Gross Floor Area (GFA), Net Lettable Area (NLA) and saleable area are three different measurements of the same building, and confusing them is one of the quiet ways a feasibility goes wrong. Gross Floor Area (GFA) is roughly what you are allowed to build and what you pay to build. Net Lettable Area (NLA) is what a commercial tenant pays rent on. Saleable area is what a residential buyer pays for. The three numbers are never the same, and the gap between them is not a rounding error. It is where your margin is made or lost.
This guide is written for the developer working out what a site can yield, what it will cost to build, and what it will sell or lease for. It covers what each area actually measures, why “Gross Floor Area (GFA)” means one thing to a planner and something else to a quantity surveyor, how the definitions change from state to state, how the efficiency ratio between built area and saleable area drives your feasibility, and where all of this sits in New Zealand. The point is practical: cost rates are quoted per square metre of Gross Floor Area (GFA), revenue is earned per square metre of saleable area, and if you model both on the same number you will flatter a deal that does not stack up.
What is the difference between gross floor area (GFA), net lettable area (NLA) and saleable area?
Gross Floor Area (GFA) is the total floor area of a building for planning and costing purposes, Net Lettable Area (NLA) is the leasable floor area a commercial tenant pays rent on, and saleable area is the floor area inside the lots a residential buyer actually buys. Each strips out different things, so each is smaller than the last: Gross Floor Area (GFA) is the biggest, and Net Lettable Area (NLA) or saleable area is what is left once you take out the parts of the building nobody pays you directly to occupy.
The reason this matters is that the three numbers do different jobs in a feasibility. You size the building against Gross Floor Area (GFA) because planning controls are written in those terms. You price the build against a floor area close to Gross Floor Area (GFA) because that is how a quantity surveyor (QS) rates it. Then you earn revenue on the smaller Net Lettable Area (NLA) or saleable area, because that is what a tenant or buyer is willing to pay for. Get the relationship between them wrong and every per-square-metre assumption in the model is pointing at the wrong denominator.
Gross floor area (GFA): what you are allowed to build and what it costs to build
Gross Floor Area (GFA) is the sum of the floor area of every storey of a building, and it is the number planning controls use to cap how much you can build on a site. In most of Australia a site carries a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) or plot ratio, and the maximum Gross Floor Area (GFA) is the site area multiplied by that ratio. A 1,000 square metre site with a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 3:1 permits up to 3,000 square metres of Gross Floor Area (GFA). That single number sets the envelope for the whole project.
Gross Floor Area (GFA) also sits close to the floor area a builder prices. Construction is generally quoted as a rate per square metre of Gross Floor Area (GFA), so the same measurement that decides your yield also drives the largest line in your budget. The catch, covered below, is that the planning definition of Gross Floor Area (GFA) and the quantity surveyor’s costing measurement are not the same area, which is where a lot of build budgets quietly come up short.
Net lettable area (NLA): what a commercial tenant pays rent on
Net Lettable Area (NLA) is the floor space a commercial tenant has exclusive use of and pays rent on, measured to the internal finished surfaces of the permanent walls that bound the tenancy. It excludes the shared parts of the building that no single tenant pays for: lift lobbies, common toilets, fire stairs, plant rooms, and service risers. In an office building, Net Lettable Area (NLA) is the number that drives rent, and therefore Net Operating Income (NOI), and therefore value.
Net Lettable Area (NLA) is defined in Australia by the Property Council of Australia (PCA) Method of Measurement, the industry standard for measuring leasable space. It is worth knowing that Net Lettable Area (NLA) is only one of three commercial measures the Property Council of Australia (PCA) sets, and using the wrong one materially changes the rent roll. The distinctions between Net Lettable Area (NLA), Gross Lettable Area (GLA) and Gross Lettable Area Retail (GLAR) are covered further down.
Saleable area: what a residential buyer pays for
Saleable area is the floor area inside the lots that will be sold, which for an apartment or townhouse project generally means the internal area of each dwelling plus its balcony, courtyard or terrace and any exclusive-use storage or car space that forms part of the lot. It excludes the common property: corridors, lobbies, the shared lift core, the basement drive aisles, and the plant. A buyer pays for what is inside their title, not for the shared circulation that gets them there.
Saleable area is the residential equivalent of Net Lettable Area (NLA), and the same logic applies: your revenue per square metre is quoted against saleable area, not against the larger Gross Floor Area (GFA) you built. Saleable area is sometimes split into Gross Saleable Area (GSA), which counts the whole footprint of the sold lots including internal walls, and Net Saleable Area (NSA), which counts only the usable internal space. Marketing and pricing conventions vary, so it pays to confirm which basis a comparable sale was measured on before you lean on its rate per square metre.
Which gross floor area (GFA) are you talking about, the planner’s or the quantity surveyor’s?
There are two different “Gross Floor Area (GFA)” numbers on most projects, and mixing them up can understate a construction budget by hundreds of dollars per square metre. The planning Gross Floor Area (GFA) is the yield number defined in the local planning instrument, and it deliberately excludes large chunks of the building. The quantity surveyor’s costing area, often also called Gross Floor Area (GFA), measures almost everything you physically build, because you have to pay to build all of it. The two are not the same area, and the costing one is usually larger.
The quantity surveyor (QS) measurement comes from the Australian Institute of Quantity Surveyors (AIQS) Australian Cost Management Manual, which builds Gross Floor Area (GFA) from two components: Fully Enclosed Covered Area (FECA) and Unenclosed Covered Area (UCA). Fully Enclosed Covered Area (FECA) is every enclosed space measured from the inside face of the external walls, including basements, plant rooms, lift shafts, stairs and enclosed car parking. Unenclosed Covered Area (UCA) adds the roofed but open areas: balconies, verandahs, covered walkways and usable undercroft. A basement car park, the plant deck and the balconies are all real construction cost, so the quantity surveyor (QS) counts them, even though the planning definition of Gross Floor Area (GFA) may exclude every one of them.
Here is why it bites. Take that 3,000 square metre planning Gross Floor Area (GFA). Add two basement parking levels, a plant room, lift and stair cores and balconies, and the quantity surveyor’s Fully Enclosed Covered Area (FECA) plus Unenclosed Covered Area (UCA) might come to 4,200 square metres of area you actually build. If you price the job at, say, $4,500 per square metre against the 3,000 square metre planning number, you budget $13.5 million. Price it against the 4,200 square metre built area and it is closer to $18.9 million. That is a $5.4 million gap sitting inside a single wrong denominator, and it is the sort of error that survives all the way to a funding application because both numbers were labelled “Gross Floor Area (GFA)”. When you build up your Total Development Cost (TDC), confirm which area your builder and quantity surveyor (QS) have rated, because the basement and balconies do not cost nothing just because planning does not count them.
How does gross floor area (GFA) decide what you can build?
Gross Floor Area (GFA) decides your yield because planning controls cap it directly. Most urban sites in Australia carry a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) in New South Wales terms, or a plot ratio in Western Australian and Australian Capital Territory terms, and the maximum floor area you can build is the site area multiplied by that ratio. As the New South Wales Department of Planning practice note on height and floor space ratio puts it, Floor Space Ratio (FSR) and height controls together set “the primary building envelopes for new development and the gross floor areas available” for each use. The starting point of any site feasibility is the permissible Gross Floor Area (GFA), because that caps the revenue-earning area the site can ever produce.
That is also why the definition of Gross Floor Area (GFA) is worth money. Because Gross Floor Area (GFA) is a list of inclusions and exclusions, careful design can keep genuinely non-saleable space (plant, basement storage, open circulation) outside the Gross Floor Area (GFA) count, freeing more of the capped floor area for saleable or lettable use. In New South Wales this has produced a substantial body of Land and Environment Court (LEC) decisions on Gross Floor Area (GFA), covering winter gardens, breezeways, plant rooms and non-habitable basement spaces, and planning lawyers stress the value of following the correct approach to calculating Gross Floor Area (GFA), because a miscalculation that inflates yield can force a redesign later. For a developer, the useful takeaway is that maximising the highest and best use of a site is partly an exercise in getting the Gross Floor Area (GFA) calculation right, not just building to the map.
How the states define and measure gross floor area (GFA) differently
The states do not measure Gross Floor Area (GFA) the same way, and the biggest difference is whether the wall is measured from the inside or the outside, which changes the number on an identical building. This is not a technicality. Measuring from the outside of the external walls captures the wall thickness on every floor, so the same building returns a larger Gross Floor Area (GFA) in a state that measures externally than in one that measures internally. If you carry a yield assumption from a Sydney project onto a Melbourne site without adjusting, the numbers will not line up.
In New South Wales, the Standard Instrument Local Environmental Plan (LEP) defines gross floor area as the sum of the floor area of each floor “measured from the internal face of external walls”, at a height of 1.4 metres above the floor. It includes mezzanines and habitable basement or attic rooms, and expressly excludes common vertical circulation (lifts and stairs), basement storage and parking, plant rooms, car parking required by the consent authority, and balconies or terraces with outer walls under 1.4 metres high. New South Wales measures from the inside, and excludes a long list of items, which tends to make the New South Wales Gross Floor Area (GFA) the tightest of the mainland states.
In Victoria, the Victoria Planning Provisions (VPP) define gross floor area at clause 73.01 as “the total floor area of a building, measured from the outside of external walls or the centre of party walls”, and it “includes all roofed areas”. Victoria measures from the outside, and counts roofed balconies and similar covered areas that New South Wales would exclude, so a like-for-like building generally returns a larger Gross Floor Area (GFA) in Victoria. Victoria has historically leaned on height, setback and site coverage controls rather than a blanket Floor Space Ratio (FSR), though floor area ratios now appear in the central city and in some strategic precincts.
In Queensland, the Planning Regulation 2017 defines gross floor area as the total floor area of all storeys “measured from the outside of the external walls and the centre of any common walls”, excluding areas used for access between levels or for parking, loading or manoeuvring vehicles. Queensland, like Victoria, measures from the outside. Individual council planning schemes then apply the control, and the definition is standardised through schedule 24 of the regulation so a scheme that uses the term must use the regulation’s meaning.
In Western Australia, there is no Floor Space Ratio (FSR). The equivalent control is plot ratio, and the measured quantity is the “plot ratio area” set by State Planning Policy 7.3 Residential Design Codes. Plot ratio area counts the area of all floors including internal and external walls, but excludes lift shafts, stairs and landings common to two or more dwellings, plant and equipment rooms, space wholly below natural ground level, parking at or below natural ground level, storerooms, lobbies, bin stores, and balconies, verandahs, courtyards and roof terraces. Western Australia’s exclusion of balconies is a notable point of difference from Victoria, which counts them.
South Australia runs a single statewide instrument, the Planning and Design Code, explained in the state’s Guide to the Planning and Design Code, which sets floor area and site coverage requirements zone by zone rather than through one universal Floor Space Ratio (FSR). The Australian Capital Territory uses plot ratio through its Territory Plan, in force since 27 September 2024, where the plot ratio is the sum of the Gross Floor Area (GFA) of the units divided by the land area. The Australian Capital Territory advice note on working out Gross Floor Area (GFA) excludes balconies and basement car parking from that count. The Northern Territory sets floor area and density controls through the Northern Territory Planning Scheme 2020, which has moved toward a plot ratio for medium and higher-density development. Across South Australia, the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory the drafting differs, but the practical question for a developer is the same: read the specific definition in the instrument that applies to your site, because whether the measurement is taken inside or outside the wall, and what it excludes, changes the yield the site can carry.
How do net lettable area (NLA), gross lettable area (GLA) and gross lettable area retail (GLAR) differ?
The Property Council of Australia (PCA) sets three different commercial measures, and the right one depends on the asset: Net Lettable Area (NLA) for offices, Gross Lettable Area (GLA) for industrial, and Gross Lettable Area Retail (GLAR) for shopping centres. Using the wrong measure does not just mislabel a plan, it changes the rentable area, and therefore the rent, the Gross Realisation Value (GRV) and the valuation.
Net Lettable Area (NLA) applies to office buildings and multi-tenant office tenancies. It is measured to the internal finished surfaces of the permanent walls, and it excludes common area facilities such as lifts, toilets, tea rooms and the areas housing plant and equipment. Net Lettable Area (NLA) is the tenant’s exclusive area, and it is the figure office rent is struck against.
Gross Lettable Area (GLA) applies to industrial buildings, warehouses, showrooms and free-standing supermarkets, and it is measured from the outside of the external walls. Because industrial tenants generally occupy the whole building, Gross Lettable Area (GLA) captures the full envelope rather than netting out shared cores.
Gross Lettable Area Retail (GLAR) applies to retail tenancies in shopping centres and shopping strips, and it is measured from the outside face of external and mall walls, but the tenant excludes the mall, common areas and public conveniences. Gross Lettable Area Retail (GLAR) is the standard for pricing retail rents and for the sales-per-square-metre benchmarks retail landlords live by.
For a developer, the reason to get this right is that commercial value follows income. On a leased commercial asset, the rent on the correct lettable area produces the Net Operating Income (NOI), and the Net Operating Income (NOI) divided by the capitalisation rate produces the value. If the lettable area is overstated, the rent roll and the end value inflate with it. When you model a leased commercial component, the sale value should be built up from the Net Operating Income (NOI) and the cap rate on the correct Property Council of Australia (PCA) measure, not from a floor plan that quietly counts the mall or the shared lobby as lettable.
What counts as saleable area in a residential development?
Saleable area is the floor area inside the lots you will sell, which for apartments and townhouses generally means the internal area of each dwelling plus its balcony or courtyard and any exclusive-use storage or car parking that forms part of the lot on title. It stops at the boundary of the common property. The corridors, the lift lobby, the foyer, the basement drive aisles and the plant room are all built, all costed, and none of them are saleable, because no buyer takes title to them.
Saleable area is usually expressed as either Gross Saleable Area (GSA) or Net Saleable Area (NSA), and the difference matters when you are comparing rates. Gross Saleable Area (GSA) measures the full extent of the sold lots, including internal partition walls. Net Saleable Area (NSA) measures only the usable internal space. Because a rate per square metre changes depending on which area sits underneath it, a comparable sale quoted at “$11,000 per square metre” means different things on a Gross Saleable Area (GSA) basis and a Net Saleable Area (NSA) basis. Before you apply a market rate to your own scheme, confirm the two are measured the same way.
For a subdivision, the saleable area logic still holds but the unit changes: you are selling land lots rather than internal floor area, so the saleable measure is the sum of the finished lot areas, and the “efficiency” question becomes how much of the parent parcel ends up in saleable lots after roads, drainage reserves and public open space are taken out. The principle is identical to the apartment case. You pay to develop the whole parent parcel, but you only sell the lots. In a subdivision, the yield of titled lots, not the raw site area, is what your revenue rests on.
What is the efficiency ratio, and why does it make or break a feasibility?
The efficiency ratio is the saleable or lettable area expressed as a percentage of the Gross Floor Area (GFA), and it is the single number that connects what you build to what you sell. It is calculated as Net Lettable Area (NLA) divided by Gross Floor Area (GFA), or Net Saleable Area (NSA) divided by Gross Floor Area (GFA), multiplied by 100. An apartment building with 3,000 square metres of Gross Floor Area (GFA) and 2,400 square metres of Net Saleable Area (NSA) runs at 80 per cent efficiency. That percentage tends to decide whether a deal is viable, more than the headline sale rate does, because it governs how much of the area you paid to build actually earns revenue.
Efficiency matters because cost and revenue sit on different measurements. Construction is priced per square metre of Gross Floor Area (GFA); revenue is earned per square metre of saleable or lettable area. The efficiency ratio is the bridge between the two, and a few percentage points of movement in it flows straight to the bottom line with no offsetting change in cost. A well-planned residential building may typically run at 80 to 85 per cent efficiency, and an office building is often benchmarked around 80 per cent Net Lettable Area (NLA) to Gross Floor Area (GFA) or better, though the achievable figure depends heavily on the floor plate, the core, the number of lifts and the amount of common amenity. Deep basements, generous lobbies, wide corridors and a large shared amenity all pull efficiency down while adding cost.
A worked example: how five points of efficiency move the margin
To see why efficiency drives the feasibility, hold everything else constant and move only the ratio. Take the 1,000 square metre site at a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 3:1, giving 3,000 square metres of Gross Floor Area (GFA). Assume, for illustration only, a construction cost of $4,500 per square metre of Gross Floor Area (GFA) and a sale rate of $11,000 per square metre of Net Saleable Area (NSA). These are round numbers to show the mechanism, not a market quote.
At 80 per cent efficiency, the Net Saleable Area (NSA) is 2,400 square metres. Revenue is 2,400 multiplied by $11,000, which is $26.4 million. Construction is 3,000 multiplied by $4,500, which is $13.5 million. Now drop efficiency to 75 per cent, the kind of loss a deeper basement or a fatter core can cause. The Net Saleable Area (NSA) falls to 2,250 square metres, revenue falls to $24.75 million, and construction does not move at all, because you are still building the same 3,000 square metres of Gross Floor Area (GFA). Five points of efficiency has taken $1.65 million off the top line with no change to cost. On many schemes that is the entire development margin.
This is also why per-square-metre benchmarks are dangerous unless you know their denominator. A construction rate of “$4,500 per square metre” and a sale rate of “$11,000 per square metre” are measured on different areas, and the efficiency ratio is what reconciles them. Modelling both against the same floor area, whether that is Gross Floor Area (GFA) or saleable area, will overstate revenue or understate cost, and usually both at once. This is where a feasibility model earns its place, keeping construction cost per Gross Floor Area (GFA) square metre and net sales revenue per saleable square metre as separate benchmarks, so the two rates stay attached to the correct area and the efficiency ratio between them is visible rather than assumed.
How do gross floor area (GFA), net lettable area (NLA) and saleable area flow through your feasibility?
The three areas enter a feasibility at different points, and keeping them on their correct line is what stops a model from double-counting or flattering itself. Gross Floor Area (GFA) drives the cost side, saleable area and Net Lettable Area (NLA) drive the revenue side, and the efficiency ratio is the assumption that links them. If you can trace each rate back to the area it belongs to, the feasibility is honest. If the areas blur together, it is not.
On the cost side, the construction budget is built against the quantity surveyor’s floor area (Fully Enclosed Covered Area (FECA) plus Unenclosed Covered Area (UCA)), which is close to but usually larger than the planning Gross Floor Area (GFA), and that number rolls up into your Total Development Cost (TDC). On the revenue side, saleable area multiplied by the sale rate builds your Gross Realisation Value (GRV) for a build-to-sell scheme, while for a leased commercial component the Net Lettable Area (NLA) drives rent, the rent drives Net Operating Income (NOI), and the Net Operating Income (NOI) capitalised at the market yield drives value.
A feasibility platform is really just enforcing this discipline: set areas at the lot level so residential revenue is priced against saleable area and commercial space against its lettable area, rather than everything being smeared across one Gross Floor Area (GFA) figure. However you model it, whether in a purpose-built tool like Feasly or a feasibility spreadsheet, the test is the same: costs against built area, revenue against saleable or lettable area, and a stated efficiency ratio you can defend.
How do these areas work in New Zealand?
New Zealand uses the same underlying logic, with its own measurement standard and its own planning framework. The commercial measurement authority is the Property Council of New Zealand (PCNZ) and Property Institute of New Zealand (PINZ) Guide for the Measurement of Rentable Areas, the accepted method for measuring floorspace in commercial and industrial buildings. Under that guide, Net Lettable Area (NLA), also called rentable area, is the net floor space under the control of the tenant, and it works the same way as its Australian counterpart for pricing rent and building up value. For residential work there is a separate Property Institute of New Zealand (PINZ) measurement guide covering how residential floor area is measured.
On the planning side, New Zealand does not run a nationwide Floor Space Ratio (FSR). Development capacity is set by district plans made under the Resource Management Act (RMA), typically through height, site coverage and density standards rather than a single floor area ratio, so the “what can I build” question is answered by the relevant district plan rather than a universal Gross Floor Area (GFA) cap. The framework is changing: the Resource Management Act (RMA) is being replaced, and developers should confirm the current position, which our guide on the Resource Management Act (RMA) reform tracks. The efficiency principle is unchanged across the Tasman: you build gross, you sell or lease net, and the ratio between them still decides the deal.
Common area-measurement mistakes that flatter a feasibility
Most area errors in a feasibility push the numbers the same way, toward a project that looks better than it is. They are easy to make because the terms sound interchangeable and the units are all square metres, so a wrong number does not look wrong. A short list of the ones that recur:
-
Costing on the planning Gross Floor Area (GFA) instead of the built area. The planning Gross Floor Area (GFA) excludes the basement, plant and often the balconies, but you still build and pay for all of it. Pricing construction against the planning number rather than the quantity surveyor’s Fully Enclosed Covered Area (FECA) plus Unenclosed Covered Area (UCA) can understate the build by a large margin.
-
Pricing revenue on Gross Floor Area (GFA) rather than saleable area. Applying a sale rate to the whole Gross Floor Area (GFA) treats corridors, lobbies and the lift core as if buyers paid for them. Revenue only accrues on saleable area or Net Lettable Area (NLA).
-
Ignoring the efficiency ratio when you benchmark. A comparable project’s ”$/m²” only transfers to yours if the efficiency is similar. A scheme with a deep basement and a big amenity floor cannot hit the same effective revenue as a lean one, even at an identical sale rate.
-
Comparing rates measured on different bases. A rate quoted on Gross Saleable Area (GSA) is not the same as one quoted on Net Saleable Area (NSA), and a commercial rate on Gross Lettable Area (GLA) is not the same as one on Net Lettable Area (NLA). Confirm the basis before you apply the rate.
-
Assuming the Gross Floor Area (GFA) definition travels between states. As shown above, New South Wales measures from inside the wall while Victoria and Queensland measure from outside, and Western Australia uses a different plot ratio area entirely. A yield assumption carried across a state border without checking the local definition will be wrong.
Frequently asked questions
Is saleable area the same as gross floor area (GFA)?
No. Saleable area is smaller than Gross Floor Area (GFA), because Gross Floor Area (GFA) includes the common property (corridors, lobbies, lift cores, plant) that you build but do not sell. The ratio of saleable area to Gross Floor Area (GFA) is the efficiency ratio, and it may typically sit around 80 to 85 per cent on a well-planned residential building, though it varies with the design.
What is a good efficiency ratio for an apartment development?
As a rough guide, a well-planned apartment building may typically achieve around 80 to 85 per cent Net Saleable Area (NSA) to Gross Floor Area (GFA), and anything below the high 70s tends to signal a lot of area going into basement, core or amenity that earns no revenue. The achievable figure depends on the floor plate, the number of lifts and stairs, the parking provision and the amount of common amenity, so treat any benchmark as a prompt to check the design rather than a fixed target.
Does gross floor area (GFA) include balconies?
It depends on the state. In New South Wales, balconies and terraces with outer walls under 1.4 metres high are excluded from Gross Floor Area (GFA); in Victoria, roofed balconies are generally included because the Victoria Planning Provisions (VPP) count all roofed areas; and in Western Australia, balconies are excluded from plot ratio area. A quantity surveyor (QS) will usually count the balcony as Unenclosed Covered Area (UCA) for costing regardless, because it is built either way.
Is net lettable area (NLA) the same as gross lettable area (GLA)?
No. Net Lettable Area (NLA) is used for offices and is measured to the internal finished wall surfaces, netting out shared cores and facilities. Gross Lettable Area (GLA) is used for industrial buildings and is measured from the outside of the external walls, capturing the full envelope. Retail uses a third measure, Gross Lettable Area Retail (GLAR). Using the wrong one changes the rent roll and the end value.
Which area should I use to value a leased commercial building?
Value follows income, so build the value from the rent on the correct lettable area. For an office, that is the rent on the Net Lettable Area (NLA), which produces the Net Operating Income (NOI). Dividing the Net Operating Income (NOI) by the capitalisation rate gives the value. Starting from an overstated lettable area inflates the rent roll and the value with it.
The bottom line
Gross Floor Area (GFA), Net Lettable Area (NLA) and saleable area are three measurements of one building, and a feasibility only holds together when each rate is attached to the area it belongs to. You build and cost against a floor area close to Gross Floor Area (GFA), you earn revenue against the smaller Net Lettable Area (NLA) or saleable area, and the efficiency ratio between them decides how much of what you built actually pays you back. Confirm which Gross Floor Area (GFA) you are using, planning or costing, check the definition for the state your site sits in, and never apply a per-square-metre rate without knowing the area underneath it. Get those three habits right and the areas stop being a source of quiet error and start being one of the clearest levers you have on the margin.
This guide is general information for property developers and other industry readers, not financial, legal, valuation or planning advice. Area definitions, planning controls and measurement standards change and vary by jurisdiction and by site. Confirm the current position with the relevant primary source and your own professional advisers before relying on it for a specific project.