Mr. Stephen Kolee (MPW): We will give a week notice in advance to all APO. Q12. Nehemiah T. Sylar: We have bill board along the project road, will we be compensated for them. Q13. Jacob S. Stewart: if my property is assessed and evaluated, will I demolished it and start reconstruction? Response Mr. Stephen Kolee (MPW): No development activities should take place once that property had been marked. Q14. Johnny Bookai: Why is it that the ROW keeps changing? During the first demolition exercise my structure was not affected but the resent one my structure was affected. Response Mr. Stephen Kolee (MPW): the accepted ROW for this kind of road construction is 75 ft and that is what we measured on either side of the road. Q15. What is the time duration between compensation and demolition? Response Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 116 Mr. Stephen Kolee (MPW): We will give enough time usually 3 months but we will communicate that to you The meeting which started at 10:15hrs ended at 2PM noon. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 117 Photographs of meeting with owners and Renters of project affected Property at Crown Hotel Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 118 4. Meeting with petty traders’ representatives from Different Zones at the Red Light Market Minutes of meeting with key stakeholders representing different zones at the Red Light market on Thursday 9th March, 2017. Present at the meeting were 17 key stakeholders representing different zones at the Red Light market as shown in the attendance list. After the opening courtesies, Muslim and Christian prayers, participants were asked to introduce themselves. Dr Ralph Bona. (Lead Consultant) enquired whether all the zones at the Red Light market were represented, zones 2,4,5,6,7 were however not represented, he then asked whether they have a mechanism of relating the massage of the meeting to the rest of the members at red light to which they all responded yes. In his opening remarks Dr. Bona said that the meeting had been called as part of the continued consultation process required in the preparation of a RAP document. He said that the RAP for the SD Cooper to Coca Cola road will not be completed if the issue of where to resettle to numerous traders along the road is not addressed. He said that for this RAP, a total of 239 properties (houses, fences business places) had been marked and 3227 petty traders had been registered and that they will be compensated according to the Government of Liberia and World Bank regulations. He said that the present state of the Omega market can only accommodate at most 1000 traders and the remaining traders (Over 2000) are to be provided with a temporary space within a 25 ft. wall that will be constructed along some areas of the project road especially. He concluded that the new ideal of the wall to retain some of the traders was the main reason for the calling of the meeting James Walker (Ministry of Public Works) addressed the traders as follow The Government of Liberia through the Infrastructure Implementation Unit, Ministry of Public Works (MPW) intends to upgrade the Road from its current condition that has a deteriorated bitumen surface. The road is to be upgraded to enhance smooth traffic flow and improve traffic movement linkages with major corridors. The road corridor is highly built-up with residential, petty traders, low to medium commercial features and artisans. To commence the proposed road project, like any other project that may affect the environment and communities, it is mandatory that the Ministry of Public Works (MPW) through Infrastructure Implementation Unit conducts an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) study and to prepare a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for those whose properties fall within the 75 feet Right of Way on either side of the road. AURECON/CEMMATS Group Ltd. had been contracted by (MPW), to carry out these assessments. He continued that a consultation with Project Affected Persons (PAP) is an important aspect of any RAP and that is why the meeting was called with the petty traders. Concerns from the petty traders and response from the consultants Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 119 Jones P.Y Gibson - In our last meeting we suggested to the consultant to look into the possibility of constructing a market and relocating the traders to Gobachop, we would like to know if the suggestion is been considered. Response Simon Tshekedi (Aurecon)– We are not ruling out any options, the Gobachop option is still on the table but at the moment we want to look at the possibility of constructing a 25ft wall and retain some of the petty traders. We would prefer moving everybody but our mandate here is rood construction Borgor .M Sallah= Safety is a concern here for the traders in the proposal wall, how would you ensure that the traders are safe in the 25ft wall? Response Simon Tshekedi (Aurecon)– The wall will be strong enough to prevent any vehicle from breaking in the event of accident. Mark J. Borbor- Why not used the same money to build the wall to improve on omega market and take all the traders along the road to Omega Response Simon Tshekedi (Aurecon) – Our business is road construction; the government will have to find a permanent market for the traders. Mark J. Borbor- Building a wall will not be an ideal option, there is enough land at Gobachop where a big market that can accommodate all the traders at red light will be constructed. The squatters at the Gobachop market site can easily be evicted and would not require compensation.Those structures were like leased and the time lapse had past for the structures to become freed for LMA. Response Dr. Ralph Bona- We are looking into all the options but the issue of discussion now is the possibility of a 25ft wall for the traders. Jones P.Y Gibson - what will happen to the remaining traders that could not get a space within the 25 ft wall? Response Dr. Ralph Bona- We are looking at the possibility of having a wall that will accommodate the remaining traders. Jackson A S Roberson– I am envisaging a problem with store owner, am not sure the store owners will allow the traders to sell in front of their store Response Simon Tshekedi (Aurecon)- The 25ft is on the ROW and do not belong to the store owners Dr Bona- We know it’s difficult for some people to have traders selling infront of their house/shop etc but the engineers will factor that into their design. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 120 Gbothe E. Morris (Transporter rep.) - We have about 40 parking stations along the road and the 25 ft will not be spacious enough, we will like total relocation of everybody to Omega which we think have enough space for us Response Dr. Bona- all your suggestions will be looked into and discussed with the engineers Joseph Sawo - The proposed 25ft wall plan is very good but we honestly we should be thinking of a more permanent solution now, if the government can do a quick impact project at Omega, all the trader will be relocated there. The problem of street trading will still continue if you leave some of the traders in the wall because they will always have to come back to the street. Madam Catherine Early- The 25 ft wall idea will work because it has worked for us a Somalia drive. We must accept this proposal so that the project will start Joes P.V Gabson- The 25 ft wall proposal is a fine idea but it’s too small for the drivers to operate. Response Simon Tshekedi (Aurecon) –The motor driver will be treated differently, they will not be operating within the 25ft. Photograph of petty traders’ representatives in the meeting Cross-section of Participants Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 121 Cross-section of Participants Cross-section of Participants Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 122 Cross-section of Participants Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 123 5. Courtesy call on the PCC Mayor by CEMMATS SUBJECT: EXPANSION OF THE SD COOPER TO COCA COLA FACTORY ROAD FROM SINGLE TO DUAL CARRIAGE ROAD Date: Friday 10th March, 2017 Location: Office the Mayor Present: C. Cyvette Gibson (Mayor), the Mayor’s Assistant, Dr Ralph Bona (CEMMATS, Sierra Leone), RashiduSinnah (CEMMATS, Sierra Leone), Joseph (CEMMATS Assistant, Liberia) The consultant team made a courtesy call on the mayor of the Paynesville City Cooperation to update her on the ESIA and RAP. Dr Ralph Bona, the lead consultant briefed the mayor as follows: “The Government of Liberia has received grants from the International Development Association (IDA) for the preparation of conceptual design support in the procurement of civil works contract and monitoring supervision services for the construction of a 6.7 km four lanes arterial road from SD copper intersection (through ELWA and Red Light intersection) to Coca Cola factory. The Government of Liberia through the Infrastructure Implementation Unit, Ministry of Public Works (MPW) intends to upgrade the Road from its current condition that has a deteriorated bitumen surface. The road is to be upgraded to enhance smooth traffic flow and improve traffic movement linkages with major corridors. The road corridor is highly built-up with residential, petty traders, low to medium commercial features and artisans. To commence the proposed road project, like any other project that may affect the environment and communities, it is mandatory that the Ministry of Public Works (MPW) through Infrastructure Implementation Unit conducts an Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) study and to prepare a Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) for those whose properties fall within the 75 feet Right of Way on either side of the road. AURECON/CEMMATS Group Ltd. had been contracted by (MPW), to carry out these assessments. He continued that the ESIA, ESMP and the RAP had been compiled and reviewed. He said that for the RAP, a total of 349 properties (houses, fences business places) had been marked and 3227 petty traders had been registered and that they will be compensated according to the government of Liberia and World Bank regulations. Dr Bona said that the most worrying aspect of the RAP is where to resettle the more than 3000 petty traders along the project road as the Omega market can only accommodate at most 1000 traders and the remaining traders are to be provided with temporary space within a 25 ft wall that will be constructed along some areas of the project road. In explaining the mechanism used in accessing the affected properties, he said that if 20% or more of the total property fall within the ROW, then the entire property will be compensated for and demolished and if less than 20% of the entire property is affected only the affected area will be compensated for and demolished. He said that the consulting team will ensure that they submit an independent and unbiased report. Dr. Bona said that consultation with the Major is key in a resettlement programme and that her inputs, suggestions and recommendations will be incorporated into the final document. He continued that there will a resettlement committee and a grievance redress committee at the MPW that will be implementing the RAP. The mayor on her part thanked the consultants for the visit and hoped that such consultations continues so that inputs, suggestions and recommendations will be incorporated into the final document to make it comprehensive. She continued that the resettlement of petty traders and the issue of solid waste along the red light area is a difficult that requires national team effort. She said that the hawkers are particular difficult to handle since they are very mobile and not registered with neither the PCC none the LMA. She said that if called upon she will facilitate the resettlement of the hawkers to OMEGA and the resolution of the issue of waste disposal at the market. The mayor concluded that she did not buy the idea of compensating the property owners and petty traders along the ROW as they are all illegal occupants. Compensating petty traders will capacitate them and encourage further street trading, the Mayor said. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 124 VIEWS OF THE PCC MAYOR ON THE RAP 1. The Mayor appreciates the World Bank’s insistence on the RAP for the expansion of the Tubman Boulevard from SD Cooper to Coca Cola Factory, but is concerned with the legal implications of such an action. Her position is that illegal occupants and defaulters of the law should not be compensated in a RAP, as this would encourage further defaulting; 2. On the 1000 or so capacity of the Omega market, the mayor was disappointed on hearing such a small number against the 3277 registered at the census conducted by the consultant, and acknowledged the enormity of the problem; 3. On the choice of category of petty traders at the Red Light Market from which 1000 can be selected (out of the 3277) to be relocated to Omega market, the mayor’s preference were the hawkers and street vendors as, in her words, ‘they are the traumatised category’. 4. She promised to make phone calls after our meeting, for the immediate relocation of the 1000 petty traders to the Omega market; 5. On the remaining 2000 and more petty traders that would remain at Red Light, and the proposition of reducing the ROW in the Red Light segment to 50ft and keeping the petty traders in the remaining 25ft separated by a barrier wall, she is opposed to this action as this would give the impression of condoning the illegal occupation of the ROW. She stated that the petty traders would traverse the wall at will and that the result will be counter-productive. She advised the consultants to provide a more sustainable option for the resettlement of the petty traders that would prevent them from returning to the street. 6. She mentioned that Omega market is under the jurisdiction of the PCC, and that they would manage its operations very well, once it is occupied. 7. On parking lots at Red Light and other areas, she stated that there is provision for parking and transporters within the market facility; 8. On the structures, and possible adjustment of the extent of the ROW to avoid excessive cost involved in demolishing them, the mayor is also opposed to this, insisting that all structures within the ROW were illegally constructed. The consultants iterated that some of the structures may not have been in the ROW in the past, as its extent was only 50ft then, in some areas. Extending to 75ft for the planned road expansion might be the reason for their inclusion in the ROW. This could therefore provide additional argument for compensation; 9. The consultants are hence requesting consultations amongst relevant government institutions on the RAP project, with emphasis on the MPW and the PCC. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 125 Photograph with the Mayor of Paynesville City Corporation Cemmats team meets the Mayor(in the middle) of Paynesville City Corporation Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 126 6. Meeting with Red Light Marketers in Paynesville Date: 12/7/17 Venue: Crown Hotel Hall In attendance: • Steven K. Kolee, James B. Walker (IIU, MPW) • Dr Ralph Bona, Mamadi Toure, Eric, Joe, Joanna (CEMMATS/Aurecon) Agenda: 1.Prayer 2.Welcome remarks, 3.Recognition of Red Light Market Zone leaders 4.Purpose of meeting: a) MPW proposal to accommodate petty traders; b) Discussion on the proposal 5. Conclusion and closing remarks Minutes: The meeting was called to order by James B. Walker who introduced himself as an employee of the IIU/MPW and requested that one of the participants volunteer to lead us in prayers. He then handed the rest of the meeting to Mr Steven Kolee who welcomed the participants and thanked them for attending in spite of the need to be at the market today. He reminded everyone of the reason of our meeting as pertaining to the expansion of the S.D. Cooper to Coca Cola Factory Road. He went on that the road is important to decongest that segment of a major link to the hinterlands. However, there is an issue relating to the fate of the marketers at the densely populated Red Light street market, according to Mr Kolee. The question according to him was, ‘where would they be relocated?’ A location should be found to which the marketers will be moved so that the road works can commence. The Omega market option has been cancelled as the site is now being used for a housing development project. That aside, the market is not ready and would require further investment and time to upgrade to a workable option. Mr Kolee continued to say that the Gorbachev market suggested by some people is not viable as the market is too small to accommodate the thousands of street marketers registered during the assessment. He went through the government’s plan to demolish structures within 75ft from the centre line on either side of the road for the expansion of the road. He then presented the government’s proposal to demarcate and set aside 25ft on both sides of the road in the Red Light area, from Victory Chapel to Parker Paint Junction to accommodate the street marketers during the implementation of the project, and that a barrier wall will be constructed to protect the marketers, whilst allowing traffic to flow uninterrupted. He concluded by urging the participants to respond to this proposal by way of views, comments and questions, as that was the purpose of the meeting. Questions/suggestions Amos Luogon: This proposal is different from what we heard before concerning our relocation. We were informed that we would be relocated to Omega market. But, if government has come out with a more workable solution, we are happy; Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 127 MemaiFallah: when will the project begin? Kolee’s response: Physical work will begin as soon as the Wet Season ends. Meanwhile, other preparatory work, not affect by the rains is ongoing; Theresa Nyumah: The marketers are many; we are appealing to the government to find a suitable place to relocate us. It therefore appeared that the proposal was not quite understood; hence, it was presented a second time for clarity. YassahJalloh: We welcome the 25ft wide market space as proposed. Nathan Tengbeh: We thank the MPW for the proposal, but appeal to them to get the police officers involved so that they will not chase us away from the market area as they always do. Joseph Sao: during the demolition of the structures along the 75ft ROW, where will the marketers be? Kolee’s response: Whilst we will attempt to answer your questions, not all of them will be answered at this meeting. We will discuss with other government stakeholders, the World Bank and the contractors and revert to you. Be assured that we are documenting all of your concerns, questions and comments. But be rest assured that we will address the issue of where you will be when the demolition is happening. HawaWamah: for hawkers that carry their goods in their hands, what are the guarantees that they will be included in this propose relocation? Emmanual (LMA executive): There will be no discrimination amongst categories of marketers. All marketers will be included in this proposal; Emilia Y. Formoh: the 25ft space might put us right in front of stores. The store owners will claim that they have paid for their shop front space, and might call the police on us. We therefore call on government to communicate their plan to shop owners to avoid this problem; Eton Diang: We believe that the 25ft space is not enough. So, give us a compensation package and we will find another location; Marcy Sirway: We do appreciate the government’s proposal, but we also believe the allotted space of 25ft is insufficient given our numbers. We will need an extension; Walay Moriba: Initially, the suggestion was 100ft ROW, but the Liberian Marketing Association (LMA) negotiated a reduction to 75ft. What is the basis of the 25ft proposal? And what are the guarantees that the police will not come and take advantage of us? Kolee’s response: We have already noted all these concerns: having a written documentation on government’s proposal, making sure the police will not chase marketers away from the 25ft area, and that the LMA will be involved in the implementation. Steve Lebo: We are appealing to government and the contractors to reduce the space to 10ft. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 128 It was therefore clear that some of the participants still did not understand the proposal. It was therefore explained again by the LMA representative, Emmanuel Liyean.. Daniel S. Massa: There is also tension between the marketers and drivers regarding parking space, and this problem will worsen after the 25ft demarcation. We appeal to the government and contractor to look into this. KoluKorva: We would like the government to help us with some financial assistance; GormaFlomo: how would we be making our living when we are removed? Emmanuel Liyean (LMA) gave a background to the whole project starting from its inception to the debate on where marketers should be relocated; the discussion on Omega vs Gorbachev market. He went on to add they the LMA took part in the negotiation to have the 25ft reserved for street market and that government has already taken the proposal to donors. He cautioned that there should be not confusion over the matter. His only appeal was that the space be developed into a market space by upgrading with pavement so that there will be no mud or dust. Siah Sahr: I agree with Mr Emmanuel Liyean. The Red Light area is the only place we have been selling our goods since 1991. There is no better option than to be allowed to operate in the same area. Agnes Jackson: the 25ft space is too small to accommodate all of us; Emmanuel Liyean (interjected): I encourage all to wait until the space has been demarcated on the ground before you can claim that it is too small. Chris Dolo: Let’s bear in mind that there are 3 categories of Red Light marketers: those that own stalls, those that convey their goods by wheelbarrow and the hawkers that carry their goods on their hands. I request that all should be included in this proposal; Emmanuel Liyean repeated his reassurance that all will be included Kolee’s response: MPW will organize consultations and a visit to the site involving market heads so figure how the 25ft will be allotted to cater to the needs of all. We will resolve the concern about the police chasing people away, and we will talk to the store owners too. Precious: Government is our parent, and parent can make provision for their children. Government must find other options such as get us to Omega market or wherever or give us money to find a location of our choice. Emmanuel Liyean: The government does not have money to build the road. The road will be constructed by the World Bank for the government. You should think of a viable option now that we know Omega is no longer an option. We must look at things from all angles. GormaFlomo: We agree with government’s proposal because the Omega option is not possible; TuaraySiah: We agree with the 25ft space. People must stop requesting for money as it is not a sustainable option. Even if government gives us $500, it will not sustain us. Conclusion: Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 129 1. From the voting that was done at the end of the meeting, at least 60% of the participants accepted the government’s proposal. The remaining was split between those demanding money and the undecided; 2. Two categories of marketers were demanding money: the youth that were apparently hawkers and women who claimed to have taken loans from various sources such as Access Bank; Those that accepted the proposal are however asking for guarantees that the will be allowed to settle peacefully in the 25ft space provided. They would like all concerned to get on board (the Police, the shop owners, commercial drivers, etc.), and there should be a signed documentation to that effect; Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 130 INFRASTRUCTURE IMPLEMENTATION UNIT MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS SOUTH LYNCH STREET MONROVIA, LIBERIA Minutes of Consultation Meeting Red Light to ELWA Intersection (4.0 KM) Held with Project-affected Persons At the Paynesville City Hall August 30, 2019 Liberia Road Asset Management Project (LIBRAMP) Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 131 1. Background In continuation of preparations for construction works on the ELWA Intersection – Coca Cola Factory road, a series of consultation meetings has been planned in order to generate adequate awareness of social and environmental issues arising from the project. These issues will potentially impact Project-affected Persons (PAPs) who are expected to be directly impacted by the road construction works along the Red Light – ELWA intersection road segment of the corridor. The most recent meeting, which is the subject of this report, took place on Friday, August 30, 2019, commencing at 2:30 PM. The attendance was impressive, with a total of 157 PAPs in attendance (see attendance records, in Annex 12 above). During the course of the meeting, every opportunity to: inform PAPs about their rights and benefits with respect to World Bank social and environmental policies under the project; encourage their cooperation in ensuring a speedy implementation of the project; and address all issues raised by the PAPs was seized. The meeting lasted for 2 hours 40 minutes, and was followed by submission of PAPs’ attestation documents to the IIU/MPW. Although the meeting was planned and spearheaded by the IIU/MPW Social Safeguards staff, a full team was on hand to facilitate the meeting and provide expert information pertaining to various aspects of PAPs’ benefits and rights under the project. As such, on hand for the IIU/MPW were the Social Safeguards Officer, and two Social Safeguards Support Staff and the IIU Environmentalist. Also present for the IIU were the project Focal Person and other Engineers, an Evaluator and an Auditor. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning were also represented. 2. Team Below is the list of personnel assigned to facilitate the consultation. No. Name Position 1 Augustus Social Safeguards Officer, IIU Nelson 2 Cynthia Social Safeguards Support Staff, IIU Torh Bropleh 3 Alice G. Social Safeguards Support Staff, IIU Bedell 4 Govergo RAP Focal Person and Engineer, IIU W. Tennih 5 Frederick Engineer, IIU Hunder, Jr. 6 Augustine Structure Engineer, MPW F. Taylor 7 Kentoma Estimator, MPW Kilby Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 132 8 Moses Internal Auditor, MPW Yeakasa 9 Aloysius Environmentalist, IIU Kotee 10 James Accountant/Auditor, PFMU Beyan 11 Dawuda S. EPA Representative (Department of Kallon Compliance and Enforcement) 12 Joseph Driver, IIU Allison 13 Darlington Driver, IIU Kahn 3. Welcome The Social Safeguards Officer of the IIU extended a hearty welcome to all PAPs and reflected favorably on the turnout. He made it clear that all doubts and concerns would be fully addressed. He requested that order should prevail so that all points to be raised by the PAPs and addressed by the team would be clearly understood by all. He urged those present to consider all questions important, and assured them that answers could very well help listeners as well as the ones asking the questions. After the welcome by the Social Safeguards Officer, a Social Safeguard Support Staff took the stand. She apologized for the team being late and expressed her gratitude for the PAPs’ patience and enthusiasm in turning out. She paused to request a volunteer to ask God’s blessings on the proceedings. At this point, the team comprising of the IIU and representatives of other government entities was introduced, with each team member stating his/her name and role on the team. 3. Overview The Social Safeguard Support Staff proceeded by giving a concise overview of the World Bank social and environmental policy with respect to road infrastructure such as the corridor under consideration. Amongst other things, she touched on the World Bank’s twin goals of sharing prosperity and reducing poverty. She stated that all Bank projects are required to be environmentally and socially sustainable, and that as such, project risks must be reduced or mitigated. She gave examples such as construction-related pollution. She went on to state that we as Borrower, were obligated to inform PAPs about what was due to them under the project as a result of adverse project impact. She listed some of these impacts as physical displacement, involuntary resettlement, loss of assets or loss of access to assets. The Social Safeguards Support Staff carefully explained to PAPs that for those in the RoW, the IIU/MPW is obligated to find the best way they can be resettled and compensated. She also listed other categories of PAPs who would be compensated, including business people, vulnerable persons, landlords and tenants. She also made it clear that although in the past, PAPs had been required to process and submit their documents and their costs refunded to them, currently the Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 133 Paynesville City Corporation (PCC) had consented to prepare the attestation documents free-of- charge, in order to relieve PAPs of any financial burden involved. 4. Environmental Perspective At this juncture, the Social Safeguards Officer asked the IIU Environmentalist to contribute to the meeting from his professional perspective. The Environmentalist commenced by stating that there were environmental guidelines both from the government environmental body (the EPA) and the World Bank that must be satisfied. He pointed out that not only people in the RoW stood to be impacted, but also those in areas adjacent to the project. He gave the example of people who would be compelled to use detours while work on the main carriageway was in progress. He also mentioned that dwellers on the Red Light drainage channel will be impacted, but that this impact would be assessed and managed. He indicated that this would entail identification of those residing along this drainage channel. He pointed out that the Contractor selected to implement the project would participate in the process of mitigating the project impacts. 5. Presentation by Structural Engineer, Property Evaluator and Others Structural Engineer The Structural Engineer explained his functions on the team, thus: he contributed expert advice to the team especially for impacted multi-storied buildings. He also gave advice on whether demolition of structures would be partial or full, depending on the structural soundness of the building expected after demolition. The Engineer explained that besides the structural consideration, if the impact on any structure was such that the building could no longer be put to any gainful use, then a decision would be made to demolish the entire building, and compensation for the whole building made accordingly. The Engineer also explained that he would be in charge of demolition after compensation and resettlement. He explained that the period between compensation and demolition could be used by PAPs to remove any materials they so desired from their structures, before the demolition equipment started the clearing work. He warned that once demolition commenced, no one would be allowed to remove any items from the site. Property Evaluator The Property Evaluator commenced by stating that there are several types of structures, which respective values depended on whether it was dirt bricks or concrete, whether it was plastered or not, tiled or not. He revealed that size is not the only determinant of cost, but that the construction materials had to be taken into consideration. He revealed further that various rates per square foot had been applied to determine the cost of each structure. He then shared these rates for category of structure. Project Focal Person The Project Focal Person zeroed in on a few crucial issues, including the adjustment in alignment that had been necessitated by presence of the 36-inch LWSC White Plains water main running alongside the roadside in the project area. He revealed that this realignment had caused the level of impact on previously marked structures to be greater, as well as the inclusion and marking of Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 134 previously excluded structures, for demolition. He gave some details of the project, revealing that the project consists of two lanes from Coca Cola Factory to Parker Paint Junction, and four lanes over the rest of the project length, that is, from Parker Paint junction thru Red Light to the ELWA intersection. He explained that while Phase I of the project (Coca Cola Factory to Red Light) is ongoing, the commencement of construction in Phase II had been delayed by the presence of the LWSC water main, and the need for adjustment in the alignment. He explained further that damage as a result of the operation of heavy construction equipment on the pipeline could not be risked because of its importance in supplying the city with water. The Project Focal Person explained to the PAPs that whilst the standard 75-ft distance from the centerline was maintained on the side of the road opposite the water main, an additional 10 ft. was taken on the side of the pipeline. The Focal Person touched on the main Red Light drainage, saying that the run-off must be properly conveyed off the road, or there would be a risk of progressive damage caused by the presence of water on the roadway. He concluded by saying that additional drainage capacity had to be provided by enhancing the existing main Red Light drainage, and that as a result, additional people would be impacted. He said that the same principle applied to those within the RoW would be applied to people affected by the drainage. MoFDP Representative The Ministry of Finance and Development Planning (MoFDP) representative also addressed the PAPs. He revealed that he is responsible for financial management of the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) payments for World Bank-financed projects at his ministry. He explained that both the MPW and the MoFDP work as a team, providing check-and-balance in the compensation payment process: the MPW receives and evaluates attestation documents, and the MoFDP checks to see if the documents are in order. Subsequently, the MoFDP makes payments. He stated that payments are made by means of checks, and that the PAPs have the responsibility to ensure that all documents and items submitted, including the spelling of names, structure numbers contact numbers are correctly done. As for businesses, he said that documents including business registration would be required. All registration dates would be examined with respect to the project cut-off date. EPA Representative The EPA professional revealed that he works with the Department of Compliance and Enforcement. He is serving as an observer on the project with regards to all environmental matters. He said as such, he would make sure that the RAP Report submitted to the EPA would be adhered to. He made reference to one of the requirements, that he could already observe was being implemented, i.e., adequate awareness. He also mentioned the importance of the implementation of the Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM). Attendance No. Name Position Location Cell No. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 135 1. Rev. Mator Raymond Pastor Victory Chapel 0770120272 Reeves 2. Pauline Nwaiouihe Landlord Rep. Duport Road 0775300351 Junction 3. Jacob Stewart Landlord “ --- 4. Levi T. Deor “ --- 0776676702 5. Winnie Senneh --- ELWA Highway 0886322336 6. Nehemiah T. Sylain PAP --- 0880544075 7. Bernice Blama PAP --- 0886528058 8. Paul G. Sylain Landlord Rep. A. B. Tolbert 0777297882 Road 9. Otis J. Raynes PAP Rep. Hage Store --- 10. Morris Soko Sirleaf --- --- 0886420581 11. Amos Cole Businessman Paynesville 0777064703 12. Selena Brown Renter Paynesville 0777376757 13. Fato A. Wheremongar Structure Owner Joe Bar 0777515088 14. Eric Ezeh --- Red Light Market 0770229431 15. Luke W. Loam --- 16. Okafor Chinedu PAP Duport Road 0888314470 Junction 17. John Okapala Tenant Paynesville Tire 0880617129 Center 18. Diamond L Saylon Lease/ Structure Duport Road 0778359560 owner Junction 19. Wilbah J. Giddings Structure Owner “ 0886525313 20. William Reeves Owner --- 0777904051 21. Mariama B. Davies Owner --- 0775001567 22. Sean Howard Owner --- 0770363179 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 136 23. Henry H. Fungoe “ --- 0777586218 24. Rebecca Zogia Power of Attorney --- 0880683915 25. Robertson Monsoe Worker Jetty Trading 0776758922 Corporation 26. Jospeh S. Loboe Owner 0886210228 27. Garjaye Mapleh 0880808259 28. Khalil Haider Owner 0777979666 29. Eddie Woods “ 0880416762 30. Jartu Dixon 0886530794 31. Francis S. Yellie 0775688225 32. Victor Y. Paye Owner 0888228330 33. Mamadou S. Diallo 0886513004 34. Arthur Toabah Owner 0886657589 35. Emmanuel F. Siaffa Owner 0770164309 36. Safiatu James “ 0886684620 37. A. Nyesella Dennis “ 0886560104 38. Gormai V. F. Roberts Business Owner 0886901072 39. Mai Old Lady Sianay “ 0881140690 40. Everlyna D. Mayson “ 0775552179 41. Charlesline D. Mayson “ 0775229839 42. Isaac K. Dunbar “ 0880233028 43. Kollie Savey 0881310633 44. Chris T. Grear Manager --- 45. Edwin Okeke Owner 0776185039 46. Joseph K. M. Sumo Business/Building 0777292277 Owner Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 137 47. Nathaniel K. Morris Owner Business 0776268220 48. James Williams Business Owner 0776095676 49. Samuel Kollie Business Shop 0770496494 50. Benson Miaway 0776286492 51. Frederick Owner 0777008809 52. Alex S. Konah Rep. 0776331431 53. Moses Takpah Business 0770790606 54. Marcus Wolo Business Shop 0770455193 55. Mohammed Konneh Business 0770216183 56. Mohammed Konneh Business 0770307897 57. Bettina S. Mulbah 0880953698 58. Korpo Flomo 0777526603 59. Tina D. George 0775288389 60. Naomi P. Jackson 0770741362 61. Alice Wee 0778807041 62. Jonathan L. Morris Owner, Business 0777735334 63. Emmanuel Cooper Owner Watch Tower 0777566487 64. Zaza Pewe Owner Paynesville 0777145881 65. Hawa Kabah Renter --- 66. J. Francis Borley Administrator Merci 0886433535 67. Mary Goi Property Owner Joe Bar --- 68. Roland E. V. Tuazama Owner --- 0777791122 69. S. Khaleelu A. Business 0886577972 Fahnbulleh 70. Phillip B. Nathan Property 0886549440 Owner/Business Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 138 71. Sameria Nyemah Property Owner New Galaxy 0770545389 72. Ifeanyi Tokpola --- TNNY Brothers 0886829951 73. Uzochukwu Anyugo --- 0776549785/ 0886824009 74. Onyegbu Christian Renter/Business 0888461583 75. James G. Marsa Petrol Retailer Pa James Filling 0886520223 Station 76. Charles F. Songor Property Owner --- 0881566757 77. J. Wolobah Sipor Finance Officer Mega House, Inc. 0886716959 78. Quincy T. Juwle CEO “ 0778160856 79. Shaver Dynamic CEO Kemp and 0886522611 Associates 80. Marie B. Sheriff --- 0881468064 81. Teta Smith 0770661017 82. Mohammed D. Alieu CEO/Owner Superdunarson 0886755539 Enterprise 83. Thomas O. Paul Accountant Junction Shopping --- Center 84. Denise Cooper Daughter, PAP --- 0777333390 85. Mohammed Sheriff Son, PAP 0880887438 86. Irene Jallah Businesswoman --- 0886513073 87. Samuel Larmouth Power of Attorney 0777919115 88. Maude Sienneh Smith Administratrix 0777057445 89. Kenneth Odjugo Owner Evon Med. Store 0886513867 90. Prince N. Chiewolo 0770542604 91. Sambolah Tanbgbeh Assistant Liberia Marketing 0777303472 Manager Association 92. Pastor Kuta Boylner Renter 0775959659 93. Weedor Zawu Owner Dry goods 0770591338 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 139 94. Belinda S. Yahwon Owner Webs 0886510584 International School 95. Jefferson K. Dolo Owner Bethel Life B. C. 0776724912 96. Mayatu Demen Owner Action for 0770176104 Community 97. Prince Ajavon Owner --- 0770777553 98. Gbolu Forkpah Owner Stores 0886554096 99. James Sorsor Siazie Owner J. S. S. 0886467109 Commodities 100. Sarah 0777525408 101. Guwah Benson Renter Proveh 0776111632 102. Alphonso Tamba Owner 0777060258 103. Amos Cephas 0777216204 104. Naomi Bueger Owner 0777578702 105. Precious Sherman Owner 0777578702 106. Jerrine Sendolo Renter 0776795952 107. Prince Emeka Nwosu God is Good 0778668067 108. Decontee Williams Owner 0777165897 109. Louise 0886538088 110. Morris Boiyou Owner M. C B. 0777733593 111. Julie Barclay Renter 0777111504 112. Shirley A. Dennis 0777650658 Sonah 113. Jurgon Carson Renter Ciroc 0886845148 114. Melvin Peabody Owner 0770483592 115. John Kollie 116. Eugene Gibson Owner 0777559018 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 140 117. Henry Teah Sherman Owner 0886979620 118. Phillip C. Obi Renter 0886680540 119. Stanley Ngoka Owner 0777209050 120. Betty Z. Zanay Owner 0776221078 121. Sunday Eze “ 0776984159 122. Doris Gaye “ 0886364477 123. Hyacienth Obira Renter 0886497566 124. Ude Kenneth Ofordile Manger, Business 0881009160 125. Rebecca Paye Owner, Business 0886818351 126. Elaine Cos Owner 0886572765 127. Christine Benson Owner 0886898157 128. Isaac S. Yorcee Owner, Business 0777061275 129. Emmanuel Gonwokay Owner, Business 0776119874 130. Arthur Togbah Owner, Business 0776292946 131. Lovetee Gborglah Owner, Business 0777178553 132. Nimely Farleh Owner, Business 0770025882 133. Paulita Mamie Owner, Business 0888897551 Coleman 134. Fatumata V. Fofana Owner, Business 0770064531 135. Fabian S. Okean Yanwe Owner, Business 0886304098 136. Shem Diaseth Tartu Administrator 0777061177 137. Ansu Kamara Owner, Business 0770185858 138. Ogugofor Harrison Owner, Business 0886951700 139. Marketta Scott 0777428105 140. Kumba Johnson 0777258079 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 141 141. Hassan B. Diakity Owner, Business 0777555271 142. Reston E. Mulbah Renter, Business 0770193263 143. Sunday Ere Business 0776984159 144. Toris Gawe Business 0886364477 145. Pastor J. Darkermini Block A. Leader Sumo 0777825009 146. Janjay White House Owner 0886589587 147. Claude Sylain Landlord 0880775500 148. Bernice Fiske Landlord, 0775600153 Business 149. Obinna Onwuzulume Owner, Business 0776659904 150. C. E. Maximore Owner, Business 0770518201 151. Alvinus Momolu Owner, Business 0775415112/ 0770756695 152. Bettina Zeon Owner, Land and 0776062321 Business 153. Elizabeth K. Mulbah 0886256760 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 142 5.0 Tabulation of Questions and Responses No. PAP Name Structure No. Question/Issue Response 1. Khaliel Haier SDC – CF 107 JG You stated that you will Your payment records pay landlords and tenants (receipts and others) will be for 3months. What reviewed. The same amount determines how much paid to the tenant will be you will pay them? paid to the landlord. 2. There were various marks Other colors of paint may placed on our structures, either be LWSC or project including numbers Contractor marks. Look out written with red paint mainly for the green paint. some time ago, and then These are the structures that more recently with green have been included for paint. The various demolition and marking exercises are compensation. confusing to us. 3. My store is built of You will notice that these bulletproof, reinforced rates are given in ranges, concrete, and therefore with a lower and upper limit, does not seem to fit any depending on the value of of the categories of materials used in and on the buildings you mentioned. building. Because your Wouldn’t the concrete building is cast reinforced rate range of 30 – 40 USD concrete, the rate will likely per square foot for storey be nearer the upper limit, building be an reflecting the higher value underestimate of the per unit area (square foot). actual cost of my building? 4. The MoFDP You must present representative stated in documentary proof that the his presentation that we property belongs to you are to submit correct (deed or other documents documents. Whatdemonstrating proof of constitutes ownership); the PCC will correct documents in this case? issue to you an attestation certifying that you are the true owner; also present your business registration and affidavit, if relevant. 5. Bendu --- What is the process we Come to PCC along with your Saturday should follow to get our deed. If the structure is documents done? marked with the code CCF/SDC, with a number, also copy the structure number and bring it along with 2 passport-size pictures. PCC will verify your Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 143 submission and issue an attestation, to be signed by their Technical Director, and approved by the City Mayor. You are to photocopy the documents and submit the original to the IIU/MPW Social Safeguards office, Lynch Street, Monrovia. Note, if anyone submits documents with the same structure code, the submissions will be placed on hold and the check withheld until the rightful owner is determined. Note: most PAPs have not submitted, thereby delaying others who have. Note: If your structure is not marked, please report this! The team will verify whether it is impacted (included) or not, by checking the records and field visits, if necessary. 6. James Marsa SDC – CF 121 To whom can we submit We will receive your now if we brought documents after the meeting documents here today? here today. Please wait for this process. After today, you will submit to the IIU/MPW. 7. How can you identify During disclosure, we will structure owner if the determine whether business structure is being used for activities are currently business purposes? ongoing (the project cut-off date will be taken into consideration). Note: We are aware that since the PAPs were captured some time ago, some have already moved away. But rest assured that they will be compensated if captured before the cut-off date. There is no compensation after the cut- off date. 8. Quincy T. --- There is a 200-ft tower on If you did not receive a Juwle my property, not marked. building permit from the How will it be considered MPW before constructing Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 144 in terms of the tower, it is more difficult compensation? for you to be compensated. Notwithstanding, we will verify whether it is in the RoW or not, and make a determination afterwards as to how the tower will be treated. 9. You did not meet with us The IIU/MPW has advised for disclosure at the PCS that the number of PAPs who (Paynesville Community have submitted their School) as you stated. documents is too small for us to proceed with disclosure of compensation amounts. Those who have not submitted their documents yet are delaying others and potentially stalling the project and making the Government of Liberia (GoL) vulnerable to claims by the Contractor. Please expedite submission of your documents! 10. Thomas O. SDC – CF 033 A , I’m the Accountant for Your will be calculated based Paul B Representative Johnson’s on your Tax Clearance. Shopping Center, located at ELWA Junction.. With respect to the period over which PAPs experience loss of income, how is this loss to be costed? 11. Are you going to use the LRA has its own rates. As LRA valuation, or revalue stated, our rates are based properties? on present-day cost of actual materials used on each structure. Secondly, our rates are not strictly based on LRA requirements, As stated we are obligated to sharing prosperity as per World Bank policy. Note: if we disclose your compensation figure and you disagree, and we determine that the value of your property is actually lower, we will definitely adopt the lower figure. Remember, if Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 145 you contest, the burden of proof will rest on you. Notwithstanding, you have the right to demonstrate why you think your building has a higher value. 12. Stan S. Ojuku SDC – CF 106 ZA My property is located The demolition will stop opposite the Duport Road where the arrow indicates. Playground. From the We will opt to demolish the road to my property is 25 entire building if we ft. How many feet of my determine that what is left is property are you going to useless for purpose of the take? structure owner. If as you say, 40 ft. of the building is beyond our arrow, then we will decide whether the remaining portion of the building will be useful and structurally sound. This will determine whether the entire building will be taken or not. We advise that no improvement on the building be carried out. You are to obtain a building permit from the MPW before making any improvement 13. Mohammed --- I have tenants. How are Let them go to the MPW with Sheriff they to be compensated? passport size photos and receipts demonstrating payment of rent. 14. Joseph K. N. --- My building is marked 1 This is not our structure code Sendolo +875. but a station number placed by the Contractor to indicate project length at this location. Our codes will carry the characters CCF – SDC, with a number. Your building was not marked! 15. Denise SDC – CF 141 I have a building and a We will only take the shelter Cooper shelter. What becomes of and not the building. Your the building, since it was tenants may remain in the not marked? building. 16. You said if we delay in A few people will stall the submitting our project and thereby affect documents, this will those who have submitted, mean a delay in receiving and leave the government compensation? Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 146 vulnerable to claims from the Contractor. 17. M. Success --- As a renter, what do I No document is required, Savior submit? except for your receipt demonstrating that you have paid rent. Come to MPW, along with your landlord, to verify. But please observe the cut-off date beyond which compensation is not to be made. 18. Maude SDC – CF 125, My property is located Once your building is Smith 127 opposite the JW Junction, marked, it will be impacted. directly behind the LWSC 36-in main. Will it be impacted? 19. Zayzay SDC – CF 105 Besides my property that If you painted over the Pewee was marked, I have three marked we placed on smaller ones in the same structures, it is very difficult location. What becomes for us to determine the of them, since they are numbers. They were erased, unmarked? by those who painted the structures! Nevertheless, we will check the records to see. 20. Lawrence T. SDC – CF 17 B, C The LWSC refused to Your container was captured. carry my number We will pay compensation (container) to the MPW. for relocation of the What will become of me? container. But LWSC will have to confirm that you own the container. 21. Alphonso SDC – CF VR 050, What will be the benefit You will inform us when the Tamba 060 & 070 of tenants who have tenants moved, but recent already moved? receipts will not be honored. If they moved before the cut- off date, compensation will be made. 22. Mardea SDC – CF 071 The most recent marking This is as a result of the Denia color is green. There are realignment. We took 10 ft. also yellow and red on PCS side so that the water marks. But now I’m main wouldn’t be affected. considered to be close to You will be compensated. the water main. 23. Eddie --- I have a lease agreement. If you have your lease Woods How am I to be agreement, our legal people compensated? will determine what is due to you. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 147 24. James SDC – CF 121 My number was erased It is problematic, but we can Williams by some unknown search and also do a field visit person. What can I do? to identify your erased structure number. Observations 5.1. The World Bank has deemed it necessary to enhance consultations before disclosure of compensation amounts. This is reasonable since PAPs’ submission of their documents has been less than desirable, and needs to be stepped up. 5.2. The consultation exercise was very well-attended, indicative of a high level of enthusiasm on the part of the PAPs. There were also indications of the PAPs’ eagerness to have their compensation amounts disclosed to them (some PAPs made reference to the fact that the IIU had promised to disclose previously but had not done so). 5.3. Participants were encouraged to pay keen attention, which they did. Every effort was made to ensure that they understood all the issues involved. They were assured repeatedly that all the issues they raised would be adequately addressed. 5.4. The IIU team consisted of a broad spectrum of professionals, including the project Focal Person and two Professional Engineers, the Social Safeguards Officer of the unit and two well-versed Social Safeguards Support Staff and the IIU Environmentalist a Structural Engineering Specialist, Other key personnel from the MPW included a Structural Engineering Specialist, the MPW Estimator and . Representing other entities of government were representatives of MoFDP and the EPA. 5.5. The Drivers played dual rolls by serving where needed, especially assisting with recording of the event. 5.6. In accordance with the diverse pool of expertise comprising the consultation team, various perspectives on the social and environmental, cost, procedure and documentation for compensation were discussed. Even engineering issues affecting PAPs were treated. 5.7. Importantly, overarching World Bank Policies affecting PAPs were clearly presented by the professionals on the team. 6. Action Required 6.1. The team is in a better position to now proceed with disclosure, which will lead up to other downstream activities, to culminate in site turnover. 6.2. With respect to the GRM, 7 out of 10 leaders selected for communities have so far responded to duty by turning up for the training. Therefore there is a need to complete the number by making up the deficit of 3 members.. 7. Conclusion The Social Safeguards Support Staff thanked the participants for taking up their time to attend the meeting. She reminded them of the importance of sufficient awareness and consultation in order to avoid conflict with the project Contractor and ensure the speedy commencement of the project. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 148 She concluded by requesting the submission of documents by all who had brought them along to the meeting. Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 149 Appendices 1. Definition of Acronyms CCF Coca Cola Factory – S. D. Cooper Junction EPA Environmental Protection Agency GoL Government of Liberia GRM Grievance Redress Mechanism IIU/MPW Infrastructure Implementation Unit/ Ministry of Public Works LIBRAMP Liberia Road Asset Management Project MoFDP Ministry of Finance and Development Planning PAP Project-affected Person PCC Paynesville City Corporation RAP Resettlement Action Plan RoW Right of Way Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 150 1. Pictorial Figure 1 Augustus W. Nelson, IIU Social Safeguards Officer (standing) and Aloysius K. Kotee, IIU Environmentalist (seated) Figure 2 Cynthia Torh Bropleh, Social Safeguards Support Staff (presenting), with the MPW Estimator Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 151 And Social Safeguards Officer in background Figure 3 Cross-section of PAPs in attendance at Consultation Meeting Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 152 ANNEX 8: CONSULTATIVE MEETINGS ATTENDANCE LOGS (ATTACHED) Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 153 ANNEX 9: UNIT RATE OF STRUCTURE TYPES Republic of Liberia Ministry of Public Works Lynch Street Monrovia, Liberia MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS APPROVED PRICE LIST FOR AFFECTED PROPERTIES FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Main No Main Outer Main Roofing Window Main Floor Ceiling Door Cost Range . Structure Type Wall Material Material Material Type Type (per sqft) Decra/Onduline/ Aluminum/ 28- Residential/ Concrete/ guage channeled Aluminum Procelain tiles/ panel/ 1 Commercial Storey Build. zinc/ concrete Framed/glass marble plywood steel $30.00 - $40.00 Decra/Onduline/ Aluminum/ 28- Residential/ Concrete guage channeled Aluminum ceramic/Terraz panel/ 2 Commercial Wall zinc/ concrete Framed/glass o/ Vinyl tiles plywood steel $20.00 - $30.00 Jalousie Window/ Wood/ Concrete/ Residential/ Concrete Decorative Terrazo/ vinyl plywood/ plywood 3 Commercial Wall Metal Sheet/zinc Blocks tiles mat / Panel $20.00 - $25.00 Jalousie Concrete/ Residential/ Dirt Brick & Window/ Terrazo / Vinyl Wood/ 4 Commercial Concrete Metal Sheet/zinc Wood/ tiles plywood plywood $10.00 - $12.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 154 Decorative Blocks Wood/ Residential/ Dirt Brick Decorative plywood/ Wood/ 5 Commercial Unplastered Metal Sheet/zinc Blocks Concrete mat plywood $6.00 - $8.00 Residential/ None/ma Wood/ 6 Commercial Dubbed Mud Metal Sheet/zinc Wood/ Zinc Mud/Concrete t plywood $5.00 - $7.00 Residential/ None/ma Wood/ 7 Commercial Dubbed Mud Thatch Wood/ Zinc Mud/Concrete t plywood $4.00 - $5.00 Residential/ None/Ma Wood/ 8 Commercial Wooden Zinc Wood/Zinc Wood t plywood $2.50 - $3.50 Residential/ 9 Commercial Zinc Framing $8.00 - $10.00 10 Foundation/slab $5.00-15.00 11 Concrete Fence/B.Wire $10.00 - $12.00 12 Concrete Fence only $7.50 - $10.00 13 Handpump $3600.00 - $4200.00 14 Well with culverts $1,500.00 15 Well without culverts $540.00 16 Grave/ Concrete $900.00 17 Grave/ Earth $500.00 18 Grave/ Tiles $1,500.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 155 19 Grave with shelter $1,800.00 20 Retaining wall $3.50 - $5.00 21 Pavement $3.50 22 Monument with engravement $500.00 23 Monument without engravement $350.00 Channeled zinc roof,Ceramic Tile floor with sides close with concrete block $5.00 Channeled zinc roof, concrete floor with sides close with concrete block $3.50 24 Shed Channeled zinc roof, concrete floor with sides close with wood $3.00 Channeled zinc roof, concrete or laterite floor with open sides $2.50 Thatch roof, concrete or laterite floor with open sides $2.00 Reinforced concrete framed structure, usually with cast roof and concrete floor $35.00 - $40.00 Mud bricks structure with zinc roof, steel strusses and concrete floor $10.00 - $12.00 25 Warehouse Concrete blocks structure with zinc roof, steel strusses and concrete floor $20.00 - $25.00 Concrete foundation with prefab structures and roof or zinc. $10.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 156 ANNEX 10: REVISION OF REAL ESTATE TAX, MINISTRY OF FINANCE Revision of Real Estate Tax, Ministry of Finance - Land Valuation Determination Guide (Based on Market Intelligence) Land Tax Calculation as the Stated Rate of 7% on Land Valuation Average Market Value for Tax Determination (Based on Market Intelligence) the Asset Value Location/Description Average minimum Value on Vacant Land Tax per Year in (U.S.D.) Tax per Year in (L.D. @ 105.00) Central Monrovia 2% 120.00 Class A Along the Broad Street and Mamba Point, Capitol Hill 50,000.00 1,000.00 120,000.00 Class B Along the Carey, Ashmun and Benson Streets 30,000.00 600.00 72,000.00 Class C Other Parts of Central Monrovia not in Class A & B 20,000.00 400.00 48,000.00 Sinkor (Ocean View) First Blocks South of the Tubman Boulevard, Warner Class A and Payne Avenue 40,000.00 800.00 96,000.00 Second Blocks South of the Tubman Boulevard, Class B excluding Payne Avenue 25,000.00 500.00 60,000.00 Third Blocks and Beach Front South of the Tubman Class C Boulevard 15,000.00 300.00 36,000.00 Sinkor (North of Tubman Boulevard to Rusell Avenue) Class A First Blocks along Tubman Boulevard, Warner 40,000.00 800.00 96,000.00 Lots between First Lots North of Tubman Boulevard Class C and Rusell Avenue 20,000.00 400.00 48,000.00 Class D First Lots along Rusell Avenue 10,000.00 200.00 24,000.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 157 Other Parts of Sinkor not mentioned above (Saye Town, Jallah Town, ICA Camp, Plunkor, Fiamah, Pyne People, Fish Market Class E Front Lots 5,000.00 100.00 12,000.00 Class F Back Lots 3,000.00 60.00 7,200.00 Class G Swamp Lots 2,000.00 40.00 4,800.00 Congo Town (Old Road) Class E Lots Along the Tubman Boulevard 5,000.00 100.00 12,000.00 Class F Other Front Lots 3,000.00 60.00 7,200.00 Class G Back Lots 2,000.00 40.00 4,800.00 Class H Swamp Lots 1,500.00 30.00 3,600.00 Paynesville, Gardnesville, Bardnesville, & New Georgia Lots Along the Main Paved Street such as Somalia Class G Drive 2,000.00 40.00 4,800.00 Class H Other Front Lots 1,500.00 30.00 3,600.00 Class I Back Lots 1,000.00 20.00 2,400.00 Class L Swamp Lots 500.00 10.00 1,200.00 Brewerville, Virginia, Cardwell, & Johnsonville Class H Lots Along the Main Paved Street 1,500.00 30.00 3,600.00 Class I Other Front Lots 1,000.00 20.00 2,400.00 Class J Back Lots 800.00 16.00 1,920.00 Class M Swamp Lots 400.00 8.00 960.00 Bushrod Island (Via Town to St. Paul Bridge) Class D Lots Along the Main Paved Street (U.N. Drive) 10,000.00 200.00 24,000.00 Class E Other Front Lots 5,000.00 100.00 12,000.00 Class G Back Lots 2,000.00 40.00 4,800.00 Class I Swamp Lots 1,000.00 20.00 2,400.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 158 Upper Montserrado (Lousiana Arthington, Todee, Careysburg, Bensonville, etc) Class K Lots Along the Main Paved Street 600.00 12.00 1,440.00 Class L Other Front Lots 500.00 10.00 1,200.00 Class N Back Lots 350.00 7.00 840.00 Class O Swamp Lots 200.00 4.00 480.00 Outside Montserrado County (Margibi, Grand Bassa, Nimba, & Maryland) Class O Administrative Centers 200.00 4.00 480.00 Class Q Other Major Cities and Economic Zones 100.00 2.00 240.00 Class S Towns and Urbanized Villages 50.00 1.00 120.00 Outside Montserrado County (Cape Mount, Bomi, & Grand Gedeh) Class P Administrative Centers 150.00 3.00 360.00 Class Q Other Major Cities and Economic Zones 100.00 2.00 240.00 Class S Towns and Urbanized Villages 50.00 1.00 120.00 Outside Montserrado County (Sinoe, Rivercess, Kru, Gbarpolu, & Gee) Class Q Administrative Centers 100.00 2.00 240.00 Class R Other Major Cities and Economic Zones 75.00 1.50 180.00 Class S Towns and Urbanized Villages 50.00 1.00 120.00 10% Undeveloped Farmland above Five (5) Acres Class I-1 Paynesville, Gardnesville, Bardnesville, & New Georgia 1,000.00 100.00 12,000.00 Class L-1 Brewerville, Virginia, Cardwell, & Johnsonville 500.00 50.00 6,000.00 Class Q-1 Upper Montserrado 100.00 10.00 1,200.00 Class S-2 Urban Areas outside Montserrado County 30.00 3.00 360.00 5% Developed Farmland above Five (5) Acres Class G-1 Paynesville, Gardnesville, Bardnesville, & New Georgia 2,000.00 100.00 12,000.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 159 Class I-2 Brewerville, Virginia, Cardwell, & Johnsonville 1,200.00 60.00 7,200.00 Class O-1 Upper Montserrado 200.00 10.00 1,200.00 Class S-1 Urban Areas outside Montserrado County 50.00 2.50 300.00 ANNEX 11: PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 160 ANNEX 12: PROPERTY NOT AFFECTED BY THE REALIGNMENT Previous Verification Current Verification Structur Name of Kind of Dimensio Re- e Principal Categor Structur Lengt Width/ Squar Appraise Lengt Width/ n appraise Vari- No. Code Contact y e h Height e/Ft Rate d Value h Height Sqft Rate d Value ance SDC/CF- 3-storey 1989.0 238,680.0 238,68 1 106CE Ducor FA concrete 39.00 51.00 0 120.00 0 0.00 Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 161 ANNEX 13: DATA COLLECTION TOOL Resettlement Action Plan for Red Light Intersection to ELWA Junction Page 162