FAQs

The Building Safety Act 2022 received Royal Assent on 28 April 2022 and makes ground-breaking reforms to give residents and homeowners more rights, powers, and protections – so homes across the country are safer. The Building Safety Act 2022 will bring in several measures intended to make buildings safer. The Act is divided into six parts (see below) with the majority of the substantive detail and reforms set out in parts two to five.

Part 1: Introduction

Part 2: The Regulator and its Functions

Part 3: Building Act 1984

Part 4: Higher-Risk Buildings

Part 5: Other Provision about Safety, Standards, etc.

Part 6: General

A higher-risk building (HRB) is a building in England that: is at least 18 metres high or has at least 7 storeys; and contains at least 2 residential units, or is a hospital or care home. The exact criteria can vary depending on the type of building and work being carried out, so the current Building Safety Regulator guidance should be checked for each project.

The Building Safety Regulator provides further criteria for determining whether a building is a higher-risk building.

The Building Safety Regulator (BSR) in England is part of the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). The BSR was set up under the Building Safety Act 2022 to:

• regulate higher-risk buildings (HRBs)
• raise safety standards of all buildings
• help professionals in design, construction, and building control, to improve their competence

The BSR sets out rules to protect the design and construction of higher-risk buildings.  They help give residents confidence in the safety and standards of their building.  BSR has a legal responsibility to consult with residents through the residents panel.

The gateway process for higher-risk buildings (HRBs) in England is a new approval process that involves three checkpoints to ensure building safety:

• Gateway 1 - The planning stage, where applicants must demonstrate that fire safety is considered
• Gateway 2 - The preconstruction stage, where the Regulator must approve the application before construction can begin
• Gateway 3 - The completion stage, where the Regulator must approve the application before the building can be occupied

The golden thread of information is a digital record of a building's information that is used to ensure a building is safe and compliant with regulations. It includes information about the building's design, construction, maintenance, and refurbishment. The golden thread is a key part of the Building Safety Act.

Gateway 2 is the building control approval stage for higher-risk buildings in England. Before relevant building work can begin, the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) must be satisfied that the proposed work complies with the Building Regulations and that the project has appropriate arrangements for managing compliance, competence and change.

Building control approval from the Building Safety Regulator is generally required before constructing a new higher-risk building or carrying out building work to an existing higher-risk building. There are limited exceptions for certain exempt work, competent person scheme work, specified fibre optic cabling work and emergency repairs. If you are unsure whether your project requires an application, BSAC can review the proposed scope of work and help establish the appropriate route.

The client is legally responsible for ensuring that building control approval is obtained before relevant work begins and that the information submitted is correct. The client can authorise another person or organisation to prepare, submit and manage the application on their behalf, but the legal responsibility remains with the client.

The documents required will depend on the building and proposed work. A Gateway 2 application may include detailed drawings and plans, a Building Regulations compliance statement, construction control plan, change control plan, competence declarations, mandatory occurrence reporting plan, fire and emergency information and, where applicable, a partial completion strategy.

BSAC can review the proposed submission, identify information gaps and coordinate the documentation required for the application.

No. Building work that requires Building Safety Regulator approval must not begin until the relevant building control application has been approved. For staged applications, the relevant stage must receive approval before work on that stage begins.

The Building Safety Regulator states that, unless an extension is agreed, it will take up to 12 weeks to assess an application for a new higher-risk building and up to 8 weeks for an existing higher-risk building after the application has been validated.

Actual timescales can vary depending on the complexity of the project, the quality and completeness of the submission and whether further information or an extension is required. Preparing a coordinated and comprehensive application before submission can help reduce avoidable queries and delays.

The Building Safety Regulator first checks whether the application contains the required information. Once the application is considered valid, it progresses to assessment. Validation does not mean that approval has been granted.

During its assessment, the BSR may request further information or clarification before making its decision. The application may be approved, approved subject to requirements or rejected.

Yes. The Building Safety Regulator allows staged applications for certain new higher-risk building projects. This can enable a project to progress in defined stages, with detailed information submitted for each stage.

Each relevant stage must receive building control approval before building work on that stage begins, and staged applications are considered by the BSR on a case-by-case basis.

The documents approved as part of the application become the project's agreed documents. Changes to those documents must be managed through the project's change control process and recorded appropriately.

Certain notifiable and major changes must be reported to the Building Safety Regulator. Where a major change is proposed, work affected by that change must not proceed until the BSR has granted the required approval.

BSAC can support the Gateway 2 process from an early application review through to submission and BSR correspondence. Our services can include reviewing project information, identifying compliance gaps, preparing or reviewing Building Regulations compliance statements, construction control plans and change control plans, coordinating dutyholder information and supporting communication with the Building Safety Regulator.

Our aim is to help clients submit a clear, coordinated and compliance-focused application package supported by the information required for assessment.

A Building Regulations Principal Designer is the designer appointed to be in control of the design work for the purposes of the Building Regulations.

The Principal Designer must plan, manage, monitor and coordinate the design work, taking reasonable steps to ensure that designers fulfil their duties and that the design, if built, complies with the relevant requirements of the Building Regulations.

For higher-risk building projects, additional duties apply throughout the design and construction process.

Where more than one designer or contractor is working on a project, the client must appoint a Principal Designer and Principal Contractor in writing. If there is only one designer, that designer fulfils the Principal Designer role.

For higher-risk building work, the client must also take reasonable steps to ensure that the person or organisation appointed has the necessary competence and organisational capability for the specific project.

Appointing the Principal Designer early allows them to influence design coordination, compliance planning and the information required for the Building Safety Regulator.

On a higher-risk building project, the Building Regulations Principal Designer plans, manages, monitors and coordinates design work to support compliance with the Building Regulations.

Their responsibilities include coordinating designers, reviewing design information, monitoring Building Regulations compliance, cooperating with the Principal Contractor, managing design-related information, maintaining relevant Golden Thread information and fulfilling the additional duties that apply to higher-risk building work.

The two roles have different statutory purposes.

A Building Regulations Principal Designer is responsible for managing and coordinating design work in relation to compliance with the Building Regulations.

A CDM Principal Designer performs duties under the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 and focuses on managing health and safety risks arising from the design process.

The roles can be carried out by the same organisation where it has the appropriate competence, but the client must clearly confirm the appointments and the organisation must be capable of fulfilling the duties of both roles.

Yes. The same individual or organisation can undertake both roles where they have the necessary competence to fulfil the different statutory duties.

Where the same party is appointed as Principal Designer under both the CDM Regulations and Building Regulations, the client should clearly confirm the appointments in writing.

It is important that the distinction between the two roles remains clear, as Building Regulations compliance and CDM health and safety duties are not the same.

A Principal Designer must have the skills, knowledge, experience and behaviours needed to carry out the role. Where an organisation is appointed, it must also demonstrate the organisational capability required to fulfil its duties.

The Principal Designer is not expected to be an expert in every individual design discipline. However, they must have sufficient Building Regulations knowledge and experience to coordinate the design team and assess whether the overall design is capable of complying with the relevant requirements.

For higher-risk building work, clients should ensure the appointed Principal Designer has competence appropriate to the complexity and risk of the particular project.

The Principal Designer's duties continue beyond the Gateway 2 application where design work continues during construction.

During this period, the Principal Designer helps coordinate design development, monitor compliance, manage design information, cooperate with the Principal Contractor and ensure relevant changes are properly assessed and recorded.

At completion, the Gateway 3 application requires compliance declarations from each Principal Designer and Principal Contractor involved in the project confirming that they fulfilled their respective Building Regulations duties.

Design changes on a higher-risk building project must be properly assessed, recorded and managed through the project's change control arrangements.

The Principal Designer helps coordinate the design team, assesses the Building Regulations implications of changes and ensures that relevant design information remains accurate and up to date.

Where a proposed change is classed as notifiable or major under the higher-risk building procedures, the appropriate Building Safety Regulator notification or approval process must be followed before the change is implemented where required.

For higher-risk building work, the Principal Designer must capture and keep relevant design information up to date as part of the Golden Thread.

They must work with the Principal Contractor to ensure design information created or changed during construction is recorded and evidenced, and share relevant information with the client and other dutyholders when required.

The Golden Thread should provide an accurate, accessible and up-to-date record of the building and how compliance is being achieved.

Yes. For higher-risk building work, the Principal Designer has additional mandatory occurrence reporting duties.

The Principal Designer must establish and operate a mandatory occurrence reporting system and submit required notices and reports to the Building Safety Regulator where a reportable safety occurrence relating to the design is identified.

The Principal Designer and Principal Contractor must cooperate so that appropriate reporting arrangements operate effectively throughout the project.

Yes. A Principal Designer can be replaced during a project.

The outgoing Principal Designer must provide the client with information explaining the arrangements they put in place to fulfil their duties, and the incoming Principal Designer must review those arrangements.

For higher-risk building work, changes to the appointed Principal Designer must also be managed through the Building Safety Regulator's building control process.

BSAC can provide Building Regulations Principal Designer support for higher-risk building projects from design and Gateway 2 through construction, change control and Gateway 3.

Our services can include design compliance coordination, review of design information, Building Regulations compliance monitoring, change control, Building Safety Regulator liaison, Golden Thread information management and support with mandatory occurrence reporting.

We work with clients, designers and Principal Contractors to help maintain a coordinated and evidenced approach to Building Regulations compliance throughout the project.

Yes, the Building Regulations dutyholder requirements are not limited to higher-risk buildings.

Where a project involves more than one designer, the client must appoint a Principal Designer in writing. Where there is only one designer working on the project, that designer fulfils the Principal Designer role.

The Principal Designer must have the appropriate competence to undertake the role for the particular project.

The Building Regulations Principal Designer plans, manages, monitors and coordinates design work to help ensure that the project complies with the relevant Building Regulations.

This can include coordinating designers, reviewing design information, identifying compliance issues, considering interactions between different design disciplines, working with the Principal Contractor and supporting the client in maintaining appropriate evidence of Building Regulations compliance.

For most building work that is not higher-risk building work, building control can be provided by a local authority building control department or a private registered building control approver.

The appropriate building control route will depend on the project and type of work being undertaken.

The Building Safety Regulator is the building control authority for higher-risk building work, whereas the standard building control routes generally continue to apply to non-HRB projects.

The statutory Golden Thread requirements established specifically for higher-risk buildings do not apply to ordinary non-HRB projects in the same way.

However, appropriate design, construction and compliance information should still be maintained throughout a non-HRB project.

Good record keeping can help demonstrate Building Regulations compliance, support building control inspections and provide the information required for completion and handover.

Design changes should be reviewed to determine whether they affect compliance with the Building Regulations.

The Principal Designer should coordinate relevant designers, assess the implications of proposed changes and ensure that updated design information is communicated to the Principal Contractor, client and building control body where appropriate.

Non-HRB projects do not follow the HRB-specific major and notifiable change control regime, but changes still need to be properly assessed and managed to maintain Building Regulations compliance.

A Building Regulations Justification Statement is a supporting document that explains how a proposed design or technical solution complies with the functional requirements of the Building Regulations, particularly where the approach does not follow the standard guidance in an Approved Document or where the guidance does not directly address the proposed solution.

The statement brings together the design rationale, applicable Building Regulations requirements and supporting technical evidence so that the compliance approach can be clearly understood and assessed.

A Justification Statement is not a separately prescribed Gateway 2 document in the same way as the Building Regulations Compliance Statement, Construction Control Plan or Change Control Plan.

However, additional justification can be valuable where a design departs from standard guidance, uses an alternative compliance approach or involves a complex solution that requires further explanation.

The relevant reasoning and evidence should also be reflected in, or clearly linked to, the Building Regulations Compliance Statement submitted as part of the Gateway 2 application.

A Justification Statement may be appropriate where the proposed design does not follow a conventional route set out within the Approved Documents or where standard guidance does not adequately address the circumstances of the project.

Examples can include complex building geometry, unusual fire strategies, mixed-use arrangements, bespoke construction details, alternative technical solutions or other project-specific approaches requiring additional explanation.

The need for justification should be assessed against the particular design, relevant functional requirements and supporting evidence rather than assumed for every higher-risk building project.

Yes. Approved Documents provide guidance on ways of satisfying the Building Regulations, but following an Approved Document is not the only possible route to compliance.

Where an alternative approach is proposed, the project team needs to demonstrate that the design still satisfies the relevant functional requirements of the Building Regulations.

A well-prepared Justification Statement can explain why the alternative approach has been adopted, how compliance is achieved and what technical evidence supports that conclusion.

The content will depend on the particular design issue, but a Justification Statement will typically identify the proposed works, the relevant Building Regulations requirements, the standard guidance or recognised approach being considered and any areas where an alternative solution is proposed.

It should then explain the design rationale, demonstrate how the relevant functional requirements are satisfied and cross-reference the technical evidence supporting the conclusion.

Supporting evidence may include drawings, specifications, calculations, fire engineering information, test evidence, assessments, product information, specialist reports and applicable standards or design codes.

The Building Regulations Compliance Statement is a required part of the relevant Gateway 2 building control application and sets out the project's overall approach to complying with the Building Regulations.

A Justification Statement is a more focused supporting document that can provide additional explanation for a particular design decision, alternative approach or area of technical complexity.

Where a Justification Statement is used, it should align with the Building Regulations Compliance Statement and the project's drawings, specifications and supporting evidence so that the submission presents a consistent compliance strategy.

No. Although fire and structural safety are particularly important considerations for higher-risk buildings, compliance with the Building Regulations extends across all applicable functional requirements.

A Justification Statement may therefore relate to any relevant part of the Building Regulations where a design decision or alternative approach requires additional explanation.

Depending on the project, this could include matters relating to structure, fire safety, ventilation, accessibility, drainage, acoustics, thermal performance, protection from falling or other applicable requirements.

The appropriate evidence depends on the technical issue and the proposed solution.

Evidence may include engineering calculations, drawings, specifications, fire strategies, test reports, certification, product performance information, assessments, technical reports, recognised standards, design codes and specialist advice.

The evidence should be relevant to the proposed design and clearly linked to the particular Building Regulations requirement being addressed.

The statement should be prepared and coordinated by people with appropriate competence and sufficient understanding of the relevant Building Regulations requirements and technical design issues.

Input may be required from several members of the design team, including architects, structural engineers, fire engineers, building services engineers, façade specialists and other technical designers.

The Building Regulations Principal Designer should also ensure that relevant design information is coordinated and that the overall design compliance strategy is coherent.

Yes, where the issues are related and can be clearly explained within one coordinated document.

For complex projects, however, it may be clearer to use separate justification statements for different design matters or disciplines and then cross-reference them from the overall Building Regulations Compliance Statement.

The most appropriate structure will depend on the complexity of the project and the amount of supporting technical evidence involved.

A clear and well-evidenced statement can make it easier for the Building Safety Regulator to understand the proposed design, the applicable requirements and the reasoning behind an alternative approach.

It can also help identify inconsistencies or gaps in the supporting information before submission.

However, providing a Justification Statement does not guarantee approval or prevent the BSR from requesting additional information. The strength of the application depends on the quality, completeness and coordination of the overall compliance evidence.

Once a Gateway 2 application is approved, the approved information becomes part of the project's agreed documents.

If the design subsequently changes, the project team must assess the effect of that change on Building Regulations compliance and manage it through the applicable change control process.

Where the change affects a design solution covered by a Justification Statement, the statement and supporting evidence may also need to be reviewed or updated. Major changes require BSR approval before the affected work proceeds.

BSAC can review proposed works and identify areas where the Building Regulations compliance route requires further explanation or supporting justification.

Our team can review drawings, specifications and technical reports, identify the applicable functional requirements, assess the proposed compliance approach and prepare a coordinated justification narrative supported by the relevant project evidence.

We can also help ensure that the Justification Statement aligns with the Building Regulations Compliance Statement and wider Gateway 2 submission, providing the Building Safety Regulator with a clear and traceable explanation of the proposed approach.

An independent section is a defined part of a wider building that can be treated as a separate building when applying the higher-risk building regime.

To qualify, the section must have access for people to enter and exit the wider building that can be reached from anywhere within that section. It must also either have no access to another section of the wider building, or only have access to another section that does not contain a residential unit.

Access intended only for exceptional use, emergency use or maintenance is treated differently under the regulations.

Determining whether an area qualifies as an independent section can change how the higher-risk building criteria are applied.

If a section qualifies, it can be treated as a separate building for the purposes of the higher-risk building regime. That section must then be assessed against the relevant height or storey threshold and use criteria.

Qualifying as an independent section does not automatically mean that the section is, or is not, a higher-risk building.

Yes, where the statutory independent section criteria are satisfied.

The section can then be considered as its own building for the purposes of assessing whether the higher-risk building regime applies.

The assessment should consider the layout, entrances and exits, connections to other parts of the building, residential use and the relevant height and storey measurements.

Not in the same way.

While a new building is being constructed or is proposed to be constructed, the provisions that allow an overall structure to be divided into independent sections do not apply.

Where multiple structures are attached as part of a new development, the overall connected structure is therefore considered when determining whether the building falls within the higher-risk building regime during design and construction.

Once construction is complete, it may be possible for parts of the overall structure to be considered independent sections for the occupation regime.

Yes. For an existing building, it may be possible for a defined part of the wider structure to qualify as an independent section.

If it does, that section is treated as its own building for the purposes of the higher-risk building regime and must then be assessed against the applicable height, storey and use criteria.

This can be particularly important where proposed work affects only one part of a complex or connected development.

Not necessarily.

For the statutory independent section test, “access” means a doorway, archway or similar opening. However, an opening intended only for exceptional use, including emergency use or maintenance, is excluded from that definition.

The intended and actual function of the connection therefore needs to be considered carefully as part of the assessment.

Potentially, but it depends on how the towers are connected.

A section must have its own appropriate means of entering and exiting the wider building and must either have no access to another section or only have access to another section that does not contain a residential unit.

Where occupants can move directly between two residential sections through normal access arrangements, the individual sections may not satisfy the independent section criteria.

The precise configuration should be reviewed against the statutory requirements.

Yes, but sharing a basement, podium or other part of a wider structure does not automatically prevent an area from being an independent section.

For example, access to another section that does not contain a residential unit may still be compatible with the independent section definition.

The review needs to consider the use of the connecting area, its entrances and exits, how people move between sections and whether any connected section contains residential units.

Once a section has been identified as an independent section, the applicable rules for measuring height and counting storeys must be applied to that section.

The regulations include specific provisions for independent sections. For example, certain storeys directly beneath an independent section may need to be included when determining the number of storeys.

This means the assessment should not simply count the visibly occupied floors within the proposed section.

No.

Independent section status determines what is treated as the “building” for the relevant assessment. The resulting building must still be tested against the applicable higher-risk building criteria.

An independent section may therefore qualify as a higher-risk building, while another independent section within the same wider structure may not.

The information required will depend on the building, but a review will typically consider architectural drawings, floor plans, sections, site layouts, building uses, residential units, entrances and exits, connections between different parts of the building and the purpose of any shared or connecting areas.

Information about emergency-only and maintenance access may also be required.

Clear and current drawings are particularly important because the physical relationship between different sections is central to the assessment.

BSAC can review the relevant drawings, layouts, building uses, entrances, exits and connections between sections against the statutory independent section criteria.

Our assessment can consider access and connectivity, emergency or maintenance-only connections, residential use and the applicable higher-risk building criteria.

We can then provide a documented review setting out the information considered, relevant statutory provisions, assumptions, methodology, findings and conclusion to help establish the appropriate regulatory route for the building.