Residents of posh Nairobi estates may have to contend with changes to their neighbourhoods following the Court of Appeal's landmark ruling in the Rhapta Road Zoning case, which sets a precedent for high-rise developments.
The ruling approved the construction of 20-storey buildings in the affluent Rhapta area, a decision that could also impact residents in neighbouring Kileleshwa.
This ruling paves the way for future high-rise development in affluent Nairobi neighbourhoods such as Muthangari, Lavington, Kilimani and Kitisuru.
The ruling also gave Nairobi City County six months to update zoning regulations based on the 2019 Physical and Land Use Planning Act (PLUPA). The county was further instructed to submit an interim report after three months and a final compliance report seven days after the six-month period had elapsed.
The court found a long-standing policy vacuum between the expiry of the pre-2010 Nairobi City Development and Ordinances and the still-ungazetted 2021 Development Control Policy.
This vacuum resulted in the development of multiple high-rise buildings, with some up to 28 floors, in some of Nairobi’s posh estates and their surrounding areas. The court faulted this, noting that Nairobi City County risked unevenness, opacity, environmental harm, and loss of public trust in approving the buildings’ development.
What it Means
Even so, it is these updated zoning regulations that would guide the future development of high-rise buildings, as they would lead to revised floor caps in buildings across the city, depending on their zones.
For instance, the 2021 policy, though not gazetted, listed Rhapta in Zone 3C, where buildings have a 20-floor cap. In the pre-2010 ordinances, Rhapta was in Zone 4/4B, which had a lower floor cap.
Residents in the posh estates have previously opposed vertical expansion in their estates, arguing that the high-rise buildings could violate the privacy of those who had stand-alone buildings. They also cited the environmental impact, where they referenced deforestation and the clearing of green spaces to develop the installations.
In its finding, the Court highlighted three areas that were embedded in the Constitution and PLUPA but were not being implemented. This included predictability, transparency, and capacity-linked growth.
In issuing the ultimatum, the court opined that it would advance intergenerational equity by ensuring that the city’s densification does not embed costly, irreversible harms.
Crucially, however, the court asserted that it had not frozen development in Nairobi City but only given direction that Nairobi's vertical growth be governed by lawful, transparent, participatory, and capacity-aware instruments. These had to be delivered within fixed timelines and under measured judicial supervision.
The case arose following a petition filed by residents of Rhapta and Kileleshwa, opposing the construction of multiple high-rise buildings of over 16 floors in those areas. Further, they argued that the Nairobi County government had failed to uphold urban planning policies, leading to congestion and environmental degradation.
They contended that permitting excessive high-rise installations had turned residential areas into overcrowded concrete jungles, contrary to established zoning laws.
