Analysis of Heritage Footprint in Towns along the Kenya Railway
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 19569693 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Allan Obatsa, Mugwima Njuguna (0000-0002-1878-6457), Gerryshom Munala, Ephraim W Wahome (0000-0001-8601-2413), Dominic Kinyua Gitau (0000-0003-0596-2287) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 13 |
| Issue | 02 |
| Pages | 149-170 |
| Publication date | 2025-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Current Urban Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2328-4900 • E-ISSN: 2328-4919 |
| Publisher | Scientific Research Publishing, Inc. (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.4236/cus.2025.132007 |
| OpenAlex | W4411741691 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 35 |
The origins of urban development and the colonial railroad in Kenya’s hinterland are inseparable. As a consequence of their history, the urban areas encompass important heritage areas that can be methodologically determined, quantified and conserved for posterity. Despite its historic significance, townscape heritage around railway stations is at threat of loss since it remains unidentified, unmapped and without a common methodological conservation approach. This paper aims to identify and map out townscape heritage along the Kenya Railway. A mixed methods approach and a cross-sectional research design were adopted. Three towns; Limuru, Naivasha and Molo with larger precinct areas were selected through homogenous sampling. A precinct around the railway station was delimited for each of the towns and data was collected through observation guides and interview schedules. A spatial analysis was done for the townscapes to provide a visual illustration of the footprints of the different towns. A combined inventory of 28 townscape heritage areas; nine for Limuru, nine for Naivasha and ten for Molo were identified by a survey. The values cited directly during the identification of significant places of heritage in the order of importance are economic, age, historic, function and identity. Findings revealed a combined heritage inventory of 28; nine in Limuru, nine in Naivasha and ten in Molo, with a heritage footprint of 10.3%, 8.4% and 19.4% respectively. Buildings are the most predominant townscape heritage. It was concluded that there is indeed heritage that is considered significant by residents. Recommendations include: mainstreaming heritage surveys and conservation planning as well as documenting townscape heritage through inventories
Archaeology · Civil engineering · Environmental planning · Footprint · Geography · Engineering · Global Maritime and Colonial Histories
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |