Damien Sharkey is managing director of build-to-rent developer HUB
How can we balance the need to ensure building safety with development certainty, to allow the delivery of much-needed homes?
As the Building Safety Act rightly makes clear, delivering homes that are safe to live in is fundamental and non-negotiable. But the Building Safety Regulator’s (BSR) control framework creates delays that leaves the government with an intractable problem: how to meet its 1.5 million housebuilding target while simultaneously ensuring the safety of those homes.
“We must prioritise safety, but the effects of the current system will be a reduction in the availability and affordability of homes”
Under the BSR’s new system, high-rise residential buildings must pass three checkpoints, or ‘gateways’, at the planning, preconstruction and completion stages. Despite its good intentions, this process is stunting the delivery of much-needed homes. If the government intends to fulfil the promise of more – and safer – homes, we need a rigorous building-control system that also safeguards the viability of large-scale housebuilding.
The approval process at gateway two, which authorises construction to start, is proving to be a particular stumbling block compared with the previous process that sat under the relevant local authority’s building control. The need for plans to reach RIBA Stage 4 detail before onsite work can even commence is requiring more comprehensive dialogue with specialist subcontractors earlier on in the design process, and adding between six months and one year to programmes.
Moreover, making design changes during construction now requires further approval, creating an inefficient stop-start process, and costing time and money that developers – in the race to build new homes – do not have.
In addition, while the BSR aims to make gateway-two decisions within 12 weeks, development partners are waiting up to 30 weeks to receive the go-ahead to start construction. Added to the UK’s mounting backlog of planning applications, these delays are leaving thousands of potential homes unable to progress.
As an example, HUB alone will have 1,200 homes in the gateway-two process this year. Imagine how many homes could be further along their journey to completion with a more efficient system in place to deliver safe buildings.
The complexities of the system don’t end at gateway two. Once completed, buildings must now pass gateway three to ensure they are fit for occupation, meaning that even during a housing crisis, buildings are sitting empty for weeks – and sometimes months – before people are able to move in.
The current regulatory framework breeds uncertainty for developers, which doesn’t encourage the delivery of the quantum of homes that we need. Soaring costs due to increased timelines and unpredictable delays threaten the viability of much-needed projects, and uncertainty means developers cannot alleviate risk for funders or secure contractors. We must prioritise safety, but the knock-on effects of the current system will be a reduction in the availability and affordability of homes.
Staging approvals
This doesn’t need to be the case. There are alternative ways to guarantee the safety of our buildings without stalling development. England need only look to Scotland’s Building Warrant system, which has a staged approach to submitting design information.
There, information is packaged up in pre-agreed stages, allowing for earlier submission (and approval) of foundations, substructure and drainage, and ultimately commencement on site of these works while other details such as facade are developed and submitted.
It’s just as safe as the BSR’s approach in England as, similarly, if it’s not been approved, then the work on site can’t progress – but the staged approach makes it far more manageable for the design team and offers more certainty on programme.
This system may not be perfect either, but it is proof of a potential way forward that prioritises safety while providing certainty through the development process.
A first step towards a more workable system in England would be for the BSR to clarify its decision timelines. This would allow developers to accurately forecast project programmes and budgets, and plan for viability accordingly. More importantly, a better-resourced BSR would enable building inspectors to meet these timelines, in turn increasing the rate of decisions and getting projects off the ground faster.
But for long-term success, we need a reformed regulatory system that prioritises building safety while promoting certainty of delivery. This balance is necessary to reassure funding partners/investors – on whom the government’s housebuilding mission hinges – that their projects are viable. Only with this certainty can our industry deliver the number of safe and affordable homes that people desperately need.
