A fresh wave of criticism has emerged over the newly renovated State House Nairobi, with prominent architect Prof. Alfred Omenya dismissing the redesign as “plain mediocre” even as the facility continues to host high-level delegations following the Africa Forward Summit.
The State House, which recently underwent extensive renovations, now features a flat-roof design replacing the iconic red-tiled structure that had defined Kenya’s presidency for decades.
The facelift also included a redesigned pavilion, resurfaced courtyards, and updated finishes aimed at modernising the ageing facility.
However, Prof. Omenya, an internationally recognised architecture scholar and awards judge, has openly criticised the outcome. In a sharply worded statement, he questioned the architectural value of the redesign despite his global experience.
“I am a Professor of Architecture. I have been a judge for Commonwealth Association of Architects Awards, International Union of Architects Awards, Asia Architecture Awards, AAK-Crown Architecture Awards, etc. I have examined Architecture in leading universities around the world, from Harvard, through UoN to ETH-Zurich. Feel free to ignore my opinion: The New State House is plain MEDIOCRE! End,” he said.
His remarks come at a time when President William Ruto has been actively hosting several African heads of state at the refurbished premises, projecting Kenya’s diplomatic stature and regional influence.
The redesign has already sparked public debate, with critics questioning both the aesthetic direction and the cost of the project.
Government officials, however, have defended the renovations, citing structural concerns such as leaks and ageing infrastructure that required urgent intervention.
Authorities have maintained that the refurbishment followed legal procurement procedures and was necessary to upgrade a key national security installation.
Budget estimates indicate that hundreds of millions of shillings have been allocated toward the project over multiple financial years.
While the government frames the new look as a modern and functional upgrade, Omenya’s criticism adds to a growing conversation among professionals and the public about architectural identity, heritage preservation, and value for public spending.