KVPT’s Patan Darbar Earthquake Response Campaign - Work to Date - September 2016

ument. (See the July 2016 draft of these Guidelines, as
well as the English translation and illustrated manual
prepared by KVPT, in the appendix to this volume.)
The months-long Indian blockade which followed the
earthquakes and continued into early 2016 also wreaked
havoc on any work plans related to construction, greatly
affecting the cost and availability of building materials.
Widespread fear that old buildings are unstable and
should be replaced with new ones is a critical, existential
threat to an enormous number of buildings that withstood
the earthquake. Given the present stalemate and
the diverse and significant challenges that face preservation
work wherever one turns in Nepal, KVPT decided
to document and share the current efforts to inspire,
stimulate and catalyze more discussions and collaborations.
Cement semantics
The single desirable consequence or silver lining to be
hoped for after such a tragedy as the 2015 earthquakes
was that there would be an eagerness to pursue innovative
and appropriate solutions to seismic strengthening.
The reality today, though, is that struggles with the
official agency and a handful of academics are not any
different from the discussions of 1999 or 1994, and today’s
work must be understood in this context. Solutions
which would be standard fare in any first world
country are here considered detrimental to heritage. Curiously,
the term ‘traditional materials’ has become the
war cry. Prohibitions against excavation to test or study
foundations are still holding up work, the government
authorities have not been able to clarify their position
with respect to norms for reinforcement of structures,
and there are constant mix-ups of vocabulary and terms
- modern, traditional etc. Seventeen months after the
earthquake, there has been no progress on reinforcement
in rebuilding except at our project sites and a handful of
others. The National Reconstruction Authority is just
beginning to function. A widely publicized controversy
plays out at a later monument, Rani Pokhari (last rebuilt
in 1951). There is no agency which is not being held
back. A historical misunderstanding of cement prohibition
by UNESCO continues to be played on. Ongoing
discussions about timber framed ring beam to strengthen
foundations seems illogical for us after seeing failure
of the Manimandapas and other structures due in part to
wet rot of timber elements.
Three new model projects for
seismic strengthening in Nepal:
After the earthquake, as we rescued the debris of fallen
temples and palaces, established a workshop, worked
with supporters worldwide, and began to shape the new
campaign, our review of the last 25 yrs of work and our
many new projects led to the identification of a few
Earthquake Response projects as model seismic designs.
These model projects were chosen so as to target the
typical and key challenges Nepal would face in its forthcoming
repair and rebuilding of historic structures.
Each of the three model projects is a major structure in
its own right within Newar Architecture, each is on the
Patan Darbar Square, and each exemplifies certain issues
common to many other historic structures which collapsed
or suffered damage in the earthquake. And for
each, we are exploring and developing a range of potential
solutions to address the wide variety of conditions,
concerns, and priorities. Of the three, the pātī type exemplified
by the Manimandapas, with its open first floor
level, is the most challenging type for providing an historically
sensitive solution that also includes a code-compliant
continuous seismic structure.
Vishveshvara:
Stabilizing one of Nepal’s greatest monuments without
dismantling
The Vishveshvara Temple in Patan Darbar, built by
King Siddhinarasimha Malla in 1627, is one of the
greatest works of Newar architecture and perhaps the
most significant early example of intact Malla-era construction
in the Kathmandu Valley. (See an extensive
chapter focusing on the documentation of this building
80