The access requirements that most often need a Performance Solution in NSW

In NSW practice the same handful of access Deemed-to-Satisfy provisions keep turning into Performance Solutions: accessible unisex toilets where toilets are on more than one storey, small raised or stepped spaces such as pods and mezzanines, existing buildings where a compliant path of travel to new work is not practical, and heritage buildings. On 27 October 2026 the Australian Building Codes Board asked NCC users for exactly this list as part of simplifying the NCC. Nothing changes on site today. NCC 2022 Amendment 2 still applies in NSW until NCC 2025 starts on 1 May 2027.

What the ABCB asked for (27 October 2026)

The ABCB asked two questions: which NCC provisions are difficult to interpret or apply, and which Performance Solutions get repeated across similar projects, and whether NCC changes could reduce the need to repeat them. The call follows the 16 October 2026 ministers' agreement to modernise the NCC. It is a call for input, not a rule change. See NCC modernisation access NSW. The closing date is still to be confirmed on the ABCB page. Check the ABCB news item "Help us simplify the NCC" before contributing.

The access provisions that most often end up as Performance Solutions

In our NSW practice, the same handful of access Deemed-to-Satisfy provisions keep turning into Performance Solutions. The lead items below were confirmed from practice on 3 November 2026. Clause numbers are from NCC 2022 Amendment 2, the edition in force in NSW until 1 May 2027.

Millimetre challenges in in-situ concrete ramp gradients

This is one of the most commonly encountered Performance Solutions in our work. AS 1428.1:2021 sets a maximum ramp gradient of 1 in 14, with landings and handrails, and step ramps at a steeper gradient over a short maximum length. Those requirements are called up through NCC Part D4. Concrete takes the form of its container. There is no such thing as a perfectly constructed in-situ poured concrete ramp. Every pour has undulations and small variations in gradient. Concrete construction standards accept these as normal tolerance, usually measured as millimetres of variation over a 3 m straightedge.

A ramp can be the right length and the right height for AS 1428.1 and still have short sections steeper than the maximum gradient, offset by sections flatter than 1 in 14. AS 1428.1 is largely a pass-or-fail standard. The 2021 edition says building tolerances should be considered in design. In our practice it is reasonable to read that as accepting minor variations as long as the gradient stays within the tolerances set in the other relevant standards.

The dilemma: what happens when local sections are steeper, or the ramp averages about 1 in 12 over its length? Does it have to be demolished and rebuilt?

The argument is about equivalent fatigue between landings, not total lifting energy. Fatigue here means how hard the user must push and for how long before resting at a landing. AS 1428.1 pairs a steeper permitted gradient with a shorter run before a landing (1 in 14 up to 9 m; 1 in 10 step ramp up to 1900 mm) to limit fatigue between landings. A ramp averaging about 1 in 12 sits between those two permitted determinants, so the allowable run at 1 in 12 can be interpolated by push force.

Assumptions used in our method of reasoning: m = 120 kg (user plus manual wheelchair); g = 9.81 m/s squared; Crr = 0.015, an assumption for rolling resistance of a manual wheelchair on concrete; the user rests at each landing, so fatigue is assessed per run between landings.

Lifting energy is the same at any gradient: E = m x g x h = 120 x 9.81 x 0.643, about 757 J for a 643 mm rise. Pure lifting energy cannot justify a steeper ramp.
Gradient changes the push force: F = m x g x (G + Crr), where G is the gradient as a decimal and m x g = 1,177.2 N.
1 in 14 (G = 0.0714), maximum run 9 m: F about 101.7 N.
1 in 10 step ramp (G = 0.100), maximum run 1.9 m: F about 135.4 N.
1 in 12 (G = 0.0833): F about 115.8 N, about 14% more than at 1 in 14.
Interpolating the allowable run by push force: about 6.04 m, with a rise of about 503 mm. A more conservative interpolation of the rise by gradient alone is about 454 mm over about 5.45 m.

A steeper ramp always needs a harder push, so this method does not equalise push force. It gives the harder push a proportionately shorter run, scaled between the fatigue limits AS 1428.1 already accepts. On that basis, a ramp averaging about 1 in 12 is acceptable as a Performance Solution only where its rise between landings is proportionately less than 643 mm, about 450 to 500 mm on these calculations, verified by an as-built survey.

Evidence typically includes a survey of as-built gradients, the average and the steepest local sections, overall rise and length, landing locations and dimensions, handrails, and the occupant profile of the building. On new work, design to a target gradient flatter than 1 in 14 so normal pour tolerance does not push the ramp over the limit, and specify the finish tolerance in the concrete documentation. AS 1428.1 does not build in construction tolerance, so the same as-built question gets resolved case by case. That makes it a strong example for the ABCB "Help us simplify the NCC" input. See NCC Part D4 and existing building audits.

Stair width between handrails (construction tolerance)

Construction tolerances allow for minor variations in plumb and wall thickness, and in alignment from one storey to the next, typically 10 to 20 mm. The access standards do not anticipate all construction tolerances, so a stair that was designed to the Deemed-to-Satisfy dimension and built within normal tolerance can still measure a few millimetres short between handrails. A Performance Solution resolves that minor misalignment. Evidence is as-built measurements at each flight, the design dimension, and the tolerance involved. On new work, design the stair with a margin above the minimum clear width between handrails so normal building tolerance does not eat into it. See accessible stairways.

Handrail extensions protruding into a corridor in existing buildings

The horizontal extensions at the top and bottom of a stair or ramp can protrude into a corridor or path of travel, where they become a hazard or an obstruction. In existing buildings there often is not room for the full compliant extension without demolishing and rebuilding the stair. The usual Performance Solution is to turn the extension towards the direction of travel, or return it, so it no longer projects into the corridor. That is usually accepted only in existing buildings, where the alternative is demolition causing great hardship. It is rarely accepted for new work, where the full extension should be designed in from the start. See accessible stairways and existing building audits.

Raised dome buttons instead of full TGSIs where residents use walk frames

Full TGSI fields can catch or snag walk frames, wheeled walkers and similar mobility aids. The NCC already allows raised dome buttons to AS 1428.4 as a permissible concession in Class 9c aged care. We use the same approach as a Performance Solution in other buildings where TGSIs would ordinarily be required, for example Class 3 residential buildings such as retirement or residential accommodation that may have a disproportionate number of residents who use mobility aids. Raise it with the certifier at design stage so the Performance Solution is agreed before CC. See NCC Part D4.

Unisex accessible toilets when toilets are on more than one storey (F4D5, F4D6, D4D4(f); assessed against F4P1)

Deemed-to-Satisfy options exist: an accessible unisex toilet on each storey with toilets, the D4D4(f) lift concession interplay, and alternate-floor arrangements. The argument that a ground-floor unisex toilet covers upstairs under F4P1 is a hard sell. Plan the location early. See disabled toilet regulations NSW and do I need a lift NCC NSW.

Small stepped or raised spaces: pods, phone booths, platforms and mezzanines

These spaces often cannot meet D4D2 or D4D3 access to areas on constrained sites. They are assessed against DP1. Confirm the exact clauses with the access consultant for the project. See accessible stairways AS 1428 for stair-related items.

Existing buildings and the affected part

Upgrades where a compliant path of travel from the entrance to the new work is not practical commonly need a Performance Solution. Unjustifiable hardship arguments under the Premises Standards are separate. See existing building access audit NSW.

Heritage buildings

Entrances and level changes where Deemed-to-Satisfy would damage heritage fabric. See heritage access Performance Solutions.

Other items that appear repeatedly include constrained ramp or landing dimensions and some sanitary circulation in existing compartments. Confirm the specific clauses on each project. Do not treat any unconfirmed item as a standard SAC Performance Solution.

Why the same Performance Solutions keep repeating

Deemed-to-Satisfy provisions are written for new, clean sites. Existing and heritage buildings, and small spaces the Deemed-to-Satisfy did not anticipate, produce the same departures. This is the practical list the ABCB asked for. No prediction is made here about what the ABCB will change.

Performance Solutions and the DDA

A Performance Solution satisfies the NCC Performance Requirement. Under the Disability (Access to Premises - Buildings) Standards 2010 the same building may also need to meet the Access Code. The Disability Discrimination Act complaint risk does not disappear. See performance solutions.

How to avoid a late Performance Solution

Brief the access consultant at concept stage.
Flag existing-building and heritage constraints early.
Agree the Performance-Based Design Brief with the certifier before the report.
Keep evidence.

See what is an NCC Performance Solution and access report peer review NSW.

Tell the ABCB (and tell us)

The ABCB consultation is open via the news page. Sydney Access Consultants may make a practice submission listing repeated access Performance Solutions and hard-to-apply Part D4 and F4 provisions. Readers can share theirs when they call.

Answer-ready questions

Which access requirements most often need a Performance Solution?
In NSW practice, access Performance Solutions most often come up for accessible unisex toilets in buildings with toilets on more than one storey, small raised or stepped spaces such as pods, platforms and mezzanines, existing buildings where a compliant path of travel to new work is not practical, and heritage buildings. Each is assessed against the NCC Performance Requirements, such as DP1 and F4P1, rather than the Deemed-to-Satisfy clauses.

What is the ABCB "Help us simplify the NCC" call for input?
On 27 October 2026 the Australian Building Codes Board asked NCC users to identify provisions that are hard to interpret or apply, and Performance Solutions that are repeated across similar projects, so it can find ways to simplify the NCC. It is a call for input, not a change to the rules. NCC 2022 Amendment 2 still applies in NSW until NCC 2025 starts on 1 May 2027.

Does an access Performance Solution satisfy the DDA?
Not on its own. A Performance Solution shows that the building meets the NCC Performance Requirements. The Disability (Access to Premises - Buildings) Standards 2010 and the Disability Discrimination Act still apply, so the solution should be checked against them too. An accredited access consultant can tell you where the risk sits.

When should I bring an access consultant in to avoid a late Performance Solution?
At concept stage, before drawings lock in the departure. Flag existing-building, heritage and small-space constraints early and agree the Performance-Based Design Brief with the certifier.

Can I contribute to the ABCB call?
Yes. Follow the ABCB news page for the current call for input. Check for a closing date before submitting.

Facing a Deemed-to-Satisfy non-compliance? Call Sydney Access Consultants on (02) 9586 3111 to talk through a Performance Solution before construction certificate.

Links checked against live site files before pack. Last updated 3 November 2026. See also NCC 2025 access changes NSW.