190
C. L. Hada et al.
on advocating the importance of RSLUP. In short, there is no complete process and
implementation mechanism tool for RSLUP.
RSLUP is an initiation of broader planning scenario and envisioning of the future
urban form to provide the basic right of any citizen, i.e., safer place to live and
prosper. RSLUP’s recommendations and guidelines should be implemented through
a legal document “building bye-laws” by the municipal authority. The building byelaw must be implementable, acceptable, and inclusive to translate the future safer
growth vision of the municipal region. RSLUP’s recommendations and guidelines
can be implemented through various mechanisms and tools related to urban development, land management, financial incentivizing such as land readjustment (land
pooling), transfer of development rights, infill development, building pooling, etc. At
the same time, institutional capacity building of the municipal authority is required
to implement the RSLUP and its implementing tools efficiently and effectively. The
integration of RSLUP to strengthen urban governance is the utmost importance.
10.8 Application of RSLUP in Selected Municipality
and Key Learning
Initially, the development of RSLUPs received support from officials of the municipalities, as well as from other ministries and agencies of the Government of Nepal
(GoN). The RSLUPs were prepared to align with higher-level physical framework
plans but were never endorsed and for this reason there were no subsequent steps for
its adoption and implementation by various government agencies. The implementing
agencies are weak to engage the wider stakeholder’s participation and collaborate
during the process of preparation, adoption, implementation, and enforcement to
strengthen the legal and institutional frameworks. Till date, eight RSLUPs have been
prepared for urban settings in Nepal. Past experience has shown that the process of
RSLUP and their implementation status is very much limited and has hardly made
it to the public sector’s development decisions. Such limitation of RSLUP prepared,
among others, is conspicuously prominent in the case of city bye-laws that largely
fails to integrate the risk reduction strategies.
No doubt, risk-sensitive land use planning has played an effective role in reducing
disaster risks in Philippines and Bangladesh. Risk-sensitive land use planning seeks
to adopt the best land use options and translate the assessment of risks into the
appropriate location of land uses, functions, and facilities into land use regulations
and policies. It is a potentially powerful mitigation tool as it seeks to mitigate the
risks and vulnerability from several geological and other hazards, generally through
physical measures such as strengthening structures to withstand earthquakes, limiting
development in flood and landslide-prone areas, placing development away from
geologically unstable areas.
The utility of RSLUP has immense possibility in an effective disaster risk reduction in Nepalese context, in the post-2015 earthquake. Methodologically integrating
C. L. Hada et al.
on advocating the importance of RSLUP. In short, there is no complete process and
implementation mechanism tool for RSLUP.
RSLUP is an initiation of broader planning scenario and envisioning of the future
urban form to provide the basic right of any citizen, i.e., safer place to live and
prosper. RSLUP’s recommendations and guidelines should be implemented through
a legal document “building bye-laws” by the municipal authority. The building byelaw must be implementable, acceptable, and inclusive to translate the future safer
growth vision of the municipal region. RSLUP’s recommendations and guidelines
can be implemented through various mechanisms and tools related to urban development, land management, financial incentivizing such as land readjustment (land
pooling), transfer of development rights, infill development, building pooling, etc. At
the same time, institutional capacity building of the municipal authority is required
to implement the RSLUP and its implementing tools efficiently and effectively. The
integration of RSLUP to strengthen urban governance is the utmost importance.
10.8 Application of RSLUP in Selected Municipality
and Key Learning
Initially, the development of RSLUPs received support from officials of the municipalities, as well as from other ministries and agencies of the Government of Nepal
(GoN). The RSLUPs were prepared to align with higher-level physical framework
plans but were never endorsed and for this reason there were no subsequent steps for
its adoption and implementation by various government agencies. The implementing
agencies are weak to engage the wider stakeholder’s participation and collaborate
during the process of preparation, adoption, implementation, and enforcement to
strengthen the legal and institutional frameworks. Till date, eight RSLUPs have been
prepared for urban settings in Nepal. Past experience has shown that the process of
RSLUP and their implementation status is very much limited and has hardly made
it to the public sector’s development decisions. Such limitation of RSLUP prepared,
among others, is conspicuously prominent in the case of city bye-laws that largely
fails to integrate the risk reduction strategies.
No doubt, risk-sensitive land use planning has played an effective role in reducing
disaster risks in Philippines and Bangladesh. Risk-sensitive land use planning seeks
to adopt the best land use options and translate the assessment of risks into the
appropriate location of land uses, functions, and facilities into land use regulations
and policies. It is a potentially powerful mitigation tool as it seeks to mitigate the
risks and vulnerability from several geological and other hazards, generally through
physical measures such as strengthening structures to withstand earthquakes, limiting
development in flood and landslide-prone areas, placing development away from
geologically unstable areas.
The utility of RSLUP has immense possibility in an effective disaster risk reduction in Nepalese context, in the post-2015 earthquake. Methodologically integrating