chapter 6 george ward based planning - George Municipality

Total % Description Challenges / Backlogelectricity above the minimumservice level.• 2 HH’s utilize solar energyusing paraffin & candlesRefuse removal 2 220 HH’s 99.4%Roads & storm water• 99.4%of HH’s receive refuseremoval services above theminimum service level.• HH’s with refuse removalservices represents 4.1% of allHH.• 5 HH’s use a communal refusedump.• 7 HH’s have no access to refuseremoval servicesBacklog: ±7 HH’s• The backlog includes: 7 HH’swith no provision of service• 3% of structures are informalstructuresHousing1 737formalhousingstructures77.81.9% is shacks in thebackyard 1.1 % is in an informalsettlement• The 3% informal structuresrepresent 0.89% of all informalstructures within the municipalarea.Backlog: ± 69 HH’s• The backlog include backyarddwellers and structures ininformal settlementsCommunity facilitiesCommunity hallsTo be addedParks & sport fieldsLibrariesServices by other spheres of governmentMulti-purpose centreTo be addedHospitals / ClinicsSchoolsCrèchesPolice stationTable 6.27: Ward 5 Service delivery StatusWARD CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEYThe IDP ward profiling process (undertaken during the end of 2011 and the beginning of 2012), required thoseattending to complete a survey form in which the performance of the municipality and the standard of servicedelivery and infrastructure in the respective ward were to be rated. The table below shows the results of thissurvey. The “No-response” category highlights the lack of such of facility or lack of access to such facilities withinthe ward, or it can highlight the individuals’ un-awareness of such facilities in the ward.Category: Excellent Satisfactory Poor No ResponseRoads and Storm water:Maintenance of existing Roads 0% 66.67% 33.33% 0.00%Maintenance of Gravel Roads 11.11% 33.33% 22.22% 33.33%Maintenance of Storm water ducts 0% 0% 0% 100.00%Water and Sanitation:Page | 100