Roof Terrace Option?

[markie 0]

Hi All. Need some help from the Gurus here. I recently bought a brand new semi detached that is 4 storeys high and comes with an Open to sky Roof Terrace.

I am thinking of ways to legally have some shelter in place so that i can make use of that space. 

 

Edited June 25, 2021 by markie
Spelling

[snoozee 98]

no way you can do it legally if the house is already at its maximum allowed height limit
URA regulation states this "Pavilion, canopy or trellis may be allowed over the roof terrace provided it is located within the permissible building envelope."

since you have a lift shaft going all the way up to the roof, you may be able to add a shelter provided it is within the building envelope.

the question is your 4 storey house is a 3 storey house with mezzanine in a 3 storey landed residential zone or a 1.4 plot ratio zone or not. if yes, then you could add the shelter. but consult a PE as you will need to know what is the structural loading allowed for what you want to construct.

 

Edited June 25, 2021 by snoozee

[markie 0]

Thanks Snoozee for ur quick reply! I have added some pictures for better illustration 

I see my immediate neighbour manage to do a sloping roof terrace 2nd picture.. i wonder if i can do the same? Or am i just going to have to settle on outdoor trellis pavilion.. etc

[snoozee 98]

your neighbour's sloping roof is done to comply with the requirements to be within the building envelope.

judging by the photo, your lift shaft is at or near the 3.5m setback line for the building envelope for the rear already. so if you want to add anything it will be like the slope of your neighbour's house or be below the height of the roof line such that you can go a bit more to the back. basically your neighbour has show you the allowed area you can built for the back already. for the front, basically you need to measure 3.5 from the front edge to know where is the limit you can build your shelter. though you could cheat a bit by adding 1m of additional roof eave but any enclosure must be at or before the 3.5m line

[3Cube 9]

The Architect that design & endorse the authorities approved plan for your property would have design shelter in if it is allowed under the authorities regulations & design guidelines.

 

What I'm about to suggest is NOT LEGALLY ALLOWED but easy to remove when instructed by authorities to do so.

Or you could just install a retractable shelter or just have some picnic umbrellas with tables & chairs. Not exactly aesthetically pleasing.

Other than this, there is nothing you can do legally.

Similarly as in my post in another thread extracted as follows:

 

Upon enlargement of your picture, you should note the words "For maintenance only".

There is a reason for this indication on Architectural plans as submitted & approved by the authorities..

As extracted from URA website under the link "GFA":

 

For development control purpose, Singapore uses a Gross Floor Area (GFA) system to work out the bulk and intensity of a development. The Gross Plot Ratio (GPR) for a specific development site is defined as the ratio of the GFA of a building to its site or plot area¹ . The allowable GPR of a development is guided by the GPR specified in the Master Plan (MP). 

This GFA handbook explains which area or space of a development is included or excluded from GFA for development control purpose. As a general principle, all covered floor area of a development and all uncovered area used for commercial purposes are included as GFA, unless otherwise exempted. This is regardless of whether the spaces are accessible or usable. 

GFA is the total area of covered floor space measured between the centre line of party walls, including the thickness of external walls but excluding voids.   

 

So likely in your case, if you cover that portion of your property. That is "adding" GFA without approval. This does not have anything to do with setback.

The best person to answer this will be your Architect, who is the sole qualified person (as define by the Authorities) in charge of calculating Plot Ratio, GFA, etc followed by the endorsement & submission. Interior Designer, Professional Engineer, Builder is not involved in this aspect.

 

Go to URA website & you can have all the information.

[snoozee 98]

correct me if i'm wrong but i don't think there is a limit on GFA for private landed houses unless it is a strata housing or bunglows where a site coverage percentage applies. if this is indeed a strata housing, i don't think the neighbour would be able to cover up the roof area already since there is a MCST to go through.

 

Edited June 25, 2021 by snoozee

[3Cube 9]

51 minutes ago, snoozee said:

correct me if i'm wrong but i don't think there is a limit on GFA for private landed houses unless it is a strata housing or bunglows where a site coverage percentage applies. if this is indeed a strata housing, i don't think the neighbour would be able to cover up the roof area already since there is a MCST to go through.

also i don't see the words "for maintenance only" even after zooming in the photo 400 percent. if the roof terrace is only allowed for maintenance, i don't think any architect would design for the lift to go all the way up already.

You didn't notice before this I said

"Similarly as in my post in another thread extracted as follows:"

Please read before comment.

All architectural plain contains a site plan with a GFA calculation which is required as part of Architect's declariration, & submission.

Edited June 25, 2021 by 3Cube
spelling

[markie 0]

Thsnks. Will speak to an architect! 

[snoozee 98]

1 hour ago, 3Cube said:

You didn't notice before this I said

"Similarly as in my post in another thread extracted as follows:"

Please read before comment.

All architectural plain contains a site plan with a GFA calculation which is required as part of Architect's declariration, & submission.

I missed out on your “in another post” which is why I amended my original post after reading your posting again.

You were implying that TS can’t add any sheltered areas on the roof terrace due to GFA limitations which is wrong since GFA limitations are not apply for landed residential houses except detached houses for site coverage.

original architect may have designed the attic as an open roof terrace and this was approved by URA. But this doesn’t mean that new owner cannot apply to URA to build to enclose the open roof terrace as long as all planning regulations are adhered to. 

[3Cube 9]

1 hour ago, snoozee said:

I missed out on your “in another post” which is why I amended my original post after reading your posting again.

You were implying that TS can’t add any sheltered areas on the roof terrace due to GFA limitations which is wrong since GFA limitations are not apply for landed residential houses except detached houses for site coverage.

original architect may have designed the attic as an open roof terrace and this was approved by URA. But this doesn’t mean that new owner cannot apply to URA to build to enclose the open roof terrace as long as all planning regulations are adhered to. 

Go to current URA website & see again.

 

There is a statement on GFA (Go to URA site, Guideline, Development Control, Residential Handbook, Semi-Detached Houses, Introduction):

"The permissible Gross Floor Area (GFA) for landed housing is resultant of the allowable building height and envelope."

The statement is same for Bungalow (Detached House) & Terrace.

 

For Strata Landed:

"A strata landed development site may have a mix of bungalows, semi-detached houses and terrace houses occupying a common development site with shared communal facilities and a single vehicular access point. The building footprint of each strata landed unit shall have minimum ground contact of 50sqm. All other requirements are guided by the envelope control guidelines and respective parameters for the relevant landed housing type."

 

Hence, it's implied if your property is a semi-D or a terrace or bungalow within a Strata Landed, the GFA statement shall be applicable.

 

If GFA is not applicable, then why the statement by URA in the first place.

Also why the word permissible??

 

My understanding is that plot ratio is "relaxed" since the various height control, envelope, requirement, etc would establish the allowable GFA.

Edited June 25, 2021 by 3Cube
added words

[snoozee 98]

4 hours ago, 3Cube said:

The Architect that design & endorse the authorities approved plan for your property would have design shelter in if it is allowed under the authorities regulations & design guidelines.

 

your this sentence and your subsequent references to GFA is implying that additional shelter is not allowed to be built for the house because of GFA limitations.

if the house was built based on envelop control guidelines and architect had designed the house to have a roof terrace instead of and enclosed attic, it doesn't mean that URA doesn't allow it due to GFA reasons. and if the new owner choses to convert the open roof terrace to an enclosed attic, as long as the enclosed attic area falls within the building envelope, I don't think URA will object even if this results in an increase of GFA for the house.

the word "permissible" would most likely mean what URA permits/allows the developer to do based on their guidelines. in a standard 2 storey landed housing zone, a terrace house will have the permissible GFA of the 2 storeys and the attic floor. But if a developer decides to insert a mezzanine floor, it is till considered as permissible GFA since suitablly sized mezzanine floors are allowed under envelope control now. But if the developer tries to put in 3 storeys plus attic in a 2 storey landed housing zone, this will become not permissible as it doesn't fulfill URA's guidelines.

for strata landed housing, industrial, commercial buildings and other building types, the GFA would have different requirements and again based on what URA permits.

[3Cube 9]

25 minutes ago, snoozee said:

your this sentence and your subsequent references to GFA is implying that additional shelter is not allowed to be built for the house because of GFA limitations.

if the house was built based on envelop control guidelines and architect had designed the house to have a roof terrace instead of and enclosed attic, it doesn't mean that URA doesn't allow it due to GFA reasons. and if the new owner choses to convert the open roof terrace to an enclosed attic, as long as the enclosed attic area falls within the building envelope, I don't think URA will object even if this results in an increase of GFA for the house.

the word "permissible" would most likely mean what URA permits/allows the developer to do based on their guidelines. in a standard 2 storey landed housing zone, a terrace house will have the permissible GFA of the 2 storeys and the attic floor. But if a developer decides to insert a mezzanine floor, it is till considered as permissible GFA since suitablly sized mezzanine floors are allowed under envelope control now. But if the developer tries to put in 3 storeys plus attic in a 2 storey landed housing zone, this will become not permissible as it doesn't fulfill URA's guidelines.

for strata landed housing, industrial, commercial buildings and other building types, the GFA would have different requirements and again based on what URA permits.

I strongly suggest you chat with the officer or any architect.

I have personally involved in physical drawing / drafting of plans as this is my job, aside from other thing such as the construction. Another words, all the way from no plans to TOP, & for many project over 25 years, noting all the updated regulations over the years.

Not trying to argue but just trying to correct the understanding.

[snoozee 98]

15 minutes ago, 3Cube said:

I strongly suggest you chat with the officer or any architect.

I have personally involved in physical drawing / drafting of plans as this is my job, aside from other thing such as the construction. Another words, all the way from no plans to TOP, & for many project over 25 years, noting all the updated regulations over the years.

Not trying to argue but just trying to correct the understanding.

I'm sure you are very experienced in your job.

Anyone can have their own interpretation of the regulations but ultimately URA is the one to decide what can or cannot be done. You and I can spar over this until the cows come home but there will be no outcome since you and I are not working as a URA planner to approve/reject this. 

Anyway TS has mentioned he will consult an architect so he will have his confirmation from a qualified person.

And oh, I has spoken to an architect to confirm my understandings was correct before typing my last posting.

[markie 0]

Thanks both for taking time to reply my query. Just for clarity, I stay in a pure landed (not strata house). 

I did some basic research and googling and looking at my immediate neighbours.. it does feel like I have a case for fully enclosing my roof attic as long as the design fit within the allowable building enveloped. i.e slope design towards front and back as Snoozee suggested

That said.. I could be wrong and there are other considerations in place that 3cube suggested. Will check with a few experts on this topic but you both have been very helpful .. super appreciated

 

[yoongf 11]

There is no GFA limit for landed properties, which is limited by the envelope boundaries.

However, the original developer that sub divided the area into multiple plots have to pay Development Charges to enhance the land from the original baseline GFA to the proposed GFA. DC rates are typically half the market land psf, not a small sum. 

As such, the original developer will not attempt to build to the max envelope, since the selling price for landed is typically based on land psf.