Understanding Planning Process
hi, my name is Lau. I'm sitting for this year's part3 exam. I'd be grateful if you could explain to me the following question that i have in mind.
Say a land title has on it land use category of "building", but doesn't have any express conditions stating whether it has to be a "residential" or "commercial" building. In that case, can a condominium block(residential) be built on a commercial podium?
Can that happen? Or is it the responsibility of the land owner to apply for the inclusion of a specific express condition (residential or commercial) before proceeding with development.
Thanks. Would really appreciate your help.
ck lau kclau@hotmail.com
The email I received above is quite typical of questions or queries I received from candidates, developers and even architects. It is also a popular exam question. The nature of the question reveal the need for better understanding of the planning process and the need to avoid confusion between NLC (National Land Code) and Planning Act.
To answer the question, I’ll try to explain the difference and the relationship between NLP and Planning Act.
The NLP in a nut-shell, tells of land use category. It can only be Agriculture, Building or Industry. Many misunderstood the categories and include ‘commercial’ or ‘tourism’ in it.
The express condition in most likelihood states the type of agriculture, building or industry that can or cannot be developed on that land. It is also likely to be silent. Some examples; the land can be used for building a single house only for a building land; or, ‘not to allow any Hevea Brasiliensis (rubber trees) to grow on the land for an agricultural category land.
Going back to the question, we see that the land is in ‘Building’ category. It technically means that any building can be built on the land. But, no building can be built unless it was approved in planning (obtained a Development Order), and subsequently received an approved building plan.
Whatever type or mix of the building to be built can only be determined by planning control process.
In planning control, two reference documents are the Structure Plan (Pelan Struktur) and Local Area Plan otherwise popularly known as RT (Rancangan Tempatan). Unlike the Structure Plan, which is general and deals mostly with policies, the RT is normally quite specific as to the permissible development content. One can see in what zone his land is.
On whether a residential can be built on a commercial podium.
The straight answer is yes. A residence can be built on building land and a commercial complex can be built on building land. A residential can be built on a commercial podium because both are buildings. I do not see any restriction as far as NLC is concerned. The restriction if any may come in the zoning of the RT. Such proposals are rather advanced for zoning plan that were normally straightforward or single-minded. What an architect needs to do is to apply for a planning approval and obtain a DO.
The real complication of building a residential on a commercial apartment is more in the aspects of quit rent, tax and tariff and also in the aspects of property classification. Such residences normally have to pay commercial rather than residential rate for utilities, commercial quit rent rate and until recently not considered as a ‘housing’ under the Housing Development Act. Buyers of such residence are not protected, as a house purchaser normally would be under the Act. This may soon change with the Act now undergoing further amendment.
There is no need for the owner to apply for an express condition to be added to the land title. It is rare that an owner would ask for an express condition to be stated when a ‘nil’ can open to more possibilities. The real problem occurs when the express condition prohibit a certain type of building or allow a specific kind of building. For example, it would be difficult to develop a commercial building on a land expressly designated for residential only. I say difficult because it is not impossible. If the land is expressly designated for residential only but the owner wants to develop a shopping complex on it, he must first apply for lifting of the restriction from PTG. This would normally require a development approval.
I suggest to architects not to be overly rigid but creative in interpreting the land use category, zoning control etc. Many new developments were carved out of creative interpretation and the ability to convincingly present new ideas.
Say a land title has on it land use category of "building", but doesn't have any express conditions stating whether it has to be a "residential" or "commercial" building. In that case, can a condominium block(residential) be built on a commercial podium?
Can that happen? Or is it the responsibility of the land owner to apply for the inclusion of a specific express condition (residential or commercial) before proceeding with development.
Thanks. Would really appreciate your help.
ck lau kclau@hotmail.com
The email I received above is quite typical of questions or queries I received from candidates, developers and even architects. It is also a popular exam question. The nature of the question reveal the need for better understanding of the planning process and the need to avoid confusion between NLC (National Land Code) and Planning Act.
To answer the question, I’ll try to explain the difference and the relationship between NLP and Planning Act.
The NLP in a nut-shell, tells of land use category. It can only be Agriculture, Building or Industry. Many misunderstood the categories and include ‘commercial’ or ‘tourism’ in it.
The express condition in most likelihood states the type of agriculture, building or industry that can or cannot be developed on that land. It is also likely to be silent. Some examples; the land can be used for building a single house only for a building land; or, ‘not to allow any Hevea Brasiliensis (rubber trees) to grow on the land for an agricultural category land.
Going back to the question, we see that the land is in ‘Building’ category. It technically means that any building can be built on the land. But, no building can be built unless it was approved in planning (obtained a Development Order), and subsequently received an approved building plan.
Whatever type or mix of the building to be built can only be determined by planning control process.
In planning control, two reference documents are the Structure Plan (Pelan Struktur) and Local Area Plan otherwise popularly known as RT (Rancangan Tempatan). Unlike the Structure Plan, which is general and deals mostly with policies, the RT is normally quite specific as to the permissible development content. One can see in what zone his land is.
On whether a residential can be built on a commercial podium.
The straight answer is yes. A residence can be built on building land and a commercial complex can be built on building land. A residential can be built on a commercial podium because both are buildings. I do not see any restriction as far as NLC is concerned. The restriction if any may come in the zoning of the RT. Such proposals are rather advanced for zoning plan that were normally straightforward or single-minded. What an architect needs to do is to apply for a planning approval and obtain a DO.
The real complication of building a residential on a commercial apartment is more in the aspects of quit rent, tax and tariff and also in the aspects of property classification. Such residences normally have to pay commercial rather than residential rate for utilities, commercial quit rent rate and until recently not considered as a ‘housing’ under the Housing Development Act. Buyers of such residence are not protected, as a house purchaser normally would be under the Act. This may soon change with the Act now undergoing further amendment.
There is no need for the owner to apply for an express condition to be added to the land title. It is rare that an owner would ask for an express condition to be stated when a ‘nil’ can open to more possibilities. The real problem occurs when the express condition prohibit a certain type of building or allow a specific kind of building. For example, it would be difficult to develop a commercial building on a land expressly designated for residential only. I say difficult because it is not impossible. If the land is expressly designated for residential only but the owner wants to develop a shopping complex on it, he must first apply for lifting of the restriction from PTG. This would normally require a development approval.
I suggest to architects not to be overly rigid but creative in interpreting the land use category, zoning control etc. Many new developments were carved out of creative interpretation and the ability to convincingly present new ideas.
posted by discussion@3 @ 7/12/2007 10:01:00 PM
5 comments
