1. Jan-Feb 2011

ANALYSIS
pedestrianisation. A sustainable city has the highest number of
pedestrians, slightly lower bicycle users, then public vehicle users and
finally the least number of private car owners. However in the Valley,
there are estimated to be only 19% regular walkers .
There is no doubt that this number needs to be increased for
Kathmandu to sustain itself. The project does propose improvement
of pedestrian movement in the centre area by restricting vehicle entry
in major routes along historic core area (permitted entry to certain
vehicles), creating pedestrian linkages, improving pavements and
sidewalks and creating pedestrian bridge along Bishnumati River with
support from Kathmandu Metropolitan City (KMC). The approach is
certainly appreciable but it fails to address the congestion created by
street vendors. Informal economy is a major source of livelihood for
urban poor and without creating better alternatives, the government
cannot simply stop them from continuing their informal way of
income generation. But on the other hand, informal means such as
street vending, which relies on peak pedestrian flow hours, creating
severe congestion on pedestrian movement. The government can
perhaps strategise some traffic diversion or distribute pedestrian
flow or create rotational street vending system to tackle this issue.
Pavements are also encroached by motor bike parking and extended
activities of adjacent shops which need to be forbidden to allow
walkability. Further on, civic sense towards prioritising pedestrian
movement more than vehicular ones in crossing and junctions seems
to be a fundamental necessity in contest of Kathmandu where all
modes of commuters seem to be rushing at a rapid pace; and this can
only be generated through moral education and understanding.
core but Tundikhel as well needs to be considered a heritage (given that
it existed since medieval times) and preserved likewise.
Another important component of urban sustainability is environmental
quality, which must be incorporated in urban transport system as
well. The project takes this initiative with support from Ministry of
Environment (MOE) by proposing to improve emission and mechanical
testing, fuel quality, air quality monitoring and reduction in the number
of vehicles. Although these approaches are of utmost necessity, their
implementation once again is doubtful. For instance, six air pollution
measuring stations installed in various parts of the Kathmandu Valley,
under the assistance of DANIDA are defunct for the last two years. The
Ministry of Environment was unable to supply constant energy to
operate the stations due to extended load shedding hours and lack of
proper maintenance. As such, proper functioning of testing equipments
this time around still remains debatable.
Conclusion
The Kathmandu Sustainable Urban Transport Project comes as a true
effort towards creating sustainability. It does not try and create the
concrete highway jungle of China or the US, but rather it abstracts from
the pedestrian friendly policy of European countries. However, the
approach is more curative than preventive. It focuses on solving the
immediate problems of the central area and almost ignores the rest of
the city and in that sense it is not truly sustainable. One can argue that
a good initiation from the city core can trigger further developments
outwards. But considering the implementation standards and
almost non-existent monitoring process of the past, any resident of
Kathmandu would be dubious about its implementation as proposed.
In fact, the design and monitoring framework of the report itself makes
several assumptions of successful implementation based on political
commitment, authorities support, effective law enforcement and
transport entrepreneur’s cooperation which unfortunately are the
downside of the country. Hopefully, the report draws an anti-corruption
policy and implementation to be monitored by the international ADB
consultants which can ensure a better performance. Nonetheless, the
project is a positive initiative for the city and its implementation shall be
the yard stick for judgement.e
Historic core saturated with heavy pedestrian flow
Furthermore in order to restrict the vehicles inside the city core it
has allocated four car parking areas in the outskirts - Social Welfare
Council, Old Bus Park, Surface parking off street along Bishnumati Link
Road and west side of Tundikhel (surface and basement parking for
401 vehicles)
The design of Tundikhel parking shows a portion of Westside setback
of the current area near New Road entry with ramps for basement
entry and shops along it. Such a design of a car park in the only
breathing space in the city, could be a controversial one. History
is evident that Tundikhel has been defragmented and reduced
over the years. Now a construction of car park can perhaps initiate
further encroachment of the ground considering the hopelessness
of law enforcement in the country. Arguable but most likely is that
construction of shops along the ramps can attract more informal
activities and congestion along the area. Perhaps not just the historic
References:
MPPW and ADB 2010, “Kathmandu Sustainable Urban Transport Project”, Draft Final Report
Pant Basanta (DSP), 2010, “Traffic Management of Kathmandu Valley and Present
Challenges of Management”, presentation at Urban Dabali, CIUD
Dhakal Shobhakar 2006, “Urban Transportation and the Environment in Kathmandu Valley,
Nepal”, Institute of Global Environmental Strategies
Adhikari Sharad, “Managing Urban Transportation in Kathmandu valley: Challenges,
Constrains and Opportunities”, Workshop strategies, IGES, MOPE
Acknowledgements:
• Mr. Kamal Raj Pandey, Joint Secretary at MPPW and Project Coordinator for KSUTP
• Mr. David Irwin, ADB Consultant and Team Leader for KSUTP
• Mr. Prafulla Pradhan, Regional Capacity Development Advisor, UN Habitat Nepal
• Dr. Jib Raj Pokharel, Heritage Specialist for KSUTP
• Mr. Sudarshan Ram Bhandari, Project Director for KSUTP
• Mrs. Archana Shakya, Kathmandu Metropolitan City
End Notes:
1. KSUTP report, pp 2, section 1.2.3
2. KSUTP annex 2.1, pp.2 shows valley’s vehicular population in 1991 as 34600 and in 2010 as 450,000.
3. Five pilot cities are: Harbin (China), Changzhou (China), Dhaka, Colombo and Kathmandu
4. GEF has been supporting sustainable urban transport projects since 1999 mostly in developing
countries.
5. MPPW and ADB 2010, pp 2 “Kathmandu Sustainable Urban Transport Project”, Draft Final Report
Annexes
6. Dhakal Shobhakar 2006, pp xii, “Urban Transportation and the Environment in Kathmandu Valley,
Nepal”, IGES
7. Adhikari Sharad (Technical Director at DOTM) 2004, pp10 “Managing Urban Transportation in
Kathmandu valley: Challenges, Constrains and Opportunities”, Workshop strategies, IGES, MOPE
January-February 2011
81
www.spacesnepal.com