Documents1.worldbank.org
Kampala City Council
Kampala Institutional and Infrastructure Development Project
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Final Report
Prepared by:
AquaConsult
In association with
EMA CONSULT LTD and SAVIMAXX LTD
November 2006
Table of Contents
Table of Contents i
LIST OF ACRONYMS viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT x
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xi
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background of the Project 1
1.2 Terms of Reference 1
1.3 Description of the Project 2
1.3.1 Study Area 2
1.3.2 Project Strategy 2
1.4 Project Components 3
CHAPTER TWO: METHODS AND TECHNIQUES 4
2.1 General Approach 4
2.2 Literature Review 4
2.3 Field visit, Data Collection Assessment and Synthesis 4
2.4 Consultations and Coordination with Stakeholders and Agencies 5
2.5 Collaboration with other Consultants 5
2.6 Assessment of Infrastructure Investments 6
2.6.1 General Task Scheduling 6
2.7 Impact Assessment and Ranking 8
CHAPTER THREE: SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS 10
3.1 Institutional, Policy and Legal Framework for Environmental Management Including Wetlands ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..10
3.1.1 Institutional Framework 10
3.1.2 Implication of Institutional Framework on KIIDP 19
3.1.3 Other Agencies that will Impact KIIDP 20
3.1.4 Policy Framework 21
3.1.5 Legal and regulatory Framework 21
3.1.6 International Legislation 26
3.1.7 World Bank Operational Policies and Potential Gaps with the National Legislation 26
Wetlands Management in the Context of Uganda Legislation and the World Bank’s Op 4.04; Natural Habitats 28
3.1.8 Situation Regarding Bahia grass 29
3.2. CURRENT SITUATION REGARDING DRAINAGE INVESTMENTS 31
3.2.1 Bio-physical environment 34
3.2.2 Socio-Economic profile of the drainage investments areas 44
3.3 SITUATION REGARDING TRAFFIC AND ROAD MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT 47
3.3.1 Bio-physical and Socio-economic Environment 47
3.4 SITUATION REGARDING URBAN MARKETS 59
3.4.1 Bio-physical characteristics of markets 59
3.5 SITUATION REGARDING PHASE 1 SOLID WASTE INVESTMENTS 65
3.5.1 Bio-physical Characteristics of the Current solid waste disposal facilityat Kiteezi 65
Physical Features 65
3.5.2 The current site and its environment 67
3.5.3 Proposed Extension to Kitezi Sanitary Landfill 70
Planned operations 72
Post closure features of the extension 74
3.5.4 Bio-physical characteristics of the proposed extension of Kiteezi waste disposal site 74
3.6. SAFEGUARD POICIES TO BE TRIGGERED BY MITIGATION ACTIONS 76
CHAPTER FOUR: SUMMARY OF OUTCOMES OF STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS 78
4.2.1 National Environment Management Authority 78
4.2.2 Wetlands Inspection Division 78
4.2.3 Medical Officer of Health, Kampala City Council 79
4.2.4 Water Resources Department 79
4.2.6 Kampala City Council and Local Council Chairpersons 80
4.2.7 Engineers Registration Board (ERB) 80
4.3 Views from and Suggestions of Users 81
4.3.1 DRAINAGE INVESTMENTS 81
4.3.2 ROAD IMPROVEMENT INVESTMENT 83
4.3.3 URBAN MARKETS IMPROVEMENT 88
4.3.4 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT 91
CHAPTER FIVE: POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS OF INVESTMENTS 94
5.1 DRAINAGE INVESTMENTS 94
5.1.1 Positive Socio-economic Impacts 94
5.1.2 Flood Attenuation Dams 98
5.2 TRAFFIC AND ROAD MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT 98
5.2.1 Positive socio-economic impacts 98
5.3 URBAN MARKETS IMPROVEMENTS SUB-COMPONENT 103
5.3.1 Positive Socio-economic impacts 103
5.4 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL 105
5.4.1 Environmental Impacts of Soli Waste Disposal facilityExtension 105
5.4.2 Environmental Problems Associated With the Continued Operation of Solid Waste Disposal at Kitezi 109
5.4.3 Measures Needed for Continued Operation of the Current solid waste 109
Management facility 109
5.4.4 Capacity Building Needs for Strengthening Environmental Management by KCC ……………………………………………………………………………………………110
5.4.5 Issues to be considered during the Process of Establishing a New solid waste 110
Management facility 110
5.5 RECOMMENDATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AT KCC 111
General Recommendations For Drainage Investments 111
Specific Recommendations 111
CHAPTER SIX: RECOMMENDED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES FOR CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTORS 113
Environmental Guidelines for Contractors 113
General Environmental Management Conditions 113
6.1 General 113
6.2 Traffic Management 118
6.2.1 Blasting 118
6.2.2 Disposal of Unusable Elements 118
6.2.3 Health and Safety 119
6.2.4 Repair of Private Property 119
6.3 CONTRACTOR’S ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND SAFETY MANAGEMENT PLAN (EHS-MP) 119
6.3.1 EHS Reporting 120
6.3.2 Training of Contractor’s Personnel 121
6.3.3 Cost of Compliance 121
6.3.4 Example Format: EHS Report 121
6.3.5 Example Format: EHS Incident Notification 122
6.3.6 Example Format: Detailed EHS Incident Report 123
CHAPTER SEVEN: KIIDP ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN 124
REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………………………………….145
APPENDICES ……………………………………………………………………………………….149
APPENDIX A: TERMS OF REFERENCE 150
Scope of Work 150
A. Drainage Systems 150
B. Traffic and Road Maintenance Management 152
C. Urban Market Infrastructure 152
D. Solid Waste Management 153
E. Construction practices 154
F. Environmental Management Plan 155
APPENDIX B: CONSULTED STAKEHOLDERS 156
APPENDIX C: SURVEY INSTRUMENTS USED 161
SURVEY INSTRUMENT ALIGNMENT WITH THE TERMS OF REFERENCE 161
A) Drainage Systems 161
B) Traffic and Road Maintenance Management 163
C) Urban Market infrastructure 165
D) Solid Waste Management 166
APPENDIX D: REFERENCES 163
APPENDIX E: SUMMARY OF WORLD BANK’S OPERATION POLICIES 170
APPENDIX F: KCC’S VECTOR MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES AT MPERERWE-KITEEZI SANITARY LANDFILL 174
LIST OF ACRONYMS
BLB - Buganda Land Board
BOD - Biochemical Oxygen Demand
CAA - Civil Aviation Authority
CBD - Conservation on Biological Diversity
DECs - District Environment Committees
DWD - Directorate of Water Development
EA - Environmental Analysis
EIA - Environment Impact ASSESSMENT
ELUs - Environmental Liaison Units
EMP - Environmental Management Plan
FGD - Focus Group Discussion
FC - Faecal coliforms
FS - Faecal Speptocsca
GDP - Gross Domestic Product
HIV - Human Immune-Deficiency Virus
HVAC - Hot Ventilation Air Current
IAQ - Indoor Air Quality
KCC - Kampala City Council
KDMP - Kampala Drainage Master Plan
KIIDP - Kampala Institutional and Infrastructure Development
Project
KUSP - Kampala Urban Sanitation Project
LC - Local Council
MERV - Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value
MTN - Mobile Telephone Networks
MoWHC - Ministry of Works, Housing and Construction
N - Nitrogen
NCRP - Nakivubo Channel Rehabilitation Project
NEA - National Environment Act
NEAP - National Environment Action Plan
NEMA - National Environment Management Authority
NES - National Environmental Statute
NFA - National Forest Authority
NGO - Non-Government Organizations
NRSC - National Road Safety Council
NWSC - National Water and Sewerage Corporation
O&M - Operation and Maintenance
Op - Operational Policy (i.e.World Bank Guidelines)
PPE - Personal Protective Equipment
RAFU - Road Agency Formation Unit
RAP - Resettlement Action Plan
R-Value - Resistance Value
SOE - State of Environment
TB - Tuberculosis
TN - Total Nitrogen
TOR - Terms of Reference
TP - Total Phosphorous
UBOA - Uganda Bus Operators Association
UBOS - Uganda Bureau of Statistics
UCC - Uganda Construction Commission
UIA - Uganda Investment Authority
UNDP - United Nations Development Program
UNEP - United Nations Environment Program
URA - Uganda Revenue Authority
URC - Uganda Railways Corporation
UTL - Uganda Telecom
UTODA - Uganda Tax Operators and Drivers Association
VOC - Volatile Organic Compounds
WCU - World Conservation Union (formerly, International Union of Conservation of Nature - IUCN)
WFP - World Food Programme
WHO - World Health Organization
WID - Wetlands Inspection Division
WRMD - Water Resource Management Department
WS - Water Sample
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The Environmental Practitioners who carried out the Environmental Impact Assessment for Kampala Instititutional and Infrastructure Development Project thank the following people for their specialist input in the assessment: Bill Wandera (Team Leader), Dr. Frank Kasiime, Charles Nuwagaba, Elizabeth Aisu, Nelson Kisaka, Mawejje David and Moses Bamanya. We are grateful to the Project Co-ordination Unit staff of KIIDP particularly, Tamale Kiguddu, Bonnie Nsambu, and Edward Mukalazi who contributed immensely towards the successful completion of the environmental assessment. We are indebted to Ms Edeltraut Gilgan-Hunt and Solomon Alemu of The World Bank for reviewing all the reports and for their valuable comments.
We are indebted to all respondents in the various Divisions of Kampala who participated in Key Informant Interviews and Focus Group Discussions. We thank officials from the Central Government institutions particularly Wetlands Inspectorate Division, National Environment Management Authority and Water Resources Department who participated in our public consultations.
Samuel Vivian Matagi
Enviromental Chemist/Enviromental Practioner
Prof. Gaddi Katushaya
Drainage Engineer/Environmental Practioner
Dr. Natal Ayiga
Sociologist/ Environmental Practioner
Luka Agwe
Socio-economist/ Environmental Practioner
September 2006
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The general objective of this Environment Analysis (EA) is to identify, assess and mitigate the potential environmental and social impacts that may result from the infrastructure investments planned under the Kampala Institutional and Infrastructure Development Project (KIIDP).
The specific objectives are:
i) to identify and assess potential adverse environmental and social effects of the planned programme
ii) to make recommendations that can be used for mitigating adverse effects resulting from programme implementation
iii) to prepare Environmental management plan that can assist in implementing mitigation measures recommended
iv) to ensure that programme activities conform to both national and World Bank safeguards.
The Terms of Reference for the study are in Appendix A.
Kampala City Council (KCC) is preparing the Kampala Institutional and Infrastructure Development Project (KIIDP), an initiative primarily designed to strengthen the governance and institutional structure within KCC in order to enhance service delivery and improve economic performance of the city. The infrastructure and services improvements cover the areas of drainage, solid waste and urban markets as well as traffic and roads maintenance management. The project has three components, namely,
➢ Institutional Development
➢ Citywide Infrastructure and Services Improvement.
➢ Project Management
KCC recognizes that the improvements will result in some positive as well as certain negative environmental impacts. It is imperative that the impacts be identified so that measures are taken to enhance the positive while the negative impacts are mitigated against, all within the framework of the development process.
This report focuses entirely on Environment Analysis of infrastructure improvements component of the KIIDP. This component will support activities aimed at improving the provision of critical services to the city. The investment in infrastructure and service improvements will address four priority areas: (i) drainage system; (ii) traffic and road maintenance management; (iii) solid waste management and (iv) urban markets infrastructure. Thee purpose of these investments is to contribute to the economic and commercial development of the city, which is critical for inducing public confidence and subsequently, encouraging compliance with municipal regulations i.e., due payment of property rate. The infrastructure investment will be phased and predicated on defined institutional and fiscal milestones and targets that will trigger investment packages during project implementation.
The methods applied in preparing the EA report included review of past reports, and technical designs, socio-economic field surveys, observation of biophysical environments, water quality sampling and analysis. This was followed with data analysis and synthesis basis of which, the consultants identified, analysed and assessed the potential environmental and socio-economic impacts covering both Phase I and II of the project but identified mitigation measures and the environmental management plan for only the investments under Phase I. The methods applied to collect data required for analysis included literature review, field assessments, focus group discussions, key informant interviews, water sampling and laboratory analysis, synthesis and analysis of data and reporting.
The literature review covered aspects of legal, policy and institutional framework for environment protection and management as well as the technical designs prepared for some of the infrastructure investments, particularly the drainage and the roads and traffic management sub-components. The fieldwork focused on the assessment of the biophysical and socio-economic characteristics of sample investment areas. The aim was to determine the baseline conditions and to assess to what extent these would be impacted by the proposed investments in order to identify the corresponding mitigation and/or enhancement measures.
Impact Assessment
In assessing the potential negative impacts, all issues were subjected to Rapid Impact Assessment Matrix (RIAM)[1]. The RIAM assigns negative value ranges for potential negative impacts so they can be ranked according to severity in terms of importance, magnitude, reversibility and cumulativeness. This method isolates the critical impacts from those that may be relevant but not as significant. The critical impacts are further evaluated to form a basis for the Environment Management Plan.
Situational Analysis
The institutional, legal and policy profile is such that:
• the institutional, legal and policy framework in place appear adequate for the implementation of the environment management plan of the mitigation requirements for the proposed investments
• enforcement of certain regulations, like planning control to discourage invasion of public way leaves and road reserves, however needs strengthening.
The socio-economic issues, within the investment areas are such that:
• urban poverty dominates the socio-economies and this perhaps accounts for invasion of land parcels in the project areas for residential purposes
• current land use along the project corridors includes subsistence cultivation on the edges of the wetlands, light industry and informal settlements.
The biophysical characteristics in the drainage investment areas are such that:
• little natural environment remains in the upper reaches of the drainage channels but the downstream sections are dominated by natural flora which in certain aspects is under threat from encroachment by human activity particularly
• the urban markets are situated in fully urbanized localities with little or no natural environment to be considered.
• The bio-physical characteristics in the road improvement corridors consists of some wetlands in some sections, flora in others and rolling terrain planted with Buganda clans trees.
• The Buganda clan’s trees were planted by the palace workers along the Lubiri Road as a symbol of their alligence to the Kabaka. They used to provide a shade for the Kabaka’s subjects who would wait to greet him on his way from the palace to Bulange. Over time, the trees gained prominence as part of the cultural heritage linked to ancient tradition.
• The biophysical status of the site proposed for the extension of the present landfill in Kitezi is that the site is dominated by flora comprising Lantana, camara, Commelina bengalensis, Sesbania sesban Impomea spp. and Amagdelina spp. The fauna comprises of Marabou stork, White egrets and Weaverbirds.
• The economic activities in most, expect in some of the traffic and road maintenance development corridors, are essentially subsistence and most activities are make-shift; established in the evening and removed at night. The implication is that the proposed project activities may not result in permanent nor large-scale distortion to existing lifestyles.
Table (i): Key positive impacts of implementing the KIID Project and
their impact levels.
|CATEGORY |POSITIVE IMPACT |IMPACT LEVEL |
|Socio economic |As a result of the proposed investments, the construction sector | |
|Impacts |will, in general terms, benefit from increased business during |+3 |
| |project implementation | |
| |Communities adjacent to the project areas will get employment | |
| |opportunity during the improvement process. More new jobs will be | |
| |created thus improving the socio-economic well-being of the |+5 |
| |communities involved | |
The investments will improve the aesthetic appeal of the immediate environment in the development corridors, it is expected that this could enhance human activity in these areas; see table (i) above.
Critical Negative Impact and Mitigation Proposal
• Thus creating potential for negative impacts like increased soil erosion and more solid waste generation. The implication is that measures for better environment management need to be instituted. This possibility underlines the need for implementing the institutional development component of KIIDP, which is designed to address KCC capacity to manage the city’s infrastructure.
Institutional and Legal Impact
The key positive institutional and legal outcomes of the proposed investments identified can be summarised as follows:
• The proposed infrastructure investments will generally result in better service delivery by KCC particularly within the project localities.
• Improving urban services often induces voluntary compliance by residents with municipal dues and rates. This will in turn improve KCC revenues and contribute to its financial stability.
• Improved traffic carriageways, demarcation and marking of lanes and installation of traffic signals together with road signs act as a basis for better traffic management and enforcement of traffic regulations. This will result in more disciplined road use and therefore reduction in road accidents.
• Regarding urban markets, KCC (Employer) should institute measures that ensure better supervision of the contractor’s activities
Drainage Investments
The key positive impacts identified of the proposed drainage investments identified can be summarised as follows:
Table (ii): Key positive impacts that will accrue from upgrading the drainage in
|CATEGORY |POSITIVE IMPACT |IMPACT LEVEL |
|Drainage investments |The drainage investments will reduce flooding, slow down pollution of | |
| |downstream waterways through better management of the drainage systems | |
| |and therefore contribute to better overall environment management | |
| | |+5 |
| |Drainage improvements will reduce incidence of diseases, particularly | |
| |malaria since stagnant waters where mosquitoes often breed will be | |
| |eliminated in parts or reduced in some sections of the drainage systems | |
| | |+4 |
| |These investments will improve environmental cleanliness and enhance | |
| |hygiene through better management of wet lands and drainage systems. For| |
| |instance, the practice of dumping solid wastes in drainage channels will| |
| |be reduced and hence blockage of culverts will be ameliorated. This will| |
| |improve property values for the poor who often reside in these | |
| |localities |+2 |
Urban Markets Improvements
Some of the key positive impacts identified of the proposed urban market improvement investments are summarised as follows:
Table (iii): Key positive impacts that will accrue from markets upgrade in
Kampala indicated against their impact levels
|CATEGORY |POSITIVE IMPACT |IMPACT LEVEL |
|Urban Markets |The urban markets improvements will result in better hygienic and | |
| |improved environmental conditions that will attract more shoppers and | |
| |encourage better business subsequently enhancing commerce and trade in | |
| |the respective localities |+5 |
| |Farmers will be able to sell more of their produce faster since market | |
| |management operations will be streamlined as a result of better | |
| |infrastructure in the markets |+4 |
| |The work environment for the poor will improve enhancing their chances | |
| |for better revenue generation. | |
| | |+4 |
| |More stalls will be constructed, therefore vendors currently without | |
| |proper retail premises will be accommodated and their incomes secured. | |
| | |+5 |
Road Maintenance Investments
The traffic improvements and road maintenance investments will result in the following key positive impacts:
Table (iv): Key positive impacts that will accrue from traffic and roads
maintenance upgrades in Kampala, and their impact levels.
|CATEGORY |POSITIVE IMPACT |IMPACT LEVEL |
|Road Maintenance |Traffic that is more orderly flows through widening and signalising | |
| |junctions, road marking and road furniture thus reducing congestion | |
| |especially during peak episodes. |+5 |
| |Better traffic flow will act to reduce the net volume of carbon emissions | |
| |into the atmosphere. |+4 |
| |Damage to vehicles resulting from poor road surfaces will be reduced thus | |
| |saving foreign exchange currently being spent on importing spares. | |
| | |+3 |
| |Indiscipline road-use practices will reduce since structured traffic control| |
| |measures will be in place. | |
| | |+3 |
Solid Waste Disposal Improvement
The solid waste disposal improvement investments will result in the key positive impacts listed below:
Table (v): Key positive impacts that will accrue from the upgrade of the waste
disposal facilityof Kampala, and their impact levels.
|CATEGORY |POSITIVE IMPACT |IMPACT LEVEL |
|Solid Waste Disposal |Extend the life of the present facility by three more years. This will | |
| |provide employment within the locality for that additional period |+4 |
| |Enhance solid waste management by KCC by providing a treatment and safe| |
| |disposal facility. |+5 |
| |It has potential for improving municipal revenues if KCC pursues the | |
| |global carbon-trading opportunities | |
| | |+3 |
Critical Negative Impacts and Mitigation Proposals
Based on the Rapid Impact Matrix, the most critical negative impacts together with their mitigation measures were identified and are summarized per investment in TABLES (vi), (vii), (viii) and (ix) below:
|Table (vi): DRAINAGE INVESTMENTS |
|CATEGORY |NEGATIVE IMPACT |MITIGATION |
|Socio-Economic |Accidents during construction arising from |Barricades to be erected along the works and proper |
|(Construction Phase) |interruption to access routes located within or |signposting to direct users away from the |
| |along the development corridors |construction sites |
| |Occationanl disruption of utility services |Liaise with relevant utilities to obtain as-built |
| | |drawings, agree construction programmes and arrange |
| | |for prompt response in case of damage to |
| | |infrastructure. |
| |Smells and odours arising from excavated silt and |Prompt removal and proper handling and disposal of |
| |debris from the channels |excavated materials into designated disposal |
| | |facilities |
| |Flooding arising from construction activities |Create storm water diversion channels and culverts |
| |including barricading main flow and diverting it |with adequate carrying capacity for peak flood flow |
| |into smaller channels | |
| | |De-silt and regularly remove solid waste from |
| | |channels |
| | |Provide screens at culverts and regularly clean them|
| |Interruption to traffic |Provide alternative traffic routing through |
| | |diversions and properly marked safety signing |
| | |Early warning mechanisms like regular notification |
| | |of planned interruptions to traffic flow through the |
| | |mass media |
| |Failure by contractors to follow environmental |Contractual requirement for contractors to abide by |
| |safety and health regulations |minimum environmental health and safety requirements |
|Socio-Economic |Interruption to commercial activities and/or loss |Implementation of a Resettlement Action Plan |
|(Operational Phase ) |of livelihoods, including social relationships | |
|Potential Bio-physical |Accumulation of silt and other excavated materials |Prompt removal and disposal of excavated materials |
|Impacts (Construction | |into designated disposal facility |
|Phase) | | |
| | | |
| |Destruction of flora and fauna downstream portions |Introducing several canals to allow the flow to |
| |of the channels arising from increased flow rates, |percolate through the papyrus |
| |i.e., Papyrus species | |
|Potential Bio-physical |Higher pollution rates due to increased flow rate |Reduce flow rates and trap sediments by planting |
|Impacts (Operational |into the channels that are above natural |papyrus species and other sedges downstream of the |
|Phase) |purification capacity of water bodies |channels, which will also contribute to water |
| | |purification. |
| |Erosion of the channel banks |Restoration of the vegetation using paparum |
| | |conjigatum |
| | |Introduce debris screens |
| |
|Table (vii): TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT AND ROAD MAINTENANCE |
|CATEGORY |NEGATIVE IMPACT |MITIGATION |
|Socio-Economic |Accidents arising from construction methods |Barricading works, signposting, lighting at night and|
|(Construction Phase) |(example, converting two-lane traffic carriageways |employing traffic wardens to direct users away from |
| |to single lane carriage ways) |the construction sites |
| | |Contractors to abide by minimum environmental health |
| | |and safety requirements |
| |Interruption to utility services (water |Liaise with relevant utilities to obtain as-built |
| |supplies, telephones and power). |drawings, agree construction programmes and arrange |
| | |for prompt response in case of interruption to |
| | |services |
| |Interruption of social and commercial routines |Institute early warning measures to inform public |
| |commercial |about possible interruptions to normal routines. This|
| | |could include periodic and targeted announcements |
| | |through the mass media |
| | |Implementation of the Resettlement Action Plan where |
| | |necessary |
| |Flooding arising from construction works and newly |Implement construction guidelines to prevent silt and|
| |installed cross culverts |construction materials from blocking the drainage |
| | |systems. |
| | |Regularly de-silt road drainage systems. |
| | |Construct and direct outfall channels adequately |
| |Interruption traffic flow |Provide alternative traffic routing through |
| | |diversions and properly marked safety sign-posting |
| | |Utilize pre-cast culvert units to reduce construction|
| | |time. |
| | |Regulate traffic and provide regular information on|
| | |planned traffic interruptions |
| |Failure by contractors to follow environmental |Contractual requirement for contractors to abide by |
| |safety and health regulations |construction guidelines to safety of workers and |
| | |third parties |
| |Restriction of access to roadside business and |Provide alternative routes to residences and |
| |residences |businesses |
|Socio-Economic |Motor accidents from over-speeding vehicles |Enforcement of traffic rules and regulations by |
|(Operational Phase ) | |relevant agencies |
|Potential Negative |Erosion during construction |Implement measures the prevent run-off from accessing|
|Bio-physical Impacts | |the construction sites |
|(Construction Phase) | | |
| |Accumulation of silt and other construction wastes |Prompt removal and disposal of excavated materials |
| |on the carriageway |into designated disposal facility |
| |Destruction of flora and fauna on road reserves |Re-vegetation should be enforced at the end of the |
| | |construction phase |
| |Contamination of soils and water sources/ wetlands |Contractor should prepare waste management plan to: |
| |with construction material and oils | |
| | |Avoid dumping waste and oil spill accessing waterways|
| | |or wetlands |
| | | |
| | |Ensure excavated material are reused or safely |
| | |disposed off at approved sites by KCC. These will be |
| | |specifically designated sites and indicated in the |
| | |Tender Documents |
|Potential Bio-physical |Accidents from over speeding and other |Enforce traffic regulations |
|Impacts (Operational |in-disciplined road usage | |
|Phase) | | |
|Table (viii): URBAN MARKETS |
|CATEGORY |NEGATIVE IMPACT |MITIGATION |
|Socio-Economic |Interruption to market activities |Provide temporary alternative market site |
|(Construction Phase) | | |
| |Interruption to utility services |Liaise with relevant utilities to obtain as-built |
| | |drawings, agree construction programmes and arrange |
| | |for prompt response in case of interruption to |
| | |services. |
| |Interruption to traffic flow |Provide road signs, traffic wardens and barricades |
| | |where necessary. |
| |Failure by contractors to follow worker safety |Contractual requirement for contractors to abide by |
| |and health regulations |construction guidelines to minimise risk of |
| | |impairment |
|Socio-Economic |None |Nil |
|(Operational Phase ) | | |
|Potential Bio-physical |Site clearance resulting in soil erosion |Protect the site against erosion by construction of |
|Impacts (Construction | |temporary storm water drains. |
|Phase) | | |
| | |Prompt reinstatement of affected surfaces |
| |Silting of storm water drains |Periodic de-silting of drains |
|Potential Bio-physical |Increased solid waste generation |Implementation of improvrd solid waste management |
|Impacts (Operational | |mechanisms to address additional volumes of waste |
|Phase) | | |
|Table (ix): SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY |
|CATEGORY |NEGATIVE IMPACT |MITIGATION |
|Socio-Economic |Contractor ignores worker safety and health |Contractual requirement for contractors to abide by |
|(Construction Phase) |regulations |construction guidelines to minimise risk of |
| | |impairment |
|Socio-Economic |Smell nuisance |Promptly spread and cover waste with soil. |
|(Operational Phase ) | | |
|Potential Bio-physical |Site clearance resulting in soil erosion |Protect the site against erosion by construction of |
|Impacts (Construction | |temporary storm water drains. |
|Phase) | | |
| | |Prompt reinstatement of affected surfaces |
| |Silting of storm water drains |Periodic de-silting of drains |
|Potential Bio-physical |Increased leachate generation that may pollute |Pre-treatment and stabilisation of leachate prior to |
|Impacts (Operational |receiving waterways |disposal to receiving waterways. |
|Phase) | | |
Construction Guidelines and Practices
The recommendations on construction guidelines are meant to ensure that safety nets for the protection of construction workers, the public and the environment are in place and adhered to. The aim is to institute a predictable mechanism for monitoring and reacting to safety requirements of the project particularly in the construction phase. The guidelines cover issues such as:
• preparation and enforcement of technical specifications to be applied in the construction process that include construction waste management
• Professional supervision of construction to ensure specifications are followed
• reduction in disposed construction wastes through re-cycling and re-use
• minimizing the handling and release of toxins including spent oils
• conservation of flora and fauna where it exists together with re-vegetation of sites with indigenous species upon construction completion ,
• implementing processes that encourage conservation of energy and water through efficient utilization processes
• enforcing environmental and health safety measures
The detailed recommended guidelines have been attached in the appendices; see Appendix B.
Environment Management Plan
Based on the mitigation measures identified and the construction guidelines, the Environment Management Plan has been elaborated for each investment. The key features of the plan are as follows:
• that it clarifies responsibilities,
• it specifies indicators for monitoring compliance
• it indicates means of verification and,
• identifies the institution that will monitor the mitigation proposals. ie NEMA, KCC, LC etc.
In addition, the environment management plan provides estimates of costs for implementation of the identified mitigation measures together with the work programme for the required activities. The detailed Environment Management Plan is enclosed in chapter six.
Recommendations
The project should be implemented as planned, provided the mitigation measures outlined in environment management plan and the construction guidelines are followed.
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1 Background of the Project
The Kampala City Council (KCC) is preparing the Kampala Institutional and Infrastructure Development Project (KIIDP), an initiative designed to strengthen the governance and institutional structure within the city in order to enhance service delivery and improve economic performance. The overall aim of the project is to deter current deterioration of the physical infrastructure in Kampala and the weakening of the service delivery capabilities of its governance structures by putting Kampala on a new path of improved physical and institutional development. This aim will be realized through a combination of two interlocking and simultaneous interventions:
i) a program of institutional and fiscal reform of the local governance structures in Kampala, with the specific objectives of significantly improving the service-delivery effectiveness and efficiency of these organs; and
ii) a program of investment at the city-wide scale, focusing on the areas of drainage, roads/traffic management, solid waste management, and urban markets.
The project will be executed under the Adaptable Program Lending arrangement of the World Bank with investments divided into 2 or more Phases.
2 Terms of Reference
This report outlines the environmental analysis of the proposed infrastructure investments of the Kampala Institutional and Infrastructure Development Project. The overall objective of the Environment Analysis (EA) was to identify, assess and propose mitigation measures to the potential negative environmental and socio-economic impacts that might result from the infrastructure investments planned in the different components of the project.
The specific objectives of the assessment were:
▪ To identify and assess the potential adverse environmental and socio-economic impacts of the planned project;
▪ To make recommendations for mitigating the effects identified as adverse for the safety of the environment;
▪ To prepare an Environment Management Plan to be applied in mitigating the identified impacts; and
▪ To ensure that the programme activities conform to the NEMA and World Bank Safeguards.
The analysis will contribute to the proper planning of the proposed infrastructure activities because it provides a framework for environmentally safe technical options as well as socially acceptable implementation processes. The proposed project, like any other development, will result in some positive and negative impacts during its implementation and operation.
Certain impacts are inevitable; for example, loss of land where roads are to be expanded and improved, interruptions to commercial services during upgrading of markets and increased generation of waste resulting from improved commercial activities following project implementation.
During the assessment, evaluation of the existing environment was carried out so that issues to be addressed and impacts of the project interventions are identified. The aim was to incorporate appropriate safeguard measures in the planning and implementation of the project. Significant portion of the issues were identified through stakeholder consultations while others resulted from observation checklists based on appropriate assessment guidelines. The overall goal was to enhance the positive impacts of the project and mitigate the negative ones. The Terms of Reference for the Environmental Analysis of KIIDP is attached as Appendix A.
3 Description of the Project
1.3.1 Study Area
The area delineated for this study is Kampala District, which encompasses 189 km2 [KUSP Report, 1994], some of which is fully urbanised, a significant portion semi-urbanised and the rest considered to be rural settlements. Kampala is built on a series of hills and valleys with gentle slopes separated by valleys that consist of natural streams, drainage channels and wetlands of varying gradients. It is a commercial and political capital city of Uganda with a population of about 1.2 million and an annual demographic growth rate of about 3.9% [UBOS, 2002].
1.3.2 Project Strategy
Kampala District accounts for about 80% of the country’s industrial and commercial sectors, over 60% of the urban population and it generates over 60% of the national GDP.
The economic future of Uganda is therefore intrinsically linked to the performance of Kampala as a locus of productive activity and investments. This, in turn, relies on the city’s ability to provide the services and infrastructure to drive and support the realization of the investment potential of the country. Unfortunately, Kampala’s services delivery capabilities have not kept pace with its economic and demographic growth. Over time, key infrastructure including roads, drainage systems, as well as solid waste services have deteriorated. At the same time, service-delivery capabilities of the City Council have encountered serious organisational, management, financial and human resource challenges that limit its ability to meet the current and future needs of the city.
The continued deterioration of the physical infrastructure in Kampala and the weakening of the capabilities of its governance structures are likely to have negative repercussions on the performance of the Ugandan economy as a whole. Increased human activity unless supported by sound mitigation strategies, is bound to escalate the negative outcomes of environment degradation leading to even higher incidences of ailments.
The proposed infrastructure development activities will trigger certain processes which may potentially negatively affect the environment or in some cases accelerate deterioration of environment and associated systems in the city that are already under threat. In this regard, the study on environment analysis to assess the environmental and social impact outcomes of the envisaged developments was carried out and mitigation strategies plus related action plans was recommended.
4 Project Components
The project has the following components (estimated cost US$ 90 million):
Component 1: Institutional Development. This component will assist Kampala and its stakeholders to refine and expand the SFR into a comprehensive approach to municipal development, constant with Kampala’s central role in the nation’s economic and political life. Achievement of key activities will trigger investments under the various phases of component 2. Activities will include: (i) developing and beginning to implement a long-term vision for the city, including an effective development plan, which identifies the steps to be taken in the near and medium term to achieve that vision with specific and annual milestones, (ii) developing and implementing a financial recovery plan designed to place KCC and its divisions in a sound and sustainable financial condition as soon as possible, (iii) creating and implementing a comprehensive organisational development strategy, based on financial sustainability, the capacity to sustain O & M of infrastructure and services, and on the clear and enforceable council’s role of policy-making and oversight form staff’s management role, and (iv) introducing and sustaining mechanisms to improve the transparency and accountability of KCC, including the development and an on going implementation of an effective and meaningful communication strategy between KCC and its stakeholders. Technical and financial support will also be provided to ensure that an effective collaborative process is put in place to identify barriers to competitiveness and to address these appropriately, in order to improve the ability of the private sector (formal and informal) to contribute to economic development and poverty reduction in Kampala.
Component 2: Citywide Infrastructure and Services Improvement. This component will support activities aimed at improving the provision of critical services to the city. The investment in infrastructure and service improvements will address four priority areas: (i) drainage system; (ii) traffic and road maintenance management; (iii) solid waste management and (iv) urban markets infrastructure. These four areas are critical for inducing the confidence of the public and service recipients and will contribute to the economic and commercial development of the city. The infrastructure investment will be phased and predicated on defined institutional and fiscal milestones/targets (e.g., O & M of existing infrastructure) that will trigger investment packages during project implementation. These milestones/targets will be determined during project preparation and agreed with KCC.
Component 3: Project Management, Monitoring and evaluation, and Civil Society Participation. This component will have two sub components:
(i) Project management, Monitoring and Evaluation: this will encompass the management activities associated with the implementation of the project, and will support program management, the establishment and implementation of a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation (M & E) system and future program formulation; and (ii) Civil Society Participation: this will provide technical and financial support to a coalition of civil society organisations (NGOS, CSOs, Private Sector Associations, Universities etc) to effectively participate in the strategic and budget planning processes of KCC in order to increase budget responsiveness, accountability and transparency to KCC’s constituents.
This environmental analysis report is concerned with investments under Component 2 of the KIIDP intervention and high lights of capacity building requirements were identified in the EMP. Detailed description of project components can be found in Chapter 3.
CHAPTER TWO: METHODS AND TECHNIQUES
1 General Approach
When preparing the EA report, the consultants identified, analysed, assessed the potential environmental and socio-economic impacts of the entire programme, and proposed mitigation measures and environmental management plans for the proposed infrastructure investments. The methods applied to collect information required for analysis included Literature Review, Field visits, Data Collection, Assessment and Synthesis. The study team also liaised with other Consultants responsible for the proposed upgrading of markets and those preparing the resettlement action plan. Relevant stakeholders were also consulted.
2 Literature Review
The consultants reviewed and analysed information from the following documents:
❖ “Environmental Impact Assessment of the Kampala Drainage Master Plan (KDMP)”, the “Final Report on the Traffic Improvement Plan (chapter 8)”, “The Needs Assessment for Market Improvements Report”
❖ “Preliminary site visit report for the solid waste disposal facility”.
❖ Draft Feasibility Report for improvement of Urban Markets
❖ The National Wetlands Policy
❖ The World Bank’s OP 4.04 on Natural Habitats
❖ Conventions and Protocols to which Uganda is a signatory
The full list of documents consulted is in Appendix D.
The relevant policy documents and other secondary information sources consulted are specified in Chapter 3: Situation Assessment.
The findings from the literature review were used to compile the situation analysis (Chapter 3).
3 Field visit, Data Collection Assessment and Synthesis
All the sample project sites for the proposed investments in Phase 1 were visited to assess and collect data related to bio-physical and socio-economic characteristics of the proposed investments areas. The methods applied for the task especially the socio-economic aspects were harmonized with those for the RAP study. With respect to the engineering and scientific assessments, observation checklist and guidelines from NEMA were used.
Furthermore, for the drainage investments, water samples were collected for laboratory analysis (Plate 2.1). General sampling was based on the investment typologies as well as the scope of the intended interventions as indicated in the TOR.
Plate 2.1: Water sample collection from Kitintale Channel
4 Consultations and Coordination with Stakeholders and Agencies
Consultations were held with the stakeholders and agencies as indicated in Appendix B. The stakeholders comprised of community members in the project area who will most likely be impacted by the infrastructure investments both at implementation as well as during operational phase. It covered key informants like government officials from technical departments and representatives of key organizations. Officials particularly from the Wetlands Inspection Division (WID), the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) provided information on institutional and legal developments related to protection of these ecosystems.
5 Collaboration with other Consultants
The consultant collaborated with other KIIDP consultants of the following relevant studies:
▪ the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) study
▪ the feasibility study on improvement of urban markets in Kampala by holding regular meetings and sharing data.
However, the team could not consult with consultants on the assessment of solid waste management, because they were not yet commissioned.
6 Assessment of Infrastructure Investments
1 General Task Scheduling
In assessing positive and adverse environmental impacts of the infrastructure investments, the study team undertook the specific activities in TABLE 2.1 below.
Table 2.1: Task Schedule
|TASK |TASK DESCRIPTION |
|TASK A |Mobilization, Data Review, Design of survey instruments and determination of sample sizes |
|Sub Task A1 |Mobilization, Recruit Research Assistants, Organizing Logistics |
|Sub Task A2 |Acquisition and Review of Documents and relevant literature |
|Sub Task A3 |Development of EIA Tool kit and Socio-economic Survey Instruments |
|Sub Task A4 |Determination of survey sample size per investment site per division |
|Sub Task A5 |Preparation of a work plan |
|Sub Task A6 |Submission and discussion of Inception Report with Employer |
|TASK B |Field work and Data Management |
|Sub Task B1 |Pre-test Questionnaires and Train Research Assistants |
|Sub Task B2 |Train Research Assistants on Survey Questionnaires |
|Sub Task B3 |Field work and Data collection processes |
|Sub Task B3.1 |Data collection on impact of Improvement of Drainage system |
|Sub Task B3.2 |Data collection on Traffic and Road Maintenance Management |
|Sub Task B3.3 |Data collection on Urban Market Infrastructure |
|Sub Task B3.4 |Data collection on Solid Waste Management |
|Task C |Analysis and Synthesis of Data |
|Sub Task C1 |Analysis of the obtained data |
2.6.2 Assessment of the Drainage systems
The drainage improvement investments visited for Phases I and II covered drainage channels indicated in Annex 3. The aim was to assess similarities and possible differences in the bio-physical characteristics of the two proposed investments in order to advise the Environment Management Plan accordingly. However, the report emphasises Phase 1.
In order to establish the pollution levels in the water flowing through drainage systems, water samples were collected for analysis. Spot sampling was done at the following points:
1. Kitintale Channel, below Bugolobi Flats,
2. Nakivubo Channel, below Namuwongo and near the mouth of the
Channel,
3. Nalukolongo, near Sembule steel rolling mills,
4. Lubigi, at Hoima Road Crossing and
Kinawataka, at the car-washing Bay, at the road crossing that divides the upper and lower Kinawataka along Bugolobi-Nambole road.
Water quality assessment was aimed at establishing the current pollution levels and identifying the possible impact on the downstream user communities and/or important water bodies in the drainage channels after the improvements. The data will also act as baseline, as improvements on the drainage are likely to result in increased rate of polluted water conveyed into the channel and downstream areas.
The water was analysed for faecal coliforms (indicators of possible presence of pathogenic/disease causing organisms), nutrients (total nitrogen and total phosphorus) and Biochemical Oxygen Demand.
3. Assessment of Traffic and Roads Maintenance
The Environment Assessment for Traffic and Roads focused on the entire major project components, e.g. traffic management, junction improvements, and road improvements (maintenance/upgrading).
The assessment of the Phase 1 road maintenance investments covered 26 kilometres of roads principally in central and to a lesser extent in Makindye, Nakawa and Rubaga and about 11 kms of gravel roads upgrading investments in Kawempe, Makindye and Nakawa divisions. Rapid assessment was made for the corresponding Phase 2 investments, which covers a total of 23 Kilometres of bitumen surface road to be improved, 54 Kilometres for gravel roads for up-grading to bitumen and 25 Kilometres of roads for upgrading reserved for phase 3.
The Phase 1 Urban Traffic Improvements have been assesed including area traffic management schemes, plus junction improvement schemes (All in Trance1). Rapid assesments were made for Phase 2 investments, which cover junction and road improvement schemes.
The exercise involved reconnaissance visits to all the project roads, junctions and areas, consultations with officials in NEMA, KCC, Traffic Police, UTODA and other relevant stakeholders to obtain their comments on the likely socio-economic and environmental impacts of the proposed investments.
4. Assessment of the Markets
A total of ten markets were surveyed, two from each division. The surveyed markets were Kitintale and Mbuya markets in Nakawa Division, and Nsambya markets in Makindye Division, Kawempe – Bwaise Growers Scheme and Kalerwe in Kawempe Division, Kasubi and Nalukolongo in Rubaga Division, Kalitunsi – Mengo Kisenyi and Katwe in the Central Division. In the end, detailed studies were carried out on the five markets recommended for upgrading in the Kagga and Partners’ Draft Report on the Feasibility Study on the Markets Improvements.
5. Assessment of solid waste management
In collaboration with the socio-economic team of this assignment, the solid waste experts assessed the current techniques of collecting and transporting solid waste from generation sites to the solid waste disposal facility. The Consultants visited the solid waste disposal facility at Kiteezi-Mpererwe to carry out a physical evaluation of daily operations and establish the bio-physical characteristic at the solid waste management facility. During these visits, observations on the operational cycle of the landfill were carried out, and interviews made with the solid waste disposal facility operator, truck drivers and with the residents, some of whom derive their livelihoods by scavenging from the solid waste disposal facility. Additional information was obtained from the socio-economic surveys of the neighbouring residents. Unlike the assessment made of the current waste disposal site at Kitezi, the proposed extension site was only evaluated for bio-physical and socio-economic issues and, the constraints to the investment were identified.
7 Impact Assessment and Ranking
Assessment of Impacts
In assessing the potential impacts, all issues were subjected to Rapid Impact Assessment Matrix (RIAM)[2]. The RIAM assigns negative and positive value ranges of 0 to 5 for potential impacts and ranks the negative one according to severity in terms of importance, magnitude, reversibility, cumulativeness. The impacts with negative values of 3 or worse are considered as critical and therefore included in the Environment Management Plan. Those with ranges of 2 to 0 are taken note of as being relevant but non-significant. The EMP therefore focuses on critical impacts in terms of mitigation while recognising the need to routinely monitor the relevant ones so that their impacts do not progress to critical level. In identifying the relevance and significance of the various impacts, the matrix in Table 2.2 below was used.
Table 2.2: Identification of Relevant and Significant Project Aspects
|Potential Impact |Assessment Issue |
|Impact Of Interventions on |Would the Intervention disturb the natural habitat and animal life on site? |
|Natural Environment (N) | |
| |Would the existing contamination of water sources be worse? |
| |Would the dumping of excavated material harm or disturb the environment? |
| |Is erosion likely during construction activities? |
|Impact Of Interventions on |Will the interventions disrupt social life during construction or/and operation of the investment? |
|the | |
|Social / Built Environment | |
|(S/E) | |
| |Will the interventions disrupt commercial activities during construction or/and operation of the |
| |investment? |
| |Will the interventions change or disrupt traffic during construction and/or operation? |
| |Will the interventions bring about permanent relocation of businesses (state number)? |
| |Will the interventions change the occurrence of malaria? |
| |Will safety hazards occur during construction? |
| |Will the situation regarding mosquito-breeding places be changed? |
| |Will damp conditions (leading to URT Infections) be improved? |
| |Will there be any changes upstream, such as trapping of material and silting? |
| |Will the interventions lead to the resettlement of residents? |
| |Will the interventions lead to changes in access & existing services? |
| |Will the intervention lead to disruption of business during construction? |
| |Will the intervention lead to damage to infrastructure during construction? |
| |Will certain economic activities have to be relocated as a result? |
|Impact Of Interventions On |Will the intervention influence future maintenance of the roads, markets, waste disposal sites or |
|The Institutional (IN) |drainage channel? |
| |Will the KDIIP benefits be sustainable? |
The answers to the above-mentioned issues were evaluated in terms of the importance or relevance of the issue, the magnitude of the impact, the reversibility thereof and the cumulative effect. The summary of the evaluation is contained in the RIAM tables in Chapter Four. The interpretations of the relevant range values are outlined in Table 2.3.
`
Table 2.3: Assessment of Relevant and Significant Impacts
|Potential Change |Impact Value |
|Major positive impact or change |5 |
|Significant positive impact or change |4 |
| Moderate positive impact or change |3 |
| Positive impact or change |2 |
| Slight positive impact or change |1 |
|NO IMPACT OR CHANGE |0 |
|Slight negative impact or change |-1 |
|Negative impact or change |-2 |
|Moderate negative impact or change |-3 |
|Significant negative impact or change |-4 |
| Major negative impact or change |-5 |
It is accepted that all issues that have a high negative score (-3 to -5) need investigating and mitigation, i.e. activities that will have a negative impact on the respective investment corridors or systems. The identified impacts and the mitigation of the critical outcomes of the proposed investments are in Chapter 4: Impacts and Mitigation Measures.
CHAPTER THREE: SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS
3.1 Institutional, Policy and Legal Framework for Environmental Management Including Wetlands
3.1.1 Institutional Framework
The institutional framework for environment protection and management of related activities in Uganda is vested in various organisations and agencies. For the purposes of the KIIDP investments, the frontline agencies will be the Kampala City Council, the Uganda Police (Traffic Department) and the National Environment Management Authority, Wetlands Inspection Division and the Directorate of Water development.
According to the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, wetlands are held in trust for the people of Uganda. The line ministry for wetlands management in Uganda is the Ministry of Water Lands and Environment and the responsible department in the ministry is the Wetlands Inspection Division. However, control and the protection of wetlands at local level is decentralised to districts under the Ministry of Local Government. In Kampala City, wetland management is the responsibility of the district in this case Kampala District.
Under the KIIDP project, the principle organisations responsible for environmental management and wetlands resources are:
• The National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA)
• The Wetlands Inspection Division (WID)
• The Directorate of Water Development (DWD)
• Kampala City Council – District Environment Office
The relationship of these organisations to the Government of Uganda, the Ministries and the Planning Authorities, is shown in the Figure 3.1 below.
National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA)
The Government of Uganda (GoU) under the National Environment Statute, 1995, established NEMA with the overall responsibility to supervise, monitor, and co-ordinate environment management in Uganda. NEMA reports to the Ministry of Water, Lands and Environment but retains principal responsibility for Environmental Management within Uganda.
Under the National Environment Statute, 1995, NEMA may delegate powers by statutory instruments to lead agencies. Functions related to management of industrial and municipal effluents discharged to land and water have been delegated to DWD and wetlands management and conservation to the Wetlands Inspection Division. Additionally some aspects of environmental management have been delegated to district councils enabling the formation of and the preparation of guidelines for District Environmental Committees; (see Figure 3.1 below).
Figure 3.1: Diagram showing the Institutional arrangement for Wetland Management under KIIDP
Wetlands Inspection Division
The National Wetlands Policy, which was promulgated in 1995, aims at curtailing the rampant loss of wetland resources and ensuring that the benefits from wetlands are sustainable and equitably distributed to all people of Uganda. Wetlands in Uganda are also protected under the Constitution of 1995, the National Environment Statute of 1995 and the Land Act of 1998. The national wetland policy specifically addressed issues of “water supply and effluent treatment”. It points out that rapid population growth and the increasing rate of development require sufficient and steady amount of water supply and discharge of effluent at an affordable cost. Many urban settlements including Kampala City are dependent on wetlands for water supply, treatment and discharge of effluent.
During the last decade, the Wetlands Inspection Division (WID) has been advocating for the development of a proper management plan for the Nakivubo wetland in Kampala. Nakivubo wetland separates Kampala City from the Inner Murchison Bay of Lake Victoria (a sole raw water supply for Kampala), and receives secondary treated effluent from the Bugolobi sewage treatment works, and heavily polluted run-off from the Nakivubo channel, which is the main storm water drainage of Kampala City.
WID has carried out several awareness activities in order to highlight the importance of the Nakivubo wetland. Over the past decade, meetings were held with Kampala City Council (KCC) and the National Water and Sewerage Corporation (NWSC) to bring the importance of the Nakivubo wetland to their attention. Since 1998, WID has been collaborating with communities in the Luzira area in tree planting activities along the wetland edges and as a result, Phoenix reclinata (a useful palm tree) has been tried out. In addition, the NWP commissioned some socio-economic studies to collect hard data on the importance of the wetland (Tumusiime and Mijumbi, 1999; Everton et al, 1999).
WID is in the process of preparing a management plan for Nakivubo wetland, which will be geared at:
❖ optimising the use of the Nakivubo wetland within the frame work of the National Wetlands Policy and other relevant documents and legislation,
❖ optimising off-site services and functions of the wetland, notably its wastewater treatment function,
❖ contributing to the well-being of all communities adjacent to wetlands
❖ enhancing equitable distribution of wetland benefits to as many potential users as possible,
❖ providing a basis for monitoring wetland use, and equitable distribution of wetland resources.
The preparation efforts have unfortunately been undermined by lack of funds and therefore not yet finalized. It would however be institutionally difficult for KIIDP to get directly involved in the activities of another agency and hence there is limited scope for the project to support these efforts and for that matter this report is unable to develop appropriate linkages between these plans and the KIIDP intervention.
The Wetlands Inspection Division of the Ministry of Water, Lands and Environment is lead agency for Wetlands management in Uganda. Its main functions include formulation of policy; setting of standards and guidelines; supervision and monitoring; technical support; and resource mobilisation for wetlands management. Specifically, its roles include among others:
• Liasing with and building the capacity of other agencies and in particular local governments and national government agencies to deal with wetlands issues within their jurisdiction.
• Drafting and proposing policy and legal frameworks for management of wetlands.
• Undertaking monitoring and inspection of wetlands.
• Ensuring integration of wetlands issues into policies and strategies of other sectors - e.g., agriculture; forestry; fisheries; water, industry, rural and urban planning.
The Wetlands Inspection Division, which works closely with NEMA, is implementing the Wetlands Sector Strategic Plan for the period 2001-2010 whose overall goal is to contribute to human welfare and to ensure that the health of the environment is enhanced. The plan is guided by eight strategic objectives, each of which is to be achieved by key actions as outlined in Table 3.1 below:
Table 3.1. Wetlands Sector Strategic Plan Objectives
|STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE |Key Actions |
|Knowledge and understanding of ecological process and |Maintain up –to-date inventories of all wet lands |
|socio-economic values of wetlands enhanced |Carry out research into the nature of and value of ecological and |
| |hydrological functions of wetlands in general, of specific wet land |
| |systems, and of specific individual wet lands. |
| |Assess values-economic, social, cultural- of products, services, |
| |ecological, and existence of wetland systems, and of specific individual |
| |wetlands. |
|Public and stakeholder awareness of wetlands and their |Carry out targeted awareness campaigns, using messages and media |
|beneficial products and services increased. |appropriate to specific target audiences. |
| |Introduce and support inclusion of wetlands – related topics in primary |
| |and secondary school curriculla |
| |Strengthen NGO collaboration in rising awareness of wetland issues. |
|Institutional framework for wetlands management further |Establish an appropriate body to be the national lead agency for wetlands|
|developed and maintained. |management and conservation, with HQ and regional offices adequately |
| |staffed and equipped to fulfil its mandate. |
| |Ensure allocation from the Government recurrent budget sufficient to |
| |cover recurrent costs of the national lead agency. |
| |Train and equip District Environment Officers to carry out wetlands |
| |management functions. |
| |Ensure allocation from District Local Government recurrent budgets |
| |sufficient to cover recurrent costs associated with wetlands management |
| |functions of the District Environment Officer. |
| |Support formation and operations of District and Local Environment |
| |Committee. |
| |Establish and maintain a National wetland Inter-Agency Co-ordination |
| |Committee. |
|Appropriate wetlands policy and legislation in place and |Review and revise wetlands policy as and when necessary. |
|enforced. |Ensure appropriate legislation (wetlands Statute; regulations; by –laws) |
| |is put in place. |
| |Prepare and disseminate guidelines on wetlands policy and legislation. |
| |Develop awareness and understanding of wetlands policy and legislation |
| |among key players. |
| |Train and equip law enforcement agencies to apply wetland legislation. |
| |Monitor compliance with wetlands policy and legislation. |
|Planning and management of wetlands systems improved. |Provide sensitization and training related to wetlands action planning to|
| |District Environment Officers and other relevant District Local |
| |government staff. |
| |Prepare District Wetlands Action Plans (DWAPs) as components of District |
| |Development Plans (DPPs) - in accordance with established procedures and |
| |models. |
| |Identify and mobilize potential sources of funding for DWAPs. |
| |Implement DWAPS. |
|Vital wetlands protected and their characteristics and |Identify and gazette vital wetlands. |
|functions conserved. |Prepare wetlands management plans (WMP) for gazetted vital wetlands – in |
| |accordance with established procedures and models. |
| |Establish necessary regulations and by- laws related to gazetted vital |
| |wetlands. |
| |Implement WMPs. |
| |Develop and implement ecological monitoring systems and procedures for |
| |gazetted vital wetlands. |
| |Identify and propose for designation as Ramsar sites wetlands of |
| |international importance. |
|Community-based regulation and administration of wetlands|Identify valuable critical wetlands and associated resource user |
|resource use established and strengthened. |communities. |
| |Provide sensitization and training related to wetlands management |
| |planning to identify resource user communities. |
| |Prepare wetlands management plans (WMPs) for valuable critical wetlands –|
| |in accordance with established procedures and models. |
| |Implement WMPs |
| |Prepare and disseminate guidelines on wise use of wetland resources. |
| |Mobilise and provide material and technical support for community-based |
| |initiatives aimed at efficient sustainable use of wetlands resources; or |
| |Develop of alternatives to use of wetlands resources. |
|Local and international financing mechanisms for wetlands|Lobby for provision in Central Government and District Local Government |
|management and conservation in Uganda mobilized. |recurrent and development budgets of significant funds for wetlands |
| |management and conservation. |
| |Identify and implement appropriate measures to exploit internal funding |
| |sources – e.g. charitable trusts, foundations, and endowments; private |
| |invest; permits, licenses, concessions; penalties, taxes on use. |
| |Develop and document wetlands management and conservation programmes and |
| |projects suitable for external donor funding. |
| |Explore and where appropriate exploit innovative international financing |
| |mechanisms – e.g. debt relief; payments for environmental services; |
| |offsets and credits; international compacts. |
The overall impact of implementation of this Strategic plan is that certain actions have been initiated in line with its objectives. Some of these include:
▪ Wetlands Management Plans have been formulated for twenty-seven sites including Nabajuzzi in Masaka District, Lutembe in Mpigi and Nabugabo in Masaka
▪ Halting unauthorised human settlements and other activities that degrade wetlands ie in Kampala where NEMA is currently demolishing structures that are illegally constructed in the Nakivubo Wetlands
▪ District Wetland Action Plans have been developed in about 30 districts. These are 2-year rolling plans that assist districts to priorotize wetland protection activities in their DPPs.
WID is currently implementing the WSSP in different parts of the country. However, because of lack of resources, some of the activities are not yet carried out in Kampala. As a result, the KIIDP Project could supplement some of the efforts outlined in the table above like carrying out inventories, protecting vital wetlands, management planning of wetlands in Kampala and enforcing wetlands policy and public and stakeholder awareness on the importance of wetlands in Kampala.
Directorate of Water Development (DWD)
DWD is the lead agency for the management of industrial and municipal effluents that discharge to receiving waters or to land. As such its prime functions are:
• Advice to NEMA on the environmental control measures to be included in development proposals submitted to NEMA.
• Issue of Permits for Discharge of wastes disposed on to land or water
• Monitoring of discharges to ensure compliance with discharge standards.
Kampala City Council
One of the main objectives of the KCC is to ensure orderly development of the capital city. Overtime the KCC has developed bylaws and regulations to facilitate the institution in carrying out its mandate and functions. However, their enforcement continues to be a problem. Within Kampala District, the District Environment Officer (DEO) is the responsible Officer to monitor environmental issues including wetlands and report any shortcomings to NEMA and Wetlands Inspection Division. In terms of KIIDP, the role of the DEO will be to monitor correct implementation of the Environmental Management Plan and report any issues or problems arising therefrom to NEMA for remedial action. Therefore, although the DEO is a KCC employee, he/she performs a watchdog role as far as environmental protection activities in the City, including KIIDP, are concerned. In this respect, the DEO will coordinate KIIDP support for the Wetland Strategic Plan as well as the environmental / wetlands management aspects of the new Kampala Structure Plan.
Wetlands in Kampala are located in areas where KCC has jurisdiction. The City Council has had trouble in controlling unauthorised activities, which degrade these wetlands (farming, housing and industrial development).
These wetlands receive semi-treated effluent from the city and its environs via drainage channels. Due to poor enforcement of effluent discharge legislation most of these channels have now degenerated into n open sewers henceforth affecting the quality of surface waters like the one in the Murchison Bay.
KCC is making efforts to ensure wise and sustainable use of wetlands within its jurisdiction. KCC through a highly participatory process finalised the “Kampala Structure Plan 1994-2004” which is now a legal document. Under the plan, wetlands, including Nakivubo wetland were zoned off as “green corridors”. A new structure plan covering the period 2007 to 2017 is too prepared as part of the institutional component of KIIDP. In addition, an EIA is required for any development in a wetland area like the recent rehabilitation and widening of the Nakivubo channel. Under current policy and legislation, Law protects a wetland that is declared a green corridor and it shall not be utilised for any other purpose without prior written approval from NEMA. Although the recent KCC policies on wetlands, which fall within its jurisdiction, are somewhat positive, enforcement remains a problem. The population continues to flock to wetlands because they are cheaper compared to the much sought after dry land, which is more expensive.
Wetlands naturally restore themselves when not interfered with. KCC should work with other lead agencies to restore degraded wetlands in its jurisdiction and the Nakivubo wetland in particular and halt further encroachment on wetlands. In this respect, KCC needs to evoke the necessary legislation, enlist support of NEMA and eliminate all harmful human activities from the wetlands. KIIDP would support the process by strengthening the capacity of the District Environment Officer (refer also, page138).
District Environment Office and Environment Committee
At district level, the District Local Governments are the lead agencies. Wetland management is a decentralised function, in accordance with the Local Governments Act 1997. Mechanisms already in place for performing this function and fulfilling the responsibilities associated with it include the office of the District Environment Officer, the District and Local Environment Committees, and overall the District Technical Planning Committee.
Section 43 of the Local Governments Acts clarifies the roles of District Local Governments with respect to wetlands management and conservation to include, among others:
• Co-ordinating wetland management including wetlands policy implementation.
• Developing and implementing District Wetlands Action Plans, as integral parts of District Development Plans.
• Monitoring wetlands management and conservation and enforcing the law relating to wetlands.
The institutional responsibility for managing wetlands therefore lies with the District Environment Directorate. This directorate reports to and is supervised by the Chief Administrative Officer. The implication is that the directorate is politically and administratively under the control of the mainstream district management arrangements and therefore operational autonomy particularly on matters of enforcing NEMA guidelines quite often becomes a challenge. For instance, recently KCC needed to demolish structures illegally constructed in the Nakivubo wetlands but the exercise had to be delegated to NEMA because some of the law-breakers were city councillors whom the division environment officers could not risk to act upon due to political considerations.
In order to address this weakness, it would have been best that the institutional profile of the district environment offices in the divisions be elevated to directorate level and provided with the same autonomy as District Tender Boards. Memberships to these directorates must be competent and should encompass a wide spectrum of stakeholders. Additionally their roles need to be expanded to include review of applications of building plans prior to approval. In this way, the directorates will be in a strong control position and to better prevent encroachment into wetlands. However, given the fact that KCC has just undergone re-structuring, these changes may not be readily implemented. The most practical approach therefore is to strengthen the district environment office through capacity building, training and overall institutional strengthening initiatives as indicated in the EMP.
Table 3.2 provides the institutional profiling of the various organizations concerned with environmental management at national level.
Table 3.2: Institutional Profile for Environmental Management
|Organization |Mandate |Function |Relevance to KIIDP for EMP |
| | | |Implementation |
|Kampala City Council |Governance of the City of |Provide urban services including markets, |Lead agency for Initiation |
| |Kampala |roads, solid waste management and control |and Implementation of EMP |
| | |urban development and manage traffic. | |
|National Environment Management |Management of Environmental |Coordinate, monitor and supervise |Review and approve EIA and |
|Authority |Affairs |environment management activities including|supervise implementation of|
| | |review of EIA reports |EMP |
|Wetlands Inspection Division |Wetland Management |Implementation of relevant policies and |Follow up on matters of EMP |
| | |enforcement of wetland regulations for |Implementation relevant to |
| | |sustainable economic development including |wetlands protection |
| | |reviewing EIA on wetlands | |
|District Environment Committees |Environment Management at |Supporting local governments to develop and|Coordinate and monitor |
|(DECs) |Local Level |implement environmental action plans, |implementation of EMP at |
| | |policies and by-laws. |the local level on behalf |
| | | |of KIIDP |
|Ministry of Water, Lands and |Water Affairs, Lands and |Policy Formulation and Political |Responsibility for issuing |
|Environment |Environment |Supervision of water, lands, environment |waste discharge permits |
| | |and natural resources therein | |
|Directorate of Water Development|Responsible for water |Promote rational utilisation of water |Enforcement of the Discharge|
| |resources management and |resources as well as coordination of water |Regulations |
| |water supply regulation |supply activities | |
|National Forest Authority |Management of Forests |Conservation and Utilisation of forests and|Policy supervision relevant |
| | |their products |to forest conservation which|
| | |Note: there are no forests in Kampala that |are relevant within EMP |
| | |need conservation. | |
|Uganda Investment Authority |Investment Promotion |Coordinate investment activities |Register and monitor the |
|(UIA) | | |planned investment |
|Uganda Land Commission |Land Management |Hold and manage land vested in or acquired |Provide legal support on RAP|
| | |by the government in accordance with the | |
| | |constitution. | |
|The District Land Board |Land Management at Local |Responsible for land issues at the local |Provide land values in the |
| |Level |government level. |development corridor |
|Town and Country Planning Board |Land Development |Orderly and progressive development of land|Enforce planning |
| | |in towns and other areas of the country |regulations. In this case |
| | | |advise KIIDP on the RAP |
3.1.2 Implication of Institutional Framework on KIIDP
The implication of the institutional framework described above is as follows:
• Kampala City Council that doubles as District Local Government will manage the investment process and therefore take responsibility for preparing an acceptable EIA for the proposed activities. This responsibility extends beyond submission of the EIA for approval by NEMA. It also requires KCC to manage a comprehensive stakeholder consultative process including full disclosure of the EIA outcomes and ensure compliance to environmental protection measures during implementation/construction and operation of the planned investments.
• The mission of the Government of Uganda is to achieve a proper understanding, appreciation for utilization of wetlands at all levels of society, while sustaining or enhancing all their beneficial functions. Central to this is a balanced and informed decision-making process about wetland management to ensure that wetlands maintain their place in the national economy and planning for sustainable economic development. The implication is that KIIDP should implement the project in close liaison with the Wetlands Inspection Division of the Ministry of Lands, Water and Environment.
• Uganda is currently one of the few countries in the world with a government institution dedicated to wetland management. It is therefore prudent that the drainage and solid waste investments under KIIDP, in particular be designed in line with the GoU policy guidelines and World Bank safeguard policies.
• The main directorate of concern for this Environmental Analysis in KCC are those of Heath and Environment and that of Works and Urban Planning. The directorate of Health and Environment, among other responsibilities is responsible for environment management including wetlands. The Directorate of Works and Urban Planning under the Director of Engineering is responsible for planning, repair, maintenance and opening up of new roads, bridges, flyovers, water channels, installation together with repair and maintenance of street and traffic lights, street parking and traffic control. The implication is that since KIIDP is expanding and rehabilitating some of the city’s infrastructure, measures need to be taken within the KIIDP framework, to strengthen the operational capacity of this directorate in order to prepare it for the additional tasks of sustaining the new infrastructure.
• There is a city law enforcement section in KCC, which tries to enforce council rules and regulations. However, law enforcement in the council is often weakened by undue political interference. The implication is that in order to sustain KIIDP interventions, the enforcement of existing regulations must be strengthened through deliberate separation political supervision from operational decision-making.
• For all the investments; urban markets, road improvement, drainage and solid waste where additional land may be required, the guidelines from the Land Commission as well as World Bank safeguard policies become relevant especially those related to resettlement and/or compensation of affected residents. Any activity that involves, land acquisition, impact on assets or impact on livelihood must follow the guidance set out in the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP), which was prepared for this project.
• KCC has six directorates that manage the city’s affairs; namely; Finance, Planning and Administration, Works and Urban planning, Gender and Community services, Health and Environment, and Education and sports. The Project Implementation Unit under the above Directorates is concerned with the implementation of KIIDP. These directorates are responsible for planning and operation of the city’s infrastructure. The implication is that within the KIIDP implementation scope capacities of these directorates will need to be enhanced.
• KCC needs to create a forum for relevant stakeholders to discuss traffic regulation and road maintenance issues. Already key actors like UTODA, Multiplex, UBOA, Boda Boda Associations, and the Traffic police are coordinating efforts. This initiative should be institutionalised and strengthened.
• Similarly, an institutional forum for management of wetlands should be created preferably under the Wetlands Inspection Division, Ministry of Water, Lands and Environment. KIIDP would in this case work with the WID to initiate the process. The membership to the forum would include KCC, the Directorate of Water Development, NWSC and the National Forestry Authority
• The institutional capacity building aspects that KIIDP should focus on include the following needs:
• The institutional profile of the Directorate of Health and Environment should be elevated and made autonomous in the same spirit of the district tender boards
• Support to WID to finalise the on-going exercise of demarcation of and gazetting of wetlands in Kampala in order to determine which town plots were allocated to the public but fall within wetland boundaries
• Legal Employers of plots in wetlands but acquired these prior to the coming into force of the Constitution in 1995, should observe the provisions of Section 44 of the Land Act 1998.
3.1.3 Other Agencies that will Impact KIIDP
Uganda Police (Traffic Police Section)
An Assistant Inspector General of Police heads the Uganda Police Traffic section. At each of the Police Stations in the Divisions of KCC is an officer in-charge of traffic, who reports to the Regional Traffic Officer-Kampala Extra.
The Police are entrusted with the following tasks:
➢ To control / direct traffic flow;
➢ To enforce traffic laws and regulations through the Traffic and Road Safety Act;
➢ They also assist other bodies in designing and carrying out projects related to Traffic and Road Safety.
KIIDP will liaise with Uganda Police – Traffic Section and other agencies like UTODA, UBOA, MoWHC-Road Agency Formation Unit (RAFU) and National Road safety Council (NRSC) for control of traffic and diversion of roads for each investment.
3.1.4 Policy Framework
Table 3.3 outlines the policy framework relevant to the implementation of the KIIDP as it relates to environment and social protection and management.
Table 3.3: Policy Framework
|Policy Title |Policy Goal |Impact on KIIDP |
|National Environment Management Policy, 1994|Goal of this policy is the promotion of |Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) must|
| |sustainable economic and social development |be conducted for KIIDP investments |
| |that enhances environmental quality | |
|The National Policy for the Conservation and|Curtail the rampant loss of wetland resources|Application of environment impact |
|Management of Wetland Resources 1995 |and ensure that benefits from wetlands are |mitigation procedures on all activities |
| |sustainable and equitably distributed |of KIIDP to be carried out in or around |
| | |affected wetlands. |
|The National Water Policy, 1999 |The discharge of effluent from industrial |Quality of drainage water from solid |
| |areas is subject to a permit in line with the|waste disposal facilityshall not pollute|
| |Waste Discharge Regulation (1996) No permit |the receiving surface water or ground |
| |is however required to undertake works of |water. |
| |improving drainage systems unless such works | |
| |impede or change direction of flow of water. | |
3.1.5 Legal and regulatory Framework
Table 3.4 outlines the legal and regulatory framework as well as its impact on the proposed infrastructure investments under KIIDP.
TABLE 3.4: Legal and Regulatory Framework
|ACT |RELEVANT PROVISIONS |IMPACT ON KIIDP |
|The Constitution of Uganda; 1995 |The State shall promote sustainable |Chapter 15, Article 237, Clauses (1) (2) (a) & |
| |development and public awareness of the |(b) gives the Government the powers as guided by |
| |need to manage land, air and water |the Parliament to acquire land any where within |
| |resources in a balanced and sustainable |the country and place it to the best use to |
| |manner for the present and future |benefit the citizens of the country, where deemed|
| |generations. |necessary. |
|The Local Governments Act 1997 |This act provides for a district-based |Section 80 states that, “Urban Local Governments |
| |system of local governments. The district |(KCC inclusive) shall have autonomy over their |
| |councils provided for in this act have both|financial and planning matters with regard to |
| |legislative and executive powers, rendering|natural resource management, the district |
| |them the highest political authorities in |councils are responsible for land surveying, land|
| |the districts. |administration, physical planning, forests and |
| | |wetlands, environment and sanitation and road |
| | |services.” Thus, the district councils will play |
| | |an important role during the implementation of |
| | |this project. |
|National Environment Act Cap 153 |Section 9 (1), requires a developer of a |KIIDP is required by Law to submit Environment |
| |project to submit an acceptable Environment|Impact Assessment for the proposed infrastructure|
| |Impact Assessment Report in accordance with|developments. Upon approval by NEMA, the EIA |
| |the guidelines in the Third Schedule of |report will have to be disclosed to the public. |
| |this Act. | |
|Environmental Impact Assessment |According to sections 20 – 24 of the NEA, |According to Section 3(2) some of the |
|Regulation 13/1998 and Environmental |all projects that have or are likely to |requirements of EIA are to establish adequate |
|Audits Guidelines |have a significant impact on the |environment standards and to monitor changes in |
| |environment are required to undergo an |environmental quality. It also points out that |
| |environmental impact assessment (EIA) |the true and total costs of environmental |
| |process prior to implementation. |pollution are borne by the polluter. |
|The National Environment (Wetlands, |Regulation 12(1) prohibits any person from |Under regulation 34(1), a developer desiring to |
|River Banks and Lake Shores |carrying out an activity in a wetland |conduct a project which may have significant |
|Management) Regulations, 2000 |without a permit issued by the Executive |impact on a wetland (for example drainage), river|
| |Director of NEMA. |bank or lake shore, shall be required to carry |
| | |out an environmental impact assessment in |
| | |accordance with sections 20, 21, and 22 of the |
| | |NES. |
|The Water Act, Cap 152 and the Water |The Act provides for use, protection and |Under Section 31 (1) of the Act, a person commits|
|Resources Regulations, 1998 |management of water resources and supply; |an offence who, unless authorised under this Part|
| |to provide for the constitution of water |of the Act, causes or allows wastes to come in |
| |and sewerage authorities; and to facilitate|contact with, or be discharged into water or |
| |the devolution of water supply and sewerage|allows water to be polluted. |
| |undertakings. | |
|Water (Waste Discharge) Regulations, |The water (Waste Discharge) Regulations of |Under regulation 5(1), a waste discharge permit |
|1998 |1998, aim at regulating the effluent or |is required for a person who owns a facility |
| |discharge of wastes on to land or into |which discharges or will discharge effluent or |
| |water. |waste into the aquatic environment or on land |
|The Land Act, Cap 227 |Section 42 states that Government or Local |Section 74 (i) states that where it is necessary |
| |Government may acquire land in accordance |to execute public works on any land (e.g. |
| |with the provisions of Article 26 and |construction of road), an authorised undertaker |
| |clause as of Article 237 of the |shall enter into mutual agreement with occupier |
| |constitution. |or Employer of the land in accordance with this |
| | |act, and where no agreement is reached, the |
| | |Minister may, compulsorily acquire land in |
| | |accordance role Section 43 of the Act. |
|The Town and Country Planning Act |The Town and Country Planning Act 1964 |The Act established guideline for planning |
|1964 |govern Land use and land planning in urban |schemes, acquisition of land and compensation for|
| |and rural areas. |acquired lands, as well as considerations to |
| | |safeguard the natural environment. |
|Public Health Act (1964) |Section 7 of the Act provides local |The project activities under the solid waste |
| |authorities with administrative powers to |management and the markets improvement components|
| |take all lawful, necessary and reasonable |are given legal impact by the provisions of this |
| |practicable measures for preventing the |Act |
| |occurrence of, or for dealing with any | |
| |outbreak or prevalence of, any infectious | |
| |communicable or preventable disease to | |
| |safeguard and promote the public health and| |
| |to exercise the powers and perform the | |
| |duties in respect of public health | |
| |conferred or imposed by this act or any | |
| |other law. | |
|Local Urban Authorities Act (1967) |These Acts empower urban authorities to |While it is clear that the law provides enough |
|and Town and Country Planning Act |affect development control and enforce |powers including enforcing standards on land |
|(1964) |standards. |developments, KCC has been unable to restrain |
|. | |residents from erecting buildings and other |
| | |property on road reserves. Implication is that |
| | |illegal structures within development corridors |
| | |may unnecessarily attract compensation and/or |
| | |resettlement action. |
|Workers' Compensation Act (2000) |Section 28 of The Workers’ Compensation Act|The provision of personal protective equipment |
| |(2000) states that: where a medical |(PPE) to employees to minimize accidents and |
| |practitioner grants a certificate that a |injuries is taken care of under this act. The |
| |worker is suffering from a scheduled |employees that carry out the project activities |
| |disease causing disablement or that the |like loading and off-loading of construction |
| |death of a workman was caused by any |material will require PPE so that the various |
| |scheduled disease; and the disease was due |sections of the Workers’ Compensation Act (2000) |
| |to the nature of the worker’s employment |are complied with. |
| |and was contracted within the twenty-four | |
| |months immediately previous to the date of | |
| |such disablement or death, the worker or, | |
| |if he or she is deceased, his or her | |
| |dependants shall be entitled to claim and | |
| |to receive compensation under this Act. | |
|The KCC (Solid Waste Management) |In Section 5 of the Ordinance, no person |The decentralisation process is supposed to bring|
|Ordinance, 2000 |shall place, deposit or allow any solid |services nearer to the people and thus improve |
|. |waste to be placed or deposited on his or |their living standards. The KCC management |
| |her premises or on private property, on a |structure has not yet yielded the desired results|
| |public street, roadside, or in a ditch, |and this has been worsened by the lack of |
| |river, stream, lake, pond, canal, channel, |institutional collaboration particularly in terms|
| |or in a park, or in gulch, ravine, |of monitoring of division activities by City |
| |excavation, or other place where it may be |Hall. The disposal of solid wastes into drainage |
| |or become a public health nuisance. |channels in Kampala is still common practice |
| | |although the Solid Waste Management Ordinance |
| | |(2000) has been put in place. The ramification of|
| | |this problem is best dealt with under the |
| | |Institutional Development Component of KIIDP |
| | |(Component 1). |
|The Roads Act, 1964 |Under the Roads Act 1964, the Minister may |A road authority may dig and take away materials |
| |declare by statutory instrument an area |required for the construction and maintenance of |
| |bounded by imaginary lines parallel to and |roads in any part of a road reserve approved by |
| |distant not more than fifty feet from the |the district commissioner without payment to any |
| |centreline of any road to be a road |person. However, the statutory instrument |
| |reserve. The Act also stipulates that no |required to establish the road reserve was not |
| |person may, without the written permission |gazetted, and the legality of the existing road |
| |of the road authority, erect any building, |reserves is currently under dispute. |
| |plant any tree or permanent crops within a | |
| |road reserve, subject to any order made | |
| |under the Act | |
|The Survey Act 1964 |The Survey Act 1964 requires that before |Compensation provided for under this Act applies |
| |any attempts are made to construct a road |only to trees, fences and standing crops that are|
| |or highway in any part of the country, a |damaged or injured during the survey. The Act |
| |survey of the area has to be carried out in|implies that where there is a road reserve, no |
| |accordance with survey operations as |compensation of any sort is due to the Employers |
| |governed by the Act |of property standing or lying on the area |
| | |gazetted as a road reserve. However, the Land Act|
| | |1998 has superseded these clauses referring to |
| | |compensation. |
| |The National Gender Policy of 1997 provides|The gender policy recommends that integration of |
|National Gender Policy, 1997 |a framework and mandate for all |gender issues in national policies and projects |
| |stakeholders to address the gender |will improve national welfare, contribute towards|
| |imbalances within their respective sectors.|sustainable development, and improve the work of |
| | |the ministries |
| Traffic Act |The Traffic Act seeks to enforce safe |The act requires developers of public roads to |
| |utilisation of public roads. |take measures that guarantee safety of road users|
| | |during project implementation. These include |
| | |alternative routing of traffic, safety signalling|
| | |and traffic wardens |
3.1.6 International Legislation
Uganda has international obligations in the field of environment which are imposed by international treaties and general principles of Law to which all nations are signatory. International standards have been used as pacesetters when determining national environmental standards relating to biodiversity management. These include the Ramsar Convention and Conservation on Biological Biodiversity (CBD).
Another legislation applicable here is the Stockholm Declaration, whereby Principle 15 of the Stockholm Declaration states that, “Planning must be applied to human settlements and urbanization with a view to avoiding adverse effects on the environment and obtaining maximum social, economic and environmental benefits for all”. In this respect, projects aimed at exploiting local people or the environment is discouraged.
3.1.7 World Bank Operational Policies and Potential Gaps with the National Legislation
The World Bank environmental operational policies that were reviewed largely concur with the national regulations. These include;
i) Environmental Assessment; which is aimed at ensuring environmental and social soundness and sustainability of investment projects. It also aims at supporting the integration of environmental and social aspects of projects into the decision making process.
ii) Natural Habitats; which is geared at promoting environmentally sustainable development by supporting the protection, conservation, maintenance, and rehabilitation of natural habitats and their functions.
iii) Cultural Property; To assist in preserving physical cultural resources (PCR) and avoiding their destruction or damage. PCR includes archaeological, paleontological, historical, and sacred sites including graveyards, burial sites, and unique natural values.
iv) Indigenous People; To design and implement projects in a way that fosters full respect for Indigenous Peoples’ dignity, human rights, and cultural uniqueness and so that they: (a) receive culturally compatible social and economic benefits; and (b) do not suffer adverse effects during the development process.
These policies are taken care of under The Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, The National Environment Act; and regulations formed under the Environment Act like, The Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, The National Environment (Wetlands, Riverbanks and Lakeshores management) Regulations, Water (Waste) Discharge Regulations, The Wildlife Statute and The Land Act. The need for stakeholder participation is strongly emphasized under the Impact Assessment Regulations.
Another policy of the World Bank that was reviewed is the OP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement, where it is clearly stated that whenever feasible, involuntary resettlement must be avoided or minimized, and alternative development solutions must be explored. It is argued that involuntary resettlement dismantles a previous production system and way of life and that all resettlement programs must be development programs as well.
When resettlement is unavoidable, the Bank’s policy is to help the borrower ensure that the productive base and income – earning ability of those involuntarily resettled are improved so that they share the benefits of the new development and are compensated for transitional hardships or at least be helped to attain the standards they would have achieved without relocation.
Squatter communities slated for removal must receive alternative locations for housing although they may lack the legal title or rights to their land (or other property) that would ensure their compensation. Planned provisions to ensure that services will be capable of handling the needs of the displaced are also a critical part of the resettlement plan.
Compared to the National Legislation of the Republic of Uganda, the World Bank’s development guidelines, tally with most of the requirements with the exception of the handling of illegal squatters who deliberately or ignorantly settle or encroach on land (premises) placed aside as national reserve for public facilities including road reserves, drainage channel reserves, wetlands etc. In this respect all persons impacted by the KIIDP investments will be resettled or compensated following the guidance provided in the Resettlement Action Plan.
Furthermore, Section 45 (Control of environmentally sensitive areas) states that; The Government or local government shall hold in trust for the people and protect natural lakes, rivers, ground water, natural ponds, natural streams, wetlands, forest reserves, national parks, and any other land reserved for ecological and touristy purposes for the common good of the citizens of Uganda.
Any wetlands serving as a source of water supply or receiving effluent as part of a designated service to any human settlement shall be declared a fully protected wetland from any encroachment, drainage or modification [Wetland Policy 7.5(i)]. The implication is that any encroachment is illegal and therefore liable to prosecution under the NEMA Statute. The Law requires that such wetlands be gazetted.
Under section 44 of the , …”the government or local government shall hold in trust for the people and protect, natural lakes, rivers, wetlands, …….and any land to be reserved for ecological……..purposes for the common good of all citizens”. No Law applies retrospectively. It should be noted that laws do not apply retrospectively. Therefore while this Section of the Land Act outlaws settlement on any land declared as being held in public interest such as wetlands, ‘squatters’ found there prior to coming into force of the Land Act in 1998, are eligible for compensation by the respective authority enforcing these provisions of the Land Act. This is in harmony with the World Bank’s Operation Policy, OP 4.12, which requires that for development projects funded by the Bank, all affected persons must be resettled or adequately compensated. However, where encroachment occurred after 1998, the resettlement conditions are subject to negotiations. For instance if the settler has official title issued by a competent authority after the date of the Act, but prior to identification and demarcation of wetlands by the local authority, then legal redress is possible under a separate section of the Land Act.
Wetlands Management in the Context of Uganda Legislation and the World Bank’s Op 4.04; Natural Habitats
The Uganda's environmental legislation and World Bank's operational policies require protection of wetlands and natural habitats. In Uganda legislation and the major one being the supreme law, The Constitution of Uganda, protect wetlands. Whereas a significant portion of wetlands in all the investment areas has been converted to residential, industrial or agricultural purposes, the remaining part is held in trust by the Ugandan Government for the people of Uganda and are hence accorded a conservation status.
According to the World Bank OP 4.04, all protected areas that fall within IUCN classification of categories I-IV level of protection are considered critical natural habitats, which require protection. However, the project does not fall under the above categories although some of the activities of this project will occur in areas currently under consideration for gazettement, like Nakivubo wetland. The implication is that once gazetted, the legal status of the wetlands in question would be raised to categories I-IV level of IUCN classification.
Wetlands are not and cannot be owned by any person or individual. No one in Uganda can lay claim to ownership of any wetland or part of a wetland if that claim was made after the coming into force of the Constitution 1995. For people whose land already had wetlands in it before the coming into force of the Constitution, they are under legal obligation to observe the provisions of Section 44 of the Land Act 1998, which states that; a person who owns or occupies land shall manage and utilise the land in accordance with the Forest Act, the Mining Act, the National Environment Statute, 1995, the Water Statute, 1995, and any other law.
Furthermore, Section 45 (Control of environmentally sensitive areas) states that; The Government or local government shall hold in trust for the people and protect natural lakes, rivers, ground water, natural ponds, natural streams, wetlands, forest reserves, national parks, and any other land reserved for ecological and touristy purposes for the common good of the citizens of Uganda.
Any wetlands serving as a source of water supply or receiving effluent as part of a designated service to any human settlement shall be declared a fully protected wetland from any encroachment, drainage or modification [Wetland Policy 7.5(i)]. The implication is that any one contravening this policy requirement is liable to prosecution under the NEMA statute. Therefore, it is recommended that those people who were in a wetland before the coming into force of the 1995 Constitution should be compensated and requested to vacate wetlands.
It should also be noted that KIIDP deals mostly with the improvement of the already established habitats like drainage channels. It is recommended that enforcement actions be put in place to restrict further encroachment and development in wetlands. In this regard the RAP will provide a census of those currently living, using or owning assets in these areas and for this matter, a cut-off date will be established after which point encroachers will not be eligible for compensation.
9 Situation Regarding Bahia grass
1 3.1.8.1 Impacts associated with planting Bahia grass (Paspalum notatum) along the banks of the drainage system.
Bahia grass (Paspalum notatum Flügge) is a deep-rooted, warm seasoned perennial grass. It is widely used as roadside cover for the humid sub-tropics. Its use as forage and for erosion control is also mentioned in some parts of the world and it is widely used in Uganda as lawn grass and as ground cover to prevent soil erosion. It has been in use in all parts of the country. Its local name is Paspalum and it is the grass of choice in virtually all public open spaces of urban areas, in schools and hospital compounds and in all public or private areas where grass cover is needed.
Bahia grass is slowing growing and difficult to establish. Upon successful establishment however, Bahia grass spreads by short, thick rhizomes to form a dense turf. There are different types of Bahia grass, namely, Pensacola Bahia, and Competitor Bahia. The common Bahia grass (Paspalum notatum), also known as Pensacola is the preferred one because of its growth requirements, which are similar to what we have in Uganda as described below.
Common Bahia grass is tropical or subtropical perennial grass (family Poaceae). Bahia grass is well adapted to low-nutrient soils. It is relatively drought and flood tolerant. It does well in climates that receive 750 mm to 1200 mm of precipitation per year. Bahia grass is best adapted to moist, sandy soils in sub-tropical and temperate climate zones. It is adapted to both upland and lowland areas, and has been found on open ground, savannah and pastures from elevations at sea level up to 2000 m. Given the dangers and risks mentioned above, we do not recommend Bahia grass for inclusion in the project.
2 3.1.8.2 Alternative Grass for Use Downstream of Wetlands
An alternative grass to Bahia grass (Paspulun notatum) is Paspalum conjugatum Berg. It is a perennial grass that grows in tufts and has a strong creeping rhizome. In Uganda, it is known to occur in all regions except the north In Kampala it is also commonly used to stabilize banks and surroundings of Waste stabilization ponds for example in Ntinda and Nalya Housing Estates. Originally, from the American tropics, P. conjugatum is naturalized throughout South-East Asia and in many tropical countries of the world. It is abundant in Indonesia, the Philippines and the Pacific Islands and also in many parts of Uganda.
3 Description
It is a vigorous, creeping perennial grass with long stolons, rooting at nodes, with culms ascending to erect, 40-80(-100) cm tall, branching, solid, slightly compressed. Leaf-sheath strongly compressed, usually 30-50 mm long, ciliate on the margins; ligule collar-shaped, about 1 mm long; leaf-blade linear or lanceolate-acuminate, 8-20 cm x 5-12 mm, glabrous to sparsely pubescent. Inflorescence well exerted with two or occasionally three diverging racemes, 7-16 cm long; spikelets solitary, imbricate, flattened ovate, up to 2 mm long, with long hairs on the margins;
4 Uses
P. conjugatum is used as forage for grazing or in cut-and-carry systems, and is rated as a very important natural pasture grass in coconut plantations. It can also be used to control soil erosion on riverbanks.
5 Ecology
P. conjugatum grows from near sea level up to 1700 m altitudes in open to moderately shaded places. It is adapted to humid climates. It is found growing gregariously under plantation crops, also along stream banks, roadsides, and in disturbed areas. It is not aquatic, it forms dense thickets, it tolerates a wide range of soil conditions, it is a shade tolerant plant at some stage of its life cycle and it is not a climber.
6 Growth and development
The germination percentage of P. conjugatum seed is usually low. Flowering commences 4-5 weeks after seedling emergence and it continues to flower all year round. New shoots develop at every rooted node.
7 Recommendation
The fact that P. conjugatum is neither an aquatic plant nor a climber, among other ecological characteristics, implies that it cannot invade and dominate wetland plants. Furthermore, it is already being used in Uganda as a lawn grass and to stabilize embankments. Consequently, it is more environmentally appropriate than Bahia grass (Paspalum notatum). The growth requirements for P. conjugatum grass species as described above are quite comparable to the conditions in the Lake Victoria basin. Based on this, it is recommended to plant P. conjugatum grass, to stabilise the banks of the drainage channels. This recommendation is applicable for earth channels, (usually the case towards the end of the channels). The P. conjugatum will in this case be useful in preventing erosion of the channel embankments.
3.2. CURRENT SITUATION REGARDING DRAINAGE INVESTMENTS
Environmental Linkage between Drainage Systems and Wetlands
Uganda’s rich endowment in wetlands, which accounts for about 10% of the land area, is mainly due to her geological past. Many wetlands originated with the upwarping of land associated with the formation of the Rift Valley. The warping was spread over a wide area impending and even reversing river flow.
The wide distribution of wetlands means a large proportion of the population have access to the utilization of wetlands, resulting in extensive degradation of the wetlands. This calls for particular urgency in their efficient management and sustainable utilization.
People have used wetlands resources in Uganda as a source of building materials, for crafts, furniture and as hunting and fishing areas. Seasonal wetlands margins have been used for grazing cattle, growing arable crops, and for domestic water. Wetlands provide habitat for wildlife.
All wetlands are characterized by impeded drainage, but vary in extent depending on the period of flooding, depth of water, altitude, fertility of the surrounding soil and other environmental factors. They are nevertheless all characterized by having distinctive plants and animals, which are adapted to water logged conditions.
Maintenance of Water quality:
Wetlands are important in improving or maintaining water quality by acting as filters: the physically, chemically and biologically remove pollutants and sediments from water that passes through the wetland. The quality of water passing through wetlands changes, and is usually improved due to the following events:
a) as the water enters a wetland, the velocity of the water reduces causing particles to settle or sink to the floor of the wetland, this has important consequences that are discussed in the following section;
b) surface water is spread out over a wide area in a wetland giving greater opportunity for chemical exchanges between the water and the soil;
c) there are many chemical processes taking place in wetland water and soils that remove or render pollutants harmless; e.g. nitrates are converted to nitrogen gas where aerobic and anaerobic soil zones occur in close proximity;
d) organic substances (solid or liquid) are slowly decomposed by micro-organisms which are resident in wetlands and associated with wetland plants,
e) some pollutant and especially plant nutrients are consumed by plants or animals e.g. phosphorus and nitrate are taken up by growing wetland plants;
Wastewater treatment:
Wetlands, whether natural or manmade (artificial), can play a major role in wastewater treatment originating from industries, agriculture and the domestic sector. The wastewater treatment function depends on four wetland features:
a. the high rate of primary productivity of wetland plants (which removes plant nutrients - especially phosphorus and nitrogen). Nutrients are taken up by plants as they grow,
b. the high rate of settlement of suspended solids and their subsequent accumulation in wetland bottom sediments along with any pollutants and pathogenic organisms such as bacteria and viruses, attached to the settling solids,
c. the anaerobic (oxygen free) conditions in the bottom sediments permit the conversion of soluble forms of heavy metals to insoluble forms and the removal of nitrogen through the process of denitrification which changes soluble nitrogen into gaseous nitrogen which is then lost harmlessly to the atmosphere,
d. large populations of decomposer organisms (protozoa, bacteria and fungi) resident in wetlands on wetland plants also assist in the conversion of some pollutants to less harmful forms and help eliminate some pathogens. Wetland plants translocate oxygen from the aerial shoots to the roots, where microorganisms to decompose/degrade the pollutants use part of the oxygen.
The effectiveness of a wetland in treating wastewater will be increased if the wastewater is spread throughout the whole wetland. However, this will be reduced where the wastewater is concentrated in a channel (as presently happens in the Nakivubo wetland in Kampala) so that the wastewater has little contact with the wetland and wetland plants in particular
Flood & Erosion Control
Flooding
Wetlands located along the shores of lakes, rivers, and streams protect surrounding properties from flooding by acting as a sponge, temporarily storing flood water and slowly releasing it back into the system. As storm water enters a wetland from surface runoff or adjacent water bodies, it is slowed down by trees, shrubs, reeds, rushes, and other wetland plants. Slowing the flow of water allows more time for it to percolate through the soil rather than continue downstream. Wetlands with a large surface area also act as a large sink, diffusing large flows over a greater land area and slowing the momentum of rushing water. In this way, wetlands help protect adjacent and downstream property from flood damage.
Erosion
During a storm, the effects of rushing water can be very destructive. Fast-flowing water can carry a large load of soil particles from the land which are then washed into lakes, rivers, and streams. Excessive sediment in water is considered both a chemical and physical pollutant; it can carry bacteria and toxic particles and can alter the habitat of the receiving water for plants and animals. Wetland vegetation reduces the erosive effect of rushing water by slowing the velocity of floodwaters, binding the soil with its roots, and causing suspended soil particles to settle.
Phase I Drainage Investments
The Phase 1 project area covers drainage systems in Lubigi wetland, Nakivubo tributaries and wetland, Nalukolongo upper reach and minor systems (drainage black spots) in Central, Kawempe and Makindye Divisions (Table 3.4).
Table 3.4: The proposed drainage works in Phase 1
|Component |Reach |Estimated Length (km) |
| |From |To | |
|DRAINAGE WORKS |
|1) Short term Action Plan – Phase 1 | | | |
|i) Lubigi Phase 1 (Mid Reach) | | | |
| Primary Channel |Gayaza Road |Hoima Road |3.6 |
|ii) Nakivubo (Tributaries and Wetland) | | | |
| Secondary 5 – Kayunga (upper reach not |Gaba Road |Nakivubo Channel |1.6 |
|designed) | | | |
| Secondary 6 – Gapco |Kasese Railway Line |Nakivubo Channel |0.3 |
| Secondary 7 – Katwe |1st Katwe Road Crossing|Nakivubo Channel |1.5 |
| Nakivubo wetland – Reticulation system |5th Street |Nortnern edges of Upper|no design |
| | |and lower wetland | |
|iii) Nalukolongo (Upper Reach) | | | |
| Secondary 2 Nateete |Junju Road |Nalukolongo Channel |0.7 |
|v) Minor Systems (Drainage Black Spots) | | | |
|Central Division | | | |
| C8 – Lugogo Bypass (near Mackenzie Vale) |Upper Mackenzie Vale |Lugogo |no design |
| | |Channel | |
| C14 – Ben Kiwanuka St – Channel St |Wilson Rd, Nakivubo |Nakivubo Channel |0.9 |
| |Green St | | |
|Kawempe Division | | | |
| K1 – Makerere Roundabout |Wandegeya Leg |Katanga Channel |no design |
|Makindye Division | | | |
| M6 – Railway Line-Queen's way |Downstream of Kevina |Katwe Drain |0.8 |
| |Road | | |
In most cases the drainage channels are narrow and shallow. Furthermore, the drainage systems receive as solid waste that are dumped indiscriminately into or nearby the drainage channels (Plate 3.1). From unpaved roads and compounds, construction sites as well as agricultural areas, a lot of silt is generated and carried into the drainage channels by storm runoff. Consequently, there is blockage of channels resulting into frequent floods in Kampala due to solid wastes silt accumulation.
Plate 3.1: Solid wastes pilling at culverts along Kawala road crossing of drainage investments under Phase1
3.2.1 Bio-physical environment
1 3.2.1.1 Water Quality
The results of water quality for samples collected from the drainage systems are indicated in Table 4.2. Generally the water quality in the drainage channels are laden with pollutants and do not meet the National Effluent Discharge Standards apart from total phosphorus. Nakivubo catchment recorded the highest values for the variables measured, followed by Lubigi, Nalukolongo and Kinawataka in that order. This is mainly because most establishments in Kampala are not connected to the sewer lines and in some cases, there is leakage from broken sewer lines into the channels.
There is no centralised wastewater treatment facility in Lubigi, Nalukolongo and Kinawataka. In these areas, septic tanks are used or in some case domestic and industrial wastewaters are discharged directly into the drainage channels. In Lubigi catchment (Bwaise in particular) most toilets are above ground (because the high water table makes it difficult for one to construct a below ground toilet), and contents are usually emptied into the drainage channels indicated in section 3.2.1.
Table 3.6: Water Quality for sampled drainage channels
|Site |Variable |
| | TN (mg/l) | TP (mg/l) | BOD (mg/l) | TC (CFU/100ml) |
|Lubigi Channel |15.5 |0.15 |180 |8,000 |
|(Kawala Road crossing) | | | | |
|Nakamiro (Just before it enters the main drainage channel) |10.2 |0.6 |78 |3,500 |
|Channel from Nakulabye to Kawala Road (Makerere-Kasubi Road |12.3 |0.09 |120 |1,000 |
|crossing) | | | | |
|Hoima Road crossing |14.5 |0.20 |175 |7,500 |
|Sentema Road crossing (In Lubigi wetland) |1.3 |0.0.3 |8 |20 |
|Katanga Channel (Just before Motor Garages at Gayaza |18.6 |0.9 |200 |6,800 |
|Roundabout) | | | | |
|Nalukolongo |18.5 |1.25 |166 |600 |
|Channel (besides fence of WFP Hqs, after Sembule, below road| | | | |
|bridge) | | | | |
|Outflow channel from Kabaka’s Lake |8.2 |0.06 |60 |500 |
|Natete-Kaboja Road (Nalukolongo Channel at Old Masaka Road |9.9 |0.12 |200 |5,300 |
|crossing) | | | | |
|Kinawataka Channel |6 |1.13 |120 |22,000 |
|Point where a channel from PEPSI meets one from | | | | |
|Ntinda-Kyambogo Industrial area | | | | |
|Lower Kinawataka wetland |25.3 |0.25 |96 |18,000 |
|(Bugolobi-Nambole road crossing ) | | | | |
|Nakivubo Channel |1.2 |0.05 |5 |16 |
|Beginning of Nakivubo Channel (Below Wandegeya Flats) | | | | |
|Channel from Nakulabye (Just before it meets one from |8.5 |0.14 |200 |1,980,000 |
|Wandegeya flats | | | | |
|Kayunga Channel (Just before it joins Nakivubo Channel at |7.3 |0.21 |250 |3,600,000 |
|Mukwano soap factory) | | | | |
|Lugogo Channel |5.4 |0.05 |88 |600 |
|Kitintale Channel |28.4 |4.55 |152 |14,000 |
|(Below St.Kizito Primary School and Bugolobi Flats) | | | | |
|Downstream of 5th Street (In upper Nakivubo wetland below |82.1 |8.45 |980 |22,000,000 |
|Namuwongo) | | | | |
|Lower Nakivubo wetland (Railway crossing) |15.7 |3.86 |198 |19,800,000 |
|National Effluent Discharge Standards |20 |10 |50 |10,000 |
TN =Total Nitrogen; TP= Total Phosphorus; BOD = Biochemical Oxygen Demand; TC= Total Coliforms
The Nakivubo channel receives wastewater from the central business district, Bugolobi sewage treatment and industries like Mukwano and City Abattoir, explaining the high levels of pollutants in the channel.
Lubigi and Nalukolongo channels largely receive pollution from illegally disposed off material, some of which include flying toilets (kaveera containing faecal material), and nearby toilets, which discharge their contents into the drainage channels.
Kinawataka channel receives water from Ntinda industrial establishments (both human and industrial wastes) and effluents from Ntinda and Kyambogo waste stabilisation ponds.
It is worth noting that wastewater in Nakivubo and Kinawata lower reach wetlands is currently canalised. For Nakivubo, this is attributed to yam growing in the wetland and partly because of the expansion/rehabilitation of the channel, which has resulted into rapid flows into the wetland. For Kinawataka wetland, there is channel at the western edge of the wetland (supposed to carry storm water run off), put in place by one of the investors, whose property used to be flooded during heavy rains. As result, the wastewater flows downstream to the road crossing with minimal treatment, as the wastewater does not interact with the wetland plants.
The same situation (little or no improvement in water quality) was also noted in Lubigi wetland from Kawala road to Hoima Road crossing, where an open channel joins the two locations. The water quality does not improve significantly between the two locations. On the contrary, as the water diffuses into the wetland and flows downstream of Lubigi wetland, the quality improves significantly as indicted by a water sample collected at Sentema Road crossing (Table 3.5). This can be attributed to the fact that Lubigi wetland, downstream of Hoima road has not been degraded and is performing one of its natural functions; water purification. Reticulation refers to establishing multiple small channels in a wetland to spread water flow over a wide area as opposed to it flowing in one wide channel. KIIDP will provide reticulation at the end of the Nakivubo Channel.
|The fact Lubigi wetland improves the water quality, the proposed reticulation system under KIIDP is highly |
|recommended. This will further enhance the improvement in water quality. The same approach/idea should be extended to|
|Kinawataka and Nalukolongo catchments. The reticulation should be done at the point where the water enters the |
|wetland. |
The proposed drainage interventions (channel lining, culvert upgrading, slope improvement and general bush clearing on channel embankments) will potentially result into increase in water flow velocity in the channels. The water quality will not improve significantly, as the residence time in these channels is short.
As pointed out earlier, it should be noted that poor water quality in the drainage channels is due to inadequate wastewater treatment. As of now, most of the drainage channels are acting as waste reticulation in addition to carrying storm water. In this regard, the treatment will depend on downstream wetlands or wastewater treatment at point of generation and the blame should not be put on KIIDP.
2 3.2.1.2 Lubigi Catchment
The Lubigi Catchment covers a major portion of Kawempe, part of Nakawa and the Northern Part of Lubaga Division.
The primary drainage of Nsooba originates between Mulago and Kyebando, crosses Kalerwe, Bwaise (Bombo road), and Kawala road, crosses Hoima, and finally discharges into Lubingi wetland. This channel passes through residential houses, commercial buildings and other establishments such as wood and metal fabrication workshops and car washing bays. Some of these developments are within the channel reserve (Plate 3.2). Some of the houses are made of poor masonry and others are constructed out of mud and wattle. When flooding occurs, water stays in contact with the walls for some time, consequently leading to collapse of the walls resulting into safety problems.
However, from Bombo road to Kawaala road, developments are mainly on one side thus providing opportunity for minimising the scope of resettlement since the channel can be widened on the undeveloped side.
Plate 3.2: House in Lubigi swamp, Bwaise, next to Nsooba Channel (about 6 metres away)
Lubigi swamp and the down stream banks of the Lubigi channel its feeder channels for example Nsooba, Kiwunya are dominated by Vossia spp, Papyrus spp and Commelina spp. The notable fauna are velvet monkeys, Sitatunga, monitor lizards, tortoises and pythons. There is also considerable flora of similar species along the reach planned for development, i.e. the corridor between Gayaza and Hoima Roads.
Constraints
The drainage constraints that have been identified within the Lubigi Catchment area are;
• Encroachment into the channel reserve by residential houses and other establishments,
• Uncontrolled silt intrusion in the channels leading to blockage of culvert positions,
• Solid waste dumping part of which is non-degradable polythene bags (commonly known as Kaveera) and plastics, which find their way into the main channel, causing blockage of culverts.
• The carrying capacity of the existing channel is inadequate due to insufficient cross section and bed slope,
• The current culverts are narrow and small in number
• Poor or lack of maintenance like failure to remove the trapped debris at the trash screens blocks water flow.
3 3.2.1.3 Nakivubo Catchment
The Nakivubo Catchment is situated in the valley between Bugolobi, Mpanga and Muyenga Hills. The catchment covers Central Division, the southern portion of Nakawa Division and the northern portion of Makindye Division. The entire length of Nakivubo Channel (i.e. starting 0.4 km from its origin at Wandegeya to about 2 km downstream of Fifth Street Channel crossing) was recently rehabilitated. Yams and some small patches of vossia and papyrus cover the Nakivubo wetland. These activities are unlawful. However, encroachers who invade wetlands prior to promulgation of relevant legislation must be compensated before they are requested to vacate these areas. It is only then that KCC in collaboration with WID could collaboratively take steps to protect the wetland from further encroachment so that it restores itself to original ecosystem
Rapid Conveyance of Strom Water into Lake Victoria
Nakivbo wetland receives untreated and partially treated effluents from Nakivubo channel. The channel discharges its polluted contents into the Nakivubo wetland and finally into Lake Victoria at the Inner Murchison bay. The water supply for Kampala is abstracted 4 km down stream from the channel outlet. As a result, the wetland protects the Inner Murchison Bay-Lake Victoria, from pollution.
Kansiime and Nalubega, 1999 in a detailed study on the process involved in the treatment of wastewater, showed that the Nakivubo wetland performs considerable tertiary treatment of the effluents it receives from the sewage works and Kampala. As such it was concluded that the wetland protects the Inner Murchison Bay from eutrophication and excessive loads of pathogens which otherwise would be transported to the nearby Gaba waterworks. Furthermore, the reticulation of the papyrus within the lower reaches of the Nakivubo wetlands enhances this process by spreading the polluted water over a large area and hence increasing the purification activity.
However, as of now, much of the wetland have been reclaimed for settlement and industrial development, or is under cocoyam and sugarcane cultivation that has replaced the papyrus vegetation. The wetland area (field observations) has been reduced to 1.3 km2 compared to 2.8 km2 reported in 1999. Several studies carried out by Makerere University Institute of Environment & Natural Resources have demonstrated that papyrus has a better waste water treatment potential that cocoyams and other wetland plants. As a result, there are fears that if this trend continues unchecked, the increasing loads of nutrients (N, P) will cause eutrophication of the Inner Murchison Bay (Kansiime, 2000).
The increasing loads of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) are causing eutrophication problems in the Inner Murchison Bay. This takes the form of massive growth of blue green algae. The loading on the bay could have undesirable repercussions for the maintenance of raw water quality in the Inner Murchison Bay. According to the Water Quality Manager, NWSC is experiencing high water treatment costs at Gaba water works.
In order to reduce flooding in some areas of the city, Kampala City Council recently rehabilitated Nakivubo channel. The rehabilitation involved widening, stone pitching and re-alignment. Whereas this has reduced the flooding in the city, the water quality in the channel and that entering Nakivubo channel has worsened as untreated treated and untreated industrial effluents, domestic waste and urban solid waste are all carried along with storm water into the channel. This has also contributed to the pollutant loads entering the Inner Murchison bay.
According to Ebong (2005), the pollutant loads entering the Nakivubo wetland have increased three fold compared to that reported by Kansiime and Nalubega in 1999. This is also currently revealed by the presence of storm water in the Inner Murchison bay within eight hours whenever they are heavy rains in the catchment. Storm water was never observed in the Inner Murchison bay in the past. This implies that the residence time in the wetland has been reduced.
National water and Sewerage Corporation under the Lake Victoria Environmental Management Project prioritised industries in Nakivubo and Kinwataka Catchment (referred to as hot spots), that contribute significantly to the pollution (with potentially high discharges of BOD, N and P) into Nakivubo and Kinawataka wetlands respectively. The industries, their location and their related discharge are given in table 3.7 below.
According to Kyambadde et al (2004), National Water and Sewerage Corporation’s effluent contributes a large proportion of BOD and NH4-N loading into Nakivubo wetland. In the same study, heavy metals were detected in trace amounts at most sampling stations in the Nakivubo Channel catchment.
Table 3.7: Showing industries, their location and related environmental discharge
|Industry |Location |Products description |Pre-treatment facility |Discharge points/Effluent Quality |
|Mukwano Industries |Press Road near |Soap, and Oil |Sedimentation |Nakivubo Channel, High TSS, BOD |
| |Railway Head | | | |
| |quarters | | | |
|Uganda Meat Industries |Old Port Bell Road |Slaughter house, Meat |None |Direct to Nakivubo Channel, Very |
|(Kampala Slaughter house) | | | |High BOD, TSS, TP, TN and faecal |
| | | | |matter |
|Crown Beverages |Nakawa Industrial |Soft drinks |none |Kinawataka wetland, High EC and pH |
|(Pepsi) |Area | | | |
|Ngege Fish Company |Luzira Industrial |Fish |Septic Tank |Luzira Nakivubo wetland High, BOD |
| |Area | | |and TSS. |
|Uganda Breweries |Port Bell Luzira |Beer |None |Recently Installed a wastewater |
| | | | |treatment plant; but used to |
| | | | |discharge untreated effluent into |
| | | | |the Inner Murchison bay |
|Dairy Corporation Limited |Fifth Street |Milk, cheese, yoghurt, |None |Partly into the sewer and the rest |
| |Industrial Area, |Ice cream | |into the environment, High BOD, |
| |Buglobi | | |TSS, COD, TP and TN |
According to the Uganda Effluent Discharge Standards (1999), industries must obtain conditional discharge permit from the Directorate of Water Development. So if enforced polluting industries are easy to monitor and control.
The capacity of Nakivubo wetland (which comprises the upper and lower wetlands; separated by the railway line) can be improved by distributing the wastewater uniformly over the entire width of the upper wetland. This is what is referred to as reticulation in this report. This increases residence time of the water in the wetland. This may require dykes and other structures in order not to conflict with hydraulic capacity of the system to take rainfall runoff from the city. In the lower wetland, a more even distribution of the wastewater can be achieved by allowing water to enter the wetland through a series of culverts. Installing facilities for opening and closing the culverts could also increase the residence time of wastewater in the wetland and especially the upper part.
Similar reticulation is also proposed for Lubigi and Kinawataka wetlands. Proposed Nakivubo System Drainage works are indicated below in Table 3.8. The reticulation system will pass through the swamp, which may be disturbed during construction due to removal of some flora and slight displacement of some fauna from its current positions. However, this disturbance will be localised and short-term and will only occur during construction of the system with no medium-term negative impact on the functioning of the swamp. The secondary tributaries 5, 6, 7, C14, K1 and M6 are mainly bordered by commercial settlement and residential slum settlements.
Table 3.8: Proposed Nakivubo Catchment Drainage Works
|Section of Drainage |Reach |Situational analysis |Proposed Upgrading |
|Area | | | |
| |From |To | | |
|Secondary 5 – |Kibuli Road |Nakivubo Channel |The channel section is narrow and |Widening channel to 8.0 m across Mukwano |
|Kayunga (upper reach| | |overgrown with grass, consequently|Industries Property, 2 New Culverts Across |
|not designed) |Gaba Road |Kibuli Road |leading to regular flooding |Mukwano Road, New 6 m wide stone pitched |
| | | | |Channel, 2 New culverts Across Kibuli Road |
|Secondary 6 – Gapco |Kasese Railway |Nakivubo Channel |- Regular flooding |New Culvert Across Nsambya Road, New culvert|
| |Line | |- Channel upstream of railway |(1.8Hx3.0W) at Railway Crossing, New Channel|
| | | |crossing is small and overgrown |(6.0 m) from Nsambya Road to railway |
| | | |with grass |Crossing |
|Secondary 7 – Katwe |1st Katwe Road |Nakivubo Channel |Small Culvert at Katwe Road, |Upgrading done under the NCRP1 |
| |Crossing | |Kalitunsi Road Insufficient Pipe | |
| | | |capacity | |
|Nakivubo wetland |5th Street |Lake Victoria |Canlisation of flow, temporalily |Reticulation system i.e., flow distribution |
| | | |removing some flora and displacing|to attenuate flood events and restore |
| | | |some fauna |wetland |
Generally, there are no issues of biological concern for Secondary 6 (Gapco) and secondary 7 (Katwe) as these pass through already developed areas. The grass, Cynadon dactylon, dominates the area.
Secondary 5 (Kayunga), passes through undeveloped area, part of which is a wetland. Its upgrading will lead to clearing of Cyperus rotundus. However, this is not an endangered plant species and is in some cases considered as a weed. Apart from some crops that may be lost during upgrading, there are no serious biological environmental issues to be taken into consideration.
The portion of the Nakivubo wetland downstream of Fifth Street crossing has been degraded by agricultural activities dominated by yams. This wetland area has been declared a critical wetland (because of its central role in wastewater treatment) and is being zoned for protection by the Ministry of Water, Lands and Environment and the Wetlands Inspection Division coordinates the activity.
Nakivubo wetland is under threat from competing activities such as cultivation of yams and sugarcane, papyrus harvesting, brick making and filling-in for developments including housing construction. The Nakivubo wetland is used for tertiary treatment of effluent from the National Water and Sewerage Works and wastewater and storm run-off carried by the Nakivubo Channel.
In order to improve upon the ecological functioning of Nakivubo wetland, several interventions have been initiated which are geared at restoring the ecological functions of Nakivubo wetland. During the last decade, the Wetlands Inspection Division (WID) has been advocating for the development of a proper management plan for the Nakivubo wetland in Kampala. National Water and Sewerage Corporation, under the Lake Victoria Environmental Management Project has had several meetings with different groups of stakeholders (WID, KCC, Makerere University, industries among others) to lay a strategy for distributing wastewater over the Nakivubo wetland. The wetland was surveyed and a preliminary proposal for distributing the wastewater has been formulated. However, funds are yet to be secured, in order to implement these proposals.
The biophysical characteristics are as follows:
• Papyrus and Mischanthidium sp. dominate the vegetation of the Nakivubo wetland.
• Other vegetation includes Typha, Vossia and Phragmites.
Constraints
• Uncontrolled silt intrusion in the channels leading to blockage of culvert for example near Agha Khan and reduction of effective cross-section.
• Solid waste dumping comprising mainly of non-degradable polythene bags and plastics, solid wastes from Owino market that find their way into the main Channel, causing blockage.
• Farming along the channel increases erosion debris into the channel,
• The carrying capacity of most of the existing the secondary channels is inadequate due to insufficient cross section and bed slope,
• Failure to remove the trapped debris at the trash screens which block water flow.
Specific for Phase 1
• Lubigi and Nakivubo tributaries should be widen, deepened and lined.
• Reticulation system should be designed to spread the wastewater into the wetland to increase treatment.
• Regularly clean grating at Lugogo by pass. The width and depth of the drainage channel be designed conforming the strength of the storm water in the area.
• The K1 design should conform to accommodate floods.
• M6 secondary drain should be deepened to a level lower than that of the surrounding ground.
Specific to Phase 2-Priority A
• Residents along secondary 6 & 7 should be instructed not to create dams (for collecting sand) inside drainage channel.
• Secondary 2 should be widened, de- silted, and the section between Silver Springs hotel and Bugolobi flats should be built.
• Secondary 10 section between Apollo Kagwa road and Makerere Hill road should all be built with trapezoid pitches.
• Broken walls and floor of Kabaka’s lake drain should be built.
• The design of C9 should be constructed to conform to the strength and volume of flood waters affecting the area.
• C7, C10, C13 and C17 should be widened and deepened, just as R2 and R5.
• Heavy trucks should not park at the edges of the drainage channel embankments, the trenches should be deepened and widened, and the flood outlet point near Luzira Prison should be built to prevent ponding.
• M5, M8, M9 and M10 should be broadened and deepened and, should be regularly de-silted.
Specific to Phase 2-Priority B
• Secondary 3 should have more pedestrian bridges built across the channel at reasonable intervals.
• Secondary 8, 9 and 10 should be widened, deepened and regularly de-silted.
• Sensitisation of the communities on waste management around Nalukulongo Primary channel (lower reach) and Secondary 3.
• Stretch of Nalukulongo channel behind World Food Programme should be regularly de-silted and, the channel from Natete Kabusu down to Sembule should be built.
• Nakivubo secondary 1, 3 and 8 should be deepened, stone-pitched and efforts be made to prevent sewage flow from National Water and Sewerage Corporation low level pumping station into the channel.
• Vehicles should not be washed in Kinawataka drain, Nomi soap factory should not empty chemical substances into the drain and the drain should be constantly de-silted.
• Dumping of solid wastes in sugarcane and banana plantations below Miracle centre church should be stopped and that section of Nkere drain should be de-silted and stone-pitched.
• A wastewater reticulation system should also be put in place for Kinawataka wetland.
4 3.2.1.4 Nalukolongo Catchment
The Nalukolongo Drainage system is located in Rugaba Division and generally runs along South of Masaka Road. The Nalukolongo permanent and seasonal wetlands stretch along the Nalukolongo and Mayanja rivers.
The biophysical characteristics of this drainage area can be described as follows:
• There exists little natural environment that has not been disturbed in the Nalukolongo drainage area
• Most of the original natural habitat has been modified through agricultural activity and settlements
• Papyrus and Typha latiforia dominate the vegetation near old Masaka Road.
• The area floods excessively during peak rains.
• As in other areas, waste is dumped in the Nalukolongo drainage channel.
Flooding in this and the area surrounding the Secondary 2 drainage system disrupts industrial activity, delays traffic on old Masaka and other access roads, disrupts commercial activities like shops and in the open air market located in Ndeeba/Kabonwa and enters people’s homes in the area along the railway line. Industries in Nalukolongo area have put in place anti-flooding protection measures. However, floods in the area still affect most roads and people’s properties and livelihoods.
Minor Works (Drainage Black Spots)
The minor works (Drainage Black Spots) are located in already developed areas with little natural bio-physical environmental characteristics.
3.2.2 Socio-Economic profile of the drainage investments areas
The residents are looking forward to the improved drainage. Some of the drainage channels like those in Bwaise are maintained by individuals to minimise flood events. This means that if communities are sensitised, they could maintain or contribute the maintenance of drainage channels in their vicinities.
1 3.2.2.1 Livelihoods and Incomes
Communities living along the drainage channels are involved in informal petty trade and commerce that cover a wide range of subsistence activities including: food sales, motorcycle taxis (boda boda), small rental shops, carpentry, motor vehicle repairs, unauthorised informal night markets. Some cultivate vegetables along side the drainage channel and a good number are jobless.
2 3.2.2.2 Solid waste management
Majority of the people who live along the drainage channels throw in them rubbish. This is because they have no places to dump rubbish or are not willing to pay private waste collectors. Hence, channels and culverts are blocked resulting into flooding during heavy down pour. In a few cases, rubbish is piled in the plastic bags (buvera) and emptied to rubbish skips, which are collected by the KCC vehicles or private collectors periodically. It was reported that the rubbish skip are not emptied regularly. In some cases, skips are placed on drainage channels and when they fill up or when waste is carelessly thrown ends up in the drain (See, Plate 3.3.)
Plate 3.3: A waste-dumping skip placed on top of a drainage Channel
3 3.2.2.3 Sanitation
In terms of sanitation, majority of households have traditional pit latrines for human excreta disposal. Some of these toilets are emptied into the drainage channels when they fill up. Because of high water table, the toilets are built above the ground (Plate 3.4). Some residents defecate in polythene bags “flying toilets” and throw them in the drainage channel.
Plate 3.4: A raised toilet adjacent to a storm drain
4 3.2.2.4 Common Diseases and their causes
Malaria was reportedly the most common disease among residents in the drainage investment areas. Malaria control is the responsibility of the Ministry of Health and several initiatives are underway to control it. In this respect the Public Health Department of KCC is already working in close collaboration with the Ministry of Health (MoH) and relevant NGOs as well as the various communities to supprt malaria control in the city. KIIDP has only an indirect contributing role to play in control of malarial diseases. Other common diseases mentioned were diarrhoea, dysentery, stomach pains, and cough, flu, athlete’s foot, and Tuberculosis and skin diseases. These too are being dealt with by KCC and the MoH.
The respondents identified breeding of mosquitoes in stagnant waters as being the single most predominant cause of malaria. The main cause of diarrhoea and dysentery was reported to be poor drainage, inadequate waste disposal practices and unhygienic pit latrines, which attract houseflies.
Constraints
• Misuses of the drainage channels as solid waste dump sites.
• Failure to clean drainage channels by de-silting or re-vegetation as neccessary
• Inadequate capacity at household level to fight malaria due to poverty and low awareness.
3.3 SITUATION REGARDING TRAFFIC AND ROAD MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT
3.3.1 Bio-physical and Socio-economic Environment
The current state of roads and traffic management in Kampala was reported to be very poor by majority of the respondents. The roads are full of potholes and some are narrow, traffic lanes are not marked and the roads are generally poorly planned, with few road signs. These shortcomings encourage indiscipline road use. Consequently, the roads become congested causing heavy traffic jams particularly during peak hours.
The biophysical and socio-economic factors of the traffic and road maintenance management component are described in Table 3.9.
Table 3.9: Bio-physical and Socio-Economic Situation of the Roads and Traffic
|Tranche |Project Site |Social and Economic Environment |Physical and Natural |
| | | |Environment |
|Tranche 1 – Bitumen |Eighth Street |People impacted |Rolling terrain flat all the |
|roads for Periodic |Activity |Working class, casual laborers, and drivers. |area is built up, no natural |
|Maintenance |Industrial area | |vegetation seen |
| |offices |Economic situation | |
| |Fuel depots |All built up street housing several industries, offices and | |
| |Railway crossing |fuel depots. | |
| |Namuwongo road |People impacted |Rolling terrain flat all the |
| |Activity |Working class, residents, students, pedestrians, cyclists and |area is built up, no natural |
| |Monitor Publications |drivers. |vegetation seen. the existing|
| |Schools |Economic situation |patched greenery is planted |
| |Offices |Retail, wholesale shops and supermarkets. Major residential | |
| |Petrol stations |area for the working class in the city with Permanent and | |
| |Residential |semi-permanent building some well-planned structures while | |
| |Supermarkets |others are makeshifts. Mixture of high class, medium and low | |
| |Shops |class residents including those surviving on petty trade along | |
| |Clinics |the roads and boda boda cyclists. | |
| |Mbogo road |People impacted |Rolling terrain flat all the |
| |Activity |Working class, residents, students, pedestrians, cyclists and |area is built up, no natural |
| |Offices |drivers. |vegetation seen. the existing|
| |Schools |Economic situation |patched greenery is planted |
| |Shops |Retail, wholesale shops and supermarkets. Major residential | |
| |Residential |area for the working class in the city with Permanent and | |
| |Supermarkets |semi-permanent building some well-planned structures. Mixture | |
| |clinics |of high class, medium and low class residents including those | |
| | |surviving on petty trade along the roads and boda boda | |
| | |cyclists. | |
| |Kisugu road |People impacted |Rolling terrain flat all the |
| |Activity |Working class, residents, students, pedestrians, cyclists and |area is built up, no natural |
| |Offices |drivers. |vegetation seen. the existing|
| |Schools |Economic situation |patched greenery is planted |
| |Shops |Retail, wholesale shops and supermarkets. Major residential | |
| |Residential |area for the working class in the city with Permanent and | |
| |Supermarkets |semi-permanent building some well-planned structures while | |
| |clinics |others are makeshifts. Mixture of high class, medium and low | |
| | |class residents including those surviving on petty trade along | |
| | |the roads and boda boda cyclists. | |
| |Mackenzie Vale |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Working class, residents, a few pedestrians and drivers. |Papsprum dominating the area |
| |Offices |Economic situation |and Cynodon dactylon well |
| |NGO offices |Offices, hotels and residential area |built up with natural |
| |Residential |High class Rich neighborhood, well planned permanent houses for|vegetation of big trees along|
| |Hotels |top civil servants |the road |
| |Queen’s Lane |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Working class, a few pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers. |Papsprum dominating the area.|
| |offices |Economic situation |Up hill road with no natural |
| |Educational Institutions |Offices and boda-boda cyclists |vegetation seen apart from a |
| |NGO offices |High class with well planned permanent houses that were |few big trees. |
| |Residential area |formerly residential houses for top government civil servants | |
| | |but majority of them have now been turned into offices, hotels | |
| | |and high-class restaurants. | |
| |Lumumba Lane |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Working class, a few pedestrians, cyclists, residents and |Papsprum dominating the area.|
| |Embassies/High commissions |drivers. |Up hill road with no natural |
| |Restaurants |Economic situation |vegetation seen apart from a |
| |Hotels |Offices, restaurants and boda-boda cyclists |few big trees. |
| |Offices |High class with well planned permanent houses that were | |
| |Residential |formerly residential houses for top government civil servants | |
| | |but majority of them have now been turned into offices, hotels | |
| | |and high-class restaurants. | |
| |Lumumba road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Working class, a few pedestrians, cyclists, residents and |Papsprum dominating the area.|
| |Embassies/High commissions |drivers. |flat road with no natural |
| |Restaurants |Economic situation |vegetation seen apart from a |
| |Hotels |Offices, restaurants and boda-boda cyclists |few big trees. All built up |
| |offices |High class with well planned permanent houses that were |area. |
| | |formerly residential houses for top government civil servants | |
| | |but majority of them have now been turned into offices, hotels | |
| | |and high-class restaurants. | |
| |Buganda road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Working class, students, pedestrians, cyclists, residents and |Papsprum dominating the area.|
| |Schools |drivers. |flat road with no natural |
| |Residential flats |Economic situation |vegetation seen apart from a |
| |Offices |Offices, restaurants and boda-boda cyclists |few big trees. Planted |
| |Embassies/High commissions |High class with well planned permanent houses that were |greenery all built up area. |
| |Restaurants |formerly residential houses for top government civil servants | |
| |Hotels |but majority of them have now been turned into offices, hotels | |
| |Clinics |and high-class restaurants. | |
| |Wandegeya road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Working class, students, pedestrians, cyclists, residents and |Papsprum dominating the area.|
| |Offices |drivers. |flat road with no natural |
| |Petrol stations |Economic situation |vegetation seen apart from a |
| |Schools |Offices, restaurants and boda-boda cyclists |few big trees. Planted |
| |Restaurants |High class with well planned permanent houses that were |greenery all built up area. |
| |Hotel |formerly residential houses for top government civil servants | |
| | |but majority of them have now been turned into offices, hotels | |
| | |and high-class restaurants | |
| |Mackinon road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Working class, students, pedestrians, cyclists, residents and |Papsprum dominating the area.|
| |Offices |drivers. |Flat road with no natural |
| |Schools |Economic situation |vegetation seen apart from a |
| |residentials |Offices, restaurants and boda-boda cyclists |few big trees. Well |
| |Restaurants |High class with well planned permanent houses that were |maintained planted greenery |
| | |formerly residential houses for top government civil servants |all built up area. |
| | |but majority of them have now been turned into offices, hotels | |
| | |and high-class restaurants | |
| | |A few foreigners and top government officials still reside in | |
| | |this area, heavily guarded by security personnel and dogs. | |
| |Kabaka Anjagala road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, students, working class, residents’ |Buganda Clans’ trees “Kabaka |
| |Buganda Kingdom Institutions |pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. |anjagala” flat road with no |
| |Residential area |Economic situation |natural vegetation greenery |
| |Commercial area |Mainly commercial area with shops, supermarkets, bars with |seen is secondary. A few open|
| |Washing bays |upcoming high class permanent buildings some storied for |plots pending development. |
| |Roadside bars |offices, schools, churches and residential houses for mainly | |
| |Boda Boda/Special hire stages|working class. Boda – boda cylists, road side kiosks. | |
| |Kibuli road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Police officers, pedestrians, working class, residents, |Pasparum common in the area |
| |Police training grounds |business community, students, patients’ worshipers’ cyclists |up hill road no natural |
| |Kibuli mosque |and drivers. |vegetation all built up place|
| |Hospital |Economic situation |with a few natural trees |
| |Educational Institutions |Majority of the people are the urban poor engaged in all types |seen. |
| |Residential area |of petty trade for survival. The mosque, hospital and | |
| |Commercial area |educational institutions are high class permanent building on | |
| |Petrol station |top of Kibuli hill. Permanent, semi-permanent including mud and| |
| | |wattle houses. Estate type of settlement around the police the | |
| | |rest of the place is slum area with upcoming permanent houses | |
| | |for commercial purposes. | |
|Tranche 1 – Bitumen |Hoima road |People impacted |Rolling terrain flat road all|
|Roads for Maintenance|Activity |Business community, drivers, residents, students, cyclists, and|built area with no greenery. |
| |Hotels |pedestrians | |
| |Commercial area |Economic situation | |
| |Residential |Majority of the people are of low income or the urban poor | |
| |Educational Institutions |engaged in all sorts of petty trade. Heavily commercial area | |
| |Roadside bars & markets |with roadside kiosks along the road, majority of the houses | |
| |Boda Boda stage |along the road are for shops, bars, restaurant, and lodges. | |
| |Lorry stage | | |
| |Ntinda-Kisaasi road |People impacted |Rolling terrain flat road |
| |Activity |Business community, students, residents, pedestrians, cyclists,|majority of the area is well |
| |Commercial area |working class, worshipers and drivers |built up with dotted natural |
| |Residential area |Economic situation |vegetation and trees along |
| |Schools |Heavily residential area for the middle class working group |the road. |
| |Recreational(Ndere Troupe) |with up coming organized commercial buildings majority storied.| |
| |churches |Mainly permanent type of settlement dotted with semi-permanent | |
| |Washing bays |structures along the road. A market at the beginning of the | |
| |Roadside markets |road with heavy traffic in the mornings and evening. Other | |
| |Special hire stages |residents are involved in all types of trade like bars, | |
| |Roadside bars |supermarkets, fabrications, brick laying road side kiosks. | |
| |Taxi stages | | |
| |Fabrication workshops | | |
| |Bukoto-Ntinda road |People impacted |Rolling terrain flat road |
| |Activity |Business community, residents, drivers, worshipers, patients, |majority of the area is well |
| |Fridge repair workshops |cyclists, students |built up with dotted natural |
| |Fabrication workshops |Economic situation |vegetation and trees along |
| |Carpentry workshops |Hotels, supermarkets, bars, road side kiosks, metal |the road. |
| |Boda Boda Stages |fabrication, artisans, road side stone and concrete products | |
| |Residential area |sold and hospitals. | |
| |Hotels |High-class area with permanent storied buildings along the road| |
| |garages |mainly for hotels, supermarkets, hospitals and churches. Not | |
| |Recreational areas |heavily residential but perceived as shopping area for the high| |
| |Petrol stations |and medium class-working group. | |
| |Churches | | |
| |Clinics | | |
| |Apollo Kagwa road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, residents, drivers, worshipers, patients, |Drainage channel crossing |
| |Fabrication workshops |cyclists, students and pedestrians. | |
| |Lorry Parks |Economic situation | |
| |Makerere University Hostels |Hotels, supermarkets, bars, road side kiosks, metal | |
| |Shops |fabrication, artisans, and hostels. | |
| |Supermarkets |Area has many students due to the presence of many schools and | |
| |Educational Institutions |hostels for university students. Mixed type of settlements both| |
| |Residential |permanent and semi-permanent structures. A few residential | |
| | |houses and up coming commercial area. | |
| |Upper Kololo Terrace |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Acacia avenue |Residents, working class, pedestrians and drivers |Pasparum present in the area |
| |Activity |Economic situation | |
| |Kololo airstrip |The city’s top class area, formerly residential for government | |
| |Kololo Hero’s Burial Grounds |top civil/public servants but now most houses have been turned | |
| |Residential |into corporate offices and recreational centers for foreigners | |
| |Offices |and Kampala’s most rich class. Still dotted with a few | |
| | |residential houses and high-class apartments. | |
| |Queens Way |People impacted |Flat terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, cyclists, working class, pedestrians, |Football field |
| |Katwe small scale industries |drivers and a few residents. |All built up area |
| |Pedestrian footbridge |Economic situation | |
| |Offices |Low class people mainly bodaboda, and bicycle rider, Very | |
| |Petrol stations |limited residential houses. A heavy traffic jam area especially| |
| |Supermarkets |in the evenings. Mainly commercial heavily populated and | |
| |Shops |characterized with the partisan type of technology in all sorts| |
| |Restaurants |items. Majority of the building still semi-permanent but there | |
| | |are serious up coming storied commercial building. | |
|Tranche 2 -Bitumen |Lourdel road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
|Roads for maintenance|Akii Bua rd |Working class, foreigners, residents and drivers. | |
| |Activity |Economic situation | |
| |Educational area |High class area, majority of houses turned into offices, | |
| |NGO offices |limited residential due to proximity to state house and is | |
| |Residential area |heavily guarded with limited access for pedestrians. | |
| |State House | | |
| |Embassies/High commissions | | |
| |Restaurants | | |
| |Access Road |People Impacted |Flat terrain |
| |Activity |Working class, cyclists, pedestrians and drivers |Nakivubo channel |
| |Electoral Commission offices | |Some flora |
| |Industrial area |Economic situation | |
| |Railway crossing |Offices, road side markets and boda-boda cyclists | |
| |Mukwano Industries |No residential houses with only security guards at night. | |
| |Fuel depots |Industrial areas with offices, fuels depots and offices. Heavy | |
| |Centenary recreation park |traffic during the day. | |
| |Jinja road |People impacted |Flat/Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, working class, street traders, drivers and | |
| |Jinja road cemetery |pedestrians. | |
| |Cricket grounds |Economic situation | |
| |Rugby pitch |Mixed class of people who come to look for survival in the | |
| |Police Station |city. Mainly commercial area with banks, | |
| |Government offices |recreational/ceremonial area with few residents. Characterized | |
| |Railway station |with traffic jams | |
| | |Working class mainly in Government offices, busy commercial | |
| | |area and play grounds limited residential houses | |
| | |Mixed class of majority business people and also the working | |
| | |class. Busy commercial area with limited residents | |
| |Kampala road |People impacted |Flat/Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, working class, street traders, drivers and | |
| |Constitutional Square |pedestrians. | |
| |Offices |Economic situation | |
| |Post office |Mixed class of people who come to look for survival in the | |
| |Banks |city. Mainly commercial area with banks, | |
| |Built up area |recreational/ceremonial area with few residents. Characterized | |
| |Shops |with traffic jams | |
| |Taxi/Boda Boda/Special hire |Working class mainly in Government offices, busy commercial | |
| |stages |area and play grounds limited residential houses | |
| |Street parking, Washing bays |Mixed class of majority business people and also the working | |
| | |class. Busy commercial area with limited residents | |
| |Bombo road |People impacted |Flat/Rolling terrain |
| |Banks |Business community, working class, street traders, drivers and | |
| |Built up area |pedestrians. | |
| |Shops |Economic situation | |
| |Taxi/Boda Boda/Special hire |Mixed class of people who come to look for survival in the | |
| |stages |city. Mainly commercial area with banks, | |
| |Street parking, Washing bays |recreational/ceremonial area with few residents. Characterized | |
| | |with traffic jams | |
| | |Working class mainly in Government offices, busy commercial | |
| | |area and play grounds limited residential houses | |
| | |Mixed class of majority business people and also the working | |
| | |class. Busy commercial area with limited residents | |
| |Haji Musa Kasule road |People impacted |Flat/Rolling terrain |
| |Banks |Business community, students, drivers, pedestrians and working | |
| |Built up area |class. | |
| |Shops |Economic situation | |
| |Taxi/Boda Boda/Special hire |Mixed class of people majority of low class, then students | |
| |stages |crossing to go to the university Kampala’s busiest suburb with | |
| |Street parking, Washing bays |24 hours commercial activity limited residents. | |
| |Ben Kiwanuka Street |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, passengers, working class, drivers and | |
| |Commercial area |pedestrians. | |
| |Whole sale shops |Economic situation. | |
| |Washing bays |Mixed classes of people the middle class involved in business | |
| |New and old Taxi parks |and petty trade together with low class seeking public | |
| |Bus park |transport from the taxi park. Kampala’s busiest street with | |
| |Offices |heavy commercial activity in all sorts of merchandize heavily | |
| |Petrol stations |populated during the day. Access to and from the old taxi park | |
| | |characterized with permanent traffic jam, limited or no | |
| | |residents. | |
| |Mengo Hill Road |People impacted |Rolling Terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, students, drivers, worshipers, pedestrians | |
| |Commercial area |and working class | |
| |Washing bays |Economic situation. | |
| |Boda Boda stage |Mixed classes of people majority low class involved in petty | |
| |Lorry park |trade. Busy commercial area mainly in second hand electronics, | |
| |Second hand Electronics |has got a number of guest houses or lodges, heavily populated | |
| |stores |during the day and half of the night, access to and from the | |
| |Mosque |new taxi park and bus park hence characterized with permanent | |
| |Offices |traffic jam. | |
| |Schools | | |
| |Lodges | | |
| |Restaurants | | |
| |Recreational centers | | |
| |Kivebulaya road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, residents, students, drivers, pedestrians |Buganda Clans’ trees |
| |Offices |and working class. | |
| |Buganda Kingdom Institutions |Economic situation. | |
| |Residential area |Middle class people both working in offices and others self | |
| |Commercial area |employed. Permanent structures of ancient type majority of | |
| |Washing bays |which are being renovated or broken and replaced with new | |
| |Roadside bars |storied buildings mainly for commercial purposes and offices. | |
| |Boda Boda/Special hire stages|Still a few residents of the middle class. | |
| |Katalima Road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, residents, students, drivers, pedestrians | |
| |Police barracks |and working class. | |
| |Schools |Economic situation. | |
| |Inland car depot |Middle class people both working in offices and others self | |
| |Residential area |employed. Permanent structures of ancient type majority of | |
| |Construction material |which are being renovated or broken and replaced with new | |
| |roadside stockpiles |storied buildings mainly for commercial purposes and offices. | |
| | |Still a few residents of the middle class. | |
| |Y.K. Lule Road |People impacted |Flat terrain |
| |Activity |Golfers, residents, drivers and working class |Dominated by papsparum |
| |Golf course |Economic situation. | |
| |Recreational areas |High class area with the biggest portion covered by the golf | |
| |NGO offices |course, offices and embassies with no residential houses for | |
| |Government Offices |individuals apart from the golf course apartments. | |
| |Hotels |. | |
| |Residential | | |
| |Kira Road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, residents, police officers and families, |Some flora |
| |Uganda Museum |drivers, pedestrians and working class. | |
| |Makeshift second hand clothes|Economic situation. | |
| |market |Mixed classes of people with the middle class mainly found in | |
| |Taxi stages |the offices and the low class/urban poor around the market | |
| |Boda Boda stages |area. Characterized with old permanent buildings formerly for | |
| |NGO offices |residents but now being renovated or broken down for better | |
| |Police |ones for office space. Half way the road there is characterized| |
| |Offices |by heavy commercial activity around Kamwokya market for the | |
| |Residential |middle and low class people. Dotted with residential areas of | |
| | |the flats estate type for the middle class. | |
| |Hanlon road |People impacted |Hilly terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, residents, police officers and families, |Drainage crossing |
| |Nsambya hospital |drivers, worshipers, pedestrians and working class. | |
| |American Embassy |Economic situation. | |
| |Residential area |Mixed working class and High-class characterized with permanent| |
| |Roadside commerce |houses mainly for residential purposes, up coming offices for | |
| |Offices |NGOs and diplomatic nature. Hospital area and catholic church | |
| |Church |center with offices. | |
| |Luthuli avenue |People impacted |Flat terrain |
| |Bazarabusa Road |Business community, residents, drivers, pedestrians and working| |
| |Activity |class. | |
| |Residential area |Economic situation. | |
| |Industrial area |High class residential area and working class with the bigger | |
| |NGO offices |part being occupied with industries. | |
| |Railway line | | |
| |Offices | | |
|Tranche 1 – Gravel |Kalerwe Road |People impacted |Rolling Terrain |
|roads for upgrading |Kawempe-Mpererwe Rd |Business community, residents, drivers, pedestrians and working|Cyperus nitindus dominated |
|to Bitumen |Bukoto-Kisaasi Road |class. |the flora |
|Tranche 2 – Gravel |Activity |Economic situation. |Wetland crossing |
|Roads for upgrading |Washing bays |Majority of the residents are of middle class dotted with some | |
|to Bitumen |Car garages |urban poor living in one roomed houses characteristic of slum | |
|Phase 1 |Roadside commerce |setting. Mixed type of settlement with both permanent and | |
|Tranche 2 – Gravel |Fabrication workshops |semi-permanent structures. | |
|Roads for upgrading |Boda Boda stages | | |
|to Bitumen |Northern Bypass crossing | | |
|Phase 2 | | | |
| |St. Barnabas Road |People impacted |Cyperus rotundus present |
| |Activity |Business community, students, patients, residents, drivers, | |
| |Residential area |pedestrians and working class. | |
| |Commercial area |Economic situation. | |
| |Hotels |Majority of the residents are of middle class dotted with some | |
| |Schools |urban poor living in one roomed houses characteristic of slum | |
| |Hospital |setting. Mixed type of settlement with both permanent and | |
| |Residential area |semi-permanent structures. | |
| |Offices | | |
| |Kimera Road |People impacted |Rolling Terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, students, residents, drivers, pedestrians |Some flora |
| |Educational Institutions |and working class |Wetland crossing |
| |Hostels |Economic situation. | |
| |Road side kiosks |Residents are mainly the urban poor and university students | |
| |Residential |occupying the up coming hostels. Mixed type of settlement with | |
| | |permanent and semi-permanent settlement a sort of slum being up| |
| | |graded. | |
| |Kyadondo Road |People impacted |Hilly terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, students, patients, residents, drivers, |Cynodon dactylon |
| |Residential area |pedestrians and working class | |
| |Schools |Economic situation. | |
| |Church |Residents are both of middle and low class. Mixed type of | |
| |Hospital |settlement with both permanent and semi permanent structures, | |
| |Football stadium | | |
| |Residential area | | |
| |Boda Boda stages | | |
| |Offices | | |
| |Bwaise-Kalerwe Road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, students, police, residents, drivers, | |
| |Roadside Commerce |pedestrians and working class | |
| |Residential area |Economic situation. | |
| |Educational area |Both middle class and urban poor with many school children | |
| |Uganda Police |crossing the roads. Mixed type of settlement residents engaged | |
| | |in petty trade along the road. | |
| |Kayemba Road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, drivers, pedestrians and working class |Bwaise wetland |
| |Washing bays |Economic situation. | |
| |Car garages |Characteristic of the urban poor. Mixed type of settlement with| |
| |Roadside commerce |majority engaged in fabrication businesses. | |
| |Fabrication workshops | | |
| |Boda Boda stages | | |
| |Northern Bypass crossing | | |
| |Old Masaka Road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Wamala Road |Business community, students, residents, drivers, pedestrians |Cyperus rotundus |
| |Muteesa II Road |and working class |Drainage channel crossing |
| |Activity |Economic situation. | |
| |Roadside Commerce |Majority of the residents live in one roomed houses | |
| |Brickmaking at roadside |characteristic of urban poor with low cost housing. A few | |
| |Washing Bays |permanent houses, | |
| |Video Halls | | |
| |Low cost Housing | | |
| |Sunderland, Neptune av |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |students, residents, drivers, pedestrians and working class |Cynodon dactylon common in |
| |Residential area |Economic situation. |the area |
| |Schools |Mainly residential both for the middle class and urban poor | |
| | |with many school children crossing the road. | |
| |Lugoba Road |People impacted |Flat terrain |
| |Activity |students, residents, drivers, pedestrians and working class | |
| |Residential area |Economic situation. | |
| |Kawempe Industrial area |Mixed class the middle class and urban poor, many schools and | |
| |Video halls |video halls characteristic of a slum dwelling. Both industrial | |
| |Schools |and residential area. | |
| |Kyebando Ring Road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Baha’I Road |students, residents, drivers, pedestrians and working class |Cynodon dactylon common in |
| |Bukoto Vale – Kyebando road |Economic situation. |the area |
| |Activity |Mainly residential for the middle class dotted with a few urban| |
| |Residential area |poor. Mixed type of settlement with both permanent and | |
| |Schools |semi-permanent structures, | |
| |Roadside commerce | | |
| |Martyr’s Way |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |students, residents, drivers and working class | |
| |Residential area |Economic situation. | |
| |Churches |High class residential area also known as ministers’ village, | |
| |Offices |mainly residential with well organized road networks. | |
| |Schools | | |
| |Kinawataka Road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, army men, drivers and working class |Vossia cuspidata dominants |
| |Washing bay |Economic situation. |the road edges |
| |URA Headquarters |Mixed class of the middle working class and low class engaged | |
| |Railway line |in petty trade along the roadside, dotted with both middle | |
| |Roadside commerce |class residential area industrial area with mainly offices, | |
| |Mbuya barracks |characterized with heavy commercial vehicles,. | |
| |Nsambya Estate Road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, patients, foreigners, residents, drivers |Some flora |
| |American embassy |and working class | |
| |Nsambya hospital |Economic situation | |
| |Catholic Church |Mixed class majority being the middle working class. Ancient | |
| |Joint Medical stores |buildings mixed type of settlement with new permanent | |
| |Residential areas |structures coming up. | |
| | |Mainly middle class in Estate type of settlement. | |
| |Soweto Road |People impacted |Roiling terrain |
| |Gaba by pass road |Business community, , students, residents, drivers and working|Cyperus nitindus |
| |Lukuli Road |class |Wetland crossing |
| |Salama Road |Economic situation | |
| |Kiwafu Road |Mixed type of class of the high class rich, middle class and | |
| |Activity |urban poor with many school children and hotels. Commercial | |
| |Residential area |activities along the road. | |
| |Boda Boda stages | | |
| |Schools | | |
| |Hotels | | |
| |Suna Road |People impacted |Rolling Terrain |
| |Busabala Road |Business community, residents, drivers and working class | |
| |Activity |Economic situation | |
| |Roadside Commerce |Both the middle and low class people living in the mixed type | |
| |Brickmaking at roadside |of settlement with permanent and semi-permanent structures. | |
| |Washing Bays | | |
| |Video Halls | | |
| |Low cost Housing | | |
| |Makamba Road | |Rolling Terrain |
| |Activity |People impacted |Wetland crossings |
| |Old Buganda buildings |Business community, students, residents, drivers and working | |
| |Night parking yards |class | |
| |Washing bays |Economic situation | |
| |Schools |Mixed class majority being the middle working class. Ancient | |
| |Student hostels |buildings mixed type of settlement with new permanent | |
| |Residential |structures coming up. Mainly residential with a few offices. | |
| |Nsooba Road |People impacted |Rolling Terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, students, residents, drivers and working |Wetland crossing |
| |Northern bypass Crossing |class | |
| |Roadside commerce |Economic situation | |
| |Residential area |Mainly middle and low class dotted with roadside commercial | |
| |Schools |activities. | |
| |Ntinda-Kyambogo Road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, students, residents, drivers and working |Cyperus rotundus, Vossia |
| |Kyambogo University |class |cuspidta |
| |Kabaka’s Land |Economic situation |Wetland |
| |Schools |High class residential area on one side with a vast empty un | |
| |Residential |developed land belonging to the Kabaka of Buganda on the other | |
| |Roadside commerce |side. | |
| |Naguru Hill Road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Residents and working class | |
| |Residential area |Economic situation | |
| | |High class residential area with multi-storied buildings with | |
| | |organized road network. | |
| |Butikiro Road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, students, residents, drivers and working | |
| |Fuel Station |class | |
| |Residential area |Economic situation | |
| |Washing Bay |Mainly the middle class mixed with urban poor. Structures are | |
| |Entertainment |both offices and residential. | |
| |Workshop | | |
| |Robert Mugabe Road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, army men, residents, drivers and working |Vossia cuspidata dominants |
| |Washing bay |class |the road edges |
| |URA Headquarters |Economic situation | |
| |Railway line |Middle class, mixed both offices and residential with Estate | |
| |Roadside commerce |type of settlement around the barracks. | |
| |Mbuya barracks | | |
| |Kiwatule - Banda road |People impacted |Rolling Terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, students, residents, drivers and working | |
| |Kyambogo University |class | |
| |Kabaka’s Land |Economic situation | |
| |Roadside commerce |Middle and a few low classes Heavily populated with university | |
| |Night parking yards |students residing mainly in hostels. | |
| |Washing bays | | |
| |Schools | | |
| |Student hostels | | |
| |Kiggala Road |People impacted |Rolling Terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, students, worshipers, residents, drivers |Wetland crossings |
| |Old Buganda buildings |and working class | |
| |Night parking yards |Economic situation | |
| |Washing bays |Mixed middle and low class, both residential and offices with | |
| |Schools |commercial activity along the roads. | |
| |Student hostels | | |
| |Churches | | |
| |Gabunga Road |People impacted |Flat terrain all the area is |
| |Activity |Business community, students, residents, drivers and working|built up, no natural |
| |Roadside Commerce |class |vegetation seen |
| |Brickmaking at roadside |Economic situation | |
| |Washing Bays |Both the middle and urban poor in low cost houses. Associated | |
| |Video Halls |with permanent and semi-permanent type of settlement. | |
| |Football ground | | |
| |Low cost Housing | | |
| |Muwayire Road |People impacted |Cyperus rotundus present |
| |Activity |Business community, students, patients, residents, drivers and | |
| |Residential area |working class | |
| |Commercial area |Economic situation | |
| |Hotels |Mainly residential for both the middle and urban poor | |
| |Schools | | |
| |Hospital | | |
| |Residential area | | |
| |New Link |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, drivers and working class | |
| |Industrial area |Economic situation | |
| |MoH Offices |Mainly middle working class with a few low class engaged in | |
| |Railway crossing |petty trade. Limited residential houses, mainly offices, | |
| |Trailer Parking |trailer parking yard and industrial area. | |
| |Konge Road |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, cyclists, pedestrians, students, residents,|Wetland crossing |
| |Residential area |drivers and working class. | |
| |Recreational area |Economic situation | |
| |Boda Boda stages |Mainly residential area for the middle class and urban poor. | |
| |Schools | | |
|Tranche 1 – Urban |Rubaga road |People impacted |Rolling Terrain |
|Traffic improvements |Activity |Business community, worshipers, students, residents, drivers | |
| |Roadside Commerce |and working class. | |
| |Hotels |Economic situation | |
| |Educational Institutions |Working class and low class, mainly commercial houses very busy| |
| |Boda Boda Stages |during the day. | |
| |Hospital | | |
| |Churches | | |
| |Bwaise Junction |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, worshipers, students, residents, drivers |Northern Bypass crossing |
| |Commercial |and working class. |Bwaise wetland crossing |
| |Vehicle garages/workshops |Economic situation | |
| |Fuel station |Majority are the urban poor and middle class. Very busy | |
| | |commercial area with permanent traffic jam, where the northern | |
| | |bypass crosses the road. | |
| |Station area |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, students, residents, drivers and working |Nakivubo channel |
| |MoH Offices |class. | |
| |Industrial area |Economic situation | |
| |Fuel depots |Working class and many school children crossing the road. | |
| |Railway crossing |Mainly offices no residential houses, | |
| |Schools | | |
| |Pride Theatre Junction |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, residents, pedestrians, drivers and working|Disintegrating roads |
| |Commercial and recreation |class. | |
| |activities |Economic situation | |
| |Boda Boda Stages |Mixed Working low class Mainly commercial and recreational | |
| |Major movement for taxis and |activities, heavy traffic zone always jammed with vehicles. | |
| |buses | | |
| |Pioneer Mall Junction |People impacted |Rolling terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, pedestrians, beggars drivers and working |Disintegrating roads |
| |Constitutional Square |class, cyclists | |
| |Central Police Station |Economic situation | |
| |Boda Boda Stages |Center of the characterized with heavy traffic throughout the | |
| | |day. Busy commercial area. | |
| | |Major movement for taxis and motor cars | |
|Tranche 2 – Urban |Makerere Hill Road |People impacted |Rolling Terrain |
|Traffic improvements |Activity |Business community, pedestrians, students, residents, drivers | |
| |Special Hire Stages |and working class. | |
| |Makerere University Main gate|Economic situation | |
| |Entertainment |Roadside kiosks, shops, bars, supermarkets | |
| |Roadside shops/containers |very busy roads with heavy student movement throughout the day.| |
| |Boda Boda stages |Mainly schools and offices limited residential hostel. | |
| |Nakulabye roundabout |People impacted |Rolling Terrain |
| |Activity |Business community, students, residents, drivers and working | |
| |Roadside commerce |class. | |
| |Boda Boda Stages |Economic situation | |
| |Lorry Park |Very busy with traffic from four roads, mainly commercial | |
| |Hostels |activities | |
| |Recreational area | | |
| |Mukwano road |People impacted |Nakivubo Channel |
| |Mukwano roundabout |Business community, police, students, residents, drivers and |Rolling Terrain |
| |Activity |working class. | |
| |Industrial area |Economic situation | |
| |Railway Crossing |Mainly industrial area with heavy traffic throughout the day. | |
| |Police Training Grounds | | |
| |Fuel Depots | | |
| |Kasubi Junction |People impacted |Some flora |
| |Activity |Business community, residents, drivers and working class. |Bwaise wetland |
| |Roadside Commerce |Economic situation | |
| |Residential |Mainly industrial area with heavy traffic throughout the day. | |
| |Taxi Stages | | |
| |Ntinda Road – Jinja Road |People impacted |Rolling Terrain |
| |Junction |Pedestrians, drivers and working class. | |
| |Activity | | |
| |Industrial area |Economic situation | |
| |Police Vehicle Inspection |Mainly industrial area with heavy traffic throughout the day. | |
| |Grounds |Spoiled traffic lights. | |
| |Major movement for taxis and | | |
| |motor cars and Trailers | | |
| |Taxi Stages | | |
| |Fairway Hotel Roundabout |People impacted |Golf Course |
| |Activity |Residents, drivers and working class. |Rolling terrain |
| |Hotels |Economic situation | |
| |NGO offices |A few residential house for the high class, offices, hotel, | |
| |Residential area |restaurants heavy traffic movement and jam especially in the | |
| |Major movement for motor cars|evening. | |
4 Wetland Crossing means locations where roads cross wetlands. These locations are provided with bridges or culverts. Some of this infrastructure will be rehabilitated under KIIDP. No new impacts are envisaged due to this rehabilitation.
3.4 SITUATION REGARDING URBAN MARKETS
3.4.1 Bio-physical characteristics of markets
1 3.4.1.1 Kalerwe Market
Kalerwe market is located in Kalerwe village, Mulago III Parish in Kawempe Division. It is about 1.5 miles from the city centre (to the North of Kampala city), along Gayaza road. This market is located in a low-lying area.
It is a permanent market, occupying about 0.6 acres and comprises of 8 small privately owned market units namely; Mutebe, Muluya, Farmers’ Hall, Bivamuntuyo, Ssenoga, Ssemugwa, Kinyozi and Mpuga., all managed by KCC. The land occupied by the market is private and the market vendors sub-lease the individual spaces where the stalls are built from the landowner. To this end, when this market comes up for improvement during Phase 2, modalities of ownership as well as operation will be negotiated and streamlined at that time. There is haphazard selling of commodities by vendors outside the market. Within Kalerwe market, there exists a blocked and garbage littered drainage channel that stinks. The blockage results from food wrappings whereas the bad stench mainly emanates from parts of dressed fresh fish and chicken, which are deliberately thrown into the drain. Because of low and/or no flows, the deposited material remains and decomposes, producing a bad smell.
The market area becomes dusty or muddy depending on the prevailing season. There is poor waste collection and disposal practice (3 waste collection sites within the market but it takes too long to collect the waste. Traders near the drain deliberately dump waste and rubbish into the drain (Plate 3.5). Additionally, the sanitation facilities are inadequate (5 toilets and 3 urinals for a population of 700-1000 persons). However, given the heavy demand to which the toilets are subjected, they can be said to be relatively well maintained. They are privately operator on 100/- charge per visit basis.
Socio-economic characteristics
Majority of the vendors in Kalerwe market are females of both middle and old age low and medium class engaged in businesses of less than 5 million in capital. The women are mainly involved in sell of fresh vegetables, fruits, all types of raw and cooked food and second hand clothes.
The male are involved in the trade of general merchandise mainly in shops and few are involved in the sell fresh foods especially fruits, there are a few homeless and street children who derive their livelihood by lifting/carrying of merchandise for customers. The highest-level of education attained by the majority of the market vendors is secondary education. This market is charactierised by the low prices offered hence attracting many retailer buyers from other markets. It is a very busy place especially very early in morning when farmers are offloading in most cases holding traffic for a long time along Gayaza road.
Plate 3.5: Waste dumping by the roadside next to a drainage channel along Gayaza Road, Kalerwe Market
The market is dusty, crowded and muddy during the rains. This not only prohibits trading operations but also puts customers off due to mud and water logged conditions, characterised by unsanitary conditions and offensive smell. Several secondary drainage trenches, which are not lined and which feed into the main Nsooba drainage channel, pass through the Market.
2 3.4.1.2 Kasubi Market
Kasubi Market is located uphill where Kimera Road (Makerere University-Kasubi Road) meets Hoima Road and Kawala-Nabweru Road. This market greatly inconveniences traffic, as it is located in the road reserve. Some vendors operate within the road and on top of drains (Plate 3.6). The market extends along Hoima and Kawala roads, at the junction, where it appears to originate. It is in Kasubi village, Kasubi Parish, in Rubaga Division. Buganda Land Board (BLB) owns the market. There is no natural environment as the entire area is already occupied by human activity.
Socio-economic characteristics
Majority of the vendors in Kasubi are females of both middle and old age low and medium class engaged in businesses of less than 5 million in capital. The women are mainly involved in sell of fresh vegetables, fruits, all types of raw and cooked food and second hand clothes.
The male are involved in the trade of general merchandise mainly in shops and few are involved in the sell fresh foods especially fruits, there are a few homeless and street children who derive their livelihood by lifting/carrying of merchandise for customers. The highest-level of education attained by the majority of the market vendors is secondary education. This market is an offloading site for foodstuff direct from farmers especially from Western Uganda.
Plate 3.6: Kasubi Market, located along a road side
3 3.4.1.3 Kawempe Market
Kawempe market is located in the ‘Growers’ area at around 150 metres from Shell Fuel Station, towards Bombo along Kampala-Bombo Road. It is located in Nabukhalu village, in Kawempe Division. It is accessed through the main Kampala-Bombo tarmac road and by several murram roads. The market is privately owned by Kakungulu, located on private land and is managed by ‘H. Sarah Farmers Kawempe Market’. It usually has around 200 vendors on Wednesday (a day for selling imported clothes among other commodities) and 50 or less on other days (for selling matooke, meat, tomatoes and other fresh foods). It has no stalls and probably the only standing stall is a makeshift butcher by Bombo roadside. It lacks a designated loading/unloading and parking space. It surrounded mainly by residential and commercial settlements.
It is mainly an open earth yard, soil floor market, approximately 2 acres in size. The market is in a valley sloping away from the road, towards Mbogo-Nabweru drain. The market has no drainage and floods during heavy rains. In addition to lacking shelters, waste management is a critical problem in the market. Waste is placed in a skip outside the market. The skips are reportedly not collected on time, resulting in unhygienic conditions.
Old ginnery/factory buildings occupy the southern side of the market. It has a single line of some brick and mortar lockups on the western end of the market yard with private electricity connections but no fencing. The market has no designated loading/off-loading allocation. The entire market reportedly has 5 water-borne toilets for women and 5 for men. It has one standpipe used for water supply purposes.
Socio-economic characteristics
Most of the vendors in Kawempe market are females of both middle and old age low and medium class engaged in businesses of less than 5 million in capital. The women are mainly involved in sell of fresh vegetables, fruits, all types of raw and cooked food and second hand clothes.
The male are involved in the trade of general merchandise mainly in shops and few are involved in the sell fresh foods especially fruits, there are a few homeless and street children who derive their livelihood by lifting/carrying of merchandise for customers. The highest-level of education attained by the majority of the market vendors is secondary education. The is mainly serviced by growers of farmers who bring the foodstuffs everyday.
4 3.4.1.4 Kibuli Market
Kibuli Market locally referred to, as Kibuli-Depo Market is located in Kibuli Parish, Kibuli village in Makindye Division along Mbogo road. It is on the land donated for market purposes by Prince Kakungulu. Therefore, it is available for any market improvement. The market occupies a very small area of about 30m x 20m probably because it is within a built up enclosure of partially built initially meant (lockup stalls. The market floor is uneven, very muddy and slippery during rains and dusty under dry conditions.
There is no running water even in the six recently constructed toilets. The market depends on a two-stance pit latrine currently in use.
The market is untidy, has no solid waste (waste) collection point and generally disorganised. There is one neighbourhood waste skip, allocated about 150 metres away and is used by both the market vendors and the surrounding residents. The drain that runs along the southern side of the market is from Kikuba-Mutwe road and is very dirty; filled with solid wastes.
There are approximately 40 vendors, 20 makeshift stalls, and 32 lockups (which have to be broken down if the market is to be upgraded). Lockups facing Kikuba-Mutwe road still operate as shops, butchery and diary shop. Kikuba-Mutwe road is a murram road connected to Kibuli Road. Sacks of charcoal occupy part of the market. The charcoal dirt mainly affects food vendors on the lower ground of the market.
Socio-economic characteristics
Majority of the market vendors in Kibuli market are females of both middle and old age low and medium class engaged in businesses of less than 5 million in capital. The women are mainly involved in sell of fresh vegetables, fruits, all types of raw and cooked food and second hand clothes.
The male are involved in the trade of general merchandise mainly in shops and few are involved in the sell fresh foods especially fruits, there are a few homeless and street children who derive their livelihood by lifting/carrying of merchandise for customers. The highest-level of education attained by the majority of the market vendors is secondary education.
[pic]
Plate 3.7: Kibuli-Mutajazi Market
5 3.4.1.5 Mbuya Market
Mbuya market is located in Mbuya Central Zone village, in Mbuya I Parish, in Nakawa Division. It is owned by KCC and located along the railway line. It is a small market of around 300 traders with makeshift selling stalls (roofed with improvised material), sells fresh foods and cooked food. Mbuya market is surrounded by a slum.
There is no vehicle access into the market and as result; vehicles offload on the road outside. It lacks built walkways, and has no electricity connections.
It has an area of 0.36 acres with no space for expansion and some permanent lockups are in poor condition. It is surrounded by narrow dirt tracks, which are very dusty in dry conditions yet muddy and slippery during heavy rains. Waste collection in the market is by KCC but is inadequate. Like other markets waste is unfortunately collected near the drain, eventually falling into the drain, thereby causing blockage (Plate 3.8).
[pic]
Plate 3.8: Waste collected next to the drain at Mbuya market enPhase, thus ending up in the drain.
The market has no tap water facilities other than one privately owned standpipe. The market floor is of soil (no concrete) and very uneven, which creates very muddy and slippery conditions during rains. It is highly populated with no sanitary facilities. It also floods during rains because it has no proper drains within and as a result, ponds of stagnant water form whenever it rains. Lockups surround the market as the only form of fencing.
All respondents reported that, the current state of existing markets is alarming and in a poor state. They are looking forward to a time when the markets can be upgraded and provide better services. Major problems included; solid waste management, poor drainage and sanitation, overcrowding and lack of parking.
Socio-economic characteristics
Majority of the market vendors in Mbuya are females of both middle and old age low and medium class engaged in businesses of less than 5 million in capital. The women are mainly involved in sell of fresh vegetables, fruits, all types of raw and cooked food and second hand clothes.
The male are involved in the trade of general merchandise mainly in shops and few are involved in the sell fresh foods especially fruits, there are a few homeless and street children who derive their livelihood by lifting/carrying of merchandise for customers. The highest-level of education attained by the majority of the market vendors is secondary education.
3.5 SITUATION REGARDING PHASE 1 SOLID WASTE INVESTMENTS
Kampala City Council only operates one solid waste landfill facility at Mpererwe-Kitezi as the final disposal technology for all waste collected and transported from Kampala District. The Mpererwe-Kitezi solid waste disposal landfill was opened in April 1996 and currently receives 400-500 tonnes of waste per day, the site being open every day of the year. Mpererwe is a containment type of site with a clay liner system and a leachate treatment facility. The 29-acre piece of land, on which the landfill is located, is a property of Kampala City Council. It is expected to be full by end of 2008 at the current rate of disposal.
The City generates an estimated 1200 tonnes of waste daily and only about 40% is disposed of in the Mpererwe solid waste management facility, the only disposal site handling Kampala’s waste disposal. The rest of the waste is fed to animals (banana peels and cooked food waste), spread in gardens, or burnt. KCC intends to improve the waste management services offered to the citizens and this will lead to an increase in the volume of waste disposed of. With planned increased efficiency in waste collection, the existing capacity of the Mpererwe-Kiteezi landfill is inadequate, thus the need for extension of the site. KCC has identified 6 acres of land adjacent to the current facility, for extension of the disposal area. The extension will increase the life of the facility for a nother 3 years at the current rate of disposal.
KCC owns this land and currently the land is vacant. A nother solid waste disposal facility at a different site altogether is planned for the future.
1 Bio-physical Characteristics of the Current solid waste disposal facility at Mpererwe-Kiteezi
Physical Features
i) The sloping site is bounded on the lower edge by a seasonal stream that flows along the bottom edge of both the current disposal area and the proposed extension. It flows from the North through relatively thick vegetation, with papyrus reeds predominant adjacent to the facility, to Walufumbe swamp.
ii) It is mainly surrounded by hills.
iii) Vegetation is mainly short grass with a few shrubs
iv) Access is through a bitumen road.
Policy Framework
The proposed extension area is not gazetted as industrial or residential so the proposed waste disposal activity suits the sparsely populated area.
Site Location
The landfill is located to the north of Kampala City, about 13 km from the City Centre. The present access to the site from Kampala City is through Kampala-Gayaza road (about 9 km), then branch off to the left at Mpererwe and follow the bitumen road going to Namulonge for about 4km.
Opening Hours
The facility is open full time i.e., 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Acceptable Types of Waste
The following waste types are accepted for disposal at the landfill:
1. Non-hazardous Municipal Solid waste (MSW) (i.e. Household waste, market waste, waste from commercial areas and waste from institutions)
2. Carcasses
3. Hospital waste: Pathological and infectious waste, but only when sterilised/ stabilised (primarily by incineration). Special hospital waste (i.e. Syringes, needles, infusion sets, etc.) when packed in sealed cardboard boxes referred to as Hospital incineration slag.
4. Sludge from sewerage treatment plants and septic tank emptying can be allowed. It should be dewatered with a dried solid content greater than 15%
5. Inert waste materials: construction waste etc.
6. Condemned consumables: food, tobacco etc.
The following waste types are not acceptable for land filling at Mpererwe:-
7. Hazardous and toxic waste (neither liquid nor solid) from industries
8. Pharmaceutical and hospital waste unless pre-treated by incineration or other appropriate means of sterilising and stabilising.
9. Pesticide containers/ buckets etc. (especially from agricultural use).
Infrastructure at the Existing Landfill
The landfill has the following important features:
Earth access roads within the site,
Bitumenised pavement access road to the facility from the Kampala-Gayaza Road.
Offices and other facilities
1. 2 offices
2. storeroom
3. Work shed
4. Guard house
5. Toilet and shower block
6. Caretaker’s house
7. Leachate treatment plant and accessories
8. Weighbridge
Fencing
An approx. 0.9 m high fence spanning the site, with a gate at the receiving area.
Disposal Area
An effective disposal area of 20 acres built to receive waste on an area basis, and the rest of about 9 acres containing roads, leachate treatment plant, offices etc.
3.5.2 Operation of the Mpererwe-Kiteezi Solid Waste Landfill.
The execution of the Works is carried out by a Contractor and supervised by KCC. The capacity building requirements in this regard include enhancement of supervisory skills of KCC staff to monitor the contractor’s outputs and to manage commercial risks shared arising from the operation of the solid waste disposal facilityby Third Parties.
Waste acceptance procedure
Each load of waste coming to the solid waste disposal facilityis recorded at the gatehouse, where the daily acceptance and control record is filled in by the record keeper. If the record keeper suspects that, the vehicle carries unacceptable waste, details are taken as above and the vehicle referred back to the waste producer.
Waste Unloading
All vehicles carrying acceptable waste are directed to the tipping front. The drivers are instructed to unload the waste immediately above the tipping front. The Contractor directs and controls the tipping of waste to minimise queues and waiting time of delivery vehicle.
Dozing and compaction
After approximately 4 vehicles have unloaded waste at the tipping front, or in case of already existing waste heaps, the waste is bull dozed out in layers not exceeding 1.5 meter thickness starting at top of tipping front and ending at bottom of tipping front.
Daily covering of waste front
At the end of the working day (or every 1.0 m of waste consolidated), all exposed surfaces, including the flanks and working face, are covered with murram (soil) to a compacted thickness of 15 to 25 cm. The soil for daily cover is obtained from an approved borrow pit and brought to the tipping front by tipper trucks.
Leachate Control
The leachate is collected by secondary drains that drain into one main drain. The leachate leaves the disposal area at the lowest point of the disposal area, into the treatment plant.
Leachate treatment
Leachate is treated using a five-stage primary process, via:
1. Collection: Collection points for leachate from the whole landfill then discharged to equalisation tank. No treatment here.
2. Equalisation; Used to equalize the influent flow for a constant discharge through succeeding units of treatment. pH controlled here to neutral level (6-8) where the biomass operates most effectively. Alkaline leachate is mixed with acid to lower pH.
3. Presetting: Settling of heavy suspended solids.
4. Aeration/biological treatment (minimum 5 days retention):
❖ Aerators are used for mixing and supplying oxygen. Metals are oxidised and precipitated out as metal hydroxides.
❖ Biological treatment in which micro organisms act on organic matter in the presence of oxygen to break down carbohydrates to carbondioxide and water. It also assists in removal of BOD5, removal of suspended solids by sedimentation, removal of metals by biosorption and precipitation as oxides & carbonates, NH3-N and organic-N by bio-uptake and to nitrification.
5. Clarification: Removal of light suspended solids that give colour to leachate.
After stage five, it is released to the environment only if it meets the current NEMA standard, (Nov 2002), otherwise, its recycled back to stage 4. There is also sludge drying (using a centrifuge) and further retention of leachate in ponds at the site. The dried sludge is taken to the landfill site.
Surface water run-off drains are provided on the outer perimeter of the access roads and along the lower embankment.
Nuisance Control
Dust: For all accesses at the site and the main access from Gayaza road to the landfill, the Contractor controls and maintains dust levels within acceptable limits by spraying with water as and when necessary.
Odour: Odour is reduced by daily covering of waste with soil and burying of carcasses found in the waste.
Pests: The number of breeding pests/insects is reduced by daily covering with soil which effectvely suffocates the the pests and prevents them from breeding. However occasionally during seasons when the house-fly nuisance appears to be at its peak, limited spraying using diluted insectcides is carried out. This occasional use of insecticides is on a small scale, limited to the landfill area, and done professionally by specifically trained contractor’s workers, who always don protective gear.
Littering of main access roads: The Contractor maintains clean the main road from Gayaza road junction to the solid waste management facility, including all access roads within the solid waste management facility, by frequently gathering litter/refuse fallen from delivery vehicles along the road and disposing it at the landfill, in any case, not less than once a day.
Interim roads
Interim or temporary roads are made for movable equipment and vehicles in the disposal area. Interim roads are always constructed on top of waste already deposited. Interim roads are constructed from appropriate permeable materials to ensure good drainage capacity during wet weather. Appropriate permeable materials include: crushed building rubble and gravel/ sand or the like, with low clay content. Crushed building rubble can be processed by the bull-dozer or compactor passing over the building rubble several times until the particle size is not greater than 100mm.
Emergencies
Fire fighting
Fires that occur in the waste are extinguished immediately. This is done by using the bulldozer to doze quantities of soil (thickness at least 1 m) on top of the burning waste. When fighting fire, the bulldozer at all times drive on soil (i.e. not on burning waste). If soil cannot be obtained in time to fight the fire, waste not on fire can be used instead of soil. (N.B. Waste on fire is not being removed since this will only increase the fire due to oxidation).
Medical Emergencies
The Contractor keeps a First Aid kit at the Site as required in the Environmental Giudelines for Contractors (pp120). An injured person is given standard First Aid, and taken to the nearest medical centre. All serious injuries are reported to the Project Manager.
Record keeping
The Contractor maintains the following records and documents for inspection by the Project Manager and submits them to the Employer on completion of the contract:
a) Daily performance records of personnel, plant and equipment in each
case indicating time of starting and finishing work, and any breaks during
the day
b) Daily reports of all materials delivered to the site including vehicle registration, driver, tonnage, extent to which vehicle was filled, and time.
c) Daily waste acceptance record
d) Equipment/ Plant fault records (including time when fault occurred, and time when it was reinstated on the Works).
e) Daily records of weather conditions indicating when rains started, durations, etc.
f) Survey records
Socio-economic
The main means of livelihood of the communities living in the general Mpererwe-Kiteezi area are; agriculture though not on a large scale and brick lying. Some people are employed at the disposal facility and others scavenging through the waste. Scattered type of settlement with both permanent and semi-permanent structures, typical of a rural setting where majority of the people are of low income. With the expansion of Kampala, there is an up-coming middle class who are settling in the area.
The persons whose livelihoods are to be impacted by the proposed extension of the landfill will be resetteled or compensated in line with the guidance provide in the RAP.
Flora
The site and its surroundings vegetation comprises of Lantana camara, Commelina bengalensis, Sesbania sesban, Typha latifolia, Cyperus papyrus, Hexia spp, Hyperenia rufa, Black jack, Impomea spp, and Amagdelina spp. All these species are represented elsewhere, including the adjacent environment to the proposed extension site.
Fauna
The proposed extension site is occupied by marabou stork, white egrets and weaver birds. These species are represented elsewhere, including the adjacent environment to the proposed extension site.
Constraints in Management of Mpererwe-Kiteezi Landfill
• The leachet is simply oxidized, which reduces the concentration of organic compounds (BOD and COD). However, the constructed wetland seems not to be providing tertiary treatment. In case metals and/or nutrients find their way into the leachet, they may not be removed.
• The leachate effluent appeared to have inhibited the growth of papyrus vegetation that was planted in the constructed wetland. This is thought to be due to failure of the papyrus to acclimatize. At the time of assessment, the wetland was being planted with a another type of reed that has been found cable of acclimatizing.
• The site does not have a well-constructed and manned gate to prohibit unauthorised access.
• The Site is muddy and slippery during rainy seasons and yet very dusty during dry spells.
2 Proposed Extension toMpererwe-Kitezi Sanitary Landfill
Location
The proposed extension to the disposal facility is located adjacent to the existing landfill in Kiteezi, Approximately 13km to the north of Kampala City Centre. The extension area is located on the south eastern side of the current landfill area.
1 Physical characteristics of Extension Area
2 Transport and access
The area covered by the extension lies directly adjacent to the currently operational site abutting the Southern flank and is readily accessible by the existing road network.
3 Excavation
Construction of the extension will involve excavation of about 40,000 m³ of earth. This excavated material will be stored for later use as cover material during the operation phase. The material storage area shall be within the site boundary. There is no likelihood of excavated material being transported and stored beyond the site boundary. Hence, no adverse environmental impacts are expected to arise outside the site boundaries from this operation.
4 Vegetation and animals
The proposed extension is located on gentle slope and is bordered by a stream on the north (in the valley), the current disposal area, on the west and scattred residential houses to the south. Part of the propsed extension area was previously cultivated with subsitence crops, mainly cassava, maize, sweet potatotes, bananas and ovacado, as evidenced by the current wild growth of these crops on this land. The persons whose livelihoods are to be impacted by the proposed extension of the landfill will be resetteled or compensated in line with the RAP. The other flora on the sloping part of the proposed site include, Imperata cylidrica, Solanum spp, Oxalis latifolia, Amagdelina spp, Leersia hexandra, Acacia spp, Ludwigia abyssinica and Rhynchelytrum repens. The valley, which has a sream, is called Kiteitika wetland and is dominated by Cyperus papyrus. Other flora include Phragmites mauritianus, Thypha, latifolia, Phoenix reclinata, Cyperus rotundus.
The common bird fauna is Marabu stock. Egrets and weaver birds were also seen. Cows are often grazing at the edges of the wetland, on the opposite side of the proposed extension. The other fauna included velvet monkeys, guinea fowl, and monkeys. Snakes were also reported by the local communities to be present in the wetland but were not seen during the survey.
Both fauna and flora mentioned above are not endangered species and will not be significantly impacted by the project as they occur in the neighbourhood of the project and are also widely distributed all over the country.
5 Seasonal Stream
A seasonal stream flows in the valley located at the bottom edge of the proposed site. It flows from the North through relatively thick vegetation, with papyrus reeds predominant adjacent to the site area.
Resource Requirements for the Extension
Materials
a) Water will be necessary for:
i) Dust control during the construction and operation phases
ii) Mixing with clay to ensure optimum compaction of the liner during construction phase
iii) Fire fighting during operation phase
iv) Water shall be obtained from the existing stream (upstream) and/or, if need be, transported from Kampala.
b) Cement and aggregate
These will be used in the construction phase especially in the drainage and leachate channels. These materials are readily and locally available on the open market.
c) Clay
This will be used as a liner to be placed at the bottom and sides of the excavated pits immediately after construction and prior to operation phase
The existing material, based on the available hydro-geotechnical site investigation data, shall be of sufficient quantity required for the liner material.
d) Marrum
This will be used as a cover material during the operation and final restoration phases. Part of the excavated material will be used as cover material too.
e) Grass and trees
This will be used after final landscaping for reinstating vegetation cover.
Equipment
The following minimum equipment will be needed:
i) Bull dozer to be used for site clearance and excavation during construction phase. It will be used for waste moving and compaction during operation and final restoration phases.
ii) Wheel loader to be used for loading material on to haulers during construction, operation and final restoration phases
iii) Tracked excavator to be used for excavation of the site and loading in areas where access by other equipment is difficult for all the construction, operation and final restoration phases.
iv) Tipper trucks (haulers) will be used to haul the excavated material and cover material during construction and operation phases respectively
v) Water bowser will be used for supply of water in construction and operation phases
vi) Pump will be used for de-watering during construction phase and during leachate treatment operations.
Energy
a) Electricity will be required for
i) Lighting the site at night for security purposes
ii) Running the leachate treatment plant.
b) Fuel
Will be required for all motorised equipment listed earlier. This will result in emissions of gases consisting mainly of carbon monoxide that will rise into the atmosphere. The rate of emissions will not be of significant nature to result into adverse environmental impacts in the direct impact zone. Mitigation proposal against the cumulative effect of the emissions is to balance these emissions with equivalent or superior carbon uptake tradeoffs by the trees planted around the site.
Planned Operations at the Extension
The operations outlined below will have direct or indirect environmental impacts of varying magnitudes:
Construction Phase
Excavation and haulage of excavated material within the site boundary will be carried out. Clay will be mixed with water and compacted along the bottom and sides of the excavated pits. The compaction of the clay will be such as to achieve a permeability of 1x10-9 m/s. Run-off during the mixing process will flow to the stream adjacent to the site. But this will have no significant impact on the quality of stream water since similar material forms part of the physico-chemical aquatic environment. .
Water will as well be used to control dust that may arise out of the excavation.
Operation Phase of the Extension
The site shall open to receive waste every day.
a) Waste acceptance
Each waste load will be checked and recorded at the gatehouse to determine its type, composition and origin. The site only accepts non hazardous waste.
b) Waste handing
Waste will be spread and compacted in layers not exceeding 1m thick and the surface covered with murram to a thickness of 15 - 25cm.
c) Leachate Management
The leachate will be collected and treated at the existing leachate treatment facility. The leachate will be combined with that from the current disposal area.
d) Spraying
i) Water will be used to control dust on internal site roads and to fight wild tip fires.
ii) Occussional spraying will be done, during pick bread periods of the housefly, cochroches or other insects, to kill vectors that come with the waste. In this regard the Vector Management Procedures of KCC (i.e. controled and occasional use of chemicals dilution prior to use, using specifically trained contractor’s personnel and using protective gear) will be applied. (Refer to Appendix F)
iii) The above requirements are already included in the landfill management contract.
iv) The waste disposal operations will be supervised by KCC’s Waste Management Engineer and monitored by the DEO, as is the current arrangement.
e) Scavenging
This will be allowed only under strict and controlled supervision to ensure that site operations are not interfered with and that accidents are avoided.
Decommission Phase
i) Secondary cover will be placed overall waste area. Vegetation reinstatement will be done after final landscaping.
ii) Vegetation will be increased in the ‘root treatment zone’
iii) This will be done following the expansion of the constructed wetland.
Medical Emergencies
The Contractor will keep a First Aid kit at the Site as required in the Environmental Giudelines for Contractors (pp120). An injured person will be given standard First Aid, and taken to the nearest medical centre. All serious injuries are to be reported to KCC’s Solid Waste Engineer.
Operational Products
Odours
Covering every layer of waste placed with murram will control the odours.
Landfill gas
Two principal gases are produced in a landfill; carbondioxide and methane. Carbondioxide will sink back into the waste. Methane, lighter than air, will rise out of the waste. The methane will be harvested and used in production of electricity for use at the landfill facility and that of the surrounding areas. Currently KCC is exploring possibilities of benefiting from the carbon credit scheme of the Global Environmental Fund through which, methane harvesting equipment will be installed.
Leachate
Leachate will be treated by the existing facility before discharging it through a constructed wetland. The quality of final effluent will be in accordance standards for waste discharges into receiving watercourses. These are DWD Effluent Discharge Standards of November 2002. These standards indicate the maximum permissible biological and chemical limits for effluents entering the environment. These standards are currently in force and followed by KCC while operating the current landfill site.
Dust
The gravel access road network from Mpererwe to the landfill (approximately 5.5 km) is bitumen standard. The internal gravel roads will be sprayed with water during the dry season.
Birds
Will be controlled by ensuring complete covering of the dumped waste to deny them direct access to the waste.
Noise
Noise is likely to emanate from machines used in site operations. Noise generating operations will be carried out during the day and will be minimised by using as few equipment as is operationally possible. The location of the site being in a remote area and relatively far from residential homesteads will be an added advantage.
Tip fires
These are caused by, among others, lens effects and hot ashes in the waste. Completely covering the waste with murram cuts off oxygen and controls the outbreak of tip fires.
Post closure features of the extension
Landfill gas.
Methane gas will be collected for power generation and/or will be flared.
Leachate Control
This will involve expanding the existing constructed wetland and massive planting of papyrus reeds in the root treatment zone.
Vegetation
Top soil will be placed on the secondary cover material and planted with Amagdelina spp,acacia spp and rhania palms, all of which are indigenous species.
1 Bio-physical characteristics of the proposed extension area of Mpererwe-Kiteezi waste disposal site
Location
The proposed extension site of Mpererwe-Kiteezi solid waste landfill is located to the south east of the current disposal area (See, Plate 3.9). It is adjacent to the fence of the old site and covers an approximate area of around 6 acres. Being a small less disturbed area it is especially rich in flora and has some fauna as well.
Surrounding environment
The average distance of the houses from the proposed extension disposal site is 500 m. This distance is adequate to neutralize the effect of gasses that result from decomposing organic wastes. No mitigation measures are foreseen therefore.
The gradient gently slopes towards Kitetika wetland as for the old site and has two seasonal community spring water wells at its south-most corner adjacent to the old site. The community uses this water both for brick making and for domestic purposes to supplement piped supplies since some residents cannot afford piped water provided by KCC for all their domestic uses. The borehole water service is also available but it is considered unreliable by the community. Multiple application of water from different sources by households is a common practice among all poor urban communities in Kampala and in Uganda as a whole. It is a coping mechanism, which works mainly as result of the public health campaigns of the Ministry of Health that advise households that water for drinking purposes must be bolied or should come from safe water sources. Hence, households in poor neighbourhoods purchase just enough ‘clean’ water quantities for only drinking purposes and obtain the rest from free unimproved sources. The proposed extension will not affect the current water supply sources. In this case, therefore, no further mitigation measures are foreseen.
The socio-economic activity in the area and surroundings is mainly subsistence agriculture. There is evidence of an abandoned subsistence farm in the proposed extension area with crops namely, cassava, banana, pumpkins, maize, sweet potatoes and Robusta coffee. Brick making is also common in the area. The farming activities will be handled as per the RAP. Any other activity that is likely to be impacted by the project will be delt with in accordance with the RAP.
Terrain
It is characterised by a gentle slope towards the eastern side where it borders Kiteitika wetland.
Plate 3.9: Proposed extension of the waste disposal site, just beyond the fence
of the current site
Soil
The soil is of reddish clay – laterite type. Also in existence were blackish clay soils.
Flora
The vegetation in the surrounding environment mainly comprises domesticated species such as banana, cassava, maize, Jackfruit and avocado. The other flora comprised of Rafia palms, coach grass, mango trees, Imperata cylindrica, Solannum spp, Acacia spp including thorny acacia, elephant grass, Phragmites mauritianus, black jack, Oxalis latifolia, and Amagdelina spp. Typha spp, Cyperus papyrus and Phragmites mauritianus dominated the wetland.
Fauna
The common bird fauna is Marabou stock. Egret and weaver birds were also seen. Dogs were scavenging and cows were grazing on the eastern side (swamp). Other fauna were black ants, jackals, velvet monkeys, grasshoppers, green and black houseflies, and reportedly; guinea fowl, monkeys. Sitatungas and snakes were also reported by the local communities to be present in the wetland.
3.6. SAFEGUARD POLICIES TO BE TRIGGERED BY PROJECT ACTIVITIES
• The Bank requires environmental assessment (EA) of projects proposed for Bank financing to help ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable, and thus to improve decision making.
• EA is a process whose breadth, depth, and type of analysis depend on the nature, scale, and potential environmental impact of the proposed project. EA evaluates a project's potential environmental risks and impacts in its area of influence; examines project alternatives; identifies ways of improving project selection, siting, planning, design, and implementation by preventing, minimizing, mitigating or compensating for adverse environmental impacts and enhancing positive impacts; and includes the process of mitigating and managing adverse environmental impacts throughout project implementation.
EA takes into account the natural environment (air, water, and land); human health and safety; social aspects (involuntary resettlement, indigenous peoples, and cultural property) and transboundary and global environmental aspects. The Bank undertakes environmental screening of each proposed project to determine the appropriate extent and type of EA; the Bank classifies the proposed project into one of four categories (A, B, C, FI), depending on the type, location, sensitivity, and scale of the project and the nature and magnitude of its potential environmental impacts. The Bank's screening process will determine which operational policies - in addition to OP 4.01 Environmental Assessment - are triggered by a proposed project. World Bank’s Safeguard Policies rellevant to KIIDP are as follows:
▪ Environmental Assessment OP 4.01
The objective of this policy is to ensure that Bank-financed projects are environmentally sound and sustainable, and that decision-making is improved through appropriate analysis of actions and of their likely environmental impacts.
▪ Natural Habitats OP 4.04
This policy recognizes that the conservation of natural habitats is essential to safeguard their unique biodiversity and to maintain environmental services and products for human society and for long-term sustainable development.
▪ Pest Management OP 4.09
The objective of this policy is to (i) promote the use of biological or environmental control and reduce reliance on synthetic chemical pesticides; and (ii) strengthen the capacity of the country’s regulatory framework and institutions to promote and support safe, effective and environmentally sound pest management.
Cultural Property OP 4.11
The objective of this policy is to assist countries to avoid or mitigate adverse impacts of development projects on physical cultural resources. For purposes of this policy, “physical cultural resources” are defined as movable or immovable objects, sites, structures, groups of structures, natural features and landscapes that have archaeological, paleontological, historical, architectural, religious, aesthetic, or other cultural significance.
• Involuntary Resettlement OP 4.12
The objective of this policy is to (i) avoid or minimize involuntary resettlement where feasible, exploring all viable alternative project designs; (ii) assist displaced persons in improving their former living standards, income earning capacity, and production levels, or at least in restoring them; (iii) encourage community participation in planning and implementing resettlement; and (iv) provide assistance to affected people regardless of the legality of land tenure.
The KIIDP will finance urban infrastructure improvement activities at several different sites in Kampala including: (a) upgrading storm water drainage channels (b) upgrading gravel roads to bitumenized pavement (c) periodic maintenance/ rehabilitation of Bitumen roads (d) junction improvements (e) markets improvement and (f) extension of an existing solid waste disposal facility.
Periodic maintenance/ rehabilitation of bitumen roads in (c) will be carried out within existing rights of way. Development of a disposal facility in (f) will be carried out on a piece of land owned by KCC. The remaining infrastructure works in (a), (b), (d) and (e) will involve resettlement to varying degrees. Hence, whereas the above infrastructure investments are critical for inducing the confidence of the public and service recipients and will contribute to the economic development of the city, some of them trigger the Bank’s safeguards policies. The following World Bank Operational policies will triggered:
• Environmental Assessment OP 4.01
• Involuntary Resettlement OP 4.12
There are no activities that trigger the other safeguards policies on Natural Habitats, Pest Management, Cultural Property, Indigenous Peoples, Forestry, Safety of Dams, Projects on International Waters and Projects in Disputed Areas. However in cases where project sites are currently in use for whatever livelihood activity, such activities will be handled in accordance to the provisions of the RAP.
CHAPTER FOUR: SUMMARY OF OUTCOMES OF STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS
4. 1 GENERAL
This section of the report summarizes the views of the stakeholders consulted as well as concerns of and ideas from the users regarding the proposed investments. The potential social and political impacts of the improvement investments are also outlined here but those considered significant for inclusion in the Environment Management Plan are assessed in Chapter five and assigned RIAM values as well as mitigation measures. The respective investments have already been described in Chapter Three. For purposes of clarity, some of the stakeholder statements are summarised or/and para-phrased.
4.2 INSTITUTIONAL CONCERNS
4.2.1 National Environment Management Authority
“Section 34 of the Local Government Act decentralizes responsibility for environment management to the local governments. However, the respective arrangements are such that the District Environment Officers lack the institutional autonomy to act independently. In order to resolve this anomaly, it is important that the institutional profiles of the DEO’s be raised, perhaps to be equivalent to that of Tender Boards. In this way, the DEO’s would gain the freedom to be able to act without undue political interference. The offices have recently been elevated to Directorate level, which is a step in the right direction but not yet sufficient to resolve the underlying issue” (Dr Gerald Saula Deputy Director NEMA).
[pic]
This concern was subsequently discussed with the Coordination Unit at KCC and it was understood that in KCC the division Environment Officers have not yet been made Directorates. According to the coordinator, Mr. David Kigundu, the issue is more to do with limited capacity than institutional profiling. Whereas the Consultant appreciates that capacity needs will always exist, what is crucial in this particular case is the political will to act according to the needs of the wider society. See also section on Capacity Building in the EMP.
2 Wetlands Inspection Division
“One of the weaknesses limiting proper management of wetlands in Kampala is the apparent unclear demarcation of roles of the various players”. Whereas the KCC is mandated by the Local Government Act to manage wetlands in their area of jurisdiction, they often turn to NEMA to play this role, which is outside its responsibility. Paul Mafabi, Assistant Commissioner, Wetlands Inspection Division.
In the Consultants’ view, the core issue is that local governments are themselves users of the environment, and by implication, potential polluters. Hence, there is no possibility of these organs to police themselves on matters of environment protection. A more pragmatic approach needs to be identified. One scenario could be to outsource environment protection services to competent independent professional providers with appropriate reward and suction regimes together with clear monitoring arrangements to ensure compliance to contracted agreements. See also Capacity Building section in the EMP.
4.2.3 Medical Officer of Health, Kampala City Council
According to The Medical Officer Health, Dr Makanga, the Vector Control Department needs to be reinstated. In 1980, the VCD was privatized and the output of the provider has not been satisfactory to date. In fact, according to Dr Makanga all vector control activities have since ceased. Malaria being a ‘sanitation disease’ the fight against malaria is linked to proper solid waste management. In this respect, the roles of the re-activated VCD would include:
▪ Sensitization and public awareness for malaria control
▪ Stone pitching channel tributaries to eliminate mosquito breeding habitats
▪ De-silting tributaries as well as anti-malaria drains
Actions needed from KIIDP, according to Dr Makanga, would include
▪ Recruitment of manpower to work in the new VCD
▪ Purchase Film Van for sensitization purposes
▪ Stone pitch and de-silt tributaries
▪ Minimise silt coming into the drains by re-vegetation
▪ Build additional anti-malaria drains and maintain the existing ones
The recommendations listed above from the department are akin to ’business as usual’ which neither worked within KCC in the past nor with the private provider. The suggestion to reinstate the Vector Control Department in KCC would not have the desired effect unless radical reforms based on a sound vector Management Plan are implemented by providing the needed inputs and incentives together with sanctions.
4.2.4 Water Resources Department
According to the Commissioner of Water Resources, Cap 152 of the Water Act requires that the Director of Directorate of Water Development (DWD) subjects all hydraulic works to regulation. Hydraulic works cover all works that are likely to alter or impede the natural flow of water in a water body. These include works such as diverting a river, building a dam or a bridge. Any person planning Hydraulic Works is required to apply for a Surface Water Permit from the Water Regulation Section of the Water Resources Department of the DWD. The Commissioner for Water Resources would , after studying the application, advise the Director whether the proposed works require a surface water permit or not.
In the case of KIIDP, it is recommended that a Surface Water Application be made to WRD detailing the nature of the works planned so that a no objection to proceed is obtained or a permit is issued. Martin Rwarinda – Acting Principal Water Office, Water Resources Department, Entebbe.
5. National Water and Sewerage Corporation
According to the Development, Monitoring and Evaluation Manager of Kampala Water, Mr Jude Mwoga, and the current quality of sewage effluent discharged into the Nakivubo wetland by NWSC only complies with BOD and TSS standards. It does not meet the regulation standards for all the rest of the parameters including nutrients like phosphorus and nitrogen. Hence technically the effluent contravenes the Waste Water Discharge Regulations because it does not meet the prescribed standards (Feasibility Report for Gaba III Waterworks Project, GKW/AquaConsult, 2002).
The action expected under these circumstances is that NEMA would enter into a compliance agreement with NWSC. The compliance agreement would require NWSC to take time-bound measures to progressively meet the discharge standards by a given agreed date. NEMA would, on their part monitor the progress to ensure that the compliance date is respected. Consultations with NEMA and with NWSC indicate that no such agreement exists and therefore, there is no institutional framework in place or willingness on part of NWSC to meet effluent discharge standards in the medium-term.
The main weakness is institutional in that given that the key players [DWD (issues discharge permits, NEMA (enforces compliance to discharge requirements) and NWSC (polluter)] are all under the same Minister, the extent to which one organization is able to check the other is limited. In order to correct the situation, it is suggested that NEMA could be made a truly independent agency and placed under the Prime Minister’s office. This action however is outside the scope and mandate of KIIDP.
4.2.6 Kampala City Council and Local Council Chairpersons
Consultations with stakeholders indicate that the state of roads is poor and using roads in Kampala has become a serious cause of delays and inconvenience.
The key informants identified the following as the main activities that will be seriously affected: pedestrian traffic, motor vehicle traffic, commercial activities of shops and bars along the roads, Newspaper vending, boda-boda transport services, telephone services, public transport operations of the public transport system along these roads and the activities of people who earn their livelihood on the roads such mechanics, car washers and food vendors. Public utilities such as water supply systems, sewerage systems, and telephone and electricity supply cables may also be affected. Most of the activities on these roads and road shoulders and pedestrian walkways are informally conducted. In-depth interviews indicated that most of these activities are carried on with permission from city authorities and the participants involved in these activities pay tax to Kampala City Council.
“Although many of the roads were originally tarmacked, years of lack of maintainace had lead to the deterioration of the roads and many sections of these roads had been reduced to earth. The investment on the roads will improve the roads and remove the dust ………………………..associated with them” (FGD participants, Rubaga).
4.2.7 Engineers Registration Board (ERB)
The Engineers Registration Act requires that all engineering works public or private in nature, be designed or checked and approved and supervised by registered engineers. The implication is that KIIDP should ensure that personnel of consultants engaged to undertake engineering designs and/or to supervise works be required to provide evidence of registration with the Engineers’ Registration Board... Dr Charles Wan-Etyem, Chairman ERB.
4.3 Views from and Suggestions of Users
Consultations on each of the investment areas were done to understand the situation of drainage, roads, urban markets and solid waste disposal practices. The front-line stakeholders consulted include KCC, Parish Development Committees, Local Council Officials in the areas where the investments will be implemented, and community members who will be directly affected by the investment activities. Exit interviews, In-depth interviews and Focus Group Discussions methods were used in the consultations. This chapter therefore presents the findings of the consultations by describing the state drainage, roads, urban markets and solid waste, and the positive and negative impacts as perceived by the people consulted.
4.3.1 DRAINAGE INVESTMENTS
Consultations with the communities and officials about the state of drainage indicate that every person consulted regarded the state of drainage to be very poor. Focus discussions with communities along the drainage channel of Lubigi reported that solid waste and silting leading to serious flooding during rainy seasons often blocks the drainage channel and its feeders. (Plate 4.1)
“Drainage channels are blocked mainly by solid wastes that deposited along drainage channels. This has caused serious flooding during rainy seasons” (FGD Nsoba.).
Plate 4.1 Nsoba Channel
KCC officials also concurs that the problem of poor solid disposal is one of the main problems leading to blockage of drainage channels and their feeders. However, they also reported that the settlement pattern in some parts of the city is responsible for the poor drainage. Human activities especially those relating to habitation and livelihood activities seriously affected drainage systems in the city. One of the main livelihood activities that contribute to flooding is soil erosion resulting from cultivation along the channels. The feeders of Lubigi channel was particularly noted for agricultural activities that contribute to silting.
“Human activity contributes greatly to the current state of poor drainage systems in Kampala city. One this is the agricultural activities along the channels especially Lubigi drainage systems (KCC Official).
“There is a problem of settlements, people settled in the wetlands and thereby blocking the natural flow of the drainage system here” (LC Official Nalukolongo).
Apart from settlements and agricultural activities, KCC and Local authorities in the city for the poor state of drainage blamed poor waste disposal in the city centre by the public and some economic activities along the Nakivubo Channel. Results of In-depth interviews shows that the Nakivubo Channel is being choked by garbage mainly deposited there by the city dwellers and businesses. Some of the major items thrown in the channel were identified as polythene bags, plastic bottles, metal products from garages and factories and industrial waste from industries that drain their wastes in the channel.
“Wastes left by the public in the city often find there way in the channels. Industrial wastes from the city’s factories and commercial activities also end up in the Nakivubo channel. This is a serious concern because apart from blocking the channel, these wastes also pollute the channel leading poor water quality” (KCC official)
Positive Impacts
Investing in the improvement of the drainage system was welcomed by the communities and local officials because of the long-term positive benefits it will have on the drainage systems and the population. The stakeholders said the following benefits would result from the investment in drainage improvement is executed properly:
“improvement of environmental cleanliness and hygiene through reduction in floods and pollution of water sources which will reduce the disease burden associated with these conditions” (Community FGD in Nsoba).
“Vector born diseases especially malaria will reduce since the stagnant waters that encourage the breeding of mosquitoes will be eliminated. The prevalence of diseases associated with drainage such as cholera and diarrhoea will also be reduced” (Community Nalukolongo).
“The channel investment should build bridges that will facilitate easy accessibility from one side of the channel to the other. This will also reduce accidents of mainly pedestrians along the channel during flood conditions” (Community Nsoba).
Negative Impacts
However, the communities also noted that there would be some negative impacts on the general community because of the improvement process. These negative effects are however expected to occur during construction. The main negative impacts identified during community consultations include accidents, disruption of utilities such as water and electricity, loss of livelihood due to displacement of people and interruptions in traffic flows.
“We anticipate from accidents during construction arising from construction activities and KCC should take appropriate actions with contractors to ensure that this is minimized (PDC Rubaga Divison).
“The population around the channels get most of their public utility services from the city. During construction, these utilities such as water, telephone and electricity, may be affected during the widening of channels. Electricity poles may have to be shifted while accidental breakage of water supply pipes and cutting of telephone cables may occur” LC Officials).
“Many households in the communities earn their livelihood along the drainage channels. During the construction this people will be displaced and will lose their livelihood. The livelihood activities most likely to be affected are commercial activities along the channels and along roads crossing the channels, care washing activities and brick making” Community FGD Nsoba).
4.3.2 ROAD IMPROVEMENT INVESTMENT
Consultations with stakeholders indicate that the state of roads is poor and using roads in Kampala has become a serious cause of delays and inconvenience.
“Although many of the roads had been tarmacked, years of lack of maintenance had lead to the deterioration of the roads and many sections of these roads had been reduced to earth. The investment on the roads will improve the roads and remove the dust and much of the dirt associated with them” (FGD participants, Rubaga).
Positive Impacts
In-depth interviews with Key stakeholders identified a number of positive impacts. The main stakeholders interviewed included City authorities, government officials, local council authorities and business persons and transporters mainly involved in the public transport sector and pedestrians. These stakeholders identified the following as positive impacts of the roads improvement project:
“the road improvement is will boost economic activities of commercial enterprises along the roads. More important, property rates along the roads will also increase leading to higher returns to Employers and subsequent investments along the roads” (Local Council Officials, Rubaga)
“The road improvements will easy traffic flows especially at busy junctions such Ntinda-Jinja road, Nakulabye, Bwaise-Apollo Kagwa road, Kabaka Anjagala road, Queens Way and many others. Paving of these roads will also remove the menacing potholes which do not only remove unnecessary traffic jams and accidents, but also increase on the life span of motor vehicle” (KCC Official).
“If the road improvements include the development of road infrastructure such as pedestrian walkways, traffic control humps pedestrian crossing and road signs. These investments will improve traffic flows in the affected areas.” (PDC Kawempe).
Results of interviews on the streets presented in Figure 4.1 appear to be consistent with in-depth interviews with Key stakeholders reported above. The Figure shows that 67 percent of respondents reported that the road improvements would increase commercial activities along the roads. Another 60 percent reported that travelling along these roads would now be convenient and comfortable. Other positive impacts reported by respondents on the roads include reduction in accidents and reduction of dust. Road infrastructure, if included in the road improvement project would be some of important positive impacts of the investment.
Negative impacts
In spite of the above beneficial effects of the road improvement, there are also anticipated negative impacts that will inadvertently affect many activities that take place on these roads and in the neighbouring areas apart from affecting pedestrian and motor vehicle traffic. Consultation with stakeholder identified the following as the main activities that will be seriously be affected: pedestrian traffic, motor vehicle traffic, commercial activities of shops and bars along the roads, Newspaper vending, boda-boda transport services, telephone services, public transport operations of the public transport system along these roads and the activities of people who earn their livelihood on the roads such as mechanics in road side garages, car washers and food vendors. Public utilities such as water supply systems, sewerage systems, and telephone and electricity supply cables may also be affected. Most of the activities on these roads and road shoulders and pedestrian walkways are informally conducted. In-depth interviews indicated that most of these activities are carried on with permission from city authorities and some of the participants involved in these activities pay tax to Kampala City Council.
▪ Loss of livelihood
Loss of livelihood by communities who earn their livelihood by the road side since they people will be displaced for the period of the reconstruction. This people include the roadside business communities, boda boda riders, shop and bar Employers, car-washing bays and garages and road side petty trader. Boda boda riders along Bukoto-Kisasi said:
“Our business will be seriously affected and we will not be able to meet our daily minimum income to give to our bosses”.
Furthermore, Figure 4.3 shows the extent to which peoples’ livelihoods will be affected along the following selected roads that were visited to assess socioeconomic impacts. Boda boda riders and Taxi operators are the main occupational groups that may be highly affected by the road improvement activities along these roads. Other activities that will be affected include the general commercial activities along the road and in shops and bars along these roads and services provided by markets (Figure 4.2).
Exit interviews on the roads indicated that the majority of respondents said that loss of business during the reconstruction for shop Employers and for those who are earning a living on these road facilities will be affected.
▪ Freedom of movement
The construction period will affect negatively freedom and convenience of movement by both pedestrians and motorists. Figure 4.4 shows the perception of respondents regarding freedom of movement or rights to movement on the road during the construction phase. A large proportion of respondents on all the selected roads visited reported that their freedom of access to roads would be seriously infringed.
▪ Traffic jam
Respondents along most roads selected for assessment reported traffic jam as a major source of inconvenience. However, the most serious problems associated with traffic jam were reported at Nakulabye Junction, Ntinda-Jinja road junction, Pride theatre and Bwaise-Kalerwe road. Key informants reported that these jams are expected to be severe since even in its normal operations, the jams are a daily problem for motorists and their passengers.
▪ Accidents
Traffic accidents and other types of accidents associated with construction work are likely to occur. Accidents will also constitute part of occupational hazards associated with people working on roads. Data in Figure 4.4 shows that most respondents found along Nakulabye Junction, Bwaise-Kalerwe, Ntinda-Jinja road junction, Pride theatre and Kasubi, reported accidents. The proportion of respondents reporting accidents, as a serious threat was high on all the other roads visited.
▪ Dirt
Two forms of dirt are expected to form mainly during the construction phase including dirt from dust and dirt from flooding due to blocked drainage. Many respondents found on the selected roads said:
“excavated soil is likely to block drains in case the construction is done during the rainy season and this will lead to flooding of the surrounding areas” (Community FGD Kalerwe).
“unless drainage is a component of the roads improvement it may result in flooding in some areas which will affect Kalerwe-Bwaise and Nsooba (KI Kalerwe).
Response from Exit interviews conducted among pedestrians, passengers, boda boda riders, taxi drivers, private motorists on selected roads concur with key informants concerns reported above. They reported that some of the negative impacts during the road construction phase would include traffic jams, dirt from dust, accidents, and inconveniences for the travelling public (Figure 4.3).
[pic]
▪ Water supply and quality
“Water supply line may be damaged thereby seriously affecting water supply to communities. If the sewage and water supply systems are damaged by activities such as earth works, excavations, levelling, filling and compacting the entire water supply system will be seriously contaminated predisposing a large section of the population to health hazards” (PDC Kawempe).
▪ Air Pollution
“During reconstruction there will be air pollution and dust emissions from construction equipment. Dust emissions will also result from earth works, borrowing activities and transportation of construction materials and wastes. High levels of dust will be generated during construction period and this will affect shop Employers, pedestrians, motorists and people working on the roads” (KI Rubaga).
▪ Environmental Pollution
“Oil used by construction equipment may drain from construction vehicles, plant and equipment. This could lead to contamination of the soil and water bodies through run off water. Oil wastes will be a problem along the roads, where the heavy machinery / equipment are used or kept” (KI Rubaga).
▪ Re-Construction Wastes
“There will obviously be a considerable amount of construction debris comprising gravel, soil, metals, old slabs etc“(KCC Central Division).
Apart from the visual impact debris can affect the water quality, dust and silting of drains.
Infections, Occupational Hazards and Road Safety.
“During reconstruction and operation a number of aspects may result in infections /diseases. Earthworks, excavation of gravel pits, construction traffic, regular vehicular traffic along roads will create dust and air pollution, which can have an impact on health of the people. The impact will be greatest among construction workers. Diseases expected to be common among workers and in the community include respiratory infections and eye infections that are closely associated with dust” (KI Kawempe).
▪ Road safety
“During reconstruction there will be some appreciable degree of danger to road users emanating from construction traffic, equipment and construction works. School children will be more vulnerable to plant and machinery. The public/pedestrians will also be prone to accidents” (KI Nakawa).
▪ Access to services
“Access to a number of services such as health and education may be interrupted, but this is expected to be temporary and after construction access to these services will be improved because of the better road “(KI Makindye).
4.3.3 URBAN MARKETS IMPROVEMENT
It is envisaged that the market improvement process will include a built up market area with stalls for goods, electricity, adequate water, sanitation and appropriate solid waste disposal system. The market access will also be improved with a good road with adequate drainage. Parking space for delivery vehicles and Employers will also be provided. This process will have several positive and negative impacts on the market vendors and their Employers. It will also have implications on the public far away from the markets.
Positive impacts
As already observed the markets are in a deplorable state and are a public health risk in their present state. Investing in their improvement will invariably lead to a number of positive benefits for both Employers and market vendors. The following positive benefits have been identified from discussion with vendors, market authorities, community leaders and KCC officials.
Aesthetic market environment
• The markets will be developed into modern markets with all essential infrastructure including adequate water supply, adequate and appropriate sanitation, improved solid waste disposal facilities, market stalls and storage facilities which will make the markets more suitable for rendering the services being provided today;
Improved public health situation
• The improved conditions in the markets will lead to a reduction in the risk of diseases that proliferate in dirt and transmissible through food. These include diarrhoea, respiratory infections and parasitic diseases.
Market and Employer Safety
• The markets will be provided with secure parking spaces for Employer’s vehicles as well as for vehicles that bring market deliveries. This will improve the security of property. For example, care will now be easily protected from vagabonds who go around vandalizing cars and stealing their contents in unsupervised market areas.
• Market areas will also have traffic control measures in place. Markets are often very busy and the locations of some markets are high-risk accident areas. This is the case with Kasubi, Kawempe, Kalerwe, Kalitunsi, Nalukolongo and Kitintale market, which are locate on very busy roads that predispose the general market public to high risks of accidents. Securing such markets by traffic control measures like those that speed control humps and Zebra crossings will greatly reduce the frequency and risks of accidents.
Employment
• In the short term, the improvement of the markets will generate employment opportunities for a number of workers mainly in the engineering and construction business. These will include engineers, masons, carpenters and unskilled workers. The employment generated will bring incomes and increase in consumer demand for many services in the economy.
• The improved markets will also provide more room for vendors thereby attracting more people into market employment.
• Materials for example aggregate stones, cement, electrical appliances and construction, implements among others will be purchased locally and this will boost Kampala’s local business incomes.
Property values
• These markets are located in areas where urban property values are still comparatively low mainly because of the undeveloped environment. The improved markets are expected to be reciprocated in the general communities that they will serve leading to an increase in property values in the neighbourhood of the markets. New services such as bars, internet cafes, shops, salons and related private investment may also be attracted in the area.
Increased sales and profits
• Increased sales and profits will be realized as new customers are attracted to the better-organized and cleaner markets, which are also safe.
Modified and better market environment
• The upgraded markets will have better planned and managed environments, for example the re-vegetation exercise will aim at providing maximum natural shade, purifying the local breathable air and enhancing the scenic beauty of the environment in and around the market; the drainage networks and access roads will be strategically designed to enhance a better environment.
Negative social impacts
A number of negative social impacts are anticipated to occur mainly during the Market improvement process. These impacts are expected to be generic although some will be more specific to individual markets. The generic negative impacts include the following:
Loss of livelihood due to market displacement
There are two markets included in the Phase 1 works: Kibuli and Kawempe. For Kibuli Market, KCC has identified a site adjacent to the existing market where temporary relocation will be effected. As for Kawempe with a very large site, the market improvement activities will be organized in such a way that vendors will continue using one part of the same site as works proceed on another.
Disruption of traffic
• In the short-term, the construction phases are likely to interfere with the traffic flow on the roads adjacent to the markets.
Disruption of public utilities
• Water, sewerage, telephone and electricity supply lines may be damaged or disrupted causing significant inconveniences to the public.
Allocation of market stalls
• Allocation of stalls in the market may become a source of conflict if the exercise is marred with corruption and lack of transparency, whereby; a reasonable number of the project’s intended beneficiaries might be pushed out of their livelihood. Market vendors gave the example of Nakawa Market where some of the intended beneficiaries were unable to secure a stall for themselves after the improvement of the market.
Increased market dues/rent
• Market vendors raised fears regarding increase in market stall rents and market dues as KCC may want to effect a cost recovery programme to recover some of the money used in the improvement of the markets. This may render some vendors who may fail to afford higher rents out of employment. Vendors in Bwaise growers market said ““We expect that after construction, the rent of stalls will be very high thereby forcing people who fail to afford out of business”.
4.3.4 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Solid waste management is the collection, recycling, storage, resource recovery and disposal of solid wastes. These wastes may be categorized as refuse from households; non-hazardous solid wastes from industrial and commercial activities refuse from
institutions and street sweepings of wastes disposed by the general public on streets. These solid wastes can be grouped into any of two types, organic waste and inorganic waste.
Solid waste disposal practice in Kampala
Consultations with stakeholders that Solid waste disposal options in and around Kampala City are of three types including combustion, burying and Land disposal.
“Land disposal commonly known as landfill is the commonest form of waste disposal in many countries. In Uganda and Kampala in particular it is by far the most important method of waste disposal used by Kampala City Council. The present location of KCC operated landfill is at Kitezi, in Wakiso district. Until 1996, earlier sites were located in Kinawataka and Lugogo by pass among others. Other methods of solid disposal mainly at the household level include combustion, composting and burying” (KCC Official, Kampala).
Proposed extension of the Mpererwe-Kiteezi landfill site
The extension to the landfill site is located adjacent to the present disposal areas at Mpererwe-Kitezi. The site is about 500 meters away from the nearest communities. The area is not heavily populated. Communities around this site reported that:
“In this area is some piped water and some some borehole water, however, there are no schools, no health facilities or other facilities of public significance in the neighbourhood. There are no large or medium scale agricultural, business and industrial activities to be affected by the location of a landfill in the area” (FGD Kitezi).
FGD report from the area indicates that the main livelihood of the communities here is subsistence agriculture. The community also reported that scavenging is a common practice in the area.
“scavenging on the landfill for reusable refuse of plastic and metal forms such as plates, cups, washing basins, kitchen hardware and other household facilities constitute an important livelihood activity” (FGD Kitezi).
Other livelihood activities identified in the community around the proposed landfill include bodaboda cycling, brick making and grocery shops to satisfy the household demands of local communities. Some makeshift eating-places have also developed over the years mainly to provide services for landfill and garbage disposal workers.
Negative Social impacts of solid waste management
Communities around the Mprerwe-Kiteezi landfill site reported that the solid waste disposal in their area would have some negative social impacts on them and their children. The main negative impacts reported during community consultations point to the following impacts.
Property destruction and values:
A landfill has implications on land and other property in the area in which it is located. With particular reference to the extension in whose heighbourhood land improvement was already in process, it was noted that the proposed extension is located contiguous with the current site and is barely less than 500 meters from the community. The landfill will therefore have immediate economic impact on the community including:
“Garbage dumps could devalue land and other property with close proximity to the landfill. This is because apart from the bad odour originating from the putrefying garbage, landfills also attract a lot of birds and insects, which feed on them. Most of these birds and insects become a nuisance to communities near landfills. This situation is currently being experienced in Kitezi” (FGD Kitezi Proposed extension area).
Health impacts
Potential impacts of solid waste disposal at the extension must be derived from knowledge from the current site. Analyses of health impacts from the present landfill site in Kitezi indicate the following potential health impacts:
“The landfill become a breeding ground for vectors especially flies and mosquitoes, which increases the disease burden of malaria and diarrhoea diseases, if the landfill is not properly constructed and operated” (FGD Kitezi Proposed extension area).
“Solid wastes include sharp objects and metals, which can cause injuries to workers during collection and disposal. Kampala generates a lot of solid waste contain sharp objects like glasses, plates, forks, spoons etc that may become injurious to workers” (KCC official Kitezi).
“Food poisoning of mainly children resulting from the consumption of expired foods and beverages dumped at the landfill is a potential health problem. Some children were hospitalized as a result of eating and drinking expired foods and beverages they collected from the landfill” FGD Kitezi Proposed extension area).
Social impacts
A number of negative social impacts that may arise from the landfill were identified during the community consultations. FGD with community members reported the following concerns social impacts:
“the landfill may encourage school absenteeism and drop out may occur because the landfill or dumping ground has profound influence on children. Children spent long hours of the day scavenging for recyclable materials, which they sell to earn some income. This has contributed to absenteeism and drop out from education” (FGD Kitezi).
“The problem of littering wastes especially polythene bags everywhere gives a bad site of the area. KCC should ensure that garbage is not littered around” (KI LC Official Kitezi).
Environmental impacts:
The main environmental concern of the community in this area concerns the problem of polythene bags. They said:
“A major problem of waste disposal in Kampala remains the polythene bag problem which arises due to poor delivery of garbage from collection centres to the landfill. The practice has caused the proliferation of neighbouring areas with polythene bags. Polythene bags have the problem of preventing infiltration of rainwater into the soil thereby destroying agricultural lands even if they are not close to the landfill. Communities near the present landfill reported that polythene bags are littered everywhere” (KI Kitezi).
A KCC report partly stated “At the landfill site today, the superficial scenery that first meets the eye is the litter of polythene bags every where” (KCC Official Kitezi).
Community’s Recommended Mitigation measures
To effectively operate the landfill, including the proposed extension, with utmost economic, health, social and environmental security, the stakeholders suggested the following measures:
“Garbage should be collected in sealed containers” (FGD Kitezi).
“KCC should secure the landfill by fencing so that it is not accessible to children and the community in the area” (KI Kitezi).
“KCC should cover the garbage with soil every time it is delivered to reduce on the bad odour” (FGD Kitezi).
CHAPTER FIVE: POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS OF INVESTMENTS
5.1 DRAINAGE INVESTMENTS
5.1.1 Positive Socio-economic Impacts
Table 5.1: The positive political and socio-economic impacts of the drainage investments
|CATEGORY |IMPACT |NATURE |IMPACT LEVEL |
|Socio-Economic (Construction Phase) |Some people adjacent to the project area will get employment during the improvement process. |Short-term; will be felt during construction | |
| | |period only Term | |
| | | |+2 |
| |Increased income to project workers and business community, selling food and other commodities|Short-term; will be felt during construction | |
| |to those working on the project over a construction period of about 3 years. |period only Term | |
| | | |+2 |
| |Improvement of environmental cleanliness and hygiene (i.e., reduction in floods, odour, |Long term, first order, irreversible | |
| |diseases especially malaria, pollution of water sources) | | |
| | | |+5 |
| |There will be less or no more mosquitoes and the prevalence of diseases associated with |Long term, first order, irreversible | |
| |drainage such as cholera and diarrhoea will reduce | | |
| | | |+5 |
| |There will be easy accessibility from one side of the channel to the other, as better bridges|Long term, first order, reversible | |
| |to cross the channel will be put in place | | |
| | | | |
| | | |+4 |
| |Increase in property values and rent arising from improved environmental conditions. |Long term, first order, reversible | |
| | | |+4 |
| |The communities’ quality of life will improve, as filth that was in drainage channels will be |Long term, first order, irreversible | |
| |cleared | |+5 |
Table 5.2: POTENTIAL NEGATIVE POLITICAL, SOCIO-ECONOMIC
|CATEGORY |NEGATIVE IMPACT |NATURE |IMPACT LEVEL |
|Socio-economic |More orderly traffic flows through signalised traffic control at|Long term, first order, |+5 |
|impacts |junctions signalling, marked lanes and signs thus reducing |irreversible | |
| |congestion especially during peak episodes. | | |
| |Reduced damage to vehicles resulting from poor road surfaces, |Long term, first order, |+5 |
| |thus saving foreign exchange currently being spent on importing |irreversible | |
| |spares. Long term impact | | |
| |Indiscipline road-use practices will reduce since structured |Long term, first order, |+4 |
| |traffic control measures will be in place. Accidents will |reversible | |
| |reduce. Long tem impact | | |
|Bio- physical |Upgrading of roads; the roads will be developed to a higher |Long term, first order, |+4 |
|impacts |class, improving the surrounding physical environment. |reversible | |
| |Improvement of road drainage, as culverts will be upgraded too, |Long term, first order, |+4 |
| |new ones added and old ones replaced. Rainfall run off will be |reversible | |
| |conveyed from side of the road to another. This will minimise | | |
| |the damage to flora along the roads arising from flooding of the| | |
| |carriageways. | | |
| |Better traffic flow will act to reduce the net volume of carbon |Long term, first order, |+4 |
| |emissions into the atmosphere. |reversible | |
Table 5.5: ASSESSMENT OF NEGATIVE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES FOR THE PROPOSED TRAFFIC AND ROAD MAINTENANCE
|CATEGORY |NEGATIVE IMPACT |NATURE OF IMPACT |IMPACT LEVEL |
|Socio-economic impacts |The urban markets improvements will result in better hygienic and improved |Long term, first |+4 |
| |environmental conditions that will attract more shoppers and encourage better |order, reversible| |
| |business subsequently enhancing commerce and trade in the respective localities | | |
| |Farmers will be able to sell more of their produce faster since market management |Long term, first |+4 |
| |operations will be streamlined as a result of better organisational infrastructure|order, reversible| |
| |in the markets | | |
| |The work environment for the poor will improve enhancing their chances for better |Short time, |+3 |
| |revenue generation |second order, | |
| | |reversible | |
| |More stalls will be created meaning that the poor vendors currently without proper|Long term, first |+5 |
| |retail premises will be accommodated and their incomes secured |order, | |
| | |irreversible | |
The negative impacts, the impact levels and the mitigation proposals are given in TABLE 5.9 below.
TABLE 5.7 IMPROVEMENTS OF URBAN MARKETS
|CATEGORY |NEGATIVE IMPACT |NATURE OF IMPACT |IMPACT LEVEL |
|Social economic (Construction and |Increased employment opportunities |Long term, Second order, Reversible|+4 |
|operation phases) | | | |
| |Increased income through collection and |Long term, Second order, Reversible|+4 |
| |sale of recyclable wastes. | | |
| | | | |
Table 5.9: NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE LANDFILL EXTENSION
|CATERGORY |NEGATIVE IMPACTS |NATURE |IMPACT LEVEL |MITIGATION |
|1. Drainage improvements |Embedded in design and Contractor’s BOQs |Embedded in design and Contractor’s BOQs | |Embedded in design and Contractor’s BOQs |
| | | |- | |
|2. Traffic & roads maintenance |Embedded in design and Contractor’s BOQs |Embedded in design and Contractor’s BOQs |Embedded in design and Contractor’s BOQs |Embedded in design and Contractor’s BOQs |
|3. Markets upgrade |YR 2007 |YR 2008 |YR 2009 |Embedded in design and Contractor’s BOQs |
| |Current Site: - |Embedded in design and Contractor’s BOQs |Embedded in design and Contractor’s BOQs | |
| |Extension: - | | | |
|4. Solid waste management |YR 2007 |YR 2008 |YR 2009 | |
|facility |Current Site: - |Embedded in design and Contractor’s BOQs |Current Site: 0.025 | |
|Sub-total |Extension: - | |Extension: 0.015 |0.040 |
| |- | | | |
| | | |0.040 | |
|5. Capacity Building in KCC for |YR 2007 |YR 2008 |YR 2009 | |
|Environmental Management | | | | |
|a) Trg in env’tal management | | | | |
|b) Office Strengthening | | | |0.100 |
|c) Field Ops & lab analyses |0.030 |0.005 |0.005 | |
| | | | | |
| |0.010 |0.0025 |0.0025 | |
| |0.035 |0.005 |0.005 | |
|Sub-totals per Phase for all |0.075 |0.0125 |0.0525 | |
|investments combined | | | | |
|Grand Total - |0.14 | |
|For entire project, all 3 Phases | | |
Capacity Building measures for the proposed EMPs
General
The environmental management under the KIIDP project must be instituted and strengthened and should cater for different phases of the project investments. Environmental monitoring should be part of environmental management planning which must be an integral part of the Environmental Management system, with priority areas of monitoring being the management of the different impacts identified in the EMPs. A strong component of Inter-Agency relationships must be established and strengthened under the EMS. Therefore, KCC and KIIDP project in particular should solicit positive contribution from NEMA, WID, DWD, Ministry of Works Housing and Communication, Uganda Police; Traffic Department and UTODA.
Recommendations for strengthening KCC's environmental management should include recommendations for wetlands management, roads management, and the management of urban markets.
Wetlands Management
District Environment Officers, who report to the Directorate of Health and Environment, face several challenges that limit their institutional output in terms of environment management:
• It is difficult to protect or manage wetlands whose boundaries are unknown. Wetlands in Kampala need to be delineated and their boundaries indicated in the Kampala Structure Plan.
• The office of the district environment officer must review all plots allocations that fall within the wetlands and prepare a list of the beneficiaries for allocation of alternative plots.
• All structures currently located in wetlands should be demolished and the respective sites restored.
• Future allocation of town plots should obtain ‘no objection’ of the DEO.
In order for the DEO to undertake above tasks, the following institutional reforms must be implemented:
• Provide the DEO with the institutional autonomy needed to make and implement independent decisions
• Accelerate the current reforms seeking to replace district environment offices with Directorates of Natural Resources and Environment
• Build capacity of the directorate by providing the needed training, facilities and toolkits for monitoring environment protection measures
The steps that should be taken within the context of KIIDP include the following:
• Train relevant staff in environment management skills
• Support the DEO to identify all plots that are likely to be within wetland boundaries by facilitating the process in terms of logistics and other needs
• Implement a public awareness campaign to prevent encroachment into wetlands
• Instititute in-house capacity for information management including provision of computers and data management software to the district environment office.
In this regard:
o The database can be used to generate and track a variety of documents.
o Data would include information on environmental monitoring, environmental audits and status of mitigation and monitoring plans.
o In addition, the data management system could manage in-coming and out-going information generated by the upgraded investments.
The training needs should be properly assessed but the general areas where support could be provided include:
- Training in project management and compliace to the proposed mitigation measures in the EMP.
- Training in general environmental management and wetlands management in particular should be provided.
- Senior staff members should be provided with training at a workshop for training of trainers organized jointly with NEMA and WID.
The socio-economic environment must be constantly evaluated by KCC especially in view of controlling spontaneous migration to areas where investments have taken place and services improved and the associated social evils. The District Environment Office capacity to manage wetlands should be strengthened.
Roads Management and Urban Markets
The main challenge in KCC regarding road management as well as urban market supervision is maintenance of the carriageways and storm drains. The practice has largely been to replace routine maintenance with full-scale rehabilitation, which is unaffordable. The consequence is that these activities are best outsourced to independent providers. The capacity building needs in KCC would cover the following scope:
• Establish minimum operational standards for management of these facilities. For instance in urban markets, the solid waste management standards need to elaborated and instituted
• Reform the engineering department to professional unit capable of supervision of outsourced works
• Establish and implement routine maintenance procedures
• Training in procurement procedures
• Training in contract supervision
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: TERMS OF REFERENCE
Objectives of the Study
General Objectives of the EA
The general objective of the Environment Analysis (EA) is to identify, assess and mitigate the potential environment and impacts that might result from the infrastructure investments in Kampala.
Specific Objectives of the EA:
v) to identify and assess potential adverse environmental social effects of the planned programme
vi) to make recommendations that can be used for mitigating adverse effects resulting from programme implementation
vii) to prepare Environmental management plan that can assist in implementing mitigation measures recommended
viii) to ensure that programme activities conform to both national and World Bank safeguards.
Scope of Work
The consultants will identify and assess the potential environmental and social impacts related to infrastructure investments in Kampala’s (i) drainage systems; (ii) traffic and road maintenance management; (iii) solid waste management; and (iv) Urban markets improvement. They will carry out the following tasks:
A. Drainage Systems
1. Describe the bio-physical and socio-economic characteristics of the investment areas, highlight the major constraints, and make specific recommendations with regard to investments to be made under the first Phase of the project, and make appropriate recommendations pertaining to the second Phase.
2. Identify and assess the political environmental and social impacts that might result from the drainage investment program, and identify and assess those impacts in relation to the first Phase and make specific recommendations; in addition, make recommendation, as appropriate, pertaining to investments under the second Phase.
3. Investigate the impacts of the proposed drainage improvements on water quality, given that improved drainage promotes rapid conveyance of contaminants to downstream water bodies. This will include water analysis tests of parameters listed by NEMA for water in the first Phase. Make specific recommendations in relation to investments in the first Phase and appropriate recommendations pertaining to investments under the second Phase.
4. In cases where the proposed drainage improvements include attenuation dams or berms, investigate the impacts on the amount and quality of water in aquifers, through carrying out tests on soil permeability and determining the ground water table.
5. In light of available information, and in consultation with NEMA, the consultants will make recommendations regarding wetlands management in the investment areas based on Uganda’s environmental legislation in this regard. For example, the Second Schedule of Uganda’s National Environment (wetlands, river banks, and lake shores management) Regulations, 2000, includes drainage as a regulated activity in a wetland that requires a permit. These and other relevant legislative requirements should be discussed in the EA Report. As appropriate, the consultants should distinguish between recommendations for the first Phase of the project, and recommendations for the second Phase.
6. In addition, the consultants will make recommendations regarding wetlands management in the investment area based on the World Bank’s Operational Policy on Natural Habitants (OP 4.04) dated June 2001. For example, OP 4.04 discusses a range of appropriate conservation and mitigation measures and notes that specific mitigation measures and their rationale should be discussed in the EA Report. As appropriate, the consultants should distinguish between recommendations for the first Phase of the project, and recommendations for the second Phase.
7. The consultants will also review the World Bank’s remaining operational policies and identify those that are likely to be triggered by the proposed project. The consultants will identify any gaps that might exist between these operational policies and the national legislation and make recommendations as to how to close such gaps, if any.
8. The consultant will review the conventions and protocols to which Uganda is a signatory, and make appropriate recommendations regarding the project.
In consultation with the relevant national institutions, for example, the Uganda Council on Science and Technology or the National Agricultural Research Organisation (NARO), the consultant will make recommendations regarding the use of Bahia grass in the four drainage basins. The EA Report should clearly state the advantages and disadvantages of planting an alien grass species in the investment area, and present a clear rationale for the proposed recommendation, including possible alternative grass species.
9. In light of the current situation in the investment area, discuss alternatives, if any, to the proposed drainage investment program, including alternative locations, timing or phasing etc.
10. In light of available information, and mind Uganda’s environmental legislation and World Banks operational policies, review and discuss in detail the requirements for improving the flood attenuation dams, for example, along Kabaka Lake in the Nalukolongo drainage basin and make appropriate recommendations for both trenches of the project.
11. For all negative impacts identified, currently occurring in the investment area e.g. the Nakivubo wetland currently under threat from high nutrient load, cultivation and canalisations, or impacts likely to be caused by or during the proposed project, carry out investments in the first tranch, and appropriate mitigation measures in relation to the second tranch.
12. Carry out consultations with relevant stakeholders, including potentially affected persons in the investment area, and incorporate the results into the EA report. To the extent possible, distinguish between consultation outcomes that are significant for the first Phase and those that most likely will have to be taken into account under the second Phase.
13. Identity and assess potential needs for strengthening KCC’s environmental management capacity in this sub-sector, and appropriate recommendations for both Phases.
B. Traffic and Road Maintenance Management
1. Describe the biophysical and socio-economic characteristics of the investment areas, highlight the major constrains, and make specific recommendations with regard to investments to be made under the first Phase of the project, and make appropriate recommendations pertaining to the second Phase.
2. Identify and assess the potential environmental and social impacts that might result from the traffic and road maintenance program, and identify and assess those impacts due to the first Phase and specific recommendations; in addition, make recommendations, as appropriate to investments under the second Phase.
3. Review and discuss Uganda’s environmental policies, laws, regulatory and administrative frameworks that are relevant to the traffic and maintenance program and make recommendations as appropriate.
4. Review and discuss the World Bank’s operational and identity those that are likely to be triggered by the proposed project. Also, identify, any gaps that might exist between these policies and national legislation and make recommendations as to close such gaps, if any.
5. In light of the current situation in the project area, discuss alternatives, if any, to the proposed traffic and road management program, including alternative locations, timing more phasing etc.
6. Carry out consultations with relevant stakeholders, including potentially affected persons, and incorporate the results into the EA report. To the extent possible, distinguish between consultation that are significant for the first Phase and those that most likely will have taken into account under the second Phase.
7. Identify and assess potential needs for strengthening KCC’s environmental management capacity in this sub-sector, and make appropriate recommendations for both Phases.
C. Urban Market Infrastructure
Under a separate consultancy assignment, a feasibility study for Improvement of Urban Markets is to be carried out. The assignment included a comprehensive Environmental Analysis. In this assignment (KIIDP EA), it will be required to incorporate environmental analysis work done under the urban markets improvement study into the EA of the overall KIIDP (including additional investigations and analysis) covering the scope below.
1. Describe the biophysical and socio-economic characteristics of the areas where urban markets are to be upgraded under the project, and highlight the major constraints that will have to be taken into account, and make recommendations as appropriate- making a distinction between the first and the second Phase of the project.
2. Assess the potential environmental and social impacts that are likely to result from the planned improvements at existing urban markets in the project area, and propose mitigation measures as appropriate- making a distinction between the first and the second Phase of the project.
3. Assess the liquid and solid waste disposal requirements at the urban markets to be improved, and propose mitigation measures as appropriate- for both Phases.
4. Review and discuss national policies, laws and legislation that are relevant to the operation and maintenance of urban markets under the project, and identify any shortcomings that might affect this activity and make appropriate recommendations with a focus on measures to be implemented under the first Phase, and subsequently under the second Phase.
5. Review and discuss then World Bank’s operational and identify those that are likely to be triggered by the proposed upgrading activities. Also, identify any gaps might exist between these policies and national legislation and make recommendations as to close such gaps, if any.
6. Carry out consultations with relevant stakeholders, including potentially affected persons, incorporate the results into the EA report, and highlight the results of consultations pertaining to the proposed project. To the possible, distinguish between consultation outcomes in relation to the first Phase and outcomes in relation to the second Phase.
7. Identify and assess the potential needs for strengthening KCC’s environmental management capacity in this sub-sector, and make appropriate recommendations for both Phases.
D. Solid Waste Management
1. Describe the bio-physical characteristics and the socio-economic of the current landfill in Kampala, and highlight any constraints that might have to be addressed by the proposed project if this site had to be used for a longer period than currently anticipated, and make recommendations as appropriate.
2. Identify and assess the environmental and social impacts that are associated with the continued operation of the existing landfill.
3. Review and discuss the national policies, laws, regulatory and administrative frameworks that are relevant to solid waste management, including medical waste, under the proposed project, identify any shortcomings that affect this activity and make appropriate recommendations for implementations during the first Phase and those relevant to the second Phase.
4. Describe the biophysical characteristics and these socio-economic environment of the new sanitary landfill site near Kampala, and highlight any constraints that might have to be addressed by the proposed project, and make recommendations as appropriate.
5. Identify and assess the environmental land social impacts that with the operation of the new sanitary land fill site.
6. In carrying out the above activities, coordinate with the anticipated two consultants that will be preparing (a) a feasibility level analysis for the capping and capturing of land fill gas and the productive use of methane at the existing land fill site; and (b) a composting project at the new land fill site and an integrated waste management strategy, and make recommendations as appropriate.
7. Review and discuss the World Bank’s policies and identify those that are likely to be triggered by the proposed solid waste management activities. Also, identify any gaps that might exist between these policies and national legislation and make recommendations as to close such gaps, if any.
8. Carry out consultations with relevant stakeholders, including potentially affected persons, and incorporate the results into the EA report, and to the extent possible, distinguish between consultation outcomes in relation the first Phase and those related to the second Phase.
9. Identify and assess potential needs for strengthening KCC’s environmental management capacity in this sub-sector, and make appropriate recommendations.
E. Construction practices
1. Develop environmental guidelines for contractors to be included in the included in the bidding documents of construction contracts.
2. Review and discuss the adequacy of current occupational health and safety guidelines and make recommendations as appropriate.
3. Assess the potential need for restoring borrow pits that are used as sources of construction material under the proposed project and make recommendations as appropriate.
F. Environmental Management Plan
Given that this EA report covers both Phases of the project, there will be a need for two sets of Environment Management Plans (EMPs): One detailed EMP for the first Phase, and a draft EMP for the second Phase because the circumstances under which the second Phase might be implemented are not known at this time.
Thus, based on the information collected and analyzed, the consultants will prepare a detailed Environmental Management Plan (EMP) for the first Phase of the proposed project.
This EMP should outline (a) potential environmental and social impacts resulting from the project activities; (b) proposed mitigation measures; (c) institutional responsibilities for the implementation of mitigation measures; (d) a monitoring plan and monitoring indicators;(e) institutional responsibilities for monitoring the implementation of mitigation measures;(f) capacity building needs to implement this EMP; (g) cost estimates; and (h) time horizons for implementing this EMP.
The draft EMP for the second Phase will have the same content, but the proposed mitigation measures will be more general, to be updated once the second Phase of the project is being prepared.
APPENDIX B: CONSULTED STAKEHOLDERS
a) KEY LEAD AGENCIES
|INSTITUTION |MANDATE |FUNCTION |RESPONSIBILITY |
|Ministry of Lands, Water|Mandate for Water Affairs |Develops & operates water and sewerage |Controls water development and |
|& Environment | |infrastructure |services delivery |
|Ministry of Finance |Mandate for Economic |Provide funds for development projects |Budgetary control |
| |Development | | |
|Ministry of Local |Mandate for Local |Oversight of operations |Service provision within the locality|
|Government |Governance | | |
|Kampala City Council |Mandate for Urban |Oversight of infrastructure operations |Service provision in Kampala City |
| |Management of Kampala City| | |
|NEMA |Mandate for Environmental |Impose Environmental Protection Control|Approval of Environmental Impact |
| |protection | |Assessments |
|NWSC |Mandate for water and |Operational Management |Provides water and sewerage services |
| |Sewerage services | |in Kampala |
|Uganda Bureau of |Mandate for Elaboration & |Enforce Standards |Provision of Standard services |
|Statistics |Enforcement of Standards | | |
|Engineers Registration |Mandate for Regulation of |Registers engineers permitted to engage|Enforces guidelines for professional |
|Board |Engineering Profession |in binding engineering decisions |conduct |
b) KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS
|No. |Name |Institution |Department |Position |
|1 |Dr Gilbert Saula |NEMA |Corporate |Dep Director |
|2 |Paul Mafabi |Wetlands Inspection Directorate |Corporate |Asst Commisioner |
|3 |Jude Mwoga |NWSC |Kampala Water |Planning, Monitoring and |
| | | | |Evaluation |
|4 |Martin Rwarinda |DWD |Water Resources |Ag Principal Water Officer |
|5 |Dr C. Wana-Etyem |Engineers’ Registration Board |Corporate |Chairperson |
|6 |Dr Makanaga |KCC |Health and Environment|Medical Officer of Health |
|7 |Bonnie Nsambu |KCC |PCU |Project Engineer |
|8 |Edward Makalazi |KCC |PCU |Project Engineer |
|9 |Michael Mudanye |KCC |PCU |Solid Waste Engineer |
|10 |Kiggundu Tamale |KCC |PCU |Project Coordinator |
|11 |Higobero I. S. |Kampala Central |Administration |Principle Town Clerk |
|12 |Dick Ssenvumo |KCC Central |City Engineer and |Senior executive Engineer |
| | | |Surveyor | |
|13 |Musoke David |KCC Headquaters |Public Health & |District Environment Officer |
| | | |Environment | |
|14 |Pheobe Gubya |KCC Central |KIIDP |Solid Waste Engineer |
|15 |Sserunjogi Charles Musoke |KCC Central |LC3 |Chairman |
| | | | |Lc3 |
|16 |Dr. Mugisha E |KCC Central |MAYO clinic |Doctor |
|17 |Rose Namayanja |KCC Central |Health | |
|18 |ENG. Zzimwanguyiza Moses |KCC Kawempe |Engineering | |
| 19 |Abbas Senkumba |KCC Kawempe |Youth Office |Youth leader |
|20 |Mzee Kavuma John |KCC Kawempe | |Opinion Elder |
|21 |C.M Mugyenyi |KCC Kawempe |Education |Inspector of schools |
|22 |Ssempala Mwebe |KCC Makindye |Works Committee |Chairperson |
|23 |Wamala C |KCC Makindye |Health |Programme Manager ECHO |
|24 |Tabuzibwa Grace |KCC Makindye |Administration |Deputy town clerk |
|25 |Deogratius Kijambu |KCC Makindye |Administration |Lc3 Chairman |
|26 |Musoke Robert |KCC Makindye | |Opinion Leader |
|27 |Susan Namutesa |KCC Makindye |Public health |Water and sanitation Officer |
|28 |Akello Obonyo Molly |KCC Makindye |Welfare and Community |Community Development officer. |
| | | |Services | |
|29 |Katushabe Jonathan |KCC Makindye |Public health |Surveillance Officer/Focal person|
| | | |Department | |
|30 |Johnson Kasigaire |KCC Makindye |Public Health and |Environment Health Officer |
| | | |Environment | |
|31 |Iga Michael |KCC Makindye |Public Health |Environment Health Assistant |
| | | |Department | |
|32 |Bakabalindi Emmanuel |KCC Makindye |Engineering |Engineer |
|33 |Tabuzibwa Grace |KCC Makindye |Administration |Deputy Town Clerk |
|34 |Iga Michael |KCC Rubaga Division |Public Health |Environment Health Assistant |
| | | |Department | |
|35 |Kabuye Gonzoleza |KCC Rubaga | |Lc1 |
|36 |Besigwa Robert |KCC Rubaga |Engineering |Senior Assistant Engineer |
|37 |Charles Nyakwebara |KCC Rubaga |Urban planning and Land| |
| | | |management | |
|38 |Nsereko James. |KCC Rubaga |Welfare and community |Community Development Officer |
| | | |services | |
|39 |Tumwine William |KCC Nakawa | |Principle Town Clerk |
|40 |Betty Onek |KCC Nakawa |Public Health and |Environment Desk |
| | | |environment | |
|41 |Semakula |KCC Nakawa | |LC councillor |
EXIT INTERVIEWS FOR ROAD USERS
|No. |Division |Parish/Village |Name of road |Type of person interviewed |
|1 |Nakawa |Bukoto |Bukoto-Kisasi R |Road seller |
| | | | |Pedestrian |
|2 |Nakawa | |Ntinda –kisasi R |Private car Employer |
| | | | |Pedestrians |
|3 |Rubaga |Nakulabye |Bakuli-Nakulabye | |
|4 |Rubaga |Ham mukasa Zone |Kabaka anjagala |Car Employer |
| | |Aggrey Zone | |Road side sellers |
|5 |Nakawa |Bukoto |Bukoto-Nakawa | |
|6 |Kawempe |kanyanya |Bahai-Road |Bodaboda |
| | | | |Road seller |
| | | | |Boda boda |
| | | | |Disabled |
| | | | |Pedestrians |
|7 |Central |Katwe |Queen’s way | |
|8 |Central |Wandegeya |Mulago |Pedestrians |
| | | | |Road seller |
| 9 |Central |Wandegeya |Haji musa Kasule |Disabled |
|10 |Rubaga |Nakulabye |Hoima Rd Lukuli |Pedestrians |
| | | | |Disabled |
| | | | |Taxi drivers |
| | | | |Road seller |
| | | | |Wheelbarrow pusher |
|11 |Kawempe |Mbogo |Ttula road |Bodaboda |
| | | | |Private car Employer. |
| | | | |Taxi driver |
| | | | |Pedestrians |
| | | | |Teacher |
|12 |Makindye |Kisugu |Namuwongo |Bodaboda. |
| | | | |Wheelbarrow pushers. |
| | | | |Pedestrian |
| | | | |Road seller |
|13 |Makindye |Wabigalo |Namugongo |Road seller |
| | | | |Cyclist |
| | | | |Pedestrian |
|14 |Makindye |Kibuli |Kibuli |Pedestrian |
| | | | |Road seller |
| | | | |Badaboda |
FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS
|No. |Name |
|1 |Buyingo Steven |M |31 |S.4 |Peasant |Rubaga |
|2 |Kakaire Dan |M |20 |Diploma |Soldier |Rubaga |
|3 |Wanyana Harriet |F |24 |S.4 |Housewife |Rubaga |
|4 |Nansubuga Damali |F |25 |P.7 |Housewife |Rubaga |
|5 |Wanyana Betty |F |50 |S.3 |Housewife |Rubaga |
|6 |Mpagi Jenny |F |45 |S.6 |Housewife |Rubaga |
|7 |Kiiri Living |M |26 |S.6 |Businessman |Rubaga |
|8 |Waika G William |M |55 |S.3 |Herbalist |Rubaga |
|9 | | | | | | |
| |Nsambya Road to Kayunga Road Drainage channel |
|1 |Nakandi Jalier |F |30 |S.4 |Teacher |Makindye |
|2 |Namubiru Hanifa |F |28 |S.4 |Teacher |Makindye |
|3 |Nakijoba Scovia |F |23 |S.4 |Teacher |Makindye |
|4 |Namutebi Fatuma |F |24 |S.4 |Teacher |Makindye |
|5 |Shuraim Musa |M |22 |S.4 |Sheik |Makindye |
|6 |Kidumbuli Awali |M |38 |None |Builder |Makindye |
|7 |Mugerwa Muhamudu |M |37 |P.7 |Builder |Makindye |
|8 |Ngobi Dawuda |M |22 |S.1 |Baker |Makindye |
|9 |Nsiiru Abudallah |M |22 |S.2 |Baker |Makindye |
|10 |Joweria Yunusu |F |32 |S.4 |Housewife |Makindye |
| |Makerere Round About Drainage |
|1 |SSekamate James |M | | |Mechanic |Kawempe |
|2 |Kyote |M |22 |P.7 |Carpenter |Kawempe |
|3 |Deo |M |20 | |Mechanic |Kawempe |
|4 |Nuwamanyire Idi |M |20 |P.7 |Carpenter |Kawempe |
|5 |Lukwago Julius |M |22 | |Mechanic |Kawempe |
|6 |Kamugisha S |M |42 |S.4 |Carpenter |Kawempe |
|7 |Sambwe |M |23 | |Mechanic |Kawempe |
|8 |Dinsi Mohamed |M | | |Mechanic |Kawempe |
|9 |Kaweesa D |M |21 |P.7 |Carpenter |Kawempe |
|10 |Ronald K |M |19 |S.1 |Carpenter |Kawempe |
|11 |Kakooza |M |30 | |Carpenter |Kawempe |
|12 |Seguya |M |34 | |Carpenter |Kawempe |
|13 |Mugerwa J |M |45 | |Mechanic |Kawempe |
| |Britania Drainage |
|1 |SSalongo Ibrahim |M |43 | |Driver |Nakawa |
|2 |Elia Nshimwe |M |24 | |Driver |Nakawa |
|3 |Lule Moses |M |32 | |Casual Labourer |Nakawa |
|4 |Abubaker .O.A |M |27 | |Casual Labourer |Nakawa |
|5 |Kamulu Swiss |M |32 | |Casual Labourer |Nakawa |
|6 |Kiringi |M |31 | |Casual Labourer |Nakawa |
|7 |Nabukonde |F |29 | |Cook |Nakawa |
|8 |Baitawo |M |28 | |Driver |Nakawa |
| |MARKETS |
| |1. Kibuli Market |
|1 |Kisambira Sliva |M |26 |S.6 |Painter |Makindye |
|2 |Ssenkubuge H |F |40 |S.4 |Business |Makindye |
|3 |Mutebi Paddy |M |40 |S.1 |Business |Makindye |
|4 |Senkosi Charles |M |40 |S.2 |Business |Makindye |
|5 |Mrs Mastura Mayanja |F |45 |P.7 |Business |Makindye |
|6 |Nanyonga H |F |25 |S.4 |Business |Makindye |
|7 |Kiwanuka Paulo |M |34 |S.4 |Business |Makindye |
|8 |Ssemanda John |M |60 |S.6 |Business |Makindye |
|9 |Serimu D |M |23 |S.2 |Business |Makindye |
|10 |Kazibwe Robert |M |26 |S.4 |Business |Makindye |
|11 |Kavuma Edison |M |40 |S.4 |Business |Makindye |
|12 |Seruzzi Ronald |M |36 |S.2 |Business |Makindye |
| |2. Kalerwe Market |
|1 |Kibuka Everest |M | |S.6 |Chicken seller |Kawempe |
|2 |Lutwama Tom |M | | |Business |Kawempe |
|3 |Najjemba M |F | | |Business |Kawempe |
|4 |Ssolongo John |M |36 | |Chicken seller |Kawempe |
|5 |Drisa K |M | | |Business |Kawempe |
|6 |Bakibinga George |M |21 |S.4 |Chicken seller |Kawempe |
|7 |Nabuli Margret |F | | |Retail | |
|8 |Ssembatya M Goerge |M |28 | |Retail | |
|9 |Ssemanda Joseph |M |46 | |Retail | |
|10 |Mandali Ronald |M |30 | |Retail | |
APPENDIX C: SURVEY INSTRUMENTS USED
SURVEY INSTRUMENT ALIGNMENT WITH THE TERMS OF REFERENCE
A) Drainage Systems
|No |Variable |Ref on FGD |Ref on KI |Ref on Checklist |Comments |
|1 |The consultant will review and comment upon the following in order to inform the consultants’ recommendations for effective wetlands management, and ensure that these recommendations are consistent |
| |with OP 4.04 Natural Habitats and Uganda's legislation |
| |the national legislation pertaining to wetlands; | | | |Review of the documents mentioned |
| |the Bank's safeguard policies, particularly OP 4.04 Natural Habitats | | | | |
| |potential alternative infrastructure designs/plans to take into account their environmental and social impacts;| | | | |
| | | | | | |
| |the effectiveness of the current institutional arrangements for wetlands management in the Kampala City area; | | | | |
| |and | | | | |
| |Successful wetlands uses and/or management schemes that could be replicated in the project area. | | | | |
| |Conventions and Protocols to which Uganda is a signatory | | | | |
| |The world Bank’s operational policies, especially those that are likely to be triggered by the proposed | | | | |
| |drainage improvements. | | | | |
|2 |Studying and reviewing the designs, regulatory framework and past EIAs carried out on related projects |
| |Review of documents listed in APPENDIX 4 of the inception report | | | | |
|3 |Conducting physical observations and assessments to collect information for describing the bio-physical and socio-economic characteristics of the investment areas. An observation checklist will be |
| |used for this task. Refer to Volume 2. |
| |Visiting sites |FGD on drainage |KI |Biol. resources, water| |
| |Describe the bio-physical and socio-economic characteristics | | |quality and hydrology | |
|4 |Collecting water samples from the affected areas, testing and analysis of parameters listed by NEMA for water analysis as well as investigating the potential impacts of the proposed drainage |
| |improvements on the water quality. |
| |sampling from drainage systems and wetlands | | | |Analysis of samples according to |
| |Laboratory analysis | | | |AWWA |
|5 |Collecting information on the political environmental and social impacts that might result from the drainage investment program. |
| |Key informant interviews |FGD on drainage |KI |Water quality & | |
| |Focus group discussions | | |Hydrology | |
|6 |Review of information on water table and soil permeability to assess the impacts of dams or beams on the quantity and quality of water in the aquifers during the implementation of the drainage |
| |improvements. |
| |Literature review | | |Water quality & |Existing reports |
| | | | |Hydrology | |
|7 |Collection of information from the relevant national institutes, namely, the Uganda National Council on Science and Technology and the National Agricultural Research Organisation with a view of |
| |obtaining information to make recommendations regarding the use of Bahia grass in the drainage basins or other alternative grass species. |
| |Key informant interviews will be conducted | |KI | | |
|8 |Review and discuss with KCC engineers the requirements for improving the flood attenuation dams along all the sampled drainage basins. |
| |Key informant interviews | |KI |Water quality & | |
| |Physical site observations | | |Hydrology, land use | |
|9 |Consider all wetlands likely to be affected by the drainage improvements, collect and test water samples for nutrient load; as well assess potential impacts of cultivation, canalisation conditions |
| |and intended investments. The National Water and Sewerage Corporation will be sub-contracted to do the water quality analysis. |
| |Key informant interviews | |KI |Water quality & |Analysis of samples according to |
| |Physical site observations | | |Hydrology, land use |AWWA |
| |sampling from drainage systems and wetlands | | | | |
| |Laboratory analysis | | | | |
|10 |Collect information on the environmental management capacity of KCC. |
| |Interviewing the District Environment Officer and personnel in-charge of environmental matters in the five | |KI | | |
| |divisions. | | | | |
B) Traffic and Road Maintenance Management
|No |Variable |Ref on FGD |Ref on KI |Ref on Checklist |Comments |
|1 |Assessing and collecting information for describing the bio-physical and socio-economic characteristics of the traffic and road maintenance management. For this activity, an observation checklist |
| |will be conducted. |
| |Visiting the sites | | |sections on | |
| |collecting information for describing the bio-physical and socio-economic characteristics of the traffic and | | |transportation & | |
| |road maintenance management | | |traffic, biological | |
| | | | |resources | |
|3 |Identify and assess the potential environmental and social impacts that might result from the traffic and road maintenance management interventions and make appropriate recommendations. |
| |studying the designs and proposed methods of construction | | | |Review of available documents |
| |review historical data for impacts resulting from similar past projects | | | | |
| |visiting the sites and observing likely impacts | | | | |
| |interviewing communities and stakeholders. | | | | |
|3 |Review and discuss Uganda’s environmental policies, laws, regulatory frameworks that are relevant to the investment. |
| |Review and discuss the national policies, laws and policies | | | |Local and world Bank policies, |
| |Identify any shortcomings that affect this activity during the first Phase and those relevant to the second | | | |laws and regulations |
| |Phase | | | | |
|4 |Review World Bank safeguards policies regarding traffic and road maintenance management. |
| |Literature review | | | |review of existing policy |
| | | | | |documents |
|5 |Identify and document gaps, conflicts that might exist between the World Bank and Government of Uganda policies. |
| |Literature review | | | |review of World bank & Uganda |
| | | | | |policies |
|6 |Assessment of the affected roads. |
| |Studying the designs and traffic flow characteristics through site observation, review of previous reports, | |KI on |Transportation & |review of design reports, |
| |key informant interviews and review of design reports and drawings | |traffic |traffic |previous reports |
|7 |Propose the safeguards (road signs, diversions, options for alternative routing of traffic, traffic flow control procedures). |
| |Studying the designs and method statements for the proposed road improvement investments, |FGD |KI |Transportation & |Review of designs |
| |Reconnaissance visits to the sites of the proposed investments, traffic flow of the diversions and discussion | | |traffic | |
| |with stakeholders (road users e.g., UTODA and communities as well as agencies like traffic police and KCC) | | | | |
|8 |Hold discussions with communities and technical personnel within KCC, Traffic Police department, Road Safety Commission, Ministry of Works, Housing and Communication, RAFU, UTODA, and UBOA, BODA |
| |BODA (motor cycle) Association. |
| |Conducting focus group discussions and key informant interviews |FGD |KI | | |
|9 |Identify and assess potential needs for strengthening KCC’s environmental management capacity in this sub-sector. |
| |Key informant interviews | |KI | |Review of relevant documents |
| |Literature review of previous studies on institutional analysis of the KCC’s existing environmental management| | | | |
| |capacity in traffic and road maintenance | | | | |
|10 |Determine the gaps and make appropriate recommendations for improvement. |
| |Comparing the existing capacity to the required capability for the scope of the function of traffic and road | | | |Analysis of existing |
| |maintenance | | | |capacities, Expert judgement, |
| | | | | |review of previous reports |
C) Urban Market infrastructure
|No |Variable |Ref on FGD |Ref on KI |Ref on Checklist |Comments |
|1 |Assessing and collecting information for describing the bio-physical and socio-economic characteristics of the planned market investment areas. |
| |Visiting the sites | | |Section on Biol. | |
| |assessing and collecting information for describing the bio-physical and socio-economic characteristics of the | | |resources | |
| |planned market investment areas | | | | |
|2 |Identify and assess the potential environmental and social impacts that might result from the improvement of the urban market infrastructure, making a distinction between the first and second |
| |Phases of the project. This will be done by studying proposed improvements and the designs, resettlement plan for the vendors during construction, visiting the sites and observing likely impacts, |
| |interviewing communities and stakeholders using key informant interview and focus group discussions. |
| |Studying the proposed improvements and designs | | |section on visual and |Literature review of past |
| |Visiting the markets and observing likely impacts | | |aesthetic quality, |studies |
| |Interviewing communities and stakeholders as well as key informants | | |utilities, energy | |
|3 |Assess the liquid and solid waste disposal requirements of the proposed improvement of the urban markets |
| |Studying liquid and solid waste management reports of the existing markets | | |checklist |Needs assessment & Feasibility |
| |Estimating waste generation rates that can be used for extrapolating future liquid and solid waste generation | | | |reports by Kagga & Partners |
| |potentials. | | | | |
| |Review national policies, laws and legislation relevant to the operation and maintenance of the markets under the project. |
| |Review and discuss the national policies, laws and policies | | | |Local and world Bank policies, |
| |Identify any shortcomings that affect this activity during the first Phase and those relevant to the second | | | |laws and regulations |
| |Phase | | | | |
| |Review and discuss world Bank’s operational guidelines that are likely to be triggered by the proposed upgrading activities. |
| |Review the Uganda and World bank operational guidelines and suggest how to harmonise the gaps |FGD |KI | | |
| |Carry out consultations with relevant stakeholders | | | | |
D) Solid Waste Management
|No |Variable |Ref on FGD |Ref on KI |Ref on Checklist |Comments |
|1 |Assessing and collecting information for describing the bio-physical and socio-economic characteristics of the current and planned landfill sites. |
| |Visiting | | |section on biological | |
| |Assessing and collecting information for describing the bio-physical and socio-economic characteristics of the | | |resources | |
| |current and planned landfill sites | | | | |
|2 |Identify and assess the environmental and social impacts that are associated with the continued operation of the existing landfill as well as the proposed landfill sites. |
| |Identify and assess the environmental and social impacts that are associated with the continued operation of | | | | |
| |the existing landfill as well as the proposed landfill sites. | | | | |
| |Visiting the proposed sites and observing likely impacts | | | | |
| |By reviewing the EIA report of the existing landfill | | | | |
|3 |Review and discuss the national policies, laws, regulatory and administrative frameworks that are relevant to solid waste management, including medical waste, under the proposed project, identify |
| |any shortcomings that affect this activity during the first Phase and those relevant to the second Phase. |
| |Review and discuss the national policies | | | |Review Uganda and compare with |
| |Review and discuss the national laws, regulatory and administrative frameworks that are relevant to solid waste| | | |OP 4.04 |
| |management, including medical waste, under the proposed project | | | | |
| |identify any shortcomings that affect this activity during the first Phase and those relevant to the second | | | | |
| |Phase. | | | | |
|4 |Liaise with anticipated two consultants that will be preparing (a) a feasibility level analysis for the capping and capturing of landfill gas and the productive use of methane at the existing |
| |landfill site; and (b) a composting project at the new landfill site and an integrated waste management strategy. |
| |A feasibility level analysis for the capping and capturing of land fill gas and the productive use of methane | | | |Reviews with the two |
| |at the existing land fill site | | | |consultants, review of existing|
| |A composting project at the new land fill site and an integrated waste management strategy | | | |literature and best practices, |
| |Visiting the sites together and sharing notes and experiences. | | | |within other parts of the world|
| | | | | |like Australia |
|5 |Review and discuss the World Bank’s policies and identify those that are likely to be triggered by the proposed solid waste management activities. Also, identify any gaps that might exist between |
| |these policies and national legislation. |
| |Review and discuss the World Bank’s policies and identify those that are likely to be triggered by the proposed| | | |Review of the world bank |
| |solid waste management activities | | | |policies and identify gaps |
| |Identify any gaps that might exist between these policies and national legislation. | | | | |
|6 |Carry out consultations with relevant stakeholders, including potentially affected persons, and incorporate the results into the EA report, and to the extent possible, distinguish between |
| |consultation outcomes in relation the first Phase and those related to the second Phase. |
| |Carry out consultations with relevant stakeholders, including potentially affected persons, and incorporate the|FGD for solid |KI | | |
| |results into the EA report |waste | | | |
| |to the extent possible, distinguish between consultation outcomes in relation the first Phase and those related| | | | |
| |to the second Phase | | | | |
|7 |Identify and assess potential needs for strengthening KCC’s environmental management capacity in this sub-sector, and make appropriate recommendations. |
| |Carrying out an institutional analysis of the KCC’s existing environmental management capacity in solid waste | |KI | | |
| |management | | | | |
|8 |Determine the gaps and make appropriate recommendations for improvement |
| |Comparing the existing capacity to the required capability for the scope of the function of solid waste | | | |Analysis of existing |
| |management | | | |capacities, Expert judgement, |
| | | | | |review of previous reports |
Appendix D. REFERENCES
Associated Consulting Engineers (1996), Bwaise III Community Drainage and Solid Waste
Management Study Vol. I, Final Report Prepared for Plan International-Kampala Uganda.
Associated Consulting Engineers (1996), Bwaise III Community Drainage and Solid Waste
Management Study Vol. II, Final Report Prepared for Plan International-Kampala Uganda.
Azza, N.G.T., Kansiime, F., Nalubega, M. and Denny, P. (2000). Differential permeability of
papyrus and Miscanthidium root mats in Nakivubo swamp, Uganda. Aquatic Botany. 67: 169-178.
Blake (1989), Civil Engineers Reference Book, Wiley.
Buckle, C. (1978). Landforms in Africa. Longman.
Byamukama, D., Kansiime, F., Mach, R. L and Farnleitner A. H. (2000) Determination of
Escherichia Coli with chromocult coliform agar showed a high level of discrimination efficiency for differing fecal pollution levels in tropical waters of Kampala, Uganda. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 66: (2) 864 – 868.
Byamukama, D. (1998) Faecal pollution in Nakivubo channel, Uganda. Comparison of
indicator organisms and isolation methods. M.Sc Thesis, IHE Delft the Netherlands.
COWI/VKI, (1998). Kampala Water Quality Monitoring Programme: Murchison Bay Water
Quality Project. Report Prepared for the Ministry of Natural Resources and National Water and Sewerage Corporation, Kampala- Uganda.
Edward A. Mc Bean, Frank A. Rovers, Grahame J. Farquhar-1995
Environment Impact Assessment Regulations, 1998. Uganda.
Environment Management Authority (2002), State of Environment Report for Uganda.
Environmental Law Guidelines and Principles: Shared Natural Resources. UNEP.
Environmental Law Guidelines and Principles: Stockholm Declaration, 1972. UNEP.
Environmental Law Guidelines and Principles: World Charter for Nature, 1982. UNEP.
Environmental Quality Standards Act, 1995. Uganda.
Everton, L., Yangon, L. Luau, P. and Malinga, A. (1999). The Economic Value of
Nakivubo Urban Wetlands. A Report Prepared for National Wetlands Conservation and Management Programme, Ministry of Water, Lands and Environment, Kampala -Uganda.
Holmes J. R. (1984), Managing Solid Wastes in Developing Countries, Wiley.
Husain, T. A.hoda and R. Khan (1989) Impact of Sanitary landfill on Ground Water Quality
Jain, R.K, L.V.urban, and G.S.Stacey (1981) Environmental Impact analysis-A New
dimension in Decision Making, 2d ed, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York
Kampala City Council (1999); Sanitation Quality Gap in Central Division Kampala,
Uganda
Kampala Urban Study Structural Plan, 1994.
Kansiime, F. and Nalubega, M. (1999). Natural Treatment by Uganda’s Nakivubo
Swamp. Water Quality International, March/April Issue, pp. 29 - 31.
Kansiime, F. Nalubega, M. Bugenyi, F.W.B. and Tukahirwa E.M. (1994). The role of
Nakivubo swamp in maintaining the water quality of Inner Murchison Bay - Lake Victoria. Journal of Tropical Hydrobiology and Fisheries. 5: 79 - 87.
Kawempe Division Finance Committee (July 1998), Revenue and Expenditure Budget
1998/99, KCC-Kawempe Division.
Kizito, Y.S. (1986). The evaluation of pollution levels of Nakivubo Channel, Uganda,
Kampala. M.Sc. Thesis, Makerere University.
Lema, J.M., Mendez R.and R. Blazquez (1988) Characteristics of Landfill Leachates and
alternatives for their treatment: A review Department of chemical Engineering, University of Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Longland F. (1985), Field Engineering - An Introduction to Development Work and
Construction, Intermediate Technology Publications
Matagi, S. N. (1993). The effect of pollution of fauna distribution in Bwaise and Nakivubo
Channel, Master Thesis, Makerere University.
Michael M. Cernea (1988). Involuntary Resettlement in Development Projects: Policy
Guidelines in World Bank-Financed Projects. WorldBank Technical Paper No. 80.
Ministry of Natural Resources, Directorate of Water Development, (1995). Uganda Water
Action Plan, Water Resources Development and Management.
Ministry of Local Government, Kampala City Council (2003). Nakivubo Channel
Rehabilitation Project (NCRP): Kampala Drainage Master Plan. Additional Services: Environmental Impact Assessment. BKS Global, Dar Al – Handasah & International Development Consultants Limited.
Ministry of Local Government, Kampala City Council (2003). Nakivubo Channel
Rehabilitation Project (NCRP): Kampala Drainage Master Plan. Short-term Action Plan: Phase 1. Kinawataka Channel Design Report. BKS Global, Dar Al – Handasah & International Development Consultants Limited.
Ministry of Local Government, Kampala City Council (2003). Nakivubo Channel
Rehabilitation Project (NCRP): Kampala Drainage Master Plan. Short-term Action Plan: Phase 1. Lubigi Channel Design Report. BKS Global, Dar Al – Handasah & International Development Consultants Limited.
Ministry of Local Government, Kampala City Council (2003). Nakivubo Channel
Rehabilitation Project (NCRP): Kampala Drainage Master Plan. Short-term Action Plan: Phase 1. Nakivubo Minor Channels Design Report. BKS Global, Dar Al – Handasah & International Development Consultants Limited.
Ministry of Local Government, Kampala City Council (2003). Nakivubo Channel
Rehabilitation Project (NCRP): Kampala Drainage Master Plan. Short-term Action Plan: Phase 1. Nalukolongo Channel Design Report. BKS Global, Dar Al – Handasah & International Development Consultants Limited.
Ministry of Natural Resources, (1994). The National Environment Management Policy for
Uganda.
Ministry of Works, Housing and Communication (2004). Feasibility Study and Detailed
Engineering Design for Upgrading to paved Bitumen) Standard of the Soroti – Lira Road; Gauff JBG Igenieure. Vol. 4A.
Mott MacDonald (1990), Practical Aspects of Land Drainage and Flood Alleviation,
Unpublished.
Mwiganga, M. and Kansiime, F. (2005). The impact of Mpererwe landfill in Kampala –
Uganda on the surrounding environment. Journal of Physics and Chemistry of the Earth. 30: 744-750
National Environment Management Authority (1996), State of The Environment Report for
Uganda, NEMA.
National Environment Management Authority (July 1997), Guidelines for Environmental
Impact Assessment in Uganda, Republic of Uganda
National Environment Statute, 1995, Uganda.
National Environmental Management Authority, Ministry of Natural Resources, (1998).
Environmental standards and preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment for Water Quality and Discharge of Effluent into Water/Land.
National Policy for the Conservation and Management of Wetland Resources in Uganda,
1995.
Omoit, S. (1995). Water quality study for Nakivubo Swamp, M.Sc, Thesis, IHE-Delft., The
Netherlands.
Orloff, Neil (1978). The environmental Input statement Process: A guide to citizen action,
information resources press, Washington, D.C.,
Otoi, S. P. (1995). Water balance for Nakivubo Swamp, M.Sc Thesis, IHE-Delft. The
Netherlands.
Seges, (1989) Review of Kampala Water Supply Expansion Scheme. Report submitted to
the Commission of the European Communities, on behalf of the Ministry of Water and Mineral Development and the National Water and Sewerage Corporation, Uganda. Seges Consultants, Brussels.
SOE (1994). State of Environment for Uganda. Ministry of Natural Resources, Kampala –
Uganda. Solid waste Landfill Engineering and Design
Taylor, A.R.D (1991). Status of Nakivubo and Luzira Swamps in Kampala. Report
prepared for the Ministry of Environmental Protection, Natural Wetlands Conservation and Management Programme, Kampala, Uganda.
The Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995.
The Environmental Audit Guidelines (1999), Uganda.
The Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations (1998), Uganda.
The Land Act, 1998. Uganda.
The Local Governments Act, 1997.
The National Environment (Noise Standards and Control) Regulations, 1998. Uganda.
The National Environment (Standards for Discharge of Effluent into Water or On Land)
Regulations, 1999. Uganda.
The National Environment (Waste Management) Regulations, 1999. Uganda.
The National Environment (Wetlands, Riverbanks and Lake Shores Management)
Regulations, 2000. Uganda.
The national Environment Statute (1995) Supplement No. 3 for the Government of
Uganda
The National Environment Statute, 1995. Uganda.
The National Wetlands Policy, (1995). Ministry of Natural Resources, Kampala- Uganda. The National Environment Statute, 1995.
The Town And Planning Act, 1964, Uganda.
Uganda Water Statute, 1995.
Uganda Wildlife Statute, 1996.
UNCHS (Habitat) for UNEP (1997). Implementing the Urban Environment Agenda. Majestic
Printing Works Ltd. Nairobi-Kenya.
WHO/UNDP (1971). Master plans for water and sewerage for the greater Kampala and
Jinja Areas. (Special studies – Lake Investigations).
World Bank, The Katwe Urban Pilot Project (August 1995), Experiences Gained and
Lessons Learned, Prepared by UNDP-World Bank Regional water and Sanitation Group (EA).
APPENDIX E. Summary of the World Bank’s Safeguard Policies
|OP 4.01 Environmental |The objective of this policy is to ensure that Bank-financed projects are |Depending on the project, and nature of impacts a |
|Assessment |environmentally sound and sustainable, and that decision-making is improved |range of instruments can be used: EIA, environmental |
| |through appropriate analysis of actions and of their likely environmental |audit, hazard or risk assessment and environmental |
| |impacts. This policy is triggered if a project is likely to have potential |management plan (EMP).When a project is likely to |
| |(adverse) environmental risks and impacts on its area of influence. OP 4.01 |have sectoral or regional impacts, sectoral or |
| |covers impacts on the natural environment (air, water and land); human health|regional EA is required. KIIDP triggers OP 4.01 and |
| |and safety; physical cultural resources; and transboundary and global |this end the Government of Uganda is responsible for |
| |environment concerns. |carrying out the EA. The current report is in |
| | |response to this requirement. |
| | | |
|OP 4.04 Natural Habitats |This policy recognizes that the conservation of natural habitats is essential|This policy is triggered by any project (including |
| |to safeguard their unique biodiversity and to maintain environmental services|any sub-project under a sector investment or |
| |and products for human society and for long-term sustainable development. The|financial intermediary) with the potential to cause |
| |Bank therefore supports the protection, management, and restoration of |significant conversion (loss) or degradation of |
| |natural habitats in its project financing, as well as policy dialogue and |natural habitats, whether directly (through |
| |economic and sector work. The Bank supports, and expects Government of Uganda|construction) or indirectly (through human activities|
| |to apply, a precautionary approach to natural resource management to ensure |induced by the project). KIIDP doesn’t trigger OP |
| |opportunities for environmentally sustainable development. Natural habitats |4.04 |
| |are land and water areas where most of the original native plant and animal | |
| |species are still present. Natural habitats comprise many types of | |
| |terrestrial, freshwater, coastal, and marine ecosystems. They include areas | |
| |lightly modified by human activities, but retaining their ecological | |
| |functions and most native species. | |
|OP 4.36 Forests |The objective of this policy is to assist Government of Uganda to harness the|This policy is triggered whenever any Bank-financed |
| |potential of forests to reduce poverty in a sustainable manner, integrate |investment project (i) has the potential to have |
| |forests effectively into sustainable economic development and protect the |impacts on the health and quality of forests or the |
| |vital local and global environmental services and values of forests. Where |rights and welfare of people and their level of |
| |forest restoration and plantation development are necessary to meet these |dependence upon or interaction with forests; or (ii) |
| |objectives, the Bank assists Government of Uganda with forest restoration |aims to bring about changes in the management, |
| |activities that maintain or enhance biodiversity and ecosystem functionality.|protection or utilization of natural forests or |
| |The Bank assists Government of Uganda with the establishment of |plantations. |
| |environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial and economically viable |KIIDP doesn’t trigger OP 4.36 |
| |forest plantations to help meet growing demands for forest goods and | |
| |services. | |
|OP 4.09 Pest Management |The objective of this policy is to (i) promote the use of biological or |The policy is triggered if : (i) procurement of |
| |environmental control and reduce reliance on synthetic chemical pesticides; |pesticides or pesticide application equipment is |
| |and (ii) strengthen the capacity of the country’s regulatory framework and |envisaged (either directly through the project, or |
| |institutions to promote and support safe, effective and environmentally sound|indirectly through on-lending, co-financing, or |
| |pest management. More specifically, the policy aims to (a) Ascertain that |government counterpart funding); (ii) the project may|
| |pest management activities in Bank-financed operations are based on |affect pest management in a way that harm could be |
| |integrated approaches and seek to reduce reliance on synthetic chemical |done, even though the project is not envisaged to |
| |pesticides (Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in agricultural projects and |procure pesticides. This includes projects that may |
| |Integrated Vector Management (IVM) in public health projects. (b) Ensure that|(i) lead to substantially increased pesticide use and|
| |health and environmental hazards associated with pest management, especially |subsequent increase in health and environmental risk;|
| |the use of pesticides are minimized and can be properly managed by the user. |(ii) maintain or expand present pest management |
| |(c) As necessary, support policy reform and institutional capacity |practices that are unsustainable, not based on an IPM|
| |development to (i) enhance implementation of IPM-based pest management, (ii) |approach, and/or pose significant health or |
| |regulate, and monitor the distribution and use of pesticides. |environmental risks. |
| | |KIIDP does not trigger OP 4.09. |
| | | |
|OP 4.11 Cultural Property |The objective of this policy is to assist countries to avoid or mitigate |This policy applies to all projects requiring a |
| |adverse impacts of development projects on physical cultural resources. For |Category A or B Environmental Assessment under OP |
| |purposes of this policy, “physical cultural resources” are defined as movable|4.01. |
| |or immovable objects, sites, structures, groups of structures, natural |KIIDP does not trigger OP 4.11 |
| |features and landscapes that have archaeological, paleontological, | |
| |historical, architectural, religious, aesthetic, or other cultural | |
| |significance. Physical cultural resources may be located in urban or rural | |
| |settings, and may be above ground, underground, or underwater. | |
|OP 4.10 Indigenous Peoples|The objective of this policy is to (i) ensure that the development process |The policy is triggered when the project affects the |
| |fosters full respect for the dignity, human rights, and cultural uniqueness |indigenous peoples (with characteristics described in|
| |of indigenous peoples; (ii) ensure that they do not suffer adverse effects |OP 4.10 para 4) in the project area. |
| |during the development process; and (iii) ensure that indigenous peoples | |
| |receive culturally compatible social and economic benefits. |KIIDP does not trigger OP 4.10 |
| | | |
|OP 4.12 Involuntary |The objective of this policy is to (i) avoid or minimize involuntary |This policy covers not only physical relocation, but |
|Resettlement |resettlement where feasible, exploring all viable alternative project |any loss of land or other assets resulting in: (i) |
| |designs; (ii) assist displaced persons in improving their former living |relocation or loss of shelter; (ii) loss of assets or|
| |standards, income earning capacity, and production levels, or at least in |access to assets; (iii) loss of income sources or |
| |restoring them; (iii) encourage community participation in planning and |means of livelihood, whether or not the affected |
| |implementing resettlement; and (iv) provide assistance to affected people |people must move to another location. |
| |regardless of the legality of land tenure. |This policy also applies to the involuntary |
| | |restriction of access to legally designated parks and|
| | |protected areas resulting in adverse impacts on the |
| | |livelihoods of the displaced persons. |
| | |KIIDP triggers OP 4.12. To this end KIIDP has |
| | |prepared a Resettlement Action Plan and has been |
| | |separately submitted to the Bank |
| | | |
| | | |
|OP 4.37 Safety of Dams |The objectives of this policy are as follows: For new dams, to ensure that |This policy is triggered when the Bank finances: (i) |
| |experienced and competent professionals design and supervise construction; |a project involving construction of a large dam (15 m|
| |the Government of Uganda adopts and implements dam safety measures for the |or higher) or a high hazard dam; and (ii) a project |
| |dam and associated works. For existing dams, to ensure that any dam that can |which is dependent on an existing dam. For small |
| |influence the performance of the project is identified, a dam safety |dams, generic dam safety measures designed by |
| |assessment is carried out, and necessary additional dam safety measures and |qualified engineers are usually adequate. |
| |remedial work are implemented. |KIIDP does not trigger OP 4.37 |
|OP 7.50 Projects in |The objective of this policy is to ensure that Bank-financed projects |This policy is triggered if (a) any river, canal, |
|International Waters |affecting international waterways would not affect: (i) relations between the|lake or similar body of water that forms a boundary |
| |Bank and its Government of Uganda and between states (whether members of the |between, or any river or body of surface water that |
| |Bank or not); and (ii) the efficient utilization and protection of |flows through two or more states, whether Bank |
| |international waterways. |members or not; (b) any tributary or other body of |
| | |surface water that is a component of any waterway |
| |The policy applies to the following types of projects: (a) Hydroelectric, |described under (a); and (c) any bay, gulf strait, or|
| |irrigation, flood control, navigation, drainage, water and sewerage, |channel bounded by two or more states, or if within |
| |industrial and similar projects that involve the use or potential pollution |one state recognized as a necessary channel of |
| |of international waterways; and (b) Detailed design and engineering studies |communication between the open sea and other states, |
| |of projects under (a) above, include those carried out by the Bank as |and any river flowing into such waters. |
| |executing agency or in any other capacity. |KIIDP does not trigger OP 7.50 |
|OP 7.60 Projects in |The objective of this policy is to ensure that projects in disputed areas are|This policy will be triggered if the proposed project|
|Disputed Areas |dealt with at the earliest possible stage: (a) so as not to affect relations |will be in a “disputed area”. Questions to be |
| |between the Bank and its member countries; (b) so as not to affect relations |answered include: Is the Government of Uganda |
| |between the Government of Uganda and neighboring countries; and (c) so as not|involved in any disputes over an area with any of its|
| |to prejudice the position of either the Bank or the countries concerned. |neighbors. Is the project situated in a disputed |
| | |area? Could any component financed or likely to be |
| | |financed as part of the project situated in a |
| | |disputed area. |
| | |KIIDP does not trigger OP 7.60 |
APPENDIX F. KCC’s Vector Management Procedures at Mperelwe Sanitary Landfill.
Mpererwe Sanitary Landfill
Vector/Insect Management Procedures
INTRODUCTION TO OPERATIONS AT THE MPERERWE SANITARY LANDFILL
a) The Landfill at Mpererwe-Kiteezi is a containment type of site and it is operated as a sanitary landfill i.e. it’s subject to regulatory control. About 500 tonnes of waste are handled on a daily basis, the site being open every day of the year.
b) All waste received is spread and compacted in layers within a confined area. At the end of each working day, or more frequently if needed, the spread waste is covered completely with a continuous layer of cover material that is then compacted. There is continuous collection and treatment of leachate before it is released to the environment.
INSECT PROBLEM AND SOURCE
c) Insects of concern include house flies, mosquitoes, cockroaches and other such insects that are typical of being found in a municipal waste steam.
d) The potential problems from insects include disease transmission and nuisance. Flies, for example, are capable of transmitting diseases such as cholera, typhoid, and diarrhoea; mosquitoes transmit malaria.
e) The insects are attracted by food sources, shelter and breeding areas hence the control of insects relies on the control of the mentioned three factors.
INSECT CONTROL
f) The main control technique shall be covering the waste with non reactive material. At Mpererwe, earth (commonly known as murrum) shall be used as cover material.
g) When waste is covered, both heat and moisture are conserved and this heat has proved to be higher than the thermal death point of all insects that are so trapped. This also denies the insects food, shelter and breeding ground.
h) Apart from annihilating the insects, covering helps to achieve the following:
1. Moisture control
2. Helps reduce odours
3. Limits rodent and bird contact with the refuse
4. Provides the required vehicle access to the active face
5. Helps prevent fires
6. Improves the aesthetics of the facility.
i) Occasionally, during the high breeding period, the insects may not be fully annihilated by covering. This will be noticed by a sharp rise of insects on the surface.
j) The insects on the surface or that have not been controlled by the covering shall be sprayed using insecticide.
k) All insecticides to be used at the landfill shall first be approved by the Solid Waste Engineer. Also all workmen employed for spraying shall be well trained in handling and use of insecticides and shall wear protective gear recommended by the Chemical Manufacturer.
l) A litre of a broad spectrum insecticide of concentration not exceeding 50EC such as (PYRINEX 48EC) whose active ingredient is chlorpyrifos 480 gm/litre shall be diluted at 200ml of insecticide per 10 litres of water and sprayed on the land receiving waste, during the high breeding period. The spraying shall be done as soon as an insect attack is noticed and repeated when necessary to ensure a comfortable drop in the vector population.
m) Care should be taken not to affect other fauna and flora. A dilution of insecticide to the concentration defined above, should be just enough to kill only house flies and similar insects without adversely affecting other fauna and flora. Any changes in concentration should first be approved by the Solid Waste Engineer.
n) It’s normal to find small isolated ponds of water on top of the waste mass after rain. These ponds are a result of the differential settlement that is inevitable in waste management and may act as a breeding ground for insects especially mosquitoes. Such identified ponds of stagnant surface water shall be drained dry immediately after rain has stopped.
-----------------------
[1] Developed by VKI Water Quality Institute of Denmark
[2] Developed by VKI Water Quality Institute of Denmark
-----------------------
Proposed Site
Government of Uganda
Ministry of Land, Water and Environment
KCC
Day to day management of the project and monitoring detrimental Activities in Wetlands
E1505
One of the weaknesses limiting proper management of wetlands in Kampala is the apparent unclear demarcation of roles of the various players”-Paul Mafabi, Assistant Commissioner, Wetlands Inspection Directorate
Part of current landfill
“We will be displaced, have nowhere to work from to earn a living and may have to go back to the village”. (FGD Katwe Market).
‘District Environment Officers lack the institutional autonomy to act independently’- Dr Gerald Saula, Deputy Director, NEMA
“We expect that after construction, the rent of stalls will be very high thereby forcing people who fail to afford out of business”. Market Vendors
DWD
Discharge Permits for Discharges to Water and Land
WID
Ensuring conservation, wise use and protection of Wetlands at National level, including reviewing EIAs on wetlands
NEMA
Coordination of Environmental management including wetlands
District Environment Officer and District Environment Committees
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- bcps org jobs
- smartcu org sign on page
- aarp org membership card registration
- free org email accounts
- hackensackumc org pay bill
- get my transcripts org from college
- bcps org community volunteer info
- my access tgh org portal
- bcps org employee self service
- intranet florida hospital org employee
- typical finance org chart
- org chart for finance department