Feb 13 2011, 10:01 PM
Think it was an unintentional design flaw for ES.......we will know once ED is completed if indeed MeH is intentionally tried to cut corners......
QUOTE(kochin @ Feb 9 2011, 08:55 AM)
from what i know, there's a minimum ceiling height for a building. if MEH don't know nevermind, a professional architect MUST know. and since drawings are submitted to council by consultants, the developer and consultants share the blame jointly.
also there's height restriction for a building. from little birds chirpings, they are saying MEH knows they can't achieve the no. of units they were hoping for and so they just charge ahead with it (by lowering ceiling height). so now they are caught with their pants down.
same goes for ED. understand they were adopting similiar strategies. paper design and actual product will surely deviate. don't know whether council will let them make the council looks like fools again or not.
This is definately not an unintentional design flaw. This is due to the greed of the developer to reap huge profit and cost saving for construction of the loft upper floor. In other words, this is call cheating. The upper floor will be constructed as part of renovation works inside the unit to form loft with a much much cheaper costs, and this additional floor area will be sold at normal floor psf rate. The upper floor structure will cost much lesser than the normal floor structure. It worked in ES, and now the same strategy will be used in ED. also there's height restriction for a building. from little birds chirpings, they are saying MEH knows they can't achieve the no. of units they were hoping for and so they just charge ahead with it (by lowering ceiling height). so now they are caught with their pants down.
same goes for ED. understand they were adopting similiar strategies. paper design and actual product will surely deviate. don't know whether council will let them make the council looks like fools again or not.
Quote
0.0202sec
0.29
7 queries
GZIP Disabled