The introduction of NCC Vol 2 Part H8 Livable housing design and the Livable Housing Design Standard has been widely criticised as tokenistic, ineffective and net negative:

Unlike the actual AS 1428.1 - Design for access and mobility, the Livable Housing Design Standard document is poorly written, dramatically increasing construction costs, wastage, waterproofing risk and site coverage, without any guarantee of actual accessibility: Floor plan layout, door design and spatial organisation can, and often do, make dwellings inaccessible to people with disabilities, despite nominal compliance with Part H8. 

"Not all new houses look like the authors of the Standard imagine: a sprawling floor plan on a concrete slab, as pictured on the Standard's front page. In fact in Tasmania, very few do."

While other states (NSW, WA) rejected the misguided Standard, Tasmanian CBOS's Director’s Determination regarding the application of Part H8 (Livable Housing provisions) of the NCC does little to alleviate the problem, even failing to exempt tiny houses, granny flats and small homes.

In other words, the Livable Housing Design Standard is worsening our environmental and housing crises, without achieving its stated objectives. In yet other words, Livable Housing Design Standard is an abject regulatory failure that should have never happened.

1. We, the undersigned, urgently request that the ABCB and/or Tasmanian Department of Justice abolish Part H8 Livable housing design and Livable Housing Design Standard.
2. We ask that instead, compliance with AS 1428.1 - Design for access and mobility is encouraged by incentives provided to home builders.
3. Most immediately, we ask that modest, economical homes (i.e. those with floor area not exceeding 120 sqm) are exempted under section 2. Exemption of certain Class 1a buildings in the Director’s Determination.

With kind regards

Jiri Lev, et al.

PO Box 1, Launceston TAS 7250
Registered Architect 1269