REVIEW OF BUILDI GS COD 5

>ND
REGULATIONS

a manual based on
Kenya's experience

HOUSING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT UNIT

.
UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI
UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI
HOUSING ~ESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CNIT

P. O. BOX .30197 NAIROBI KENYA TELEPHONE X1IIlI:I: EXT. 212 TELEGRAMS VARSITY
724520/9

REVIEW OF BUILDING CODES

AND

REGULATIONS

A Manual Bases on

Kenya's Experience

Author: Saad S. Yahya

Date: September, 1987

HOUSING RESEARCH AND DEVE~O?MENT UNIT

DIRECTOR DR P.M. SYAGGA

P.O. Box 30197, NAIROBI, .Kenya

Telephone 724520/9 ex. 212

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE
ABBREVIATIONS (i)

I THE BACKGROUND 1

II METHODOLOGY 9

III LEGAL AND POLITICAL ASPECTS 25

- IV CONSTRAINTS 29

V LESSONS AND ISSUES 32

APPeNDIX Te~s of Reference 34

B Chr0nology of Events 40

TABLE 1 Cost of the Study

FIGURE 1 Organisation of the Study 10

2 Climatic Zones of Kenya·for Building Design 15

SELECTED REFERENCES
1

THE BACKGR,OUND

Introduction
In order to understand the deficiencies of th€ building codes and
regulations in Kenya one has to recall, even momentarily, what.
h apperield in Europe nearly a 'century ago. •Formal r-u i.Ld.i.nq control
of h.ousing development was created originally in Europe at the
end of the nineteenth century in order to combat the unpleasant
odours and sights and, later, public health dangers created by
the insanitary living conditions of the overcrowded urban poor
as a result of the Industrial Revolution. The manpower needs of
the new factories created at the expense of the earlier small
scale rural industries, produced an urgent demand for vast
quantities of cheap. accommodation close to the factories. As a
result large numbers of dwellings were quickly constructed at
minimum cost and with the minimum of fac~lities.

The lack of proper sewerage and refuse disposal aggravated by the

overcrowded conditions Of both buildings and whole areas of the
urban centres, created ideal breeding grounds for major outbreaks
of diseases.
•
The spread.of
•
these diseases tp the better
accommodated and more educated (and therefore mo re vociferous):
members of the community, together with the emergence of
ph i.Lan t.hrep.ica Ll.ymt.nded organisations and individuals creat.ed
an impetus to find means of providing more sanitary conditions'.
. "
The simultaneous initial development of local authorities with
powers to order and manage the life and development of the ~rpan
area, provided the means and the vehicle,for the application of
these improvements.

Thus the early Public Health Acts were born. Their objectives
were to prohibit conditions to arise whereby the health of the
public at large would be threatened. Thus water supplies either
from wells, standpipes or individual piped supplies had to be
uncontaminated; human waste and refuse had to be collected and
disposed of in a clean sanitary manner. Subsequently the controls
were extended to cover the construction of buildings to ensure
structural stability, weather resistance, minimUm levels of
lighting and ventilation.
2

Following the heavy influx of settlers into Kenya after the

first World War the British colonial authorities introduced
public health legislation and building controls for the rapidly
growing towns of Nairobi, Mombasa and Kisumu during the period
·1929 - 1931. This legislation was naturally based on the
Bri tish system both with regard..
__to the regulations themselves
. ;.•.
and their means of application.-·

The public control of the building process was extended further

by the introduction of the Town Planning Act of 1931,_ and the
Nairobi City Council introduced its own Building By-laws
.(Planning) in 1948.

However the most strictly applied regul~tions were

and are those
•
embodied in the PUblic Health Act and its 'by-product the
Building ~Qde. Historically the pre-eminence of the Public
Health Acts and their creation to protect the public from
'coptagious diseases gave them legalprecedan~ over all other
legislation~

Current Issues

Within the urban areas effective development has been

impeded in the past by a conflict be,.t.ween standards and
needs. Standards protect some groups against the means
used to provide needs for others. Realistic minimUm
standards are essential but if they are set too high
they impose needless sacrifices on those in greatest
need. Low'costhousing in municipalities is a case in
point. Over the last plan period only 8 percent of the
low cost units planned were.completed and these cost·
on the average five times, the expected cost.

Excessivelx high and unrealistic standards for building

design, occupancy, and municipal services were clearly'
a major contributing factor. During the planning p'er Lod ,
all municipalities will review their housing standards
in order to make' them appropriate for the settings to
which they will be applied and to reduce them to the
minimum cons Ls t.errc with the provision of low cost
housing at- reasonable cost •. These standards will be
raised as development creates higher and more widespread
income. -

(Development Plan 19,79-1983 Part 1,

Chapter .~, Government of Kenya)
3

The application of the minimum standards referred to in the

above quotation is normally exercised by the local authorities
un de r; "the powers given them by the following legislation: Public
Health Act, 1972, Building Codes Grade 1 & Grade 11 1968, Town
Plantling Act and local By-laws supplemented by policies approved
by the Councils which expand or modify the Building Codes or
Planning Legislation. In addition, where the land to be developed
is Government land then the Commissioner of Lands can, as a
condition of granting a lease, impose his own standards and
requirements. Since the late sixties concerted efforts have
been made by the Ministry of Housing and Soc~al Services (now
the Ministry of Works, Housing and Physical Planning), through
the NHC, to implement both site and services and squatter
upgrading schemes throughout the country. In addition numerous
studies have been unde.rt aken by the HRDU of the Uni vers ity of
Nairobi und consultants on behalf of the Ministry to recommend
optimum plot sizes, layouts, building designs and alternative
forms of treatment and disposal.

In some cases proposals for site and services projects which

have been professionally designed to provide housing for the low
income,population have not. been implemented because they do not
satisfy the requirements of the existing legislation and
regulations governing construction. The principal areas of
conflict between th~ b ui Ld Lrrq Leq Ls La t.Lon and the production'
of low cost housing lie the following areas:

a) Lack of specific requirements: Comments and criticisms came

from both ,developers and local government officials about the
lack, of specific requirements in the Building code s and especially .
the Grade 11 codes which are designed to cater for simple
buildings in periurban and rural areas. As a·result developers
are faced with inconSistent personal int~rpretations by officials.
On th~ other hand local government 6fficials claim that they are
forced to refer to the earlier building regulations (repealed in
4

1963) for guidance. The powers of the Medical Officer of Health

given under the Public Health Act 1972 also appear to cause
considerable problems to developers due to:

i) the amount of personal interpretation involved and

ii) the legal powers given by the Act for him to overrule
the Building Code.

The annoyance caused by arbitrary application and personal

Ln t.e
rpre t at.Lon of the vague clauses in the legislation was
aggravated by the lack of any authority or pr~vision for appeal
by aggrieved app Li.c ant.s, The decision of local authori ty
officials, even if considered incorrect, is final.

b) Lack of unified legislation: This criticism applied to all

the legislation and regulations, but is strongest in relation to
the various requirements for the provision of infrastructure;'
The plea often heard was for a unified set of standards in one
document.

c) Inappropriate standards: The developers of low cost housing

claimed that the local authorities insist~d upon b~ilding
materials far superior to those permitted by. the Grade II
Building Code. Conversely the house builqers wer~ unharpy with
some of the materials permitted and considered that onl¥ concrete
blocks and reinforced coltimps and beams constituted a "real house"

With regard to the infrastructure requirements it is accepted

that the minimum standards demanded raise the overall cost of the
project. There appears, however, to be an acceptance that the
provision of potable water and collection and treatment of human
waste is an absolute necessity. Therefore the conflicts relate
to the engineering details and to how these services are provided.

The required standards of construction of access' roads seem to be

a clear point of conflict, revolving around the high capital cost
of building to "adoptive standards" versus the high maintenance
costs of murram (i.e. laterite) roads.