Objective

To inform the industry of the revised method of levying civil penalty for non-conservation developments.

Background

1. Under Section 34 of the Planning Act (Cap 232, 1998 Edition), unauthorised works/ uses that comply with planning requirements may be given planning permission subject to the payment of civil penalty up to a maximum of 50 times the processing fee or $150,000 (whichever is lower).
2. Currently, the civil penalty levied for non-conservation development is differentiated by enforcement records and application type (ie: Change of use, Additions & alterations). For unauthorised retention of new erection and reconstruction of buildings, a civil penalty up to 25 times the processing fees or $150,000 (whichever is lower) may be imposed. (Refer to Circular No. URA/PB/2003/42-DCD dated 1 Dec 2003).
3. The current civil penalty guidelines do not take into consideration the extent of unauthorised works to be retained. As it is equitable to calibrate civil penalty according to the amount of unauthorised works to be retained so that it can act effectively as a deterrent, URA has reviewed the civil penalty guidelines.

3-tier Band Civil Penalty

4. Under the revised guidelines, the civil penalty levied will be dependent on the amount of unauthorised retention works based on the 3 bands below (see Table 1). The guiding principle is that the greater the extent of unauthorized works to be retained, the higher the civil penalty levied. It will apply to all development application types.

Table 1 - 3-tier band civil penalty

5. Unauthorised retention works is measured and defined as the total floor area occupied by the unauthorized retention works. Structures such as car porches and pavilions which are currently exempted from GFA will be counted as part of the unauthorised floor area to be retained for the purposes of computing the civil penalty.
6. Civil penalty for change of use applications will be classified under Band I. Similarly, for retention cases which can be granted on temporary permission, civil penalty will be levied based on Band I regardless of the extent of unauthorized retention works due to the temporary duration.
7. For retention cases where URA is of the view that applicants were trying to deceive the authorities (eg. by concealing works during inspections or submission of false documents), a higher civil penalty of up to 25 times the processing fees or $150,000 (whichever is lower) will be imposed regardless of the extent of retention works. The circumstances and severity of the case will be taken into account when deciding on the actual amount of civil penalty to be imposed.

Implementation

8. The revised guidelines on civil penalty will apply to all new development applications [involving civil penalty] which are received on or after the date of this circular.
9. For submission purposes, the unauthorised works to be retained should be separately demarcated and the floor area clearly reflected on plans for our consideration.
10. This circular supersedes our previous Circular No. URA/PB/2003/42-DCD dated 1 Dec 2003.
11. I would appreciate it if you could convey the contents of this circular to the relevant members of your organisation. If you or your members have any queries concerning this circular, please do not hesitate to call our DCG Enquiry Line at Tel: 6223 4811 or e-mail us at ura_dcd@ura.gov.sg. We would be pleased to answer queries on this, and any other development control matter. For your information, the past circulars to the professional institutes are available from our website http://www.ura.gov.sg.