2/17/2015 Revised 

Method Of Levying Civil Penalty For Retention Of Unauthorised Works Or Use For Non­Conservation Developments

WITHIN URA WEBSITE

ABOUT US CAREERS MEDIA ROOM CIRCULARS E-SERVICES PUBLICATIONS MORE CONTACT INFO FAQS FEEDBACK SITEMAP

Plans & Maps TOOLS FOR Professionals TOOLS FOR THE Public
Circulars SUBSCRIBE

PRINT

Revised Method Of Levying Civil Penalty For Retention Of

Unauthorised Works Or Use For Non-Conservation
Developments
Fax: 6227 4792

Circular No: URA/PB/2009/18-DCG

Our Ref: DC/ADMIN/CIRCULAR/PB_09
Date: 03 Aug 2009

CIRCULAR TO PROFESSIONAL INSTITUTES

Who should know

Property owners, developers, business operators and Qualified Persons (QP)

Effective date
With effect from 3 August 2009

Revised Method Of Levying Civil Penalty For Retention Of Unauthorised Works Or Use For Non-Conservation
Developments

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

Band Total floor area occupied by unauthorised retention works Civil Penalty Fees to be
Imposed
(as multiple of Processing
Fee)

a. Without b. With
enforcement enforcement
records record 

2 2
http://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/circulars/2009/aug/dc09­18.aspx 1/2
2/17/2015 Revised Method Of Levying Civil Penalty For Retention Of Unauthorised Works Or Use For Non­Conservation Developments

I  0m2 to ≤ 50m2* 1x 2x

II 50m2 to ≤ 150m2 4x 8x

III >150m2 6x 12x

For cases involving applicant trying to deceive the authorities (eg: by Up to 25 X or $150,000
concealing works during inspections) regardless of extent of retention whichever is lower
works **

 * Civil penalty imposed for Change of Use cases & cases granted on Temporary Permission will be
classified under Band I.
** Actual amount of civil penalty shall be determined by the Competent Authority, taking into account the
circumstances of the case.

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.

Thank you.

HAN YONG HOE

GROUP DIRECTOR (DEVELOPMENT CONTROL)
for CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Back To Prev

CIRCULARS

Privacy Statement Rate This Website

Last updated on: 16 Feb 2015
© 2015 Urban Redevelopment Authority
Terms of Use Site Requirements

http://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/circulars/2009/aug/dc09­18.aspx 2/2