The Bhutanese Leading the way.
The Bhutanese (TB): It has been nearly two years since the Thimphu Design Code came into effect in late 2024. How far along is the implementation roadmap, and what major milestones have been achieved across the core, urban, and suburban zones thus far?
Department of Human Settlement (DHS): The Design Code is a hybrid of the conventional prescriptive codes and the form-based codes, and it is currently being implemented to guide and regulate the developments within the Thimphu Structure Plan (TSP) area. To streamline the process, the Construction Approval System (CAS) has incorporated three separate stages of development applications, namely Planning, Design and Development. This resolve planning issues at the early stage of the development application rather than changing the whole engineering drawings at the last stage if the planning issues arise. TSP being a regeneration plan, achieving its major milestones will depend on the plan being implemented as intended.
The implementation of the TSP priority projects has started with development of parks like Olakha Park and Ecological parks. Similarly, the upgrade of Changlam and the Expressway are in the pipeline.
TB: The code introduced a phased permitting process starting with a planning permit, followed by design and construction permits. How streamlined is this digital workflow today, and what is the average turnaround time for applicants?
DHS: The digital workflow is designed to streamline the phased permitting process, with defined turnaround times (TAT) at each stage. The average TAT for a Planning Permit is 7 days, while the combined TAT for Design and Construction Permits is 20 days. These timelines are intended to ensure a timely and efficient development approval process.
TB: We have received feedback regarding the operation and maintenance of online portal services. What steps are being taken to resolve system downtimes, technical glitches, or processing bottlenecks faced by architects and landowners?
DHS: Currently, the online portal system is being utilised by designers, property owners, and approving authorities and is functioning fairly smoothly. However, minor issues and technical glitches do arise from time to time. The DHS is working closely with developers and relevant stakeholders to identify and resolve these issues and ensure the system continues to function effectively.
4. How many appeals have been lodged, and what are the most common points of contention between developers and municipal authorities?
DHS: Aggrieved applicants cannot appeal directly to the MoIT. Where a development proposal is unique or not covered under the provisions of the Design Code, the applicant may appeal to the Technical Committee through the implementing agency for consideration. However, in practice, a number of aggrieved applicants have approached the ministry’s management seeking amendments to the provisions or permission for higher development rights.
TB. The restriction on minimum plot sizes (13 to 15 decimals, or higher in unpooled areas) has limited the ability of families to subdivide land for inheritance or sale. Is the government reviewing these thresholds?
DHS: The TSP and its accompanying documents are currently in the second year of implementation, and the government is taking stock of the issues arising during implementation. However, the government is not currently reviewing or amending the provisions of the TSP. As per the established process, the TSP will undergo a comprehensive cyclical review after five years of implementation, at which point the relevant provisions may be reviewed and updated as necessary.
It is also important to clarify that the minimum plot-size requirements apply primarily when land is subdivided into separate plots. They do not apply in the same way to the transfer or development of an existing plot or to land reconfiguration. Where physical subdivision is not possible, affected families may explore legally permitted arrangements such as joint ownership, reconfiguration, consolidation or comprehensive development, depending on the circumstances of the land.
TB: Grievances persist regarding the mandatory, and often costly, geotechnical assessments required for approvals, especially in sloped or reclassified zones. Is the government considering any financial or technical assistance to ease this burden on lower-income or rural-urban fringe landowners?
DHS: The requirement for geotechnical investigations (GI) applies to specific zones that have been identified as high-risk areas through higher-level geotechnical assessments. This requirement is intended to ensure the safety of residents, developers, and the proposed developments. The process also provides opportunities for the experts to assess the site-specific issues so that mitigation actions are already thought about during the design phase.
TB: Landowners in areas down zoned into suburban or rural categories (such as parts of Changbangdhu, Upper Mothithang or generally upper slopes) have raised concerns over potential drops in land value and restricted building heights. How is the government addressing these grievances, and are there compensation or equity mechanisms being discussed?
DHS: Currently, there is no compensation mechanism for the down zoned areas. The down zoning is based on the planning interventions such as carrying capacity and infrastructure provision capability from the ministry’s side. The MoIT remains mindful of the concerns raised by affected landowners and continues to review planning approaches to ensure that development regulations are balanced with the interests and welfare of communities in these areas.
TB: The enforcement of side and back setbacks measured from the most protruding structure (such as balconies or Rabsel walls) has effectively reduced usable building space. Has the department evaluated feedback on this rule, or is there room for architectural flexibility?
DHS: Through the application of FAR, developers have flexibility to explore different building forms and configurations while complying with the prescribed development rights. The FAR calculation also excludes the non-usable spaces and FAR includes only the carpeted area. Therefore gross building footprint is comparable with erstwhile coverage regulation. The setback provisions, including the measurement from the most protruding elements of a building, are intended to balance development potential with the quality of the built environment.
The differentiated setback requirements were introduced to improve the privacy, natural ventilation, and access to daylight and sunlight for residents, while avoiding significant compromise to the overall permissible built-up area. Therefore, architectural flexibility can still be achieved through creative building forms and the distribution of the allowable FAR within the plot, while maintaining the required setbacks.
TB: One of the main goals of the code was to densify the core and Major Employment Areas while discouraging sprawl. Are we seeing a measurable shift in commercial decentralization toward areas like North and South Thimphu, or are people still crowding the city center?
DHS: It is still at an early stage of the Thimphu City-wide Design Code implementation to observe any significant or measurable changes in the spatial distribution of commercial activities. The intended outcomes of the Code, including the densification of the urban core and Major Employment Areas (MEAs), while discouraging further urban sprawl, are expected to materialize gradually over time.
The services are already decentralized and distributed through creation of major employment areas and upgradation of uses in the north and the south. The sub district zones in the North(Jungshina-Hejo) and South (Olakha) are allowed to have higher density built form and more uses to achieve the vision of the plan.
TB: How successfully is the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) system working in practice? Are builders utilizing the flexibility to build wider and lower, or are economic pressures still pushing everyone toward maximum vertical heights?
DHS: The FAR system is working reasonably well as a flexibility tool, but in practice its flexibility does not necessarily mean that builders will choose wider, lower buildings. FAR regulates the total amount of floor space rather than simply prescribing a particular building shape, so theoretically a developer can achieve the same FAR through a wider, lower building or a narrower, taller one. This is one of the main advantages of the system.
TB: Based on the lessons learned during the initial execution phase, what major changes or fine-tuning does the Department plan to introduce to the Design Code in the near future?
DHS: At present, the ministry does not have any immediate plans to amend the Design Code. However, the ministry remains committed to monitoring its implementation closely and will continue to consider necessary refinements based on practical experience and feedback as the need arises.
