Reply To: Regulation 503

Before requesting any support Please search the Forum First. You may find your desired answer. This will save your waiting time and will save our working hour. We may not answer the question which we have already answered. You should also read our Support Policy
#4234
Stephen Ryan
Participant

Robbo & Marcus

Thanks for your input, it is a can of worms I believe. Agree the old wording was more meaningful but was that because we were used to it and maybe had some measures / processes in place to deal with it.

Interesting you as MBS’s both consider accessibility into buildings being an amenity issue. Do you both do some / lots of these statements? If so do you have an assessment template that you use? I imagine that many of these subdivisions do not have a RBS appointed for a BP so you would do the majority of these reports / statements. I vaguely remember us having something like that at CoPP many years ago, I might follow up with them.

Despite taking the MBS hat off 10 years ago I’m not sure I would include access within the definition of amenity if you use the structure of the BCA as a guide. Amenity according to the BCA is all those things I listed above. Access to me is an issue of equity. I don’t think I’ve been tainted in those 10 years but others may disagree.

Not sure how to make reasonable provision for access to and within a building without it being compliant or having a performance solution via an “expert” access report by an appropriate person. An old two storey building with no lift is an issue.

Cheers, Steve.