12                                                            East Port of Spain

12.1                              Characteristics and Issues

12.1.1                             Area Characteristics

For the purposes of this Study, East Port of Spain is defined as that part of the Study Area lying east of the St. Ann's River, its perimeter to the north and east being Lady Young Road and on the South Beetham Highway. It straddles the administrative areas of the Port of Spain City Corporation and the San Juan / Laventille Regional Corporation.  It includes five main settlements each with overlapping neighbourhoods that in the process of  community-centered rejuvenation and regeneration the communities will identify. These settlements are:

·         Belmont (upper and lower) embracing the north west sector.

·         Morvant nestled in the east sector and fringed by Lady Young Road on the east.

·         Laventille lies between Belmont and Morvant accessed from Belmont in the main via St. Barb's Road with Laventille Road running through this settlement from Piccadilly Street on the west  to Morvant on the East.

·         Beetham stretching the length of the southern fringe across the Priority Bus Route from Laventille.

·         Sea Lots though outside of the physically defined area lies to the south west of Beetham to which it has very strong historical human settlement connections as it also does to Laventille.   

 

 

The areas to the north of Lady Young Road (Mon Repos, Never Dirty, Romain Lands and Marie Road) have been included elsewhere in this report (see section 11) as it is felt that the development problems and issues in these areas are more characteristic of the other hillside areas (e.g. Maraval, Dundonald Hill) where development is still expanding and also because it is distinctly separated from East Port of Spain by the Lady Young Road. 

In 1990, the total population of the area was around 71,500 representing around 55%of the total Greater Port of Spain population.  The number of households increased during the 1980s although the population declined.  In particular, the number of households increased in the hilly areas above Belmont and neighbouring Gonzales and in Picton and Eastern Quarry of Laventille.

An examination of up to date aerial photography indicates little potential for new housing, or for any other form of development in East Port of Spain.  In short, the area is at capacity.  It is noteworthy that the vacant sites identified in the 1973 Planning Study for the areas were developed during the 1980s. 

Virtually the entire area is hilly – the only exceptions are Belmont proper and lower Gonzales, lower Laventille along the Eastern Main and Old St. Joseph Road., Beetham and Sea Lots.  Settlement has occurred throughout the area with over 63% occurring on slopes steeper than 1:6.  The area is predominantly residential with no major employment or commercial areas except those adjacent to the Eastern Main Road.  The distribution of schools and churches is widespread but there are few health or recreational facilities.

The area is the heartland of the panyards, which traditionally was and to some extent still is community-based. The most famous of the community-based steelbands is Desperadoes atop Picton Hill where they have built a new complex which combined with the historic Fort Picton, the RC Fatima Shrine and the artistically decorated WASA tanks and reservoirs provide one of the best vantage points across the city . 

 

This suggests the possibility of Picton Hill becoming an organised cultural development focus.  Much of the development in the western sections of Laventille has occurred in defunct quarries that previously supplied aggregates for the construction of the city.

There is little recent data to describe the characteristics of the Study Area.  In 1973, one quarter of the housing was described as in ‘poor’ condition, and a further 20% as ‘fair’.  It is probable that this proportion will have decreased due to the gradual upgrading by existing householders and the low incidence of new housing.  The great majority of households relied on standpipes and pit latrines; conversely virtually all had electricity. In 1973, over 70% of households relied on standpipes. 

This proportion is likely to have decreased but much of the upper central part of Laventille has little in the way of a water distribution system.  Proper sewerage was confined to lower Belmont, Morvant, Success Village and Picton / Clifton.

Elsewhere pit latrines are ubiquitous; these can operate successfully when there is little water usage but problems arise when house connections are introduced. In many areas, there is no proper drainage system and reliance is placed upon crudely dug earth conduits which frequently become blocked and overflow onto the tracks and roads.  The hilly nature of the area however prevents flooding.  The main exception is the low-lying Beetham area where flooding does occur.

The road network in the area is fairly extensive and most properties have road access.  This varies considerably in quality from good quality surfaced roads, through partially paved lanes to unpaved tracks.  Low quality, newer properties on the hillsides are accessible only by means of steps cut into the hillside.  In some areas, e.g. Upper Belmont, these have been properly engineered and concreted.  There is little organised public transport in the area and reliance on licensed and unofficial 'PH' taxis is almost total.

 

 

The area has a wide range of land tenures from individually owned small plots, planned NHA neighbourhoods, ‘chattel’ rentals (renting of private plots) and squatting.  In 1973, around 25-35% of households were squatting and 40-50% were chattel rentals; most of the remainder were owner occupied.  The main squatting settlements are Sogren Trace, Morvant Old Road, Alexis Street, Picton Quarry, Eastern Quarries, Upper Leon Street and Beetham Phase IV.  Many of these are old-established communities where the housing has been improved and redeveloped over time.  They all involve hillside housing.

In 1973, unemployment in the area was around 20%.  The current rate is probably somewhat higher given that in the mid-1990s, unemployment in St Anns as a whole was 20%.  It is noteworthy that unemployment in St Anns did not decline in the 1990s as occurred in the rest of the Study Area.  There is no information on employment within the area although anecdotal evidence suggests the following:

·         Little locally based employment.

·         The majority of those employed work in Port of Spain proper.  A rough estimate is that this area provides 15-20% of employment in Port of Spain.  

·         A high level of under-employment with a high preponderance of unskilled and casual jobs.

In general, there has been a lack of concerted government activity in the area.  This is manifest in the poor condition of many roads, a high number of unpaved and un-engineered tracks, a low incidence of household water connections, few health or recreational facilities, and, paradoxically, by the high level of squatting and other low income housing which does not conform to official standards.  Community groups complain about the lack of government involvement and investment and the apparent unwillingness to assist them in progressing development initiatives that they have identified. In particular, they fear that their enthusiasm and local support will evaporate unless concrete results are achieved.

Nevertheless government activity in the area has not been entirely absent.  Flats and housing have been provided, electricity coverage is virtually total, many roads are paved and some of the major ones are in good condition, coverage of schools is widespread.  The 1995 ‘Land Regularisation’ Act identifies several squatting locations and schedules them for eventual regularisation.  Three of these are currently being progressed – Alexis Street, Sogren Trace and Upper Leon Street, Success Village.

There are also several community development initiatives by the INPPC, the Community Development Division, and the National Commission for Self Help and the Unit for Poverty Eradication and Equity Building.  Some of these initiatives are funded by the Community Development Fund (from the IDB).

These initiatives tend to be small-scale infrastructure improvements (e.g. landscaping) or geared towards instigating community development activities (e.g. after school programmes) and encouraging private sector involvement.  These initiatives operate through some of the large number of community based organisations (CBOs) operating in the area. 

Characteristics of Principal Sub-Areas

Belmont - embracing the north west sector and containing the flat section skirted by Belmont Circular Road and the sloping terrain rising from the eastern side of the Circular and traversed by the connecting Belmont Valley Road and St. Francois Valley Road.

The latter provides a vehicular access to the Lady Young Road. Belmont is linked to Laventille via St. Barbs Road and straddles the neighbourhood of Gonzales via Belle Eau Road.  Belmont is one of the oldest settlement of POS with its beginning generated by Emancipation in 1838 when the those freed moved from the plantations to the eastern reaches of POS - Belmont and Laventille. This reality shaped its physical layout:

Now Belmont’s streets reflect Belmont’s independence of mind.  Not for them the orderly sameness of Woodbrook layout, so lacking in character that one could not, at a glance, tell a Petra Street from a Rosalino Street. 

If the streets in Belmont were planned at all, it must have been by someone with a devious mind, who preferred mystery to predictability.  The characteristic of Belmont’s streets was and still is the casualness with which roads wander into lanes, and end abruptly in alleys without a word of warning.” (taken from “Memoirs of a Belmont Boy”   author:  Ralph Araujo)

But there was community cohesion from very early recorded as far back as the 1860's when the Rada families settled firstly in Belmont Valley Road bringing with them their strong African spiritual values. Later along the Circular and in close proximity the Christian churches were established - Belmont Methodist Church, St. Francis R.C. Church, St. Margaret's E.C. Church. Primary and secondary schools flourished. The Belmont Orphanage came into being.

Morvant is a relatively new settlement coming after World War II.  It is one of the early public housing programmes structured in planned layouts and through which the Lady Young Avenue meanders. It is linked to Laventille through Laventille Road on the north, Pelican Road on the west and Old Morvant Road on the south.  The NHA has over the years undertaken apartment construction within this settlement.

Laventille lies in the centre of the Study Area, epitomising the designation "behind the bridge", an expression it shares with its western neighbourhoods of John John and East Dry River, due to its main access point to Down Town POS being the bridge across the river on Laventille Road. Its southern boundary is littered with a number of streets emanating from the Eastern Main Road and intercepted by the one-way (west to east) Old St. Joseph Road. 

This is the district made up of a number of villages which include Trou Macaque, Success, Chinapoo, Prizgar Lands, Picton Hill, of remarkable evidence of human survival, of creativity - the soul of Carnival and of the steelpan is largely rooted in this place -, of community viability and conflict and fragmentation. Haphazard physical development expresses itself as you ascend with the housing in many areas not conforming to conventional planning standards but yet with a certain order rooted in the common sense that survival evokes.

So many of its citizens say they live under the yoke of a dehumanizing stigma which substantially limits their potentialities and therefore shortens the horizons of their young people. The facilities so necessary for viable human settlement are largely non-existent.

Beetham was a Shanty Town which lived off the La Basse now it is Beetham Estate - a transition from wood to concrete - comprising some 800 families and having direct links to the Waste Disposal Facility, the Central Market and the City. It comes under the jurisdiction of the NHA and is flanked by two main arterials - Beetham Highway on the south and the Priority Bus Route on the north.  Central to the Estate is the playground with SERVOL on its eastern side. These features effectively generate two communities - Beetham E, which includes a settled area and a squatter area on the eastern extremity and Beetham W.  Beetham is a substantial residential area in place for many years and which has grown and become consolidated by official and unofficial settlement action.

Sea Lots: this community actually below the south west corner of East POS comprises some 500 families has been dangling on the eastern coastal section of the City for decades living from day to day with no official sense of the future except that created by its own energies. This is the most significant of the residential settlements on the Waterfront. It is physically divided by the St. Anns River into two sections - Sea Lots East and Sea Lots West also called Katanga. They both fringe the Sea Lots Industrial Centres and have direct linkages with the St. Vincent Caricom Jetty and the Central Market.

Residency in this area goes back many generations linked initially to the old La Basse, to the St Vincent Jetty and to pirogue (by oar and then by engine) fishing. The population has grown and may comprise some 2000 people. There is some level of community mobilisation and organisation in both areas and a high degree of attachment to their location, as evinced by the following expressed views of the citizenry:

"we want to stay. Our families have grown in these areas, our children go to school in The City, we find jobs on the Waterfront "

"we deserve a better standard of living. We want to improve our homes to become legal"

"don’t talk about relocation. We will not stand for that"

"raise the esteem of the people. We want our lives"

"we are prepared to contribute to the settlement upgrading of the area".

12.1.2                              Key Issues

The problems facing Eastern Port of Spain are numerous and varied.  They have been enunciated many times, e.g. in the 1973 and 1988 documents produced by TCPD, in the IDB-financed Urban Shelter Study and by residents themselves.  At the risk of some over-simplification they can be categorised into two main groups:

·         Problems related to physical development particularly housing and infrastructure.  These are of prime concern to this project

·         Problems related to social and non-physical development.  These issues are essentially outside the scope of this study.  Their amelioration requires policies and proposals related to community development and viability which though not directly addressed further in this study are impinged through the process of relevant physical development issues.

It should be emphasised that much of what follows is general in nature.  The area is large and contains a wide variety of communities with their own character, opportunities and problems.  Improvement priorities will thus both differ and vary between neighbourhoods – two communities with poor roads and water supply may have different perceptions of which should be the priority issue.  Opinions will vary on how to develop ‘opportunity sites’.  Some areas may have problems unique to themselves, e.g. the impact of pollution in St. Anns River in Sealots.

 

Problems related to land use

Eastern Port of Spain is an essentially residential area that supplies a significant proportion of the labour force to central Port of Spain. The area has developed incrementally, largely outside the official planning system, and without limited reference to any land use plan.  Most structures have been built without planning permission.  Anecdotal evidence suggests that TCPD hardly ever handles planning applications from East Port of Spain. The area is essentially at capacity in that there are few opportunities for new settlement development.  Those that do exist tend to be small and scattered throughout the area; they often involve existing underused or derelict sites.

There are few opportunities for increasing the quantum of settlement development.  There is also little potential for changing the overall existing and well-established pattern of land use: to do so would involve major redevelopment and relocation.  Three comprehensive development areas were proposed in the 1973 plan but were never implemented.  The density of development also acts a major constraint on future large-scale redevelopment. There is a clear need for an increase in recreational facilities.  Health care provision also appears to be deficient as does the availability of community centres which can provide a focus for community-based activities and organisations.  There are negligible sites at present in use for business development.

The potential for significant change is limited in the extreme, existing development control standards are inappropriate and unaffordable and there is no reason to believe that the application of stricter development control in the area will be either feasible or beneficial. It was also apparent that in some areas, local communities exert some form of development control in preventing further housing development. In this context, the clear requirement is for the identification of potential development sites, decisions as to what such sites should be used for, and measures as to how the preferred uses can be brought to fruition.  This undoubtedly emphasises that planning and implementation have to take place simultaneously.

 

Housing Related Problems

The majority of houses have been established for many years and have been subject to continual upgrading and on plot redevelopment as financial resources allow. 

This applies to squatted, chattel and owner-occupied housing.  The presence of sub-standard housing in many areas is thus limited to newer houses located on the upper hillsides.  One would expect that these too, would, over time, be improved.  Again the major exception is part of Beetham (phase IV) which, unlike the other blocks in this area was never redeveloped.  Much of the area is squatted, and has been for many years.  Current government policy is for regularization, which will increase security of tenure and encourage residents to upgrade their properties and contribute to infrastructure upgrading.  This policy is to be welcomed. 

Problems with Infrastructure

The principal problems relate to inadequate water supply, extensive need for sewering, inadequate roads, poor sanitation and drainage.  The extent of these problems vary considerably within the area as a whole.  In some areas, e.g. lower Belmont, they are not evident.  In others, e.g. the squatting areas, they are omni-present.  In general however the problems are essentially localised, i.e. action at a local level would lead to substantial improvements, without either requiring action at a wider scale, or impacting negatively on other areas.  One major exception is Beetham where flooding in the area comes from the lack of capacity and inadequate maintenance of the main drains. 

12.2                            Proposals for Action

12.2.1                             Proposed Strategy

The Port of Spain Local Area Concept Plan prepared in 1999 recommended an approach based around incremental upgrading and rehabilitation.  The current study endorses this approach.  Proposals for major redevelopment are rarely implemented due to problems of cost, local opposition, and/or the unavailability of alternative sites for existing residents.  Simultaneously, the existence of such proposals can act as a barrier to ongoing, incremental upgrading.

 

This situation should only change where relocation sites, acceptable to the local population, are available and can be developed at an affordable cost. There is however one exception – Beetham Phase IV - where comprehensive redevelopment may be the only feasible option.

12.2.2                             Area Planning Guidance

The key principles in the proposed approach are the following:

·         Any programme for upgrading must be developed with the full participation of the local community (ies) and the active involvement of community organisations operating in the area.  This participation should include the identification of priorities and solutions to the deficiencies and opportunities specific to that area. It should also extend to participation in the scheme implementation/ construction works.  These organisations have detailed knowledge of their areas, a clear perception of the priority problems, and can identify sites, however small that offer development opportunities. They resent outsiders presenting them telling them what should be done or what they should be doing. 

·         It is imperative that any initiative has some financial commitment that will permit the implementation of some of the identified improvements.  Many communities and organisations are wary of planning and development initiatives.  Too often they have come to nought leaving them angry and disillusioned.  Funding sources should therefore be identified beforehand

·         The process should be incremental.  It should focus, in the initial stages on lower cost, more easily implementable issues.  Too often, proposals have been over-ambitious and financially excessive.  As a result, projects implemented represent only a small proportion of those proposed.  As mentioned above, the lack of follow-up implementation is a large factor in local dissatisfaction and mistrust.  The emphasis should thus be on categorising problems in terms of their likely cost and, initially, concentrating, on those that can most easily be resolved and are consistent with the finance likely to be available.  [The issue on the inter-relationship between problems in adjacent areas is discussed below]

·         There should be co-ordinated action involving relevant government departments and agencies, e.g. Ministry of Housing and Settlements, Ministry of Planning and Development, INPPC, Land Settlement Agency, WASA.  The aim would be to co-ordinate activities into a reduced number of more concentrated initiatives.

Without doubt the rejuvenation and regeneration of East POS is possibility the most challenging human settlement enterprise for the country. The citizens are tired and despondent and fed up with promises that seldom ever materialise, with consultations that lead nowhere, with tomorrows that carry no hope:

"Due to a lack of interest tomorrow has been cancelled indefinitely" - a Morvant graffitti

Therefore the way forward requires a properly funded simultaneous planning and implementation thrust - for trust to be generated, for the population to be stimulated, for the communities to sense by visible achievement the possibility for their collective and individual viability.

Accordingly the enterprise cannot be undertaken in the conventional frame: it requires an urgent, action-oriented, integrated approach based on the fundamental involvement of the resident population and structured to pursue an incremental process.

Although one hesitates to use the word ‘vision’ in the context of East Port of Spain, where government investment and assistance has, for many years, been limited, the following can be seen as representing the ideal:

‘By 2020, the provision of physical infrastructure and social/ community facilities in East Port of Spain should be similar to those provided elsewhere in Greater Port of Spain and employment opportunities inside and outside the area should reduce unemployment to national levels’.

Some ideas to build on community based planning in the East Port of Spain area are illustrated in Figure 12.1.

 

12.1                                                          Implementation and Phasing

12.2.3                             Implementation Mechanisms

The principal vehicle for implementing the wholesale rehabilitation and upgrading of East Port of Spain will be a specially designated Task Force. It could come under UDeCOTT or similar agency and the area can be given a special legal designation by the State to allow for the undertaking to have a specific focus, a time frame and a capacity to resolve land ownership issues.

The Task Force should be a small unit, housed in the area with sensitively located branches as necessary.

12.2.4                              Phasing

There would be three main stages to the implementation process:

Stage 1     Identification:

·         Establish a physical presence in the area

·         Identify ongoing public and private sector projects; evaluate their effectiveness and shortcomings. 

·         Generate linkages with The Port of Spain City Corporation and The San Juan Laventille Regional Corporation, with the relevant government agencies - URP, NCSH, WASA - and the relevant Ministries assess and co-ordinate where necessary the existing ongoing public and private sector projects

·         Organise a system of community participation and mobilisation and collaboration with NGO's, CBO's, Steelbands

·         Interface with the private se