DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION was still the territory of our investigation, but the focus changed from the actual waterway to the banks of the river and the potentials of developing a green river strategy. This has been exemplified by a river park from Shankhamul to Teku.
The main research question of this thesis was;
‘How can the riverscape of Kathmandu be transformed with the use of green infrastructure, creating green public space that can serve as a framework for the future sustainable development of Kathmandu?’ The work presented seeks to answer this question by presenting a vision and a strategy for the riverscape of Kathmandu, and finally show a tangible design for a stretch of the river; The Bagmati River Park. In the following discussion we will treat each part of the thesis individually, reflecting on the method, process, the result and the final outcome of the thesis.
Method discussion
We took a chance by not defining our task strictly before going on our study trip to Kathmandu, however we felt that in order to work with the river as landscape architects, we were forced to experience the place, before being able to define the scope of the thesis. The visit to Kathmandu became decisive for the direction of the project. Through our many investigations and interviews we learned that a cleaning project of the river was already underway. At the same time, we were struck by the lack of urban greening. The issue of greening became a recurring theme in our ongoing discussion about Kathmandu and its river, and it resulted in a change of scope from cleaning the river, to greening the river. The river
A narrow scope from the beginning would have been beneficial in the process of gathering information, as we would have had a smaller area to research. The broad scope meant that we spent much time on research, which we ended up not using in the final report. However, this research was necessary and helped us define our project, but we realized later in the process, back in Copenhagen, that we missed out information that could easily have been gathered, if our scope of the project had been narrowed down. It was however not practically possible to go back and gather this information. The process we have been through raises questions of how we, as landscape architects, are in dialogue with a site, and the importance of being able to revisit a site during the design process. Interacting with it and changing the perspective, as the design process moves forward, new questions occur. We could have enhanced our understanding of Kathmandu, the river and the site, have we had the time to investigate, after we had narrowed down our project. In short we can conclude that a continuous relation to the site gives a deeper understanding and serves as an important tool within the landscape architectural field.
146