Ruto-Sifuna Chicken Row Sparks Debate on Affordable Housing Design Across Kenya

A political exchange between President William Ruto and Nairobi Senator Edwin Sifuna over affordable housing has reignited a broader debate about how Kenya should approach housing development in different parts of the country.

The disagreement centred on whether apartment living reflects the lifestyles of all Kenyans.

The row was sparked by Sifuna's remarks that keeping chickens would be difficult in high-rise apartments, prompting President Ruto to dismiss the argument. While the exchange is dominating headlines, it has also brought renewed attention to a long-running planning question.

The affordable housing program has largely been associated with high-rise apartment blocks in cities such as Nairobi, Mombasa, Nakuru and Kisumu, where land is scarce, infrastructure is expensive and higher densities make economic sense.

However, Boma Yangu projects are no longer limited to major urban centres. Housing developments have been launched or planned in counties where land is more readily available and population densities are much lower, raising questions about whether the same construction model should be applied everywhere.

Urban planners generally support vertical development in cities because it accommodates more people on limited land while reducing the cost of extending roads, sewer lines, water networks and electricity. Higher densities also make public transport and commercial services more viable.

Those advantages become less obvious in rural and peri-urban counties, where land constraints are less severe and many households have traditionally preferred detached homes with outdoor space. In such areas, lower-rise developments can often achieve the same housing objectives without dramatically changing established settlement patterns.

The expansion of the Affordable Housing Programme into smaller towns also has wider implications for Kenya's urbanisation strategy. Well-planned housing can encourage the growth of new urban centres by attracting businesses, schools, healthcare facilities and other services that follow residential development.

That approach could reduce migration pressure on Nairobi and other major cities by creating alternative growth centres across the country. Instead of concentrating jobs and housing in a few metropolitan areas, infrastructure investment can help distribute economic activity more evenly.

The debate, therefore, is less about whether affordable housing should be built and more about whether a standardised design is appropriate for every county. Housing policies that respond to local economies, culture, land availability and infrastructure needs are more likely to deliver developments that remain attractive over the long term.

As construction accelerates under the Affordable Housing Programme, the conversation may increasingly shift from the number of units delivered to the type of communities being created. For planners, engineers and policymakers, the lasting measure of success will be whether the projects support sustainable urban growth while reflecting the needs of the places where they are built.