Makerere engineer says covering Nakivubo Channel is not a good idea

___________________

Q&A 

In the aftermath of the recent floods that ravaged downtown Kampala, destroying property and leaving arcade traders demanding compensation, debate has intensified over how to manage the Nakivubo Channel.

As the government considers long-term solutions, New Vision’s Nelson Mandela Muhoozi spoke to Eng. Dr Apollo Buregyeya, a lecturer at Makerere University’s Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, who shared deep insights on the implications of covering the Nakivubo Channel and what real modernisation should look like.

Qn: Eng. Buregyeya, what is the significance of Nakivubo Channel to Kampala’s drainage system?

Ans: Nakivubo Channel is not just a ditch that floods during the rainy season; it is Kampala’s primary sewer artery. Every rainstorm washes stormwater, raw sewage, and industrial waste from slums, pit latrines, and leaking pipes into it. This mixture flows into the Nakivubo swamp before reaching Lake Victoria. The channel, together with the swamp, acts as the city’s most effective and cheapest wastewater treatment system. The papyrus zones remove up to 75 percent of nitrogen and over 80 percent of phosphorus before the water reaches Murchison Bay, where Gaba’s water intake serves millions of residents.

Qn: There have been some calls to cover the channel as part of modernisation. What is your view on this proposal?

Ans: Covering the Nakivubo Channel to hide it from view is like applying makeup to an infected wound. The surface may look clean, but the disease festers beneath. Once you enclose such a natural system, it suffocates. Enclosed drains become anaerobic breeding grounds for methane and pathogens. They also create hidden choke points where plastic and solid waste build up, triggering sudden floods. Cities like Nairobi and Lagos learned this lesson the hard way after sealing their natural channels, only to face devastating flash floods and public health crises later on. Kampala risks repeating that mistake.

Dr Eng. Apollo Buregyeya from Makerere University. (Courtesy)

Qn: Supporters of the project argue that redevelopment will make the city cleaner and more attractive. How do you respond?

Ans: I understand the desire to transform Nakivubo’s current state—it’s a stinking, garbage-filled hazard, and people living nearby suffer daily. The proposed redevelopment promises underground flood-control chambers, waste filtration systems, and landscaped walkways, which sounds modern and appealing. Economically, a rebranded corridor could attract investors and raise property values. Even the President supports it as part of a smart city vision. However, beauty without science is short-lived. You cannot bury sewage with concrete and call it progress.

Qn: So, are you saying engineering alone cannot solve Kampala’s drainage problems?

Ans: Exactly. Engineering is not magic. It’s expensive to build and even more expensive to maintain. Once the channel is sealed, every blockage becomes invisible, every malfunction hidden, and every flood more catastrophic. Kampala’s record in maintaining even simple drainage systems is not impressive. A design may look perfect on paper, but without consistent maintenance, it fails in practice.

Qn: What concerns do you have regarding the governance of such a project?

Ans: Governance is the elephant in the room. Who will manage this underground system? Will it remain a public good, or will it slip into private hands where profit outweighs public health? In Uganda, privatisation has often left citizens worse off. My worry is that covering Nakivubo could become another case where business interests override science and public welfare.

Qn: What would a more sustainable solution look like?

Ans: The choice is not between beauty and filth—it’s between superficial fixes and real solutions. Science supports a hybrid approach. We should expand upstream sewage treatment at plants like Bugoloobi so that less raw waste reaches Nakivubo. Keep parts of the swamp and channel open as natural filters and integrate them into green buffer zones and urban parks. Design pedestrian walkways alongside the open system, not on top of it. That way, Kampala gains both beauty and biology.

Qn: Are there global examples Kampala can learn from?

Ans: Absolutely. Seoul in South Korea demolished a highway to restore the Cheonggyecheon stream, transforming a polluted canal into a thriving urban park. Kigali, our neighbour, preserved its wetlands as part of its drainage master plan, reducing floods while creating green public spaces. These examples show modernisation does not mean burial—real smart cities integrate nature into their urban systems.

Qn: Beyond engineering, what bigger message does Nakivubo’s case carry for Kampala?

Ans: Covering Nakivubo is not merely a technical decision; it’s a moral and societal one. It tests what we value as a city—short-lived glamour or genuine restoration. Uganda has already lost more than 60 percent of Nakivubo’s wetland vegetation in just two decades. Each hectare lost reduces our resilience to floods, disease, and pollution. Every concrete slab poured without proper treatment is a debt to the next generation.

Qn: Finally, what would you say is the real path to modernisation for Kampala?

Ans: True modernisation is not about hiding waste underground. It’s about facing it head-on—investing in treatment, protecting swamps, and designing beauty that works with biology. A smart city is not one that conceals its dirt but one that manages and transforms it into value. Nakivubo is more than a channel; it’s a mirror reflecting whether Kampala chooses denial or dignity, pretence or progress. The choice we make will define the city’s resilience and the health of its future generations.