The government might have to bring down forty-one buildings in Nairobi's South C, Nairobi West and Lang'ata estates after a recent survey found that these structures have illegally encroached into the protected airspace around Wilson Airport.
The discovery has ignited a heated debate in the Senate, with lawmakers questioning why developers whose buildings violate aviation safety rules are being accommodated while others have previously lost their structures for similar breaches.
An obstruction survey conducted between October and November last year assessed a total of one hundred and thirty-four buildings within a six-kilometre radius of Wilson Airport. The survey's findings were sobering.
Forty-one of these structures were found to exceed the maximum permissible height, creating dangerous obstacles within the airport's protected airspace that could significantly increase risks during aircraft takeoff and landing operations.
The issue dominated a Senate Roads Committee sitting held on Friday, June 26, after the government disclosed that it was exploring changes to flight paths rather than ordering the demolition of the buildings.
This disclosure sparked immediate concern among lawmakers who questioned the government's apparent willingness to accommodate developers whose buildings violate aviation safety regulations.
Aviation Principal Secretary Teresia Mbaika appeared before the committee and acknowledged that demolishing the buildings would be complicated, noting that many of the structures already have the required approvals from various agencies.
When confronted by senators about what Mbaika described as "the easier route," she posed a difficult question back to them. "What is the easier route to deal with the matter? Is it to bring down the buildings which are on the flight path, or is it to come up with a plan that works for us because of some of these people?" she asked the lawmakers.
Mbaika further explained that if senators chose to approach the building owners, some of them have approvals by various agencies, including the Nairobi County Government.
However, she stressed that county approval alone does not override aviation safety requirements set by the Kenya Civil Aviation Authority.
Under Kenyan law, any person intending to construct a building, mast, telecommunications tower, billboard or any other tall structure near an airport must obtain clearance from the Kenya Civil Aviation Authority before construction can begin.
Developers are also required to secure approvals from county governments, but such county approval cannot supersede aviation safety standards.
One of the buildings flagged by the survey belongs to the Parliamentary Service Commission. This structure stands about twenty-seven metres high, even though the Kenya Civil Aviation Authority had approved a maximum height of only twenty-one metres for the area. The discovery raised eyebrows about how such a breach could occur in a government building.
The situation has left lawmakers deeply concerned about the apparent inconsistency in how the government handles aviation safety violations.
Senators questioned why the government appeared willing to accommodate developers whose buildings violate aviation safety regulations, while other structures have previously been demolished for similar reasons.
The lawmakers were particularly troubled by the suggestion that flight paths could be altered to accommodate unlawful developments instead of enforcing existing aviation laws.
The debate highlights the tension between development interests and public safety in Nairobi. It also raises questions about how buildings managed to violate airspace regulations in the first place, and whether the approvals granted by various agencies were properly coordinated with aviation authorities.
For now, the government faces mounting pressure to take decisive action, either by enforcing the law and ordering demolitions, or by providing a clear justification for why this case should be treated differently from previous similar violations.
0 Comments