Gateway 2 documentation – “Approval with Requirements”

Introduction

This is the latest in my series of articles on the new Gateways 2 and 3 that apply for Building Regulations applications for Higher Risk Buildings (HRBs).

This one focusses on the question of what level of information is required for the Gateway 2 application, in particular focussing on the question of Approval with Requirements.

This article, like the previous ones, are based on my review of the regulations and my involvement in various online sessions (mostly in the latter part of 2023) with the Building Safety Regulator (BSR). I’m not the part of the BSR so I am reporting on issues that they discussed in those meetings, and from the perspective of a fire engineer.

Approval with Requirements

There is still quite a lot of uncertainty about exactly the level of design detail that would be required at Gateway 2. The majority of announcements from the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) have heavily implied that the design needs to be essentially complete. It is also clear that if a particular design is approved, it’s necessary to build to that design. Later changes can only be made via a formal change control process that is really only going to allow very limited numbers of changes. So that means that the Gateway 2 application would need to be the ‘construction stage’ version of all relevant information.

The result is that the main contractor and all specialist subcontractors will need to have been appointed and have completed their designs, which would then be submitted for Gateway 2 approval. Work could only start on site when all of those designs had been approved by the BSR.

The BSR has also stated that they will not have pre-consultation discussions, so the Gateway 2 submission would be the first time that there would be any contact with the BSR. That obviously creates some major risks for the project team, because the BSR might disagree with some strategic issue of the design which would then significantly impact all the detailed system designs. But that’s a separate topic that I’ve discussed before, so I’m not going into it again here.

There have recently been some news articles stating that the BSR has relaxed their requirements relating to the level of detail that’s required at Gateway 2, referring to a concept of Approval with Requirements, although without much detail of what that would involve.

The concept of Approval with Requirements was discussed in several of the online BSR sessions in 2023, and I had various discussions with them about it, so the summary below is based on that.

Part of the point of Gateway 2 is to make sure that the design is approved before it’s built. That will stop the current practice where a considerable amount of the design and approval occurs on buildings which are largely already built.

Under Gateway 2, work cannot start on site until BSR approval has been obtained for the design.

However, there are some aspects of the building which would not be affected by the early construction stages. For example, the fire alarm system design has no impact on the piling or structural frame design, so there is no specific reason why the fire alarm system design could not be reviewed and approved whilst the piling and structural frame construction are underway. This means that the Gateway 2 application might include a more limited design specification for the fire alarm system with a commitment that the full design would be submitted at a later date. It would still be necessary to make sure that the fire alarm system is approved before work starts on the fire alarm system installation, but that could be scheduled in.

In that situation, the BSR would give Gateway 2 approval on the basis of a Requirement relating to the later submission of the fire alarm system design, and approval before installation starts.

So far, so sensible.

But other systems could be a bit more complicated.

For example, sprinklers. The general pipework layout will not affect the piling, so the pipework design could be carried out on the basis of a Requirement for later approval. But the sprinkler tank takes considerable space and so the design of the tank room could have an impact on the piling and structural frame layout. The detailed tank design, including size and location, would therefore need to be included in the Gateway 2 submission, with a Requirement for the pipework layout to be approved later, but obviously before that pipework is installed.

Ventilation would be a different issue. Ventilation is often achieved via large ducts or shafts, either horizontal or vertical. Horizontal ducts (e.g. for basement smoke ventilation) have an impact on head height, and therefore on the depth needed for the basement. Vertical ventilation shafts take up considerable space and would often be concrete, which would be supported on piles, so the locations and sizing of those shafts would have an impact on the piling and structural frame design. So, the ventilation design would presumably have to be fully detailed in the Gateway 2 application.

These specific examples were discussed with the BSR in the online sessions, and in principle they agreed with the above summary.

This means that it might be possible for the Gateway 2 application to include a relatively limited specification for some aspects of the design, as long as they don’t affect the piling or structural frame. The piling and frame construction could then start, whilst the detailed design of those aspects are finalised, submitted and approved. Obviously, there would be a risk that if the design or approval of those aspects are delayed, it may then result in work on site being delayed until approval is obtained, but that would be down to the contractor to manage.

However, the Approval with Requirements approach does not mean that the Gateway 2 application can include early stage design for everything. That would not be allowed. It would realistically only be a limited, specific number of aspects of the design that could be covered by the process.

Is this approach definitely allowed?

I don’t know. The BSR said in the online sessions that they would be OK with the approach summarised above. But when they published their guide on the Gateway 2 and 3 regulations (https://www.hse.gov.uk/building-safety/building-control/regime-overview.htm) there was no mention of it.

The BSR has referred to the concept of Approval with Requirements in various meetings, but as far as I’m aware there are no written details of what that would involve. Maybe the BSR is going to produce a guide on this issue (and I sincerely hope they do) but I simply don’t know.

So, it may just be a case of trial and error. Make a Gateway 2 application based on the summary above and wait to see how the BSR responds. Obviously, this is less than ideal (understatement of the year), but at present the only alternative is to submit a completed construction stage for absolutely everything.

In time, these issues will be ironed out and we’ll have a clear understanding of how the process works, but in the meantime, it will be challenging.