Tag Archives: BCA

Up to S$3m funding to improve energy efficiency of buildings

Developers and building owners can expect more funding from the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) to improve the energy efficiency of their buildings.

Under the enhanced Green Mark Incentive Scheme for Existing Buildings, BCA will co-fund up to 50 per cent or S$3 million of the cost of building projects.

This includes the purchase of energy-efficient equipment, such as chillers and LED lightings, the installation of the equipment and consultancy fees.

Previously, the scheme co-funded up to 35 per cent or S$1.5 million of the cost of energy-efficient equipment only.

To be eligible for the funding, one criteria applicants must meet is the Green Mark standard, a yardstick to rate the environmental sustainability of buildings in the tropics.

Owners who plan to retrofit their buildings to Green Mark Platinum standard can receive the maximum amount of funding.

Buildings rated with Green Mark GoldPlus can receive up to S$2.25 million co-funding, up from the previous S$0.5 million and those rated with Green Mark Gold can receive up to S$1.5 million, up from the previous S$0.15 million.

The S$100 million scheme was launched in 2009.

Since then, BCA has received 71 applications for an estimated S$11 million.

BCA said it considered industry feedback in raising the maximum co-funding level.

Dr John Keung, chief executive officer of BCA, said: “They were quite concerned about this initial costs. It could be anything from 5 to 10 per cent (higher) and the payback period is four years, six years, that kind of length. They believe that if funding level can be increased a bit more, it would be easier, make it more viable for them to go for the higher green building standard.”

Industry members say the increased funding will help them implement more energy-efficient features, which will result in lower electricity bills.

S Kunalen, chairman of International Plaza Management Council, said: “We can save about S$400,000 a year, which will then go towards our sinking fund, which will allow for other improvements in the building.”

To date, there are more than 1,200 green building projects, equivalent to 16 per cent of gross floor area of the buildings in Singapore.

Under the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint, unveiled in 2009, the target is to “green” 80 per cent of buildings by 2030.

Source : Channel NewsAsia – 26 Jul 2012

 

 

 

Building laws need larger scope

I read with interest the report “‘Proxy wars’ in condos” (June 11).

As many Singaporeans now reside in strata title homes, including those hived off from public housing, it is timely that the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) is reviewing the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act. This should include enlarging the scope of duties carried out by the Strata Titles Board.

For a start, it should hear cases between management councils and developers, besides hearing only cases between residents and councils.

This would free the courts for major cases that would develop the legal fraternity and Singapore as an arbitration hub, rather than be constrained by such domestic issues.

Before a development is allowed, architects are required to seek approval from the BCA. In turn, it requires the building plans to be submitted to the Fire Safety Bureau, the sewerage and drainage departments and other authorities for approval of aspects of building design of which the BCA is not the sole authority.

As the coordinating body for the final approval of building works, it could thus intervene to get sub-standard works rectified before a Temporary Occupation Permit is issued.

If ancillary works, such as swimming pools, tennis and squash courts, car park wash bays, gymnasiums and playgrounds could be sanctioned, then arbitration, if any, would be kept to a minimum.

Ancillary works that are often defective are found mostly in common areas that do not require the BCA’s approval. This is where home owners are at the short end of the stick.

Management councils now use the maintenance fund to obtain legal redress against developers that provide these sub-standard works.

This could be made unnecessary by requiring developers to obtain approval for ancillary works, too.

It is time-consuming, costly and not right to use maintenance funds to seek legal redress.

from Gilbert Tan Hee Khian

Source : Today – 2012 Jun 18