CONSULTANCY SERVICES TO UNDERTAKE

PRE-FEASIBILITY AND APPRAISAL STUDY

FOR GILGIL – NYAHURURU – RUMURUTI (A4)
– KIARUTARA – GATANGA – THIKA (B20),
BUURI – KATHERI – MERU – CHAARIA –
MITUNGUU – KATHWANA – ISHIARA – ENA
(B65) ROAD
(KeNHA/RD/PSC/3166/2020)

PRELIMINARY REPORT

VOLUME 1 - PRE-FEASIBILITY AND APPRAISAL

STUDY

June 08, 2021

Barabara Plaza - JKIA, Off Airport

9A Sifa Towers, Lenana Road,
South Road
Kilimani
Along Mazao Road Opposite Aviation
P.O. Box 3103-00100, Nairobi
House
Tel : +254 20 440 6905, 0792 745
P.O. Box 49712 – 0100
459
Nairobi, Kenya
Email : info@itecengineering.co.ke
Email: info@kenha.go.ke
Web: www.itec-eng.org
Web: www.kenha.go.ke
 9A Sifa Towers, Lenana Road, Kilimani
P.O. Box 3103-00100, Tel: +254 20 4406905; 0792 745459, Nairobi
info@itecengineering.co.ke www.itec-eng.org

Our Ref: ITEC/OP059/OP/L0019

Date: 08th June 2021

Director, Policy, Strategy and Compliance

Kenya National Highways Authority,
Barabara Plaza, Mazao Rd., Off Airport South Rd.,
P.O. Box 49712 – 0100 GPO
NAIROBI.

Attention: Assistant Director, Economic Planning

Dear Sir,

CONSULTANCY SERVICES TO UNDERTAKE PRE-

FEASIBILITY AND APPRAISAL STUDY FOR GILGIL –
NYAHURURU – RUMURUTI (A4) – KIARUTARA – GATANGA
– THIKA (B20), BUURI – KATHERI – MERU – CHAARIA –
MITUNGUU – KATHWANA – ISHIARA – ENA (B65) ROAD
CONTRACT NO. KeNHA/RD/PSC/3166/2020

Re: Preliminary Report

We are pleased to submit the Preliminary Report for the above-

captioned study for your consideration.

This is the second deliverable under this consultancy services.

We look forward to your comments so that we can proceed to the

next phase in this consultancy services.

Yours faithfully,
for ITEC Engineering Ltd.
 9A Sifa Towers, Lenana Road, Kilimani
P.O. Box 3103-00100, Tel: +254 20 4406905; 0792 745459, Nairobi
info@itecengineering.co.ke www.itec-eng.org

Eng. Tom OPIYO

Managing Director

Encl: Preliminary Report

Document Control Sheet

SUBMITTAL DETAILS

Submitted to: Project Engineer

of Kenya National Highways Authority (KeNHA)
ITEC Contact: Name: Eng. Tom Opiyo
Email: topiyo@itec-eng.org

DOCUMENT VERSION CONTROL

Version Document
Change Details
No. Name/Title
V1.0 Preliminary Report

APPROVAL RECORD
Signatur
Name Role/Title Date
e
Author Project Team

Eng. Paul Project 08/06/202

Reviewer
Olukoye Coordinator 1
08/06/202
Approver Eng. Tom Opiyo Team Leader
1

Unless otherwise expressly stipulated in the contract applicable to the project in reference, intellectual
property rights for this report are granted to the Client for the purpose of the Project only. Any copy,
modification, reproduction, or disclosure to third parties of the whole or part of the information herein,
otherwise than for the Project, shall be subjected to ITEC’s prior written authorization. ITEC shall maintain
the right to utilize and publish material related to the Project, including but not limited to any picture, image,
photographs, drawings of the Project design, for the purpose of its own commercial references. Any such
publication or distribution of the documents made by the Client shall explicitly bear ITEC’s name and the
documents shall be referred to as a creation of ITEC. The working methods and know-how used by ITEC for
the provision of the services shall always remain its exclusive intellectual property.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................9
1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................1
1.1 Invitation for Consultancy Services....................................................1
1.2 Contract Details..................................................................................1
1.3 Objectives of the Study.......................................................................2
1.4 Scope of Services................................................................................2
1.5 Project Deliverables............................................................................3
1.6 Approach and Methodology................................................................3
1.7 Structure of the Report.......................................................................4
1.8 The Project Roads...............................................................................5
1.8.1 Project Location Map.............................................................................. 5
1.8.2 Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20) Road.................................................6
1.8.3 Buuri – Katheri – Meru – Chaaria – Mitunguu – Kathwana – Ishiara –
Ena (B65) Road.................................................................................................. 6
1.8.4 Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) Road...............................................8
2 STRATEGIC TRANSPORT SECTOR GOALS AND
DEVELOPMENT PLANS................................................................2-1
2.1 Introduction.....................................................................................2-1
2.2 Legal Frameworks.........................................................................2-1
2.2.1 The Constitution of Kenya 2010...........................................................2-1
2.2.2 Kenya Roads Act 2007..........................................................................2-1
2.2.3 Urban Areas & Cities Act 2011............................................................2-2
2.2.4 Physical and Land Use Planning Act 2019...........................................2-2
2.2.5 Environmental Management and Coordination Act 2015....................2-2
2.2.6 Land Act 2012...................................................................................... 2-2
2.3 Policy Framework.........................................................................2-2
2.3.1 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)........................................2-2
2.3.2 Kenya Vision 2030................................................................................ 2-3
2.3.3 Big Four Agenda................................................................................... 2-3
2.3.4 Integrated National Transport Policy (INTP).......................................2-3
2.3.5 National Treasury and Planning Circular No. 22/2019........................2-3
2.3.6 KeNHA Strategic Plan..........................................................................2-4
2.3.7 Ongoing and Planned Projects.............................................................2-4
3 SOCIO-ECONOMIC OUTLOOK AT NATIONAL AND COUNTY
LEVEL........................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 National Profile................................................................................3-1
3.1.1 Introduction.......................................................................................... 3-1
3.1.2 Population............................................................................................ 3-1
3.1.3 Kenya’s GDP Prospects........................................................................3-2
3.1.4 Sectoral GDP Growth........................................................................... 3-3
3.1.5 Other Financial Characteristics...........................................................3-4
3.1.6 National Transport System..................................................................3-5

E-
3.2 County Profiles..............................................................................3-8
3.2.1 Introduction.......................................................................................... 3-8
3.2.2 Kiambu County Profile.........................................................................3-8
3.2.3 Murang’a County Profile....................................................................3-11
3.2.4 Embu County Profile..........................................................................3-12
3.2.5 Meru County Profile...........................................................................3-14
3.2.6 Tharaka-Nithi County Profile.............................................................3-18
3.2.7 Laikipia County Profile.......................................................................3-20
3.2.8 Nyandarua County Profile..................................................................3-24
3.2.9 Nakuru County Profile........................................................................3-27
3.3 Social Outlook.............................................................................3-33
3.3.1 Introduction........................................................................................ 3-33
3.3.2 Gender distribution............................................................................ 3-33
3.3.3 Education and Literacy levels............................................................3-34
3.3.4 Health................................................................................................... 3-1
3.3.5 Employment rate.................................................................................. 3-2
3.3.6 HIV/AIDS Prevalence........................................................................... 3-3
4 TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE PROJECT ROADS..........4-1
4.1 Traffic Forecast and Projections......................................................4-1
4.1.1 Traffic Surveys Methodology................................................................4-1
4.1.2 Existing Traffic Conditions...................................................................4-3
4.1.3 Traffic Growth Rates............................................................................ 4-7
4.1.4 Diverted Traffic.................................................................................. 4-10
4.1.5 Generated Traffic............................................................................... 4-10
4.1.6 Base Year Traffic and Forecasted Traffic Volumes............................4-13
4.1.7 Traffic Engineering Design and Capacity Analysis Criteria...............4-13
4.1.8 Basic Capacities and Cross-section Types..........................................4-14
4.1.9 Equivalence Factors (EF) and Pavement Loading..............................4-16
4.2 Pavement Evaluation, Soils and Materials Investigations..........4-18
4.2.1 Condition Survey and Pavement Layers Evaluation...........................4-18
4.2.2 Alignment Soil Investigations.............................................................4-20
4.2.3 Pavement Materials Sources..............................................................4-22
4.2.4 Recommendations for Pavement Materials........................................4-24
4.3 Topographical Surveys and Mapping..........................................4-24
4.4 Road Design Proposals...............................................................4-25
4.4.1 Design Standards and Manuals..........................................................4-25
4.4.2 Cross-sections.................................................................................... 4-26
4.4.3 Horizontal Alignment Design.............................................................4-26
4.4.4 Vertical Alignment Design..................................................................4-26
4.4.5 Gradients............................................................................................ 4-27
4.4.6 Intersections....................................................................................... 4-27
4.4.7 Service Lanes and loop roads.............................................................4-29
4.4.8 Pavement Design................................................................................ 4-29
4.4.9 Structural Design............................................................................... 4-33
4.5 Preliminary Cost Estimates........................................................4-38
5 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENTS....5-1

E-
5.1 Introduction.....................................................................................5-1
5.2 Methodology and Approach..........................................................5-1
5.2.1 Environmental Aspect..........................................................................5-1
5.2.2 Social Aspect........................................................................................ 5-2
5.3 Key Findings.................................................................................5-4
5.3.1 Environmental Evaluation Results.......................................................5-4
5.3.2 Social Evaluation Results.....................................................................5-7
5.4 Recommendations and Conclusions...........................................5-22
5.4.1 Environmental Context.......................................................................5-22
5.4.2 Social Context.................................................................................... 5-22
6 ECONOMIC EVALUATION....................................................6-26
6.1 Introduction...................................................................................6-26
6.2 Project Economic Appraisal........................................................6-26
6.3 Economic Decision Criteria........................................................6-28
6.4 Guidelines Applied in the Study.................................................6-29
6.5 Economic Appraisal Tools...........................................................6-29
6.6 Benefit Categories of Road Transport Improvements................6-30
6.7 HDM-4 Inputs.............................................................................6-33
6.8 HDM-4 Analysis Assumptions.....................................................6-47
6.9 Economic Analysis Results.........................................................6-48
6.10 Project Package-Wise Switching Value Analysis........................6-55
6.10.1First Year Rate of Return...................................................................6-56
6.10.2Project Benefits Delay by 3 Years......................................................6-56
6.10.3Risk Analysis....................................................................................... 6-57
6.11 Recommendation..........................................................................6-1
7 RESULTS-BASED LOGICAL FRAMEWORK.............................7-2
7.1.1 Introduction.......................................................................................... 7-2
7.1.2 Baseline Indicators............................................................................... 7-2
7.1.3 Result Based Logical Framework.........................................................7-2

E-
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1: Overall Prefeasibility Study Approach and Methodology.......3
Figure 1-2: Project Roads Contextual Map................................................5
Figure 1-3: Start of B20 project road.........................................................6
Figure 1-4: End of B20 project road..........................................................6
Figure 1-5: Start of B65 project road at the junction with B6 road...........7
Figure 1-6: End of B65 project road at the junction with A2 road............7
Figure 1-7: Long straights at km 4+000....................................................7
Figure 1-8: Winding alignment at km 24+000..........................................7
Figure 1-9: Newly Paved section at Km @17+000....................................8
Figure 1-10: Ongoing pothole patching works at km 28+000...................8
Figure 1-11: Pothole at Km 35+800..........................................................9
Figure 1-12: Pothole patching work at Km 36+000..................................9
Figure 1-13: Ongoing base repair works at Km 73+000...........................9
Figure 1-14: Ongoing paving works at Km 82+500...................................9
Figure 3-1: Kenya's Population 1897 - 2019...........................................3-2
Figure 3-2: Number of Basic Education Institution by Level, 2017-2019 3-
35
Figure 4-1: AADT Composition along Kiarutara -Gatanga –Thika road..4-4
Figure 4-2: AADT Composition for Gilgil-Nyahururu-Rumuruti.............4-5
Figure 4-3: AADT Composition along Buuri - Ena Road.........................4-6
Figure 5-1: Levels of education attained among respondents on A4 road
project...................................................................................................5-15
Figure 5-2: Levels of education attained among respondents on B20 road
project...................................................................................................5-15
Figure 5-3: Levels of education attained among respondents on B65 road
project...................................................................................................5-16
Figure 5-4: Main sources of income among respondents along A4 Road
Project...................................................................................................5-17
Figure 5-5: Sources of income along B20 road project........................5-18
Figure 5-6: Sources of income for respondents along B20 road project. .5-
19
Figure 5-7: Land Ownership Status along A4 Road..............................5-20
Figure 5-8: Land ownership status within B20 Road Project...............5-20

E-
Figure 5-9: Land Ownership status along B65 Road............................5-21
Figure 6-1: Economic Appraisal of Road Transport Projects................6-27

E-
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1: Schedule of Deliverables...........................................................3
Table 2-1 Ongoing and Planned Projects................................................2-5
Table 2-2: Roads under Periodic Maintenance.......................................2-5
Table 3-1: Kenya Real GDP Growth: 2015-2019.....................................3-2
Table 3-2: Gross Domestic Product by Activity, 2015-2019: Constant
2009 Prices..............................................................................................3-3
Table 3-3: Gross Domestic Product by Activity, 2015-2019: Percentage
Change.....................................................................................................3-4
Table 3-4: Classified Road Network in Kenya 2017................................3-6
Table 3-5: Gross County Product - Kiambu County................................3-9
Table 3-6: Per Capita GCP – Kiambu County..........................................3-9
Table 3-7: Agricultural Crop production trends in Kiambu County 2013 –
2016.......................................................................................................3-10
Table 3-8: Road Network in Kiambu County.........................................3-10
Table 3-9: Gross County Product –Murang’a County............................3-11
Table 3-10: Per Capita GCP – Murang’a County...................................3-12
Table 3-11: Gross County Product –Embu County................................3-13
Table 3-12: Per capita GCP – Embu County..........................................3-13
Table 3-13: Gross County Product –Meru County.................................3-15
Table 3-14: Per Capita GCP – Meru County..........................................3-16
Table 3-15: Gross County Product –Tharaka-Nithi County...................3-19
Table 3-16: Per Capita GCP – Tharaka-Nithi County............................3-19
Table 3-17: Gross County Product –Laikipia County............................3-21
Table 3-18: Per Capita GCP – Laikipia County.....................................3-21
Table 3-19: Area Cropped, Production and Value for Major Crops, 2017-
2019.......................................................................................................3-22
Table 3-20: Acreage Under Irrigation by Type of Crop grown, 2017-2019
...............................................................................................................3-22
Table 3-21: Agricultural Production Laikipia County 2018 -2019........3-23
Table 3-22: Kilometres of Roads Covered by Type and Agency, 2017 -
2019.......................................................................................................3-23
Table 3-23: Gross County Product –Nyandarua County.......................3-25
Table 3-24: Per Capita GCP – Nyandarua County.................................3-25

E-
Table 3-25: Road Length by Surface Condition....................................3-27
Table 3-26: Road Classes and Respective Lengths...............................3-27
Table 3-27: Nakuru County Population Projection...............................3-28
Table 3-28: Gross County Product –Nakuru County.............................3-29
Table 3-29: Per capita GCP – Nakuru County.......................................3-29
Table 3-30: Area Cropped, Production and Value for Major Crops, 2013 –
2014.......................................................................................................3-29
Table 3-31:Horticultural Production and value by Crop, 2013-2014 –
Nakuru County......................................................................................3-30
Table 3-32: Total number of visitors to Nakuru and Hells Gate National
Parks......................................................................................................3-31
Table 3-33: Population distribution by sex among the counties affected
by the road project................................................................................3-34
Table 3-34: Total Population and School-Age Population, 2019...........3-35
Table 3-35: Kenya's Net Enrolment Rate in percentage.......................3-36
Table 3-36: Number of education facilities and enrolment rate of
Counties within the road project.............................................................3-1
Table 3-37: Number of health facilities per county and births...............3-2
Table 3-38: Employment rate..................................................................3-2
Table 3-39: Prevalence Rate of HIV/AIDS By County.............................3-3
Table 4-1: Survey types and proposed methodologies...........................4-1
Table 4-2: Locations of Manual Classified Traffic Counts......................4-2
Table 4-3: Locations of Origin-Destination Surveys...............................4-3
Table 4-4: Locations of Axle load Surveys..............................................4-3
Table 4-5 AADT per section....................................................................4-4
Table 4-6: AADT Per section along Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) 4-5
Table 4-7: AADT Per section along Buuri - Ena Road.............................4-6
Table 4-8: Proposed Elasticity Value of Transport Sub-Sector w.r.t. GDP
.................................................................................................................4-8
Table 4-9: Adopted Traffic Growth Rate foe A4 and B20........................4-9
Table 4-10: Adopted Traffic Growth Rate for B65..................................4-9
Table 4-11: Adopted diverted traffic per vehicle Type.........................4-10
Table 4-12: Generated Traffic for each road section............................4-12
Table 4-13: Level of Service Criteria (LOS)..........................................4-14

E-
Table 4-14: Lane Capacity Criteria.......................................................4-14
Table 4-15: Forecasted growth and derived Cross-section Types........4-14
Table 4-16: Recommended Typical Cross-section for all roads............4-15
Table 4-17: Adopted Equivalence Factors............................................4-16
Table 4-18: Recommended Traffic Classes for all roads.......................4-17
Table 4-19: Available Pavement and Construction Reports and Data by
Road Section..........................................................................................4-18
Table 4-20: Existing Pavement Structure.............................................4-19
Table 4-21: Pavement Layer Moduli for the A4 Road...........................4-20
Table 4-22: Material Site Locations......................................................4-22
Table 4-23: Material Test Results Summary for the B65 Road............4-22
Table 4-24: Test Results Summary for Hardstone Sources and Suitability
as GCS Source for the B65 Road...........................................................4-23
Table 4-25: Test Results Summary for Hardstone Sources and Suitability
as GCS Source for the B20....................................................................4-23
Table 4-26: Test Results Summary for MS 1 and MS2 and Suitability as
HPS Source for the B20........................................................................4-23
Table 4-27: Test Results Summary for MS 1 and MS2 and Suitability as
Crushed Rock Source for the B20.........................................................4-23
Table 4-28: Mapping datum characteristics.........................................4-24
Table 4-29: Design Standard References for the Project.....................4-25
Table 4-30: Proposed Horizontal Alignment Standards for Class A and B
Roads.....................................................................................................4-26
Table 4-31: Proposed Vertical Alignment Standards for Class A and B
Roads.....................................................................................................4-26
Table 4-32: Climbing Lane Locations....................................................4-27
Table 4-33: Assessment of traffic operations at Intersections..............4-27
Table 4-34: Proposed Intersection types along each road....................4-28
Table 4-35: Proposed loop roads and service roads.............................4-29
Table 4-36: Proposed Pavement Options for Buuri -Katheri -Meru -
Chaaria -Mitunguu -Kathwana - Ishiara – Ena (B65) Road...................4-30
Table 4-37: Proposed Pavement Options for Gilgil – Nyahururu –
Rumuruti (A4)........................................................................................4-31
Table 4-38: Proposed Pavement Options for Kiarutara -Gatanga –Thika. 4-
32

E-
Table 4-39: Existing and Proposed Culvert dimensions.......................4-37
Table 4-40: Bridge Clearance Guidelines.............................................4-37
Table 4-41: Cost Estimates for each road section showing cost options..4-
38
Table 5-1: Stakeholder Mapping.............................................................5-1
Table 5-2: Sample Sizes for each road....................................................5-3
Table 5-3: Administrative units along the road projects.......................5-10
Table 5-4: Population distribution by Sex in affected Sub-county........5-11
Table 5-5: Population distribution by Sex in affected Sub-county........5-12
Table 5-6: Population distribution by Sex in affected Sub-county........5-12
Table 5-7: Average monthly income along A4 Road Project.................5-17
Table 5-8: Average monthly income along B20 Road Project...............5-18
Table 5-9: Average monthly income along B65 Road Project...............5-19
Table 5-10: Ranking of Road projects from the highest to lowest priority
...............................................................................................................5-24
Table 6-1: Economic Decision Making Criteria....................................6-28
Table 6-2: Vehicle Pollution Emission...................................................6-31
Table 6-3: Proposed Vehicle Classification System..............................6-34
Table 6-4: HDM-4 Motorized Vehicle Prices.........................................6-35
Table 6-5: HDM-4 Non-Motorized Price Inputs....................................6-36
Table 6-6: Fuel Price Build-up Economic Cost......................................6-37
Table 6-7: Value of Travel Time............................................................6-38
Table 6-8: Summary of Road Maintenance Cost in Kenya....................6-40
Table 6-9: Proposed Maintenance Regime...........................................6-41
Table 6-10: Project Road Homogenous Sections..................................6-42
Table 6-11: Project Cost Estimates for Upgrading of Gilgil – Nyahururu –
Rumuruti (A4) Road...............................................................................6-44
Table 6-12: Project Cost Estimates for Upgrading of Thika-Gatanga-
Kiarutara (B20) Road............................................................................6-45
Table 6-13: Buuri – Katheri – Meru/Gitimbine (B65) Road...................6-46
Table 6-14: Basic Economic Evaluation Assumptions...........................6-47
Table 6-15: Evaluation of Alternatives..................................................6-48
Table 6-16: Sensitivity Analysis Scenarios............................................6-48

E-
Table 6-17: Base Case Economic Analysis Results by Project Packages. .6-
48
Table 6-18: Project Packages Sensitivity Analysis................................6-49
Table 6-19: HDM-4 Homogenous Section-Wise Results.......................6-50
Table 6-20: Project Package-wise Homogeneous Sectional Ranking.. .6-51
Table 6-21: Overall Project Package-wise Homogeneous Sectional
Ranking..................................................................................................6-52
Table 6-22: Quantifiable Project Benefits.............................................6-54
Table 6-23: Road Maintenance Cost in the With and Without Project
Cases.....................................................................................................6-55
Table 6-24: Project Package 1 Risk Analysis........................................6-59
Table 6-25: Project Package 2 Risk Analysis........................................6-60
Table 6-26: Project Package 3 Risk Analysis........................................6-61
Table 6-27: Recommended Pavement Structure for the different
Homogenous Road Sections....................................................................6-2
Table 7-1: Results-Based Logical Framework.........................................7-3

E-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

E1. Introduction
E1.1. Project Background
The Kenya National Highways Authority has earmarked roads for
construction and detailed design studies as programmed in its FY
2018/2019 – 2022/2023 Strategic Plan. To inform prioritization of the
roads for detailed design studies and construction, the Authority, through
the Development Vote, commissioned ITEC Engineering Limited (ITEC)
to undertake Pre-Feasibility and Appraisal Study for Gilgil – Nyahururu –
Rumuruti (A4) – Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20), Buuri – Katheri –
Meru – Chaaria – Mitunguu – Kathwana – Ishiara – Ena (B65) Road.
This is the Preliminary Report for the assignment. The Draft Final Report
will be the next deliverable after approval of this report by KeNHA.
E1.2. Objective
Pre-feasibility assessment of a project is designed to guide decision-
makers as to whether the project is sound on technical, economic, social
and environmental perspectives or not. This study has therefore been
undertaken to provide the Authority with a decision criterion in view of
the country needs on the viabilities of the three road projects. Once
complete, this pre–feasibility study will provide enough information for
deciding whether to proceed to preliminary and detailed engineering
design studies or not. In addition, it will inform which road packages and
section should be prioritized if there are financial resource constraints.

E-11
E1.3. Overall Approach and Methodology
The overall approach and methodology for the study is summarised in
Figure E-1 below.

Road Project Proposals

Collationof Legal, Policy and Collationof Secondary Data Setting/ Review of Project Goals
Institutional Documents and Objectives

 Relevant Legislations,  Relevant Planning and Design Data  Collatenational and regional
Regulations, Policy Frameworks development goals
 Socio-economic Data
 Relevant Manuals and
Standardsand Guidelines  Environmental Data

DataGap Analysis

Policy Review and Analysis Alignment of Project Goals and

Primary DataCollection Objectives withNational and
Regional Goals

Prefeasibility Study

 Technical Feasibility
 Socio-economic Feasibility
 Environmental Assessment
 Route Assessment
 Estimation of Project Costs
 Economic Analysis

Recommendation

Figure E-1: Overall Prefeasibility Study Approach and Methodology

E-12
E1.4. The Project Roads
E1.4.1. Project Location Map
A contextual map showing the project roads and their location relative to
the entire national road network is shown in Figure E-2.

E-13
 Figure E-2: Project Roads Contextual Map
E1.5. Description of the Project Roads
E1.5.1. Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20) Road
The road is an important link for the central region as it connects Kiambu
county to Nyandarua and Nakuru counties and forms part of the B20
road, which starts at A8 road -Lanet-Dundori-Ol Kalou-Njabini-Kiarutara-
Gatanga-A2 Thika-A3 to Thika Road. This route has great economic
potential due to the available agricultural produce, tourism opportunities
and trade.
E1.5.2. Buuri – Katheri – Meru – Chaaria – Mitunguu – Kathwana –
Ishiara – Ena (B65) Road
This road functions as a regional loop road linking major towns such as
Kathwana to the A9 road corridor. It also acts as a shorter link between
the A9 road and A2 road as it traverses the slopes of Mount Kenya. This
section, when complete, will reduce the travel times between Meru and
Timau and its environs.
E1.5.3. Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) Road
This road is part of the A4 road corridor, which links the A8 road at Gilgil
to Ethiopia's international border at Illeret. It provides linkages to
national and regional roads, including the LAPSSET Corridor, the B21
road at Nyahururu and the B20 road at Ol Kalou. The road links
Nyandarua County to the Counties of Nakuru, Nyeri, Murang’a and
Kiambu. The project road plays a big role in the distribution of
agricultural products coming from Nyandarua county. It is also a tourism
link to the Nyahururu falls and national parks located North of Rumuruti.
E2. Strategic Transport Sector Goals and Development
Plans
This study has reviewed the legal, policy, and institutional frameworks;
sectoral plans; project relevant data; and, ongoing and planned projects,
to ensure that it is aligned to their goals and objectives.
1. Legal Frameworks
The Constitution of Kenya 2010 Physical and Land Use Planning Act 2019
Kenya Roads Act 2007 Environmental Management and
Urban Areas & Cities Act 2011 Coordination Act, 2015
Land Act 2012
2. Policy Framework and Sectoral Plans
UN Sustainable Development National Treasury and Planning Circular
Goals (SDGs) No. 22/2019

E-14
Kenya Vision 2030 KeNHA Strategic Plan 2018/2019 –
Big Four Agenda 2022/2023
Integrated National Transport
Policy (INTP)
3. Major Ongoing and Planned Projects
Projects within the areas of influence such as the rehabilitation of the
metre-gauge railway line along the Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4)
road, the proposed Rironi – Mau Summit road (A8) project have been
taken into account.

E3. Socio-Economic Outlook at National and County

Level
E3.1. National Profiles
The study examined national factors that would be considered in the
review and development of the feasibility report. These are population,
GDP sectoral growth, other financial characteristics and the national
transport system in relation to the project area of influence.
Population: Kenya’s population expanded from 2.5 million persons in
1897 to 8.6 million in 1962, just before independence. The population in
2019 was estimated to be 47.6 million. The population growth is one of
the indicators that has been used in forecasting future travel demand.
Gross Domestic Product: The real GDP growth for Kenya in 2019 was
about 5.4%, down from 6.3% in 2018. Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing
sector accounted for a sizeable proportion of the slowdown whereas the
manufacturing sector, financial and insurance sector and real estate
activities had positive growth rates. The COVID-19 shock is expected to
further reduce growth in 2020 and 2021 with large impacts on services
(transport, retail trade, tourism, events, leisure, etc.), industry
(manufacturing and construction) and agriculture mainly due to the
measures taken to slow down the rate of infection nationally and globally.
The World Bank’s GDP growth scenario for 2020 is for a baseline of
1.5%, before rebounding to about 6.1% in 2021/2022 on assumption that
COVID-19 Pandemic will have been contained.
Sectoral GDP: Most sectors of the economy posted slowed growths in
2019 compared to the performance in 2018. However, performance in
the period under review was, to a considerable extent, supported by
accelerated growths in Financial and Insurance Activities (6.6%) and
Public Administration and Defence (8.1%).

E-15
Inflation: The annual inflation as measured by the Consumer Price Index
(CPI) increased from 4.7% in 2018 to 5.2% in 2019. The upsurge in
inflation was mainly attributable to rise in transportation, food and
beverage prices arising from constrained domestic supply due to less
favourable weather conditions in first half of 2019 which improved in the
second half causing drops in food prices as well as the overall inflation.
Foreign Exchange Rate Analysis: During the period 2018 to 2019, the
Kenyan Shilling gained against currencies of key trading countries with
Trade Weighted Index (TWI) improving from 115.7 in 2018 to 113.0 in
2019. This was mainly occasioned by strengthening of the Kenyan
Shilling against the Euro, Pound Sterling, Chinese Yuan and Indian
Rupee by 4.6%, 3.8%, 3.7% and 2.4% respectively.
Regional Trade Analysis: Exports to EAC increased by 8.0% to KES
140.4 billion in 2019. Value of exports to COMESA member states
increased by 1.9% to KES 164.2 billion in 2019. Notable declines were
recorded in exports to South Africa and Somalia, contracting by 24.5%
and 21.8%, respectively. The value of imports from Africa rose by 11.4%
to KES 234.2 billion and accounted for 13.0% of the total import bill. This
was attributable to increase in imports from South Africa, which stood at
KES 74.0 billion. Value of imports from the EAC countries contracted by
5.8% from KES 71.9 billion in 2018 to KES 67.7 billion in 2019.
Road Transport: Kenya’s National Classified Road Network has grown
from 45,000 Km in 1963 to over 161,451 km in 2018 (Road Inventory and
Condition Survey of 2018). The expansion of roads has seen increased
and improved access to all parts of the Country but has also led to
increased maintenance needs in the road network.
Railway Transport: The total metre-gauge railway network currently
consists of 2,778 km comprising 1,083 km of mainline, 346 km of
principal lines, 490 km of minor and branch lines and 859 km of private
lines and sidings. The 78 km Gilgil to Nyahururu medium gauge railway
line is currently under rehabilitation The rail line which cuts through
Nakuru, Nyandarua and Laikipia counties runs almost parallel to the
Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti road with stations at Gilgil, Oleolondo, Ol
Kalou and Nyahururu. The rehabilitated rail is expected to have an
impact in the transportation of agricultural produce and livestock.
Air Transport: There are five (5) major international airports namely: (i)
Jomo Kenyatta International Airport – Nairobi; (ii) Moi International
Airport – Mombasa; (iii) Eldoret International Airport – Eldoret; (iv)
Kisumu International Airport – Kisumu and (v) Isiolo International
Airport. The other strategic airports which exist in the country include
Malindi Airport – Malindi, Wajir Airport – Wajir and Wilson Airport –
Nairobi. The main airstrips which are operated by KAA include:

E-16
Lokichoggio Airport – Lokichoggio, Manda Airport – Manda Island and
Ukunda Airport – Diani Beach.
E3.2. County profiles
The project roads are located in the Central Part of Kenya. They traverse
eight counties namely – (1) Kiambu, (2) Murang’a, (3) Embu, (4) Tharaka
Nithi, (5) Meru, (6) Laikipia, (7) Nyandarua, and, (8) Nakuru. These
counties define the road area of influence due to planned improvements.
Population: Population has a great impact on the level and patterns of
travel. According to the 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census,
Kiambu had the highest population of the eight counties at 2,417,735
persons, with Nakuru following at 2,164,221 persons. Tharaka Nithi and
Nyandarua had the lowest at 393,177 persons and 638,289 persons,
respectively.
Gross County Product and Per capita: The county gross product
showed steady growth due to the increased growth in economic activities
since the devolution of funds to the 47 counties. The average gross
county product growth rates in 2017 were: Kiambu 5.4%; Murang’a
4.6%; Embu 13.46%; Meru 5.2%; Tharaka Nithi 8.3%; Laikipia 8.55%;
Nyandarua 9.3%; and, Nakuru 7.68%. Travel demand is expected to grow
in proportion to county growth rates.
Productive Sectors: The main agricultural activity in Kiambu County
is the cash crop growing of tea and coffee. The small scale farmers grow
food crops including maize, beans, pineapples, potatoes and vegetables.
Livestock farming is also practiced including dairy farming, rearing of
sheep, goats, poultry and pigs due to the ready market in Nairobi and its
environs. Other significant sectors in Kiambu include the trade and
commerce due to proximity to Nairobi as well as industrial sector and
tourism.
Agriculture in Murang’a County consists mainly of tea, coffee,
vegetables as well as dairy farming. Due to proximity to Nairobi,
smallholder farmers engage in planting of fruits and vegetables including
cabbages, kales and spinach to supply markets in Nairobi and its
environs. Other sectors include tourism, forestry and construction.
Embu County has high potential for agriculture due to the rainfall and
soil characteristics. The cash crops grown in the County are mostly tea
and coffee as well as bananas. Food crops grown include legumes, fruits
such as mangoes, millet, sorghum and maize. There is also significant
livestock farming particularly in the semi-arid areas of the County. The
County also has significant tourism attractions including the Mwea
reserve, Mt. Kenya National Park and the hydro-electric dams.
Meru County has a diverse agricultural output ranging from large scale
cereal farming, horticulture, food crops to dairy farming and livestock

E-17
rearing. Some of the major cash crops which are grown in Meru County
include tea, coffee, miraa and bananas among others. Other significant
sectors include industry and trade, forestry, tourism and construction
including mining of materials.
Farming in the upper zones of Tharaka Nithi County, with fertile soils
and high rainfall, consists of tea, coffee, bananas, maize and beans while
the lower zones produce green grams, millet and sorghum as well as
livestock farming. Tourism is also a significant sector due to the Mt.
Kenya National park in the upper zone.
In Laikipia County, livestock farming is the predominant economic
activity with crop farming also being practiced. The main livestock
include cattle, goats, sheep and camels. The main crops grown are maize,
bean, wheat and potatoes. The horticulture and floriculture industry is
emerging with large scale and small scale farms noted along the road
between Nyahururu and Rumuruti towns. Tourism sector is also
important due to the Thomson’s falls in Nyahururu.
The main economic activity in Nyandarua County is farming due to the
favourable climate and arable land. The County is a major agricultural
producer of potatoes, cabbages, maize, beans, carrots, peas and livestock
rearing. Other economic activities in the County include quarrying,
flower farming and trade.
Nakuru County also has agriculture as its main economic activity. The
main crops grown are maize, beans, irish potatoes, sweet potatoes,
vegetables and fruits. There is also floriculture especially around Lake
Naivasha. Gilgil town initially having several industries is now engaged
in agricultural activities and trade. The economy of the town is boosted
by the existence of military and paramilitary institutions with personnel
engaging in trade in the town.
Road Network: Nakuru has the largest road network at 12,491 km
followed Laikipia which has 7,862 km. Tharaka Nithi has the least road
network length at only 2,052 km.
Rail Network: The metre-gauge rail network currently traverses
Nakuru, Nyandarua and Laikipia counties. It is under rehabilitation and
expected to be completed in 2022.
Airport and airstrips: Air travel in the counties traversed by the roads
is not fully developed. There are small airstrips in the counties mainly
used by private charters, individual owners and military/governmental
organizations.
E3.1. Social setting
Gender distribution: The gender comparison shows that there are more
women in the Country and counties than the population of men. The

E-18
growth of the women population is similar to the population growth over
the ten years between 2009 and 2019. Considerations of gender equality
should be made during the employment of locals during construction in
all cadres of labour.
Education and Literacy levels: According to the approved Basic
Education Statistical Booklet 2019, access to education in Kenya has
significantly improved between 2017 and 2019. The increase in the
learning centres is attributed to the accelerated investments by county
governments following devolution. The number of pre-primary learning
centres has increased from 41,779 in 2017 to 46,530 as at 2019. Primary
schools have increased from 31,449 in 2017 to 32,344 in 2019. Similarly,
secondary schools increased to 10,487 in 2019 from 8,958 in 2017. The
construction of the proposed road is likely to increase access to the
education facilities as the distance to some of the schools could be
reduced. Additionally, the improved roads can motivate the County
Government to construct more schools in areas currently deemed
inaccessible.
Health status: Based on the Ministry of Health fact sheet 2012, Kenya
had 4,039 public health facilities, which are also supplemented with
approximately 4,000 more non-governmental, faith-based, and private
health facility funders. Tharaka Nithi and Laikipia counties had the
lowest number of public health facilities, but Tharaka Nithi has
significantly increased its number of health facilities in the recent past
after devolution.
Employment rate: The 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census
found that out of the 47 million Kenyans, the economically active
population comprised of 22.3 million Kenyans (working-19.7 million and
those seeking work 2.6 million). The employment rate for Nakuru,
Nyandarua and Laikipia are 9.4%, 3.0% and 8.3%. Meru has the highest
employment rate at 9.8% followed by Tharaka-Nithi at 6.7% and Embu at
5.9%. Kiambu has a high employment rate of 12.9% while Murang’a has
a rate of 5.8%. The low employment rate especially among the youth is
attributed to the preference for white-collar jobs. The road projects will
provide additional employment opportunities to the local youth, and
expected to increase the employment rates in the short term.
HIV/AIDS Prevalence: The prevalence rate of HIV/AIDs in the country
is 6%, approximately 1.6 million people. Along the Gilgil-Nyahuru-
Rumuruti Road, Nakuru has the highest prevalence rate of 4.1%. This is
because of the high population of people in the county and the urban
setting, where the disease spreads faster than in the semi-urban and
rural settings. Tharaka Nithi has the highest prevalence rate attributed
to the limited access to healthcare and cultural beliefs that limit the
locals from obtaining anti-retroviral drugs. The prevalence rate in

E-19
Kiambu and Murang’a Counties is relatively the same, with only a 0.4%
margin. Among all these counties, the prevalence rate of HIV/AIDS
remains higher in females than males.

E-20
E4. Technical Assessment of the Project Roads
E4.1. Traffic Forecasts and Projections
Traffic studies were carried out in accordance with the following
guidelines:
1. Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) Overseas Road Note 40: A
guide to axle load surveys and traffic counts for determining traffic
loading on pavements; and,
2. Kenya Road Design Manuals and Ministry of Roads guidelines for
conducting traffic studies.
The following traffic studies were conducted along the project roads from
22nd February 2021 to 13th March 2021:
Table E-1: Survey types and proposed methodologies

Type of Duration Remarks

Surveys
Link Counts 7-day, 16-hour Done to determine the nature of traffic in terms
counts (0600h – of volumes and traffic characteristics along the
2200h) sections.

Turning 7-day, 16-hour Done to determine the nature of traffic in terms

Movement counts (0600h – of volumes and traffic characteristics at major
counts 2200h) junctions.

3-day, 16-hour 3-day counts at other junctions along the road.

counts (0600h –
2200h)

Origin – 3-day, 16-hour Establish traffic movement patterns, commodity

Destination surveys (0600h – flow, route choice, freight and occupancy rates,
survey 2200h) and potential diverted traffic by analysing
captive origin-destination pairs.

Axle load 3-day, 16-hour Establish existing axle loading for all commercial
surveys surveys (0600h – vehicle classes plying the project road and on
2200h) any road links that are likely to divert onto the
project road in the future.

E4.2. Normal Traffic

Table E-2 below summarizes the normal AADT obtained for each road
section from the traffic data collection.

Table E-2: Normal AADT per Road Section

Road Total Total
with without
Section
Motorcy Motorcy
cles cles
Kiarutara – Thika A2 Junction - Gatunyu 8,605 6,606

E-21
Road Total Total
with without
Section
Motorcy Motorcy
cles cles
Gatanga – Thika Gatunyu – Gatanga Junction 4,037 3,583
(B20)
Gatanga Junction – Gatura Junction 4,355 3,548
Gatura Junction - Kiarutara 953 588
Gilgil – A8/G711438 Junction - CBD 7,297 3,582
Nyahururu –
A8/A4 Junction - CBD 1,698 1,619
Rumuruti (A4)
Gilgil (Barracks) - Ol Kalou Junction 6,563 4,062
Ol Kalou Junction - Ol Joro Orok Junction 15,927 9,997
Ol Joro Orok Junction - 6,266
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A 5,002
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A - 13,180
Nyahururu/Nyeri Junction 7,612
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A - Ol Jabet 8,694 4,520
Ol Jabet - Rumuruti R/A 3,708 2,331
Buuri – Katheri – Ena-Kathwana 6,636 4,147
Meru – Chaaria –
Kathwana-Mitunguu junction 4,037 1,548
Mitunguu –
Kathwana – Mitunguu junction-Gitimbine Junction 3,165 1,148
Ishiara – Ena
Gitimbine Junction-Katheri 12,742 5,879
(B65) Roads
Katheri-Mujujuni cross junction 1,265 483
Mujujuni cross junction-Kisima 2,560 1,444

E4.3. Diverted and Generated Traffic

Diverted or reassigned traffic refers to traffic that changes from an
alternative route to the project road, but still travels between the same
origins and destinations. Generated traffic is additional traffic on the
improved road or route that was not present without improvement.
Generated traffic is, essentially, a result of increased development that
can be directly attributed to road improvement. Considering all growth
factors and applying transport elasticity, the expected generated traffic
along all the project roads were determined and added to the normal and
diverted traffic to get the design traffic.
E4.4. Traffic Growth Rates
The adopted traffic growth rates for use in forecasting the traffic are
shown in Table E-3.

E-22
Table E-3: Adopted Traffic Growth Rate for the Project Roads
A4 and B20 B65
Vehicle Type Lo Medi Hig Lo Medi Hig
w um h w um h
Motor Cycles, Tuk tuks, Cars, & 4WDs 3.3 5.3 6.3 3.3 5.3 6.4
10.
Matatus and Large buses 5.4 8.5 3.1 5.0 5.9
1
Pick-Up/Utility Vehicles & 2 Axle
2 3.2 3.8 2 3.2 3.9
Trucks (LGV MGV)
3, 4, 5 & 6 Axle Trucks 2.5 4.0 4.8 2.7 4.4 5.3

E-23
E4.5. Future Traffic
The future traffic at opening, and at 10 years and 20 years after opening is shown in Table E-4.

Table E-4: Normal; Diverted; Generated; Total at Opening; 10 years after; 20 years after opening
Generate
d& AADT AADT
Road Section
AADT Diverted AADT at (Year (Year
2021 Traffic Opening 10) 20)
Gilgil – Nyahururu A8/G711438 Junction 3,728 363 5,111 9,413 13,394
– Rumuruti (A4)
A8/A4 Junction - Gilgil (Barracks) 1,698 166 2,344 4,393 6,334
Gilgil (Barracks) – Ol Kalou Junction 4,812 462 6,510 11,622 16,176
Olkalau Junction - Ol-joro orok Junction 7,915 772 10,874 20,134 28,780
Ol-joro orok Junction - Nyahururu/Nakuru
592
R/A 6,063 8,332 15,422 22,020
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A -
920
Nyahururu/Nyeri Junction 9,282 12,960 24,865 36,417
Nyahururu/Nyeri Junction - Ol-Jabet 5,772 565 7,953 14,823 21,292
Ol-Jabet - Rumuruti R/A 3,708 359 5,060 9,243 13,099
Kiarutara – Thika A2 Junction - Gatunyu 8,605 924 11,843 21,679 30,810
Gatanga – Thika
Gatunyu - Gatanga Junction 4,037 487 5,677 10,674 15,440
(B20)
Gatanga Junction - Gatura Junction 4,094 490 5,721 10,639 15,294
Gatura Junction - Kiarutara 3,836 461 5,316 9,632 13,548
Buuri – Katheri – Ena - Kathwana 3,433 499 4,706 7,889 10,488
Meru – Chaaria –
Kathwana - Mitunguu junction 4,037 560 5,574 9,587 12,944
Mitunguu –
Kathwana – Mitunguu junction - Gitimbine Junction 3,165 478 4,414 7,607 10,284
Ishiara – Ena Gitimbine Junction - Katheri 4,778 626 6,502 10,982 14,664
(B65) Roads Katheri - Mujujuni cross junction 1,265 297 1,862 3,160 4,242
Mujujuni cross junction - Kisima 2,560 420 3,600 6,181 8,337

E-24
E4.6. Basic Capacities and Cross-section Types
The basic capacity for the project roads were calculated using
appropriate Passenger Car Units (PCUs) factors for each road section.
The proposed cross-section types obtained are summarised in Table E-5,
which are based on the medium growth rates for a 10-year design period
(2038).
Table E-5: Recommended Typical Cross-section for all roads
Road Section Name TCS
Remarks
Type
Dual
I
Thika A2 Junction - Gatunyu Carriageway
Kiarutar Single
II
a– Gatunyu - Gatanga Junction Carriageway
Thika Single
II
(B20) Gatanga Junction - Gatura Junction Carriageway
Single
II or III
Gatura Junction - Kiarutara Carriageway
A8/G711438 Junction - CBD Single
II
Carriageway
A8/A4 Junction - CBD Single
II or III
Carriageway
Gilgil (Barracks) – Ol Kalou Junction Single
II
Carriageway
Gilgil –
Ol Kalou Junction - Ol Joro Orok Single
Nyahur II
Junction Carriageway
uru –
Ol Joro Orok Junction - Single
Rumuru II
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A Carriageway
ti (A4)
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A - Single
II
Nyahururu/Nyeri Jnc. Carriageway
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A - Ol Jabet Single
II
Carriageway
Ol Jabet - Rumuruti R/A Single
II
Carriageway
Gitimbine Junction-Katheri Single
II
Buuri – Carriageway
Meru – Katheri-Mujujune cross junction Single
II or III
Ena Carriageway
(B65) Mujujune cross junction-Kisima Single
II
Carriageway

E4.7. Pavement Loading and Design Recommendations

The Equivalence Factor (EF) of an axle is its pavement damaging effect
in relation to a standard axle which has a load of 80 KN. Table E-6 shows
the computed equivalence factors for the various road sections.

E-25
Table E-6: Adopted Equivalence Factors
Vehicle Equivalence Factors
Vehicle Thika – Gilgil – Nyahururu – Buuri –
Category Kiarutara Nyahururu Rumuruti Meru – Ena
(B20) (A4) (A4) (B65)
LGV 0.004 0.009 0.012 0.084
MGV 1.379 4.828 2.339 2.045
HGV 1 3.172 2.013 0.786 0.085
HGV 2 0.465 0.798 2.400 1.736

The recommended traffic classes, based on the EFs and the future traffic
volumes, and pavement design recommendations are shown in Table E-8,
E-9 and Table E-10. They have been designed in accordance with
recommendations in Kenya Road Design Manual Part III for new roads
and reconstructed roads, and Kenya Road Design Manual V for overlays
and rehabilitations. The design options take into account the traffic
classes, alignment soils and availability of construction materials.

E-26
Table E-8: Proposed Pavement Options for Buuri -Katheri -Meru -Chaaria -Mitunguu -Kathwana - Ishiara – Ena
(B65) Road
Road Section Leng Traffi CES Recommended Pavement Structure
th c A Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
(Km) Class
Ena-Kathwana T3 5.68 Recently constructed
Kathwana- T3 3.52
Recently constructed
Mitunguu junction
Mitunguu T3 3.31
junction-Gitimbine Recently constructed
Junction
Gitimbine 7.4 T3 6.53 Scarify surfacing. Adopt Scarify surfacing. Adopt
Junction-Katheri existing base and subbase as existing base and subbase as
new subbase layer. Apply the new subbase layer. Apply the
following new layers: following new layers:
Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Surfacing: DSD
Type II Base: 150 mm GCS Class B
Base: 150 mm GCS Class C Widening to 11m
Widening to 11m
Katheri - Kithaku 3.2 T4 1.51 Currently under construction
Kithaku - 11.7 T4 1.51 Surfacing: DSD Surfacing: DSD Surfacing: DSD
Mujujune Base: 150 mm GCS Class C Base: 150 mm GCS Class C Base: 150 mm GCS Class C
Subbase: 150 mm CIG Subbase: 150 mm GCS Class Subbase: 200mm Natural
Subgrade: reprocess C Material (soft
subgrade to form improved Subgrade: reprocess stone/weathered rock)
SG Class S3; subgrade to form improved Subgrade: reprocess
Widening to 11m SG Class S3; subgrade to form improved
Widening to 11m SG Class S3;
Widening to 11m
Mujujune - 15.66 T4 2.45 Scarify surfacing and base Scarify surfacing and base Scarify surfacing and base
Buuri/Kisima and set aside GCS for reuse; and set aside GCS for reuse; and set aside GCS for reuse;
Adopt gravel subbase as new Adopt gravel reprocess Adopt gravel reprocess
subgrade. Apply the following subbase and adopt as new subbase and adopt as new
layers: subgrade. Apply the following subgrade. Apply the following
Surfacing: DSD layers: layers:

E-27
 Base: 150 mm GCS Class C Surfacing: DSD Surfacing: DSD
Subbase: 150 mm CIG Base: 150 mm GCS Class C Base: 150 mm GCS Class C
Subgrade: Class S3; Subbase: 150 mm GCS Class Subbase: 200mm Natural
Widening to 11m C Material (soft
Subgrade: Class S3; stone/weathered rock)
Widening to 11m Subgrade: Class S3;
Widening to 11m

Table E-9: Proposed Pavement Options for Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4)

Road Section Length Traffic CESA Recommended Pavement

(Km) Class Structure
Option 1 Option 2
A8 Junction - Gilgil 5.7 T3 5.5 Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type I Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type I
CBD Base: 150 mm GCS Base: 150 mm GCS
Subbase: 150 mm CIG Subbase: 150 mm GCS
Gilgil CBD - Ol Kalou 28.7 T3 7.39 Subgrade: Scarify existing + gravel Subgrade: Scarify existing + gravel
to form improved SG Class S4; to form improved SG Class S4;
Widening to 11m Widening to 11m
Ol Kalou - Nyahururu 33.2 T2 14.8 Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type I Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type I
Base: 125mm DBM Base: 125mm DBM
Subbase: 175mm CIG Subbase: 175mm GCS
Subgrade: Scarify existing + gravel Subgrade: Scarify existing + gravel
to form improved SG Class S4; to form improved SG Class S4;
Widening to 11m Widening to 11m
Nyahururu - 43.7 T3 6.27 Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type I Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type I
Rumuruti Base: 150 mm GCS Base: 150 mm GCS
Subbase: 150 mm CIG Subbase: 150 mm GCS
Subgrade: Scarify existing + gravel Subgrade: Scarify existing + gravel
to form improved SG Class S4; to form improved SG Class S4;
Widening to 11m Widening to 11m

E-28
E-29
Table E-10: Proposed Pavement Options for Kiarutara -Gatanga –Thika

Road Section Leng Traffi CESA Recommended Pavement Structure

th c
Option 1 Option 2
(Km) Class
A2 Thika 9.9 T3 6.86 Scarify existing surfacing and adopt existing base
Junction - as new subbase;
Gatunyu Widening to 11m
Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type II
Base: 150 mm GCS Class B
Gatunyu - 21.1 T4 2.24 Scarify existing surfacing and adopt existing base
Gatanga as new subbase;
Junction Widening to 11m
Surfacing: Triple SD Scarify existing surfacing and adopt
Base: 150 mm GCS Class C existing base as new subbase;
Widening to 11m
Gatanga T3 4.01 Scarify existing surfacing and adopt existing base Surfacing: DSD
Junction - as new subbase; Base: 150 mm GCS Class B
Gatura Junction Widening to 11m
Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type II
Base: 150 mm GCS Class B
Gatura Junction 11.22 T4 2.34 Scarify existing surfacing and adopt existing base
- Kiarutara as new subbase;
Widening to 11m
Surfacing: Triple SD
Base: 150 mm GCS Class C
Gatakaini - 28 Currently under construction
Njabini

E-30
E4.8. Structural Design
The design of structures was carried out following recommendations of
the Kenya Road Design Manual Part IV Bridge Design, Ministry of Public
Works & Housing, Standard Drainage Structures Manual Part 1,
Standards Culverts and Drifts Manual, British Standards BS 5400 and
relevant Eurocode standards and annexes.
Table E-11 and Table E-12 summarise the proposed design of the minor
and major drainage structures for each road.
Table E-11: Proposed Minor Structures
Pipe Diameter (mm)
Road Type Total
450mm 600mm 900mm 1200mm
No.
Existing Pipe
2 23 15 2 44
Culverts
B20
Proposed Pipe
42 2 44
Culverts
Existing Pipe
1 51 120 2 183
Culverts
A4
Proposed Pipe
181 2 183
Culverts
Existing Pipe
- 11 23 1 37
Culverts
B65
Proposed Pipe
36 1 37
Culverts

E-31
Table E-12: Proposed Major Structures
Existing Structures Proposed Structures
No Chaina
Location Structur Span/ W Ht Proposed
. ge Status Type Comments
e type Dia (m) (m) (m) Structure
Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20)
1 2+839 Near Bahati Box Existin 3.6 7.2 3.3 1 cell 3 x 2.5 Box Narrow crossing, replace
Ridge culvert g Culvert with new box culvert,
single cell 3 x 2.5
2 31+572 After Gatura Armco Existin 1.2 1.2 1 cell 1200mm Pipe Replace with 1200mm
Centre Single g pipe Culvert pipe culvert
Cell
3 31+637 After Gatura River Existin 8 and 10 4 3.3 Retain existing Retain the bridge,
Centre bridge g and structure rehabilitate the furniture.
5.5
Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4)
1 6+294 Near Army River Existin 9 7 2 cell 4 x 2.5 Box Retain, repair the
Barracks Gate Bridge g Culvert furniture, mark narrow
and provide footbridge;
or replace the structure
with box culvert, 2 cell 4
x 2.5
2 8+359 Pembroke Rail over Existin 5.6 4.2 Rail over Road Rail Replace with adequately
Road g (Span @13.5m Bridge designed rail over road
Bridge Skew) bridge.

3 18+238 Chokereria Box Existin 4 7 3 1 cell 4 x 3 Box Replace with a new box
Culvert/Sl g Culvert culvert, single cell 4 x 3
ab bridge
4 20+895 Before ArmCo Existin 4 50 1 cell 5 x 4 Box Replace with box culvert,
Oleliondo Single g Culvert single cell 5 x 4
cell
5 22+666 Oleleondo Railway Propos 13 (Span @15m Bridge Replace with adequately
bridge ed Skew) (Road designed road over rail
over bridge.
Rail)
6 23+928 After Oleleondo River Existin 16.5 7.4 Retain existing Retain, repair defects on

E-32
 Existing Structures Proposed Structures
No Chaina
Location Structur Span/ W Ht Proposed
. ge Status Type Comments
e type Dia (m) (m) (m) Structure
(Deep Gorge) Bridge g structure deck soffit, and mark
narrow
7 32+078 Before Ol Kalou Box Existin 4 7.2 1 cell 4 x 2.5 Box Replace with new box
Culvert/Sl g Culvert culvert, single cell 4 x 2.5
ab bridge
8 33+503 Ol Kalou 1x1 Box Existin 7.4 1 cell 2 x 1.5 Box Replace with new box
culvert g to Culvert culvert, single cell 2 x 1.5
1200m
m twin
9 33+945 Ol Kalou Twin Existin 7.4 2 cell 1200mm Pipe Replace with new
900mm g to Culvert multicell pipe culvert,
box twin cell 1200mm
culvert
10 54+614 Before Ol Joro Railway Propos 15 (Span @15m Bridge Replace with adequately
Orok bridge ed Skew) (Road designed road over rail
over bridge.
Rail)
11 56+540 At bridge River Existin 12 7.4 (Span @15m) Bridge Replace with proposed
centre near Ol Bridge g new bridge, single span
Joro Orok 15m.

12 62+084 Nyandarua Bridge Existin 6 7.4 2 cell 4 x 3 Box Replace with new box
Polytechnic g Culvert culvert,2 cell 4 x3
13 67+540 Nyahururu Box Existin 3 7.4 4 1 cell 4 x 3 Box Replace with new box
Culvert/Sl g Culvert culvert, single cell 4 x 3
ab bridge
14 67+867 Nyahururu Bridge Propos Interchange (2 Bridge Proposed new
Bypasses ed Spans @ 20m) interchange bridge - road
over road, two span
@20m.
15 82+900 After Maili ArmCo Existin 2 2 1 cell 3 x2 Box Replace with new box
saba single g Culvert culvert,single cell 3 x 2
cell
16 86+013 Before Ol Jabet Armco 3 Existin 2 2 2 cell 4 x2 Box Replace with new box

E-33
 Existing Structures Proposed Structures
No Chaina
Location Structur Span/ W Ht Proposed
. ge Status Type Comments
e type Dia (m) (m) (m) Structure
cell g Culvert culvert,2 cell 4 x2
17 91+918 Before Armco 2 Existin 2 2 2 cell 3 x2 Box Replace with new box
Limunga centre Cell g Culvert culvert,2 cell 3 x2
18 92+560 Limunga centre Armco 3 Existin 2 2 2 cell 4 x2 Box Replace with new box
cell g Culvert culvert,2 cell 4 x2
19 96+000 After Junction Armco 2 Existin 2 2 2 cell 3 x2 Box Replace with new box
Shopping Cell g Culvert culvert,2 cell 3 x2
centre

Existing Structures Proposed Structures

No Chaina
Location Structur Span/ W Ht Proposed
. ge Status Type Comments
e type Dia (m) (m) (m) Structure
Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20)
Buuri – Ena (B65)
1 0+000 Meru/ Tharaka Bridge Propos 20 12 6 Interchange (2 Bridge Proposed new
Interchange ed Spans @ 20m) interchange bridge - road
over road, two span
@20m.
2 4+358 After Kainginyo Box Existin 2.5 10.3 2.5 Retain existing Box Could be retained, install
market culvert g structure or Culvert guardrails, in good
replace with 2 condition or replace with
cell 2 x2 single cell 2 x 2
3 5+730 Kianthumbi Box Existin 2.5 2.5 Retain existing Box Could be retained, install
Methodist culvert g structure or Culvert guardrails, in fair
replace with 2 condition or replace with
cell 2 x3 single cell 2 x 2
4 9+274 After Kithaku River Existin 7 4 14 Bdg No. 1 (Span Bridge Replace with proposed
bridge g @10m) new bridge, single span
10m.
5 31+40 After Ntimiriti Box Existin 2 cell 14 Retain existing Should be retained - one

E-34
 Existing Structures Proposed Structures
No Chaina
Location Structur Span/ W Ht Proposed
. ge Status Type Comments
e type Dia (m) (m) (m) Structure
0 culvert + g @5m structure cell is for animal crossing
animal and the other for
crossing drainage.

E-35
E4.9. Preliminary Cost Estimates
The construction cost estimates for the proposed project road sections
and pavement options are shown in Table E-13.
Table E-13: Cost Estimates for each road section showing cost options
Road Homogenous Section Financial Cost
Pavement Pavement Pavement
Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
(Ksh) (Ksh) (Ksh)
A4 A8 Junction - Gilgil CBD 628,055,173 621,817,768 None
.70 .29
Gilgil CBD - Ol Kalou 2,151,154,0 2,119,748,1 None
09.20 25.84
Ol Kalou - Nyahururu 4,038,259,3 3,995,874,1 None
13.79 37.88
Nyahururu - Rumuruti 5,032,488,0 5,457,555,6 None
49.29 76.89
Nyahururu Eastern 296,624,583 293,305,262 None
Bypass (New) .97 .97
B20 A2 Thika Junction - 1,100,593,8 1,058,846,6 None
Gatunyu 07.94 11.79
Gatunyu - Gatura 1,529,269,2 973,414,711 None
60.64 .39
Gatura - Kiarutara 685,639,618 567,408,565 None
.07 .13
B65 Gitimbine - Katheri 583,624,088 543,435,581 None
.49 .67
Katheri - Kithaku 260,051,938 278,727,678 255,642,38
.05 .21 8.29
Kithaku - Mujujune 726,132,893. 794,416,068. 710,010,476
22 18 .91
Mujujune - Buuri/Kisima 874,725,982. 699,553,376. 699,553,376
72 19 .19

E5. Environmental and Social Impact Assessments

E5.1. Environmental Context
An initial environmental evaluation was undertaken to help in classifying
the project according to environmental sensitivity. Based on the
Environmental (Impact Assessment and Audit) (Amendment) Regulations,
2019, construction of new major roads including trunk roads are

E-36
classified as high risk project, whereas construction and rehabilitation of
roads including collectors and access roads is considered a medium risk
project. Based on the screening and scoping exercise of the project
roads, it is evident that there is a need to construct new major roads that
will be flagged as high-risk projects. Some of the environmental impacts
and mitigation measures that are likely to arise from the project are
summarised below.

E-37
E-14: Ranking of Road projects from the highest to lowest priority
Road Name Positive Impacts Negative Impacts
Gilgil-  Availability of  Poor drainage systems
Nyahururu- transportation  Loss of biodiversity
Rumuruti (A4)  Good networking  Increased soil erosion
Road  Create employment  Impacts on infrastructure
 Ease of communication (damage on property,) and
 Easy accessibility loss of land
 Maintenance of vehicle will  Pollution (air and noise)
be minimized  Loss of source of income
 Peaceful coexistence  Interference with road
especially along the safety
Rumuruti section where  Public Health
cattle rustling is a common
event among the residents
Kiarutara-  Increased economic  Lack of drainage systems
Gatanga-Thika activities.  Loss of biodiversity
(B20) Road  Improved transport system  Increased Soil erosion
and enhanced accessibility  Demolition of structures
 Rapid and cheap and relocation of utilities
transportation of especially those located on
perishable farm the road reserve
 Pollution (air and noise)
 Loss of source of income
 Increased road accidents
 Public Health
Buuri-Katheri-  Long –term regional  Increased human-wildlife
Meru-Chaaria- economic planning interaction
Mitunguu-  Meru, Tharaka Nithi, and  Loss of biodiversity
Kathwana- Embu County governments  Increased Soil erosion
Ishiara (B65) could provide incentives to  Interference with
Road investors in the area and surface/ground water
promote development of resources
sectors such as  Impacts on infrastructure
agriculture, industries, (damage on property)
tourism.  Increased pollution (air
 Focus on regular and noise)
maintenance of the road  Generation of solid/liquid
 Proactive planning in wastes
anticipation of enhanced  Loss of source of income
immigration to the area  Increased road Accidents
 Public Health

E-38
E5.2. Social Context
E5.2.1. Project suitability and baseline indicators
The social survey results along the three roads, based on the four socio-
economic features are outlined in the table below.
E-15: Ranking of Road projects from the highest to lowest priority
Road Projects Employment Income Highest Level of Rank
Status (%people Educatio Insecur
earning below n Level ity
the minimum
wage of KES
15,000/=)
Kiarutara- Self- 56.7% Secondar 25.8% Highes
Gatanga- employment - y-30.8% t
Thika (B20) 35.8% Priorit
Road Wages/Salary- y
31.7%
Farming-27.5%
Buuri- Self- 55.7% College/ 15.6% Mediu
Katheri-Meru- employment - University m
Chaaria- 30% -29.3% priorit
Mitunguu- Wages/Salary- y
Kathwana- 18.8%
Ishiara-Ena Farming-36.9%
(B65) Road
Gilgil- Self- 24.8% College/ 8.2% Low
Nyahururu- employment - University priorit
Rumuruti 56% -34.85% y
(A4) Road Wages/Salary-
21.6%
Farming-17.9%

Based on the results of the survey, the construction of the Kiarutara-

Gatanga-Thika (B20) Road should be given the highest priority because
the households along the road project have the highest percentage
earning below the recommended minimum wage of KSh. 15,000. Most of
the residents (30.8%) have studied up to the secondary level of
education, and the area has the highest percentage level of insecurity
(25.8%).
Significant socio-economic impact is expected across the three road
projects during the construction period. This is because of the many
encroachments recorded along the road reserve particularly at the towns
and market centres. Displacement of households will require a
Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) to be established. It is also important for
an income restoration programme to be established to ensure the
affected households are not adversely affected during the construction
phase. Grievances are prone to arise especially if demolitions and
acquisitions of private land is inevitable. It would be necessary to

E-39
establish measures within the project framework to protect the Project
Affected Persons (PAPs).

E-40
E6. Economic Evaluation
E6.1. Results
The economic appraisal was carried out using HDM-4 2.10 Software.
Project analysis was carried for project packages and sections as follows:
(1) Package wise Analysis: Package 1: A8 Junction -Gilgil – Nyahururu –
Rumuruti (A4) Road: 113.9 Km; Package 2: Thika-Gatanga-Kiarutara
(B20) Road: 42.22 Km; and, Package 3: Gitimbine – Katheri-Kithaku-
Mujujune-Buuri/Kisima; 37.96 Km; and, (2) Homogeneous Section-wise
Analysis for six sections of the three road projects, taking into account
the packaging for construction as lots.
Table E-16: Base Case Economic Analysis Results by Project Packages
Project Package Pavement Option Pavement Option Pavement Option
1 2 3
EIRR NPV* EIRR NPV* EIRR NPV*
Package 1 31.3% 216.54 30.0% 198.5 N/A N/A
Package 2 17.2% 28.77 17.0% 26.83 N/A N/A
Package 3 35.5% 28.51 37.6% 28.74 17.4% 2.47
Source: Consultant 2021, *NPV in USD Million

Based on the EIRR and NPV results of the package-wise analysis:

1. Package 1 and Package 2 projects with Pavement Option 1 are
recommended; and,
2. Package 3 project with Pavement Option 2 was recommended.
Sensitivity analyses were undertaken for these best options, which
established that Pavement Option 1 was robust in terms of economic
indices for Package 1 & Package 2. Pavement Option 2 was also robust
for Package 3 (Table E-17). The Pavement Options were thus
recommended at pre-feasibility study stage for the project packages.
Table E-17: Project Package Sensitivity Analysis
Projec
t Design Design Design
Sensitivity Scenario Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Packa
ge EIR
NPV* EIRR NPV EIRR NPV
R
Increase in Capital Cost 28.9 205. 27.6 186.7
N/A N/A
+20% % 29 % 2
Decrease in Project Benefits - 28.2 161. 27.0 147.0
Packa N/A N/A
20% % 98 % 2
ge 1
Combination of Scenarios-1
25.9 150. 24.7 135.2
& -2 (Capital Costs +20% & N/A N/A
% 74 % 4
Benefits -20%)
Increase in Capital Cost 16.4 25.5 16.4
24.17 N/A N/A
+20% % 7 %
Packa Decrease in Project Benefits - 16.2 19.8 16.2
ge 2 18.80 N/A N/A
20% % 1 %
Combination of Scenarios-1 15.4 16.6 15.5 16.13 N/A N/A

E-41
 & -2 (Capital Costs +20% &
% 1 %
Benefits -20%)
Increase in Capital Cost 31.5 33.5 27.0
26.41 14.7% 2.47
+20% % % 3
Decrease in Project Benefits - 30.6 32.6 21.2
Packa 20.71 14.1% 1.59
20% % % 8
ge 3
Combination of Scenarios-1
26.9 28.9 19.5
& -2 (Capital Costs +20% & 18.61 11.6% -0.37
% % 8
Benefits -20%)
Source: Consultant 2021, NPV in USD millions

Combined Switch Value Analysis

This involved altering all the factors (Costs or Benefits) to change
accordingly.
 For Package 1: The switching value tests showed that an increase
in costs by 70.0% and a corresponding decrease in benefits by
65.0% would be required to reduce the EIRR to 12.0% & NPV=0
and make the package economically unviable.
 For Package 2: The switching value tests showed that an increase
in costs by 53.0% and a corresponding decrease in benefits by
45.5% would be required to reduce the EIRR to 12.0% & NPV=0
and make the package economically unviable.
 For Package 3: The switching value tests showed that an increase
in costs by 52.0% and a corresponding decrease in benefits by
65.2% would be required to reduce the EIRR to 12.0% & NPV=0
and make the package economically unviable.

E6.2. Homogeneous HDM-4 Section-wise Analysis

The study carried out homogeneous section-wise analysis for six sections
of the three road projects, taking into account the packaging for
construction as lots, as listed below:
1. A8 Junction to Gilgil CBD-Ol Kalou-Nyahururu Bypass Start Road:
64.81 Km under Package 1
2. Nyahururu Bypass Road, Nyahururu Town Road & Nyahururu to
Rumuruti Road: 49.09 Km under Package 1
3. A2 Thika Junction-Gatunyu-Gatura Road: 31.0 Km under Package 2
4. Gatura to Kiarutara Road: 11.22 Km under Package 2
5. Gitimbine-Katheri-Kithaku Road: 10.6 Km under Package 3

E-42
The sectional analysis for Kithaku-Mujujune-Buuri/Kisima: 27.36 Km
showed that the NPV results for Pavement Option 3 was most desirable.
The Consultant therefore recommends that the Pre-Feasibility and
Appraisal Study for Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) Road; Kiarutara –
Gatanga – Thika (B20) Road; and, Buuri/Kisima– Katheri –
Meru/Gitimbine (B65) Road should proceed to the next stage
Overall Project Homogeneous Sectional Ranking
The overall sectional ranking was also undertaken to establish the
economic performance of the various homogenous sections, in terms of
NPV/Cost Ratio. In order to maximize the return to a limited budget, the
sections with higher NPVs per dollar were ranked higher.
The results show that given an amount of available budget, the projects
could be selected to proceed to the next stage in the following order,
based on their recommended Design Pavement Options.

Table E-17: Project Benefits

Packa Road Road Section Leng Sectio Section NPV/ Rankin
ge Sectio Name th nal Financial Cost g Score
n ID Financ Cost Ratio Based
ial (USD) on
Cost/K NPV/Co
m st Ratio
(USD)
Packag A4:00 A8 Junction to 64.81 991,67 64,270,19 5.933 1
e1 1- Gilgil CBD-Ol 1 0.9
A4:00 Kalou-
3 Nyahururu
Bypass Start
Packag B65:0 Gitimbine- 10.6 598,83 6,347,652 5.268 2
e3 01- Katheri- 5 .5
B65:0 Kithaku
02
Packag B20:0 A2 Thika 31 730,24 22,637,58 1.627 3
e2 01- Junction- 5 4.6
B20:0 Gatunyu-
02 Gatura
Packag A4:00 Nyahururu 49.09 730,24 35,847,71 1.021 4
e1 4b, Bypass Road, 5 0.6
A4:00 Nyahururu
4c, Town Road &
A4:00 Nyahururu to
4a & Rumuruti
A4:00
5
Packag B20:0 Gatura to 11.22 730,24 8,193,345 0.735 5
e2 03 Kiarutara 5 .1

E-43
 Packag B65:0 Kithaku- 27.36 730,24 19,979,49 -0.349 6
e3 03- Mujujune- 5 4.0
B65:0 Buuri/Kisima
04

Project Benefits
Quantifiable Benefits
It is important to note that for the realization of the expected project
benefits to the road users, the upgrading of the trunk roads, A4, B20 and
B65 project roads, with the recommended Design Pavement Option
should be carried out.
The Table below summarises the tangible / quantifiable benefits, viz.
savings in VOC, VoTT, NMT Travel Time Operating Costs and Accident
Cost Savings.

E-44
Table E-18: Project Benefits
Project Benefit Area

Benefit (NPV used

Savings in Vehicle

Savings in Travel
Time Costs (USD

as a Proxy) (USD
Operating Costs

Operating Costs
Savings in NMT
(USD Millions)

(USD Millions)
Development
Package

Length

Millions)

Millions)
Travel &
Road
Sectio Road Section Name
n ID

A8 Junction to Gilgil
A4:001
CBD-Ol Kalou- 64.8
- 183.73 31.91 0.3 185.01
Nyahururu Bypass 1
A4:003
Start
Package 1

A4:004
b,
Nyahururu Bypass
A4:004
Road, Nyahururu Town 49.0
c, 41.2 13.11 0.22 27.67
Road & Nyahururu to 9
A4:004
Rumuruti
a &
A4:005
113.
Total
90
B20:00
1- A2 Thika Junction-
Package 2

31 25.02 9.4 0.04 21.48

B20:00 Gatunyu-Gatura
2

B20:00 11.2
Gatura to Kiarutara 5.54 2.47 0.03 3.43
3 2

42.2
Total
2
B65:00
1- Gitimbine-Katheri-
10.6 525.05 9.15 0.07 28.8
Package 3

B65:00 Kithaku
2
B65:00
3- Kithaku-Mujujune- 27.3
10.56 2.56 0.6 4.72
B65:00 Buuri/Kisima 6
4
37.9
Total
6
Source: Consultant 2021

E-45
Savings in Road Maintenance Cost
Results generated from HDM-4 analysis showed that upgrading all the
project roads will likely generate savings in road maintenance cost of
approximately USD 591,993 during the first ten-year period from year
2025 to year 2034. This is because, the improved A4, B20 and B65 road
networks will require less road maintenance intervention compared to
the without project case.

Non-Quantifiable Benefits
For the reference, the benefits, which are non-quantifiable and which
would be realized from implementing this project are as follows: Overall
Economic Benefits: improved labour mobility for better employment
opportunities; reduced total transport cost of goods and services,
improved investments, and activities in the counties in the project road
area of influence and increased overall economic growth; Social and
Gender Benefits: reduced incidences of theft and crime (Gender Based
Violence) on women, children and physically challenged people.
Improved quality of life for the residents in in the project road areas of
influence; Road Safety: reduction in fatal, serious and slight road
accidents. Improved and safe pedestrian movement; Regional
Integration and Cross Border Trade: Upgrading the A4 Road from A8
Junction to Gilgil-Nyahururu and Rumuruti will facilitate transportation
of freight and passengers along the corridor between Kenya and
Ethiopia. This will help stimulate economic growth and thus reduce
poverty in Kenya and Ethiopia and specifically in the counties traversed
by the road corridor; and National Inter and Intra County Trade:
upgrading the A4, B20 and B65 project roads will stimulate inter and
intra county trade in goods and services. The roads will also facilitate
movement of labour between towns and counties in order to access
gainful employment opportunities. The roads will act as a catalyst in
unlocking the economic potential of the project road areas of influence.
It is important to note that the non-quantifiable benefit areas mentioned
above are additional benefits to the road users. Therefore, the magnitude
of benefits of the proposed interventions under the project case, i.e.,
quantifiable plus non-quantifiable, would be much higher, and
accordingly the project evaluation needs to be considered for making
decisions.

E7. Results-Based Logical Framework

Monitoring and Evaluation is used to assess the performance of projects
set up by governments with the goal to improve current and future
management of outputs, outcomes and impacts. The indicators for the
project roads have been developed based on the logical levels of the

E-46
results chain namely impact, output and outcome result chain areas. The
indicators are divided into three main types:
Output indicators: These describe the extent of completion of project
and its associated services and components. e.g. Kms of roads
constructed.
Outcome indicators: The outcome indicators assess the extent of
utilization of the resource, the user satisfaction of the resource and level
of adoption of the resource or service. E.g. % number of new road users
using the road.
Impact indicators: Impact indicators assess the benefits accrued by the
population in the targeted area from use of the outputs. Direct benefits
are those that are experienced by the beneficiaries. Indirect benefits, in
this case, are statistical changes in macro development indicators which
can be attributed to the improvements in the road infrastructure, and the
usage of the road by the population of the target area.

E-47
Table E-19: Summary Performance Indicators for the RBLF
PROJECT NAME-----1. GILGIL-NYAHURURU- RUMURUTI (A4); 2. KIARUTARA-GATANGA-THIKA(B20); 3. BUURI-
KATHERI-MERU-CHAARIA-MITUNGUU- KATHWANA- ISHIARA- ENA (B65) ROAD
PROJECT PURPOSE: To inform the client on the viability of the proposed road projects and on which roads should be
prioritized for detailed designs.
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ASSUMPTIONS/RISKS
MEANS OF
RESULTS CHAIN and MITIGATION BENEFICIARY
INDICATOR Baseline Target VERIFICATION
MEASURES
Improved Reduced To be Average Field surveys; Assumption: Reduction Population of
transport average travel determined travel time Baseline data; of travel time by half. the County
conditions, time on the before project on project evaluation Residents willing to
mobility and road; commencemen road to reports; participate in the
accessibility Reduced t reduce at observations project and commit
to services accidents opening; resources, e.g. water,
and along the quarry etc
15 minutes
amenities proposed Reduced congestion
– B20
within the roads; Fewer structures to
counties of Accessibility to 30 minutes– relocate to save on cost
proposed social services B65, A4 and time;
road in the health & Risk: Unfavourable
corridors and education macro-economic
other sectors; conditions & Non-
Counties conducive business
environment; Delayed
relocation of facilities
IMPACT

Mitigation: The GoK to

continue supporting
infrastructural projects.

E-48
Improved Volume of To be Local trade Observation; Assumption: the County
trade and trade growth determined to grow in Data from the government and other
Agricultural in the County; before project value and Ministry of neighbouring Counties
activities in Increase of commencemen volume by Industrialization, to continue and remain
the County Small and t 50% in the Trade and committed to their trade
and the Middle Size year 2028 Enterprise agreements; Improved
neighbouring Businesses; Development; Agricultural practices in
Counties Increase in the County the Counties of the
number of Government proposed road
new Small Trade and
Business and Industry
Roadside departments.
Infrastructure;
Growth in
Sale of
agricultural
inputs,
outputs,
commodities
and daily
essentials
Improved Average Average Average Primary Data Assumption: the County
economic household household household from targeted government and other
and social income monthly incomes area; socio- neighbouring Counties
activities improved; income to increase by economic studies to continue and remain
along the Increase in the increase by 30% by the committed to their trade
proposed sale of --------- during year 2030 agreements;
roads agricultural the first year in the That the pandemic will
corridor produce in the of project area end soon and things to
markets; construction of influence. normalize.
Reduced travel
time to the Risk:
market; Unfavourable political
Increase in environment;
agricultural Unfavourable macro-
and non- economic conditions
agricultural and lack of conducive

E-49
 activities; environment for trader.
Increase in
the % Incomes
from economic
activities
during and
after the
project;
Increase in
the number of
migrant
population
living along
road;
Improved
social
coexistence
among the
communities
where cattle
rustling is
experienced.
Improved Increased During Increase in Land title deeds More investment in the
land values number of construction land Land ownership area to increase the
along the investors and after ownership deeds economic growth of the
project along the road construction of from 30%- Progress reports county
corridor Corridor the road 30% 50% in 5 County land Government and
of people to years after boards reports financial institutions to
own land and project fund development
property in the completion projects by providing
area loans at an affordable
interest rate and flexible
repayment plan
The cost of land may
increase and chase
away the investors

E-50
 Increased Skilled and Beginning of Annual Contractors Government to invest Migrants and
Employment non-skilled every fiscal maintenanc employee and continue supporting the local people
through Road workers year e register; road rehabilitation
maintenance employed on Cost of living; projects;
program road Road Routine maintenance of
maintenance maintenance project facilities, like
project.; register; bus stages, sidewalks
Roads under Monitoring and and drainage;
maintenance; evaluation Encourage local
Ratio of reports. contractors to
women and participate in road
men employed maintenance activities;
on the project.
Reduced Transport After project 1-2 years Favourable macro- 1. Transporters
transport freight and Completion after Project Monitoring economic conditions in 2. Cargo traders
tariffs and shipping cost completion reports; the area. 3. Passengers
logistic costs; reduced by --- Average Monthly progress 4. Private
increased KES travel time reports; Favourable working Vehicle owners.
reliability Decrease in reduced by Data from traffic conditions for works to
and cost of 15 – 30 control unit; continue without
accessibility movement of minutes Vehicles interruptions.
of vehicular cargo by road movement on the
services in users; road The project will be
the region Volume of accepted by the
motorists and beneficiary.
non-motorized
users along
the proposed
road corridor;
Average
number of the
people who
OUTCOMES

can access
reliable and
affordable
public
transport

E-51
 services.
Reduction of % number of After project Continued Field surveys; Assumption: there will Motorists
travel time; new road Completion smooth Observation; smooth flow of traffic
congestion users using traffic flow M&E reports throughout the project
and the road in the next Number of period and after;
accidents % reduction in 10 years; vehicle on the Risks: The increased
along the travel time Travel time road number of motorized
proposed % increase in to reduce by Traffic and crash vehicles proving to be
road automobile 25 - 50% Reports dangerous for those
activities; after the Ministry of who walk, cycle and use
% decrease in completion Health records motorcycles.
accident rate of the on road crash Increase in accidents
along the road project. causalities
section; Increase in
Improved time automobile
taken to activities by
access health 40% within
and education 3 years of
facilities, and construction
amenities completion.
Accidents
reduced by
50% in the
second
year.
Time taken
by
ambulance
and school
children to
reach their
facilities
reduced by
half
Increased Improved After project Reduction NEMA reports; Assumption : that the Residence of
sensitization garbage Completion in air County County governments the County and
on disposal and pollution Government will handle the garbage the

E-52
 Environment waste elements by disposal collection and disposal neighbouring
al Hazards management the year management effectively and towns
Management along the 2030 reports efficiently,
proposed road;
Improved
quality of air
along the
proposed road
due to
reduction in
carbon
emissions and
air pollution

Construction KMs of road During Complete Project Progress Risk: delays in Residents of the
OUTPUTS

of ------------- constructed construction (37/39/111)- reports and implementing RAP county;

km of road phase KMs of road disbursement KeNHA to delay Motorists;
by 2028 and financial payments to the Business men
reports from contractor and women
KeNHA;
Beautificatio Number of Plant There will be no trees The County and
n and trees planted (10,000)tree uprooted its residents
planting of s by 2028
---------------
trees along
the proposed
road.
Resettlement Number of Before project 100% RAP consultative Assumption: all Business women
and facilities to be commencemen completion meetings facilities, services and and men;
rehabilitation relocated and t. of Disbursement PAPs will be relocated County
of facilities rehabilitated; resettlemen and financial early enough before the Municipality
Number of t and MPR reports project starts
PAPs relocated rehabilitatio from KeNHA; Risk: KeNHA and
along the n and Survey reports; Ministry of Housing to
project construction County delay in the
corridor; of market Government disbursement of funds
Number of stalls by the Reports on to the affected persons

E-53
 PAPs end of the displacement and and
compensated; project. compensation; facilities/organization;
Number of Project Refusal of the PAPs to
people Completion relocate
encroaching in Reports. Mitigation: KeNHA to
close commence the process
proximity to ahead of project start.
the road
HIV/AIDS Number of During the Conduct HIV/AIDs Assumption: Project Construction
STI, road construction implementatio HIV/AIDS & information staff to be give Workers;
safety and workers and n phase STIs disseminated at protective gear; Members of the
gender volunteers awareness construction community;
sensitization attending the at least sites Project Staff.
training. after every
Trained six month Contractor's
personnel on during the reports;
the matter project Project progress
period reports
Technical Strengthen the Capacity Monthly and More investment in KeNHA
support traffic building Annual Project capacity building to
management consultanci Progress reports; strengthen KeNHA’s
capacity of es traffic management
KeNHA completed capacity.
Increase by ----
KeNHA’s
capacity to
Maintain and
Upgrade roads
Training and Number of Training at Number of male Risk: low turn-up of Men and women
skill youth trained least 50% of and female artisans to be trained; equipped with
development in artisan female artisans enrolled; lack of qualified artisan skills
courses youth by the Project Progress personnel to train the
Number of end of 2028 reports artisans
youth enrolled Record from
on internship TVET/VTI Low turnout of interns
program to be trained; Lack of

E-54
 qualified personnel to
train the interns; Covid
19 restrictions

COMPONENTS INPUTS
I. Civil Works: Construction of --------------------KMs of the Total Cost with contingencies:
following roads: KES--------------- million:
1. Gilgil – Nyahururu - Rumuruti (A4) - @
KES------------Million
1. Bank loan :KES --------------------Millions
2. Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20); - @
KES------------Million
KEY ACTIVITIES

2. Grant: KES------------------Millions.
3. Buuri – Meru- Ena (B65) --@ KES------------
Million
3. Government of Kenya :KES------------
II. Procurement of Consultancies : Design ; Construction Millions
supervision; Technical Audit services; Maintenance - @
KES---------Million
III. Technical assistance in Traffic Management – -@
KES--------------------million
IV. Relocation of facilities, compensation, and resettlement of
PAPs --@ KES------------Million
V. Training and skills development –KES-----------------million
VI. Signage; Tree planting and beautification - @ KES
-------------------------- million

For each of the above performance baseline and target indicators, means of verification, assumptions/risks and
mitigation measures and project beneficiaries have been defined.

E-55
1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Invitation for Consultancy Services

The Kenya National Highways Authority (KeNHA) has earmarked roads

for construction and detailed design studies as programmed in its FY
2018/2019 – 2022/2023 Strategic Plan. To inform prioritization of the
roads for detailed design studies and construction, the Authority, through
the Development Vote, engaged the services of ITEC Engineering Limited
(ITEC), a Consultancy firm, to undertake a pre-feasibility and appraisal
study of three road links: (1) Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4); (2)
Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20); and, (3) Buuri – Katheri – Meru –
Chaaria – Mitunguu – Kathwana – Ishiara – Ena (B65) Road.

1.2 Contract Details

The relevant details of this Consultancy Services Contract are outlined

below:

1. Contract Title Consultancy Services To Undertake Pre-

Feasibility And Appraisal Study For Gilgil –
Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) – Kiarutara –
Gatanga – Thika (B20), Buuri – Katheri –
Meru – Chaaria – Mitunguu – Kathwana –
Ishiara – Ena (B65) Road

2. Contract Number KeNHA/RD/PSC/3166/2020

Kenya National Highways Authority

3. Client
(KeNHA)

4. Funding Development Fund

5. Notification of Award 30th September 2020

6. Acceptance of Award 5th October 2020

Date of Signing of
7. 03rd November 2020
Contract

8. Date of Commencement 1st January 2021

9. Time for Completion 6 months

10. Date of Completion 30th June 2021

None granted so far. The Consultant has

11. Extension of Time applied for four weeks extension of time
which is under review by the Client

1-1
1-2
1.3 Objectives of the Study

Pre-feasibility assessments are designed to guide decision-makers on

whether investment projects are soundly based on technical, economic,
social and environmental perspectives, or not. Therefore, this study has
been undertaken to provide KeNHA with the necessary information on
the viability of the projects in view of the needs of the country. On
completion, this study will provide the necessary information for deciding
whether or not to proceed to preliminary and detailed engineering design
studies. It will also provide information on alternative ways of achieving
viability and eliminating unviable intervention alternatives.

1.4 Scope of Services

The scope of works as outlined in the Terms of Reference includes, but is

not limited to, the following tasks:
1. Undertake poverty and social assessment of the project area,
including public consultation, gender assessment and social action
plan.
2. Undertake traffic surveys to determine current levels, possible
generated traffic and estimated traffic growth rate given the proposed
intervention.
3. Undertake travel surveys and analyses, including a review of existing
traffic studies on roads with similar characteristics.
4. Estimate the costs for the “without” and “with” project, including
estimates for design, supervision consultancy services, right of way,
social and environmental impacts and mitigation costs, resettlement
costs, construction and future maintenance costs.
5. Map the project road alignment and provide preliminary survey
information and land use.
6. Map stakeholder’s needs and the approach in engaging them towards
the project implementation.
7. Utilize roads economic decision models including HDM – 4, Roads
Economic Decision (RED), Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA) in the study.
8. Assess and quantify the life cycle costs and benefits of the “without”
and “with project” case.
9. Present investment choice using decision criteria such as Net Present
Value (NPV), Internal Rate of Return (IRR) and Net present value/cost
(NPV/C) ratio.
10. Undertake risk analysis for the investment options.
11. Produce proper sensitivity, switching values, user impacts, and
distribution of benefits analyses.
12. Perform budget constraint optimization.

1-3
13. Propose suitable means of funding the project (Government
Exchequer, Development partner, PPP or others.
14. Enumerate non-quantifiable social benefits and other effects of the
proposed intervention.
15. Identify impact, outcome, output and input indicators and develop a
comprehensive Logical Framework that will be utilized for project
performance monitoring during implementation and post-completion
period.
16. Document lessons learned during the study and how such can be
utilized to improve future prefeasibility studies.
The assignment is to be completed within six (6) months from the
commencement of the assignment.

1.5 Project Deliverables

The list of reports to be submitted during the assignment as per ToR is as

follow:
Table 1-1: Schedule of Deliverables
No Reports / Approximate Contractual Submission
. Submissions Duration Date Date
1. Commencement 0 01/01/2021 01/01/2021
2. Inception Report 1 month 29/01/2021 02/02/2021
3. Preliminary 3 Months 30/04/2021 08/06/2021
Report
4. Draft Final 1 Month 29/05/2021 -
Report
5. Final Report 1 Month 29/06/2021 -

1.6 Approach and Methodology

The overall approach and methodology for the prefeasibility study is

shown in Figure 1-1 below.

1-4
 Road Project Proposals

Collationof Legal, Policy and Collationof Secondary Data Setting/ Review of Project Goals
Institutional Documents and Objectives

 Relevant Legislations,  Relevant Planning and Design Data  Collatenational and regional
Regulations, Policy Frameworks development goals
 Socio-economic Data
 Relevant Manuals and
Standardsand Guidelines  Environmental Data

DataGap Analysis

Policy Review and Analysis Alignment of Project Goals and

Primary DataCollection Objectives withNational and
Regional Goals

Prefeasibility Study

 Technical Feasibility
 Socio-economic Feasibility
 Environmental Assessment
 Route Assessment
 Estimation of Project Costs
 Economic Analysis

Recommendation

Figure 1-1: Overall Prefeasibility Study Approach and Methodology

1-5
1.7 Structure of the Report

This Preliminary Report is divided into the following chapters:

Chapter Introduction (this section), provides introductory information on

1: the project, including the objective and scope of the project
Chapter2 Strategic Transport Sector Goals and Development Plans, provides
: a review of the legal, policy, and institutional frameworks; sectoral
plans; project relevant data; and, ongoing and planned projects to
align project objectives to national and international policies and
plans that guide overall development.
Chapter Socio-Economic Outlook at National and County Level, provides an
3: analysis of the socio economic trends at the national, regional and
county level
Chapter Technical Assessment of the Project Roads, describes the technical
4: field studies, design standards, design proposals and cost
estimates for the roads
Chapter Environmental and Social Impact Assessments, presents the
5: approaches employed for the environmental and social
assessments, the key findings as well as the recommendations and
conclusions.
Chapter Economic Evaluation, illustrates the scope, approach and
6: methodology, application of the HDM-4 software, and the results
of the economic evaluation.
Chapter Results-Based Logical Framework, provides a project-level
7: framework to monitor the achievement of results and to adjust
relevant projects and activities when necessary. Results
Framework focuses specially on impact and the outcomes of the
work done through the project

1-6
1.8 The Project Roads

1.8.1 Project Location Map

Figure 1-2 is a contextual map showing the project roads and their
location relative to the larger road network, further discussed in the
succeeding sections.

1-7
 Figure 1-2: Project Roads Contextual Map

1.8.2 Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20) Road

The road is an important link for the central region as it connects Kiambu
county to Nyandarua and Nakuru counties and forms part of the B20,
which starts at A8-Lanet-Dundori-Ol Kalou-Njabini-Kiarutara-Gatanga-A2
Thika-A3 to Thika Road. This route has great economic potential due to
the available agricultural produce, tourism opportunities and trade.

1-8
The road follows a south-easterly direction sloping from Kiarutara
through Gatura before terminating at Thika town. The road is set on the
ridges of hills and has alternating sags and crests for most of its length.
The start of the road is rolling and changes to hilly terrain along the
ridges.

Figure 1-3: Start of B20 project road Figure 1-4: End of B20 project road

The main centres along the road are Gatunyu, Mabanda, Rwegetha,
Chomo, Gatura and Kiarutara. These are mainly small market centres
with only one or two rows of buildings. Some notable activities include
trading at Gatura and Kirwara, flower farms and large real-estate
developments.
The road reserve is not demarcated, which has resulted in massive
encroaching. At the market centres, road congestion is witnessed,
especially during peak hours due to high levels of high roadside
activities, including trading. There was encroachment noted at
Rwegetha, Kirwara, Mabanda, and Chomo Centres.

1.8.3 Buuri – Katheri – Meru – Chaaria – Mitunguu – Kathwana –

Ishiara – Ena (B65) Road
This road functions as a regional loop road linking major towns such as
Kathwana to the A9 corridor. It also acts as a shorter link between the A9
road and A2 road by traversing through the slopes of Mount Kenya. This
section, when complete, will reduce the travel times between Meru and
Timau and its environs.

1-9
Figure 1-5: Start of B65 project road at Figure 1-6: End of B65 project road at the
the junction with B6 road junction with A2 road

The horizontal alignment between the Ena to Meru road section is mostly
rolling terrain with flat sections experienced between Ena and Kathwana
with several hilly stretches. The road section between Meru to Mujujune
is on mountainous terrain as it traverses the slopes of Mt. Kenya. The
section between Muchiene to Buuri starts on mountainous terrain before
going into rolling terrain towards the end of the project. The carriageway
width between Ena to Gitimbine/Meru is approximately 6.5m with 1m
shoulders on either side.

Figure 1-7: Long straights at km 4+000 Figure 1-8: Winding alignment at km

24+000

The main centres along the road with notable commercial activity include
Ishiara, Tunyai, Chaaria, Mitunguu, Gitimbine, Kibirichia and Ntimiriti.
Approaching the road from Buuri, large scale farming (mainly wheat) is
the main economic activity. Land sub-division and increased human
activity is witnessed from Kibirichia to Meru where people grow tea,
coffee, maize and beans and keep livestock as well. The road traverses
through the Muchiene Forest, leading to potential increased human-
wildlife interaction. Schools, worship centres, tea and coffee factories,
and markets were observed along the road corridor. The Meru National

1-10
Cereals and Produce Board depot is located at the Gitimbine junction
that joins to the Chaaria-Mitunguu-Kathwana-Ishiara-Ena road stretch.
The locals grow food crops that include maize, sunflower, peas, millet,
sorghum, and mangoes. They are also involved in livestock keeping,
mainly cows and goats. Social institutions such as schools and worship
centres are also present in the area.
From Meru-Chaaria-Mitunguu-Kathwana-Ishiara-Ena, the road reserve is
well-demarcated, and no encroachments were observed. Human
settlements exist along the road corridor, although they are sparsely
populated. Utilities such as power lines and water pipes are also present
on the road reserve.

1.8.4 Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) Road

This road is part of the A4 road corridor, which links the A8 at Gilgil to
Ethiopia's international border at Illeret. It provides linkages to national
and regional roads, including the LAPSSET Corridor, the B21 at
Nyahururu and the B20 at Ol Kalou. The road, therefore, links several
counties, including Nakuru, Nyeri, Murang’a and Kiambu counties. These
roads play a big part in the distribution of agricultural products coming
from Nyandarua county. It is also a tourism link to the Nyahururu falls
and national parks located North of Rumuruti.
The terrain from Gilgil to Ol Kalou Section is generally rolling terrain,
rising from Gilgil towards Ol Kalou with intermittent crest and sag
curves. The carriageway width is approximately 6.5m with 0.5m wide
shoulders, though some sections lack shoulders due to wear and
vegetation growth. The pavement surfacing type is asphalt concrete in
fair to poor condition and there were ongoing works on several road
sections.

Figure 1-9: Newly Paved section at Km Figure 1-10: Ongoing pothole patching
@17+000 works at km 28+000

The terrain between Ol Kalou – Nyahururu is similarly gentle to rolling

terrain rising to Ruirii and descending to Nyahururu. The horizontal

1-11
alignment of the section is generally straight with long curves. The
vertical alignment is composed of the gentle crest and sag curves. The
geometrics of the section may also require improvements in terms of
widening.

Figure 1-11: Pothole at Km 35+800 Figure 1-12: Pothole patching work at Km

36+000

The terrain between Nyahururu – Rumuruti transitions from rolling

terrain to a hilly terrain at km 78 to km 80 descending to a flat/gently
rolling terrain. The alignment at this section is winding with several
reverse curves, sharp curves and steep sections as the road descends
eastwards towards Rumuruti.

Figure 1-13: Ongoing base repair works at Figure 1-14: Ongoing paving works at
Km 73+000 Km 82+500

1-12
2 STRATEGIC TRANSPORT SECTOR GOALS AND
DEVELOPMENT PLANS

2.1 Introduction

Background review of the policies and plans is important in

understanding the overall objectives on a given project, within the
context of existing frameworks of a country. Additionally, it is essential to
align project objectives to national and international policies and plans
that guide overall development.
This background review looked at: legal, policy, and institutional
frameworks; sectoral plans; project relevant data; and, ongoing and
planned projects. The following sections provide the outcomes of the
review.

2.2 Legal Frameworks

2.2.1 The Constitution of Kenya 2010

The Constitution of Kenya was promulgated in August 2010. The
constitution is citizen-focused and places the well-being of Kenyans at the
heart of all Government policies and programmes. As enshrined in Article
10 of the Constitution, Kenya's national values are critical and core in the
pursuit of the economic, social and political aspirations of Kenyans.
The national values and principles of governance include:
1. Patriotism, national unity, sharing and devolution of power, the
rule of law, democracy and participation of the people;
2. Human dignity, equity, social justice, inclusiveness, equality,
human rights, non-discrimination and protection of the
marginalised;
3. Good governance, integrity, transparency and accountability; and,
4. Sustainable development.
All government institutions are required to ensure that national values
and principles of governance guide public service delivery. In 2015, the
Sessional paper on national values and principles of governance was
discussed and adopted by Parliament.
The objectives of this study are in line with promotion of national values
and principles as they require participation of key stakeholders within
the project areas; the outputs will encourage transparency and
accountability in using public resources; and, if the projects are
implemented, they will promote sustainable development.

1
2.2.2 Kenya Roads Act 2007
In accordance with the Roads Act 2007, the overarching mandate of
KeNHA encompasses management, development, rehabilitation and
maintenance of all national trunk roads. KeNHA is thus responsible for,
amongst other functions, feasibility studies, engineering designs, and
construction of national trunk roads. The project roads are national trunk
roads.

2.2.3 Urban Areas & Cities Act 2011

This Act provides for the establishment and management of cities,
municipalities, towns and other urban areas. It provides criteria for
conferring urban areas at various levels.
The Act also provides for the principle of governance and participation of
residents of towns and cities in development matters. It defines a town as
an urban area with a population of at least ten thousand residents.
The Act has been reviewed and its requirements taken into account
where the project roads traverse urban areas.

2.2.4 Physical and Land Use Planning Act 2019

The law was enacted to regulate all physical planning activities in Kenya.
It gives power to County Governments to regulate development within
their areas of jurisdiction. Further, it empowers the Director-General in
charge of Physical Planning to prepare various Physical and Land Use
Development Plans. The Act also gives guidance on the objectives and
the contents of various Physical and Land Use Development Plans.
This study has taken into account existing land use and development
plans of the County Governments where the project roads are located.

2.2.5 Environmental Management and Coordination Act 2015

The Environmental Management and Coordination Act provides guidance
on environmental matters. It also outlines environmental impact
assessment procedures, including environmental audit and monitoring
procedures applicable to all developments likely to impact the
environment significantly.
This study has complied with all requirements of the Act.

2.2.6 Land Act 2012

The Land Act No. 6 of 2012, is an Act of Parliament that gives effect to
Article 68 of the Constitution. The object of the Act is to revise,
consolidate and rationalize land laws, provide for sustainable
administration and management of land and land-based resources, and
for connected purposes.

2
This Act outlines the National Land Commission (NLC) function in
matters of planning, which is to monitor and have oversight
responsibilities over land use planning throughout the country and
manage the government land. NLC will thus be involved in the process of
land acquisition, if necessary, once the projects to be taken forward are
selected.

2.3 Policy Framework

2.3.1 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The UN General Assembly adopted the 17 sustainable development goals
as targets for global development in all sectors. The most relevant SDG
goals to that the objectives of this study will contribute to are: (i) Goal 8:
Promoting sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and
productive employment and decent work for all; and, (ii) Goal 9: Building
resilient infrastructure, promoting inclusive and sustainable
industrialization and fostering innovation.
The study has been aligned to Goals 8 and 9 and relevant performance
targets included in the Results Based Logical framework, which is one of
the outputs of the study.

2.3.2 Kenya Vision 2030

The Kenya Vision 2030 is the long-term vision, which aspires that Kenya
becomes globally competitive and prosperous country by the year 2030.
The plan is anchored on three pillars: The Economic; the Social; and, the
Political. Infrastructure is considered as one of the foundations and
enablers of macroeconomic stability to support the three main pillars.
The Kenya Vision 2030 is to be implemented in successive five-year
Medium-Term Plans, and are designed to fast track Flagship Projects
identified under Vision 2030, various programmes and key policies. The
first plan (MTP I) covered the period 2008 – 2012, while the second (MTP
II) covered 2013 - 2017. The Third Medium Term Plan 2018 – 2022 (MTP
III), which is currently under implementation, outlines the policies,
programmes, and projects the Jubilee Government intends to implement
during the five years starting 2018 to 2022. MTP III development
objectives are to deliver accelerated and inclusive economic growth,
higher living standards, universal health care, increased job creation,
especially for youth, commercialised agriculture providing higher rural
incomes and food security, improved manufacturing sector and more
diversified exports.
The roads sub-sector falls under infrastructure, which is one of the
foundations of the three pillars, and its programmes and projects include:
expansion and maintenance of roads, decongestion of cities and urban

3
areas, and road safety programmes. KeNHA is indicated as an
implementing agency of the MTP III under the road sector programmes
with indicative budgets and timelines provided.

2.3.3 Big Four Agenda

The “Big Four” Agenda has four initiatives targeting growth in
manufacturing sector, improvement in food security and nutrition,
provision of universal health coverage and provision of affordable
housing to Kenyans. The role of transportation is key in all the four
initiatives. Roads are necessary for delivery of raw materials to
manufacturers, providing access to healthcare institutions and access to
markets for agricultural produce. Roads also play a major role in
providing connectivity between the affordable housing locations and
economic and social centres.

2.3.4 Integrated National Transport Policy (INTP)

The INTP developed in 2009 is the national framework document that
provides for the overall direction for the transport sector. It identifies the
challenges limiting the transport sectors from supporting national and
regional economic development and outlines a number of key actions to
address the challenges. The INTP explicitly outlines strategies for
developing a national transport sector database while also advocating for
an integrated approach across the road agencies in data collection and
sharing to enhance coordinated planning and development of the road
network.

2.3.5 National Treasury and Planning Circular No. 22/2019

This document guides state corporations and semi-autonomous
government agencies, such as KeNHA, to prepare and submit budgets in
line with their strategic plans, which should be based on the Big 4
agenda and the MTP III. The guideline states that all new projects will
require approval from the National Treasury and Planning, based on the
Public Investment Management Framework provided in the National
Treasury and Planning Circular No. 16/2019.
The National Treasury and Planning Circular No.16/2019 is the guideline
on Public Investment Management (PIM) for the national government
and its entities. The guideline provides a framework for the efficient and
effective management of public investments to ensure value for money
and optimal use of public resources. The PIM framework lays down the
six-step Public investment management process consisting of: 1) Project
Identification and conceptual planning; 2) Pre-feasibility and pre-
appraisal; 3) Feasibility and appraisal; 4) Implementation; 5) Monitoring,
evaluation and reporting.

4
This project fits under the project pre-feasibility and pre-appraisal stage,
where the best three project alternatives should be compared using
multi-criteria analysis, including demand and marketing, technical and
engineering, social and environmental, human resource and
administrative, institutional and legal factors.

2.3.6 KeNHA Strategic Plan

The KeNHA Strategic Plan 2018/2019 – 2022/2023 acts as the guide in
facilitating the achievement of the KeNHA vision to be a leading
authority in the provision of national trunk roads. The Plan is aligned to
the Constitution of Kenya 2010, the third Medium-term Plan of Vision
2030, the Big 4 development agenda, and the Road Sector Investment
Plan.
The Strategic Plan outlines six result areas, including network capacity
and quality enhancements, road asset security and preservation,
environmental and social sustainability, institutional framework, resource
mobilization and strengthening of corporate governance. As a part of the
network capacity and quality enhancements, the Authority seeks to
construct 3,820 km of roads and maintain 85,000 km of roads during the
plan period.
The Strategic Plan lists the roads targeted by the authority in the plan
period for design work as well as construction projects with their
associated budgetary requirements, expected commencement year and
implementation rate over the 5 years. The roads under this contract have
been listed as part of the road sections to be designed during the
strategic plan period.

2.3.7 Ongoing and Planned Projects

A review of the road projects within the study area has been done to
identify the ongoing and planned projects which may impact the project
area of the proposed roads. The ongoing projects that were assessed are
shown in Table 2-2:

5
Table 2-2 Ongoing and Planned Projects
Road Ongoing Projects Planned Projects
Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) Nyahururu Bypasses Nakuru-Nyahururu –
(KURA) Mweiga (KeNHA)
Upgrading of Gilgil –
Machinery Road
(KeRRA)
Upgrading of Captain-
Wanjohi Road (KeRRA)
Buuri – Katheri – Meru – Chaaria – Cocacola – Mpuri – Makutano – Embu –
Mitunguu – Kathwana – Ishiara – Kithaku – Katheri & Meru –Lewa (Dualling
Ena (B65) Roads Kithurune – Kariene – of Meru Town
Kaguma/Gaitu – Giaki Highway) (KeNHA)
Roads (KeRRA)
C356/B65 Junction Meru Town Roads
Project (KURA)
Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20) Mau Mau Lot
2:Gatakaini– Njabini
(KeNHA)
Thika Bypass (KURA)

It should also be noted that all the project roads were under
performance-based maintenance contracts covering the year 2020/2021.
Table 2-3 shows the sections of the project roads under maintenance.
Table 2-3: Roads under Periodic Maintenance
Road Section Contract No.
Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti Gilgil – Ol Kalou KENHA/RD/RA&CM/
(A4) 3004/2020

KENHA/RD/RA&CM/
Ol Kalou - Nyahururu
3038/2020

KENHA/RD/RA&CM/
Nyahururu - Rumuruti
3006/2020

Buuri – Katheri – Meru – Ena – Kanyuambora – KENHA/RD/RA&CM/

Chaaria – Mitunguu – Thuchi River - 2844/2019
Kathwana – Ishiara – Ena Chiakariga
(B65) Roads Chiakariga - Meru KENHA/RD/RA&CM/
2805/2019
KENHA/RD/RA&CM/
Mucheene – Katheri -
3047/2020
Gitimbine
Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika KENHA/RD/RD/M/
Thika – Gatakaini Road
(B20) 3151/2020

Other projects within the areas of influence include the rehabilitation of

the railway along the Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) road. At the
time of writing, the works were still at the preliminary stage, mostly
consisting of demolition works and site clearance.

6
3 SOCIO-ECONOMIC OUTLOOK AT NATIONAL AND
COUNTY LEVEL

3.1 National Profile

3.1.1 Introduction
Kenya lies on the equator and overlies the East African Rift covering a
diverse and expansive terrain that extends roughly from Lake Victoria to
Lake Turkana and further south to the Indian Ocean. The Country shares
a land border area with Tanzania to the south and southwest, Uganda to
the west, South Sudan to the north-west, Ethiopia to the north and
Somalia to the northeast. It covers an area of 580,367 Km 2 (569,140 Km2
of land and 11,227 Km2 of water area.
The Country has several major lakes among them: Lake Turkana (6,405
Km2), Lake Victoria (3,855 Km2), Lake Baringo (155 Km2) and other water
bodies’, which constitute approximately 165 Km 2. A distinctive feature of
Kenya is the Great Rift Valley, which runs from the Mouth of Zambezi
through Kenya, Tanzania and Ethiopia and across the Red Sea to Israel.
The climate in Kenya varies greatly with the regional topography of the
Country. The climate in the coastline is warm and humid and cooler in
the Central region especially close to Mount Kenya. In the Western
Region, the climate is hot and dry which becomes humid around Lake
Victoria, which gives way to forested hilly areas in the neighbouring
western region.
The long rainy season occurs from March/April to May/June. The short
rains season occurs from October to November/December. The main
natural resources in Kenya include limestone, soda ash, salt, gemstones,
fluorspar, zinc, diatomite, gypsum, wildlife and hydropower.

3.1.2 Population
Kenya’s population expanded from 2.5 million persons in 1897 to 8.6
million in 1962, just before independence. Figure 3-15 presents Kenya’s
population during various census years since 1969 to 2019.

1
Figure 3-15: Kenya's Population 1897 - 2019
Source: 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census: Volume II

The population growth is one of the inputs that has been used in
forecasting., The population growth rates p.a. is derived from comparing
growth from previous census. The derived population growth rates are
2.2%. 3.2% and 1.8%% between 2009-2019, 2019-2029 and 2029-2039
respectively.

3.1.3 Kenya’s GDP Prospects

The real GDP growth for Kenya in 2019 was about 5.4%, down from 6.3%
in 2018 as seen in Table 3-4. Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing sector
accounted for a sizeable proportion of the slowdown whereas the
manufacturing sector, Financial and Insurance sector and Real Estate
activities had positive growth rates.
Table 3-4: Kenya Real GDP Growth: 2015-2019
GDP at Constant 2009
Year Percentage GDP Growth
Price (KSH Million)
2015 4,061,901.50 5.7%
2016 4,300,698.60 5.9%
2017 4,507,377.10 4.8%
2018 4,792,173.50 6.3%
2019 5,049,309.50 5.4%
Source: Kenya Economic Survey 2019

Economic Impact of COVID-19 on Kenyan Economy

The COVID-19 shock is expected to further reduce growth in 2020 and
2021 with large impacts on services (transport, retail trade, tourism,
events, leisure, etc.), industry (manufacturing and construction) and
agriculture mainly due to the measures taken to slow down the rate of
infection nationally and globally.

2
The World Bank’s GDP growth scenario for 2020 is for a baseline of
1.5%, before rebounding to about 6.1% in 2021/2022 on assumption that
COVID-19 Pandemic will have been contained.

3.1.4 Sectoral GDP Growth

Table 3-5 below present GDP valued at 2009 prices and the real GDP
growth rates, respectively, for the period 2015 to 2019. Most sectors of
the economy posted slowed growths in 2019 compared to the
performance in 2018. However, performance in the period under review
was, to a considerable extent, supported by accelerated growths in
Financial and Insurance Activities (6.6%) and Public Administration and
Defence (8.1%).
Table 3-5: Gross Domestic Product by Activity, 2015-2019: Constant
2009 Prices
Industry 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Agriculture, forestry and fishing 900,420.60 942,576.90 957418.5 1014421.4 1050758.2
Growing of crops 681,274.50 694,643.80 744,691.70 773,094.10 773,094.10
Animal production 173,545.50 177,732.70 177,994.60 182,278.90 188,189.20
Support activities to agriculture 24,641.20 20,007.20 19,458.40 19,746.60 19,813.30
Forestry & logging 43,377.10 46,916.10 48,957.90 49,973.80 51,613.00
Fishing & aquaculture 20,136.60 16,646.50 16,363.70 17,730.40 18,048.60
Mining and quarrying 41,809.00 45,774.40 47,813.50 49,110.90 50,325.30
Manufacturing 428,153.30 441,320.60 444,468.20 463,713.80 478,390.60
Manufacture of food, beverages and tobacco 168,898.90 170,762.60 184,937.10 191,190.10 191,190.10
Other manufacturing and repair and installation 265,516.30 272,421.70 273,705.60 278,776.70 287,200.50
Electricity supply 68,499.10 75,039.00 81,705.50 90,279.00 97,367.80
Water supply; sewerage, waste management 31,654.20 33,491.80 34,379.00 35,066.20 36,738.30
Construction 211,314.00 232,246.20 251,806.50 269,083.70 286,232.20
Wholesale and retail trade; repairs 311,746.40 323,433.10 342,056.30 365,644.80 389,900.10
Transport and storage 292,628.70 313,749.30 340,372.50 366,814.30 366,814.30
Land transport 183,734.30 192,137.50 196,348.90 204,641.30 214,257.90
Air transport including support services 21,274.80 20,972.60 22,098.80 23,174.90 23,236.20
All other transport including postal and courier activities 69,745.80 79,518.60 95,301.60 112,556.20 129,320.20
Accommodation and food service activities 43,086.30 48,802.80 55,776.20 65,034.40 71,745.30
Information and communication 164,797.90 182,984.50 203,712.90 221,552.20 221,552.20
Telecommunications 118,964.90 132,540.90 149,785.00 169,852.50 186,715.10
Publishing, broadcasting, other IT and information activities 31,003.60 32,257.00 33,199.40 33,860.30 34,837.10
Financial and insurance activities 268,821.10 275,932.30 290,503.70 309,536.50 309,536.50
Financial activities 216,553.80 232,134.60 236,861.90 248,165.70 262,421.80
Insurance activities 34,888.20 36,686.50 39,070.30 42,337.90 47,114.70
Real Estate 333,537.50 362,724.30 384,955.10 400,794.90 422,194.70
Professional, scientific and technical activities 42,187.60 44,358.30 46,381.90 48,855.20 51,840.00
Administrative and support service activities 50,113.00 52,059.70 53,627.20 57,060.10 59,253.30
Public administration and defence 157,834.10 166,666.80 174,482.40 186,215.70 201,207.60
Education 281,542.10 296,340.10 311,722.50 329,716.80 347,642.00
Pre-primary and Primary education 113,890.90 117,305.30 121,198.70 127,012.10 131,151.70
General secondary education 117,010.90 122,122.50 131,402.10 140,088.90 152,410.60
Higher and other education 50,640.30 56,912.30 59,121.60 62,615.70 64,079.70
Human health and social work activities 72,744.60 76,205.90 79,476.30 82,936.50 87,785.80
Arts, entertainment and recreation 5,268.80 5,551.50 5,938.40 6,337.30 6,837.20
Other service activities 27,551.00 29,212.50 31,254.60 33,347.20 35,545.30
Activities of households as employers 19,006.90 19,273.00 19,581.40 19,894.70 20,213.00
Financial Intermediation Services Indirectly Measured -110,331.30 -105,546.90 -106,455.70 -112,953.80 -112,953.80
All economic activities 3,592,808.10 3,810,993.60 3,989,962.60 4,245,645.90 4,478,926.00
Taxes on products 469,093.40 489,705.00 517,414.50 546,527.60 570,383.50
GDP at market prices 4,061,901.50 4,300,698.60 4,507,377.10 4,792,173.50 5,049,309.50

Source: Kenya Economic Survey 2020

3
Table 3-6: Gross Domestic Product by Activity, 2015-2019: Percentage
Change
Industry 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Agriculture, forestry and fishing 5.3 4.7 1.6 6 3.6
Growing of crops 7.2 6.7 2 7.2 3.8
Animal production 2.2 2.4 0.1 2.4 3.2
Support activities to agriculture 1.9 -18.8 -2.7 1.5 0.3
Forestry & logging 1 8.2 4.4 2.1 3.3
Fishing & aquaculture -8.6 -17.3 -1.7 8.4 1.8
Mining and quarrying 12.3 9.5 4.5 2.7 2.5
Manufacturing 3.6 3.1 0.7 4.3 3.2
Manufacture of food, beverages and tobacco 6 3.9 1.1 8.3 3.4
Other manufacturing and repair and installation 2.2 2.6 0.5 1.9 3
Electricity supply 11.5 9.5 8.9 10.5 7.9
Water supply; sewerage, waste management 2.7 5.8 2.6 2 4.8
Construction 13.8 9.9 8.4 6.9 6.4
Wholesale and retail trade; repairs 5.9 3.7 5.8 6.9 6.6
Transport and storage 8 6.5 7.2 8.5 7.8
Land transport 6.3 4.6 2.2 4.2 4.7
Air transport including support services -1.1 -1.4 5.4 4.9 0.3
All other transport including postal and courier activities 16.4 14 19.8 18.1 14.9
Accommodation and food service activities -1.3 13.3 14.3 16.6 10.3
Information and communication 7.4 9.9 11 11.3 8.8
Telecommunications 8.6 11.4 13 13.4 9.9
Publishing, broadcasting, other IT and information activities 3 4 2.9 2 2.9
Financial and insurance activities 9.4 6.9 2.6 5.3 6.6
Financial activities 10.1 7.2 2 4.8 5.7
Insurance activities 5.1 5.2 6.5 8.4 11.3
Real Estate 7.2 8.8 6.1 4.1 5.3
Professional, scientific and technical activities 3.6 5.1 4.6 5.3 6.1
Administrative and support service activities 1.5 3.9 3 6.4 3.8
Public administration and defence 5.5 5.6 4.7 6.7 8.1
Education 4.9 5.3 5.2 5.8 5.4
Pre-primary and Primary education 1.7 3 3.3 4.8 3.3
General secondary education 8.4 4.4 7.6 6.6 8.8
Higher and other education 4.6 12.4 3.9 5.9 2.3
Human health and social work activities 5.8 4.8 4.3 4.4 5.8
Arts, entertainment and recreation 1.5 5.4 7 6.7 7.9
Other service activities 6 6 7 6.7 6.6
Activities of households as employers 1.5 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.6
Financial Intermediation Services Indirectly Measured 13.5 0.5 -4.3 0.9 6.1
All economic activities 6.1 6.1 4.7 6.4 5.5
Taxes on products 2.8 4.4 5.7 5.6 4.4
GDP at market prices 5.7 5.9 4.8 6.3 5.4

Source: Kenya Economic Survey 2020

3.1.5 Other Financial Characteristics

Inflation: The annual inflation as measured by the Consumer Price Index
(CPI) increased from 4.7% in 2018 to 5.2% in 2019. The upsurge in
inflation was mainly attributable to rise in transportation, food and
beverage prices arising from constrained domestic supply due to less
favourable weather conditions in first half of 2019 which improved in the
second half causing drops in food prices as well as the overall inflation.

4
Foreign Exchange Rate Analysis: During the period 2018 to 2019, the
Kenyan Shilling gained against currencies of key trading countries with
Trade Weighted Index (TWI) improving from 115.7 in 2018 to 113.0 in
2019. This was mainly occasioned by strengthening of the Kenyan
Shilling against the Euro, Pound Sterling, Chinese Yuan and Indian
Rupee by 4.6%, 3.8%, 3.7% and 2.4% respectively. During the review
period, the Kenyan Shilling weakened against the Japanese Yen (2.0%),
the US Dollar (0.7%), UAE Dirham (0.7%) and Saudi Riyal (0.7%). Within
the EAC bloc, Rwanda Francs and the Tanzania Shilling depreciated
against the Kenyan Shilling by 3.7% and 0.7%, respectively, during the
review period. On the other hand, Uganda Shilling gained against the
Kenyan Shilling by 1.3%.
Trade Analysis: Exports to African countries was KES 224.2 billion in
2019 with Uganda remaining the leading export destination, accounting
for 28.6% of total exports to Africa. Exports to EAC increased by 8.0% to
KES 140.4 billion in 2019. Value of exports to COMESA member states
increased by 1.9% to KES 164.2 billion in 2019. Notable declines were
recorded in exports to South Africa and Somalia, contracting by 24.5%
and 21.8%, respectively.
The value of imports from Africa rose by 11.4% to KES 234.2 billion and
accounted for 13.0% of the total import bill. This was attributable to
increase in imports from South Africa, which stood at KES 74.0 billion.
Value of imports from the EAC countries contracted by 5.8% from KES
71.9 billion in 2018 to KES 67.7 billion in 2019.

3.1.6 National Transport System

Transport Sector Overview
Transport sector plays an important role in contributing to the social and
economic development in any country. Kenya has several transport
systems, viz. railway, marine, air, road and pipeline to meet its domestic
freight and passenger traffic requirements as well as linkages to the
neighbouring countries. A brief note on different modes of transport
operating in the country is given in the following sections.
Road Transport
This is the predominant mode of transport in Kenya transporting more
than 93% of all freight and passenger traffic. Since 1963, Kenya’s
National Classified Road Network has grown from 45,000 Km in 1963 to
approximately over 160,000 Km in 2016 1. The expansion of roads has
seen increased and improved access to all parts of the Country but has
also led to increased maintenance needs in the road network.

1
KNBS

5
The current road network classification consists of paved, gravel and
earth roads. The network is divided into National Trunk Roads and
County Roads which is in accordance with the Kenya Roads Register and
as shown in Table 3-7 below2.
Table 3-7: Classified Road Network in Kenya 2017
Paved Unpaved Total
Road Agency Road Class (km) (km) (km)
A&S 4,693 2,824 7,517
KeNHA B 3,660 6,547 10,207
Subtotal KeNHA 8,353 9,371 17,724
C 3,479 15,623 19,121
KeRRA
Subtotal KeRRA 3,479 15,623 19,121
U_A to U_C 921 1,361 2,282
KURA
Subtotal KURA 921 1,361 2,282
Sub-Total National Trunk Roads 12,753 26,374 39,127
D,E,F, G 4,237 117,569 121,806
County Governments Subtotal County
4,237 117,569 121,806
Roads
Grand Total 16,9903 143,943 160,993
Source: KRB 2019

As shown in Table 1-2 above, the road network in Kenya is approximately

160,993 Km out of which 39,127 Km constitute the National Road
Network and 121,806 Km constitute the County Roads Network. The
Road Inventory & Condition Survey (RICS) estimated that there exist an
additional 90,000 Km of roads which when added to the roads register
will bring the total road network in Kenya to more than 250,000 Km with
corresponding maintenance and development requirements.

Railway Transport
Railway transport is the second most important mode of transport in
Kenya, after road transport, for both freight and passenger services. It is
suitable for transporting bulky and heavy commodities over long
distances. Railway transport mainly falls under the Kenya Railways.

The total railway network currently consists of 2,778 km comprising

1,083 km of mainline, 346 km of principle lines, 490 km of minor and
branch lines and 859 km of private lines and sidings.

Railway Construction and rehabilitation

2
KRB APRP 2018-2019 FY
3
Difference of 518km from Road Register total length of 161,451 km are proposed links under
LAPSSET corridor. The total length of paved roads excludes 740.33 km (New Roads (542.5km)
and Narrow Roads (197.83km)) mapped under the Road Inventory and Condition Survey of 2018

6
The most recent construction is the Standard Gauge Railway consisting
of two phases. The first phase comprised of the 472 km Mombasa-Nairobi
line completed in 2017 and phase 2A, a 120 Km SGR section (Nairobi to
Naivasha) which was completed in September 2019.

The 78 km Gilgil to Nyahururu medium gauge railway line is currently

under rehabilitation The rail line which cuts through Nakuru, Nyandarua
and Laikipia counties runs almost parallel to the Gilgil – Nyahururu –
Rumuruti road with stations at Gilgil, Oleolondo, Ol kalou and
Nyahururu. The rail is expected to have an impact in the transportation
of agricultural produce and livestock. Other rehabilitation works are
ongoing on the 240 km Nairobi – Nanyuki route, 465 Km Longonot -
Malaba and the 216 km Nakuru – Kisumu routes.
Maritime Transport
The maritime transport system in Kenya consists of one major seaport,
Mombasa and other smaller scheduled ports along the Kenyan coastline.
The port of Mombasa which is managed by Kenya Ports Authority (KPA)
is one of the modern ports in Africa. It handles all types of ships and
cargo services not only for Kenya but also for the Kenyan hinterland and
land-locked countries.
KPA owns and operates Inland Container Depots (ICDs) or “dry ports” at
Nairobi, Kisumu and Eldoret, all of which are connected to the port of
Mombasa by a special rail service (railtainer) for the transportation of
containerised imports and exports. At the moment only Kisumu and
Nairobi ICDs are operational.
Pipeline Transport
The Kenya pipeline infrastructure currently consists of 1,792 Km of
multiproduct pipeline and associated facilities. The infrastructure
consists of the following main facilities.
Mombasa-Nairobi Pipeline – A 450km 14-inch diameter pipeline, eight
pump stations and a flow rate of over 830,000 litres per hour and a new
20-inch Mombasa – Nairobi pipeline was completed in 2018
Western Kenya Pipeline Extension (WKPE) 325 km 6-inch, 8-inch
and 14-inch diameter pipelines running from Nairobi to Eldoret, a 121
km 6-inch and 10-inch diameter pipeline running from Sinendet in
Nakuru to Kisumu connecting to the Kisumu Oil Jetty and the Kisumu –
Busia Pipeline.
Air Transport
Kenya has a thriving and viable aviation industry which is vital for the
country’s development through the provision of air transport services
and hence facilitation of tourism, and promotion of trade and earning of
foreign exchange. There are five (5) major international airports namely:

7
(i) Jomo Kenyatta International Airport – Nairobi; (ii) Moi International
Airport – Mombasa; (iii) Eldoret International Airport – Eldoret; (iv)
Kisumu International Airport – Kisumu and (v) Isiolo International
Airport. The other strategic airports which exist in the country include
Malindi Airport – Malindi, Wajir Airport – Wajir and Wilson Airport –
Nairobi. The main airstrips which are operated by KAA include:
Lokichoggio Airport – Lokichoggio, Manda Airport – Manda Island and
Ukunda Airport – Diani Beach.

8
3.2 County Profiles

3.2.1 Introduction
The project roads are located in mainly located in the Central Part of
Kenya. They travers five counties namely – (i) Kiambu, (ii) Murang’a, (iii)
Embu, (iv) Tharaka Nithi, (v) Meru, (vi) Laikipia, (vii) Nyandarua and
Nakuru. These counties define the road area of influence due to planned
improvements.
The following section discusses the social and economic profiles of these
counties. Understanding the economic and social context is necessary to
establish realistic growth rates for normal traffic as well as generated
traffic from induced development.
3.2.2 Kiambu County Profile
3.2.2.1 County Description
Kiambu County is one of the 47 counties in the Republic of Kenya. It is
located in the central region and covers a total area of 2,543.5 Km 2 with
476.3 Km2 under forest cover according to the 2019 Kenya Population
and Housing Census. Kiambu County borders Nairobi and Kajiado
Counties to the South, Machakos to the East, Murang’a
3.2.2.2 Project Road Area of Influence
The project road (Thika-Gatanga-Kiarutara (B20) Road) traverses
through Kiambu County and specifically in Thika Town Sub County at the
border between Murang’a County and Kiambu County. The project road
in Kiambu County is approximately 1 Km and is paved to bitumen
standards. The project road provides access to coffee mills, coffee
estates, flower farms and real estates among others. The Thika- Gatanga-
Kiarutara (B20) Road provides an important link to the Mau Mau Roads
Project in Murang’a county which will provide a direct connection
between Murang’a and Nyandarua Counties.
3.2.2.3 County Administrative Units
Kiambu County has twelve constituencies/sub-counties and sixty wards.
The sub-counties (and number of wards in brackets) include; Gatundu
North (4), Gatundu South (4), Juja (5), Thika Town (4), Ruiru (8),
Githunguri (5), Kiambu (4), Kiambaa (5), Limuru (6), Kikuyu (5), Kabete
(5) and Lari (5).
3.2.2.4 County Population
Kiambu County had a total population of 2,417,735 people according to
the 2019 Population Census out of which 1,187,146 were male and
1,230,454 were female. Ruiru Sub-County had the highest population

9
followed by Juja, Thika Town, Kiambaa, Kabete, Kikuyu, Githunguri,
Limuru, Kiambu, Lari, Gatundu South and Gatundu North respectively.
The project road transverses through Thika Town Sub-County, whose
population was projected to increase from 284,776 in 2019 to 297,794 in
2022. The continuous increase in population in the Sub-County would
lead to an increase in demand for goods and services and thus demand
for travel.
3.2.2.5 Gross County Product
The 2019 Gross County Product Report showed that Kiambu County GCP
was increasing steadily from KES 173.544 million in 2013 to KES
225.457 million in 2017 averaging 6.5%. The County share to the
National GDP averages 5.52% rising from 5.4% in 2013 to 5.6% in 2017.
Table 3-8: Gross County Product - Kiambu County
GCP in Millions County Share to
Year Growth of GCP
KES National GDP
2013 173,544 5.4%
2014 184,974 6.6% 5.4%
2015 200,328 8.3% 5.5%
2016 214,399 7.0% 5.6%
2017 225,457 5.2% 5.6%
Average Growth 2013-2017 5.4% 5.5%
3.2.2.6 County Per Capita Income
The per capita GCP for Kiambu in constant 2009 prices was
approximately 118,343 KES in 2017 compared to 114,762 in 2016.
During the period 2013 – 2017, the highest per capita growth rate of was
registered in 2015 whereas the lowest growth rate was realized in 2018
as shown below.
Table 3-9: Per Capita GCP – Kiambu County
Per Capita GCP: (Constant Growth in Per
Year
Prices, KES) Capita GCP
2013 98,566
2014 102,992 4.5%
2015 109,361 6.2%
2016 114,762 4.9%
2017 118,343 3.1%
Source: 2019 Gross County Product Report
3.2.2.7 Productive Sectors
The economic activities in Kiambu County cover various sectors that
include Crop production, Tourism, Trade and Commerce, Agriculture
Production and Forestry among others. The following section will discuss

10
some of these sectors relevant to the project road area of influence in the
county.
1. Crop, Livestock, Fish Production
The main food crops grown in the county include maize, beans, Irish
potatoes, bananas and vegetables. Coffee and tea are the main industrial
crops grown especially in the upper and lower highlands of the county
including Thika Sub-county.
The county has a total arable land of 1,878.4 Km 2 of which a total of
21,447 Ha is under food crops and a total of 35,367.41 Ha is under
industrial crops. The table below shows acreage and production trends of
food crops in recent years.

11
Table 3-10: Agricultural Crop production trends in Kiambu County 2013
– 2016
2013 2014 2015 2016
Yield Yield Yield Yield
(Tonne (Tonn (Tonne (Tonne
HA HA HA HA
s, es, s, s,
000’s) 000’s) 000’s) 000’s)
77,937 251.96 83,295. 422.44 86,882. 385.63 76,123. 326.14
Food Crops
00 00 00
Horticultur 10,385 247.85 8,196.5 206.68 7,020.9 168.55 5,328.6 116.19
al Crops .6 3 0 0
Industrial 10,386 247.85 28,411. 457.56 28,050. 232.54 28,452. 247.32
Crops 00 00 00

Horticultural crop production is also a major economic activity consisting

of vegetables, herbs and spices, fruits and floriculture. Examples of
horticulture crops include french beans, snow peas, green vegetables,
dhania, basil, mint, pineapples, mangoes, avocadoes and summer flowers
for export.
2. Agricultural Crop Production in Project Road Area of
Influence
Agricultural crop production in the project road area of influence in
Thika Town Sub-County for the period 2018-2020 was estimated to be
weighing 14,124 tonnes valued at Kshs. 335,978,000 in 2020. The
expectation is part of the produce will be transported through the project
road from the farms along the road to market centers along the road as
well as
3. Tourism
The county has several tourist attraction sites with the major ones near
the project road being fourteen falls in Thika, Mau Mau Caves and
various Historical sites in Gatundu.
4. County Transport Network
Kiambu County has a total of 5,533 Km of roads network. 249 Km of road
are yet to be opened. The roads under bitumen standards are 865.4 Kms,
1,051 km on gravel, 3,167 Km on earth surface. The county is served by
A2 Thika Super Highway from Githurai-Ruiru-Juja-Thika an average of 50
Kms and A8 Uthiru-Kikuyu-Kamandura- Kinungi on average of 65 Km
which 25.1 km of it is currently being rehabilitated. The Table below
details the road network by class in Kiambu County.
Table 3-11: Road Network in Kiambu County
Classificatio Grand
Description Paved Unpaved
n Total
A International Trunk 157.68 157.68
Connecting Provincial
B 18.08 18.08
HQs
C Connecting District HQs 228.99 4.88 233.87

12
 Connecting Divisional
D 182.00 178.15 360.15
HQs
E Connecting Locations 164.04 575.98 740.02
G Government Facilities 5.18 8.96 14.14
R Rural Access Roads 4.34 136.93 141.27
T Tea Roads 12.14 59.71 71.85
U Unclassified 92.96 3,503.16 3,596.12
Total 865.41 4,467.77 5,333.18
The county is also served by a railway line, which is 131 km and has
Railway stations in Kahawa, Ruiru, Juja, Thika, Kikuyu and Limuru.
3.2.3 Murang’a County Profile
3.2.3.1 County Description
Murang'a County is one of the counties of Kenya's former Central
Province. Its largest town and capital is Murang'a, formerly referred to
as Fort Hall during the colonial era. It is inhabited mainly by and is
considered the home of the Gikuyu, the largest community in Kenya.
3.2.3.2 County Administrative Units
The county is divided into seven sub counties/ constituencies and 35
wards namely; Kiharu (6), Kangema (3), Mathioya (3), Gatanga (6),
Kigumo (5), Kandara (6), and Maragua (6).
3.2.3.3 Project Road Area of Influence
The project road (Thika-Gatanga-Kiarutara (B20) Road) traverses
through Murang’a County and specifically in Gatanga and Kandara Sub-
Counties. The project road in Murang’a County is approximately 37 Km
and is paved to bitumen standards. The project road provides access to
coffee mills, coffee estates, flower farms, schools, health facilities and
real estates among others.
3.2.3.4 County Population
Murang’a County had a total population of 1.056 million people
according to the 2019 Population Census out of which 523,940 were
males and 532,669 were females. Gatanga Sub-County had a population
of 187,989, while Kandara had a population of 175,098.
The population of Murang’a County was projected to increase to 1.313
million in 2030 and 1.602 million in 2040 with the population of Gatanga
and Kandara Sub-Counties increasing to 233,934 and 217,855 in 2030
and 285,399 and 265,783 in 2040 respectively.
3.2.3.5 Gross County Product
The 2019 Gross County Product Report showed that Murang’a County
GCP increased from KES 71.411 million in 2013 to KES 85.519 million in
2017. During 2017, the county economy of Murang’a grew by 3.2% which

13
was a significant decrease compared to the growth of 6.3% during 2016
as shown in the Table below. The contribution of Murang’a County to the
National Economy averaged 2.3% from 2013 to 2017.
Table 3-12: Gross County Product –Murang’a County
GCP in Millions County Share to
Year Growth of GCP
KES National GDP
2013 71,411 2.3
2014 75,294 5.4% 2.2
2015 77,958 3.5% 2.3
2016 82,859 6.3% 2.3
2017 85,519 3.2% 2.3
Average Growth 2013-2017 3.7% 2.3
3.2.3.6 County Per Capita Income
The per capita GCP for Murang’a in constant 2009 prices was
approximately 77,301 KES in 2017 compared to 76,377 in 2016. During
the period 2013 – 2017, the highest per capita growth rate of 4.2% was
registered in 2016 whereas the lowest growth rate was realized in 2018
as shown below.

Table 3-13: Per Capita GCP – Murang’a County

Growth in Per
Year Per Capita GCP: (Constant Prices, KES)
Capita GCP
2013 69,845
2014 72,195 3.4%
2015 73,288 1.5%
2016 76,377 4.2%
2017 77,301 1.2%
3.2.3.7 Productive Sectors
Tourism and Wildlife: The main tourist attraction sites in the county
are the Aberdares National Park and the cultural heritage sites.
Moreover, there are ideal natural sites for hiking and camping at Rapids
Camp, Aberdare cottages and sport and leisure fishing sites at Kimakia
fishing grounds and Ndakaini Dam. The main wildlife in the county are
elephants which are a major source of human-wildlife conflicts especially
in Mathioya and Kigumo constituencies. This is due to the constituencies’
proximity to the Aberdare forest which forms the wildlife habitat.
3.2.4 Embu County Profile
3.2.4.1 County Description
The administrative capital of the County is Embu town which was
formerly the Eastern Province headquarters. The county borders

14
Kirinyaga to the west, Kitui to the east, Tharaka Nithi to the north,
Machakos to the south. The county occupies an area of 2,821 km2.
3.2.4.2 Administrative and Political Units
Embu County comprises of four (4) Sub-counties namely; Manyatta (6),
Runyenjes (6), Mbeere North (5) and Mbeere South (3). The Table below
represents a breakdown of administrative units.
3.2.4.3 Project Road area of Influence
The project road (Buuri – Katheri – Meru – Chaaria – Mitunguu –
Kathwana – Ishiara – Ena (B65) traverses through Embu County and
specifically in Mbeere North sub-county. The project road in Embu
County is approximately 36 Km and is paved to bitumen standards.
3.2.4.4 County Population
The population of Embu County according to the 2019 Population Census
was approximately 608,599 people out of which 304,208 were males,
304,367 were females and 24 were inter-sex.
The population of Embu County was projected to increase to 726,699 in
2025, 842,443 in 2030, 976,623 in 2035 and 1.132 million in 2040.
Mbeere North sub-county which the road traverses was projected to
increase from 130,010 in 2025 to 202,551 in 2040.
3.2.4.5 Gross County Product
The 2019 Gross County Product Report showed that Embu County GCP
increased from KES 47.862 million in 2013 to KES 52.604 million in
2017. During 2017, the county economy of Embu grew by 5.7% which
was a significant increase compared to the negative growth of -3.5%
during 2016 as shown in the Table below. The contribution of Embu
County to the National Economy averaged 1.4% from 2013 to 2017.
Table 3-14: Gross County Product –Embu County
GCP in Millions County Share to
Year Growth of GCP
KES National GDP
2013 47,862 1.5
2014 46,221 -3.4% 1.4
2015 51,568 11.6% 1.5
2016 49,765 -3.5% 1.4
2017 52,604 5.7% 1.4
Average Growth 2013-2017 1.4
Source: 2019 Gross County Product Report

3.2.4.6 County Per Capita Income

The per capita GCP for Embu County in constant 2009 prices was
approximately KES 93,013 in 2017 compared to 88,904 in 2016. During
the period 2013 – 2017, the highest per capita growth rate of 10.5% was

15
registered in 2015 whereas the lowest growth rate was realized in 2016
as shown below.
Table 3-15: Per capita GCP – Embu County
Growth in Per
Year Per Capita GCP: (Constant Prices, KES)
Capita GCP
2013 88,118
2014 84,258 -4.4%
2015 93,070 10.5%
2016 88,904 -4.5%
2017 93,013 4.6%
Source: 2019 Gross County Product Report

3.2.4.7 Productive Sectors

Main crops produced
The main crops produced in Embu County are classified into three
categories namely; food crops, industrial and horticultural crops. Food
crops include maize, sorghum, millet, beans, cowpeas and green grams
and root crops. Industrial crops are mainly Coffee, Cotton and Miraa.
Horticulture crops include bananas, avocados, mangoes, lemons, paw
paws, tomatoes, green vegetables, onions and potatoes.
The total production for food crops in Embu county expanded by 9.0%
from 76,131 bags/Mt in 2018 to 82,977 bags/Mt in 2020. The area under
food crop farming increased by 8.2% to 88,137 Ha in 2020 from 81,479
Ha in 2018.
The total production for industrial crops in Embu County expanded by
5.6% from 46,311 MT in 2018 to 48,882 MT in 2020. Miraa was largely
produce followed by Coffee and Cotton. The area under industrial crop
farming increased by 1.0% to 13,785 Ha in 2020 from 13,655 Ha in 2018
as shown in the Table below.
In Embu county, the horticultural crops grown are mainly fruits and
vegetables. The total production for horticultural crops in Embu County
expanded by 9.0% from 96,122 MT in 2018 to 104,788 MT in 2020. The
highest value of horticultural crops produced in Embu County are
mangoes and bananas. The area under horticultural crop farming
increased by 14.0% to 6,811 Ha in 2020 from 5,973 Ha in 2018.
The project road is expected to facilitate the movement of these food
crops to the market centres along it including Kanyuambora, Ciangera,
Ishiara, Kathwana,
Livestock Production
Livestock farming is gaining popularity with the revival of milk
cooperatives and investment by private sector and county government on
dairy value chain. This was mainly concentrated in Manyatta and

16
Runyenjes. Mbeere North where the road traverses was noted to have
mostly beef cattle (34,296), goats (68,138) and poultry due to its semi-
arid climate. Beekeeping is also a major activity with 11,404 log hives.
Tourism and Wildlife
Tourism is a key sub-sector that has a high potential in the county for
both local and international tourists. Some of the available sites include
caves, waterfalls and rocky hills for rock climbers. The county is also a
gateway to Mt. Kenya. The county is a host to a number of hydro-electric
power dams which are a source of tourist attraction for both local and
international tourists.
Mwea National Reserve is a major attraction site for wild game viewing
including Elephant, lesser kudu, Nile crocodile, hippo, giraffe, Burchell’s
zebra, buffalo, leopard, bushbuck, monkey, bush pig, impala and
hartebeest. It is also the meeting point of rivers Tana and Thiba,
Kamburu and Masinga hydro-electric dams. It is home to over 200
species of birds are also to be found in the reserve which is renowned for
its water birds and waders.
In Mt. Kenya National Park, wildlife species include Elephants, tree
hyrax, white-tailed mongoose, suni, black fronted duiker, mole rat,
bushbucks, water buck and Elands. Animas rarely seen include leopard,
bongo, giant forest hog and rhino. Over 130 bird species are also
available in the National park.
3.2.4.8 County Transport
Road Transport: The total road network in the County is approximately
2,052.3 Km of which 914.3 Km exists as earth, 154 Km as paved and 948
Km as gravel.
Airstrips: The county is also host to two airstrips. One airstrip is located
at Don Bosco in Embu town and is currently being refurbished. It is used
mainly for security purposes. The other airstrip is in Kiambere and is
mainly used by Kenya Electricity Generating Company (KenGen).
3.2.5 Meru County Profile
3.2.5.1 County Description
Meru County is located on the Eastern Side of Mt. Kenya in the former
Eastern Province. It covers an area of 6,936 Km 2 and it is approximately
271 Km by Road from Nairobi, 751 Km from the port city of Mombasa,
233 Km from the Nakuru town and 554 Km from Moyale Border town.
Meru County borders the Counties of Isiolo to the North, Tharaka Nithi
to the South East, Nyeri to the South West and Laikipia to the West. The
County has nine Sub-Counties namely; Imenti South, Central Imenti,
Tigania East, Imenti North, Igembe North, Igembe Central, Buuri and
Tigania West.

17
3.2.5.2 County Administrative Units
The county comprises of nine administrative sub-counties and 45 wards
namely, Tigania East (5), Tigania West (5), Igembe North (5), Igembe
South (5), North Imenti (5), South Imenti (6), Buuri (5), Igembe Central
(5) and Central Imenti (4).
3.2.5.3 Project Road area of Influence
The project road (Buuri – Katheri – Meru – Chaaria – Mitunguu –
Kathwana – Ishiara – Ena (B65) traverses through Meru County and
specifically in Buuri West, Buuri East, Imenti Central and Imenti North
Sub-Counties. The project road in Meru County is approximately 71 Km
and some sections are paved whereas others exist as gravel roads.
3.2.5.4 County Population
The population of Meru County according to the 2019 Population Census
was approximately 1,545,714 people out of which 767,698 were males,
777,975 were females and 41 were inter-sex.
The population of Meru County was projected to increase to 2,139,573 in
2030 and 2,875,407 in 2040.
Buuri West, and East were expected to grow from 80,762 and 76,598 in
209 to 111,791 and 106,030 in 2030 and 150,237 and 142,495 in 2040.
Meru Central was projected to grow from 133,818 in 2019 to 185,230 in
2030 and 248,933 in 2040. Imenti North was projected to grow from
169,317 in 2019 to 234,369 in 2030 and 314,972 in 2040.
3.2.5.5 Gross County Product
The 2019 Gross County Product Report showed that Meru County GCP
increased steadily from KES 85.906 million in 2013 to KES 105.150
million in 2017. During the period 2016-2017, the county economy of
Meru grew by 2.4% which was a significant decrease compared to the
growth of 4.4% during the period 2015-2016 as shown in the Table
below. The contribution of Meru County to the National Economy
averaged 2.9% from 2013 to 2017.
Table 3-16: Gross County Product –Meru County
GCP in Millions County Share to
Year Growth of GCP
KES National GDP
2013 85,906 2.8
2014 92,610 7.8% 2.9
2015 98,371 6.2% 3.0
2016 102,725 4.4% 3.0
2017 105,150 2.4% 3.1
Average Growth 2013-2017 2.9
Source: 2019 Gross County Product Report

18
3.2.5.6 County Per Capita Income
The per capita GCP for Meru County in constant 2009 prices was
approximately KES 70,759 in 2017 compared to 69,843 in 2016. During
the period 2013 – 2017, the highest per capita growth rate of 6.7% was
registered in 2014 whereas the lowest growth rate was realized in 2017
as shown below.

Table 3-17: Per Capita GCP – Meru County

Per Capita GCP: (Constant Growth in Per
Year
Prices, KES) Capita GCP
2013 60,194
2014 64,252 6.7%
2015 67,570 5.2%
2016 69,843 3.4%
2017 70,759 1.3%
Source: 2019 Gross County Product Report

3.2.5.7 Productive sectors

The economic activities in Meru County cover various sectors that
include Tourism, Trade and Commerce, Agriculture Production,
Fisheries, Forestry, Energy and Mining among others. The following
section will discuss some of these sectors.
1. Tourism
Meru County is well endowed with both small and large wildlife
conservation areas that support a diversity of wildlife species. These
support quite a number of activities such as tourism, hunting, camping,
photography, research and animal capturing which take place in the
County.
Some of the National Parks in the County include Mt. Kenya National
Park, Meru National Park, Meru Museum and Imenti Forest.
There are a variety of wildlife such as white elephant, baboons, giraffe,
gazelle, buffalos, rhino, cheetah, zebras and different birds’ species.
These wildlife species are mainly found in the gazetted game parks and
forests such as the Meru National Park, Mt. Kenya National Park and
Imenti forest.
The project road traverses the Mt. Kenya forest providing access to the
forestry personnel and also viewing of different wildlife species to
tourists and travellers.
2. County Agriculture
Agriculture is the predominant economic sector in Meru County. The
bulk of Agricultural production in Meru County comes from both small
scale farmers and large scale farmers who employ different levels of

19
input of production. Some of the major cash crops which are grown in
Meru County include Tea, Coffee, Miraa and Bananas among others.
The total agricultural production in terms of metric tonnes in 2020 was
approximately 2.911 million which was a significant improvement from
the 2019 production of 1.042 million. The major crops grown in the
County included potatoes, cotton, bananas, tea, maize, mangoes and
avocados among others.
Meru central and Imenti north have favourable climates for tea and
coffee. Katheri and Kithaku areas have extensive acreage covered by tea
and coffee plantations with the Katheri Coffee Farmers’ Co-operative
Society having factories in Riiji, Gichugune, and Kinjo among others and
a research station in Katheri.
Buuri East and West are particularly significant areas for agricultural
produce with extensive farms cultivating food crops such as potatoes and
wheat with small-scale farmers cultivating vegetables including
tomatoes, cabbages, kales, peas, tomatoes and carrots which are then
transported through the existing road to markets in the County and as far
as Nairobi. The project road will thus provide an important access to
markets by providing network linkage to the A2 in the west and the A9 in
the East.
3. Livestock Production
Meru County is well endowed with livestock animals which include
Cattle, Poultry, Goats, Sheep, Pigs, Bees, Rabbits and Donkeys among
others. Buuri east and West feature large cattle ranches with beef and
dairy cattle as well as sheep. The Livestock population in Meru County
increased from 2.113 Million in 2011 to approximately 2.358 Million in
2014. The Buuri
4. Main Forest Types and Size of Forests
The county’s gazetted forest cover is 972.3 km 2, which is 14.02% of the
total county area. There are nine gazetted forests, with Upper Imenti and
Ontulili forests being the main gazetted forests occupying 148.35 and
332.27 km2 respectively in the county. Mucheene forest which the road
traverses is the third largest forest occupying 102 Km 2. Many forests
serve as essential wildlife habitats, and are traditionally important for
cultural ceremonies and as sacred sites to local communities.
Forests provide crucial direct and indirect goods and services to Meru
people and make a significant contribution to the county’s economy.
About 70% of Kenya’s domestic energy comes from wood and Meru
County is no exception.
5. Industry and Trade
The County has continued to promote growth of trade through provision
of market facilities. In each and every sub county headquarters there is a

20
market that facilitates wholesale and retail trade. Notable markets
include; Gakoromone Market, Nkubu Fresh produce market, Maua
Cereals and Fruits Market, Mutuati Fresh produce market, Athiru
Ruujine Market, Nchiru Market, Mikinduri Cereals and Livestock market,
Katheri Market, Kangeta Market, Kiguchwa Market among others. There
are different kinds of products and wares that are traded within the
markets, these include; cereals, household goods, animals, textiles,
leather articles, fruits and vegetables.
The county has a number of factories which add value to mainly tea and
coffee. These are mainly owned by the various tea and coffee
cooperatives societies. There are also factories processing livestock
products such as milk, owned by farmer’s cooperatives. There are other
factories in the county producing bread and animal feeds which are in
small scale and mainly found in Meru town. The sector has been under
exploited by the County given the potential. It has huge potential in
turning around the economic ecosystem of the people. The notable
processing factories which add value to agricultural products within the
County are Meru Dairy Cooperative Union which processes Mount Kenya
Dairy Products and Njeru industries which processes purple tea for
export.
3.2.5.8 County Transport
1. Road Network
The county has 5,968 km of road network. This comprises of 582 km
bitumen, 581 km gravel and 4,805 km of earth surface roads. This
network is maintained by different road agencies such as KeRRA, KURA,
KeNHA and County Government. Eighty percent of the earth roads are
under the mandate of the county government. However, during the rainy
seasons, some sections of earth surface roads are impassable.
2. Airports and Airstrips
The county is served by the Isiolo International Airport and a number of
airstrips, namely: Gaitu, Mitunguu and private airstrips which include;
Lewa wild life conservancy, Meru national park, Kisima farm, Oldonyo
farm, Embori farm and Maarania farm airstrips.
3. Major Bus and Lorry Parks/Terminus
Meru county has several upgraded bus parks which include; Nkubu
offset, Kionyo, Nkubu main stage, Gitimbine, Gakoromone offset, Samrat,
Riverland, G4S, Meru main stage, Personality, Makutano main stage,
Makutano offset, Timau main stage, Kianjai offset, Maua Main stage,
Kariene, offset, Laare and Maua offset.

21
3.2.6 Tharaka-Nithi County Profile
3.2.6.1 County Description
Tharaka-Nithi County is located in Kenya’s former Eastern Province and
a home to the Chuka, Muthambi, Mwimbi and Tharaka people of the
larger Ameru (Amiiru) community. It borders the Counties of Embu to the
South and South West, Meru to the North and North East, Kirinyaga and
Nyeri to the West and Kitui to the East and South East. The county lies
between latitude 000 07’ and 000 26’ South and between longitudes 370
19’ and 370 46’ East. The total area of the County is 2,641 km 2.
3.2.6.2 Administrative and Political Units
The County is divided into five (5) administrative sub-counties namely:
Tharaka North (2), Tharaka South (3), Chuka (3), Igambango’mbe (2) and
Maara (5). Tharaka North Sub-county is the largest covering an area of
803.4 Km2, followed by Tharaka South with 746.1 Km 2; Maara is third in
size with an area of 465.3Km2 and Chuka fourth is with 316Km2 and
Igambango’mbe is the smallest covering an area of 308 Km 2. The total
area for Chuka and Maara sub-counties includes 179 Km 2 and 184 Km2 of
Mt. Kenya forest respectively.
3.2.6.3 Project Road area of Influence
The project road (Buuri – Katheri – Meru – Chaaria – Mitunguu –
Kathwana – Ishiara – Ena (B65) traverses through Tharaka Nithi County
and specifically in Igambang’ombe and Maara Sub-Counties. The project
road in Tharaka-Nithi County is approximately 26 Km and is all paved to
bitumen standard.
3.2.6.4 County Population and Distribution
Tharaka Nithi had a total population of 393,177 people during the 2019
Population Census out of which 193,764 were male, 199,406 were female
and 7 were intersex. Maara Sub-county had the highest population
followed by Chuka, Tharaka South, Tharaka North and Igambang’ombe
respectively.
3.2.6.5 Gross County Product
The 2019 Gross County Product Report showed that Tharaka-Nithi
County GCP was on an upward trend from KES 25.407 millions in 2013
to KES 34.861 million in 2017. During the period 2016-2017, the county
economy of Tharaka-Nithi grew by 15.8% which was a significant
increase compared to the growth of 4.2% during the period 2015-2016 as
shown in the Table below. The contribution of Tharaka-Nithi County to
the National Economy averaged 0.8% from 2013 to 2017.
Table 3-18: Gross County Product –Tharaka-Nithi County
Year GCP in Millions Growth of GCP County Share to

22
 KES National GDP
2013 25,407 0.8
2014 26,940 6.0% 0.8
2015 28,879 7.2% 0.8
2016 30,104 4.2% 0.8
2017 34,861 15.8% 0.9
Average Growth 2013-2017 0.8
Source: 2019 Gross County Product Report

3.2.6.6 County Per Capita Income

The per capita GCP for Tharaka-Nithi County in constant 2009 prices was
approximately KES 87,106 in 2017 compared to 87,106 in 2016. During
the period 2013 – 2017, the highest per capita growth rate of 14.6% was
registered in 2017 whereas the lowest growth rate was realized in 2016
as shown below.
Table 3-19: Per Capita GCP – Tharaka-Nithi County
Per capita GCP: (Constant Growth in Per
Year
Prices, KES) Capita GCP
2013 66,098
2014 69,398 5.0%
2015 73,654 6.1%
2016 75,998 3.2%
2017 87,106 14.6%
Source: 2019 Gross County Product Report

3.2.6.7 Productive Sectors

Crop Production
The main occupation of the people in the county is agriculture, which
include crop and livestock production. The main food crops include;
maize, beans, cowpeas, sorghum, green grams, millet, pigeon peas, and
bananas. The cash crops include tea and coffee grown mainly in Maara
and Chuka/Igambang’ombe constituencies. However, farmers from
Tharaka grow green grams and sorghum as a food and cash crop. The
total agricultural production in 2020 was approximately 200.868 Mt
which was slight increase compared to 179,280 Mt recorded in 2019. The
value of agricultural crops produced in the County increased from KES
4.970 billion in 2019 to KES 5.621 billion in 2020.
The project road traverses the low lying semi-arid area of the County in
Maara and Igamba Ng’ombe where the predominant agricultural activity
is livestock rearing of cattle, sheep and goats mostly for meat.
Tourism
The County has features that promote tourism including mountains, hills
(Kijege hills and Gikingo hills among others), water falls (along Nithi,

23
Thuci, Maara, Kathita, Thanantu and Tana Rivers), and expansive
landscapes, variety of wildlife, diverse culture and agro-tourism. The
main attractions include expansive landscape of great scenic beauty, rich
botanic, wildlife diversity and mountain climbing, cultural sites and the
Tana River Basin.
Major activities include trekking, cultural exchange visits, film
production and site seeing on the magnificent scenery of Mt. Kenya,
Meru National park and several waterfalls. Mountain climbing and water
sport tourism takes place in Tana River basin. Other recreational
facilities are available in Chuka, Chogoria and Marimanti.
Main Wildlife
Wild animals are found in Mt. Kenya and other small forests in the
county. Some of the major wildlife found in the county include: elephants,
hyraxes, mongoose, duiker, mole rat, bushbucks, water bucks, elands,
buffalos, leopard, bongo, hyenas, over 150 species of birds and over 50
species of reptiles.
3.2.6.8 County Transport
The county has a total road network of 1,670 Km of which 630 Km is
classified network, and 1,040 is unclassified network. The county has
only 61 Km of bitumen road. These include the 32 Km of road B65 along
Thuchi-Nkubu road from Kathageri-Chuka-Chogoria to Keria, 18 Km
along Ishiara-Kathwana-Chiakariga (Mate road), 5Km on E789
(Chiakariga-Marimanti), 4.8 Km on D474 (Chogoria-Maara), and 1.2Km
on D471 (Kibugua). Gravel surface covers 36.4 Km while the rest is earth
surface. The other roads consist of a maintainable road network covering
808 Km in Tharaka and 402 Km in Maara and Chuka/Igambang’ombe
Sub County’s.
3.2.7 Laikipia County Profile
3.2.7.1 County Description
Laikipia County borders Samburu County to the North, Isiolo County to
the North East, Meru County to the East, Nyeri County to the South East,
Nyandarua County to the South, Nakuru County to the South West and
Baringo to the West. It covers an area of 9,532.2 km 2 and is ranked as
the 15th largest county in the country by land size. The county is
cosmopolitan with about 23 communities comprising of Maasai,
Samburu, Rendile, Somali, Pokot, Kalenjin, Meru, Kikuyu, and Turkana
among others.
3.2.7.2 Administrative Units
Laikipia County comprises of five administrative Sub counties (15 wards)
namely Laikipia East (2), Laikipia North (2), Laikipia West (4), Laikipia
Central (4) and Nyahururu (4) with 16 wards. The sub-county

24
headquarters are at Nanyuki, Doldol, Rumuruti, Lamuria and Nyahururu,
respectively. The county headquarters is currently at Nanyuki with the
gazetted one being Rumuruti. The county however, has three
constituencies namely Laikipia East, Laikipia North and Laikipia West
constituencies.
3.2.7.3 Project Road area of Influence
The project road (Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) Road) traverses
through Laikipia County and specifically in Laikipia West and Nyahururu
Sub-Counties. The project road in Laikipia County is approximately 40
Km and is all paved to bitumen standard.
3.2.7.4 County Population
Laikipia County had a total population of 518,560 people during the 2019
Population Census out of which 259,440 were male, 259,102 were female
and 18 were intersex. Nyahururu Sub county had the highest population
(154,704) followed by Laikipia West (129,263), Laikipia East (102,815),
Laikipia Central (95,594) and Laikipia North (36,184) respectively.
The population of Laikipia County was projected to increase to 717,808
in 2030, 964,674 in 2040. Mbeere North sub-county which the road
traverses was projected to increase from 130,010 in 2025 to 202,551 in
2040. Nyahururu’s population was projected to increase from 154,704 in
2019 to 214,147 in 2030 and 287,795 in 2040.
3.2.7.5 Gross County Product
The 2019 Gross County Product Report showed that Laikipia County GCP
rose from KES 28.148 million in 2013 to KES 38.864 millions in 2017.
During the period 2016-2017, the county economy of Laikipia grew by
0.1% which was a significant decrease compared to the growth of 14.8%
during the period 2015-2016 as shown in the Table below. The
contribution of Laikipia County to the National Economy averaged 1.0%
from 2013 to 2017.
Table 3-20: Gross County Product –Laikipia County
GCP in Millions County Share to
Year Growth of GCP
KES National GDP
2013 28,148 0.9
2014 29,962 6.4% 0.9
2015 33,823 12.9% 1.0
2016 38,826 14.8% 1.1
2017 38,864 0.1% 1.1
Average Growth 2013-2017 1.0
Source: 2019 Gross County Product Report

25
3.2.7.6 County Per Capita Income
The per capita GCP for Laikipia County in constant 2009 prices was
approximately KES 74,205 in 2017 compared to 76,775 in 2016. During
the period 2013 – 2017, the highest per capita growth rate of 10.8% was
registered in 2016 whereas the lowest growth rate was realized in 2017
as shown below.
Table 3-21: Per Capita GCP – Laikipia County
Ye Per Capita GCP: (Constant Growth in Per
ar Prices, KES) Capita GCP
201
61,943
3
201
63,618
4 2.7%
201
69,318
5 9.0%
201
76,775
6 10.8%
201
74,205
7 -3.3%
Source: 2019 Gross County Product Report

3.2.7.7 Productive Sectors

The economic activities in Laikipia County cover various sectors that
include Trade and Commerce, Agriculture Production, Energy, Mining,
Transport and Education among others. The following section will
discuss some of these sectors.
1. Trade and Commerce
Revenue collection from the different Trade and Commercial activities in
Laikipia County increased by 34% from approximately 608 Million in
2017/2018 FY to approximately 805 Million in 2018/2019 FY. During the
FY 2017/2018, the major sources of revenue generation for Laikipia
County Government were: Hospitals (38.56%), Land Rates (13.53%),
County National Resources Exploitation (10.29%), Single business permit
(10.09%) and Vehicle Parking fee (8.75%) among others. The County has
various major towns situated along the project road which contribute
significantly to the earnings including Nyahururu, Rumuruti and Ol jabet.
2. Tourism
The county benefits from tourism due to the many wildlife conservancies
and ranches. Because of its diverse wildlife, it’s one of the top
destinations for local and foreign tourists. Some of the tourist attraction
sites include; Ol Pejeta conservancy, Thomson falls, Laikipia Plateau
reserve among others. The number of visitors to Thomson falls increased
by 33.37% from 152,892 in 2018 to 203,912 in 2019. The main visitors
apart from Kenyans who made up 80 to 90% of the visitors were from
mainly Europe (2 – 4%) and North America (1 – 2%).

26
 3. County Agriculture
The total agricultural production in 2019 in Laikipia County was
approximately 200,611 Mt which was a slight increase from the 2018
production of 196,887 Mt. The main crops produced in the County were
maize, beans, wheat, Irish-potatoes, sorghum and coffee.
Table 3-22: Area Cropped, Production and Value for Major Crops, 2017-
2019
2017 2018 2019
Yiel Yiel Yiel
Crop
Area Producti d/Ha Area Producti d/Ha Area Producti d/Ha
s
(Ha) on (MT) (MT (Ha) on (MT) (MT (Ha) on (MT) (MT
) ) )
39,6 44,3 44,5
Maize 102,932 2.59 127,618 2.88 129,535 2.9
78 12 69
Bean 23,2 20,1 21,0
31,873 1.37 27,562 1.37 27,845 1.3
s 65 18 05
Whea 6,89 7,92 7,99
11,378 1.65 14,265 1.8 15,112 1.8
t 6 5 2
Irish
2,20 2,39 2,44
Potat 20,932 9.48 26,389 11 27,044 11
8 9 2
o
Sorgh
285 322 1.13 827 976 1.18 875 997 1.13
um
Coffe
78 79 0.97 79 77 0.98 79 78 0.98
e
72,4 75,6 76,9
Total 167,516 196,887 200,611
10 60 62
Source: Department of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries, County Government of Laikipia

The acreage under irrigation faring in Laikipia County increased from

3,527 Ha in 2017, 3,758 Ha in 2018 and 3,973 Ha in 2019 as shown in
the Table below.
Table 3-23: Acreage Under Irrigation by Type of Crop grown, 2017-2019
Crop 2017 2018 2019
Tomatoes 2,375 2,528 2,673
Onions 91 234 262
Cabbages 316 365 380
Kales 245 252 265
Spinach 147 125 134
Snow Peas 145 67 72
Melons 82 44 42
Brinjals 4 5 5
Sweet Pepper 5 7 6
French Beans 65 84 87
Butter Nuts 25 12 15
Chillies 25 28 25
Okra 2 2 2
Baby Com 5 5
Total 3,527 3,758 3,973

27
Source: Department of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries, County
Government of Laikipia
4. Livestock Production
Laikipia County is well endowed with different livestock breeds. Data
obtained from the Department of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries,
County Government of Laikipia showed that local chicken was the
majority in 2021 as they stood at 26.8% of the total livestock followed by
local goats (23.6%), local sheep (21.6%), beef cattle (13.8%) and dairy
cattle (4.5%).
5. Horticultural Production
Data obtained from the Department of Agriculture, Livestock and
Fisheries in Laikipia County showed that horticultural products produced
in the county increased from 24,446 Mt in 2017 to 29,637 Mt in 2019. In
terms of value, the value of horticultural products increased from KES
457,693 to KES 576,310 as shown in the Table below.
Table 3-24: Agricultural Production Laikipia County 2018 -2019
2018 2019
Catego
ry Area Quantity Value(KES Area Quantity Value(KES
(Ha) (Mt) '000' ) (Ha) (Mt) '000' )
Fruits 355 5,868 302,770 384 6,137 306,522
Vegetab
1,452 21,824 246,806 1,550 23,047 249,409
les
Flowers 58 442 20,242 58 453 20,379
Grand-
1,865 28,134 569,818 1,992 29,637 576,310
Total
It is important to note the increase in the flower industry in the County
with most of the farms situated along the Ewaso Nyiro river. The access
to markets of these farms are through the A4 and improving the road will
lead to faster freight times for the flowers to overseas markets.
3.2.7.8 County Transport
1. Road Network
The counties road transport network as at 2019 stood at 7,862.9 Km of
which 4,436.5 Km was earth, 3,043 Km was gravel and 383.13 Km was
paved to bitumen standards. The table below shows the Kilometres of
Roads Covered by Type and Agency during the period 2017 – 2019.
Table 3-25: Kilometres of Roads Covered by Type and Agency, 2017 -
2019
Type of Grand
Year Earth Gravel Bitumen Total
Road Total
KeNHA 155 155
2017 KURA 11.9 17.1 29 7,134.1
KeRRA 356.1 45 401.

28
 Type of Grand
Year Earth Gravel Bitumen Total
Road Total
1
6,54
County 4,116 2,428 5
9
KeNHA 155 155
KURA 17.6 17.6
2018 KeRRA 302 46 348 7,135.6
6,61
County 3,966 2,644 5
5
KeNHA 155 155
KURA 18.1 18.1
2019 KeRRA 135 195 330 7,862.9
7,36
County 4,437 2,908 15
0
Source: Source: Kenya Rural Roads Authority (KERRA), Kenya Urban Roads Authority (KURA),
Department of Infrastructure, Laikipia County
2. Air-Transport
Nanyuki Airfield is in Nanyuki, Laikipia County, in the Kenyan East Rift
Valley. The airstrip is situated on the western foot-hills of Mount Kenya
and it lies only 8 kilometres, south of the Equator. It is approximately 140
kilometres, by air, north of Jomo Kenyatta International Airport, the
country's largest civilian airport in Nairobi.
3. Railway Network
The county is served by the Nairobi-Nanyuki Railway line which is
approximately 25 Km long. This line was recently refurbished and train
serviced commenced operation in Nanyuki in 2020. This line will not only
enable the importation of critical products such as fuel and farm inputs,
but it will also improve the capacity to export home-grown agricultural
products to intended markets on time and in an efficient way.
3.2.8 Nyandarua County Profile
3.2.8.1 County Description-
Nyandarua County is located in the North-Western part of former Central
Province of Kenya. The County is connected to Uganda and Tanzania by
primary roads: Ol’Kalou-Miharati-Engineer Road (B20) and Ol’Kalou-
Gilgil road (A4) that join the Nairobi-Nakuru Transnational Highway (A8)
at Nakuru and Gilgil respectively. The highway then connects the County
to Uganda via Eldoret, Webuye and Malaba and to Tanzania via road
(A12) through Kisumu, Migori and Isebania. Nyandarua borders Nyeri to
the East, Laikipia to the North, Nakuru to the West, Murang’a to the
South East and Kiambu to the South. The County is mainly linked to the
major town centres in the region (Nakuru, Nyeri and Nyahururu) by
road, the dominant mode of transport.

29
The major economic activities in the County include farming, quarrying
and trade. Agriculture is the backbone of Nyandarua’s economy due to
the fertile soils and favourable climate. It is considered the food basket of
Kenya because of its high production of potatoes, cabbages, carrots, peas
and milk that are sold in Nairobi and most other towns in the country.
3.2.8.2 Administrative Units
The County is divided into five Sub-Counties. Kinangop is the largest
Sub-County covering 822 km2 with 8 electoral Wards is the largest. The
other Sub-Counties are Kipipiri with 4 Wards, Ol’Kalou with 5 Wards and
Ndaragwa with 4 Wards. Ol’Joro Orok Sub-County covering 389.1 km 2
with 4 Wards is the smallest.
3.2.8.3 Project Road area of Influence
The project road (Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) Road) traverses
through Nyandarua County and specifically in Ol-Kalou and Ol' Joro Orok
Sub-Counties. The project road in Nyandarua County is approximately 42
Km and is all paved to bitumen standard. A good transport system is
necessary for easing the mobility of raw materials, labor, goods and
services thus promoting economic development and inter-regional
competitiveness. Therefore, Capacity enhancement of this road will open
up these areas economically by reducing travel cost, cost of
transportation, reducing inconveniences caused by poor roads, and
enable local people access better services such as education and health
care.
County Population
The population of the County at the last population census of 2019 was
638,289 persons, which showed that it increased by approximately by
14.8% from the 2009 population census results. The projected population
for 2030 and that for 2040 was approximately 835,229 persons and
1,018,980 persons respectively as shown in the Table below.
3.2.8.4 Gross County Product
The 2019 Gross County Product Report showed that Nyandarua County
GCP was on an upward spiral increasing steadily from KES 57.619
million in 2013 to KES 82.099 millions in 2017. During the period 2016-
2017, the county economy of Nyandarua grew by 7.2% which was a
significant decrease compared to the growth of 9.5% during the period
2015-2016 as shown in the Table below. The contribution of Nyandarua
County to the National Economy averaged 2.6% from 2013 to 2017.
Table 3-26: Gross County Product –Nyandarua County
GCP in Millions County Share to
Year Growth of GCP
KES National GDP
2013 57,619 2.1

30
 2014 62,159 7.9% 2.2
2015 69,975 12.6% 2.6
2016 76,615 9.5% 3.0
2017 82,099 7.2% 3.3
Average Growth 2013-2017 2.6
Source: 2019 Gross County Product Report

3.2.8.5 County Per Capita Income

The per capita GCP for Nyandarua County in constant 2009 prices was
approximately KES 117,295 in 2017 compared to 111,622 in 2016.
During the period 2013 – 2017, the highest per capita growth rate of
10.4% was registered in 2015 whereas the lowest growth rate was
realized in 2017 as shown below.
Table 3-27: Per Capita GCP – Nyandarua County
Growth in Per
Year Per Capita GCP: (Constant Prices, KES)
Capita GCP
2013 89,072
2014 94,203 5.8%
2015 103,975 10.4%
2016 111,622 7.4%
2017 117,295 5.1%
Source: 2019 Gross County Product Report

3.2.8.6 Productive Sectors

1. Crop Production
The total agricultural crop production in Nyandarua County increased by
27.7% from 1,067,229 Mt in 2015 to 1,363,232 Mt in 2020. During the period
2015 to 2019, the value of agricultural crop production in Nyandarua County
increased from Kes 13,090 million to Kes 89,254 million. T he main crops
produced in the County were irish potatoes, cabbages, peas and maize.
2. Main Livestock Breeds and Facilities
Data obtained from Nyandarua County Livestock Department showed
that in 2018, the total number of livestock animals were 1.527 million,
which was projected to increase to 1.707 million in 2020, and 1.917 in
2022. The main livestock were cattle, sheep and goats. Kipipiri Sub-
County holds the only ranch in the County – Ol Magogo, which is run by
KALRO. It occupies 300 hectares and mainly rears sheep and cattle.
Tourism and Wildlife
3. Main Tourist Attractions and Activities
The main tourist attraction sites include: The Aberdare National Park
which has abundant wildlife and recreational activities including
mountain climbing and nature trails; Lake Ol’Bolosat; pre-colonial and
colonial times settlements at the foot of the Aberdare forest where the
colonialists lived; the Mau Mau caves at Geta and Kimathi and other
attractions including scenic terrains, waterfalls, rivers and forests. There

31
are numerous investment opportunities in tourism as the County has few
star rated hotels.
4. Main Wild-Life
The wildlife in the County is mainly found in the park, forests and at lake
Ol’Bolosat. The Aberdare
National Park has abundant wildlife which include elephants,
hippopotamus, cheetahs, lions, leopards, monkeys, wild pigs, baboons,
water bucks, Thompson’s gazelles, zebras and hyenas. Lake Ol’Bolosat
has hippopotamus in addition to a large population of bird species, in
particular the Sharpe’s long claw eagle, one of the threatened bird
species, can also be found here.
5. Main Forest Types and Size of Forests (Gazetted and Un-
Gazetted Forests)
Total gazetted forest area in the County is 49,916.2 km² which is
concentrated in the western side of the Aberdare Ranges. The main
forest areas include four forests, namely Ndaragwa (13,233.5 ha), Lake
Ol’Bolosat (3,326.9 ha), Geta (19,884.3 ha), North Kinangop (6,811.5 ha)
and South Kinangop (6,660 ha). The gazetted forest areas also include
Lake Ol’Bolosat wetland which covers 33.3 sq. km.
3.2.8.7 County Transport System
1. Road Transport
Road transport is the primary mode of transportation in Nyandarua
County, with a total road length of Approximately 3,400 kilometres. Earth
roads account for 78% of the total road network, while bitumen roads
constitute only about 7%, which indicates that there are challenges of
mobility within the County. The roads are further classified according to
their surface condition as outlined in the table for below.
Table 3-28: Road Length by Surface Condition
Road Type Length Km Percentage (%)
Bitumen 224 7
Gravel 525 15
Earth 2,651 78
Total 3,400 100
The current road network comprises of hierarchical roads classified as A,
B, C, D, E, F and G classes. The major roads traversing the County are
Nyahururu-Nyeri (B21), Ol’Kalou-Miharati (formerly C69, now B20) and
Ol’Kalou-Nyahururu (formerly C77, now A4). The existing road network
is largely shaped by the human settlement pattern, as well as internal
and external growth nodes. There are also numerous Class D and E roads
within the County. The table below shows various road classes in the
County and the length they cover.

32
Table 3-29: Road Classes and Respective Lengths
Road Class Length in Km Percentage (%)
A 51.06 7%
B 151.46 20%
C 374.95 50%
D 173.9 23%
Total 751.37
Source: Kenya Roads, 2017
2. Air Transport
The County has a paved airstrip at Gatimu owned by the Government
which operates for strategic purposes only and currently has no
commercial importance. The airstrip is inadequately serviced and has
minimal operations. Ways of revitalising this airstrip to extend its
activities for commercial and tourism use should be explored.
3. Railway Transport
The county has a 60 kms long metre gauge rail connecting Gilgil to
Nyahururu that passes through the Nyandarua County with stations in
Ol’Kalou and Ol’Joro Orok. Currently, the railway line is being
rehabilitated by the Kenya Railways. This will have an impact in freight
transport since it runs almost parallel to the project road though mostly
for bulky goods with export potential.
3.2.9 Nakuru County Profile
3.2.9.1 County Description
Nakuru County is among the most cosmopolitan in the country. The
major economic activities include; agriculture, tourism and financial
services. Nakuru is an agricultural rich County whose background was
shaped by the early white settlement schemes.
3.2.9.2 County Position and Size
The County covers an area of approximately 7,498.8 Km² with the County
headquarters in Nakuru Town.
It is located in the Rift Valley and it borders seven Counties; Laikipia to
the north-east, Kericho to the West, Narok to the south-west, Kajiado to
the South, Baringo to the North, Nyandarua to the East and Bomet to the
West.
3.2.9.3 County Administrative Units
The County is divided into eleven administrative Sub-Counties (and
wards) namely; Nakuru East (5), Nakuru West (6), Naivasha (8), Molo
(4), Njoro (6), Kuresoi North (4), Kuresoi South (4), Rongai (5), Bahati
(6), Subukia (3) and Gilgil (5).

33
3.2.9.4 Project Road area of Influence
The project road, Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) Road traverses
through Nakuru County and specifically in Gilgil Sub-County. The project
road in Nakuru County is approximately 18 Km and is all paved to
bitumen standard.
3.2.9.5 County Population
The population of the County at the last population census of 2019 was
approximately 2.164 million persons. The population projection for 2030
and 2040 showed that population in Nakuru County would likely increase
to 2,605,183.0 persons and 3,049,794.0 persons in 2030 and 2040
respectively as shown in the Table below. Naivasha was the most
populated sub-county followed by Njoro, Nakuru North, Rongai, Nakuru
West, Nakuru East and Gilgil among others.
Table 3-30: Nakuru County Population Projection
Population
Population Projection
Sub county Census
2019 2030 2040
Naivasha 355,383 427,134 508,290
Njoro 238,773 286,981 341,507
Nakuru North 218,050 262,074 311,868
Rongai 199,906 240,267 285,917
Nakuru West 198,661 238,770 284,137
Nakuru East 193,926 233,079 227,364
Gilgil 185,209 227,010 270,143
Kuresoi North 175,074 210,421 250,401
Molo 156,732 188,376 224,167
Kuresoi South 155,324 186,683 222,154
Subukia 85,164 102,358 121,806
3,049,794.
2,164,221.0 2,605,183.0
Total 0
Source: KNBS 2019 and Consultants Estimates
3.2.9.6 Gross County Product
The 2019 Gross County Product Report showed that Nakuru County
increased steadily from KES 161.073 million in 2013 to KES 216,295
million in 2017. During the period 2016-2017, the county economy of
Nakuru grew by 4.2% which was a significant decrease compared to the
growth of 10.0% during the period 2015-2016 as shown in the Table
below. The contribution of Nakuru County to the National Economy
averaged 6.1% from 2013 to 2017.

34
Table 3-31: Gross County Product –Nakuru County
GCP in Millions County Share to
Year Growth of GCP
KES National GDP
2013 161,073 5.4
2014 177,446 10.2% 5.7
2015 187,767 5.8% 6.0
2016 206,545 10.0% 6.6
2017 216,295 4.7% 6.9
Average Growth 2013-2017 6.1
Source: 2019 Gross County Product Report

3.2.9.7 County Per Capita Income

The per capita GCP for Nakuru County in constant 2013 prices was
approximately KES 88,248 in 2017 compared to 102,826 in 2017. During
the period 2013 – 2017, the highest per capita growth rate of 6.1% was
registered in 2016 whereas the lowest growth rate was realized in 2017
as shown below.
Table 3-32: Per capita GCP – Nakuru County
Growth in Per
Year Per capita GCP: (Constant Prices, KES)
Capita GCP
2013 88,248
2014 93,801 6.3%
2015 95,806 2.1%
2016 101,684 6.1%
2017 102,826 1.1%
Source: 2019 Gross County Product Report

3.2.9.8 Crop, Livestock, Fish Production and Value addition

1. Main Crops Produced
The main crops produced include; maize, beans, Irish potatoes, sweet
potatoes, vegetables, herbs, spices fruits and cut flowers. The Table
below shows the total crops produced in Nakuru County during FY 2013
& FY 2014.
Table 3-33: Area Cropped, Production and Value for Major Crops, 2013 –
2014
2013 2014
Value Value
Crop Area Producti Area Producti
(Millions (Millions
(Ha) on (Mt) (Ha) on (Mt)
KES) KES)
Barley 4,522 14,552 348.5 3,456 11,974 270.7
51,46 43,94
Beans 29,699 1,184.30 20,942 810.5
7 6
Cassava 99 840 15.9 111 827 14.6
Cocoyam 18 129 9.3 15 128 10.8

35
 2013 2014
Value Value
Crop Area Producti Area Producti
(Millions (Millions
(Ha) on (Mt) (Ha) on (Mt)
KES) KES)
s
Cow
60 40 1.2 59 51 1.9
Peas
Dolichos
100 108 8 91 116 9.2
Bean
Finger
318 367 12.7 414 456 14.7
Millet
Grain
Amarant 23 23 1.4 27 29 1.3
h
Green
50 17 1.3 22 7 0.4
Grams
Irish 12,29 29,94
186,852 2,420.00 301,686 3,516.00
Potatoes 7 0
90,69 86,50
Maize 233,985 5,694.80 160,682 2,787.90
0 4
Pigeon
87 168 3.5 77 167 2.7
peas
Sorghum 1,665 2,235 56.3 1,330 1,623 36.4
Soya
49 13 0.4 44 11 0.4
Beans
Sweet
279 1,947 38 217 1,786 29.8
Potatoes
31,29 32,05
Wheat 99,809 2,973.20 90,542 2,772.90
2 7
193, 198,
Total 570,784 12,769 591,027 10,280
016 310
Source: Department of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries, County Government of Nakuru

2. Horticultural Production
Data obtained from the Department of Agriculture, Livestock and
Fisheries in Nakuru County showed that Horticultural farming was very
vibrant. Data obtained showed that horticultural products produced in
the county increased from 264,799 Mt in 2013 to 447,841 Mt in 2014. In
terms of value, the value of horticultural products increased from KES
44,976 million in 2013 to KES 109,679 million in 2014 as shown in the
Table below.
Table 3-34:Horticultural Production and value by Crop, 2013-2014 –
Nakuru County
2013 2014
Crop Value Value
Category Area Product (Millio Area Productio (Millio
(Ha) ion (Mt) ns (Ha) n (Mt) ns
KES) KES)
Fruits 2,177 9,335 322 649 8,645 458

36
 17,27 35,88
Vegetables 250,969 3,578 434,479 5,879
0 8
Medicinal And
Aromatic 384 2,223 25,069 337 2,676 65,077
Plants (Maps)
Flowers 1,213 2,272 16,007 1,235 2,041 38,265
Grand-Total 21044 264799 44976 38109 447841 109679
Some of the fruits include avocadoes, bananas, tree tomatoes, mangoes,
passion fruits, oranges, plums and pears while vegetables include
tomatoes, kales, cabbages, spinach, garden peas and carrots. Roses and
other flowers are also grown within the county for export. The project
road area of influence within Gilgil sub-county has several flower farms
and small-scale farming of fruits and vegetables.
3. Livestock production
Livestock production is one of the major economic activities undertaken
in the County. The main livestock reared include; dairy cattle, poultry,
sheep, goats and rabbits. Dairy and meat production are the main income
earners. Milk production has been boosted by the availability of major
milk processing companies that purchase milk directly from the farmers’
co-operatives. The companies include Kenya Cooperative Creameries
(KCC), Brookside among others. The County is boosting this sector by
constructing the milk cooling plants for farmer groups across the County
4. Ranches
There are 17 ranches in Nakuru County. Five are company ranches while
12 are private ranches. Most ranchers keep dairy and beef cattle, goat
and sheep with milk, meat, hide and skin, wool and mutton as their main
products.
Nakuru County is among the counties with a large inflow of tourists from
within and outside Kenya. The county boasts of major flora and fauna
that attract tourists.
5. Main Tourist Attractions and Activities
The National Parks are the major tourist attractions in the County. These
are; Lake Nakuru National park, Hells Gate National Park and Mt.
Longonot National Park. Other tourist sites include; Menengai Crater,
Subukia Shrine, Lord Egerton Castle, Lake Naivasha, Lake Elementaita,
Hyrax hill prehistoric site, Ol-doinyo Eburru volcano and Mau forest.
Other private wildlife conservancies that attract tourists include; Marura,
Oserian and Kedong in Naivasha sub-County and Kigio and Soysambu in
Gilgil sub-County.
6. Main Wildlife
Black and white rhinos thrive in the surrounding national parks, which
also has its fair share of Cape buffalos, African wild dogs, Zebras, Elands,
Waterbucks, Baboons, Velvet Monkeys, Columbus Monkeys, Giraffes,

37
Impalas, Thomson Gazelles, Bush Bucks, Reed Bucks, Warthogs, Lions
and flamingos on the shores of Lake Nakuru and Lake Elementaita.
7. Wildlife Conservation Areas
Nakuru County hosts three national parks namely: Lake Nakuru National
park, Hells Gate National Park and Mt. Longonot National Park. Further,
there are five private wildlife conservancies which include; Marura,
Oserian, Kedong, Kigio and Soysambu. The Table below shows the total
number of visitors to Nakuru and Hells Gate National Parks during the
period 2013-2019.
Table 3-35: Total number of visitors to Nakuru and Hells Gate National
Parks
Year Lake Nakuru National Park Hell's Gate National Park
2013 262,496 88,960
2014 225,981 114,086
2015 188,937 121,835
2016 214,699 154,385
2017 216,008 206,485
2018 241,980 165,817
2019 232,999 165,617
Source: Statistical Abstract 2020

As shown above, the total number of tourists visiting Lake Nakuru

National Park decreased by 11% from 262,496 in 2013 to 232,999 in
2019. Similarly, the total number of tourists visiting Hells Gate National
Park increased by 86% from 88,960 in 203 to 165,617 in 2019. The
tourism sector will benefit from the road construction by linking tourism
attractions in the different counties to form tourism circuits.
3.2.9.9 County Transport
1. Road Network
According to the Nakuru County Integrated Development Plan 2018-
2022, the entire road network in the County was approximately 12,491
km. Out of which paved roads constitute 993.7 Km and gravel roads
4,500 Km and earth roads 6998 Km. The quality of road infrastructure
can be described as 20% good, 35% fair and 45% poor.
Some roads especially in agricultural rich areas including Kuresoi North
and South, Molo, Njoro Subukia, Naivasha and Gilgil are still in
deplorable condition hence leading to delays in transporting of
agricultural produce to the market making farmers to incur losses for
perishable goods.
2. Rail Network
The old railway line (192 Km) traverses through the County to Uganda,
which transports cargo mainly from the port of Mombasa to Malaba
border. The proposed Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) passes through Mai

38
Mahiu (Naivasha) as it joins Narok County all the way to Malaba border.
The proposed dry port in Naivasha as a result of the SGR is expected to
boost economic activities in the County.
3. Airport and Airstrips
Currently, the County does not have an existing airport. However, there
are plans for expansion of the airstrip at Lanet Military Base for
commercial services. This will improve economic integration with the
rest of the nation and open international market for products within the
County including direct export of horticulture and floriculture.

39
3.3 Social Outlook

3.3.1 Introduction
The success of a society is linked to the well-being of each citizen. This
means investing in people so that they can improve their overall well-
being and reach their full potential. It also involves removing any
barriers that limit the citizens from achieving their dreams or growing
towards self-sufficiency.
Social development for sustainable development has been included in the
Sustainable Development Goals under the “Transforming our world: the
2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” The objective is to
strengthen the social dimension: within the social sectors (poverty
eradication strategies) and through social policy (promoting policies that
enhance access to quality education, healthcare, safe drinking water, and
group-specific policies for youths, the elderly, persons with disabilities,
etc.) (United Nations, n.d).
The Kenyan government, through the Ministry of Labour and Social
Protection, is also focused on promoting Social Development. According
to the State Department for Social Protection (2021), their objective is to
mobilize and empower individuals, families, groups and communities to
facilitate the process of social change for growth and improved
livelihoods.
An analysis of social development in Kenya and the affected counties
within the road projects is centred on:
 Gender distribution
 Education and Literacy levels
 Health status
 Employment rate

3.3.2 Gender distribution

Gender issues concern the evaluation of measures put into ensuring
equal rights and opportunities are given to both men and women in all
sectors of society, including economic participation and decision-making.
The gender comparison shows that there are more women in the Country
and counties than the population of men. The growth of the gender
population is similar to the population growth over the ten years between
2009 and 2019.

40
Table 3-36: Population distribution by sex among the counties affected
by the road project
County Male Male Female Female M/F M/F
‘09 ‘19 ‘09 ‘19 Ratio Ratio
‘09 ‘19
Nyandaru 292,155 315,022 304,113 323,247 0.96 0.96
a
Meru 670,656 767,698 685,645 777,975 0.98 0.98
Tharaka 178,451 193,764 186,879 199,406 0.95 0.95
Nithi
Embu 254,303 304,208 261,909 304,367 0.97 0.97
Murang’a 457,864 523,940 484,717 532,669 0.94 0.94
Kiambu 802,609 1,187,1 820,673 1,230,45 0.98 0.98
46 4
Laikipia 198,625 259,440 200,602 259,102 0.99 1
Nakuru 804,582 1,077,2 798,743 1,084,83 1.01 0.99
72 5
Kenya 19,192, 23,548, 19,417,6 24,014,7 0.99 0.98
458 056 39 16
Source: KNBS Population Census 2019
Nakuru County shows a slight change in the gender numbers, with a
change from men being more than women are in 2009 to the number of
women being more than the men’s population. Nyandarua, where the
long section of the road traverses, has the same ratio with slightly more
women than men do.
In Tharaka Nithi, the male to female ratio is at 0.95 showing more
females than males in the County. Both Murang’a and Kiambu counties
show no change in the gender gap with 0.94 and 0.98, respectively.
Considerations of gender equality should be made during the
employment of locals during construction in all cadres of labour.

3.3.3 Education and Literacy levels

According to the 2019 national census, Kenya has a population of 47.6
million. The Ministry of Education has defined the official age of
attending schools in the Basic Education Statistical Booklet 2019 as
follows: 4-5 years for pre-primary, 6-13 years for primary and 14-17 years
for secondary. Table 3-37 below shows that 36% of the Kenyan
population are aged between 4-17 years, and collectively, they should be
acquiring their basic education.

41
Table 3-37: Total Population and School-Age Population, 2019

According to the approved Basic Education Statistical Booklet 2019,

access to education in Kenya has significantly improved from 2017-2019,
as shown in Figure 1-1 below. The increase in the learning centres is
attributed to the accelerated investments by county governments
following the devolution. The number of pre-primary learning centres
increased from 41,779 in 2017 to 46,530, and that of primary schools has
increased from 31,449 in 2017 to 32,344 in 2019. Similarly, the number
of secondary schools increased to 10,487 in 2019 from 8,958 in 2017.

Figure 3-16: Number of Basic Education Institution by Level, 2017-2019

Source: (MoE 2020)
The net enrolment rate across the pre-primary, primary and secondary
levels of education in Kenya has also significantly increased from 2016-
2018, as presented in the table below:

42
Table 3-38: Kenya's Net Enrolment Rate in percentage
Level 2016 2017 2018
Pre-Primary 74.9 76.9 77.2
Primary 91.2 91.2 92.5
Secondary 49.5 51.1 53.3
Source: MoE, 2020
The increase in the number of learning institutions at the national level is
attributed to the construction of more education facilities at the county
level. An analysis of the number of education facilities within the counties
affected by the road projects showed they have quite a number of
learning institutions. Table 2-6 presents the specific number of schools in
each county depending on the type of learning facility.

43
Table 3-39: Number of education facilities and enrolment rate of Counties within the road project
Number of Education Facilities & Net Enrolment Rate (NER) 2018-2022
Technical
County Vocatio
ECDE Primary Secondary Tertiary Training
nal
Institute
Nakuru 830 public 714 public 24 public 336 public 1 public university, 1 private 2 schools
schools schools schools schools university, 13 university
NER-96% NER-79% campuses, 4 teachers
training colleges, 15
Institute of Technology,
Nyandaru 496 public 349 public 24 public 167 public 4 schools
a schools schools schools schools
NER-54.5% NER- NER-60.66%
96.8%
Laikipia 428 public 286 public 10 public 83 public 1 university, 1 university 3 schools
schools schools schools schools campus, 1 branch of
NER-79% NER-93.4% NER-61.5% management institute, 1-
KMTC branch
Kiambu Not provided 476 public 34 271 public 1 public university, 6 private 2 schools
NER-71.7% schools schools universities, 4 university
NER- NER-86.4% campuses, 26 colleges
96.9%
Murang’a 1000 schools 512 schools 65 306 public 1 public university & 1 1 school
schools private university
NER-71.04%
Meru 773 public 773 public 29 public 377 public 1 public university, 1 private 1 National
schools schools schools schools university, 4 university polytechnic, 5
NER- campuses, 2 teachers technical
training colleges training
Tharaka 432 public 479 public 18 public 141 public 2 universities, 1 satellite 3 Technical
Nithi schools schools schools schools campus Training

1
 Institute
Embu 399 public 384 public 26 public 176 public 4 public universities 3 technical
schools schools schools schools including constitute colleges training
and campuses, 2 private institute
universities, 3 private middle
level commercial colleges, 3
teacher training colleges
(Source: County Integrated Development Plans 2018-2022)

2
The high number of schools and increased enrolment rate has helped to
improve the literacy level within the county. The construction of the
proposed road is likely to increase the access to the education facilities
as the distance to some of the schools could be reduced. Additionally, the
improved roads can motivate the County Government to construct more
schools in areas currently deemed inaccessible.
The Kenya Health and Demographic survey carried out in 2014 showed
that the literacy levels for men between 15 -49 in the Country was 97%
while that for women between the same age range was 88%.

Literacy Levels for Men between 15 Literacy levels for Women

-49 between 15 - 49

The figures show that the literacy levels for both genders in the
respective Counties are high, between 75% and 100%. However,
women's literacy levels in Tharaka Nithi and Laikipia were lower,
ranging between 75% and 90%. Murang’a County had high literacy levels
for both genders, while Tharaka Nithi has the largest gender gap in
literacy levels.

3.3.4 Health

Based on the Ministry of Health Fact Sheet 2012, Kenya had 4,039 public
health facilities, which are also supplemented with approximately 4000
more non-governmental, faith-based, and private health facility funders.
The indicators used included population, nutrition, child and maternal
health, HIV and AIDS, health personnel, health facilities and health
financing. Table 2-7 highlights maternal health and the number of health
facilities between 2017 – 2019 as indicators for the respective counties.

1
Table 3-40: Number of health facilities per county and births
County 2014 2019
No. of Births at No. of Public Births at
Public health health health
health facility (%) facilities facility (%)
facilities
Nyandarua 65 74.6 73 95.1
Meru 103 93.5 498 94.5
Tharaka 43 91.7 96 92.9
Nithi
Embu 75 93.0 93 94.7
Murang’a 92 94.1 122 95.4
Kiambu 104 96.5 105 97.5
Laikipia 55 77.8 77 76.8
Nakuru 136 85.8 236 88.4
KENYA 83.3 85.7

Over the 5-year review period, Tharaka Nithi and Laikipia counties had
the lowest number of public health facilities, but Tharaka Nithi has
significantly increased its number of health facilities. Laikipia remains
with the lowest number, but with the construction of the proposed road,
the County government will likely invest in additional facilities.

As part of promoting social development, it is critical to focus on

maternal and reproductive health among mothers. A rapid increase is
noted in Nyandarua County with the percentage of births in a health
facility, but a decline of 1% was recorded in Laikipia County. All other
affected counties have been registering increased births at health
facilities. The decrease in Laikipia is attributed to the long distance to
the health facilities and the poor condition of roads in the county. Other
social problems like insecurity (mainly due to cattle rustling), drought
and famine, and cultural practices make the residents not consider
health a priority.

3.3.5 Employment rate

The employment rate in Kenya is calculated from the proportion of

people employed as a percentage of the population within the working-
age between 18 -54. The 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census
found that out of the 47 million Kenyan, the economically active
population comprises 22.3 million Kenyans (working 19.7 million and
those seeking work 2.6 million). Among the working population, 50.4%
were males compared to 40.6% women. 14.5 million youths aged
between 15-34 years were in the labour force. This implies that
unemployment among the reproductive age remains high since about 2.6
million seek work, which is unavailable.
Table 3-41: Employment rate

2
 COUNTY EMPLOYMENT RATE (%)
Nakuru 9.4
Nyandarua 3.0
Laikipia 8.3
Meru 9.8
Tharaka Nithi 6.7
Embu 5.9
Kiambu 12.9
Murang’a 5.8
Source: KNBS Population and Housing Census, 2019

The employment rate for Nakuru, Nyandarua and Laikipia is 9.4%, 3.0%
and 8.3%, respectively. Meru has the highest employment rate at 9.8%,
followed by Tharaka-Nithi at 6.7% and Embu at 5.9%. Kiambu has a high
employment rate of 12.9%, while Murang’a has a rate of 5.8%.
The low employment rate, especially among the youth, is attributed to
the preference for white-collar jobs. Farming and trading opportunities
that serve as employment opportunities and sources of income are not a
priority among the graduates. The majority of them venture into these
income-generating activities as they wait for a white-collar job. This
perception poses a challenge to the National and County Governments to
provide incoming generating activities that will see the youth employed.

3.3.6 HIV/AIDS Prevalence

The prevalence rate of HIV/AIDs in the country is 6%, approximately 1.6
million people. The prevalence rate among the counties within the road
projects is outlined in the table below:
Table 3-42: Prevalence Rate of HIV/AIDS By County
County HIV PREVALENCE RATE (%)
Nakuru 4.1
Laikipia 3.2
Nyandarua 3.0
Tharaka Nithi 3.9
Embu 3.3
Meru 2.9
Kiambu 5.6
Murang’a 5.2

Along the Gilgil-Nyahuru-Rumuruti Road, Nakuru has the highest

prevalence rate of 4.1%. This is because of the high population of people
in the county and the urban setting, where the disease spreads faster
than in the semi-urban and rural settings. Tharaka Nithi has the highest
prevalence rate attributed to the limited access to healthcare and

3
cultural beliefs that limit the locals from obtaining anti-retroviral drugs.
The prevalence rate in Kiambu and Murang’a Counties is relatively the
same, with only a 0.4% margin. Among all these counties, the prevalence
rate of HIV/AIDS remains higher in females than males.

4
4 TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE PROJECT
ROADS

This section outlines the methodology for obtaining data from secondary
sources and fieldwork, the analysis approach and criteria and the
technical assessment for the project roads.

4.1 Traffic Forecast and Projections

4.1.1 Traffic Surveys Methodology

The objective of the traffic data collection along the existing road was to
determine the normal traffic volumes and composition, and on the
intersecting major roads, to enable the estimation of the total future
traffic composed of generated and diverted traffic after the proposed
improvements and upgrading is complete.
Traffic studies were carried out in accordance with the following
guidelines;
1. Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) Overseas Road Note 40: A
guide to axle load surveys and traffic counts for determining
traffic loading on pavements; and,
2. Kenya Road Design manuals and Ministry of Roads guidelines for
conducting traffic studies
The following traffic studies were conducted along the project roads from
22nd February 2021 to 13th March 2021:
1. Classified Motorized traffic counts;
2. Axle load surveys;
3. Origin-Destination (O-D) surveys; and,
4. Road crashes surveys.
In addition to the above studies, information on ongoing and
proposed/likely developments within the project influence area was
collected to help in the estimation of the future generated traffic.

The survey methodologies, their durations and the remarks are

summarised in Table 4-43.
Table 4-43: Survey types and proposed methodologies

Type of Duration Remarks

Surveys
Link Counts 7-day, 16-hour Done to determine the nature of traffic in terms
counts (0600h – of volumes and traffic characteristics along the
2200h) sections.

1
Turning 7-day, 16-hour Done to determine the nature of traffic in terms
Movement counts (0600h – of volumes and traffic characteristics at major
counts 2200h) junctions.

3-day, 16-hour 3-day counts at other junctions along the road.

counts (0600h –
2200h)

Origin – 3-day, 16-hour Establish traffic movement patterns, commodity

Destination surveys (0600h – flow, route choice, freight and occupancy rates,
survey 2200h) and potential diverted traffic by analysing
captive origin-destination pairs.

Axle load 3-day, 16-hour Establish existing axle loading for all commercial
surveys surveys (0600h – vehicle classes plying the project road and on
2200h) any road links that are likely to divert onto the
project road in the future.

Classified Manual Traffic Counts

The classified traffic counts were carried out in the locations shown in
Table 4-44. Traffic flow for each direction was continuously recorded
through manual tallying by trained enumerators under the supervision of
Traffic Engineers.
Table 4-44: Locations of Manual Classified Traffic Counts

Road section Station Type of Count

Turning Movement
A104/A4 Junction
Count
Turning Movement
A104/G711348 Junction
Count
Along A4 after Junction with
G710035A Link Count
Turning Movement
B20/A4 Staggered Junction Count
Gilgil – Nyahururu Turning Movement
– Rumuruti (A4) C487/A4 Junction Count
Turning Movement
B21 East/A4 Junction Count
B21 West/A4 Junction Turning Movement
(Roundabout) Count
Ol Jabet Town (Nyahururu -
Rumuruti) Link Count
Turning Movement
Rumuruti Junction (Roundabout) Count
Buuri – Katheri – Turning Movement
Meru – Chaaria – B65/A9 Junction Count
Mitunguu – Ishiara (Ena - Kathwana) Link Count

2
 Road section Station Type of Count
Turning Movement
C383/B65 Junction Count
Turning Movement
C359/B65 Junction Count
Turning Movement
A9/B65 Staggered Junction Count
Turning Movement
Kathwana – Ishiara C362 /B65 Junction Count
– Ena (B65) Roads Turning Movement
D1197/B65 Junction Count
Turning Movement
C356/B65 Junction Count
Turning Movement
A2/B65 Junction Count
Kiarutara – Turning Movement
Gatanga – Thika Kiarutura (Gatura - Kiarutara) Count
(B20) Turning Movement
C502/B65 Junction Count
Turning Movement
C545/B20 Junction Count
E2215/D1315 ( Former C66) Turning Movement
Count
Gatunyu (Thika - Gatanga) Link Count
Turning Movement
A2/B20 Junction Count
A map of the above study locations is attached in Appendix A of this
report.
Origin- Destination Survey
The Origin-Destination surveys were carried out using the roadside
interviews method at several locations along the road for three (3) days
over periods of twelve (12) hours. The information collected included the
vehicle type, the trip purpose, trip frequency, the commodity being
transported (for goods vehicles) and the number of occupants (for
passenger vehicles). The locations are shown in Table 4-45.

3
Table 4-45: Locations of Origin-Destination Surveys
Road Station Specific Location
Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) Ol Jabet Ol Jabet Town
C487/A4 Junction Ol Joro Orok
Buuri – Katheri – Meru – Chaaria – C359/B65 Junction Mitunguu
Mitunguu – Kathwana – Ishiara – Mujujune shopping
Ena (B65) Roads C356/B65 Junction Centre
Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20) Gatunyu (Thika -
Gatanga) Gatunyu centre
E2215/D1315 ( Former Near Kariminu Centre
C66) Junction

Analysis of O-D data obtained from roadside interviews was carried out
separately for each of the O-D stations. Traffic zones were established
using major towns and centres in the project area of influence as the
nodes. Main attractors and generators were also determined for each
station. Trip purposes were classified into six groups namely: home,
work/employment, school, trade/business, social functions (including
visits, weddings and funerals), tourism, shopping/leisure and ‘others’
(functions like taking a vehicle for service and test driving etc.) and
medical reasons
The detailed results and discussions are presented in Appendix A while
the summarised findings are discussed in subsequent sections.
Axle Load Surveys
The axle load surveys were conducted at the same locations as the origin-
destination surveys. They were undertaken for three (3) days over
periods of twelve (12) hours using portable axle weighing scales and
assisted by the Police in stopping vehicles. The locations are shown in
Table 4-46.
Table 4-46: Locations of Axle load Surveys
Road Station Specific Location
Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) Ol Jabet Ol Jabet Town
C487/A4 Junction Ol Joro Orok
Buuri – Katheri – Meru – Chaaria – C359/B65 Junction Mitunguu
Mitunguu – Kathwana – Ishiara – Mujujune shopping
Ena (B65) Roads C356/B65 Junction Centre
Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20) Gatunyu (Thika -
Gatanga) Gatunyu centre
E2215/D1315 ( Former Near Kariminu Centre
C66) Junction

The axle load data was analysed and the pavement loadings estimated.
The detailed results and discussions are presented in Appendix A while
the summarised findings are discussed in subsequent sections.

4
4.1.2 Existing Traffic Conditions
The traffic data collected was analysed to determine the existing traffic
conditions for each of the project roads. The road was divided into
homogenous road sections based on the predominant land use (e.g.
urban and rural) and the observed traffic levels

4.1.2.1 Kiarutara -Gatanga –Thika (B20)

Table 4-47 shows the traffic volumes for each section of the road, while
Figure 4-17 shows the AADT composition of the road.. The Thika A2
Junction – Gatunyu section had the highest traffic volume and can be
attributed to the existing land use in the area consisting of plantations,
tourism and residential developments. Gatura Junction – Kiarutara
section has low AADT due to reduced settlement towards the forested
area and lesser trips.
Table 4-47 AADT per section
Total with Total without
Section
Motorcycles Motorcycles
Thika A2 Junction - Gatunyu 8,605 6,606
Gatunyu – Gatanga Junction 4,037 3,583
Gatanga Junction – Gatura 4,355
Junction 3,548
Gatura Junction - Kiarutara 953 588

Figure 4-17: AADT Composition along Kiarutara -Gatanga –Thika road

5
Most of the trips along Kiarutara -Gatanga –Thika road are home/work
trips. Recreational trips such as was also noted along the road, with
vehicles heading to tourist attractions such as Mt. Kenya forest and
plantation tours along the road. Most home/work trips are frequent trips
taken daily along the road (31%), followed by work trips covering the
working days of the week at 24%.
The most common commodity type is industrial products such as soap,
detergents, processed foods, tools, fertilizers etc., being distributed
within the centres along the road. This is followed by agricultural
produce.

4.1.2.2 Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4)

Table 4-48 summarises the total AADT for each road section along the
Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) road by road traffic section.
Table 4-48: AADT Per section along Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4)
Road Section Total with Total without
Motorcycles Motorcycles
A8/G711438 Junction - CBD 7,297 3,582
A8/A4 Junction - CBD 1,698 1,619
Gilgil (Barracks) - Ol Kalou Junction 6,563 4,062
Ol Kalou Junction - Ol Joro Orok Junction 15,927 9,997
Ol Joro Orok Junction - 6,266 5,002
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A - 13,180 7,612
Nyahururu/Nyeri Junction
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A - Ol Jabet 8,694 4,520
Ol Jabet - Rumuruti R/A 3,708 2,331

The highest traffic volumes were noted around Ol Kalou and Nyahururu
town. Ol Kalou is the county headquarters for Nyandarua, while
Nyahururu town is a major urban centre with links to Nanyuki and
Nakuru towns. Table 4-48 shows the AADT composition of the road
sections.

6
Figure 4-18: AADT Composition for Gilgil-Nyahururu-Rumuruti

Based on the O-D survey at Ol Jabet town, most of the trips were home-
work trips frequently taken, with daily trips constituting 30% of all trips
taken. When combined, trips taken daily, weekly and on weekdays only
account for 63% of all trips, which is indicative of commuter-type traffic.
Construction materials are the most common commodity type indicating
growth in the real estate sector. This is followed by agricultural goods
and food stuff.
The O-D survey analysis results at Ol Joro Orok town near Rumuruti
indicate a similar trend with the most common commodity types being
construction materials and agricultural products. Agricultural products
included horticultural products such as flowers etc. Construction
materials were also being delivered to Rumuruti.

4.1.2.3 Buuri – Katheri – Meru – Chaaria – Mitunguu – Kathwana

– Ishiara – Ena (B65) Road
Table 4-49 and Figure 4-19 show the AADT per section and the AADT
composition, respectively, along the Buuri -Katheri -Meru -Chaaria -
Mitunguu -Kathwana - Ishiara – Ena (B65) road.
Table 4-49: AADT Per section along Buuri - Ena Road
Road Section Total with Motorcycles Total without

7
 Motorcycles
Ena-Kathwana 6,636 4,147
Kathwana-Mitunguu 4,037 1,548
junction
Mitunguu junction- 3,165 1,148
Gitimbine Junction
Gitimbine Junction-Katheri 12,742 5,879
Katheri-Mujujuni cross 1,265 483
junction
Mujujuni cross junction- 2,560 1,444
Kisima

Figure 4-19: AADT Composition along Buuri - Ena Road

The highest traffic volume was at the Gitimbine Junction-Katheri section
of the road, attributed to Gitimbine being approximately 1 km from the
Meru CBD, a major trip generator and attractor. Motorcycles and
personal cars constitute the largest proportion of traffic along the road
For the Buuri - Ena road section, many users were either doing more
than one trip a day (24%) and monthly trips (26%) with most trips being
work or business trips. The most common commodity type is agricultural
products. A significant proportion of vehicles were noted to be carrying
tea, bananas and flour. Construction materials were mostly masonry
stones from quarries around the Kaguma area. These trucks were noted
to be overloading and causing damage along the road between Kaguma
and Gitimbine.

8
For the Buuri - Ena road section (at Mujujune) most trips were also noted
to be work (40%) or business trips with most of the trips being
undertaken on weekdays. The most common commodity being
transported was agricultural products, mostly wheat and tea.
Construction materials and foodstuff were also common.

4.1.3 Traffic Growth Rates

4.1.3.1 Indicators of Traffic Growth Rates

In order to estimate the future traffic on the project roads, the
Consultant worked out traffic growth rates for different passenger and
freight carrying vehicles and for different periods in years to come. Some
of the major factors which are known to influence traffic demand along
trunk roads in Kenya are as follows:
 Changes in Demography: urban population growth, natural and
migration from different regions including rural areas.
 Changes in Land Use: This could occur along a road corridor due to
change of land use from low traffic generating activities to higher
and vice versa. Some of the traffic generating activities such as
commercial and residential uses, Governmental and institutional
developments, manufacturing and storage facilities, recreational
uses, health care and improvement in transport infrastructure
including airport, town expansion plan, etc.
 Dynamics of Macro-Economic Performance Indicators.
 Counties Socio-economic Performance Indicators.
 Presence of efficient transport infrastructure leading to the
generated and the induced traffic in future on account of reduced
vehicle operating cost and savings in travel time.
 Traffic capacity constraints and lack of transport infrastructure and
plans; and,
 Availability of alternative transport modes for sharing traffic loads
rationally, as per their availability and efficiency.
These indicators have been used to develop the recommended traffic
growth rates with the detailed analysis and the assumption made are
provided in Appendix A.

4.1.3.2 Elasticity Values Derivation

Growth rates vary by vehicle user class and also by the operators, viz.
private, public, and commercial vehicles for passenger and freight
movement. Demand for transport depends upon growth in income

9
measured by the GDP. The change in volume of trips in response to
changes in income overtime is known as income elasticity of demand.
Empirical evidence demonstrates that elasticity coefficients tend to vary
by type of transport demand. The responsiveness of vehicle use to GDP is
also known as “Growth Elasticity with respect to GDP”. According to
(Todd Littman, 2019, transport income elasticity varies between 1 and 2.
Table 4-50 shows the proposed elasticity value of the transport sub-
sector with respect to GDP for the three vehicle classes.
Table 4-50: Proposed Elasticity Value of Transport Sub-Sector w.r.t. GDP
Elasticit
N Vehicle
Vehicle Types y Value
o User Class
(e)
1. Private Small, large, and medium saloons and other
Vehicles people carriers, SUVs, etc.; also included are
4x4s vehicles, such as Toyota Land Cruisers, 1.25
Mitsubishi Pajero, Nissan Patrol, Land
Rovers, Range Rovers, Jeeps, RAV 4s, etc
2. Public Mini Bus (14 Seater), Medium Bus (2 Axle),
Transport Large Bus (2 Axle ) and Large Bus (3 Axle) 0.9
Vehicles
3. Commercial Utility Pick-up, Light Truck (2 Axle), Medium
Vehicles Truck (2 Axle), Heavy Goods Truck (3 Axle) 1.0
and Articulated Truck (4-6 Axle)
Source: Consultant4

4.1.3.3 Adopted Traffic Growth Rates

The vehicle elasticities were associated with three growth scenarios
(Low, Medium and High) to obtain corresponding traffic growth rate
scenarios by vehicle type. The analysis and the overall structure of the
three growth scenarios (Low, Medium and High) for the different project
road sections are shown in Appendix A, while the adopted traffic growth
rates for use in forecasting the traffic are shown in Table 4-51 and Table
4-52.

4
The above elasticity values were derived from the following two publications:
1) Kenya Project Appraisal Guidelines for Road and Transport Projects. The
European EDF Programme for Kenya. Ministry of Transport, Infrastructure,
Housing and Urban Development. Edition 1 – 2016: Institutional Capacity
Building to the Transport/Road Sector in Kenya.
2) Todd Litman (2019). Transport Elasticities: Impacts on Travel Behaviour:
Understanding Transport Demand To Support Sustainable Travel Behavior,
Technical Document 11, Sustainable Urban Transport Project (www.sutp.org)
and GIZ (www.giz.de); at www.sutp.org/index.php/en-dn-tp

10
Table 4-51: Adopted Traffic Growth Rate foe A4 and B20
THIKA – GATANGA – KIARUTARA (B20) AND GILGIL – NYAHURURU – RUMURUTI
(A4)
GROWTH RATE
Vehicle Type
LOW MEDIUM HIGH
NMT 2.2 3.5 4.2
Motor Cycle 3.3 5.3 6.3
TUKTUK 3.3 5.3 6.3
Small/Medium Car 3.3 5.3 6.3
Four Wheel Drive Vehicles (4WD) 3.3 5.3 6.3
Pick-Up/Utility Vehicles 2 3.2 3.8
Matatu (14 Seater) 5.4 8.5 10.1
Medium Bus (25-30 Pass) 5.4 8.5 10.1
Large Bus 2 Axle Bus 5.4 8.5 10.1
Large Bus 3 Axle Bus 5.4 8.5 10.1
2 Axle Truck (LGV) 2 3.2 3.8
2 Axle Truck (MGV) 2 3.2 3.8
3 Axle Truck 2.5 4 4.8
4 Axle Truck 2.5 4 4.8
5 Axle Truck 2.5 4 4.8
6+ Axle Truck 2.5 4 4.8
Others 2 3.2 3.8

Table 4-52: Adopted Traffic Growth Rate for B65

BUURI – MERU -ENA( B65)
GROWTH RATE
Vehicle Type
LOW MEDIUM HIGH
Motor Cycle 3.3 5.3 6.4
TUKTUK 3.3 5.3 6.4
Small/Medium Car 3.3 5.3 6.4
Four Wheel Drive Vehicles (4WD) 3.3 5.3 6.4
Pick-Up/Utility Vehicles 2 3.2 3.9
Matatu (14 Seater) 3.1 5 5.9
Medium Bus (25-30 Pass) 3.1 5 5.9
Large Bus 2 Axle Bus 3.1 5 5.9
Large Bus 3 Axle Bus 3.1 5 5.9
2 Axle Truck (LGV) 2 3.2 3.9
2 Axle Truck (MGV) 2 3.2 3.9
3 Axle Truck 2.7 4.4 5.3
4 Axle Truck 2.7 4.4 5.3
5 Axle Truck 2.7 4.4 5.3
6+ Axle Truck 2.7 4.4 5.3
Others 2 3.2 3.8

11
4.1.4 Diverted Traffic
Diverted or reassigned traffic refers to traffic that changes from an
alternative route to the project road, but still travels between the same
origin and destination. To determine the diverted traffic, analysis of the
O-D matrices was used together with identification of alternate routes for
the different origin and destination zones along the project roads.
It was observed that the Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti road is the main
route connecting the major traffic nodes along it. Whereas other routes
exist between the nodes, the routes are not parallel but loop through
other interior towns before connecting back to the main traffic
generators. Additionally, the road conditions were noted to be poor with
some of the routes having gravel surfacing. As such, there are no savings
in time and cost in using the alternative routes along the project road
and given that the available road capacity, the increase in volumes due to
diverted traffic along this road was not considered.
However, for Thika – Kiarutara (B20) some traffic would be diverted from
the Thika – Magumu road particularly vehicles that were heading
towards Njabini.
The Buuri – Ena (B65) road was noted to reduce the travel times for
vehicles moving between Meru area and Timau/ Nanyuki area which
currently loop between A2 and A9 through Subuiga, a distance of
approximately 40 km with delays due to congestion within Meru town.
There is also an alternate route linking Mujujune centre along the project
road to Kiirua along B6 but still had longer travel times than the project
road with delays due to congestion within Meru town.
The adopted diverted traffic volumes for the roads are as shown in Table
4-53.
Table 4-53: Adopted diverted traffic per vehicle Type
Lar
ge
Large Large HGV
Road car LG MG Tot
Bus 2- Bus Combin
Section Salo & V V al
Axle 3-Axle ed
on 4W Pick Mata Mediu
Car D -up tu m Bus
Thika –
Kiarutara 38 9 7 18 0 0 0 0 18 1 150
(B20)

Buuri –
Meru – Ena 234 52 112 33 0 0 0 0 35 5 781
(B65)

4.1.5 Generated Traffic

Generated traffic is additional traffic on the improved road or route that
was not present without improvement. Generated traffic is, essentially, a

12
result of increased development that can be directly attributed to road
improvement.
All the roads traverse or are located near major trade centers undergoing
significant development due to their functions and due to improvements
in the road network. The Thika – Kiarutara section of the B20 road due to
its proximity to Thika has attracted large scale real estate developments
along it such as Bahati Ridge Development and Thika Golden Pearl
Development as well as the horticultural farms along it. Linkage to
Njabini will provide additional market for trade of goods and thus
increase the traffic.
Gitimbine –Buuri/Kisima section of B65 starts 1 km from Meru town and
generated traffic is expected to be significant due to the road network
improvement through dualling of the Meru highway, improvement of
KURA road network within Meru town and completion of the Meru
bypasses.
The Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti road traverses two County
headquarters and improvement in the road is expected to increase the
land use development through reduction in transport costs, improvement
in accessibility, increase in local investment within these centers and
thus improve the economic activities of the towns. Additionally,
improvement will reduce costs and time for access to agricultural inputs,
access to the tourism locations along the road and improve access to
market for goods and services for the smaller towns.
Considering all these factors and applying transport elasticity, we
assumed that the generated traffic will be an increase of 7.6% of the
existing traffic along all the project roads. The figure is considered to be
representative and adequate for analysis at pre-feasibility stage.
Table 4-54 shows the generated traffic for each road section.

13
Table 4-54: Generated Traffic for each road section
Larg Larg
Salo Larg Pic e e HGV HGV HGV HGV
M/ Tuk Mata Mediu LG MG Othe
Rd Road Section on e car k- Bus Bus 3- 4- 5- 6- TOTAL
Cycle tuk tu m Bus V V r
Car 4WD up 2- 3- Axle Axle Axle Axle
Axle Axle
B20 Thika A2
Junction -
Gatunyu 192 5 159 123 115 176 5 3 2 7 36 4 2 2 2 0 834
Gatunyu -
Gatanga
Junction 44 1 146 37 33 107 2 1 2 10 13 1 0 0 0 0 397
Gatanga
Junction -
Gatura Junction 77 0 100 38 42 85 12 8 2 9 22 3 1 0 0 0 400
Gatura Junction
- Kiarutara 175 1 68 21 29 50 3 3 2 6 10 3 0 0 0 0 371
B65 Ena-Kathwana 48 1 78 32 32 79 6 2 2 8 28 3 0 0 2 0 322
Kathwana-
Mitunguu
junction 239 1 71 13 18 11 1 0 1 6 15 2 0 0 4 0 383
Mitunguu
junction-
Gitimbine
Junction 194 0 61 8 7 4 2 1 0 4 15 2 0 0 2 1 301
Gitimbine
Junction-Katheri 66 2 171 30 40 78 7 3 2 11 32 4 0 0 2 1 449
Katheri-
Mujujuni cross
junction 75 0 16 5 6 3 2 1 0 3 6 0 0 0 0 1 120
Mujujuni cross
junction-Kisima 107 1 61 8 39 7 1 1 0 5 12 1 0 0 0 0 243
A4 A8/G711438
Junction 107 4 93 38 27 56 9 5 4 7 11 1 1 0 0 0 363
A8/A4 Junction -
Gilgil
(Barracks) 8 0 62 28 9 34 0 1 9 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 166
Gilgil
(Barracks) - Ol
Kalou Junction 72 1 159 93 54 47 5 6 1 7 11 6 0 0 1 1 462
Ol Kalou Jcn -
Ol Joro Orok Jcn 171 66 129 116 61 164 4 6 2 17 22 8 2 0 3 3 772
Ol Joro Orok Jcn 121 1 212 50 37 122 3 2 1 10 18 11 1 0 2 1 592
-Nyahururu/Nak
uru Rbt

14
Nyahururu/
Nakuru Rbt -
Nyahururu/Nye
ri Jcn 160 25 318 74 67 205 13 17 7 13 16 3 1 0 1 0 920
Nyahururu/ 120 5 206 55 30 101 3 7 0 7 24 4 0 0 1 1 565
Nyeri Junction -
Ol Jabet
Ol Jabet - 132 0 94 28 18 49 1 2 0 2 22 3 0 0 1 6 359
Rumuruti R/A

15
4.1.6 Base Year Traffic and Forecasted Traffic Volumes
The normal, generated and diverted traffic were computed for the project
roads to constitute the base year traffic. Based on the adopted medium
traffic growth rates, the base year traffic for the at the year of opening
(2025) were forecasted to 10 years (2035), and then further to 20 years
(2045) which was taken as the design year.

4.1.7 Traffic Engineering Design and Capacity Analysis Criteria

Roads and their associated facilities (such as intersections) are designed
to accommodate actual forecast traffic volumes (design volumes) for a
specific design period and road functional class. The proposed road
projects should have adequate capacity to accommodate traffic for the
forecast design year and criteria is for assessing the capacities is
outlined below.

4.1.7.1 Criteria for Road Cross-Sections Types

Based on the Kenya Road Design Manual Part, the 10-year AADTs were
converted into Passenger Car Units (PCUs) in order to take into account
the impact on the capacities (and other traffic variables such as speed) of
the various vehicle classes as compared to a standard car. The total
PCUs in year 10 (design year) are used to recommend a cross-section
type based on the Table 4.2.2 of the Kenya RDM I.
The Kenya RDM I further recommends that the design capacity of a road
is related to a Level of Service (LOS) which is acceptable based on the
economic considerations and on the road agency’s acceptable LOS
tolerances.

4.1.7.2 LOS Criteria for Highway Performance Analysis

The Levels of Service (LOS) criteria based on the Highway Capacity
Manual 6th Edition was adopted as a basis for determining the
performance of the project road sections and major intersections. The
LOS is a globally recognized standard used to evaluate the performance
of highways and road network facilities and assigns values from A to F as
defined by various measurements or estimates of speed, volume to
capacity ratios, stops, or other criteria. LOS ‘A’ indicates the best
conditions with no congestion or delay, while ‘F’ is the worst case with
substantial delay and 100% saturation of the road entity. LOS ‘C’ is
generally considered acceptable. Table 4-55 shows the analysis criteria
for road section (including intersection approaches).

16
Table 4-55: Level of Service Criteria (LOS)
Road Sections - Intersections -
Volume to Control Delay
LOS Description
Capacity Ratio (Sec/Veh)
(V/C)
Free flow conditions with drivers 0-10
un affected by other movements <0.65
A in the traffic streams
Stable flow with drivers having >10-15
reasonable freedom to 0.65-0.75
B manoeuvre
Stable flow, but drivers >15-25
0.75-0.85
C somewhat restricted.
Approaching stable flow limits >25-35
with drivers significantly 0.85-0.95
D restricted
Unstable flow, traffic or close to >35-50
capacity with drivers severely 0.95-1.0
E restricted
F Forced flow, over capacity limits >1.0 >50

Table 4-56: Lane Capacity Criteria

Lane Capacity (passenger

Link Type
cars/hour/lane)
Arterial Road 1,000
Collector Road 800
Local Road 300

4.1.8 Basic Capacities and Cross-section Types

The basic capacity for the entire road was calculated using appropriate
Passenger Car Units (PCUs) factors for each section. The Kenya Road
Design Manual Part I recommends that the geometric design period is
taken as 10 years. hence the design year for the road project has been
taken as (2038) 10 years after opening. The proposed cross-section types
obtained are summarised in Table 4-57.

17
Table 4-57: Forecasted growth and derived Cross-section Types
Mediu Cross
Low High
m Sectio
Growt Cross Cross Growt
Growt n Type
Road Section h sectio Sectio h
h
n type n Type
AADT AADT AADT
(pcu) (pcu) (pcu)
Thika A2 Junction - Gatunyu 21,634 I 26,203 I 28,919 I
Gatunyu - Gatanga Junction 10,942 II 13,447 II 14,946 I
Gatanga Junction - Gatura
Junction 12,234 II 14,936 II 16,555 I
Gatura Junction - Kiarutara 2,254 II or III 2,759 II 3,061 II
A8/G711438 Junction - CBD 8,560 II 10,495 II 11,651 II
A8/A4 Junction - CBD 5,351 II 6,602 II 7,353 II
Gilgil (Barracks) - Ol Kalou 11,776 14,166 15,567
Junction II II I
Ol Kalou Junction - Ol Joro 20,365 24,797 27,439
Orok Junction I I I
Ol Joro Orok Junction - 15,894 19,298 21,323
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A I I I
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A - 24,261 30,284 33,937
Nyahururu/Nyeri Junction I I I
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A - Ol 14,773 18,128 20,146
Jabet II I I
Ol Jabet - Rumuruti R/A 8,744 II 10,533 II 11,607 II
Ena-Kathwana 13,380 II 18,702 II 25,959 II
Kathwana-Mitunguu
junction 5,700 II 7,743 II 10,607 II
Mitunguu junction-
Gitimbine Junction 4,522 II 6,169 II 8,343 II
Gitimbine Junction-Katheri 14,013 II 19,269 I 26,872 I
Katheri-Mujujuni cross
junction 2,460 II 3,278 II 4,635 II
Mujujuni cross junction-
Kisima 8,722 II 12,545 II 16,719 II

Table 4-58 shows the recommended typical cross-sections for each road
which are based on the medium growth rates for a 10-year design period.
Table 4-58: Recommended Typical Cross-section for all roads

Road Section Name TCS Type Remarks

Kiarutara – Dual
I
Gatanga – Thika A2 Junction - Gatunyu Carriageway
Thika (B20)
Single
II
Gatunyu - Gatanga Junction Carriageway
Gatanga Junction - Gatura Single
II
Junction Carriageway
Single
II or III
Gatura Junction - Kiarutara Carriageway

18
Gilgil – A8/G711438 Junction - CBD Single
II
Nyahururu – Carriageway
Rumuruti (A4)
A8/A4 Junction - CBD Single
II or III
Carriageway
Gilgil (Barracks) – Ol Kalou Single
II
Junction Carriageway
Ol Kalou Junction - Ol Joro Orok Single
II
Junction Carriageway
Ol Joro Orok Junction - Single
II
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A Carriageway
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A - Single
II
Nyahururu/Nyeri Junction Carriageway
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A - Ol Single
II
Jabet Carriageway
Ol Jabet - Rumuruti R/A Single
II
Carriageway
Buuri – Katheri Gitimbine Junction-Katheri Single
II
– Meru – Carriageway
Chaaria –
Katheri-Mujujune cross junction Single
Mitunguu – II or III
Carriageway
Kathwana –
Mujujune cross junction-Kisima Single
II
Carriageway

4.1.9 Equivalence Factors (EF) and Pavement Loading

The Equivalence Factor (EF) of an axle is its pavement damaging effect
in relation to a standard axle which has a load of 80 KN. The EF value for
each axle were computed using Liddle’s equation (Kenya RDM Part III)
and then summed for each vehicle type and used with the AADT at
opening to compute the Initial Daily No. of Equivalent Standard Axle
(ESA) on the road. The cumulative number of standard axles (CNSA) for
both directions was then calculated using the equation below.
n−1
365 ×t 1 ( 1+r )
CNSA=
r
Where: -
t1 = Initial daily no. of standard axles i.e. average ESA in
the 1 year of opening
st

r = Annual growth rate expressed as a decimal fraction

n = Design period (years)

19
The pavement design period was taken as 20 years from the time the
project road will be opened to traffic.
Table 4-59 shows the computed equivalence factors for the various road
sections.
Table 4-59: Adopted Equivalence Factors
Vehicle Equivalence Factors
VEHICLE Thika – Gilgil – Nyahururu – Buuri –
CATEGORY Kiarutara Nyahururu Rumuruti Meru – Ena
(B20) (A4) (A4) (B65)
Minibus 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
BUS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
LGV 0.004 0.009 0.012 0.084
MGV 1.379 4.828 2.339 2.045
HGV 1 3.172 2.013 0.786 0.085
HGV 2 0.465 0.798 2.400 1.736

20
4.1.9.1 Recommended Traffic Loading Classes
The recommended traffic classes for use in the pavement design are
shown in Table 4-60.
Table 4-60: Recommended Traffic Classes for all roads

Road Section Name Traffic

Class
Kiarutara – Thika A2 Junction - Gatunyu T3
Gatanga – Thika
Gatunyu - Gatanga Junction T4
(B20)
Gatanga Junction - Gatura Junction T3
Gatura Junction - Kiarutara T4
Gilgil – Nyahururu A8/G711438 Junction - CBD T3
– Rumuruti (A4)
A8/A4 Junction - CBD T3
Gilgil (Barracks) – Ol Kalou Junction T3
Ol Kalou Junction - Ol Joro Orok Junction T2
Ol Joro Orok Junction - T2
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A - T3
Nyahururu/Nyeri Junction
Nyahururu/Nakuru R/A - Ol Jabet T3
Ol Jabet - Rumuruti R/A T3
Buuri – Katheri – Gitimbine Junction-Katheri T3
Meru – Chaaria –
Katheri-Mujujune cross junction T4
Mitunguu –
Kathwana – Mujujune cross junction-Kisima T4
Ishiara – Ena
(B65)

21
4.2 Pavement Evaluation, Soils and Materials Investigations

The Consultant obtained and reviewed reports and data for the project
roads from the relevant departments in KeNHA and other related
agencies. This information includes the pavement design and materials
investigations report, as-built reports, and the ongoing maintenance
works on the project roads.
Table 4-61: Available Pavement and Construction Reports and Data by
Road Section
Lin Leng
Road Section Name k th Remarks / Data Source
ID (Km)
Kiaruta Njabini – B2 28
ra – Kiarutara 0
Gatang Kiarutara – B2 41
a – Jnc. A2 Thika 0
Thika
(B20)
Gilgil - Gilgil – A4 35 Pavement Evaluation Report for the
Nyahur Nyahururu Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti Road
uru – Ol Kalou – A4 35 (MTRD Report No. 1430 of 2019):
Rumuru Nyahururu No pavement or alignment
ti (A4) Nyahururu – A4 42 investigations were carried out for
Rumuruti this road section. Only material
sites were sampled.
Buuri – Ena – B6 53
Ena Jnct E789 5
(B65) Chiakariga
Jnct E789 B6 56
Chiakariga 5
Meru
A2 Buuri – B6 39
Katheri_Meru 5
Gitimbine – KeRRA availed construction
Katheri- Documents for the following road
Kithaku - sections: Katheri-Kithaku, Kithaku –
Mujujune – Kisima and Mujujune –Kisima. The
Kisima information contained alignment
soils and pavement materials data

Where no secondary data could be obtained, the Consultant collected

primary data on soils and materials sites. The sections below summarise
the findings, while the detailed report and results are in Appendix B.

4.2.1 Condition Survey and Pavement Layers Evaluation

A detailed road condition survey was first undertaken of the project
roads. The existing pavement layers were then evaluated through

22
trenching every five (5) Km and sampling the pavement layers. The
layers were also subjected to DCP testing to evaluate the layer strengths
and estimate the elastic moduli. For the Gilgil – Nyahururu road (B20),
the existing pavement structure was obtained from the Pavement
Evaluation MTRD Report No. 1430 of 2019.

23
A summary of the results is shown in Table 4-62, with detailed results in
Appendix B.
Table 4-62: Existing Pavement Structure
Existing Existi
Roa Existi
Road Leng Pavemen ng Existing Pavement
d ng
th t Shoul
Section Cla C/Way Structure
(Km) Conditio der
ss Width
n Width
Gitimbine B65 7.4 Good 6 1 Surfacing: 40mm AC
Junction- Base: 150 mm GCS
Katheri Subbase: 150 mm GCS
Improved Subgrade:
200mm
Katheri - B65 3.2 Unpaved 6 1 Under construction
Kithaku
Kithaku - B65 11.7 Unpaved 7 0 Under construction
Mujujune
Mujujune B65 15.66 Good 6.5 1 Surfacing: 50mm AC
- Base: 150 mm GCS
Buuri/Kisi Subbase:150mm Gravel
ma Subgrade: 300mm
Improved
A8 A4 5.7 Fair 6 2 Surfacing: 35-50mm AC
Junction - Base: 130-150 mm Natural
Gilgil CBD Material
Subbase: 150 mm gravel
Subgrade: 175-300mm
Gravel
Gilgil CBD A4 28.7 Fair 6 2 Surfacing: 50 - 80 mm AC
- Ol Kalou Base: 100 - 180mm quarry
waste
Subbase: 100 - 150 mm
gravel
Subgrade: 150-300mm
gravel
Ol Kalou - A4 33.2 Fair 6 2 Surfacing: 100-180mm AC
Nyahurur Base: 125 - 1200mm GCS
u Subbase: 160 - 180mm
natural material
Subgrade: 150-300mm
gravel
Nyahurur A4 43.7 Fair 6 2 Surfacing: 25mm SD
u - Base: 125 - 200mm GCS
Rumuruti Subbase: 140mm Quarry
Waste
Subgrade: Quarry waste
Nyahurur A4 2.6 6 3
u Bypass New
(New)
A2 Thika B20 9.9 Good 6 1m x 2 Surfacing: 50mm AC
Junction -
 Road Roa Leng Existing Existi Existi Existing Pavement
Section d th Pavemen ng ng Structure
Gatunyu Cla (Km) t C/Way Shoul
Gatunyu - B20 21.1 Good 6 1m x 2
Gatanga
Junction Base: 150 mm GCS
Gatanga B20 Good 6 1m x 2 Subbase:150mm GCS
Junction - Subgrade: 200mm
Gatura improved
Junction Native: Red coffee soil
Gatura B20 11.22 Good 6 1m x 2
Junction -
Kiarutara
Gatakaini B20 28 Under
- Njabini Construct
ion

The results of DCP testing was analysed using UK 3.1 DCP software
programme and Recap LVR V1 programme to give: CBR of Base,
Subbase and Subgrade; Layer profile curves; Structural Number (SN)
and elastic modulus. For the Thika-Gatura road section, the highest CBR
was 221% on the base layer, and the lowest is 51% on the subbase layer.
For the Gatura-Kiarutara road section, the highest CBR was 50% on the
base layer, and the lowest is 29% on the subbase layer.
For the Gilgil – Nyahururu road (B20), the existing pavement structure,
strength and residual life were obtained from the Pavement Evaluation
MTRD Report No. 1430 of 2019. Based on the report, DCP tests were
undertaken on the subgrade and the results indicate a mean subgrade
CBR of 25%. FWD deflection measurements were also undertaken on the
Gilgil – Nyahururu road (A4), which were then analysed using RoSy
Software to obtain the pavement and subgrade moduli overlay
requirements, residual pavement life and critical layers. Table 4-63
shows the pavement moduli obtained from the analysis, while a review of
the report findings are summarised in Appendix B.
Table 4-63: Pavement Layer Moduli for the A4 Road

25
4.2.2 Alignment Soil Investigations
Alignment soil samples were collected from trial pits dug along the B20
and B65 Roads to depths ranging from 1.2 m to 1.5 m below existing
road levels. The trial pit logs were taken, samples taken and then
subjected to the following tests based on the Kenya Road Design Manual
Part III (RDM III):
1. Grading to 0.075 mm
2. Atterberg Limits
3. Compaction tests (standard compaction, 2.5 kg rammer)
4. California Bearing Ratio (CBR) and swell on samples moulded at
100 % MDD (standard compaction) and OMC (standard
compaction). CBR values were determined after four (4) days’ soak.
For the Gilgil – Nyahururu road (B20), the alignment soils analysis was
obtained from the Pavement Evaluation MTRD Report No. 1430 of 2019,
which were reviewed. The findings are discussed below.
For the Ena - Kathwana --Mitunguu junction - Gitimbine Junction road
section of the B65 road, alignment soils investigations were not carried
out because the road has been recently constructed.
Alignment Soils classification
For the Thika – Gatura – Kiarutara road section, the alignment soils are
generally “Clayey SILTS” with a liquid limit higher than 50 %, indicating
the materials are of high plasticity.
For the Gilgil – Nyahururu road section, the alignment soils are
predominantly brownish silty clays, while for the Nyahururu – Rumuruti
section, the predominant soil type is brownish soft rock.
Alignment Maximum Dry Density (MDD) and Optimum Moisture
Contents (OMC)
The MDD ranges between 1210-1576 Kg/m3 and OMC between 26- 48%
for Gatura to Kiarutara road; MDD 1208-1965 Kg/m3 and OMC between
14-48% for the Thika to Gatura.
For the Gilgil – Rumuruti road, the Mean MDD is 1340 Kg/m3 (LHS) and
1355 Kg/m3 (RHS) 24% (LHS) and 23% (RHS).
Alignment soil CBR and Subgrade Class
For the Thika - Gatura Road (B20) Section the alignment soils CBR
ranges 5% - 11%. The subgrade therefore is predominantly S2.
For the Gatura – Kiarutara Road (B20) Section the alignment soils CBR
ranges 5% - 24%. The subgrade therefore is predominantly S2 with
isolated sections of S1 expansive soils.

26
For the Kathaka – Mujujune Road (B65) Section the alignment soils CBR
ranges 5% - 9%. The subgrade therefore is predominantly S2.
For the Gilgil – Nyahururu (A4) the alignment soils CBR ranges 6% - 7%.
The subgrade therefore is predominantly S2 soils.
Most of the road section will require an improved subgrade due to the
low CBR values below S3; except where and improved subgrade is
already provided.
Swell and plasticity
For the Thika - Gatura Road (B20) Section, the alignment soil plasticity
index varies between 28% - 42%. The swells vary between 0.42% –
0.98%.
For the Gatura – Kiarutara Road (B20) Section, the alignment soil
plasticity index varies between 22% - 40%. The swells vary between 0.6%
– 0.91%.
For the Kathaka – Mujujune Road (B65) Section, the alignment soil
plasticity index varies between 30% - 43%. The swells vary between 0.5%
– 1.1%.
For the Gilgil – Nyahururu (A4) road alignment soil plasticity index varies
between 22- 24%.
The allowable swell (RDM Part III) at 100% MDD and 4-days soak for
materials for earthworks and subgrade are 3% and 2%, respectively. The
Plasticity Index (PI) criterion for earthworks materials is 50%. The
alignment soils meet the above criterion.

27
4.2.3 Pavement Materials Sources
Table 4-64 below gives a summary of the pavement material sites
investigated, outlining their locations and the type of materials.
Table 4-64: Material Site Locations
Road Section Material Site No. Location Type of Gravel
Gitimbine- MS 1 - Ruguchu Along Meru- Nanyuki *Greyish
Katheri- Road Gravel
Kathaka- MS2 Murinya Along Kisima- Reddish -Grey Light
Mujujune- Kamanyinga Mujujune- Ruiri Road Gravel
Kisima Roads
MS 1 - Gatuiko Along Thika-Gatura *Soft Rock
Road Investigated
Thika-Gatura-
MS2 - Gaturumo Along Thika-Gatura *Soft Rock
Kiarutara-
Road Investigated
Roads
MS3 - Munene-Kaha Along Thika-Gatura *Soft Rock
Road Investigated

Detailed description of material Sites, layout plans, trial pit logs and test
results are given in Appendix B. The following tests were carried out
Kenya Road Design Manual Design Part III:

Gravel Base and Subbases G.C.S Base/Subbase

 Grading to 0.075 mm sieve.  Loss Angeles Abrasion
 Atterberg Limits. Value (L.A.A)
 Compaction tests (Heavy compaction: 4.5  Aggregate Crushing
kg rammer). Value (A.C.V)
 CBR and swell at 4 days’ soak on  S.S.S(5 Cycles)
specimens moulded at OMC (Heavy
compaction) at 95 % MDD.
Hard stone test results were obtained from existing commercial quarries
located within the vicinity of the project roads.
A summary of test results given in Table 4-65 and Table 4-66 while
results are in Appendix B.

28
Table 4-65: Material Test Results Summary for the B65 Road

MS Grading PI PM CBR SWEL MDD OMC

L
Ref. Max. %
Size Passing
(%) (%) (%) Kg/m3 (%)
10-50 0.075
mm mm
1 37 15 5 11 35 0.3 1570 19.6
2 18 6 NP 0 25 2* 1440 11.8
Acceptance
Criteria for
Max.40 250
Base 5-35% Max 30 >20 - - -
% 0
Improvemen
t
Acceptance
Criteria
Max.40 Max.40 250
Subbase Max. >20 - - -
% % 0
Improvemen
t

Table 4-66: Test Results Summary for Hardstone Sources and Suitability
as GCS Source for the B65 Road

Test / Result Acceptance Criteria RDM3 Chart B4

Source H3- H4-Mega - Hardstone Class C
Krishna Max.
L.A.A (%) 15 13 45 - GCS Base/Subbase
A.C.V (%) 14 16 32 - GCS Base/Subbase
S.S.S (%) 1.3 1.2 12 - GCS Base/Subbase

Table 4-67: Test Results Summary for Hardstone Sources and Suitability
as GCS Source for the B20

Test / Result Acceptance Criteria RDM3 Chart B4

Source H1- H2-West Hardstone Class C
Hellana Build Max.
L.A.A (%) 26 15 45 GCS Base/Subbase
A.C.V (%) 21 15 32 GCS Base/Subbase
S.S.S (%) 0.6 1.7 12 GCS Base/Subbase

29
Table 4-68: Test Results Summary for MS 1 and MS2 and Suitability as
HPS Source for the B20
Test / Result Acceptance Criteria PDG Chart
Source B1G
MS1- H2-Munene Soft Stones
Gatuiko Kahoya Max.
L.A.A (%) 56 46 Hand Packed Stone
51 Base/Subbase
A.C.V (%) 51 37 Hand Packed Stone
35 Base/Subbase
PI (%) NP NP 12 Hand Packed Stone
Base/Subbase

Table 4-69: Test Results Summary for MS 1 and MS2 and Suitability as
Crushed Rock Source for the B20
Test / Result Acceptance Criteria PDG Chart GM 8/7
Source MS1- H2- Gravel Type
Gatui Munen
Crushed Soft Stone
ko e
Kahoya G30 G50 G80
L.A.A 56 46 Crushed Rock,
(%) 70 50 G20/G30/G50/G80
A.C.V 51 37 Crushed
(%) 40 35 Rock,G20/G30/G50/G80
PI (%) NP NP Max 10 10 Crushed
12 Rock,G20/G30/G50/G80

4.2.4 Recommendations for Pavement Materials

The following are recommended materials for pavement construction for
the various road sections:
1. Thika – Kiarutara (B20) road: There is an acute scarcity of
gravel in this area. Soft stones are available for hand packed stone
bases and subbases or crushed to be used as crushed gravel.
Hardstone is also available for use as Graded Crushed stones in
pavement layers. Three potential material sites for hand packed
stones or crushed soft stone and two hardstone sources for use as
GCS were identified.
2. Gitimbine – Katheri – Kisima (B65) raod section: Materials for
base and subbase Graded Crushed Stone and Gravel are available.

30
 3. Gilgil – Rumuruti – Nyahururu (A4) road:

4.3 Topographical Surveys and Mapping

Topographical surveys of the three roads were undertaken to map the

project alignment and provide preliminary survey information used as a
base in the road design and technical assessment.
Datum Mapping: The mapping datum used during the survey is shown
in Table 4-70. The mapping projections are due to the different locations
of the road sections.
Table 4-70: Mapping datum characteristics

Datum Arc 1960

Mapping Projection UTM Zone 36S and 37 N
Ellipsoid Clarke 1880 Modified
Units Meters
Reconnaissance, Ground Control Planning and Design: The
reconnaissance site visit was done to help the Consultant familiarize the
project area. The Consultant also searched and retrieved the existing
national controls to connect the survey to the national network.
Ground Control Extension: Static differential Geodetic GPS Surveying
was done to extend ground controls within the project area from existing
national controls by setting up two new Control Receivers on at least two
known base points and Rover Receivers remaining controls. Each new
point was described in a point description sheet with its coordinates, a
photo and a sketch of it with respect to its surrounding. The final
processing was done using Spectre Precision Processing Software.
Ground Topographical Surveying and Digital Mapping:
Topographical survey was executed using differential RTK Surveying and
in line with survey guidelines for topographical surveys set out in the
survey manual. The features picked were road edges, road centerline,
trees, fences, culverts, power lines, rivers, railway lines, farms, buildings,
bridges and spot heights.
Satellite Imagery Vectorization and Visualization: From the
acquired imagery, spatial features were extracted in the various spatial
layers like roads, buildings, drainage, land use, commercial areas, rivers,
trees etc. Plotting of the topographical maps was done in AutoCAD Civil
3D.

31
4.4 Road Design Proposals

4.4.1 Design Standards and Manuals

Table 4-71 presents the approved standards by the Ministry of Transport,
Infrastructure, Housing and Urban Development and Public Works
(MoTIHUD&PW) adopted for this project.
Table 4-71: Design Standard References for the Project
Road Design Manual Part I – Geometric Design and
Rural Roads 1979

Traffic Engineering TRL Overseas Road Note Note 40: A guide to axle
load surveys and traffic counts for determining
Design
traffic loading on pavements
Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition

Road Design Manual Part I – Geometric Design and

Rural Roads 1979
Geometric Design Manual for Traffic Signs in Kenya, 1975
Draft Design Manual for Roads and Bridges

Road Design Manual Part III – Material and

Pavement Design for New Roads 1987
Pavement and
Materials Road Design Manual Part V – Pavement
Rehabilitation and Overlay Design 1988

Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge

Specifications Construction, 1986

British Standards BS 5400.

Eurocode KS EN with UK Annexes as the main
standards supplemented by 1 and 2 above. No.
Road Design Manual Part IV Bridge Design, Ministry
of Public Works & Housing, Roads Department
(August 1993).
Structures Standard Drainage Structures Manual Part 1
(Standard Small Span Concrete Bridges) of the
Ministry of Public Works, Roads Department,
Bridges Section.
Standards Culverts and Drifts Manual, Ministry of
Transport & Communications, April 1982.
Kenya Railways Guidelines on clearance heights

32
 Kenya Road Design Manual Part 1
Surveying
Survey of Kenya Guidelines

33
4.4.2 Cross-sections
An appropriate cross-section for the project road was chosen based on
road function, traffic needs and design speed. The all-road sections have
adopted a typical cross-section of a carriageway of 7m and a shoulder of
2m each apart from the dual carriageway section from Thika A2 Junction
to Gatunyu centre. This section will have a typical carriageway of 7m,
shoulders of 2 m each and a median of 5 m. The table below shows the
cross-section type for each road.

4.4.3 Horizontal Alignment Design

Table 4-72: Proposed Horizontal Alignment Standards for Class A and B
Roads
Design Design Design
Design Element Speed (50 Speed (80 Speed (100
Km/h) Km/h) Km/h)
Minimum radii for horizontal 350 m
100 600
curves
Horizontal radii without > 2,000 m
>360 m >2,200 m
transition curves
Maximum super elevation 4% 6.0% 6%
Clothoid parameter (A) 75 150 210
Normal passing sight distance 250 m 475 m 475 m
Reduced passing sight distance 175 m 325 m 325 m
Max. rate of change of Super- 0.5%
1.25% 0.5%
elevation
Min. rate of change of Super- 0.3%
0.3% 0.3%
elevation
The criteria for minimum curve radii was not achieved everywhere along
the project road. This was necessary to avoid land acquisitions,
construction of major structures such as bridges and heavy earthworks,
which would increase the construction cost.

4.4.4 Vertical Alignment Design

The main design criterion for vertical curves is to ensure that the
minimum stopping sight distance criteria stipulated in the Road Design
Manual Part I are met. The other design considerations include drainage,
aesthetics and comfort of vehicle occupants.
The new vertical alignment has been designed to follow the existing
terrain as closely as possible in order to minimize earthworks.

34
Table 4-73: Proposed Vertical Alignment Standards for Class A and B
Roads
Design Design Design
Design Elements Speed Speed (80 Speed
50 km/h Km/h) 100 km/h
Max. gradients, flat terrain - 4% 3%
Max. gradients, rolling terrain 7% 5% 4%
Max. gradients, mountainous 9% - -
terrain
Minimum length of sag and crest 100 m 160 m 200 m
curves
Min. gradients (in cuts) 0.5% 0.5% 0.5%
Minimum stopping sight distance 60 m 80 m 200 m
(0% gradient)
Normal Passing Sight Distance 250 m 475 m 575 m
Min. crests curve radii (stopping 800 m 1500 m 2,500 m
sight dist.)
Min. crests curve radii (passing 400 m 700 m 1,100 m
sight dist.)
Min. sag curve radii (stopping 1,200 m 1700 m 2,400 m
sight dist.)
The vertical curves were designed as stipulated in Road Design Manual
Part I. However, the 80 km/h speed requirement could not be met in
some sections in which case a minimum speed of 50 km/h was adopted.
Speed limit signs shall be erected to warn road users of reduced
standards at such sections.

4.4.5 Gradients
The vertical gradients closely followed the existing terrain, except where
drainage structures and ground conditions dictated otherwise. Climbing
lanes have been considered for locations with significant grade changes
over long stretches of the road. Table 4-74 below summarizes the
location of the climbing lanes.
Table 4-74: Climbing Lane Locations

Road Climbing Lane Location

Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika Km 31+850 – 35+600 Both sides
(B20)
Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti Km 16+800 – Km 19+200 (LHS)
(A4

35
 Km 77+450 – Km 79+950 (RHS)
Buuri –Meru –– Ena (B65) Km 1+500 – Km 3+680 (LHS)
Km 11+700 – Km 16+100 (LHS)

4.4.6 Intersections
Intersections along the roads were assessed for suitability to be
upgraded into interchanges. This was mainly focussed at intersections of
Class A and/or class B roads as well as the terminals of the project roads.
Table 4-75 give the LOS results for the major intersections along the
project roads.
Table 4-75: Assessment of traffic operations at Intersections

Road Section Name Base LOS Opening LO 10 Years LOS

Conditio Year S Condition
n Condition (Sec/veh)
(Sec/veh) (Sec/veh)

Kiarutara Thika A2 Junction -

– Gatanga Gatunyu 23.4 C 46.2 E 61.2 F
– Thika
(B20) Gatanga Junction 6.8 A 8.1 A 23.4 C

Gatura Junction 6.2 A 13.7 B 98.4 F

Gilgil – A8/G711438 Junction -

Nyahurur CBD 5.6 A 12.5 B 15105.3 F
u –
Rumuruti A8/A4 Junction - CBD 4.3 A 4.6 A 288.0 F
(A4) Ol Kalou – Dundori
Junction 4.6 A 4.8 A 14.8 B

A4/B20 Junction
4.6 A 4.5 A 5.0 A

Ol Joro Orok Junction -

4.7 A 4.7 A 6.8 A

Nyahururu/Nyeri
Junction 4.9 A 5.6 A 32.8 D

Nyahururu/Nakuru
Roundabout 20.2 C 25.7 D 46.2 E

Ol Jabet - Rumuruti R/A

9.3 A 11.8 B 21.3 C

Buuri – Gitimbine Junction-

Meru –– Katheri 4.5 A 4.6 A 8.8 A
Ena (B65)
Mujujune cross junction 12.1 B 20.0 C 1168.9 F

Mujujune cross junction-

Kisima 9.1 A 9.6 A 71.3 F

Based on the intersection analysis shown above, the critical intersections

requiring intervention were noted. Background information was collected
on any planned or ongoing projects at these intersections to obtain
information on the proposed layouts and also the impact of these projects
to the Level of service. The intersections covered under other projects
have therefore been excluded in the costing of the project with schematic

36
layouts given for those considered within the project. Table 4-76 shows
the intersections details, the projects under which they fall and the
proposed layouts.
Table 4-76: Proposed Intersection types along each road

Road Intersection Existing Propose Remarks

Type d
Kiarutara – Thika A2 /B20 Elevated T- Elevated Schematic design
Gatanga – Intersection Junction on roundabo shown in the
Thika (B20) either side ut. design.
A8/G711438 T - Junction Trumpet Under Mau
Junction - CBD Interchan Summit dualling
ge project
A8/A4 Junction T - Junction Trumpet
Interchan
ge
Nyahururu/ Roundabout Retained Impact of bypasses
Gilgil – Nakuru and planned
Nyahururu Roundabout Nakuru –
– Rumuruti Nyahururu/ T - Junction Retained Nyahururu –
(A4) Nyeri Junction Mweiga Road
should reduce
LOS.
A4/ Nyahururu Cross - Half- Schematic design
eastern and Junction Cloverlea provided.
Western f
Bypasses interchan
ge
Gitimbine Staggered T - Elevated Designed under
Junction- Junction interchan Dualling of Meru
Katheri ge Highway project
Buuri – Ena Mujujune cross T - Junction Retained Low turning
(B65) junction volumes.
Kisima T - Junction Retained Low turning
junction – volumes.
A2/B65

4.4.7 Service Lanes and loop roads

To accommodate local traffic, service lanes and loop roads have been
proposed at major towns along the roads particularly those where the
town is linearly developing along the road with noted encroachment. The
proposed locations are based on the road condition survey, the social
survey and the observations of local traffic. The Ena – Buuri road has
been excluded due to most towns already having service lanes such as
Katheri. Additionally, further discussions will be necessary with the local
authorities due to development of parking along the road as witnessed in
Ol Kalou on A4 and Kibirichia along B65. Nyahururu town has a
restricted width due to developed central business district. However, the
recently completed bypasses will provide alternative routes for through

37
traffic and thus reduce the traffic volumes through the CBD while the
local traffic volumes would use the existing roads with others noted to be
under construction.
Table 4-77 shows the type proposed for each town along each project
road.
Table 4-77: Proposed loop roads and service roads

Project Road Loop roads Service Lanes either

side
Gatunyu – 120m Gatura – 200 m
Kiarutara – Gatanga –
Rwegetha – 80 m Kirwara – 100m either
Thika (B20)
side
Gilgil – 300 m
Gilgil – Nyahururu –
Ol Kalou – 1km
Rumuruti (A4)
Ol Joro Orok – 200 m
The loop roads and service roads were assumed to have the similar
structure to the existing carriageway. A typical cross-section of loop
roads and service road is shown in Table 4-77. The lengths of the loop
roads have thus been added to the design lengths and used to compute
the quantities and in economic analysis.

4.4.8 Pavement Design

The objective of pavement design is to provide a road structure that can
withstand the expected traffic loading over a specified time without
deteriorating below a predetermined level of service with adequate
maintenance. This is achieved by providing a pavement structure that
can withstand traffic induced stresses and strains without premature
fatigue failure within the pavement and permanent deformation of the
sub grade.
Based on the results of materials investigations and the pavement
evaluations, road sections the pavements have been designed in
accordance with recommendations in RDM III for new roads and
reconstructed roads, and RDM V for overlays and rehabilitations. Based
on the availability of construction materials as discussed in this chapter,
the table below summarises the various pavement options that have been
considered for the various project roads.

38
Table 4-78: Proposed Pavement Options for Buuri -Katheri -Meru -Chaaria -Mitunguu -Kathwana - Ishiara – Ena
(B65) Road
Road Section Leng Traffi CES Recommended Pavement Structure
th c A Pavement Option 1 Pavement Option 2 Pavement Option 3
(Km) Class
Ena-Kathwana T3 5.68 Recently constructed
Kathwana- T3 3.52
Recently constructed
Mitunguu junction
Mitunguu T3 3.31
junction-Gitimbine Recently constructed
Junction
Gitimbine 7.4 T3 6.53 Scarify surfacing. Adopt Scarify surfacing. Adopt
Junction-Katheri existing base and subbase as existing base and subbase as
new subbase layer. Apply the new subbase layer. Apply the
following new layers: following new layers:
Surfacing: Single Surface Surfacing: DSD
Dressing (SSD) + 50mm AC Base: 150 mm GCS Class B
Type II Widening to 11m
Base: 150 mm GCS Class C
Widening to 11m
Katheri - Kithaku 3.2 T4 1.51 Currently under construction
Kithaku - 11.7 T4 1.51 Surfacing: Double Surface Surfacing: DSD Surfacing: DSD
Mujujune Dressing (DSD) Base: 150 mm GCS Class C Base: 150 mm GCS Class C
Base: 150 mm Graded Subbase: 150 mm GCS Class Subbase: 200mm Natural
Crushed Stone (GCS) Class C C Material (soft
Subbase: 150 mm CIG Subgrade: reprocess stone/weathered rock)
Subgrade: reprocess subgrade to form improved Subgrade: reprocess
subgrade to form improved SG Class S3; subgrade to form improved
SG Class S3; Widening to 11m SG Class S3;
Widening to 11m Widening to 11m
Mujujune - 15.66 T4 2.45 Scarify surfacing and base Scarify surfacing and base Scarify surfacing and base
Buuri/Kisima and set aside GCS for reuse; and set aside GCS for reuse; and set aside GCS for reuse;
Adopt gravel subbase as new Adopt gravel reprocess Adopt gravel reprocess
subgrade. Apply the following subbase and adopt as new subbase and adopt as new
layers: subgrade. Apply the following subgrade. Apply the following

39
 Surfacing: DSD layers: layers:
Base: 150 mm GCS Class C Surfacing: DSD Surfacing: DSD
Subbase: 150 mm CIG Base: 150 mm GCS Class C Base: 150 mm GCS Class C
Subgrade: Class S3; Subbase: 150 mm GCS Class Subbase: 200mm Natural
Widening to 11m C Material (soft
Subgrade: Class S3; stone/weathered rock)
Widening to 11m Subgrade: Class S3;
Widening to 11m

Table 4-79: Proposed Pavement Options for Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4)

Road Section Length Traffic CESA Recommended Pavement

(Km) Class Structure
Option 1 Option 2
A8 Junction - Gilgil 5.7 T3 5.5 Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type I Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type I
CBD Base: 150 mm GCS Base: 150 mm GCS
Subbase: 150 mm CIG Subbase: 150 mm GCS
Gilgil CBD - Ol Kalou 28.7 T3 7.39 Subgrade: Scarify existing + gravel Subgrade: Scarify existing + gravel
to form improved SG Class S4; to form improved SG Class S4;
Widening to 11m Widening to 11m
Ol Kalou - Nyahururu 33.2 T2 14.8 Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type I Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type I
Base: 125mm DBM Base: 125mm DBM
Subbase: 175mm CIG Subbase: 175mm GCS
Subgrade: Scarify existing + gravel Subgrade: Scarify existing + gravel
to form improved SG Class S4; to form improved SG Class S4;
Widening to 11m Widening to 11m
Nyahururu - 43.7 T3 6.27 Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type I Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type I
Rumuruti Base: 150 mm GCS Base: 150 mm GCS
Subbase: 150 mm CIG Subbase: 150 mm GCS
Subgrade: Scarify existing + gravel Subgrade: Scarify existing + gravel
to form improved SG Class S4; to form improved SG Class S4;
Widening to 11m Widening to 11m

40
41
Table 4-80: Proposed Pavement Options for Kiarutara -Gatanga –Thika

Road Section Leng Traffi CESA Recommended Pavement Structure

th c
Option 1 Option 2
(Km) Class
A2 Thika 9.9 T3 6.86 Scarify existing surfacing and adopt existing base
Junction - as new subbase;
Gatunyu Widening to 11m
Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type II
Base: 150 mm GCS Class B
Gatunyu - 21.1 T4 2.24 Scarify existing surfacing and adopt existing base
Gatanga as new subbase;
Junction Widening to 11m
Surfacing: Triple SD Scarify existing surfacing and adopt
Base: 150 mm GCS Class C existing base as new subbase;
Widening to 11m
Gatanga T3 4.01 Scarify existing surfacing and adopt existing base Surfacing: DSD
Junction - as new subbase; Base: 150 mm GCS Class B
Gatura Junction Widening to 11m
Surfacing: SSD + 50mm AC Type II
Base: 150 mm GCS Class B
Gatura Junction 11.22 T4 2.34 Scarify existing surfacing and adopt existing base
- Kiarutara as new subbase;
Widening to 11m
Surfacing: Triple SD
Base: 150 mm GCS Class C
Gatakaini - 28 Currently under construction
Njabini

42
4.4.9 Structural Design

4.4.9.1 Structural Condition Survey

As per our methodology, the major and minor structures were identified
along the project roads and a technical investigation conducted to
ascertain the adequacy of the existing structures. Additionally, locations
requiring structures were also evaluated. These included railway
crossings and interchange locations.
The result of the structural condition survey of the major structures for
each project road is shown in below with the proposed structure types
for each road.

43
 Existing Structures Proposed Structures
No Chaina
Location Structur Span/ W Ht Proposed
. ge Status Type Comments
e type Dia (m) (m) (m) Structure
Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20)
1 2+839 Near Bahati Box Existin 3.6 7.2 3.3 1 cell 3 x 2.5 Box Narrow crossing, replace
Ridge culvert g Culvert with new box culvert,
single cell 3 x 2.5
2 31+572 After Gatura Armco Existin 1.2 1.2 1 cell 1200mm Pipe Replace with 1200mm
Centre Single g pipe Culvert pipe culvert
Cell
3 31+637 After Gatura River Existin 8 and 10 4 3.3 Retain existing Retain the bridge,
Centre bridge g and structure rehabilitate the furniture.
5.5
Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4)
1 6+294 Near Army River Existin 9 7 2 cell 4 x 2.5 Box Retain, repair the
Barracks Gate Bridge g Culvert furniture, mark narrow
and provide footbridge;
or replace the structure
with box culvert, 2 cell 4
x 2.5
2 8+359 Pembroke Rail over Existin 5.6 4.2 Rail over Road Rail Replace with adequately
Road g (Span @13.5m Bridge designed rail over road
Bridge Skew) bridge.

3 18+238 Chokereria Box Existin 4 7 3 1 cell 4 x 3 Box Replace with a new box
Culvert/Sl g Culvert culvert, single cell 4 x 3
ab bridge
4 20+895 Before ArmCo Existin 4 50 1 cell 5 x 4 Box Replace with box culvert,
Oleliondo Single g Culvert single cell 5 x 4
cell
5 22+666 Oleleondo Railway Propos 13 (Span @15m Bridge Replace with adequately
bridge ed Skew) (Road designed road over rail
over bridge.
Rail)
6 23+928 After Oleleondo River Existin 16.5 7.4 Retain existing Retain, repair defects on
( Deep Gorge) Bridge g structure deck soffit, and mark
narrow

44
 Existing Structures Proposed Structures
No Chaina
Location Structur Span/ W Ht Proposed
. ge Status Type Comments
e type Dia (m) (m) (m) Structure
7 32+078 Before Ol Kalou Box Existin 4 7.2 1 cell 4 x 2.5 Box Replace with new box
Culvert/Sl g Culvert culvert, single cell 4 x 2.5
ab bridge
8 33+503 Ol Kalou 1x1 Box Existin 7.4 1 cell 2 x 1.5 Box Replace with new box
culvert g to Culvert culvert, single cell 2 x 1.5
1200m
m twin
9 33+945 Ol Kalou Twin Existin 7.4 2 cell 1200mm Pipe Replace with new
900mm g to Culvert multicell pipe culvert,
box twin cell 1200mm
culvert
10 54+614 Before Ol Joro Railway Propos 15 (Span @15m Bridge Replace with adequately
Orok bridge ed Skew) (Road designed road over rail
over bridge.
Rail)
11 56+540 At bridge River Existin 12 7.4 (Span @15m) Bridge Replace with proposed
centre near Ol Bridge g new bridge, single span
Joro Orok 15m.

12 62+084 Nyandarua Bridge Existin 6 7.4 2 cell 4 x 3 Box Replace with new box
Polytechnic g Culvert culvert,2 cell 4 x3
13 67+540 Nyahururu Box Existin 3 7.4 4 1 cell 4 x 3 Box Replace with new box
Culvert/Sl g Culvert culvert, single cell 4 x 3
ab bridge
14 67+867 Nyahururu Bridge Propos Interchange (2 Bridge Proposed new
Bypasses ed Spans @ 20m) interchange bridge - road
over road, two span
@20m.
15 82+900 After Maili ArmCo Existin 2 2 1 cell 3 x2 Box Replace with new box
saba single g Culvert culvert,single cell 3 x 2
cell
16 86+013 Before Ol Jabet Armco 3 Existin 2 2 2 cell 4 x2 Box Replace with new box
cell g Culvert culvert,2 cell 4 x 2
17 91+918 Before Armco 2 Existin 2 2 2 cell 3 x2 Box Replace with new box

45
 Existing Structures Proposed Structures
No Chaina
Location Structur Span/ W Ht Proposed
. ge Status Type Comments
e type Dia (m) (m) (m) Structure
Limunga centre Cell g Culvert culvert,2 cell 3 x2
18 92+560 Limunga centre Armco 3 Existin 2 2 2 cell 4 x2 Box Replace with new box
cell g Culvert culvert,2 cell 4 x2
19 96+000 After Junction Armco 2 Existin 2 2 2 cell 3 x2 Box Replace with new box
Shopping Cell g Culvert culvert,2 cell 3 x2
centre

Existing Structures Proposed Structures

No Chaina
Location Structur Span/ W Ht Proposed
. ge Status Type Comments
e type Dia (m) (m) (m) Structure
Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20)
Buuri – Ena (B65)
1 0+000 Meru/ Tharaka Bridge Propos 20 12 6 Interchange (2 Bridge Proposed new
Interchange ed Spans @ 20m) interchange bridge - road
over road, two span
@20m.
2 4+358 After Kainginyo Box Existin 2.5 10.3 2.5 Retain existing Box Could be retained, install
market culvert g structure or Culvert guardrails, in good
replace with 2 condition or replace with
cell 2 x2 single cell 2 x 2
3 5+730 Kianthumbi Box Existin 2.5 2.5 Retain existing Box Could be retained, install
Methodist culvert g structure or Culvert guardrails, in fair
replace with 2 condition or replace with
cell 2 x3 single cell 2 x 2
4 9+274 After Kithaku River Existin 7 4 14 Bdg No. 1 (Span Bridge Replace with proposed
bridge g @10m) new bridge, single span
10m.
5 31+40 After Ntimiriti Box Existin 2 cell 14 Retain existing Should be retained - one
0 culvert + g @5m structure cell is for animal crossing
animal and the other for

46
 Existing Structures Proposed Structures
No Chaina
Location Structur Span/ W Ht Proposed
. ge Status Type Comments
e type Dia (m) (m) (m) Structure
crossing drainage.

47
Additionally, the minor structures along the road were also recorded.
Due to the revised designs based on the re-classification of the roads,
most of the cross-culverts were proposed for replacement due to limited
widths. Additionally, some of the cross culverts had diameters of 300
mm, 450 mm and 600 mm which were hydraulically inadequate based on
the requirements and climate resilience considerations. Table 4-81
summarises the proposed minor structures along the roads.
Table 4-81: Existing and Proposed Culvert dimensions
Pipe Diameter (mm)
Road Type Total
450mm 600mm 900mm 1200mm
No.
Existing Pipe
2 23 15 2 44
Culverts
B20
Proposed Pipe
42 2 44
Culverts
Existing Pipe
1 51 120 2 183
Culverts
A4
Proposed Pipe
181 2 183
Culverts
Existing Pipe
- 11 23 1 37
Culverts
B65
Proposed Pipe
36 1 37
Culverts

4.4.9.2 Design Considerations

Major Structures
The major structures along the road included existing river bridges and a
rail overpass. The proposed major structures have included additional
structure types such as road overpasses and road over rail bridges. The
design of the major structures was based on the following parameters
obtained from the Kenya Road design manual Part IV and discussions
with Kenya Railways Staff.

Table 4-82: Bridge Clearance Guidelines

Design Element Horizontal Clearance Vertical Clearance
Road overpass Bridge Minimum 5.5 m Minimum 2 m from
Shoulder to inner edge
of pier or abutment
Road over rail Bridge Minimum 7.6 m from Minimum 3.0 m from
Top of rail to bottom of centre of outer track to
soffit beam inner edge of pier or
abutment
Preliminary designs for the major structures to be replaced were done
and the material quantities extracted. These have been used to prepare
the cost estimates for the major structures.

48
Minor Structures
As indicated previously, the pipe culverts across all roads have been
proposed for replacement due to the changing width of the road and
improvement of drainage capacity particularly the Culverts with
dimensions less than 900mm diameter.

49
4.5 Preliminary Cost Estimates

The cost estimate was prepared for each of the different pavement
alternatives using the determined unit rates and construction quantities.
The cost of construction of the proposed project was estimated as
summarised in Table 4-83.The computed costs are shown in Table 4-83.
Table 4-83: Cost Estimates for each road section showing cost options

Road Homogenous Section Financial Cost

Pavement Pavement Pavement
Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
(Ksh) (Ksh) (Ksh)
A4 A8 Junction - Gilgil CBD 628,055,173 621,817,768 None
.70 .29
Gilgil CBD - Ol Kalou 2,151,154,0 2,119,748,1 None
09.20 25.84
Ol Kalou - Nyahururu 4,038,259,3 3,995,874,1 None
13.79 37.88
Nyahururu - Rumuruti 5,032,488,0 5,457,555,6 None
49.29 76.89
Nyahururu Eastern 296,624,583 293,305,262 None
Bypass (New) .97 .97
B20 A2 Thika Junction - 1,100,593,8 1,058,846,6 None
Gatunyu 07.94 11.79
Gatunyu - Gatura 1,529,269,2 973,414,711 None
60.64 .39
Gatura - Kiarutara 685,639,618 567,408,565 None
.07 .13
B65 Gitimbine - Katheri 583,624,088 543,435,581
.49 .67
Katheri - Kithaku 260,051,938 278,727,678 255,642,38
.05 .21 8.29
Kithaku - Mujujune 726,132,893. 794,416,068. 710,010,476
22 18 .91
Mujujune - Buuri/Kisima 874,725,982. 699,553,376. 699,553,376
72 19 .19

50
5 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT
ASSESSMENTS

5.1 Introduction

This chapter outlines the environmental and social considerations that is

meant to guide decision makers in prioritization of the roads for detailed
design studies and construction. It presents the approaches employed,
the key findings as well as the recommendations and conclusions.

5.2 Methodology and Approach

5.2.1 Environmental Aspect

The techniques employed in assessing the environmental impact of the
proposed road projects are discussed below:

5.2.1.1 Project Screening

Project screening of the three road projects was based on the mandatory
and discretionary provisions set out in the Environmental Management
and Co-ordination Act (EMCA) No. 8 of 1999 and the recently amended
Environmental (Impact Assessment and Audit) (Amendment) Regulations,
2019.

5.2.1.2 Project Scoping

The scope of the scoping exercise aimed at understanding the following
aspects:
 Geographical coverage of the road projects
 Identification of significant impacts and development of mitigation
measures in the early phases of the project cycle that may inform
any necessary changes to the design work
 Stakeholder Analysis –This entailed identification and mapping of
stakeholders with the aim of get an overview of all persons,
groups, organizations and institutions involved in or connected
with the project, as well as the role of each stakeholder,
responsibilities and interests in the project.
Table 5-84: Stakeholder Mapping

Stakeholder Name of Stakeholders

Category
 County Commissioners and Deputy County
National
Commissioners /Assistant County Commissioners
Government
 Local Administration (Chiefs and Village Elders)

1
  National Environment Management Authority (NEMA)
 Surveys of Kenya
 Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning
 Kenya wildlife services
 Kenya forestry services
 Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute
 Department of Roads & Infrastructure
County Government
 Department of Water, Environment, Natural
Resources
 Department of Lands and Physical Planning
 Department of Trade, Investment, Industrialization
 Department of Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries
 Sub County and ward Administrators
 Members of County Assembly (MCAs)
 Education, Religious and Health Institutions
Institutions
 Project Affected Persons (PAPs)
Other Interested
 Business Community, Leasers, Landlords and tenants
Parties
 Non-Governmental Organizations and Community
Based Organization

5.2.2 Social Aspect

5.2.2.1 Introduction
Two types of data were used in preparation of the social assessment
report. Secondary data such as the Sustainable Development Goals,
Outcome of the 2019 Kenya National Population and Housing Census,
Ministry of Health fact sheet, Millennium Development Goals, Kenya
Vision 2030, Ministry of Education Statistical report were first reviewed
before embarking on collection of primary data.
The advantages and disadvantages of both data sources as observed
during the literature review and data collection exercise are summarised
below:
Secondary Data
Merits Demerits
 Information was readily  Difficulty in determining the
accessible on internet validity of the data
 Saves on time and cost  Inappropriateness of data.
For instance, where the
 Availability of regular data
study focuses on an entire
such as the national census
country and one’s area of
that allows the researcher to
interest is a county or a sub-
understand the trends or
county
analyse the evolution of
some variables
Primary Data

2
Merits Demerits
 The data is usually specific  Collection of primary data is
to the needs of the expensive in terms of
researcher financial resources and time
consumption
 Data is accurate and free of
personal bias which makes it  Some of the respondents
authentic may be unwilling to disclose
information especially
 The researcher has full
personal data
control over the data
collected in terms of design,
method and data analysis
technique applied.
 Data is reliable and up-to-
date

5.2.2.2 Secondary Data Collection and Review

The consultant reviewed relevant national and local development, and
economic policy and planning documents such as the relevant
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Kenya Vision 2030, the County
Integrated Development Plans among others. Preliminary desk review of
secondary data provided essential socio-economic information that
helped in understanding the development objectives and identification of
gaps within the data. This discovery helped in the selection of the data
collection techniques and instruments that were employed in the Social
Impact Assessment. The survey questions used in engaging with the
identified stakeholders within the road object focused on:
i) Validating secondary data on socio-economic indicators such as
provision of social services like health and education.
ii) Understanding the changing trends on indicators such
education and literacy levels, employment levels, sources of income
and distribution. The County government have invested in
enhancing these aspects, but at the same time, it is essential to
understand how they may have been affected by the existing
pandemic of Covid-19 that was an unforeseen risk.
iii) Gathering information to fill gaps on how road safety can be
enhanced during the different phases of the project cycle. The
survey questions also sought to understand people’s expectation
and experiences on impacts of road construction on their
livelihoods.

3
5.2.2.3 Primary Data Collection and Review
The following approaches were employed during the social baseline
studies:
 Key Informant Interviews (KII)-The KII was undertaken from
23rd March 2021 to 26th March 2021 and 15th April 2021. The
exercise applied both face-to-face and telephonic interviews with
local administration, county officials, and heads of departments of
various Government ministries such as Kenya Wildlife Service
(KWS), Kenya Forest Service (KFS), and Kenya Marine and
Fisheries (KMFRI). A list of the stakeholders engaged during the
KII is attached in Table 5-85.
 Household Interview Surveys- The 2019 Kenya Population and
Housing Census data (Volume II) from Kenya National Bureau of
Statistics (KNBS) was used to develop sample sizes for the sample
survey and control areas. The table below shows the sample size
used in the study for each road.
Table 5-85: Sample Sizes for each road
Project Name Sample
size
Gilgil-Nyahururu-Rumuruti (A4) 200
Kiarutara-Gatanga-Thika (B20) 200
Buuri-Katheri-Meru-Chaaria-Mitunguu-Kathwana- 400
Ishiara-Ena (B65)

The data collection was conducted from 18th April 2021 to 23rd April
2021 across the three road projects.
 Public Consultation Forums- the Second Level Public
Consultation forums had not been undertaken by the time of
submitting this report. The delay was caused by the ban on public
gatherings by the President of Kenya following the third wave of
Covid-19 in the country. The consultant intends to provide the
outcome of the Public Consultation Meeting in the next submission
i.e. the Draft Final Report.

5.3 Key Findings

5.3.1 Environmental Evaluation Results

An initial environmental evaluation was undertaken to help in classifying
the project according to environmental sensitivity. Based on the
Environmental (Impact Assessment and Audit) (Amendment) Regulations,
2019, construction of new major roads including trunk roads is classified
as a high risk project whereas construction and rehabilitation of roads

4
including collectors and access roads is considered a medium risk
project. Based on the screening and scoping exercise of the road
projects, it is evident that there is a need to construct new major roads
that will be flagged as high-risk project. Some of the environmental
impacts and mitigations measures that are likely to arise from the project
are discussed below.

5.3.1.1 Gilgil-Nyahururu-Rumuruti (A4) Road

Several environmental impacts are likely to arise from the construction of
the proposed road project. The positive impacts include:
 Availability of transportation
 Good networking
 Create employment
 Ease of communication
 Easy accessibility
 Maintenance of vehicle will be minimized
Peaceful coexistence especially along the Rumuruti section where
cattle rustling is a common event among the residents.
The negative impacts are inevitable therefore, mitigation measures to
prevent or reduce the extent of the impacts are provided below.

Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures

Poor drainage systems Depending on the water volume and velocity,
retention ditches should be established and a
drainage channel lined up to points where water can
be discharged without serious consequences
Loss of biodiversity Replace the trees upon completion of the project
Increased soil erosion Implement specific erosion protection works
Impacts on infrastructure Develop a Resettlement Action Plan that identifies the
(damage on property, ) and Project Affected People (PAP) and where the property
loss of land affected is Valued. Then compensate all the PAPs who
are affected by either loss of private land or property.
For the encroachers, issue them with notice before
demolitions to prevent them from suffering from huge
losses.
The objective should be to leave the PAPs in a better
position than we found them especially if the impact
is on private land.
Pollution (air and noise) Use machines with minimized noise emissions
Pour water along the roads to reduce dust pollution
Loss of source of income Proactive physical planning for the area by County
government to ensure a market is put up to prevent
encroachers and roadside sellers from losing income
due to lack of selling points

5
 Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures
Interference with road safety Put up clear and visible road signage
Use zebra crossings alongside speed calming humps
and put up additional signage especially near learning
and health institutions
Public Health Integrate HIV/AIDS, STIs preventive and awareness
programme amongst workers.
Enforce the Covid-19 safety measures as directed by
the Ministry of Health
Establish a clinic within the Contractor’s camp during
construction phase

5.3.1.2 Kiarutara-Gatanga-Thika (B20) Road

Construction of the B20 road along Kiarutara-Gatanga-Thika Sections
will generate both positive and negative impacts. The anticipated
benefits include:
 Increased economic activities that will translate into higher income
levels on the households and thus reduce the level of poverty.
 Improved transport system and enhanced accessibility will reduce
travel time, enhance road safety and lower the high cost of
transport as most residents rely on the public service vehicles for
movement. The transport system will also enhance access to
amenities and utilities such as health institutions, religion facilities
and learning institutions.
 Rapid and cheap transportation of perishable farm produce to
markets will encourage more farmers to increase their production
and obtain better returns as well as access to new markets.
 Land values along the project corridor will also increase
significantly.

Environmental Mitigation Measures

Impacts
Lack of drainage Depending on the water volume and velocity, retention
systems ditches should be established and a drainage channel lined up
to points where water can be discharged without serious
consequences
Loss of biodiversity Consider planting the appropriate trees and vegetation within
the road median and other suitable areas to compensate for
the permanent loss of biodiversity
Increased Soil Apply temporary erosion control practices to stabilize exposed
erosion soils and prevent onsite damage.
Since the terrain of the road project lies along the highly
sloping lands, terracing is recommended across the land
scope to check the flow of surface runoff and to reduce soil

6
 loss.
Impacts on Develop a Resettlement Action Plan that identifies the Project
infrastructure Affected People (PAP) and where the property affected is
(demolition of Valued. Then compensate all the PAPs who are affected by
structures and either loss of private land or property. For the encroachers,
relocation of utilities issue them with notice before demolitions to prevent them
especially those from suffering from huge losses.
located on the road
The objective should be to leave the PAPs in a better position
reserve)
than we found them especially if the impact is on private land.
Pollution (air and Avoid loud noise especially during the night. Map all noise
noise) sensitive receptors and develop a plan during construction
that avoids excess noise within proximity of the receptors.
Besides, warn the residents about expected noise pollution
such as blasting.
Loss of source of Proactive physical planning for the area by County
income government to ensure a market is put up to prevent
encroachers and roadside sellers from losing income due to
lack of selling points
Increased road Put up clear and visible road signage especially on road
accidents diversions
Use zebra crossings alongside speed calming humps and put
up additional signage especially near learning and health
institutions.
Engage traffic marshals to assist the motorists on smooth
movement along the construction area.
Public Health Integrate HIV/AIDS, STIs preventive and awareness
programme amongst workers.
Enforce the Covid-19 safety measures as directed by the
Ministry of Health
Establish a clinic within the Contractor’s camp during
construction phase

5.3.1.3 Buuri-Katheri-Meru-Chaaria-Mitunguu-Kathwana-Ishiara
(B65) Road
Construction of the new road is mainly recommended from Buuri to
Gitimbine in Meru town. Meru-Chaaria-Mitunguu-Kathwana-Ishiara road
has been recently constructed and the suggestions on the environmental
impacts are mainly meant to enhance the positive impacts of the road.
Suggestions on enhancing the positive impacts are mainly of socio-
economic nature. They include but not limited to the following:
 Long –term regional economic planning taking into account the
improved infrastructure as the key economic driver
 Meru, Tharaka Nithi, and Embu County governments could provide
incentives to investors in the area and promote development of
sectors such as agriculture, industries, tourism.

7
  Focus on regular maintenance of the road especially in sections
where there is mining of rocks and sand harvesting as the
materials are transported by road.
 Proactive planning in anticipation of enhanced immigration to the
area.
The negative environmental impacts and the recommended mitigation
measures that are likely to occur between Buuri-Katheri-Meru are as
discussed below:
Environmental Mitigation Measures
Impacts
Increased human- Liaise with Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) and Kenya Forest
wildlife interaction Service (KFS) to put up an electric fence along the forest area
to reduce the human-wildlife interaction. This point is mainly
between Mujujune and Katheri.
Loss of biodiversity Vegetation should only be cleared where necessary. Preserve
the species of the plants and trees to be replanted upon
completion of the construction of the road.
Increased Soil Ensure earth cuttings are at a gentle angle.
erosion
Construct soil-holding structures in very loose soils along
steep slopes.
Interference with Contractor to be keen on avoiding contamination of water
surface/ground resources that could arise from accidental spillage.
water resources
Impacts on Develop a Resettlement Action Plan that identifies the Project
infrastructure Affected People (PAP) and where the property affected is
(damage on Valued. Then compensate all the PAPs who are affected by
property) either loss of private land or property. For the encroachers,
issue them with notice before demolitions to prevent them
from suffering from huge losses.
The objective should be to leave the PAPs in a better position
than we found them especially if the impact is on private land.
Increased pollution Avoid loud noise especially during the night. Map all noise
(air and noise) sensitive receptors and develop a plan during construction
that avoids excess noise within proximity of the receptors.
Besides, warn the residents about expected noise pollution
such as blasting.
Generation of Proper disposal and management of wastes should be agreed
solid/liquid wastes upon before commencement of works. Forbid discharge of
non-treated wastes to rivers and drain waters.
Loss of source of Proactive physical planning for the area by County
income government to ensure a market is put up to prevent
encroachers and roadside sellers from losing income due to
lack of selling points
Increased road Put up clear and visible road signage especially on road
Accidents diversions

8
 Use zebra crossings alongside speed calming humps and put
up additional signage especially near learning and health
institutions.
Engage traffic marshals to assist the motorists on smooth
movement along the construction area.
Public Health Integrate HIV/AIDS, STIs preventive and awareness
programme amongst workers.
Enforce the Covid-19 safety measures as directed by the
Ministry of Health
Establish a clinic within the Contractor’s camp during
construction phase

5.3.2 Social Evaluation Results

5.3.2.1 Key Informant Interview Findings

The interviews with the county officials and heads of departments of
various Government ministries provided feedback on any improvements
needed within the road projects and mitigation measures to ensure
improved project construction and operation.
a) Gilgil-Nyahururu-Rumuruti (A4) Road
Positive impacts
 Boost agricultural production
 Faster delivery of perishable products to the markets
 Increased marketing opportunities
 Ease of movement of people and goods
 Improved road network to other counties across the country
 Creates marketing space for construction of temporary
stalls/market centres along the road reserve
Negative impacts Mitigation Measures
i) Increased Put up visible road signage and let the traffic
road marshal guide the motorists adequately.
accidents Consider use of local language or both
Swahili/English on signage to allow the locals to
understand the road signage
ii) Poor/Lack of Ensure good drainage systems are in place.
drainage During construction have an alternative drainage
systems system to prevent flooding especially on the

9
 diversion routes
iii) Flouting of  Develop a specific path for motorcycle
traffic rules users, a separate path for pedestrians, and
especially by the main road for the vehicles
motorcycle  Enforce laws to prevent unlicensed and
users underage motorcycle users from engaging
in motorcycling
iv) Traffic  Consider a bypass route to divert the traffic
congestion by away from Gilgil town
the many
road users
v) Encroachers  Ban trading activities along the road
engaging in reserve and impose fines for those flouting
trading the rules
activities  Engage the County government to
construct temporary stalls that can be
relocated during road expansion
vi) Inadequate During planning involve all stakeholders and
designs incorporate their opinions in the design

b) Kiarutara-Gatanga-Thika (B20) Road

Positive impacts
 Expansion of road to accommodate the diverse road users
 Construction of designated market centres for traders
 Faster transportation of farm produce
 Increased land value
 Better accessibility and improved condition of feeder roads
Negative impacts Mitigation Measures
i) Increased  Ensure proper road markings and signage.
road  Put up street lights to improve visibility at
accidents night
 Enforce traffic rules
ii) Lack of Establish good drainage systems and take into
drainage consideration the area highly experiences
systems challenges like soil erosion and mudslides during
the rainy season

10
 iii) Displacement  Compensate the project affected persons
of property to ensure their livelihoods are not
and negatively affected
demolitions  Give prior notice before demolitions to
avoid losses
iv) Increased  Establish alternative routes
traffic snarl  Allow the contractor to work 24hrs to
ups during finish the construction in less time
construction
 Obtain experienced and qualified
contractors to avoid delays during
construction and poor quality work
v) Lack of Offer jobs to the local youths to allow them
employment acquire new skills and enhance project
opportunities ownership
for the locals

c) Buuri-Katheri-Meru-Chaaria-Mitunguu-Kathwana-Ishiara
(B65) Road
Positive impacts
 Provision of employment opportunities to the youth will help in
reducing social evils such as drug abuse
 Improved transportation and ease of movement
 Attraction of investment opportunities to the area
 Provision of alternative routes that are faster and less busy
Negative impacts Mitigation Measures
i) Increased Enforce road safety to avoid unnecessary
road accidents
accidents
ii) Environmenta  Ensure the contractors pour water on the
l pollution road frequently to reduce the dust
(dust and emission.
noise  Any work that causes the noise pollution
pollution) should be done during daytime and issue
prior notices to the locals of the activity
iii) Lack of  Ensure alternative routes are provided and
alternative are in good condition to prevent accidents
routes and minimize traffic jam

11
 iv) Lack of prior  Issue the Project Affected Persons with
notice during notices especially the encroachers who are
demolitions trying to make a living on the public land
v) Delays during Monitor the contractor and provide them with
construction adequate resources to minimize the delays
resulting in
long
construction
period
vi) Interference Allow the utility providers’ time to relocate the
with water infrastructure on the road reserve and provide
supply them with an alternative space to avoid the
systems disruption in accessing the essential services.

5.3.2.2 Baseline Survey Findings

a) Administration
The road projects traverses across several counties, which are governed
by County Authorities. Each road project and the affected administrative
areas in terms of counties and the sub-counties are outlined in the table
below. During the Key Informant Interviews, the Consultant paid a
courtesy call to the County Commissioners of each County and the
Deputy County Commissioners of the affected sub-counties and made
them aware about the project.
Table 5-86: Administrative units along the road projects
Road Project County Sub-County
Name
Gilgil-Nyahururu- Nakuru Gilgil
Rumuruti
Nyandarua Nyandarua Central
Laikipia Nyahururu
Laikipia West
Kiarutara- Kiambu Thika West
Gatanga-Thika
Murang’a Gatanga
Kandara
Buuri-Katheri- Meru Buuri West
Meru-Chaaria-
Buuri East
Mitunguu-
Kathwana- Meru Central
Ishiara-Ena Imenti North

12
 Imenti South
Tharaka Nithi Tharaka South
Igambang’ombe
Embu Mbeere North
Embu East

b) Demographics
i) Gilgil-Nyahururu-Rumuruti (A4) Road
The population data for the road project area was taken in accordance to
the 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census (KPHC) Volume II. The
population distribution within the sub-counties affected by the road is
summarised as follows:
Table 5-87: Population distribution by Sex in affected Sub-county
County Sub-county Male Female Total
Nakuru Gilgil 92,955 92,247 185,209
Nyandarua Nyandarua 37,329 37,931 75,262
Central
Laikipia Laikipia West 65,158 64,102 129,263
Nyahururu 76,249 78,447 154,704

The high populations in Gilgil, Laikipia West, and Nyahururu Sub-

counties is attributed to the many urbanized areas as compared to
Nyandarua Central where the urban settlements are currently growing.
The establishment of Nyandarua County Headquarters in Ol-Kalou town
has triggered increased migration of people from rural to urban centres
in search of employment and other amenities available in towns.
Results from the surveyed population reveals that more than half (57%)
of the respondents were female which is representative of the gender
split. 71% of the households were male-headed households with only 21%
being headed by females. Majority (78%) of the respondents are married.
The average age of the respondents was between 35 years. More than
half 70% of the respondents fall within the productive age bracket of 18–
40 yrs.
Average household size of the surveyed population is four (4) people per
household. Size of houses is an important indication of road usage
whereby the larger the houses the more likely the number of road users
will be high.

13
Majority of the respondents confirmed that they were residents of the
village/area by birth while others are residents by marriage or migration.
ii) Kiarutara-Gatanga-Thika (B20) Road
According to the 2019 population census, the population distribution
within the affected sub-counties in the road project is shown in the table
below:
Table 5-88: Population distribution by Sex in affected Sub-county
County Sub-county Male Female Total
Kiambu Thika West 120,698 125,104 245,820
Murang’a Gatanga 94,437 93,548 187,989
Kandara 86,698 88,393 175,098
Thika West sub-county has a higher population than Gatanga and
Kandara. The disparity is attributed to the fact that Thika West is an
urban area that not only offers major amenities such as financial and
health institutions, but there are major real estate developments that
have boosted the population growth. Some of the Real Estates within the
road project include Bahati Ridges, Panorama Gardens, Thika Golden
Pearl, Royal Castle Gardens and Amani Gardens.
Based on the household survey conducted, 53% were female respondents
while 47% comprised of men. Males head 67% of the households while
females head only 16%. 65% of the respondents are married while the
remaining 35% consists of the single, divorced, and widowed. There is a
small population of vulnerable persons within the area consisting of
widowers (3%), disabled (5%) and the elderly (5%) who are above
60years. The average age of the respondents was 33 years with more
than half (59%) of them being in the productive age of 18-40 years.
The average number of persons per each surveyed household is 4 people
per household. Majority of the residents in Gatanga and Kandara
confirmed they were born in the area, but in Thika West sub-county,
majority of them had migrated into the area after purchasing land.

iii) Buuri-Katheri-Meru-Chaaria-Mitunguu-Kathwana-Ishiara-
Ena (B65) Road
This road project traverses across three counties, with a large section
being in Meru County. The population distribution in the affected area is
as follows:
Table 5-89: Population distribution by Sex in affected Sub-county
County Sub-county Male Female Total

14
Meru Buuri West 40,496 40,264 80,762
Meru 66,920 66,894 133,818
Central
Buuri East 38,101 38,497 76,598
Imenti 88,506 89,056 117,567
North
Imenti South 103,338 103,162 206,506
Tharaka Tharaka 36,190 39,058 75,250
Nithi South
Igambang’o 26,464 26,745 53,210
mbe
Embu Embu East 64,571 64,991 129,564
Mbeere 53,517 55,360 108,881
North
The demographic distribution along this road revealed that there is a
large number of male (67%) respondents than female (33%) respondents.
More than half (78%) of the surveyed households are headed by males
while 26% are headed by females. The average number of persons per
household from the household survey is four people as centres such as
Kathwana in Tharaka Nithi county experience growth; more people are
migrating to the county.
Majority (79.4%) of the respondents are married with only 2.5 % being
divorced and 2.8% being widowed. Only 35% of the respondents are
within the productive age of 18-40 years with the average of the
respondents being 43 years.
c) Gender Issues
Gender equality concerns generally relate to the unequal/unfair
treatment that both men and women get in the society. Promoting gender
equality is not about women and men becoming the same, but according
both genders equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities. Despite
calls for sustainable fairness and equity for both men and women, women
continue to be side-lined in a majority of issues within the society.
It is important to note that women empowerment and improvement of
women’s social, economic and political status is essential for the
achievement of sustainable development in all areas of life. Although
Kenya’s legal framework is progressive in its support of women’s land
rights, patriarchal social and customary norms continue to limit women’s
ability to exercise and enforce their rights to land and other property.

15
Many women and girls within the road project are still do not have equal
opportunities despite these being enshrined in the law.
Women and young people do most of the farm activities. Despite their
involvement in the agricultural activities, few women and the young
people get access to the income generated from the sale of the
agricultural produce or get to have a say on its expenditure. This is in
addition to the women balancing household chores and childcare
responsibilities. Men are typically controlling household income and
assets and they get to make all the decisions pertaining to allocation of
resources. Women’s limited ability to own land and property despite the
existing law that allows females to inherit ancestral land, limits their
opportunity to credit. If the education enrolment in schools is anything to
go by, more females are attending schools than males. This could be a
step towards social change. At the same time, it would be important to
provide equal job opportunities to both genders during the proposed road
construction.
Along the Buuri-Katheri-Meru-Chaaria-Mitunguu-Kathwana-Ishiara-Ena
Road, drug abuse was indicated as a major social problem by 5% of the
respondents. It was reported that drug abuse is common among the
males and the females. The road project can be used to create awareness
about drug abuse, preventive measures and the road to recovery for the
victims. Awareness on HIV/AIDs is also prudent especially along the
Gilgil-Nyahururu-Rumuruti road and Kiarutara-Gatanga-Thika Road
where teenage pregnancies were reported to be on the rise resulting in
increased cases of school dropouts especially during the Covid-19
Pandemic.
d) Health
i) Gilgil-Nyahururu-Rumuruti (A4) Road
Nakuru County has approximately 459 hospitals with Gilgil Sub County
only having 40 hospitals where 18 of them are public hospitals.
Nyandarua County has 207 health facilities where 73 are public hospitals
and only one (1) Level 5 hospital. Laikipia County has less than 100
hospitals whereby two are level 5 hospitals, five are Level 4 hospitals, 6
are public health centres and 64 public dispensaries. Although the
existing facilities seems appreciable especially in Gilgil and Nyandarua,
they are not sufficient to service the high human populations in these
areas. For instance, in Nyandarua County, the average distance to a
public health facility is 3.7km. Constructing the proposed road could
reduce the distance and the time spent by ambulances to get to a health
facility especially when there is traffic jam like in Gilgil and Nyahururu
towns. On the other hand, constructing a new road could help Laikipia
County to set up more health facilities and reduce the distance they
travel to get health care as well.

16
 ii) Kiarutara-Gatanga-Thika (B20) Road
Kiambu County has 105 public health facilities: 11-Level 4 hospitals, 24-
Level 3 hospitals, 70-Level 2 hospitals. Thika Sub-County has only 14
government healthcare facilities, 12 Faith Based Organizations and 60
private hospitals. Murang’a County has 272 facilities: 1-Level 5 hospital,
6-Level 4 hospital, 26 public health centres, 114-dispensaries and 4
private hospitals. The average distance to a public hospital in Kiambu
County is 7km. Therefore, it is evident that there is need to improve the
situation in the health sector across these two counties. Construction of
the proposed road project will help to promote access to the healthcare
facilities. Additionally, the road will encourage the county governments
to establish more facilities as they will be more accessible to the
residents.

iii) Buuri-Katheri-Meru-Chaaria-Mitunguu-Kathwana-Ishiara-
Ena (B65) Road
Meru County has 498 public hospitals: 1-Level 5 hospital, 23-Level 4
hospitals, 39-Level 3 hospitals, 435-Level 2 hospitals. Out of the 498
hospitals, more than half (291 hospitals) are found in the Sub-Counties
affected by the road project. The availability of health facilities has
enhanced the provision of health services among the Meru residents.
Tharaka Nithi County has 149 hospitals with only 43 of them situated
within the affected sub-county. This implies that the local residents are
forced to travel long distances to access health care. Embu County has
93 public hospitals: 1-Level 5 hospital, 4-Level 4 hospitals, 11-Level 3
hospitals, 77-Level 2 hospitals. Hospitals within the road project are
fairly distributed as most households have access to public healthcare.
However, in the section between Buuri-Katheri-Meru, construction of the
proposed road could help reduce the time spend access the Level 5
hospital in Meru Town because of the traffic snarl ups present within the
town.
e) Education and literacy level
i) Gilgil-Nyahururu-Rumuruti (A4) Road
Literacy levels (those who can read and write) is high among
respondents within the road project. 34.8% of the respondents had
attained either college or university education while 31.8% had
secondary level. Only 0.76% lacked formal education, but they did not
belong to the productive age of 18-40 years. This implies that if the road
project is considered for construction, the local residents are capable of
providing both skilled and unskilled labour. Additionally, with the high

17
literacy level, they are able to comprehend and give meaningful opinions
about the proposed road project.

Figure 5-20: Levels of education attained among respondents on A4 road

project
ii) Kiarutara-Gatanga-Thika (B20) Road
Literacy levels among the respondents residing along the Kiarutara-
Gatanga-Thika Road were found to be varying from one area to another.
In Thika, most respondents had attained college/university education
while in Gatanga and Kandara Sub-Counties they mostly reached the
Secondary level. A summary of the respondents along the entire road
showed that 30.8% of the respondents had attained Secondary level
education while only 23.3% had managed to complete their
college/university education. Only 3.3% lacked any formal education, but
with the large population of those who can at least read and write, the
3.3% can easily be translated for any information that they fail to
comprehend by relatives, neighbours, friends or administration.

18
Figure 5-21: Levels of education attained among respondents on B20
road project

iii) Buuri-Katheri-Meru-Chaaria-Mitunguu-Kathwana-Ishiara-
Ena (B65) Road
The high number of learning institutions across this county has really
promoted access to education among its residents. About 29.3% of the
respondents have attained college/university education while 25.5% have
completed their secondary education. Survey shows that literacy levels of
the respondents was good, as a substantial number of the respondents
had reached college/university level.

19
Figure 5-22: Levels of education attained among respondents on B65
road project
f) Livelihood
i) Gilgil-Nyahururu-Rumuruti (A4) Road
The respondents along the road project have different sources of income
that they rely on to meet their cost of living. The survey on their income
sources found that 56% of the respondents are self-employed while only
21.6% rely on wages/salary. 17.9% rely on farming as their source of
livelihood. Farming may seem as a major activity when one transects
along the road project, but most people who are farmers also engaged in
other activities such as trading. They cited that the cost of living is high
and it is impossible to be reliant on agriculture for survival because of
the low returns. The table below shows the income distribution among
the respondents. Most of the persons interviewed earn between KES
15,000-20,000.

Figure 5-23: Main sources of income among respondents along A4 Road

Project
Table 5-90: Average monthly income along A4 Road Project
AVERAGE INCOME PER MONTH
Income Range
(KES) Percent (%)
less than 5000 0.7
5001-10000 9.0
10001-15000 14.9
15001-20000 38.8
20001-50000 28.4

20
50001-100000 5.2
>100001 2.2
Total 99.3
Blank 0.7
Total 100.0

ii) Kiarutara-Gatanga-Thika (B20) Road

Respondents are engaged in both formal and informal businesses within
the road corridor. Majority of the small business enterprises are traders
who operate retail shops, café/hotels, cyber shops, and carpentry outlets.
Results from the baseline survey indicated that self-employment (35.8%)
is the main source of income among the respondents. 31.7% of the
interviewees also earn their income from both formal and informal
employments with the average monthly income ranging between KES
10,001-KES 15,001.

Figure 5-24: Sources of income along B20 road project

Table 5-91: Average monthly income along B20 Road Project
AVERAGE INCOME PER MONTH
Income (KES) Percent (%)
less than 5000 11.7
5001-10000 20.8
10001-15000 24.2
15001-20000 20.0

21
20001-50000 15.8
50001-100000 3.3
>100001 4.1
Total 100.0

iii) Buuri-Katheri-Meru-Chaaria-Mitunguu-Kathwana-Ishiara-
Ena (B65) Road
The main sources of income for the households were farming (36.9%),
and wages/salaries from formal employment (30%) as shown in the figure
below. 32.5% of the households earn less than Ksh 10,000 per month
(28.7% earn Kshs 5001-10,000 and 3.8% earn less than Ksh 5,000) as
indicated in the Table below. Constructing the A4 project will help the
farmers to transport their fresh produce faster and make increased
income by exploring new opportunities. This will help increase their
income thresholds. More business and employment opportunities will be
available for the local communities.

Figure 5-25: Sources of income for respondents along B20 road project
Table 5-92: Average monthly income along B65 Road Project
AVERAGE INCOME PER MONTH
Income Percent (%)
less than 5000 3.8
5001-10000 28.7
10001-15000 17.5
15001-20000 17.5
20001-50000 15.0

22
50001-100000 5.6
>100001 1.9
Total 90.0
Blank 10.0
Total 100.0

g) Land Tenure
i) Gilgil-Nyahururu-Rumuruti (A4) Road
Agriculture is the dominant livelihood activity along the road project. In
Gilgil, the farmers do not only concentrate on production of food crops,
but are also venturing into fish farming. In Nyandarua, the farmers’
practice potato farming and with the new potato processing plant and
regulations on pricing and weighing, more farmers are engaging in
potato production. Dairy farming is commonly practised in Nyahururu
besides the large-scale production of other food crops like peas, potatoes
and carrots that are transported for sale in major towns like Nakuru and
Nairobi. Towards Rumuruti, farmers are engaged in horticultural
production and processing in both large scale and small-scale levels.
Most (68.7%) of the respondents owned their land under the Freehold
tenure with only 26.1% having title deeds as proof of ownership. 17.16%
of the respondents said that they had sales agreement records. 24.63% of
the respondents who did not know about the records indicating proof of
ownership were persons who resided temporary in Nakuru, Nyandarua
and Laikipia Counties. They indicated that they had mainly migrated to
the areas due to employment and operation of business ventures.

Figure 5-26: Land Ownership Status along A4 Road

ii) Kiarutara-Gatanga-Thika (B20) Road

23
The vibrant economy of Kiambu County has played a key role in
attracting migrants to the town. Land prices are shooting up in Thika
especially from the mushrooming real estate developments. On the other
hand, the fertile highlands of Murang’a have enabled Gatanga and
Kandara to be an agricultural centre. The main cash crops grown in the
area are tea and coffee.
Results from the Household survey indicate that more than half (55.8%)
of the land is under the Freehold tenure system with 59.2% of the
respondents owning a title deed as proof of ownership. 29.17% of the
respondents did not know if they have records indicating proof of
ownership with a majority of them citing that they occupied ancestral
land.

Figure 5-27: Land ownership status within B20 Road Project

iii) Buuri-Katheri-Meru-Chaaria-Mitunguu-Kathwana-Ishiara-
Ena (B65) Road
At Kisima, large scale farming of horticultural crops and wheat is mainly
practised in the area, but the large scale farming shifts to small-scale
farming as one approaches Mujujune towards Katheri and Meru town.
The farmers in Meru County grow Khat, tea, and coffee as the major cash
crops and other food crops like maize and vegetables. In Tharaka Nithi
and Embu counties, most of the agricultural activities are practised in
small scale. The main crops grown in this area include sorghum, millet,
mangoes, maize and beans. Bee keeping is also an income generating
activity particularly in Tharaka Nithi county and Mbeere North sub-
county.
Majority (83.75%) of the respondents along the road project reported
that they own the land under the freehold tenure with 62.5% having title
deeds as proof of ownership. This implies that most of the respondents
are residents. Only 9.4% of the respondents did not know about the
records showing proof of ownership.

24
Figure 5-28: Land Ownership status along B65 Road

h) Transport & Communication

i) Gilgil-Nyahururu-Rumuruti (A4) Road
The main form of transport within the project area is road transport.
Majority 69% of the respondents rely on Public Service Vehicles (PSVs)
to move from one point to another while 24% use motorcycles (commonly
referred to as bodaboda). The farmers within the road project rely on the
road network to transport their farm produce to the major towns. The
large-scale farms in Rumuruti also rely on the roads to deliver their fresh
produce to the airport for export. The road network also serves as a link
to other counties and the Northern Kenya. Therefore, the road project
not only plays a key role in the transportation aspect, but in promoting
communication as well. Tourists can access the various tourist
attractions in Nyandarua and Laikipia counties such as the Thompson
falls and Lake Ol’Bolossat via the A4 road.
38% of the respondents stated that the frequency of accidents along the
road as moderate with average number of accidents monthly being 3.
The leading cause of accident was attributed to the motorcycle users by
77% of the respondents. The accidents mainly arise from their failure to
abide by the traffic rules.

ii) Kiarutara-Gatanga-Thika (B20) Road

The B20 road acts as the main form of transport within the project area.
The people also rely on the road network for transportation of their farm
produce mainly for the cash crops and horticultural produce that are
grown in the area. The road acts as a link to the Aberdare National Park
and reserve, which is a tourist attraction.
At least 52% of the respondents use Public Service Vehicle to commute
from one point to another with their alternative form of transport being
motorbike (24%) and private cars (16%). The survey found that

25
motorbikes (68%) are the main cause of accidents along the road project
mainly because of the narrow roads within the area. However, the rate at
which accidents occur was found to be almost a balance between
moderate (26%) and rare (25%).
Communication within the road corridor is unlimited as the various
towns in between the road project are all accessible. 26% of the
respondents stated that the feeder roads are in poor condition especially
during the rainy season. During the construction of the road project, they
can consider improving the feeder roads to enhance transport and
communication in the area.

iii) Buuri-Katheri-Meru-Chaaria-Mitunguu-Kathwana-Ishiara-
Ena (B65) Road
The main means of transport in Meru, Tharaka Nithi and Embu counties
is the road network. This is despite Embu County having an airport and
on the border of Isiolo County and Meru County sits the Isiolo Airport.
The Public Service Vehicle (47%) is the main means of transport
preferred by the respondents along the road project. Only 15% of the
respondents rely on private cars while 26% prefer using motorbike.
Majority of the responds cite that travelling via road is more affordable
despite the many hours from Nairobi city to Meru County. Businesses
that can transport luggage to Nairobi argue that the cost of airlifting
their products to Nairobi is quite high and with the current pandemic, it
is very expensive. Most of the respondents (83%) indicated that
motorcycle is the leading cause of accident along the road project and
the average number of accidents is three per month.

5.4 Recommendations and Conclusions

5.4.1 Environmental Context

The screening and scoping of the three road projects indicate that
construction of either the Gilgil-Nyahururu-Rumuruti (A4) Road,
Kiarutara-Gatanga-Thika (B20) Road, or the Buuri-Katheri-Meru-Chaaria-
Mitunguu-Kathwana-Ishiara-Ena (B65) Road will be a high-risk project.
Therefore, during the detailed design studies, an Environmental Impact
Assessment study needs to be conducted as per the National
Environment Management Authority (NEMA) guidelines. The findings of
this study will help in environmental preservation during the different
phases of the project cycle.

26
5.4.2 Social Context

5.4.2.1 Stakeholder Engagement Methods and tools

For purposes of effective stakeholder engagement during the design and
construction stages, stakeholders of the proposed road project can be
divided into the following core categories:
 Affected parties- it includes persons, groups and other entities
within the Project Area of Influence (PAI) that are directly
influenced (actually or potentially) by the project and/or have been
identified as most susceptible to change associated with the
project. These persons need to be closely engaged in identifying
impacts and their significance, as well as in decision-making on
mitigation and management measures. They mainly consist of
people who are likely to be displaced by the road project. e.g. the
host community, national government and county government
 Other interested parties- individuals/groups/entities that are
indirectly affected by their project. Their interests could affect the
project implementation. E.g. residents of other communities
neighbouring the project area who can benefit from employment,
business owners who can provide materials to be used in
construction, regulatory agencies like NEMA
 Vulnerable groups- persons who may be disproportionately
impacted or further disadvantaged by the project as compared to
any other groups due to their vulnerable status e.g. elderly people,
persons with disabilities, low-income families, dependent on state
or non-governmental organizations for support, women-headed
households, or the unemployed
Some of the methods of engaging the stakeholders include:
 Advance public notification of an upcoming project activities- Use
publicly accessible channels such as mass media (radio, television,
newspaper, and public notice boards) to create awareness. KeNHA
can also use its social media pages and website to communicate to
the affected parties and interested parties on the project activities
during the implementation phase.
 Since the vulnerable group status may lead to people’s reluctance
or physical incapacity to participate in large-scale community
meetings, visiting such individuals/ families at their homes or
holding separate small group discussions with them at an easily
accessible venue is a way for the project to reach out to the groups.
The vulnerable group, under standard circumstances, are likely to
be insufficiently represented at community gatherings.

27
5.4.2.2 Project suitability and baseline indicators
The social studies indicate that there is a need for the construction of the
proposed road projects. The community checks that need to be
conducted to determine the suitability of the project include
identification of the beneficiary road users. The construction of the
proposed road projects can only be successful if the target beneficiaries
desire a new road or expansion/improvement of the existing roads.
Project suitability can also be determined by focusing on whether the
identified road users have a common goal. For instance, do the road
users require the new road because it will help in easing the traffic
congestion or help in improving the transport system in the area? The
more the group has in common, the more likely the project will be
successful and sustainable. Lastly, assess the leadership and likely
capacity of the community. Leaders play a significant role in promoting
solidarity and ensuring the local community reach a consensus whenever
they present diverse opinions that could hinder the project
implementation.
The baseline indicators that can be assessed to understand the impact of
the project include:
i) Output indicators- Analysis of the demographic distribution in
terms of age, sex, household status, marital status
ii) Outcome Indicators- Study the changes in average income per
household before, during, and after construction of the proposed
roads; assess the frequency of accidents and the leading cause of
accidents.
iii) Impact indicators- analyse the changes in the transport and
communication networks within the project areas, impact of the
mode of communication used in engaging stakeholders and solving
issues among the stakeholders.

5.4.2.3 Ranking of the Road Projects

The major socio-economic factors that significantly influence the people’s
wellbeing and life span include income, education, employment, and
security. These factors are interrelated and they help in creating strong
social networks that enable human beings to achieve long and healthy
life. For instance, employment provides income that shapes education
and medical care. In this regard, these four factors have been adopted in
ranking of the road projects.
The survey results along the three roads based on the four socio-
economic features has been outlined in the table below. The construction
of the Kiarutara-Gatanga-Thika (B20) Road should be given the highest

28
priority because the households along the road project have the highest
percentage earning below the recommended minimum wage of KES
15,000/=. Most of the residents (30.8%) have studied up to the secondary
level of education, and the area has the highest percentage level of
insecurity (25.8%).
Table 5-93: Ranking of Road projects from the highest to lowest priority
Employment Status Income Highest Level Ranking
(Percent Educatio of
age of n Level Insec
Road Projects people urity
earning
below
the
minimu
m wage
of KES
15,000/=
)
Kiarutara- Self-employment - 56.7% Secondar 25.8 Highest
Gatanga- 35.8% y-30.8% % Priority
Thika (B20)
Wages/Salary-31.7%
Road
Farming-27.5%

Buuri- Self-employment -30% 55.7% College/ 15.6 Medium

Katheri-Meru- % priority
Wages/Salary-18.8% University
Chaaria-
-29.3%
Mitunguu- Farming-36.9%
Kathwana-
Ishiara-Ena
(B65) Road
Gilgil- Self-employment -56% 24.8% College/ 8.2% Low
Nyahururu- University priority
Wages/Salary-21.6%
Rumuruti -34.85%
(A4) Road Farming-17.9%

Significant socioeconomic impact is expected across the three road

projects during the construction period. This is because of the many
encroachers noticed along the road reserve particularly at the towns and
market centres. Displacement of households will require a Resettlement
Action Plan (RAP) to be established. It is also important for an income
restoration programme to be established to ensure the affected
households are not adversely affected during the construction phase.
Grievances are prone to arise especially if demolitions and acquisition of
private land is inevitable. It would be sensible to establish measures

29
within the project framework that protect the Project Affected People
(PAPs).

30
6 ECONOMIC EVALUATION

6.1 Introduction

The feasibility assessment is designed to guide decision makers (KeNHA)

as to whether the project roads are sound on technical and economic
perspectives. The specific objectives of the study are as follows:
1. To establish economic viability of the project roads by examining
EIRR and NPV;
2. To estimate project benefits in terms of savings in Vehicle
Operating Costs, Value of Travel Time Cost and savings in Road
Maintenance Cost among others; and,
3. Carry out qualitative and quantitative project risk analysis.
This section presents the Economic Evaluation illustrates the scope,
approach and methodology, application of the HDM-4 software, and the
results. The outputs of the economic evaluation have been used to assess
the viability of the investments, which will be useful for development
planners and decision-makers.

6.2 Project Economic Appraisal

Economic evaluation involves the assessment of the net value of projects

and policies. In the infrastructure sector, projects are valued in terms of
their net worth, the difference between the value of their benefits and
their costs, both measured so far as is possible in terms of monetary
units.
Economic evaluation is part of the project cycle whose process consists
of the following stages: Problem Identification (ex-ante); Pre-Feasibility
(ex-ante); Feasibility (ex-ante); Detailed Design (ex-ante); Procurement
and Negotiation; Implementation; Operation and Monitoring and
Evaluation (ex-post). Transport investment appraisals should satisfy the
following minimum requirements:
1. Promote the efficient use of resources;
2. Be able to test whether schemes conform to or promote the
decision makers’ objectives;
3. Demonstrate to the public that policies have their basis in a sound
technical assessment;
4. Be consistent in approach, thus ensuring that common methods are
not only applied but are seen to apply; and,

31
 5. Help in understanding the incidence of impacts and the
mechanisms by which benefits are transmitted and help to bring as
many impacts as possible within the scope of its evaluation.
Three key elements of economic appraisals are:
1. Identification and consistent valuation of all costs and benefits;
2. Appropriate allowance for their phasing over time; and,
3. Application of decision criteria to determine which investments are
viable.
Project economic appraisal is closely associated with the technique of
Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA), which is a method for evaluating the net
economic impact of a public project, e.g. a road or bridge improvement.
CBA aims to determine whether a project is desirable from the public
good point of view, by means of the algebraic sum of the time-discounted
economic costs and benefits of the project over its expected lifetime.
The CBA process is shown diagrammatically in the Figure below. The
diagram shows the key elements and data requirements and then the
subsequent analytical steps.

32
Figure 6-29: Economic Appraisal of Road Transport Projects
Source: (World Bank5, 2005)

6.3 Economic Decision Criteria

Decision criteria refer to a series of tests of project acceptability and

viability. This study will use the following economic indices to test the
viability of the project roads.

5
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTTRANSPORT/Resources/336291-1227561426235/5611053-
1231943010251/trn-5EENote2.pdf

33
Table 6-94: Economic Decision Making Criteria
Economic
No Decision Criteria
Parameter
The NPV of a given investment is obtained by
subtracting the present value of the costs from the
present value of the future benefits. The benefits, as well
Net Present as the costs, are discounted at the discount rate. The
00 investment is viable if the NPV is positive. This shows
Value
1 that the present value of benefits is greater than the
(NPV)
present value of costs.
Select project if NPV > Zero (0)
Reject project if NPV < Zero (0)
The EIRR of a given project is defined as the discount
Economic rate at which the present value of benefits and the
Internal present value of costs are equal. It is a measure of the
00
Rate of marginal efficiency of capital. For a project to be viable,
2
Return the EIRR has to be greater than the Discount Rate.
(EIRR) Select project if EIRR > Discount Rate
Reject project if EIRR < Discount Rate
Where there are insufficient funds and the projects are
independent, then simply selecting the highest NPV
might exhaust the available budget.
Net Present
Value Cost With independent projects, this deficiency can be
00 remedied by ranking projects in descending order of the
Ratio
3
(NPV/Cost magnitude of their NPV/Cost ratio and then working
Ratio) down the list of potentially attractive projects until funds
are exhausted. The NPV/Cost ratio in effect will give a
measure of the NPV return per dollar invested of the
project roads Counties6.

6
Kenya Project Appraisal Guidelines for Road and Transport Projects. The European
EDF Programme for Kenya. Ministry of Transport, Infrastructure, Housing and Urban
Development. Edition 1 – 2016: Institutional Capacity Building to the Transport/Road
Sector in Kenya.

34
6.4 Guidelines Applied in the Study

The following Economic Appraisal Guidelines were relied upon when

carrying out the economic analysis for the project study.
1. Kenya Project Appraisal Guidelines for Road and Transport Projects.
The European EDF Programme for Kenya. Ministry of Transport,
Infrastructure, Housing and Urban Development. Edition 1 – 2016:
Institutional Capacity Building to the Transport/Road Sector in Kenya.
2. Kenya National Treasury Circular No: 16/2019: Guidelines on Public
Investment Management for National Government and its Entities.
3. World Bank Transport Note No – 5: A Framework for the Economic
Evaluation of Transport Projects
4. World Bank Transport Note No – 19: Transport Projects with
Significant Expected Restructuring Effects
5. World Bank – Hand Book on Economic Analysis of Investment
Operations
6. World Bank – Economic Appraisal of Transport Projects. A Manual
with Case Studies. Hans A. Adler (1987).
7. Tanzania Manual for Carrying out Economic Appraisal and Evaluation
of Trunk and Regional Roads Investment Projects: 2015

6.5 Economic Appraisal Tools

The economic evaluation has mainly been undertaken by using the HDM-
4 Version 2.10 software tool. HDM-4 is the internationally accepted
standard model for road project appraisals. It can undertake linear
modelling of road networks, and it simulates highway cycle and vehicle
operation condition and costs for multiple road design and maintenance
regimes. The study has used the HDM-4 model to evaluate the projects
and determine their viability or not.
The HDM-4 V2.10 has minimum data requirements to run the model,
including traffic volumes, road network data, work standards, and unit
costs for construction and maintenance. Therefore, the quality of data
will always influence the level of reliability of the HDM-4 V2.10 output.
This study has adopted the Road Sector Investment Plan Phase 2 7 (RSIP
2) Workspace files, which were duly calibrated for Kenya. The workspace
was calibrated and configured to reflect the following local conditions:
1. Climatic conditions;
2. Road deterioration models;
3. Vehicle types and characteristics;

7
The RSIP 2 study was undertaken by the Kenya Roads Board in 2018.

35
 4. Speed flow types; and,
5. Work standards and intervention levels.

6.6 Benefit Categories of Road Transport Improvements

Overview: Road improvement projects generate a series of benefits,

which can be quantified to a large extent due to the empirically verified
physical consumption of resources by vehicles. The principal benefits
(savings) accruing to a road transport project will fall under the following
broad categories:
1. Savings in vehicle operating costs (VOCs);
2. Savings in passenger and cargo travel times (VoTT);
3. Savings in road maintenance costs (Agency Costs);
4. Savings in the cost of road accidents; and,
5. Developmental and other social benefits.
These cost components are briefly discussed below.
Savings in VOCs: This is the principal cost accruing to road users.
Improvements to existing roads often lead to the lowering of road user
operating costs through improvements in road condition. Such
improvements tend to have a dramatic effect on fuel and tire
consumption and vehicle maintenance. Roughness and capacity
improvements further reduce VOCs through an increase in safe travelling
speeds.
Savings in passenger travel time: The value of travel time is usually
considered to be an important item in the evaluation of road transport
infrastructure projects. Travel time savings fall under the category of
benefits, which do not have a direct market price (also known as non-
traded goods). The Value of Travel Time (VoTT) refers to the cost of time
spent on transport. It includes costs to businesses of the time their
employees and vehicles spend on travel, and costs to consumers of
personal (unpaid) time spent on travel. The Value of Travel Time Savings
(VoTTS) refers to the benefits from reduced travel time costs.
The study will consider savings in travel time for passengers and cargo
Savings in Road Maintenance (Agency Cost): Normally,
improvements to roads bring about a reduction in maintenance
requirements. As a road approaches the end of its economic life with
traffic volumes at or exceeding its design capacity, it undergoes ever
more frequent failures requiring corresponding greater regular
maintenance. This is usually the case mainly for earth and gravel roads,
which tend to require much more maintenance than paved roads per unit

36
of traffic as traffic levels increase. Paved roads on the other hand exhibit
similar characteristics except that the critical period arrives much later.
Rehabilitation, reconstruction or indeed any new road will require,
initially at least, less maintenance than any older road being replaced,
particularly if an earth/gravel road is being upgraded to paved standards.
Savings in Road Accidents: Generally, roads with poor geometry and
pavement conditions, signage and markings, coupled with inadequate
enforcement of traffic rules and regulations, have high accident rates/’00
million vehicle-km, while improved roads record much lower accident
rates (World Bank, 2005)8. Investments in new roads should result in
reductions in road crash rates per vehicle-km, if roads are improved with
strict road safety audits (RSA), and also proper enforcement of traffic
rules and regulations.
In the economic appraisal exercise, the reduction in accidents, in terms
of fatal, disability and injuries, would be considerable if evaluated for the
entire appraisal period while comparing with and without project
situations. This exercise needs proper data and fairly established causal
relationship between the proper road improvement option and reduction
of road accidents. Due to lack of general agreement in the above-stated
issue, it is rather difficult to estimate the benefits on account of reduction
in accidents for road improvement option with a fair level of confidence.
Savings in road crashes have therefore not been included in the analysis
as there are no agreed road crash rates and costs for Kenya.
Developmental and other Social Benefits: Developmental Benefits are
the value of additional new output that is produced as a result of lower
transport costs in the productive processes they use. Generated traffic
can be related to developmental benefits. This can be defined as those
that may be made which previously were not made on account of reduced
transport costs. Generated traffic thus will be an important item in traffic
estimation for the Road Improvement project since it will lower transport
costs and thus induce more trips. In addition to the reduction of
roughness on the road networks, further economic activity will be
induced in the project road areas of influence. This will lead to an
increase in disposable income among households enabling them to
engage in extra investments, which may make them better financially
and economically. The NPV indicator has been used as a proxy to
measure development benefits.

8
World Bank (2005). Transport Notes on the Economic Evaluation of Transport
Projects. Valuation of Accident Reduction.
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/391681468313794880/pdf/
339370rev0trn11620EENote2pdf.pdf

37
Emission Reduction Benefits: Motor vehicles9 produce various harmful
air emissions, as summarized in the table below.
Table 6-95: Vehicle Pollution Emission
Harmful
Emission Description Sources Scale
Effects
Climate
Fuel
Carbon dioxide A product of change,
production Global
(CO2) combustion. Human
and tailpipes.
health10
A toxic gas caused
Carbon Human health, Very
by incomplete Tailpipes
monoxide (CO) climate change local
combustion.
Air
Ozone
A class of durable conditioners
CFCs and HCFC depletion, Global
chemicals. and industrial
climate change
activities.
Local
Fine Tailpipes,
Human health, and
particulates Inhalable particles. brake lining,
aesthetics. Region
(PM10; PM2.5) road dust, etc.
al
Road dust (non- Dust particles Vehicle use,
Human health,
tailpipe created by vehicle brake linings, Local
aesthetics.
particulates) movement. tire wear.
Human health,
Element used in Fuel additives
Lead ecological Local
older fuel additives. and batteries.
damages
Fuel Climate
Methane (CH4) A flammable gas. production change, Global
and tailpipes. Human Health
Various Human health,
Nitrogen Oxides Local
compounds, some ozone
(NOx) and and
are toxic, all Tailpipes. precursor,
nitrous oxide Region
contribute to ecological
(N2O). al
ozone. damage.
Major urban air
pollutant caused by Human health,
Region
Ozone (O2) NOx and VOCs NOx and VOC plants,
al
combined in aesthetics.
sunlight.
Local
Human health
Sulphur oxides Lung irritant and Diesel vehicle and
and ecological
(SOx) acid rain. tailpipes. Region
damage
al
Fuel Local
VOC (volatile Human health,
Various hydrocarbo production, and
organic ozone
n (HC) gasses. storage & Region
hydrocarbons) precursor.
tailpipes. al
Toxics (e.g. Toxic and Fuel Human health Very
benzene) carcinogenic VOCs. production risks local
9
Even electric cars, trains, and buses are responsible for emissions, since the electricity they use
is often generated by fossil fuels such as coal or natural gas.
10
Human health incudes headache and respiratory diseases among others.

38
 Harmful
Emission Description Sources Scale
Effects
and tailpipes.
Source11

Lifecycle emissions include both tailpipe emissions and indirect

emissions from fuel extraction and refining, vehicle manufacturing, and
the construction of facilities for transportation.
Benefits of emission reduction could result from;
1. Widening a traffic artery which increases the vehicle miles
travelled (VMT) for the street and decreasing the vehicle hours on
this and other streets.
2. Converting a roadway system from road transport streets to bus
streets
3. Reducing IRI Roughness Index on an existing road section
These emissions can cause various human health and environmental
damages, which could either be local (where emissions occur affect their
costs) or regional or global. There have been several efforts to reduce
transport emissions and, therefore the need to evaluate emission
reduction benefits. The establishment of a basis for monetizing climate
change emission costs is still under development and has been changing
over time12.
This study has not used the HDM-4 Vehicle Emission module to estimate
the impact of air pollution in the with and without project cases because
the project is still at the prefeasibility stage, with detailed studies not yet
done.
Gender-Related Benefits: Gender refers to the social differences and
relations between men and women, which tend to vary widely among
societies and change over time13. It is important to note that gender
influences the different roles, social status, economic and political power
of women and men in society. In developing countries and specifically in
Kenya, the existence of persistent inequalities hinders women from
participating in different development activities. According to the World
Bank (2010), Gender Action Plan focusses on the following:
1. Ensuring women’s equitable participation in project-related public
consultations;
2. Incorporating gender-responsive design features in urban transport
infrastructure and services;

11
USEPA (2000), Indicators of the Environmental Impacts of Transportation, Center for
Transportation and the Environment (www.itre.ncsu.edu/cte); ORNL, Transportation Energy Data
Book ORNL (www.ornl.gov).
12
Todd Litman (2009), "Air Pollution Costs," Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis, Victoria
Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org). Available at www.vtpi.org/tca/tca0510.pdf.
13
TRANSIP 2019. Guiding Tool for Gender Mainstreaming in Ethiopia Transport Projects.

39
 3. Promoting increased employment opportunities for women and
strengthening the implementing agencies’ institutional capacities
for gender mainstreaming.
4. Addressing the GAP in the risks of GBV in public transport that
need to be addressed during system establishment in the
respective sub-projects.
Various investment components of World Bank financed projects provide
several starting points from which gender can be addressed (World Bank,
201014). These issues coincide with the dominant strategic approach of
the Bank to focus on poverty alleviation through the promotion of
inclusive transport modes with the improvement of the status of
pedestrians, bikers and public transport passengers. For the case of
women, this also means reducing queuing time for public transport,
improvement of adequate facilities and addressing incidences of
overcrowding and lack of safety.
Transport is one of the main sectors which contributes to overall
economic growth and development. On one hand, its availability
facilitates the movement of goods and people and this is mainly used as a
yardstick to measure development. On the other hand, transport facilities
are not equally accessible and affordable for both women and men mainly
in urban areas.
One key characteristic with developing countries and Kenya to be
specific, is that a high proportion of the poor (both men and women) walk
or use non-motorized transport, particularly for short length journeys.
Majority of the road sections of the project roads lack sidewalks and
NMT facilities. Therefore, given that this study will propose the
improvement of pedestrian’s sidewalks in the project road area of
influence, the savings in non-motorized travel and operating costs likely
to be realized have been used as proxy to measure benefits relating to
gender. The calculated NPV for the project roads include NMT benefits.

6.7 HDM-4 Inputs

Vehicle Fleet and Characteristics: The vehicle fleet classification used

for this study follows the latest classification used for HDM-4 analysis in
Kenya. The vehicle classification is consistent with: Kenyan Design
Manuals, RSIP 2 (2019), Road Note 40 and East Africa Community: Final
Report on Harmonization of Vehicle Overload Control – Volume VI
(2014). The table below provides the vehicle classification that was
proposed for this study.

14
Julie Babinard; John Hine; Simon Ellis; Satoshi Ishihara. 2010. Mainstreaming gender in road
transport: operational guidance for World Bank staff (English). Transport paper series; no. TP-28.
Washington, DC: World Bank.

40
Table 6-96: Proposed Vehicle Classification System
Non-
No Motorized Traffic No Motorized
Traffic
NMT-
MT-01 Motorcycle Pedestrians
01
NMT- Animal
MT-02 Tuk
02 Carts
NMT-
MT-03 Saloon car (private cars and station wagons) Hand Carts
03
Four-wheel drive (include jeeps, RAV-4s,
NMT-
MT-04
double cabin pick-ups, Land Rovers and large Bicycles
04
cars)
Pick-up/utility (include pick-ups, built pick-
MT-05
ups and vans
Matatu (12/14-seaters, and matatus carrying
MT-06
14-25 pass.)
MT-07 Medium Bus (25 - 30 seater)
Large bus (typically with seating capacity >
MT-08
40 pass.) 2 Axle
Large bus (typically with seating capacity >
MT -09
40 pass.) 3 Axle
MT-10 Light Trucks – 2 Axle
MT-11 Medium Truck – 2 Axle
MT-12 Heavy Truck – 3 Axle
MT-13 Heavy Truck – 4 Axle
MT-14 Articulated Truck & Trailers – 5 Axle
MT-15 Articulated Truck & Trailers – 6 Axle
MT-16 Tractors and Tractor Equipment
Source: Consultant 2021
Vehicle Operating Cost (VOCs) Inputs: This analysis will base vehicle
operating costs inputs on the Final RSIP 2 study of 2019 15, with updated
the costs. The VOCs are usually divided into fixed costs and variable
costs. Fixed costs are those incurred independent of the kilometres
travelled by a vehicle. These costs are obtained by dividing the annual
costs by the kilometres travelled, and can be divided into capital costs,
crew hours, insurance costs and vehicle taxes among others. Variable
costs are dependent on the kilometres travelled by the vehicle and
comprise of fuels, oils and lubricants, tyres, spare parts and maintenance
labour hours.
VOCs are usually affected by several factors that include but are not
limited to: Vehicle related factors (age, make, engine capacity, load
carried, type of fuel, type of tyres etc.); Roadway related factors (road
surface type and roughness, horizontal curvature etc.); Traffic related

15
MoTIHUD & PW. KRB (2019). 2 nd Road Sector Investment Programme (2018-2022).
Government of Kenya.

41
factors (travelling speed, traffic volume and composition etc.); and
Environmental related factors (temperature and rainfall etc.).
The table below summarises the economic VOC inputs used in the study.

42
Table 6-97: HDM-4 Motorized Vehicle Prices
Economic Price
Represe Mini-
Articul
ntative Curr Motor 4 Wheel Pick-up bus Small Large Light Medium Heavy
Car ated
Vehicle ency cycles Drive Utility (Matatu Bus Bus Truck Truck Truck
Trucks
Type )
1,673 5,007,52 4,605,13 4,310,9 10,494,3 2,682, 4,426,29 8,852,5 9,567,9
New KSH 106,723 3,636,456
,644 0 0 38 31 600 0 80 40
Vehicle
15,56 24,94
Price USD 992 46,565 33,815 42,823 40,088 97,587 41,160 82,320 88,972
3 6
11,44
Replace KSH 2,683 7,059 11,443 14,358 31,297 33,205 50,370 38,451 50,370 50,370
3
Tyre
USD 25 66 106 134 291 309 468 106 358 468 468
Lubricant KSH 359 359 372 372 372 372 372 372 372 372 372
Oil (per
litre) USD 3.34 3.34 3.46 3.46 3.46 3.46 3.46 3.46 3.46 3.46 3.46
Maintena KSH 89 89 89 89 237 237 237 237 237 237 237
nce
Labour USD 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 2.20 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2
(per hr)
Crew KSH 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 130 291 268 283 283 328
Wages
(per hr) USD 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 2.7 2.5 2.6 2.6 3.0
677,3 2,289,26 1,575,74 1,077,5 2,415,23 994,5 1,109,20 1,109,2 1,527,2
Annual KSH 76,454 974,379
63 2 8 11 4 51 9 09 94
Overhead
USD 711 6,299 21,288 9,061 14,653 10,020 22,459 9,248 10,315 10,315 14,202
Passenge KSH 109 109 109 109 109 109 109 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
r Work
Time (per USD 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
hr)
Passenge KSH 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
r Non-
Work (per USD 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
hr)
Cargo KSH 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 201.0 201.0 201.0 201.0
Holding USD 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9

43
 (per hr)
Annual
Interest 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
(%)
Source: Consultant Estimates

44
Table 6-98: HDM-4 Non-Motorized Price Inputs
Economic Price
Purch Crew Passenger Cargo Energy Annual
Nam
ase Wages Time (per Holding Used (per Interest
e
Cost (per hr) hr) (per hr) MJ) (%)
Pedes
0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0
trians
Bicycl
79.04 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.1 12.0
es
Anim
al 197.60 0.00 36.0 0.0 0.2 12.0
carts
Source: Consultant Estimates

Some other important inputs are briefly discussed below.

Depreciation Cost: The cost items obtained from RSIP 2 Workspace
Files and updated by the Consultant in 2021 was observed to have taken
into consideration the cost of deprecation. The depreciation/km was
highest for Standard Cars /Small Medium Cars (approximately 35% of
total VOC) followed by utility vehicles (approximately 25% of total VOC)
and public transport and other commercial vehicles (approximately 12-
18% of total VOC).
Fuel Prices: Fuel consumption is an important component of VOCs.
Road users pay the market price for petrol and diesel at various pump
stations in the country. This price normally includes taxes, duties and
levies among others, which normally represents the financial price.
Economic analysis though is concerned with the cost to the economy,
which is in economic terms. Several components are usually taken into
consideration when building up the cost of fuel. The economic cost of fuel
is derived by removing taxes, levies and duties. The Table below shows
the basis used to derive and estimate the cost of fuel during the period
May 15th to June 14th 202116.

16
https://www.epra.go.ke/public-notice-pump-prices-in-kenya-for-the-period-15th-may-14th-june-
2021/

45
Table 6-99: Fuel Price Build-up Economic Cost
Super
Ite Diesel
Petrol
m Cost Item
KES/
No KES/Litre
Litre
1 Landed Cost (a) 55.44 58.83
2 Pipeline transport (Mombasa-Nairobi) 2.35 2.35
3 Road Transport (Mombasa-Nairobi)- Bridging 0 0
4 Pipeline losses 0.09 0.08
5 Depot Losses 0.48 0.27
6 Delivery within 40Kms of Nairobi 0.54 0.54
7 Storage & Distribution (b) 3.46 3.24
8 Importers Margin 7 7
9 Dealers Margin 3.89 3.89
10 Oil Marketing Companies Margins ( C ) 10.89 10.89
11 Merchant Shipping Levy Levy 0.02 0.02
12 Import Declaration Fee (IDF) Levy 1.04 1.13
13 Excise Duty Tax 19.9 10.31
14 Road Maintenance Levy Levy 18 18
15 Anti-adulteration Levy Levy 0 0
16 Petroleum Development Levy Levy 0.4 0.4
17 Petroleum Regulatory Levy Levy 0.25 0.25
18 Railway Development Levy Levy 0.79 0.84
19 Value Added Tax (VAT) Tax 5.54 5.81
20 Taxes & Levies (d) 45.94 36.76
21 Retail Prices in Nairobi (a)+ (b) + (c ) + (d) 115.73 109.72
Retail Average Price (EPRC - May 15th - June 127.49142
22 108.8229
14th 2021) 9
81.551428
23 Price excluding taxes (22-20) 72.06286
6
24 Domestic Distribution costs (23*0.15) 12.23 10.81
Domestic Content adjusted by standard
25 10.89 9.62
conversion factor (24*0.89)
26 Foreign content (23*0.83) 67.69 59.81
27 Economic Price (23+24) KES 93.78 82.87
28 Economic Price USD 0.88 0.77
Source: ERPC 2019 and Consultant Estimates 2021

Value of Time: Road investment projects generate benefits related to

travel time savings as a result of higher speeds or reduced travel times
from one point to another for both freight and passengers. For passenger
traffic, the valuation of travel time is dependent on different types of
purpose of travel, whereas, for freight movement, the valuation reflects
the time-savings in fast movement of commodities. Time valuation
requires a basic distinction between travel in working time (employers’
business) and in non-working time (usually defined to include all other
travel purpose, such as shopping, commuting, education, personal
business, etc).
The table below details the value of Travel Time for Passengers Traffic.

46
Table 6-100: Value of Travel Time
Estimates
S. No. Particular Remarks / Source of Data
*
World Bank GDP 2019 (Constant
A GDP (2019) in US$ Million 65,060.16
2010 Prices)
B Population (2019) 47,564,000 KNBS 2019 (KHPC Report)
Per Capita Income
C 1,237 World Bank 2019
(GDP/Population) in US$
Labor force participation rate,
total (% of total population ages
D Employment Ratio (%) 0.7
15+) (modeled ILO estimate) -
2018
GDP/Economically Active
E 1,866.48 (C)/(D)
Person (US$)
World Bank (Final consumption
F Consumption Ratio (%) 0.95
expenditure (% of GDP)
Consumption - Employed
G 1,767 (E)*(F)
Person (US$)
Consultants Estimate (8 Hours
H Annual Working Hours 2,080
Per Day)
I Wage Rate/hour (US$) 0.85 (G)/(H)
Employment Overhead Cost
J 0.33 Gwilliam OT-5(World Bank)
Factor**
Value of Working Time/Hour
K 1.13 (I)*(1+(J))
(US$)
Value of Non-working
L 0.25 (I)*30%
Time/Hour (US$)
Source: Consultant 2021

VOT for freight traffic was estimated by multiplying the VOT for
passenger traffic by 1.85 units as described by Gwilliam OT-5 (World
Bank)17.
Road Agency Costs and Works Standards
Road Agency Costs consist of two key components: road construction and
maintenance works and services costs.
Types of Maintenance: Highway road maintenance comprises
“activities to keep pavement, shoulders, slopes, drainage facilities and all
other structures and property within the road margins as near as
possible to their as-constructed or renewed condition”. It includes minor
repairs and improvements to eliminate the cause of defects and to avoid
excessive repetition of maintenance efforts. For management and
operational convenience, road maintenance can be categorized as
routine, periodic, and urgent.
1. Routine maintenance, which comprises small-scale works conducted
regularly, aims “to ensure the daily pass-ability and safety of existing
roads in the short-run and to prevent premature deterioration of the
roads” (PIARC 1994). Frequency of activities varies but is generally
once or more a week or month. Typical activities include roadside

17
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/759371468153286766/The-value-of-time-in-
economic-evaluation-of-transport-projects

47
 verge clearing and grass cutting, cleaning of silted ditches and
culverts, patching, and pothole repair. For gravel roads, it may
include regrading every six months.
2. Periodic maintenance, which covers activities on a section of road at
regular and relatively long intervals, aims “to preserve the structural
integrity of the road”. These operations tend to be large scale,
requiring specialized equipment and skilled personnel. They cost
more than routine maintenance works and require specific
identification and planning for implementation and often even design.
Activities can be classified as preventive, resurfacing, overlay, and
pavement reconstruction. Resealing and overlay works are generally
undertaken in response to measured deterioration in road conditions.
For a paved road, repaving is needed about every eight years.
3. Urgent maintenance is undertaken for repairs that cannot be
foreseen but require immediate attention, such as damaged bridge
along highways.
Road Maintenance Cost Estimates: Maintenance costs vary with road
conditions, traffic volume, geographic location, climate conditions, work
methods, technical equipment, and other factors. In road investment
projects, maintenance cost is mainly included in the Without Project Case
and in the With Project Case, which will be the same in this study.
Maintenance costs used in the study were adapted from the 2019 RSIP 2,
and is summarised in the table below.

48
Table 6-101: Summary of Road Maintenance Cost in Kenya
KES USD
Road Surface

Intervention
Work Items
Description

Economic

Economic
Financial

Financial
Unit

Cost

Cost

Cost

Cost
Severely damaged area >5%
Paved Patching 2,333 2,550 21.69 23.71
Pot hole >5 No./Km
Road
Wide Structural cracking 148.156
Maintena Crack sealing 161.92 1.38 1.51
PAVE >20% 8
nce (Pre M2
D Edge repair Edge break > 10 m²/km 1,852 2,024 17.22 18.82
and Post
Constructi Overlay (AC, thickness of new Roughness> 6 IRI and
817 893 7.60 8.30
on) surfacing 35mm) Cracked carriageway >=20%
Reconstruction (AC) Roughness > 9 IRI 4,317 4,718 40.14 43.87
Light Grading Twice a Year KM 66,400 80,000 617.46 743.92
Unpaved
Road Light Grading Once a Year KM 33,200 40,000 308.73 371.96
UN- Maintena Spot Regravel - M3 1,660 2,000 15.44 18.60
PAVE nce: Routine Misc Annually KM 18,592 22,400 172.89 208.30
D Without
Drainage Works Annually KM 16,600 20,000 154.36 185.98
Project
Case 1,389.2 1,673.8
Heavy Grading of Earth Roads Annually KM 149,400 180,000
7 2
Source: RSIP 2 Study Report of 2019 and Consultant’s estimates

49
Proposed Road Maintenance Regime: The proposed road
maintenance activities on the project roads shown are summarised in
Table 6-11 and will aim at:
 Preserving the roads to remain in their originally constructed
condition.
 Protecting adjacent resources and enhancing user safety; and
 Providing efficient and convenient travel along the trunk road
corridors.

Table 6-102: Proposed Maintenance Regime

Maintenanc
Maintenance Intervention Trigger
e Category
Miscellaneous/Routine
After 365 Days
Maintenance
Routine Drainage Cleaning Drainage Factor >3.0
Maintenance Patching/edge repair Potholes >=5. No./ Km
Wide Structural Cracking
Crack Sealing
>=10%
Periodic maintenance
5cm Overlay
Roughness >=6.0 and Wide
Structural 10cm Overlay
Structural Cracking <=7%; and
Overlay 5cm
Rut depth mean <5mm
10cm (6cm DBM+ 4cm AC)
Two-way AADT>=30,000 vpd &
Reconstructio
Widening+ 10cm AC Cumulative ESAL>=16.5
n
MESAL/lane
Source: Consultant 2021

Homogeneous Project Road Sections: Road section option analyses

were carried out taking into consideration the Without Project Case
(options without improvements) and With Project Case (options with
improvements). Based on this analysis, homogenous road sections were
identified, which were typically based on traffic volumes, pavement
types, and road section functions. They are presented in the table below.

50
Table 6-103: Project Road Homogenous Sections
Place Name Chainage Lengt
Road Secti Surfac
No Status h
Name on ID ing From To From To (Km)
A4- Existin
1 Sealed A8 Junction Gilgil CBD 0.00 5.70 5.70
001 g
A4- Existin
2 Sealed Gilgil CBD Ol Kalou 5.70 34.40 28.70
002 g
Gilgil – A4- Existin
3 Sealed Ol Kalou Nyahururu Bypass Start 34.40 64.81 30.41
Nyahur 003 g
uru – A4- End of bypass along Nyeri –
4 New N/A Nyahururu Bypass Start 64.81 67.41 2.60
Rumur 004a Nyahururu road
uti (A4) A4- Existin Junction with Nyeri Nyahururu
5 Sealed Nyahururu Bypass Start 0.00 2.38 2.38
Road 004b g road
A4- Existin Junction with End of bypass along Nyeri –
6 Sealed 0.00 0.41 0.41
004c g Nyeri/Nyahururu Road Nyahururu road
A4- Existin End of bypass along Nyeri – 111.1
7 Sealed Rumuruti (Project End) 67.41 43.70
005 g Nyahururu road 1
113.9
Sub-Total Project Road
0
Thika- B20- Existin
8 Sealed A2 Thika Junction Gatunyu 0.00 9.90 9.90
Gatang 001 g
a- B20- Existin
9 Sealed Gatunyu Gatura 9.90 31.00 21.10
Kiaruta 002 g
ra
B20- Existin
(B20) 10 Sealed Gatura Kiarutara 31.00 42.22 11.22
003 g
Road
Sub-Total Project Road 42.22
B65- Existin
11 Sealed Gitimbine Katheri 0.00 7.40 7.40
001 g
Buuri –
B65- Existin
Katheri 12 Sealed Katheri Kithaku 7.40 10.60 3.20
002 g
– Meru
B65- Existin Unseal
(B65) 13 Kithaku Mujujune 10.60 22.30 11.70
003 g ed
Road
B65- Existin
14 Sealed Mujujune Buuri/Kisima 22.30 37.96 15.66
004 g

51
 Sub-Total Project Road 37.96
194.0
Grand Total
8
Source: Consultant 2021

52
Project Road Improvement Standards/Options: Two (2) pavement
design options were analysed for the Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4)
Road and Thika-Gatanga-Kiarutara (B20) Road. For the Buuri – Katheri –
Meru (B65) Road, three (3) pavement design options were analysed. The
tables below show the Pavement Structures for the different road
sections which were derived from Section 4.4.8 of this report.
Project Construction Cost: The costs considered under project
construction included the following:
1. Road Improvement Cost (Pavement, Drainage, Alignment, Junction
Design, etc);
2. Social Cost (Land Acquisition, Gender / Vulnerable Group facilities/
HIV/AIDS awareness and mitigation costs, etc.);
3. Environment mitigation and monitoring measures costs;
4. Road Safety Cost;
5. Street Lighting and Traffic Lights Project Cost; and,
6. Project Supervision Services Cost.
Construction costs were derived from the Engineering Cost Estimates of
2021 as shown in Section 4.5. The summary costs for the three pavement
options were used to estimate construction cost per kilometre, which was
used in the HDM-4 model. Economic costs were calculated from financial
construction costs component using a SCF, which excluded taxes, duties,
and VAT and price escalation. The tables below contain the Project Road
Construction Costs for the three road projects, by pavement type.

53
Table 6-104: Project Cost Estimates for Upgrading of Gilgil – Nyahururu
– Rumuruti (A4) Road
Investment Options for Investment Options for
Road Section Description Alternative 1 Alternative 2
Design Option 1 Design Option 2
Economi
Section 1-A4 Road Economic Financial Financial
c
KES. 528,545,10 621,817,7
533,846,898 628,055,174
Total 3 68.29
USD
4,964,254 5,840,298 4,914,952 5,782,297
Total
A8 Junction to
Length 5.700 5.700 5.700 5.700
Gilgil CBD
KES. per
93,657,350 110,185,118 92,727,211 109,090,837
km
USD per
870,922 1,024,614 862,272 1,014,438
km
Economi
Section 2-A4 Road Economic Financial Financial
c
KES. 1,801,785, 2,119,748,1
1,828,480,908 2,151,154,009
Total 907 25.84
USD
17,003,083 20,003,627 16,754,845 19711582.73
Total
Gilgil CBD - Ol
Length 28.700 28.700 28.700 28.700
Kalou
KES. per
63,710,136 74,953,101 62,779,997 73,858,820
km
USD per
592,442 696,990 583,793 686,815
km
Economi
Section 3-A4 Road Economic Financial Financial
c
KES. 3,396,493, 3,995,874,1
3,432,520,417 4,038,259,314
Total 017 37.88
USD
31,919,080 37,551,859 31,584,061 37157718.26
Total
Ol Kalou -
Length 33.200 33.200 33.200 33.200
Nyahururu
KES. per 102,304,00
103,389,169 121,634,317 120,357,655
km 7
USD per
961,418 1,131,080 951,327 1,119,208
km
Economi
Section 4-A4 Road Economic Financial Financial
c
KES. 4,638,922, 5,457,555,6
4,277,614,842 5,032,488,049
Total 325 76.89
USD
39,777,631 46,797,213 43,137,437 50749925.86
Total
Nyahururu -
Length 43.700 43.700 43.700 43.700
Rumuruti
KES. per 106,153,82
97,885,923 115,159,910 124,886,858
km 9
USD per
910,243 1,070,874 987,127 1,161,326
km
Economi
Section 5-A4 Road Economic Financial Financial
c
KES. 249,309,47 293,305,2
252,130,896 296,624,584
Total 4 62.97
USD
2,344,571 2,758,318 2,318,334 2727451.854
Total
Nyahururu
Length 2.600 2.600 2.600 2.600
Bypass (New)
KES. per
96,973,422 114,086,378 95,888,259 112,809,717
km
USD per
901,758 1,060,892 891,667 1,049,020
km

54
 Economi
Section 1-5: A4 Road Economic Financial Financial
c
KES. 10,324,593,96 12,146,581,13 10,615,055 12,488,300,97
Total 0 0 ,826 2
USD
96,008,618 112,951,315 98,709,629 116,128,975
Junction with A8- Total
Gilgil-Nyahururu- Length 113.900 113.900 113.900 113.900
Rumuruti KES. per
90,646,128 106,642,503 93,196,276 109,642,678
km
USD per
842,920 991,671 866,634 1,019,570
km
Source: Consultant 2021

55
Table 6-105: Project Cost Estimates for Upgrading of Thika-Gatanga-
Kiarutara (B20) Road
Investment Options for Investment Options for
Road Section Description Alternative 1 Alternative 2
Design Option 1 Design Option 2
Econom
Section 1-B20 Road Economic Financial Financial
ic
KES. 900,019,6 1,058,846,6
935,504,737 1,100,593,808
Total 20 11.79
USD
8,699,278 10,234,445 8,369,302 9,846,237
Total
A2 Thika Junction
Length 9.900 9.900 9.900 9.900
- Gatunyu
KES. per 90,911,07
94,495,428 111,171,092 106,954,203
km 3
USD per
878,715 1,033,782 845,384 994,569
km
Econom
Section 2-B20 Road Economic Financial Financial
ic
KES. 827,402,5 973,414,7
1,299,878,872 1,529,269,261
Total 05 11.39
USD
12,087,601 14,220,707 7,694,033
Total 9051804.023
Gatunyu - Gatura Length 21.100 21.100 21.100 21.100
KES. per 39,213,38
61,605,634 72,477,216 46,133,399
km 9
USD per
572,872 673,967 364,646 428,995
km
Econom
Section 3-B20 Road Economic Financial Financial
ic
KES. 482,297,2 567,408,5
582,793,675 685,639,618
Total 80 65.13
USD
5,419,411 6,375,777 4,484,893
Total 5276344.268
Gatura -
Length 11.220 11.220 11.220 11.220
Kiarutara
KES. per 42,985,49
51,942,395 61,108,700 50,571,173
km 7
USD per
483,013 568,251 399,723 470,262
km
Econom
Section 1-3: B20 Road Economic Financial Financial
ic
KES. 2,209,719
2,818,177,284 3,315,502,687 2,599,669,888
Total ,405
USD 20,548,22
26,206,290 30,830,930 24,174,385
Total 8
A2 Thika Junction
Length 42.220 42.220 42.220 42.220
- Kiarutara
KES. per 52,338,21
66,749,817 78,529,197 61,574,370
km 4
USD per
620,708 730,245 486,694 572,581
km
Source: Consultant 2021

56
Table 6-106: Buuri – Katheri – Meru/Gitimbine (B65) Road
Investment Investment Options Investment Options
Road Section Options for for for
Description Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3
Design Option 1 Design Option 2 Design Option 3
Section 1-B65 Econo Financ Econo Econo Financi
Financial
Road mic ial mic mic al
KES. 496,080, 583,624, 461,920, 543,435
Total 475 088 244 ,581.67
USD 4,613,06 5,427,13 4,295,40
5,053,419
Gitimbin Total 3 3 6
e (Meru) Length 7.400 7.400 7.400 7.400
- Katheri KES. 67,037,9 78,868,1 62,421,6
73,437,241
per km 02 20 55
USD per
623,387 733,396 580,460 682,894
km
Section 2-B65 Econo Financ Econo Econo Financi
Financial
Road mic ial mic mic al
KES. 221,044, 260,051, 236,918, 278,727 217,296, 255,642,
Total 147 938 526 ,678.21 030 388.29
USD 2,055,49 2,418,22 2,203,11 2,020,64 2377223.
2591894.585
Total 4 8 0 0 984
Katheri
Length 3.200 3.200 3.200 3.200 3.200 3.200
- Kithaku
KES. 69,076,2 81,266,2 74,037,0 67,905,0 79,888,24
87,102,399
per km 96 31 40 09 6
USD per
642,342 755,696 688,472 809,967 631,450 742,882
km
Section 3-B65 Econo Financ Econo Econo Financi
Financial
Road mic ial mic mic al
KES. 617,212, 726,132, 675,253, 794,416 603,508, 710,010,
Total 959 893 658 ,068.18 905 476.91
USD 5,739,47 6,752,32 6,279,19 5,612,04 6602402.
Kithaku 7387291.848
Total 6 5 8 2 466
-
Length 11.700 11.700 11.700 11.700 11.700 11.700
Mujujun
e KES. 52,753,2 62,062,6 57,713,9 51,581,9 60,684,65
67,898,809
per km 44 40 88 58 6
USD per
490,554 577,122 536,684 631,392 479,662 564,308
km
Section 4-B65 Econo Financ Econo Econo Financi
Financial
Road mic ial mic mic al
KES. 743,517, 874,725, 594,620, 699,553 594,620, 699,553,
Total 085 983 370 ,376.19 370 376.19
USD 6,913,98 8,134,09 5,529,38 5,529,38 6505161.
Mujujun 6505161.665
Total 1 5 7 7 665
e-
Length 15.660 15.660 15.660 15.660 15.660 15.660
Buuri/Kis
ima KES. 47,478,7 55,857,3 37,970,6 37,970,6 44,671,35
44,671,352
per km 41 42 49 49 2
USD per
441,506 519,419 353,090 415,400 353,090 415,400
km
Section 1-4: B65 Econo Financ Econo Econo Financi
Financial
Road mic ial mic mic al
KES. 2,077,85 2,444,53 1,968,71 2,316,132,70 1,415,42 1,665,206
Total 4,667 4,902 2,799 4 5,305 ,241
Meru USD 19,322,0 22,731,7 18,307,1 13,162,0 15,484,78
21,537,767
(Gitimbi Total 15 82 02 70 8
ne) to Length 37.960 37.960 37.960 37.960 30.560 30.560
Buuri/Kis KES. 54,738,0 64,397,6 51,862,8 46,316,2 54,489,73
ima 61,015,087
per km 05 53 24 73 3
USD per
509,010 598,835 482,273 567,381 430,696 506,701
km

57
Source: Consultant 2021

6.8 HDM-4 Analysis Assumptions

Basic Economic Evaluation Assumptions: The assumptions are

presented in the table below.
Table 6-107: Basic Economic Evaluation Assumptions

No Area/Particular Description of the Assumption(s)

2021: Pre-Feasibility
2022: Project Planning for Feasibility and Detailed
Design
2023: Detailed Design Year 1
2024: Detailed Design Year 2
Project
1 Implementation 2025: Construction Year 1
Schedule 2026: Construction Year 2
2027: Construction Year 3
2028: Project Opening
2037: 10th Year after Opening
2047: 20th Year after Opening
Economic Analysis The economic analysis period considered for this study
2
Period is 20 years.
3 Traffic Data Input Refer to Section 4.1 for AADT Traffic Input Data.
4 Traffic Growth Rates Refer to Section 4.1
Standard Conversion The SCF value used in the study was 0.85. This was
5
Factors derived from the RSIP II Report of 201918.
As stated in the Kenya Project Appraisal Guideline for
Road and Transport Projects in section 2.4, the study
6 Discount Rate
used 12% Discount Rate for carrying out Economic
Analysis.
The study was analyzed using the US Dollar. Exchange
7 Currency
Rate used was 1 USD = 107.54 KES as of 31.05.202119.
The study assumed that beyond the analysis period,
earthworks, concrete drainage structures, bridges, and
some pavement structure will remain serviceable given
8 Residual Value the pavement maintenance types and regimes adopted.
In view of the above, the study assumed a Salvage
Value (Remaining Service Life20) of 20% for the project
at the end of the analysis period.

18
Kenya Roads Board (2019). 2nd Road Sector Investment Programme (2018 – 2022)
19
https://www.centralbank.go.ke/
20
P. Babashamsi et al (2016). Evaluation of Pavement Life Cycle Cost Analysis: Review and
Analysis. International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 9:241–254

58
Project Road Section Attributes: The HDM-4 road section attributes
for the With Project and Without Project Cases are detailed in Appendix
F.
Evaluation of Alternatives: The following project Alternatives have
been analysed against the Base Alternative (Alt 0) for the Pre-Feasibility
Study.
Table 6-108: Evaluation of Alternatives
Project Alternative Description
Base (ALT 0) Road Maintenance Regime – Do Minimum
Pavement Design Option 1: Refer to Table 6-13, Table 6-
Alternative 1 (ALT 1)
14 and Table 6-14
Pavement Design Option 2: Refer to Table 6-13, Table 6-
Alternative 2 (ALT 2)
14 and Table 6-14
Alternative 3 (ALT 3) Pavement Design Option 3: Refer to Table 6-14
Source: Consultant 2021

Sensitivity Analysis: The study carried out five (5) sensitivity tests as
shown in the table below.

Table 6-109: Sensitivity Analysis Scenarios

Scenari
Description Condition
o
Increase in capital cost of the intervention
1 Increase in Cost
by 20%
Decrease in benefits of the intervention by
2 Decrease in Benefits
20%
Combination of (1) & Increase in capital cost by 20% & decrease
3
(2) in benefits by 20% together
Source: Consultant 2021

6.9 Economic Analysis Results

Scope of Economic Analysis Results: The HDM-4 project analysis was

carried for: (1) Package wise Analysis: Package 1: A8 Junction -Gilgil –
Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) Road: 113.9 Km; Package 2: Thika-Gatanga-
Kiarutara (B20) Road: 42.22 Km; and, Package 3: Gitimbine – Katheri-
Kithaku-Mujujune-Buuri/Kisima; 37.96 Km; and, (2) Homogeneous
Section-wise Analysis for six sections of the three road projects, taking
into account the packaging for construction as lots.
Package-Wise Analysis (HDM-4 Results)
The table below gives the Economic Indicators Summary for the three
different packages for the different pavement options. These results
relate to Pavement Option 1, Pavement Option 2 and Pavement Option 3

59
compared to Alternative 0: (Do Minimum/Without Project Case Road
Maintenance Regime) for the project roads.
The Table shows the summary of economic indicators for the project
packages.
Table 6-110: Base Case Economic Analysis Results by Project Packages

Project Package Design Option 1 Design Option 2 Design Option 3

EIRR NPV* EIRR NPV* EIRR NPV*
Package 1 31.3% 216.54 30.0% 198.5 N/A N/A
Package 2 17.2% 28.77 17.0% 26.83 N/A N/A
Package 3 35.5% 28.51 37.6% 28.74 17.4% 2.47
Source: Consultant 2021

*NPV in USD Million

The Table above shows that the NPV results of economic indices for
Pavement Option 1 were higher than for Pavement Option 2 and
Pavement Option 3 for Package 1 and Package 2.
The NPV result for economic indices for Pavement Option 2 was higher
than for Pavement Option 1 and Pavement Option 3 for Package 3.
Based on the package-wise analysis, Pavement Option 1 is recommended
for Package 1 and Package 2 and Pavement Option 2 is recommended for
Package 3 at Pre-Feasibility study stage subject to sensitivity and
sectional analysis.
Package-Wise Sensitivity Analysis
The sensitivity analysis for the packages was carried out for all the
scenarios. The results are presented in the table below.
Table 6-111: Project Packages Sensitivity Analysis

Project Design Design Design

Packa Sensitivity Scenario Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
ge EIR NPV EIR EIR NP
NPV
R * R R V
28.9 205. 27.6 186.
Increase in Capital Cost +20% N/A N/A
% 29 % 72
Decrease in Project Benefits - 28.2 161. 27.0 147.
Packag N/A N/A
20% % 98 % 02
e1
Combination of Scenarios-1 & -2
25.9 150. 24.7 135.
(Capital Costs +20% & Benefits N/A N/A
% 74 % 24
-20%)
Packag 16.4 25.5 16.4 24.1
Increase in Capital Cost +20% N/A N/A
e2 % 7 % 7
Decrease in Project Benefits - 16.2 19.8 16.2 18.8
N/A N/A
20% % 1 % 0
Combination of Scenarios-1 & -2 15.4 16.6 15.5 16.1 N/A N/A
(Capital Costs +20% & Benefits % 1 % 3

60
 -20%)
31.5 26.4 33.5 27.0 14.7
Increase in Capital Cost +20% 2.47
% 1 % 3 %
Decrease in Project Benefits - 30.6 20.7 32.6 21.2 14.1
Packag 1.59
20% % 1 % 8 %
e3
Combination of Scenarios-1 & -2
26.9 18.6 28.9 19.5 11.6 -
(Capital Costs +20% & Benefits
% 1 % 8 % 0.37
-20%)
Source: Consultant 2021

*NPV in USD Million

The results obtained for Package 1 and Package 2 showed that in all
instances, Alternative 1: Design Option 1 was found as a better option
based on NPV compared with results for Alternative 2: Design Pavement
Option 2 and Alternative 3: Design Pavement Option 3 even under the
worst-case scenario considered under the sensitivity analysis.
The results obtained for Package 3 showed that in all instances,
Alternative 2: Design Option 2 was found as a better option based on
NPV compared with results for Alternative 1: Design Option 1 and
Alternative 3: Design Option 3 even under the worst-case scenario
considered under the sensitivity analysis.
This exercise established that Design Pavement Option 1 was robust in
terms of economic indices for Package 1 & Package 2. Design Option 2
was robust for Package 3. The Pavement Options were thus
recommended at pre-feasibility study stage.

Homogeneous HDM-4 Section-Wise Analysis

The study carried out homogeneous section-wise analysis for six sections
of the three road projects, taking into account the packaging for
construction as lots. The results are presented in the Table below.
Table 6-112: HDM-4 Homogenous Section-Wise Results
Alternative Alternative Alternative
Projec 1 2 3
Road
t Road Design Design Design
Section
Packa Section ID Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Name
ge
EIRR NPV* EIRR NPV* EIRR NPV*
A8 Junction
to Gilgil CBD-
A4:001- 39.6 185. 38.8 171.6
Ol Kalou- N/A N/A
A4:003 % 01 % 5
Nyahururu
Bypass Start
Packag
Nyahururu
e1
A4:004b, Bypass Road,
A4:004c, Nyahururu 17.9 27.6 16.8
23.1 N/A N/A
A4:004a & Town Road & % 7 %
A4:005 Nyahururu to
Rumuruti
Packag B20:001- A2 Thika 16.5 21.4 16.3 19.81 N/A N/A

61
 Junction-
B20:002 Gatunyu- % 8 %
e2 Gatura
Gatura to 16.1 16.0
B20:003 3.43 3.26 N/A N/A
Kiarutara % %
Gitimbine-
B65:001- 52.5 51.9
Katheri- 28.8 27.62 5.9% -0.28
B65:002 % %
Packag Kithaku
e3 Kithaku-
B65:003- 18.1
Mujujune- 3.3% -4.16 6.6% -2.64 4.72
B65:004 %
Buuri/Kisima
Source: Consultant 2021

*NPV in USD Million

The results obtained showed that Alternative 1: Design Pavement Option

1 was robust compared to Alternative 2: Design Pavement Option 2 and
Alternative 3: Design Pavement Option 3 for the following sections:
 A8 Junction to Gilgil CBD-Ol Kalou-Nyahururu Bypass Start Road:
64.81 Km under Package 1
 Nyahururu Bypass Road, Nyahururu Town Road & Nyahururu to
Rumuruti Road: 49.09 Km under Package 1
 A2 Thika Junction-Gatunyu-Gatura Road: 31.0 Km under Package 2
 Gatura to Kiarutara Road: 11.22 Km under Package 2
 Gitimbine-Katheri-Kithaku Road: 10.6 Km under Package 3
The sectional analysis for Kithaku-Mujujune-Buuri/Kisima: 27.36 Km
showed that the NPV results for Alternative 3: Design Pavement Option 3
was desirable compared to Alternative 1: Design Option 1 and Alternative
2: Design Option 2. This road section run through a forest area which is
about 11.67 Km and has low traffic. Design Pavement Option 1 and
Design Pavement Option 2 were superior in terms of strength compared
to Design Pavement Option 3. The road section passes through an
unsealed road section in the forest area from Kithaku to Mujujune Road:
11.7 Km which has low traffic and a sealed road section which runs
Mujujune to Buuri/Kisima Road: 15.66 Km which is paved to Bitumen
Standards with Single Surface Dressing. Therefore, improving this
section with Alternative 3: Deign Option 3 (Surfacing: 20mm AC, Base:
150 mm GCS & Sub-Base: 150 mm GCS) will provide more desirable
results in terms of NPV and savings in vehicle operating cost and savings
in value of travel time for passengers and freight.
Project Package-wise Homogeneous Sectional Ranking
The study adopted the approach proposed in the Kenya Project Appraisal
Guideline for Road and Transport Projects (2016). The Guideline states
that the NPV/Cost Ratio should be used to rank independent projects
when working down a list of potentially attractive projects until funds are
exhausted.

62
The NPV/Cost ratio in effect gives a measure of the NPV return per dollar
invested. In order to maximize the return to a limited budget, projects
with higher NPVs per dollar should be chosen.
The table below shows the Project Package-wise Homogeneous Sectional
Ranking list for the recommended design pavement options in the
Homogeneous HDM-4 Section-Wise Analysis presented above.
Table 6-113: Project Package-wise Homogeneous Sectional Ranking
Packa Road Road Leng Sectiona Section NPV/ Rankin
ge Sectio Section th l Financial Cost g Score
n ID Name Financia Cost Ratio Based
l (USD) on
Cost/Km NPV/Co
(USD) st Ratio
A8 Junction
to Gilgil
A4:00
CBD-Ol
1- 64,270,19
Kalou- 64.81 991,671 5.933 1
A4:00 0.9
Nyahururu
3
Bypass
Start
Packag
A4:00 Nyahururu
e1
4b, Bypass
A4:00 Road,
4c, Nyahururu 48,681,12
49.09 991,671 1.021 2
A4:00 Town Road 4.4
4a & &
A4:00 Nyahururu
5 to Rumuruti
113. 1,983,34 112,951,3
Total
90 1.80 15.25
B20:0 A2 Thika
01- Junction- 22,637,58
31 730,245 1.627 1
Packag B20:0 Gatunyu- 4.6
e2 02 Gatura
B20:0 Gatura to 8,193,345.
730,245 0.735 2
03 Kiarutara 11.22 1
42.2 1,460,48 30,830,92
Total
2 9.33 9.72
B65:0
Gitimbine-
01- 6,347,652.
Katheri- 10.6 598,835 5.268 1
B65:0 5
Kithaku
Packag 02
e3 B65:0 Kithaku-
03- Mujujune- 16,384,12
598,835 -0.349 2
B65:0 Buuri/ 9.4
04 Kisima 27.36
37.9 1,197,67 22,731,78
Total
6 0.28 1.85
Source: Consultant 2021

63
Ranking the road sections in descending order using the NPV/Cost Ratio,
one could select the following order given the amount of available budget
of progressing the project to the next stage under the different packages:
Package 1:
 Rank 1: A8 Junction to Gilgil CBD-Ol Kalou-Nyahururu Bypass
Start Road: 64.81 Km
 Rank 2: Nyahururu Bypass Road, Nyahururu Town Road &
Nyahururu to Rumuruti Road: 49.09 Km
Package 2:
 Rank 1: A2 Thika Junction-Gatunyu-Gatura Road: 31.0 Km
 Rank 2: Gatura to Kiarutara Road: 11.22 Km
Package 3:
 Rank 1: Gitimbine-Katheri-Kithaku Road: 10.6 Km
 Rank 2: Kithaku-Mujujune-Buuri/Kisima: 27.36 Km
Overall Project Package-wise Homogeneous Sectional Ranking
After carrying out the sectional project package ranking, the Consultant
carried out the overall sectional ranking to establish the economic
performance of the different homogenous sections in terms of NPV/Cost
Ratio. In order to maximize the return to a limited budget, the sections
with higher NPVs per dollar were ranked higher. The Table below shows
the ranking score based on NPV/Cost Ratio of the different road sections
for the different packages based on the recommended Design Pavement
Options shown in Table 6-22.
Table 6-114: Overall Project Package-wise Homogeneous Sectional
Ranking
Packa Road Road Section Leng Sectio Section NPV/ Rankin
ge Sectio Name th nal Financial Cost g Score
n ID Financ Cost Ratio Based
ial (USD) on
Cost/K NPV/Co
m st Ratio
(USD)
A8 Junction to
A4:00
Gilgil CBD-Ol
Packag 1- 991,67 64,270,19
Kalou- 64.81 5.933 1
e1 A4:00 1 0.9
Nyahururu
3
Bypass Start
B65:0
Gitimbine-
Packag 01- 598,83 6,347,652
Katheri- 10.6 5.268 2
e3 B65:0 5 .5
Kithaku
02
B20:0 A2 Thika
Packag 01- Junction- 730,24 22,637,58
31 1.627 3
e2 B20:0 Gatunyu- 5 4.6
02 Gatura
Packag A4:00 Nyahururu 49.09 730,24 35,847,71 1.021 4

64
 4b,
A4:00 Bypass Road,
4c, Nyahururu
e1 A4:00 Town Road & 5 0.6
4a & Nyahururu to
A4:00 Rumuruti
5
Packag B20:0 Gatura to 730,24 8,193,345
0.735 5
e2 03 Kiarutara 11.22 5 .1
B65:0
Kithaku-
Packag 03- 730,24 19,979,49
Mujujune- -0.349 6
e3 B65:0 5 4.0
Buuri/Kisima
04 27.36

Source: Consultant 2021

Ranking all the homogeneous six sections in descending order using the
NPV/Cost Ratio, one could select the projects in the following order given
the amount of available budget of progressing to the next stage.
 Rank 1: A8 Junction to Gilgil CBD-Ol Kalou-Nyahururu Bypass Start
(A4) Road: 64.81 Km: Under Package 1
 Rank 2: Gitimbine-Katheri-Kithaku (B65) Road: 10.6 Km: Under
Package 3
 Rank 3: A2 Thika Junction-Gatunyu-Gatura (B20) Road: 31.0 Km:
Under Package 2
 Rank 4: Nyahururu Bypass (A4) Road, Nyahururu Town (A4) Road
& Nyahururu to Rumuruti (A4) Road: 49.09 Km: Under Package 1
 Rank 5: Gatura to Kiarutara (B20) Road: 11.22 Km: Under Package
2
 Rank 6: Kithaku-Mujujune-Buuri/Kisima (B65) Road: 27.36 Km:
Under Package 3
The above exercise on the ranking is indicative, which would be helpful
to appreciate the budgetary constraints and required outlays for
progressing the project to the next stage. In addition, the ranking could
be further refined at a later stage of implementation with more details
available on the project activities.

Project Benefits
Quantifiable Benefits
It is important to note that for the realization of the expected project
benefits to the road users, the upgrading of the KeNHA trunk roads (A4,
B20 and B65 project roads) in Kenya with the recommended Design
Pavement Option should be carried out.
The steps and methods followed for estimation of the quantifiable
benefits are adequately discussed in various sections. The Table below

65
summarises the tangible / quantifiable benefits, viz. savings in VOC,
VoTT, NMT Travel Time Operating Costs and Accident Cost Savings. The
estimated project benefits are based on the Project Package-wise
Homogeneous Sections.
Note:
 As detailed in section 6.1.6: Benefit Categories of Road Transport
Investment, the study will use the savings in non-motorized travel
and operating costs likely to be realize as a proxy to measure
benefits relating to gender. The NPV indicator will be used as a
proxy to measure development benefits.

66
Table 6-115: Quantifiable Project Benefits
Project Benefit Area
Savings in Savings in Development
Savings in
Packa Road Road Section Vehicle NMT Travel Benefit (NPV
Length Travel Time
ge Section ID Name Operating & Operating used as a
Costs (USD
Costs (USD Costs (USD Proxy) (USD
Millions)
Millions) Millions) Millions)
A8 Junction to Gilgil
A4:001- CBD-Ol Kalou-
64.81 183.73 31.91 0.3 185.01
A4:003 Nyahururu Bypass
Start
Packag
Nyahururu Bypass
e1 A4:004b,
Road, Nyahururu
A4:004c,
Town Road & 49.09 41.2 13.11 0.22 27.67
A4:004a &
Nyahururu to
A4:005
Rumuruti
Total 113.90
B20:001- A2 Thika Junction-
Packag 31 25.02 9.4 0.04 21.48
B20:002 Gatunyu-Gatura
e2
B20:003 Gatura to Kiarutara 11.22 5.54 2.47 0.03 3.43
Total 42.22
B65:001- Gitimbine-Katheri-
10.6 525.05 9.15 0.07 28.8
Packag B65:002 Kithaku
e3 B65:003- Kithaku-Mujujune-
10.56 2.56 0.6 4.72
B65:004 Buuri/Kisima 27.36
Total 37.96
Source: Consultant 2021

67
Savings in Road Maintenance Cost
Results generated from HDM-4 analysis showed that the upgrading all
the project trunk roads will likely generate savings in road maintenance
cost of approximately USD 591,993 during the first ten-year period from
year 2025 to year 2034. This is because, the improved A4, B20 and B65
road networks will require less road maintenance intervention compared
to the without project case. The Table below shows the 10 Year savings
in Road Maintenance Cost for the different Project Package-wise
Homogeneous Sections.
Table 6-116: Road Maintenance Cost in the With and Without Project
Cases
Maintena
Maintena
nce Cost
nce Cost Differe
Packa Road Item in the
Road Name in the WP nce in
ge ID Description WOP
Case
Case
USD USD USD
A8 Junction to
A4:00 10 Year
Gilgil CBD-Ol
1- Maintenance
Kalou- 241,391 155 241,236
A4:00 Cost (2025-
Nyahururu
3 2034)
Bypass Start
A4:00
Packa
4b, Nyahururu
ge 1
A4:00 Bypass Road, 10 Year
4c, Nyahururu Maintenance
28,384 155 28,229
A4:00 Town Road & Cost (2025-
4a & Nyahururu to 2034)
A4:00 Rumuruti
5
B20:0 A2 Thika 10 Year
01- Junction- Maintenance
210,212 155 210,057
B20:0 Gatunyu- Cost (2025-
Packa 02 Gatura 2034)
ge 2 10 Year
B20:0 Gatura to Maintenance
56,414 155 56,259
03 Kiarutara Cost (2025-
2034)
B65:0 10 Year
Gitimbine-
01- Maintenance
Katheri- 5,228 155 5,072
B65:0 Cost (2025-
Kithaku
Packa 02 2034)
ge 3 B65:0 10 Year
Kithaku-
03- Maintenance
Mujujune- 241,391 190,250 51,141
B65:0 Cost (2025-
Buuri/Kisima
04 2034)
591,99
Total 783,019 191,025
3
Source: Consultant 2021

68
6.10 Project Package-Wise Switching Value Analysis

Determining ‘Switching’ Values is part of the sensitivity analysis – except

it occurs in reverse. This exercise involves identifying key variables and
varying them upwards or downwards until the EIRR = Discount Rate or
NPV = 0.
Switching value for this study was estimated by exporting the HDM-4
undiscounted cost streams to Excel spreadsheet from where Goal Seek
Analysis was undertaken. The Table below shows the switching value
test results for the three project packages based on their respective
recommended Design Pavement Option.

Table XX: Project Package-Wise Switching Value Test

Package 1: Design Pavement Option 1

NPV @ FYR B/
SENSITIVITY TESTS EIRR
12% R C

36.8
Base Case
31.3% 216.5 % 4.9
Additional Sensitivity Scenario
Benefits Lagged by 3 Years from
Project Start 21.7% 138.2 3.5
Combined Switch
70.0
Switching' Value: Cost increase of % 12.0%
-
65.0
& Benefit decrease of % 12.0%

Package 2: Design Pavement Option 1

NPV @ FYR B/
SENSITIVITY TESTS EIRR
12% R C

15.2
Base Case
17.2% 28.8 % 2.8
Additional Sensitivity Scenario
Benefits Lagged by 3 Years from
Project Start 15.6% 21.2 2.3
Combined Switch
53.0
Switching' Value: Cost increase of % 12.0%
-
45.5
& Benefit decrease of % 12.0%

69
 Package 3: Design Pavement Option 2

NPV @ FYR B/
SENSITIVITY TESTS EIRR
12% R C

44.7
Base Case
37.5% 28.7 % 4.4
Additional Sensitivity Scenario
Benefits Lagged by 3 Years from
Project Start 25.2% 19.3 3.3
Combined Switch
52.0
Switching' Value: Cost increase of % 12.0%
-
65.2
& Benefit decrease of % 12.0%

Source: Consultant 2021

6.10.1 First Year Rate of Return

The estimated first year rate of return for Package 1, Package 2 and
Package 3 under the base case scenario was 36.8%, 15.2% respectively.
This showed that the project packages should proceed to the next stage
after pre-feasibility and study appraisal with immediate effect.

6.10.2 Project Benefits Delay by 3 Years

The case of lagging benefits by three (3) years from the opening in 2028
would still make the project packages viable.
 For Package 1, the result of EIRR (21.7%), NPV (USD 138.2
million) and BC Ratio (3.5) were all positive and above their
respective cut off points. This showed that project delays resulting
from implementation would have minimal effect on the viability of
the roads under Package 1.
 For Package 2, the result of EIRR (15.6%), NPV (USD 21.2
million) and BC Ratio (2.3) were all positive and above their
respective cut off points. This showed that project delays resulting
from implementation would have minimal effect on the viability of
the roads under Package 2.
 For Package 3, the result of EIRR (25.2%), NPV (USD 19.3
million) and BC Ratio (3.3) were all positive and above their
respective cut off points. This showed that project delays resulting
from implementation would have minimal effect on the viability of
the roads under Package 3.
Combined Switch

70
This involved altering all the factors (Costs or Benefits) to change
accordingly.
 For Package 1: The switching value tests showed that an increase
in costs by 70.0% and a corresponding decrease in benefits by
65.0% would be required to reduce the EIRR to 12.0% & NPV=0
and make the package economically unviable.
 For Package 2: The switching value tests showed that an increase
in costs by 53.0% and a corresponding decrease in benefits by
45.5% would be required to reduce the EIRR to 12.0% & NPV=0
and make the package economically unviable.
 For Package 3: The switching value tests showed that an increase
in costs by 52.0% and a corresponding decrease in benefits by
65.2% would be required to reduce the EIRR to 12.0% & NPV=0
and make the package economically unviable.
Note: It is important to note that none of these possible events can occur. However, the
impact on the economic viability under the different switching value tests for the
project packages, the decision rules support economic viability strongly.

6.10.3 Risk Analysis

Quantitative risk assessment mainly follows from the project sensitivity
analysis. Risk assessment considers the probability that different values
will occur and summarizes the associated risk attached to the project.
Whereas sensitivity analysis merely states a value and works out the
result, risk analysis attempts to attach a probability to that value actually
being realized and then obtaining values for the decision variables.
Quantitative risk assessment provides a means of estimating the
probability that the project NPV will fall below zero, or whether the
project EIRR will fall below the discount rate of 12.0%.
The Consultant assigned probability distribution to the crucial variables
in the study under the base case. This was estimated in order to calculate
the expected financial and economic decision indicators. The probability
distribution for each variable was derived from distributions found in
literature of different projects21.
The Tables below shows the Risk Analysis results for the KeNHA Pre-
Feasibility study project roads (A4, B20 and B65) for Project Package 1,
Package 2 and Package 3 under the respective Design Pavement Option
discussed in the previous section.
It shows the probability distributions for the critical variables and the
probability distributions for the decision variables, which include the
NPV and EIRR, which have been calculated by the Consultant.

21
The World Bank Group (2013). Investment Project Financing Economic Analysis Guidance
Note. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/PROJECTS/Resources/40940-1365611011935/
Guidance_Note_Economic_Analysis.pdf

71
72
Table 6-117: Project Package 1 Risk Analysis
Percentag Net Probabilit
Base Case Probabilit Adjusted Probabilit Probabilit
e Increase Benefit y of Probabilit
Constructio y of Base Base y of Cost NPV y of NPV
of Base Variation Benefit y of NPV
n Cost Case Cost Case Cost Variation <0
Cost s level
258 0.20 -7.90 0.050 5.00%
343 0.30 78.00 0.075
200.00% -265.40 0.25 429 0.30 163.80 0.075
537 0.15 271.10 0.038
579 0.05 314.00 0.013
258 0.20 36.33 0.060
343 0.30 122.23 0.090
150.00% -221.17 0.30 429 0.30 208.03 0.090
537 0.15 315.33 0.045
579 0.05 358.23 0.015
-88.47 1.0 258 0.20 80.57 0.060
343 0.30 166.47 0.090
100.00% -176.93 0.30 429 0.30 252.27 0.090
537 0.15 359.57 0.045
579 0.05 402.47 0.015
258 0.20 124.80 0.030
343 0.30 210.70 0.045
50.00% -132.70 0.15 429 0.30 296.50 0.045
537 0.15 403.80 0.023
579 0.05 446.70 0.008
Total 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.00%
Source: Consultant 2021

73
Table 6-118: Project Package 2 Risk Analysis
Percentag Net Probabilit
Base Case Probabilit Adjusted Probabilit Probabilit
e Increase Benefit y of Probabilit
Constructio y of Base Base y of Cost NPV y of NPV
of Base Variation Benefit y of NPV
n Cost Case Cost Case Cost Variation <0
Cost s level
42 0.20 -33.39 0.050 5.00%
56 0.30 -19.29 0.075 7.50%
200.00% -75.69 0.25 71 0.30 -5.19 0.075 7.50%
88 0.15 12.41 0.038
95 0.05 19.51 0.013
42 0.20 -20.77 0.060 6.00%
56 0.30 -6.67 0.090 9.00%
150.00% -63.07 0.30 71 0.30 7.43 0.090
88 0.15 25.03 0.045
95 0.05 32.13 0.015
-25.23 1.0 42 0.20 -8.16 0.060 6.00%
56 0.30 5.94 0.090
100.00% -50.46 0.30 71 0.30 20.04 0.090
88 0.15 37.64 0.045
95 0.05 44.74 0.015
42 0.20 4.46 0.030
56 0.30 18.56 0.045
50.00% -37.84 0.15 71 0.30 32.66 0.045
88 0.15 50.26 0.023
95 0.05 57.36 0.008
Total 1.00 1.00 1.00 41.00%
Source: Consultant 2021

74
Table 6-119: Project Package 3 Risk Analysis
Percentag Net Probabilit
Base Case Probabilit Adjusted Probabilit Probabilit
e Increase Benefit y of Probabilit
Constructio y of Base Base y of Cost NPV y of NPV
of Base Variation Benefit y of NPV
n Cost Case Cost Case Cost Variation <0
Cost s level
35 0.20 -5.12 0.050 5.00%
47 0.30 6.58 0.075
200.00% -40.32 0.25 59 0.30 18.38 0.075
73 0.15 32.98 0.038
79 0.05 38.88 0.013
35 0.20 1.60 0.060
47 0.30 13.30 0.090
150.00% -33.60 0.30 59 0.30 25.10 0.090
73 0.15 39.70 0.045
79 0.05 45.60 0.015
-13.44 1.0 35 0.20 8.32 0.060
47 0.30 20.02 0.090
100.00% -26.88 0.30 59 0.30 31.82 0.090
73 0.15 46.42 0.045
79 0.05 52.32 0.015
35 0.20 15.04 0.030
47 0.30 26.74 0.045
50.00% -20.16 0.15 59 0.30 38.54 0.045
73 0.15 53.14 0.023
79 0.05 59.04 0.008
Total 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.00%
Source: Consultant 2021

75
The rule of thumb follows that if the costs and benefits can be added to
obtain NPV, so can the probabilities be multiplied as shown in the final
column, i.e., expressed as a percentage. The point of interest with NPV is
whether NPV<0.
 For Package 1: As depicted in Error: Reference source not found
above, NPV is below 0 in one instance. The cumulative probability
for the one instance in which NPV<0 is 5%.
17. Therefore, there is a 5% probability that investing Design
Pavement Option 1 in Project Package 1 for the Pre-Feasibility
Study will NPV < 0 or will have a 95% probability of having
NPV>zero (0). This therefore shows that investing in Package 1 is a
worthwhile undertaking given that is acceptable and viable.
 For Package 2: As depicted in Error: Reference source not found
above, NPV is below 0 in six instance. The cumulative probability
for the six instance in which NPV<0 is 41.0%.
18. Therefore, there is a 41% probability that investing Design
Pavement Option 1 in Project Package 2 for the Pre-Feasibility
Study will NPV < 0 or will have a 59% probability of having
NPV>zero (0). This therefore shows that investing in Package 2 is a
worthwhile undertaking given that is acceptable and viable.
 For Package 3: As depicted in Error: Reference source not found
above, NPV is below 0 in one instance. The cumulative probability
for the one instance in which NPV<0 is 5.0%.
19. Therefore, there is a 5% probability that investing Design
Pavement Option 2 in Project Package 3 for the Pre-Feasibility
Study will NPV < 0 or will have a 95% probability of having
NPV>zero (0). This therefore shows that investing in Package 3 is a
worthwhile undertaking given that is acceptable and viable.

6.11 Recommendation

In terms of package-wise sectional analysis, in all the instances under the

base case and sensitivity scenarios, the option of upgrading A8 Junction
to Gilgil CBD-Ol Kalou-Nyahururu Bypass Start (A4) Road: 64.81 Km;
Nyahururu Bypass Road, Nyahururu Town Road & Nyahururu to
Rumuruti (A4) Road: 49.09 Km; A2 Thika Junction-Gatunyu-Gatura (B20)
Road: 31.0 Km; Gatura to Kiarutara (B20) Road: 11.22 Km and Gitimbine-
Katheri-Kithaku (B65) Road: 10.6 Km with Alternative 1: Design
Pavement Option 1 yielded higher economic indices results compared to
Design Pavement Option 2 and Design Pavement Option 3.
The economic indices result for Kithaku-Mujujune-Buuri/Kisima (B65)
Road: 27.36 Km, showed that in the instances under base case and
sensitivity scenarios, Alternative 3: Design Option 3 yielded higher

1
results compared to Design Pavement Option 1 and Design Pavement
Option 2.
The overall homogenous six sections were ranked in descending order
using the NPV/Cost Ratio. The results obtained showed that given the
amount of available budget, the projects could be selected to proceed to
the next stage in the following order based on their recommended Design
Pavement Option.
 Rank 1: A8 Junction to Gilgil CBD-Ol Kalou-Nyahururu Bypass Start
(A4) Road: 64.81 Km: Under Package 1
 Rank 2: Gitimbine-Katheri-Kithaku (B65) Road: 10.6 Km: Under
Package 3
 Rank 3: A2 Thika Junction-Gatunyu-Gatura (B20) Road: 31.0 Km:
Under Package 2
 Rank 4: Nyahururu Bypass (A4) Road, Nyahururu Town (A4) Road
& Nyahururu to Rumuruti (A4) Road: 49.09 Km: Under Package 1
 Rank 5: Gatura to Kiarutara (B20) Road: 11.22 Km: Under Package
2
 Rank 6: Kithaku-Mujujune-Buuri/Kisima (B65) Road: 27.36 Km:
Under Package 3
The Consultant therefore recommends that the Pre-Feasibility and
Appraisal Study for Gilgil – Nyahururu – Rumuruti (A4) Road; Kiarutara –
Gatanga – Thika (B20) Road; and, Buuri/Kisima– Katheri –
Meru/Gitimbine (B65) Road should proceed to the next stage with the
following recommended pavement structures for the different
homogenous road sections.

2
Table 6-120: Recommended Pavement Structure for the different
Homogenous Road Sections
Roa Stru
Pk Sub- CB
d Road Name Surfacing Base ct.
g base R
ID No.
A8 Junction - Gilgil 150mm 150mm
A4 50mm AC 14 2.69
CBD GCS CIG
A4 150mm 150mm
Gilgil CBD - Ol Kalou 50mm AC 14 2.69
GCS CIG
Pk
A4 125mm 175mm
g Ol Kalou - Nyahururu 50mm AC 14 3.04
DBM CIG
1
A4 Nyahururu - 150mm 150mm
50mm AC 14 2.69
Rumuruti GCS CIG
A4 Nyahururu Bypass 125mm 175mm
50mm AC 14 3.04
(New) DBM CIG
A2 Thika Junction - 150mm 150mm
B20 50mm AC 14 2.54
Gatunyu GCS GCS
Pk
150mm 150mm
g B20 Gatunyu - Gatura 50mm AC 14 2.54
GCS GCS
2
150mm 150mm
B20 Gatura - Kiarutara 35mm AC 14 2.43
GCS GCS
150mm 150mm
B65 Gitimbine - Katheri 50mm AC 14 2.54
GCS GCS
150mm 150mm
Pk B65 Katheri - Kithaku 20mm AC 10 2.58
GCS CIG
g
150mm 150mm
3 B65 Kithaku - Mujujune 20mm AC 10 2.43
GCS GCS
Mujujune - 150mm 150mm
B65 20mm AC 10 2.43
Buuri/Kisima GCS GCS
Source: Consultant 2021

3
Non-Quantifiable Benefits
A spectrum of non-quantifiable / intangible benefits of the investments/
interventions has been discussed in detail in Section 6.1.3 of this report.
It has been emphasised that several benefits of qualitative nature would
also be realised after the proposed interventions, i.e., with the project
situation; and perception of such benefits could be subjective, and
therefore difficult to incorporate in the economic appraisal exercise, e.g.,
estimation of EIRR, NPV, etc. Nevertheless, the merits of those
qualitative benefits cannot be ignored in the overall economic analysis
and their roles in any decision-making process. For the reference, the
benefits, which are non-quantifiable and which would be realized from
implementing this project are as follows:
 Overall Economic Benefits: improved labour mobility for better
employment opportunities; reduced total transport cost of goods
and services, improved investments, and activities in the counties
in the project road area of influence and increased overall
economic growth.
 Social and Gender Benefits: reduced incidences of theft and
crime (Gender Based Violence) on women, children and physically
challenged people. Improved quality of life for the residents in in
the project road areas of influence.
 Road Safety: reduction in fatal, serious and slight road accidents.
Improved and safe pedestrian movement.
 Regional Integration and Cross Border Trade: Upgrading the
A4 Road from A8 Junction to Gilgil-Nyahururu and Rumuruti will
facilitate transportation of freight and passengers along the
corridor between Kenya and Ethiopia. This will help stimulate
economic growth and thus reduce poverty in Kenya and Ethiopia
and specifically in the counties traversed by the road corridor.
 National Inter and Intra County Trade: upgrading the A4, B20
and B65 project roads will stimulate inter and intra county trade in
goods and services. The roads will also facilitate movement of
labour between towns and counties in order to access gainful
employment opportunities. The roads will act as a catalyst in
unlocking the economic potential of the project road areas of
influence.
It is important to note that the non-quantifiable benefit areas mentioned
above are additional benefits to the road users. Therefore, the magnitude
of benefits of the proposed interventions under the project, i.e.,
quantifiable plus non-quantifiable, would be much higher, and

1
accordingly the project evaluation needs to be considered for making
decisions.
The Economic Analysis and Economic Indicators Results for all the
project packages and Design Pavement Options are presented in the
following sections:
 Appendix G2: HDM-4 Economic Analysis Summary Results
 Appendix G3: Economic Indicators Summary
 Appendix G4: HDM-4: Average Annual Net Change in Annual
Emission Quantities
NB: Detailed Results can be obtained from HDM-4 Object File, which will be submitted
with this report.

7 RESULTS-BASED LOGICAL FRAMEWORK

7.1.1 Introduction
An assessment is aimed at improve the quality of future performances
while an evaluation is aimed at determining the quality of the present
performance. Thus, an evaluation assessment is aimed to both
determining the quality of the present performance as well as the
improvement of the quality for future performances by addressing needs
and gaps between current and desired project performance. Monitoring
and Evaluation is used to assess the performance of projects set up by
governments with the goal to improve current and future management of
outputs, outcomes and impacts.

7.1.2 Baseline Indicators

The indicators for the road project have been developed based on the
logical levels of the results chain namely impact, output and outcome
result chain areas. The indicators are divided into three main types;
Output indicators: These describe the extent of completion of project
and its associated services and components. e.g. Kms of roads
constructed.
Outcome indicators: The outcome indicators assess the extent of
utilization of the resource, the user satisfaction of the resource and level
of adoption of the resource or service. E.g. % number of new road users
using the road.
Impact indicators: Impact indicators assess the benefits accrued by the
population in the targeted area from use of the outputs. Direct benefits
are those that are experienced by the beneficiaries. Indirect benefits, in

2
this case, are statistical changes in macro development indicators which
can be attributed to the improvements in the road infrastructure, and the
usage of the road by the population of the target area.

7.1.3 Result Based Logical Framework

The framework has been prepared based on the indicators described in
the previous section. Some of the indicator values have been left blank
where the required values are road-specific e.g. Kms of road to be
constructed. The result –based logical framework is shown in Table 7-
121.

3
Table 7-121: Results-Based Logical Framework

PROJECT NAME-----1. GILGIL-NYAHURURU- RUMURUTI (A4); 2. KIARUTARA-GATANGA-THIKA(B20); 3. BUURI-

KATHERI-MERU-CHAARIA-MITUNGUU- KATHWANA- ISHIARA- ENA (B65) ROAD
PROJECT PURPOSE: To inform the client on the viability of the proposed road projects and on which roads should be
prioritized for detailed designs.

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ASSUMPTIONS/RISKS

MEANS OF
RESULTS CHAIN and MITIGATION BENEFICIARY
INDICATOR Baseline Target VERIFICATION
MEASURES
Improved Reduced To be Average Field surveys; Assumption: Reduction Population of
transport average travel determined travel time Baseline data; of travel time by half. the County
conditions, time on the before project on project evaluation Residents willing to
mobility and road; commencemen road to reports; participate in the
accessibility Reduced t reduce at observations project and commit
to services accidents opening; resources, e.g. water,
and along the quarry etc
15 minutes
amenities proposed Reduced congestion
– B20
within the roads; Fewer structures to
counties of Accessibility to 30 minutes– relocate to save on cost
proposed social services B65, A4 and time;
road in the health & Risk: Unfavourable
corridors and education macro-economic
other sectors; conditions & Non-
Counties conducive business
environment; Delayed
relocation of facilities
Mitigation: The GoK to
continue supporting
infrastructural projects.
Improved Volume of To be Local trade Observation; Assumption: the County
trade and trade growth determined to grow in Data from the government and other
IMPACT

Agricultural in the County; before project value and Ministry of neighbouring Counties
activities in Increase of commencemen volume by Industrialization, to continue and remain
the County Small and t 50% in the Trade and committed to their trade

4
 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS MEANS OF ASSUMPTIONS/RISKS
RESULTS CHAIN and MITIGATION BENEFICIARY
INDICATOR Baseline Target VERIFICATION
MEASURES
and the Middle Size year 2028 Enterprise agreements; Improved
neighbouring Businesses; Development; Agricultural practices in
Counties Increase in the County the Counties of the
number of Government proposed road
new Small Trade and
Business and Industry
Roadside departments.
Infrastructure;
Growth in
Sale of
agricultural
inputs,
outputs,
commoditiesan
d daily
essentials
Improved Average Average Average Primary Data Assumption: the County
economic household household household from targeted government and other
and social income monthly incomes area; socio- neighbouring Counties
activities improved; income to increase by economic studies to continue and remain
along the Increase in the increase by 30% by the committed to their trade
proposed sale of --------- during year 2030 agreements;
roads agricultural the first year in the That the pandemic will
corridor produce in the of project area end soon and things to
markets; construction of influence. normalize.
Reduced travel
time to the Risk:
market; Unfavourable political
Increase in environment;
agricultural Unfavourable macro-
and non- economic conditions
agricultural and lack of conducive
activities; environment for trader.
Increase in

5
 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS MEANS OF ASSUMPTIONS/RISKS
RESULTS CHAIN and MITIGATION BENEFICIARY
INDICATOR Baseline Target VERIFICATION
MEASURES
the % Incomes
from economic
activities
during and
after the
project;
Increase in
the number of
migrant
population
living along
road;
Improved
social
coexistence
among the
communities
where cattle
rustling is
experienced.
Improved Increased During Increase in Land title deeds More investment in the
land values number of construction land Land ownership area to increase the
along the investors and after ownership deeds economic growth of the
project along the road construction of from 30%- Progress reports county
corridor Corridor the road 30% 50% in 5 County land Government and
of people to years after boards reports financial institutions to
own land and project fund development
property in the completion projects by providing
area loans at an affordable
interest rate and flexible
repayment plan
The cost of land may
increase and chase
away the investors

6
 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS MEANS OF ASSUMPTIONS/RISKS
RESULTS CHAIN and MITIGATION BENEFICIARY
INDICATOR Baseline Target VERIFICATION
MEASURES
Increased Skilled and Beginning of Annual Contractors Government to invest Migrants and
Employment non-skilled every fiscal maintenanc employee and continue supporting the local people
through Road workers year e register; road rehabilitation
maintenance employed on Cost of living; projects;
program road Road Routine maintenance of
maintenance maintenance project facilities, like
project.; register; bus stages, sidewalks
Roads under Monitoring and and drainage;
maintenance; evaluation Encourage local
Ratio of reports. contractors to
women and participate in road
men employed maintenance activities;
on the project.
Reduced Transport After project 1-2 years Favourable macro- 1. Transporters
transport freight and Completion after Project Monitoring economic conditions in 2. Cargo traders
tariffs and shipping cost completion reports; the area. 3. Passengers
logistic costs; reduced by --- Average Monthly progress 4. Private
increased KES travel time reports; Favourable working Vehicle owners.
reliability Decrease in reduced by Data from traffic conditions for works to
and cost of 15 – 30 control unit; continue without
accessibility movement of minutes Vehicles interruptions.
of vehicular cargo by road movement on the
services in users; road The project will be
the region Volume of accepted by the
motorists and beneficiary.
non-motorized
users along
the proposed
OUTCOMES

road corridor;
Average
number of the
people who
can access

7
 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS MEANS OF ASSUMPTIONS/RISKS
RESULTS CHAIN and MITIGATION BENEFICIARY
INDICATOR Baseline Target VERIFICATION
MEASURES
reliable and
affordable
public
transport
services.
Reduction of % number of After project Continued Field surveys; Assumption: there will Motorists
travel time; new road Completion smooth Observation; smooth flow of traffic
congestion users using traffic flow M&E reports throughout the project
and the road in the next Number of period and after;
accidents % reduction in 10 years; vehicle on the Risks: The increased
along the travel time Travel time road number of motorized
proposed % increase in to reduce by Traffic and crash vehicles proving to be
road automobile 25 - 50% Reports dangerous for those
activities; after the Ministry of who walk, cycle and use
% decrease in completion Health records motorcycles.
accident rate of the on road crash Increase in accidents
along the road project. casualties
section; Increase in
Improved time automobile
taken to activities by
access health 40% within
and education 3 years of
facilities, and construction
amenities completion.
Accidents
reduced by
50% in the
second
year.
Time taken
by
ambulance
and school
children to

8
 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS MEANS OF ASSUMPTIONS/RISKS
RESULTS CHAIN and MITIGATION BENEFICIARY
INDICATOR Baseline Target VERIFICATION
MEASURES
reach their
facilities
reduced by
half
Increased Improved After project Reduction NEMA reports; Assumption : that the Residence of
sensitization garbage Completion in air County County governments the County and
on disposal and pollution government will handle the garbage the
Environment waste elements by disposal collection and disposal neighbouring
al Hazards management the year management effectively and towns
Management along the 2030 reports efficiently,
proposed road;
Improved
quality of air
along the
proposed road
due to
reduction in
carbon
emissions and
air pollution

Construction Kms of road During Complete Project Progress Risk: delays in Residents of the
OUTPUTS

of ------------- constructed construction (37/39/111)- reports and implementing RAP county;

km of road phase KMs of road disbursement KeNHA to delay Motorists;
by 2028 and financial payments to the Business men
reports from contractor and women
KeNHA;
Beautificatio Number of Plant There will be no trees The County and
n and trees planted (1,000)trees uprooted its residents
planting of by 2028
---------------
trees along
the proposed
road.

9
 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS MEANS OF ASSUMPTIONS/RISKS
RESULTS CHAIN and MITIGATION BENEFICIARY
INDICATOR Baseline Target VERIFICATION
MEASURES
Resettlement Number of Before project 100% RAP consultative Assumption: all Business women
and facilities to be commencemen completion meetings facilities, services and and men;
rehabilitation relocated and t. of Disbursement PAPs will be relocated County
of facilities rehabilitated; resettlemen and financial early enough before the Municipality
Number of t and MPR reports project starts
PAPs relocated rehabilitatio from KeNHA; Risk: KeNHA and
along the n and Survey reports; Ministry of Housing to
project construction County delay in the
corridor; of market Government disbursement of funds
Number of stalls by the Reports on to the affected persons
PAPs end of the displacement and and
compensated; project. compensation; facilities/organization;
Number of Project Refusal of the PAPs to
people Completion relocate
encroaching in Reports. Mitigation: KeNHA to
close commence the process
proximity to ahead of project start.
the road
HIV/AIDS Number of During the Conduct HIV/AIDs Assumption: Project Construction
STI, road construction implementatio HIV/AIDS & information staff to be give Workers;
safety and workers and n phase STIs disseminated at protective gear; Members of the
gender volunteers awareness construction community;
sensitization attending the at least sites Project Staff.
training. after every
Trained six month Contractor's
personnel on during the reports;
the matter project Project progress
period reports
Technical Strengthen the Capacity Monthly and More investment in KeNHA
support traffic building Annual Project capacity building to
management consultanci Progress reports; strengthen KeNHA’s
capacity of es traffic management
KeNHA completed capacity.

10
 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS MEANS OF ASSUMPTIONS/RISKS
RESULTS CHAIN and MITIGATION BENEFICIARY
INDICATOR Baseline Target VERIFICATION
MEASURES
Increase by ----
KeNHA’s
capacity to
Maintain and
Upgrade roads
Training and Number of Training at Number of male Risk: low turn-up of Men and women
skill youth trained least 50% of and female artisans to be trained; equipped with
development in artisan female artisans enrolled; lack of qualified artisan skills
courses youth by the Project Progress personnel to train the
Number of end of 2028 reports artisans
youth enrolled Record from
on internship TVET/VTI Low turnout of interns
program to be trained; Lack of
qualified personnel to
train the interns; Covid
19 restrictions

COMPONENTS INPUTS
I. Civil Works: Construction of --------------------KMs of the Total Cost with contingencies:
following roads: KES--------------- million:
KEY ACTIVITIES

1. Gilgil – Nyahururu - Rumuruti (A4) - @

KES------------Million
1. Bank loan :KES --------------------Millions
2. Kiarutara – Gatanga – Thika (B20); - @
KES------------Million
2. Grant: KES------------------Millions.
3. Buuri – Meru- Ena (B65) --@ KES------------
Million
3. Government of Kenya :KES------------
II. Procurement of Consultancies : Design ; Construction Millions
supervision; Technical Audit services; Maintenance - @
KES---------Million
III. Technical assistance in Traffic Management – -@
KES--------------------million

11
 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS MEANS OF ASSUMPTIONS/RISKS
RESULTS CHAIN and MITIGATION BENEFICIARY
INDICATOR Baseline Target VERIFICATION
MEASURES
IV. Relocation of facilities, compensation, and resettlement of
PAPs --@ KES------------Million
V. Training and skills development –KES-----------------million
VI. Signage; Tree planting and beautification - @ KES
-------------------------- million

12
13