After months of uncertainty over building-height regulations, property owners in Thimphu will have to wait longer for clarity on whether three-storey buildings will be permitted in areas classified as Suburban IV.
The Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport, through the Department of Human Settlement (DHS), has withdrawn an amendment that would have allowed three-storey construction in Suburban IV areas.
In a notification issued on August 19, the DHS repealed its earlier notification of April 17, 2026, which had amended the Design Code for the Thimphu Structure Plan.
The latest decision means building construction and plot-subdivision applications will continue to be processed under the previously approved Design Code until the ministry issues further instructions.
The reversal comes after the revised rules had raised expectations among property owners, particularly those seeking to make more efficient use of increasingly scarce and expensive urban land.
The April 17 notification introduced several changes to the development framework for areas within the Thimphu Structure Plan.
Among other changes, it renamed the Rural Area Type as Suburban IV, stating that the change was intended to avoid confusion with development outside the planning boundary.
It also increased the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for Suburban III and Suburban IV to 0.85 and 0.75, respectively, for standard plot sizes.
Most significantly for property owners, the amendment increased the permitted building height in Suburban IV—previously designated as Rural Area Type—to three storeys.
The amendment also introduced different categories for Suburban III and IV based on slope conditions and revised minimum plot-size requirements for future subdivisions.
The changes were viewed by some residents as an opportunity to maximise the use of existing land. An additional floor could provide more space for extended families or rental accommodation and potentially improve the financial viability of construction projects amid rising building costs.
However, the proposed relaxation has now been withdrawn. According to the DHS, the decision followed the RCUD meeting on August 17, 2026, where the broader implications of the April amendments were considered.
The department said the repeal was based on concerns regarding the “larger implications” of the amended provisions for the principles, objectives and vision of the Thimphu Structure Plan.
Following the decision, the DHS directed Thimphu Thromde and the dzongkhag administrations to apply the provisions of the approved Design Code when processing construction and plot-subdivision applications. The instruction effectively puts the April amendments on hold.
For property owners, this means the three-storey provision cannot currently be relied upon when planning or seeking approval for new construction in Suburban IV.
The withdrawal is likely to disappoint owners who had anticipated greater flexibility in developing their plots.
For some families, the ability to construct an additional floor could have helped accommodate multiple generations, provide rental units or offset substantial construction costs. Supporters of greater building flexibility have also argued that carefully regulated increases in building height could allow more efficient use of land without requiring further outward expansion.
However, building height is only one element of urban development. Any increase in permissible floors also has implications for structural safety, infrastructure capacity, parking, traffic, drainage, fire safety and the overall character and density of the city.
Importantly, the August notification does not state that three-storey construction will permanently be prohibited in Suburban IV. Instead, it repeals the April amendment and restores the previously approved Design Code pending further direction from the ministry.
Property owners therefore face a return to the earlier regulatory framework while awaiting a possible review or revised proposal.
The two notifications have also highlighted the challenges of balancing demands for greater development flexibility with long-term urban planning objectives.
For residents who had already begun considering construction based on the April changes, the withdrawal could create additional uncertainty over design, investment and project timelines.
A clearer indication from the government on the reasons behind the reversal, and whether an alternative proposal is being considered, could help address those concerns.
Sherab Dorji, Thimphu
