Posted on March 16, 2025 by James King and Katie Mortimer 7

Further Consideration of the Approach to Calculating Gross Floor Area

A recent decision of the Land and Environment Court considers how the definition of ‘gross floor area’ (GFA) in the Standard Instrument Local Environment Plan (Standard Instrument) operates in respect of lifts and access to car parking areas.

Gross Floor Area

GFA is defined in the Standard Instrument (and therefore nearly all local environmental plans) to relevantly mean:

‘the sum of the floor area of each floor of a building measured from the internal face of external walls, or from the internal face of walls separating the building from any other building, measured at a height of 1.4 metres above the floor, and includes—

(a) the area of a mezzanine, and

(b) habitable rooms in a basement or an attic, and

(c) any shop, auditorium, cinema, and the like, in a basement or attic,

but excludes—

(d) any area for common vertical circulation, such as lifts and stairs, and

…

(g) car parking to meet any requirements of the consent authority (including access to that car parking), and

…

(j) voids above a floor at the level of a storey or storey above.‘

A Dispute as to the Calculation of GFA

In a recent case concerning a proposed three storey dwelling house (including a basement) in Maroubra there was a dispute as to the correct calculation of GFA for the following areas:

• pedestrian access from the basement to other levels of the dwelling, including the walkway, stairs and lift;
• an area for car manoeuvring for front in, front out access; and
• all levels of the lift shaft.

The issue was important as it is GFA that determines the floor space ratio (FSR) of developments. The GFA calculation impacted whether the FSR standard was breached and a clause 4.6 request was required.

The Council argued that the pedestrian access area to the basement was not a requirement of the consent authority and the area also provided access to storage areas, meaning the area was not excluded under (g) in the definition of GFA above. The Applicant’s evidence was that the stairs and walkway provided access to the parking areas and should be excluded as part (g) of the definition does not require exclusive access.

The Council submitted that the entire area for vehicle maneuvering for front in, front out access should be included as GFA as that type of vehicular access was not a requirement of the Council. The Applicant submitted that the area provided access to car parking and it was irrelevant whether there was an express control requiring vehicles to leave in a forward direction, and therefore the area should be excluded.

In relation to the lift shaft, the Council submitted that all levels of the shaft should be included as GFA. The Applicant stated that the lifts should be excluded except for one level as they are void levels above a storey.

The Court’s Findings

The Court agreed with all of the Applicant’s submissions.

Commissioner Porter found that the walkway, stairs and lift providing access to the car parking were excluded from the GFA calculation by paragraph (g), even though they served other purposes including providing access to storage areas. The Commissioner was satisfied these areas primarily provide access to the car parking to and from the proposed dwelling.

The Commissioner also accepted that the area for vehicular maneuvering should be excluded from the GFA calculation. Porter C interpreted the “access to car parking” exception at (g) of the definition in the Standard Instrument widely, noting that the maneuvering area was part of the access required for parking.

This approach is different to the decision that we posted about here: A Reminder: The Correct Approach to Calculating Gross Floor Area, where the Court previously considered ‘access to car parking’ by reference to an area provided in the Australian Standards, and found it could not constitute the entirety of a basement.

Otherwise the Court concluded that only one level of the lift should be included in the GFA calculation. The other levels of the lift shaft were properly considered to be void areas and so were excluded from the calculation by the exclusion at (j) of the definition. The Court has taken this approach for some time. Similarly, stairs were considered to be part void and part floor space (so 50% of the total stairs provided would be considered GFA).

This decision is not binding on other Commissioners or Judges, and other cases will turn of the facts and evidence before the Court.

The case law on what is properly included and excluded from gross floor area will no doubt continue.

You can read the decision here: Keith v Randwick City Council [2025] NSWLEC 1011.

If you wish to discuss the issues raised in this post please contact Katie Mortimer on 8235 9716 or James King on 8235 9722.