Since the original DA indicates 60 units were proposed for this site, and it's now down to 56, why the need to modify internal floor heights and internal floor to ceiling heights? Unless the intention is to claw back space to add back extra units?
To meet the definition "habitable room" the Building Code of Australia used to specify a minimum 2.4m internal ceiling height (excluding kitchens, stairwells etc). Assuming that's still the case, reducing ceiling heights therefore renders the space "uninhabitable".
Presumably the Code is intended to protect people from living in pokey, low ceiling boxes.
Of course, the proposed amendments might mean a cheaper build and the words "affordable housing" may be a clue.
Council should reject the proposed amendments.
This comment has been sent but has not yet been acknowledged by the email server of Canterbury-Bankstown Council (Canterbury). This can happen if our email system or Canterbury-Bankstown Council (Canterbury)'s email system or network has a temporary problem.
Please check back in an hour or so. If the status hasn't changed you can contact us to figure out what's going on.
