Stop invasion-driven settlements, they hurt planning, building codes

It has been a big relief to read that the Kirima family has decided not to evict those settled on its Nairobi land. It’s been reported that the family is willing to dispose of the land to the occupants on a “willing buyer willing seller” basis.

This, they observe, will avert evictions associated with cruel demolitions and destruction of property. This is a perfect win-win situation for the family and the occupants. The Kirima land is in Nairobi’s Eastlands.

However, since construction thereon was ad hoc, illegal and hurried, no standard planning or surveying may have been done. Hence no regard was paid to the city planning standards or those stipulated by the National Construction Authority (NCA). This includes the provision of standard road widths, wayleaves for service infrastructure and open spaces for recreation.

The structures were likely erected without regard to architectural and structural codes. No regard was paid to zoning standards to militate a rational balance of residential and commercial uses.

The structures erected only suited the whims of the gatekeepers responsible for allowing entry into the land, and perhaps the cash paid out. This is a perfect nightmare for planners, service providers and construction regulators.

If the Kirima settlement deal translates into desired ownership documents, this will have added onto an emerging trend of invasion-driven settlements where title to private land is circumstantially conveyed to unauthorised occupiers.

Another memorable example, where the government bought private land then regularised informal occupation was the Waitiki farm in Kenya’s South Coast in 2016. In such cases, standard planning and construction procedures are shelved for the political expediency of respecting the “facts-on-the-ground”, the haphazard web of roads, dwellings and commercial units put in place by the unauthorised occupiers.

Ordinarily, to convey titles and build, landowners are required to comply with County planning and, for the individual beneficiaries, the NCA’s standards.

Basic service infrastructure would also need to be provided. In these reversed circumstances, planning and construction authorities will have to get innovative.

I suppose that for the Kirima family to convey individual titles to occupiers, it will need to provide some appropriate plan to the Nairobi County and to the Lands ministry. For good results, there will be a need for a close collaboration between the family, the occupants and City authorities to meet planning basics.

This includes enabling service infrastructure along with education, health, social and commercial facilities. The NCA will have to see how best to ensure that structures erected within the settlement won’t be the next pain point with building collapses.

In all, the national and county governments should prevent invasion-driven settlements from undermining the rights of legitimate landowners.

The writer is a consultant on land governance. Ibrahim Mwathane ([email protected])