All Clusters | Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Cluster 4 Cluster 5 Cluster 6 Export PDF
Live data — last updated: loading…
KMC
Government of Nepal
Kathmandu Metropolitan City
Environment Management Department  |  Solid Waste Management Division
Comprehensive Waste Management Survey Report
CLUSTER 7
Solid Waste Data Collection & Analysis Kathmandu Metropolitan City — Wards 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
Ward 12 Ward 18 Ward 19 Ward 20 Ward 21 Ward 22 Ward 23 Ward 24 Ward 25
Survey Period 6 Jestha 2082 B.S. – 2 Mangsir 2082 B.S. (May 2025 – November 2025)
Transfer Station Ward 12, Teku TS (KMC)
Total Cluster Area 5.600 km²
Estimated Population 100,810 residents
Estimated Households 20,162
Document Reference KMC/EMD/SWM/C7/2081
Date Prepared April 26, 2026
Prepared By Kathmandu Metropolitan City — Environment Management Department
Table of Contents
1. Abstract

This report presents the findings of the Solid Waste Management data collection survey conducted in Cluster 7 of Kathmandu Metropolitan City (KMC), which comprises Wards 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25. The primary objective of this study was to collect structured, ward-level data to support evidence-based planning and decision-making for local governance and solid waste service delivery.

The data collection was carried out using a digital mobile application by trained surveyors selected through the KMC Shram Bank system. The survey was organized into two major data modules — Waste Management and Garbage Vulnerable Points (GVP) — supplemented by auxiliary data on road networks, religious sites, parks, and water bodies gathered from respective local authorities.

Each module captured specific, measurable indicators relating to local infrastructure, waste generation patterns, management practices, and community-level conditions. Where required, local officers and police personnel accompanied survey teams to facilitate community coordination and verify data authenticity. The resulting dataset provides a comprehensive baseline for identifying service gaps, prioritizing interventions, designing waste collection routes, and establishing an equitable fee structure across all wards of Cluster 7.

Document Scope: This report covers all 9 wards of Cluster 7 (Wards 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25), serving an estimated population of 100,810 across an area of 5.600 km². The Transfer Station serving this cluster is located at Ward 12, Teku TS (KMC).
2. Report Structure & Modules

This report is organized into five major modules, each addressing a distinct dimension of the waste management survey. The table below summarizes the scope of each module:

Table 2.1 — Report Modules and Scope

Module Title Description Data Source
1 Waste Data Collection & Analysis Structured survey of households and commercial establishments covering waste generation quantities, waste types, management practices, segregation behaviour, and socio-economic profiling. Includes both Waste Profile and Economic Profile sub-modules. Field survey (digital app)
2 Garbage Vulnerable Points (GVP) Identification and mapping of illegal dumping sites, open waste accumulation areas, and vulnerable public spaces that require priority intervention and monitoring. Field observation & community reporting
3 Road Network Analysis Classification of roads by width, surface type, and pavement condition to support vehicle deployment planning and waste collection route design. KMC GIS / field survey / OSM
4 Temples, Parks & Ponds Inventory of religious sites, public open spaces, and water bodies requiring dedicated waste collection schedules, particularly during major festivals. Ward office records / field visit
5 Economic Profile & Fee Schedule Calculation of monthly waste service fees for commercial establishments (based on actual waste volume and KMC tariff schedule) and households (based on family size). Includes ward-wise revenue projections. Derived from survey + KMC fee schedule
3. List of Abbreviations

Table 3.1 — Abbreviations Used in This Report

AbbreviationFull Form
KMCKathmandu Metropolitan City
GVPGarbage Vulnerable Point
GISGeographic Information System
GPSGlobal Positioning System
SWMSolid Waste Management
IECInformation, Education and Communication
TPDTonnes Per Day
HHHousehold
B.S.Bikram Sambat (Nepali Calendar)
MRFMaterial Recovery Facility
TORTerms of Reference
PANPermanent Account Number
VATValue Added Tax
NPRNepalese Rupee
OSMOpenStreetMap
EMDEnvironment Management Department
4. Cluster Profile

Cluster 7 comprises Wards 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 of Kathmandu Metropolitan City. The cluster-based approach was adopted to organize data collection in a systematic and operationally manageable structure, enabling better coordination, progress monitoring, and inter-ward comparison. Enumerators were selected through the KMC Shram Bank and received structured training prior to field deployment.

Table 4.1 — Cluster 7 Key Attributes

AttributeValue
Cluster NumberCluster 7
Wards Covered (9 wards) Ward 12Ward 18Ward 19Ward 20Ward 21Ward 22Ward 23Ward 24Ward 25
Total Cluster Area5.600 km²
Estimated Population100,810 residents
Estimated Households20,162
Transfer Station LocationWard 12, Teku TS (KMC)
Total Survey RecordsLoading…
Households SurveyedLoading…
Commercial Establishments SurveyedLoading…
Estimated Daily Waste (TPD)Loading…
Total GVP Sites RecordedLoading…
Religious Sites / TemplesLoading…
Total Road Network LengthLoading…
--
Total Records Surveyed
--
Households
--
Commercial Establishments
5. Module 1: Waste Data Collection & Analysis
5.1 Introduction

Kathmandu Metropolitan City (KMC) conducted a comprehensive field survey of households and commercial businesses across Cluster 7 to collect reliable, ward-level data on waste generation quantities, waste composition, and current management practices. The data collection was carried out using a structured digital mobile application, ensuring systematic coverage, real-time GPS tagging, and consistent data entry across all wards.

In addition to waste-specific data, the survey recorded household profiles (family size, contact details) and business profiles (TypeID, PAN/VAT), which support both operational planning and the calculation of equitable service fees. Locations of irregular waste disposal sites (GVPs) were also documented during the same field visits.

5.2 Objectives

The specific objectives of the waste data collection module are as follows:

  1. Collect ward-level waste data — Gather accurate, granular information on the type, quantity, and daily generation of waste from households and commercial establishments in Cluster 7.
  2. Document waste management practices — Record the existing disposal and management methods used by generators, including door-to-door collection vehicle use, composting, and rooftop farming.
  3. Profile households and commercial entities — Collect essential background data including household size, business category, and identification numbers (PAN/VAT) required for service billing.
  4. Assess waste segregation compliance — Determine the rate of source segregation at household and commercial levels against the 95% target set in the KMC service contract.
  5. Support data analysis and reporting — Organize and verify collected data in a systematic manner to enable evidence-based operational planning and monitoring.
5.3 Map Division & Ward Coverage

The Cluster 7 survey area was geographically divided into systematic collection zones, with each zone covering one or more wards. Each division was assigned 4–5 surveyors to ensure efficient and consistent areal coverage. GPS coordinates were recorded for each surveyed unit with an accuracy of approximately ±50 metres. The spatial distribution of collection points across Wards 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 confirms comprehensive coverage. Ward boundaries used in the study align with KMC administrative divisions, and data density maps were used during the collection period to monitor progress and identify uncovered zones.

Figure 5.1 — Cluster 7 Ward Coverage Map (Interactive)
5.4 Working Mechanism
5.4.1 Surveyor Selection & Training

Surveyors were recruited from applicants registered in the KMC Shram Bank based on predefined eligibility criteria. All selected individuals received an orientation covering survey objectives, data collection protocols, ethical guidelines, and hands-on training in the use of the mobile data collection application. Each surveyor was assigned a specific ward or zone and provided with a printed ward map and field manual.

5.4.2 Field Data Collection

During field visits, surveyors used the mobile application to record structured data for each household and business unit visited. Data recorded included waste generation estimates, waste type, management practices, disposal payment status, waste segregation behaviour, and GPS location. Photographs of PAN cards or household representatives were captured for identity verification. Data was submitted in real time to the KMC central server via mobile data connection.

5.4.3 Institutional Support & Coordination

Local ward office staff and, where necessary, police personnel accompanied survey teams during certain visits. Their presence facilitated community coordination, ensured surveyor safety, and helped access restricted premises. Ward representatives and local community leaders assisted in locating households and businesses that had unclear addresses or had recently relocated.

5.4.4 Data Cleaning & Validation

A dedicated data management team conducted continuous quality reviews of submitted records. This included identification and correction of: incomplete entries, duplicate records, GPS coordinate anomalies (e.g., coordinates outside ward boundaries), and multilingual inconsistencies in the TypeID and Tole name fields (Nepali/English). Errors were cross-verified with field surveyors before finalization. Records with irrecoverable data quality issues were flagged and excluded from quantitative analysis.

5.5 Survey Instrument — Nature of Questions

The digital survey form was structured into four categories of questions, tailored to the type of entity being surveyed:

Table 5.1 — Survey Question Categories

CategoryApplies ToFields Collected
6.1 Household Information HH records Full name of head of household; phone number; family size (number of kitchens/families including tenants)
6.2 Business Information Commercial records Business name; TypeID (business category); PAN/VAT registration number; mobile contact number
6.3 Location & Documentation All records GPS coordinates (±50 m accuracy); tole (locality) name; photograph of PAN card or household representative
6.4 Waste Management All records Total waste generated (weight category); type of waste (organic / recyclable / hazardous / other); current management practice; waste segregation behaviour; illegal disposal awareness; monthly payment for disposal services
5.6 Overview of Data Collection Timeline
5.6.1 Collection Methodology

All survey data for Cluster 7 (Wards 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25) was gathered through a structured digital field survey using a mobile data collection application (ODK-based platform). Each field collector was equipped with a GPS-enabled smartphone loaded with a standardised digital form covering both Household and Commercial establishment categories. Collectors were deployed ward-by-ward under the supervision of the Kathmandu Metropolitan City — Environment Management Department.

The survey instrument captured the following information for each entry:

  • Entity identification — full name, mobile number, citizenship/NID number, PAN/VAT number (commercial)
  • Location — GPS coordinates (latitude/longitude) auto-recorded at time of survey; tole name entered manually
  • Waste profile — average daily waste generation category, waste type, waste management method, segregation practice
  • Establishment type — TypeID classification for commercial entities; family unit count for households
  • Photographic evidence — photograph of premises or waste storage point captured via device camera
  • Timing — form start time and end time automatically recorded, allowing per-record duration tracking

Each completed form was automatically assigned a unique Form ID and synchronised to the central KMC data server at the end of each field day. The average time taken to complete one survey record was approximately 4 minutes (range: under 1 minute for simple entries to up to 2 hours for complex commercial premises requiring detailed inspection). GPS location coverage across all wards in this cluster exceeded 96% of collected records, confirming near-complete geographic traceability of the data.

5.6.2 Collection Period & Ward-wise Timeline

Data collection for Cluster 7 was carried out from 6 Jestha 2082 B.S. to 2 Mangsir 2082 B.S. (May 2025 – November 2025). Collection duration varied by ward depending on geographic area, population density, number of establishments to be surveyed, and collector availability. Each ward was assigned a dedicated team of collectors who worked systematically through their designated zones, following pre-mapped tole boundaries to ensure complete coverage.

Table 5.2 — Ward-wise Data Collection Timeline

WardCollection PeriodDuration (Days) No. of CollectorsAvg Records/DayTotal CollectedCoverage
Loading data…

5.7 Profile Generation Methodology
5.7.1 Waste Profile

KMC's waste stream consists predominantly of organic/biodegradable materials from residential and market sources, with a significant but smaller fraction of recyclables (plastics, paper, metals) and a minor hazardous component. Commercial areas generate higher proportions of organic and plastic waste relative to household areas. A critical systemic challenge is the absence of source segregation at the point of generation, which reduces recycling efficiency and increases treatment costs. Some records are coded as N/A where respondents were unavailable, unwilling to participate, or lacked information.

5.7.2 Economic Profile

KMC has published a standardized fee schedule specifying minimum waste volume parameters and service charges for each business TypeID. During the survey, waste quantity was recorded in kilograms (kg). To align with KMC tariff parameters, kg values are converted to litres using type-specific density values provided by the KMC Environment Department. Once the volume is established, it is compared against the base volume for the business type; if actual daily volume exceeds the base allocation, an additional charge is applied for each increment of excess volume.

For households, the fee is not based on waste quantity but on the number of family units (kitchens) residing at the premises — a larger household generates more waste and therefore pays a higher service charge.

Commercial Fee Formula:
Volume (Litres/day) = Waste Weight (kg/day) ÷ Density (kg/L)
Additional Monthly Charge = ⌈ (Excess Litres ÷ Extra-per-Unit) ⌉ × Extra Rate

Household Fee: Flat-rate, based on number of family units (kitchens). Base: NPR 300/month for 1 family; +NPR 25 per additional family unit.
Note on Weight Midpoints: Where waste generation is recorded as a weight range (e.g., "0–5 KG"), the midpoint value is used for calculations: 0–5 KG → 2.5 kg/day | 5–10 KG → 7.5 kg/day | 10–15 KG → 12.5 kg/day | 15–50 KG → 32.5 kg/day | 50–200 KG → 125.0 kg/day | 200+ KG → 300.0 kg/day.
5.8 Ward-wise Survey Summary

The following table and charts present the ward-level breakdown of surveyed entities in Cluster 7, including household counts, commercial establishment counts, total records, and estimated daily waste generation (TPD).

Figure 5.2 — Household vs. Commercial Distribution
Figure 5.3 — Survey Records by Ward
Figure 5.4 — Estimated Daily Waste Generation by Ward (Tonnes Per Day)

Table 5.3 — Ward-wise Survey Summary

WardHH SurveyedCommercialTotal RecordsEst. TPD
Loading…

5.9 Daily Waste Generation Distribution

The distribution of waste generators by daily weight category reveals that the majority of surveyed entities — both household and commercial — fall within the 0–5 kg/day range, consistent with small household units and small retail establishments. Higher-volume generators (15 kg/day and above) are predominantly commercial entities such as restaurants, hotels, and large businesses.

Figure 5.5 — Waste Generation Distribution by Weight Category

Table 5.4 — Waste Generation by Weight Category and Ward

Ward0–5 kg5–10 kg10–15 kg 15–50 kg50–200 kg200+ kgUnknownTotal
Loading…

5.10 Waste Type Distribution

The composition of waste varies significantly between household and commercial generators, and between wards. Organic waste dominates the overall stream, but recyclable waste contribution is proportionally higher in commercial zones. Statistical testing confirms that both ward location and entity type are significant predictors of waste composition (chi-square tests, p < 0.001).

Figure 5.6 — Waste Type Composition (Cluster 7 Total)

Table 5.5 — Waste Type Distribution by Ward

WardOrganicOrg %Recyclable Rec %HazardousOthersNot RecordedTotal
Loading…

5.11 Waste Management Practice

This section documents the primary waste disposal method used by each surveyed entity. The two main categories are: (i) collection by KMC-authorized vehicles (door-to-door service), and (ii) self-managed composting or rooftop farming. A significant proportion of records did not capture this field, which represents a data quality gap to be addressed in follow-up surveys.

Figure 5.7 — Waste Management Method Distribution

Table 5.6 — Waste Management Method by Ward

WardCollection VehicleComposting / Rooftop Not RecordedNR %Total
Loading…

5.12 Waste Segregation Compliance

Waste segregation at source is a contractual requirement under the KMC Solid Waste Management service agreement, with a target compliance rate of ≥95%. The survey assessed whether each household and commercial establishment currently segregates waste before disposal.

Figure 5.8 — Waste Segregation by Ward

Table 5.7 — Waste Segregation by Ward

WardSegregates OrganicSegregates Recyclable Segregates HazardousNot SegregatingTotal
Loading…

5.13 Tole-Level Micro Analysis

Tole (locality) level analysis identifies the highest-concentration areas within each ward, which are critical for optimising collection routes and prioritising service interventions. The table below lists the top tole by record count for each ward in Cluster 7.

Loading…

5.14 Household vs. Commercial Entity Analysis

This section analyses the distribution of surveyed entities by type — Household (HH) and Commercial — across each ward. Understanding entity composition is critical for targeted service delivery, differentiated fee schedules, and ward-level resource planning.

Figure 5.9 — HH vs. Commercial Records by Ward
Figure 5.10 — Cluster Entity Type Split

Table 5.14 — Entity Type Breakdown by Ward

WardHouseholdHH %CommercialComm %Total
Loading…

5.15 Data Quality Assessment

Data quality assessment was conducted with conditional field logic: fields not relevant to a given entity type are excluded from that type's missing-value calculation. CompanyName and PAN_VAT are assessed for Commercial records only; FamilyCount and Fullname for Household records only.

Table 5.15 — Missing Value Analysis by Field and Entity Type

FieldApplies ToHH MissingHH %Comm MissingComm %
Loading…
Key Quality Findings:
  • Loading…

5.16 Survey Coverage Heatmap

The heatmap below visualises the spatial density of survey records across all wards of Cluster 7, plotted using GPS coordinates captured automatically by the ODK mobile application during field data collection. High-intensity zones indicate areas with the greatest concentration of surveyed establishments.

Figure 5.11 — GPS Survey Density Heatmap

Colour intensity represents record density — red = highest, blue = lowest concentration.

5.17 Top Commercial Establishment Types

The chart and table below present the distribution of commercial establishments by TypeID across all wards of Cluster 7. TypeID classification is used for fee schedule assignment and waste density factor selection.

Figure 5.12 — Top Commercial Establishment Types

Table 5.18 — Commercial Establishment Type Distribution

TypeID / Establishment CategoryCountShare of Commercial
Loading…

5.18 Waste Generation by Entity Type

This section compares waste generation weight categories between Household (HH) and Commercial entities. Understanding how generation differs by entity type is critical for designing appropriate fee structures, planning vehicle capacity, and targeting awareness campaigns.

Figure 5.13 — Waste Generation Category by Entity Type
Figure 5.14 — HH vs Commercial Avg. Waste Share

Table 5.20 — Waste Weight Category by Entity Type

Weight CategoryHH RecordsHH %Commercial RecordsComm %Total
Loading…

5.19 Family Size Distribution & Waste Generation (HH Only)

Family size is a significant predictor of household waste generation. This section analyses the distribution of household records by family unit count and its relationship with reported waste generation. Commercial records are excluded as family count is not applicable to businesses.

Figure 5.15 — HH Records by Family Size Category
Figure 5.16 — Avg. Waste Generation by Family Size

Table 5.21 — Family Size Categories and Waste Generation

Family CategoryHH Records% of HHAvg. Waste (kg/day)Implication
Loading…

5.20 Estimated Daily Waste Tonnage & Vehicle Requirement

This section estimates the daily waste generation tonnage per ward and projects the minimum number of collection vehicles required to service each ward effectively. Estimates are derived from the survey weight-category midpoints applied to all valid records. Vehicle capacity is standardised at 3 metric tons per trip with 2 trips per day (6 MT/vehicle/day), consistent with KMC operational standards.

Figure 5.17 — Estimated TPD by Ward (HH vs Commercial)
Figure 5.17b — Cluster TPD Split

Table 5.22 — Estimated Daily Waste Tonnage & Vehicle Requirement by Ward

WardHH TPD (MT)Commercial TPD (MT)Total Est. TPD (MT)Min. Vehicles RequiredCapacity Status
Loading…

5.21 Ward Performance Scorecard

The scorecard below consolidates key performance indicators for each ward in Cluster 7. Metrics include survey volume, entity composition, GPS data coverage, waste segregation compliance, average daily waste generation, survey duration, and number of data collectors deployed.

Figure 5.18 — Ward Scorecard: GPS Coverage vs Segregation Compliance

Table 5.23 — Ward Performance Scorecard

WardTotal RecordsHHCommercial GPS CoverageSegregation %Avg Waste (kg/day) Survey DaysCollectorsOverall
Loading…

5.22 Problems and Challenges

During the implementation of the waste data collection survey in Cluster 7, the following operational and technical challenges were encountered, affecting efficiency, coverage, and data accuracy:

Table 5.19 — Survey Challenges and Impact

ChallengeDescriptionImpact
Incomplete Household & Business Information Some premises could not be located due to unclear addresses, recent relocation, or lack of proper identification. Key data fields (PAN, FamilyCount) were missing or partially recorded. Incomplete database; gaps in fee billing
GPS Accuracy & Mapping Limitations GPS devices achieved approximately 80% location accuracy. Signal interference from dense urban structures contributed to imprecise coordinates, making it difficult to accurately link records to service zones. Inaccurate spatial mapping; route planning challenges
Low Response Rates Several residents and business owners were unwilling to participate or unavailable during survey hours, particularly in the morning. Privacy concerns and busy schedules reduced response rates. Under-coverage in certain toles
Waste Reporting Inconsistencies Respondents often underestimated or overestimated waste quantities due to limited awareness of measurement standards, recall bias, or intentional misreporting. Reduced reliability of TPD estimates
Time & Resource Constraints The large number of units to survey within a fixed timeline created pressure on staffing and logistics, making thorough follow-up visits difficult. Coverage gaps; insufficient repeat visits
Data Entry & Multilingual Inconsistencies Manual entry errors, inconsistent formatting, and mixed Nepali/English input in TypeID and Tole fields required extensive post-processing and validation rounds. Increased cleaning workload; delayed analysis
5.23 Recommended Solutions
  • Conduct follow-up visits coordinated with community leaders to reach uncovered households and businesses.
  • Use high-accuracy GPS devices and cross-verify coordinates with local maps to improve spatial precision.
  • Raise awareness among residents and businesses about survey purpose and legal compliance obligations.
  • Provide detailed field manuals and refresher training to all enumerators before each collection phase.
  • Allocate additional supervisory staff for wards with historically low response rates.
  • Implement real-time validation in the mobile application to flag incomplete entries at point of data collection.
  • Standardise TypeID and Tole name dictionaries within the application to eliminate multilingual inconsistencies.
  • Strengthen ward office coordination protocols to ensure consistent institutional support across all wards.
  • Deploy dedicated IEC officers in wards with the lowest segregation rates.
  • Implement a secondary data quality review checkpoint at ward level before central compilation.
6. Module 2: Garbage Vulnerable Points (GVP)
6.1 Introduction

Garbage Vulnerable Points (GVPs) are locations in the urban environment where solid waste is irregularly dumped in public spaces, creating health hazards, environmental pollution, and aesthetic degradation for surrounding communities. These sites are typically found under bridges, along drainage channels (nalas), on open land, at street corners, in road medians, and in other unmonitored or underserved locations. Identifying, documenting, and systematically eliminating GVPs is a core component of KMC's urban waste management strategy for Cluster 7.

6.2 Objectives
  • Identify and map all active GVP locations within Cluster 7 (Wards 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25)
  • Assess the type, estimated volume, and illegal dumping frequency at each identified GVP site
  • Prioritize sites for immediate clean-up intervention and long-term prevention measures
  • Establish a monitoring and tracking framework for GVP elimination and recurrence prevention
  • Provide data-driven recommendations for community engagement and enforcement actions
6.3 Results and Findings
--
Total GVP Sites
--
KMC Recognized
--
Actual GVP
--
Actual GVP %
Figure 6.1 — GVP Count by Ward
Figure 6.2 — GVP by Type

Table 6.1 — GVP Summary by Ward

WardTotalKMC RecognizedActual GVP TempleParkOtherActual GVP %Priority
Loading…

6.4 Location-wise GVP Registry

The table below lists representative GVP sites identified during the survey. Precise GPS coordinates and photographs are maintained in the KMC spatial database.

Table 6.2 — GVP Location Registry

WardForm IDRemarksAddressLatitudeLongitude
Loading…
6.5 Data Collection Methodology

GVP data was collected simultaneously with the waste survey using a combination of direct field observation and respondent-reported information:

  • Direct field observation by trained surveyors throughout the data collection period
  • Community reporting: respondents were asked to identify known illegal dumping locations near their premises
  • GPS-tagged photography at each identified GVP site for spatial documentation
  • Cross-verification with ward office records and local community representative feedback
  • Classification by site type (illegal dumping, licensed collection point, near temple/park) and estimated waste volume
6.6 Recommended Solutions & Monitoring Framework
Intervention Measures
  • Deploy collection vehicles on daily routes that pass through known GVP hotspots
  • Install lockable community bins at high-frequency illegal dumping locations
  • Erect signage and physical barriers at active GVP sites to deter further dumping
  • Engage ward offices and community groups as local GVP monitoring partners
  • Apply and enforce KMC littering fines (progressive penalty structure) for repeat offenders
  • Convert cleared GVP sites to community green spaces or designated bin collection centres
Monitoring & Tracking Framework
  • GPS-tagged before-and-after photographs submitted monthly to document clearance progress
  • Monthly GVP status report prepared by service provider with photographic evidence
  • Community feedback line and ward office reporting channel for newly identified sites
  • KMC field inspection team to conduct quarterly verification visits to all documented GVP sites
  • Integration of GVP status into KMC real-time operational dashboard (Active / Cleared / Recurrent)
  • GVP elimination rate weighted at 20% of monthly service provider KPI scorecard
6.7 Conclusions

The GVP survey has documented sites across all wards, identifying confirmed illegal dumping locations. Successful and sustained GVP elimination requires a combined approach across four dimensions:

  • Infrastructure: provision of adequate bins, barriers, and signage at hotspot locations
  • Enforcement: consistent application of KMC fines and police presence at repeat sites
  • Service improvement: increased collection frequency and expanded route coverage near GVP hotspots
  • Community engagement: sustained IEC activities and local ownership of public space cleanliness

The service provider must demonstrate measurable, documented GVP reduction in monthly KPI reports, with a contractual target of 100% site elimination by the end of Month 3 of service operations.

7. Module 3: Road Network Analysis
7.1 Introduction

Road network data for Cluster 7 was systematically collected and analysed to support waste collection vehicle deployment planning. A detailed understanding of road widths, surface types, and pavement conditions is essential for selecting appropriate vehicle types, designing efficient collection routes, and identifying zones that require lightweight vehicles (e-rickshaws, tricycles) versus standard compactors.

7.2 Objectives
  • Map and classify the road network within Cluster 7 by width category, surface type, and pavement condition
  • Identify road segments accessible to different vehicle types for waste collection operations
  • Determine primary, secondary, and tertiary collection zones based on road accessibility constraints
  • Provide evidence-based operational recommendations for vehicle type selection and route planning
7.3 Data Sources

Road network data was obtained from multiple sources: KMC GIS databases, field surveys conducted by technical staff, and validation against OpenStreetMap data. Each road segment was classified by width category (<4m, 4–6m, 6–10m, >10m), surface type (Black Topped, Gravel, Earthen, Other), and pavement condition (Good, Fair, Poor). Classification was verified during field data collection.

7.4 Road Network Overview
--
Total Road (km)
--
Road Segments
--
<4m Roads %
--
Density (km/km²)
7.5 Road Classification Analysis
Figure 7.1 — Road Length by Width Category
Figure 7.2 — Road Surface Type
Figure 7.3 — Road Length by Ward and Width Category (km)

Table 7.1 — Road Width Classification & Recommended Vehicle Types

Road Width CategoryLength (km)Share (%)Recommended Vehicle for Waste Collection
Loading…
7.5.1 Road Surface Type Distribution
7.5.2 Pavement Condition Assessment

Table 7.2 — Pavement Condition Analysis

ConditionLength (km)Share (%)Operational Implication
Good72.342.9%No access restrictions — all vehicle types permitted
Fair65.438.8%Standard vehicle access — monitor condition seasonally
Poor30.8818.3%Lightweight vehicles recommended; coordinate maintenance with KMC infrastructure
7.5.3 Road Network by Ward

Table 7.3 — Road Length by Width Category and Ward

Ward<4m (km)4–6m (km)6–10m (km)>10m (km)Total (km)Segments
Loading…
7.6 Vehicle Accessibility Matrix

Table 7.4 — Vehicle Type by Road Width and Operational Role

Road WidthPermitted Vehicle TypeCollection Role
< 4m Electric garbage rickshaws; tricycle collection vehicles Primary door-to-door collection in narrow lanes and alleys
4–6m 3.3 CUM 4-compartment tipper trucks Secondary collection; transfer from e-rickshaw drop-off points
6–10m Standard compactor; bulk waste carrier Secondary collection routes; transport to intermediate transfer points
> 10m Full-size compactor trucks; bulk transfer vehicles Route to Transfer Station at Ward 12, Teku TS (KMC)
Operational Requirements for All Vehicles:
  • All collection vehicles must be equipped with GPS trackers for real-time fleet monitoring
  • 4-compartment segregated bins (Blue/Green/Yellow/Red) are mandatory on all vehicles
  • Collection schedules must avoid peak traffic hours (8–10 AM and 5–7 PM)
  • Vehicles must avoid routes through roads rated "Poor" condition during monsoon season (June–September)
7.7 Key Findings & Conclusions
Key Road Network Findings:
  • The road network is characterised by a predominantly narrow lane structure, which fundamentally shapes the waste collection vehicle strategy
  • Primary collection must rely on lightweight vehicles (e-rickshaws, pedal tricycles) due to narrow lane dominance in residential zones
  • Dense urban fabric with limited road widths requires comprehensive, multi-vehicle routing across the full network
  • Roads rated "Poor" condition require priority maintenance coordination with KMC Infrastructure Department
  • The Transfer Station at Ward 12, Teku TS (KMC) is accessible via major arterial roads (>10m) from all wards
  • 4-compartment vehicle requirement directly supports segregation compliance goals and source separation targets
8. Module 4: Religious Sites, Parks & Water Bodies
8.1 Introduction

In addition to household and commercial waste generators, Cluster 7 contains religious heritage sites, public open spaces, and water bodies (pokhari) that require dedicated waste management plans. These facilities generate specific waste types distinct from residential and commercial sources, with significant seasonal volume surges during major festivals. This module documents the inventory of such sites and establishes collection requirements for each category.

--
Religious Sites / Temples
--
Parks & Open Spaces
--
Pokhari (Ponds)
--
Wards Covered
8.2 Public Open Spaces & Collection Schedule

Community gathering spaces, temple courtyards, road medians, and market areas constitute the primary public open spaces requiring regular sweeping and waste collection services. The following table specifies collection frequency requirements for each space type.

Table 8.1 — Public Open Space Collection Schedule

Space TypeLocation DescriptionWardsRequired Collection Frequency
Temple CourtyardsAll major temple and religious site premises12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25Daily — before morning and after evening worship
Road Medians & Green StripsAlong major roads wider than 6mVarious3 times per week (minimum)
Community Gathering AreasChowks, junctions, and public plazasAll wardsDaily
School PremisesPrimary and secondary school groundsAll wardsAfter school hours — daily on school days
Market SpacesOpen-air market areas and vegetable marketsVariousAfter market closure — daily
Pokhari Buffer Zones50m perimeter around all water bodiesWhere applicableDaily sweeping — no waste disposal permitted
8.3 Temple & Religious Site Count by Ward
Figure 8.1 — Temple / Religious Site Count by Ward
8.3.1 Pokhari (Pond) Details
Loading…
8.3.2 Parks & Open Spaces
Loading…
8.4 Temple & Religious Site Inventory

Table 8.2 — Temple and Religious Site Registry

S.N.Temple / Religious Site NameWardCollection Requirement
Loading…
8.5 Waste Generation Characteristics & Collection Requirements
Waste Generation Profile
  • Organic waste: Flower offerings (phool), food prasad, leaf wrappings — significant volume on festival days
  • Non-recyclable: Incense ash, clay lamps (diyo), ritual materials — require separate handling from regular waste
  • Recyclable: Water bottles, plastic packaging, and packaging materials from visitors
  • Seasonal surges: Major festivals (Dashain, Tihar, Shivaratri, Teej, Indra Jatra) generate 3–5× normal daily waste volumes
Mandatory Collection Standards
  • Dedicated early morning collection (before 7:00 AM) at all temple sites during major festival days
  • Segregated bins (minimum 2 compartments: organic and non-organic) must be installed at all public open spaces
  • All registered temple and religious sites must receive collection at minimum once daily throughout the year
  • During major festivals, twice-daily collection is mandatory at high-footfall religious sites
  • 50-metre buffer zone enforcement around all pokhari (water bodies) — no waste disposal permitted within this zone
10. Module 5: Economic Profile & Fee Schedule
10.1 Fee Calculation Methodology

The monthly waste management service fee for each generator is calculated from actual survey weight data. For commercial entities, the recorded waste weight is converted to daily litres using a type-specific density value, then compared against the KMC-published base volume for that business TypeID. When actual daily volume exceeds the base allocation, an incremental additional charge applies. For households, fees are based solely on the number of family units (kitchens) — not waste quantity — following a flat-rate progressive structure.

Commercial Fee Formula:
Daily Volume (L) = Survey Weight Midpoint (kg/day) ÷ TypeID-specific Density (kg/L)
Monthly Base Charge = KMC minimum charge for TypeID
Additional Monthly Charge = ⌈ (Excess Daily Litres ÷ Extra-per-Unit) ⌉ × Monthly Extra Rate

Household Fee Formula:
Monthly Fee (NPR) = 300 + (Number of Family Units − 1) × 25
10.2 KMC Fee Schedule — Evaluation Criteria

The table below presents the KMC standardised fee parameters for each commercial TypeID present in this cluster. These parameters are set by the KMC Environment Department. TypeIDs not listed in the standard KMC schedule are assigned the default “Other” rate (32 L / NPR 840 / month).

Table 10.1 — KMC Commercial Fee Schedule (TypeIDs present in Cluster 7)

TypeID / Business CategoryRecords in ClusterMin Vol (L)Min Cost (NPR)Added Vol (L)Added Cost (NPR)
Loading…
10.3 Commercial Revenue Summary
--
Records with Fee
--
With Extra Charges
--
Monthly Base Revenue
--
Total Monthly Revenue
Figure 10.1 — Monthly Commercial Revenue by Ward (NPR)

Table 10.2 — Commercial Revenue by Ward

WardRecords w/ FeeWith Extra Charges Base Revenue (NPR)Additional Revenue (NPR)Total Monthly (NPR)
Loading…

10.4 Commercial Fee Tier & TypeID Analysis

Fee is computed per record using the survey-reported average waste generation and the type-specific density. Rows are shaded by fee tier: high (≥ NPR 5,000/unit), medium (NPR 2,000–4,999), standard (NPR 500–1,999).

Table 10.3 — Commercial Fee Analysis by TypeID (Ward-wise)

Loading…

10.5 Household Fee Structure

For households, the monthly waste management fee is not determined by waste quantity but by the number of family units (kitchens) sharing the premises. This approach is administratively simple, equitable, and reflects the established correlation between household size and waste generation (r = 0.37, p < 0.001). Larger households produce proportionally more waste and therefore pay a higher service charge.

Table 10.4 — Household Fee Schedule by Family Unit Count

Family Units (Kitchens)HH Record Count Real HouseholdsMonthly Rate (NPR) Extra Cost (NPR)Total Monthly Revenue (NPR)
Loading…
10.5.1 Ward-wise Household Fee Breakdown
10.6 Combined Revenue Summary — Commercial & Household

The table below presents the combined monthly waste management fee revenue projection per ward, aggregating both commercial establishment charges and household service fees. This provides the expected total monthly revenue that should be collected from Cluster 7 under the KMC fee schedule.

Table 10.5 — Combined Monthly Revenue Summary by Ward

Ward Commercial Revenue (NPR)Comm. Extra Cost (NPR) Household Revenue (NPR)HH Extra Cost (NPR) Total Monthly Revenue (NPR)
Loading…
CLUSTER 7 TOTAL -- -- -- -- --
Total without Extra Cost --
Total with Extra Cost --
Total — No Extra Cost & No Default --

10.7 Service Performance KPIs & Monitoring Framework

Table 10.6 — Service Provider KPI Targets by Month

Performance IndicatorWeightMonth 1Month 2Month 3Month 4+ Target
Door-to-Door Waste Collection40%70%80%90%≥95%
Source Segregation Compliance25%50%70%90%≥95%
GVP Elimination Rate20%50% identified67% cleared100% cleared100% sustained
IEC Activities15%≥3/month≥3/month≥3/month≥3/month
10.7.1 Penalty & Deduction Schedule

Table 10.7 — Performance-based Penalty Schedule

Achievement LevelPayment DeductionAdministrative Action
85–95% of target−10% of monthly paymentWarning letter issued
75–85% of target−20% of monthly paymentFormal notice + mandatory improvement plan
<70% of target−30% of monthly paymentFlag for contract performance review
<70% for 3 consecutive monthsContract suspensionKMC retains right to terminate contract
11. Next Steps & Action Plan

Based on findings from all five survey modules, the following priority actions are recommended for Cluster 7. Actions are grouped by urgency and implementation timeline to support systematic, evidence-based delivery of waste management improvements across Wards 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25.

11.1 Immediate Actions (0–30 Days)

Table 11.1 — Priority Immediate Actions

#ActionDescription & TargetResponsible Party
1 Data Gap Remediation Collect missing PAN/VAT numbers from commercial entities (65.5% gap — critical for billing). Follow up on blank FamilyCount HH records (32.2% gap). Verify and clean 413 records with collection duration <30 seconds. Kathmandu Metropolitan City
2 GVP Emergency Clearance Mobilize clean-up crew to the top 3 highest-priority GVP sites identified in the survey. Install barriers and signage at cleared sites to prevent recurrence. Document before-and-after status with GPS-tagged photographs. Service Provider / Ward Office
3 IEC Campaign Launch Conduct ward-level awareness sessions on waste segregation (≥1 session per ward in Month 1). Distribute bilingual Nepali/English segregation guide to all surveyed households. Coordinate with ward offices to appoint local waste focal persons. KMC EMD / Ward Office
4 Collection Route Design Use road network data to finalise vehicle deployment plan per ward. Designate e-rickshaw zones (<4m roads) and compactor zones (>6m). Establish daily collection timetable and Transfer Station delivery schedule for Ward 12, Teku TS (KMC). KMC Operations Team
5 Award Service Contract Finalise and award the solid waste collection service contract based on survey data, TOR requirements, and cluster-level operational plan. Ensure all KPI benchmarks and penalty clauses are formally agreed. KMC Environment Department
11.2 Short-term Actions (1–3 Months)

Table 11.2 — Short-term Actions and Success Indicators

#ActionSuccess Indicator
1Complete 100% GVP elimination across all wards per contractual Month 3 targetZero active illegal GVP sites in KMC monitoring dashboard
2Deploy GPS-enabled collection vehicles with 4-compartment segregated bins (Blue/Green/Yellow/Red) on all routes100% vehicle compliance verified by KMC field inspection
3Achieve ≥70% source segregation compliance through continued IEC activitiesMonthly field audit compliance report ≥70%
4Install segregated collection bins at all religious sites, parks, and major public spaces100% of registered sites equipped
5Establish monthly KPI reporting cycle with ward-level performance dashboardsFirst KPI report submitted to KMC by end of Month 1
6Activate real-time GPS fleet tracking system for all deployed vehiclesFleet tracking dashboard live by Month 1
7Begin fee billing for all commercial entities with verified PAN/VAT dataFirst billing cycle issued within 45 days
11.3 Medium-term Actions (3–6 Months)

Table 11.3 — Medium-term Actions and Success Indicators

#ActionSuccess Indicator
1Achieve ≥95% door-to-door waste collection coverage across all wardsMonthly route coverage audit ≥95%
2Complete fee billing for all commercial entities including those without initial PAN/VAT data100% commercial entities billed
3Scale source segregation compliance to ≥95% per contract requirementKPI audit compliance report ≥95%
4Conduct supplementary survey for uncovered Tole sub-areas and correct remaining data gapsUpdated database with ≥98% field completion
5Cross-verify survey data with KMC taxpayer records and census dataVerification report produced and discrepancies resolved
6Integrate fee billing into KMC Finance billing systemFee collection system operational by Quarter 2
7Conduct follow-up comparison survey to measure change from baseline across all indicatorsBaseline comparison report submitted by Month 6
Conclusion: Successful implementation of this three-phase action plan will establish Cluster 7 as a model for evidence-based solid waste management in Kathmandu. Sustained GVP elimination, high segregation compliance, optimised vehicle deployment, and complete fee billing will collectively improve service quality, environmental outcomes, and revenue collection across Wards 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25. KMC's data-driven approach positions Cluster 7 to meet all contractual obligations while delivering measurable improvement for the communities it serves.
KMC / EMD / SWM © 2026 Kathmandu Metropolitan City. All rights reserved. KMC / SWM Report