Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan for Urban Transportation System

September 22,2016

Ichiro Kobayashi

Team Leader, JICA RRNE Project

2

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Purpose of the Project

The propose of the SUIT project is to develop and demonstrate a concept for an index to measure and report on sustainable urban transport in Asian cities and progress towards Sustainable Development Goals.

The index is to be based on a set of indicators that will reflect the various models of transport and refer to contributions of transport within the relevant dimension of and goals for sustainable development.

Review of Discussion Paper

3

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Table 1 SDGs and targets of explicit or direct relevance for transport. Page 7 of discussion paper

9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation

9.1 Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure for natural disasters, including regional and trans-border infrastructure, to support economic development and human well-being, with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all.

9.2 Develop transport infrastructure resilient against natural disasters, such as earthquake, flood, landslide etc., to support emergency response activities.

11 Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe resilient and sustainable

11.2 By 2030, provide access to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems, even after natural disasters, for all, improving road safety, notably by expanding public transport, with special attention to the needs of those in vulnerable situation, women, children, persons with disabilities and older person.

4

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Natural Disaster Damage and Sustainable Development

Resilience

Time

No Disaster

Disasterwithout BBB

Disasterwith BBB

BBB&

DRR

GorkhaDisaster

NextDisasterDisaster

mitigation efforts

Disaster mitigation

efforts

RecoveryRecovery

Source: The Project for Assessment of Earthquake Disaster Risk for the Kathmandu Valley

5

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Seismic Hazard in Asia region

High earthquake hazard city: Manila, Indonesia, Yangon, Dhaka, Kathmandu etc.,

Source: Global Seismic Hazard Assessment Program, 1999

6

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Situation after the 2015 Gorkha earthquake on April 25, 2015

KTM-BKT road (land deformation)

Residential House collapse

7

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Residential Area

8

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Comparison of historical earthquake damage in the Kathmandu Valley

8

1934 > 2015~1833 > 2015 largest aftershock

2015 Gorkha (M7.8) 50,984 (8.3%) 40,166 (6.5%) 1,713 (0.1%) 9,024 (0.4%) 614,777 2,517,023

Mid Nepal (M8.0) 53,465 (20.9%) 74,941 (29.3%) 17,695 (1.3%) 146,874 (10.6%)

North Bagmati (M6.0) 17,796 (6.9%) 28,345 (11.1%) 2,616 (0.2%) 21,913 (1.6%)

KV local (M5.7) 46,596 (18.2%) 68,820 (26.9%) 14,333 (1.0%) 119,066 (8.6%)

1934 Bihar (M8.4) 58,701 (22.9%) 77,773 (30.4%) 19,523 (1.4%) 162,041 (11.7%)

Assessmet / Damage 0.84 1.69 2.77 4.40

Comparison of the 2015 damage with North Bagmati scenario (in %)

Damage of 2015 Gorkha earthquake Current

Scenario earthquakes and damage assessment of 2002 project At the time ot 2002

256,203 1,387,826

EarthquakesDamage of Buildings Casualty No. of

BuildingsPopulation

Heavily Partly Death Injured

After JICA, 2002

YearTotal

BuildingsPopulation Remarks

1833 7.3-7.7 3,565 29% 296 0.59% 12,500 50,000 Masonry

1934 8.4 55,739 71% 4,296 1.36% 78,750 315,000 Masonry

2015 7.8 91,150 15% 1,713 0.07% 614,777 2,517,023 RC+Masonry

2015 7.8 72,920 39% 1,370 0.18% 188,750 755,000 Masonry

Damage to

BuildingsDeaths

(references: Oldham(1883), Rana(1935), UNDP(1994), Bilham(1995, Web), NPC(2015),

Ohsumi(2015) , Sapkota(2016) and Bollinger(2016))

Source: The Project for Assessment of Earthquake Disaster Risk for the Kathmandu Valley

9

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

9

KV

SATREPS (Tokyo Univ., DMG) provided the fault model details

M=8.6

M=7.8

M=7.8

M=7.8

M=8.3

Largest Aftershock M=7.3

Far-Mid Western

Nepal Scenario Eq.

Model

Western Nepal

Scenario Eq.

Model

Central Nepal

South Scenario

Eq. Model

Gorkha Eq. Model 1934 Eq. Model

Magnitude 8.6 7.8 7.8 7.8 8.3

Type Reverse Reverse Reverse Reverse Reverse

Scenario Earthquake Verification Earthquake

Scenario Earthquake Fault Model Three Scenario Earthquakes and Two Verification Earthquakes

(set technically, for disaster management purpose)

Source: The Project for Assessment of Earthquake Disaster Risk for the Kathmandu Valley

10

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

JAPAN’s Experience/Regulation (1996- :After the Great Hanshin earthquake, 1995))

Definition of Emergency Transportation Route (ETR) To ensure a smooth transport which occurs immediately after the earthquake, emergency transportation route is to connect the disaster prevention bases in each other.

In Japan, the ETRs are designated as Primary ETR, Second ETR and Third ETR.

Primary ETR: The route which connects the each city hall (including regional disaster prevention center and international airport) for the main functions of the emergency measures.

Second ETR: The route which connects the primary ETR and the public office and main disaster prevention bases. (including police office, fire station and medical center/hospital)

Third ETR: The route which connects the other disaster prevention bases (regional transport hub, stockpiling warehouse, etc.)

Designation of Emergency Transportation Route and Disaster Prevention Base

11

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

RRNE’s Study (2016)

Designation of Emergency Transportation Route (ETR) [Proposal]

The component of the emergency transportation road network in KV is based on the following classification.

National ETR: The route which connects the Disaster Prevention Complex in each other. Also the National ETR connects the primary bases in the inside/outside of KV.

Typical road width ≧ 20m (Urban Transportation Master Plan/JICA-Study)

Primary ETR: The route which connects the Disaster Prevention Complex and National ETRs. Also the Primary ETR is to complement the National ETR.

Typical road width ≧ 12m (ditto)

Second ETR: The route which connects the Second Prevention Base/ New Open Space for evacuator and National/Primary ETR.

Typical road width ≧ 8m (ditto)

Designation of Emergency Transportation Route and Disaster Prevention Base

12

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Designated DPB in KV (Draft)

Designation of Emergency Transportation Route and Disaster Prevention Base

13

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Designated ETR in KV (Draft)

Legend

1 Kathmandu Ring Road

2 Araniko Highway

3 Tribhuvan Highway

2 Primary ETR 4 DOR's Roads, others

5 DOLIDAR's Roads, others

6 Additional ETR (RRNE)

Classification of ETR Name of ETR

1 National ETR

3 Second ETR

Designation of Emergency Transportation Route and Disaster Prevention Base

14

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Preconditions/Target of Vulnerability Assessment RRNE Team carried out field survey of 63 bridges (April 2016).

These 63 bridges were evaluated the risk of collapse by using the "Kubo/Katayama Method" (Tokyo Metropolitan Conference on Disaster Reduction, Seismic Review Committee for Bridges/1976)

Evaluation index for analysis

Vulnerability Assessment of DOR’s Bridges in KV

No. Evaluation Index No. Evaluation Index

1 Condition of Ground 6 Number of Span

2 Liquefaction 7 Width of Crown

3 Type of Girder 8 Seismic Class (JMA)

4 Condition of Bearing 9 Type of Substructure

5 Height of Abutment/Pier 10 Material of Abutment/Pier

15

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Location of DOR’s Bridges (63)

Vulnerability Assessment of DOR’s Bridges in KV

16

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Sample result of bridge damage As part of the vulnerability assessment, showing the calculation results of the

following three bridges.

Vulnerability Assessment of DOR’s Bridges in KV

Bridge Number Bridge Name Road Name Classification

of ETR Evaluation Value (P)

Photograph

3 27-H003-

031 Manohara

(New)

Araniko Highway 6.000kp

National ETR L =83.75m RW=12.5m

5-spans

37.6 (huge damage)

P≧30

13 26-H002-

001 Bishnumati

Tribhuvan Highway 1.200kp

National ETR L =83.10m RW=13.4m

8-spans

27.0 26 ≦ P ＜30

31 26-F026-

003 Manomata

Chabahil-Sankhu

11.200kp

- L=42.0m

RW=6.3m 3-spams

18.9 (no damage)

P < 26

17

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Calculation of the evaluation value Calculation of the evaluation value of the bridge damage is due to the following

formula.

P = Evaluation Index1 x E.Index2 x E.Index3 x E.Index4 x E.Index5 x E.Index6 x E.Index7

x E.Index8 x E.Index9 x E.Index10 ……… formula(1)

Estimation result of the bridge damage is shown as below.

Vulnerability Assessment of DOR’s Bridges in KV

Seismic Class JMA=5.0 (MMI=7)

JMA=5.5 (MMI=8)

JMA=6.0 (MMI=9)

JMA=6.5 (MMI=10)

JMA=7.0 (MMI=11)

Other evaluation index Condition of Ground: 0.2≦Tg＜0.4, Possibility of liquefaction

Number of damaged bridge (nos.)

Dam

age

asse

ssm

ent

Damage Rank A

(huge damage) P≧30 0 0 7 14 16

Damage Rank B

26 ≦ P ＜30 0 3 7 2 12

Damage Rank C

(no damage) P < 26 61 58 47 45 33

Under Construction 2

Total 63

18

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

3D View of Emergency Transportation Route and Open Spaces

Open Space

New Open Space

Damage Estimation Bridge

Secondary

Primary

National-RingRoad

National

Emergency Transportation Road Network

19

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Proposed Organization of the KVRP Formulation

GON

NRA KVDA

Ministries and Agencies

・

Strategic Development Master Plan for the Kathmandu Valley

JAPAN

DDCs Municipalities

Kathmandu Valley Resilience Plan (KVRP)

Japanese Experience of

Preparation of Resilient Plan under the concept of BBB

Priority Actions in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030

Risk Assessment of Earthquake Disaster for

Kathmandu Valley

JICA

Implementation of Priority Project by each

Ministry

• MoF • MoUD • MoFALD • MoPIT • MoE • MoHA •Department Mines and Geology •DUDBC •Other organizations

20

Kathmandu Valley Resilient Plan

Thank You