{"id":518678,"date":"2025-04-15T10:52:52","date_gmt":"2025-04-15T09:52:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.constructionnews.co.uk\/?p=518678"},"modified":"2025-04-23T16:10:01","modified_gmt":"2025-04-23T15:10:01","slug":"inside-the-bsr-bottleneck-part-one","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.constructionnews.co.uk\/sections\/long-reads\/inside-the-bsr-bottleneck-part-one-15-04-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Inside the BSR bottleneck: part one"},"content":{"rendered":"

High-rise<\/strong> residential <\/strong><\/em>development has virtually <\/strong><\/em>ground to a halt since the <\/strong><\/em>Building Safety Regulator <\/strong><\/em>took on full powers. In the first instalment of a two-part series, <\/strong><\/em>Charlotte Banks explores <\/strong><\/em>the problems\u00a0<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

When Leeds City Council approved plans for three new residential towers on the Dyecoats regeneration scheme in April 2022, construction was expected to start that summer. Three years on, excavators have only just arrived. Before submitting its plans, developer Latimer (the development arm of housing association Clarion) had proactively redesigned the scheme to incorporate second staircases, in anticipation of one post-Grenfell reform, only to come up against another \u2013 the Building Safety Regulator (BSR). The newly established watchdog had given itself a deadline of 12 weeks to determine whether Dyecoats could start building. It took 40.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf jobs that are on the cusp of viability have to wait 20 weeks for gateway approval, that can destroy the whole return on investment for those projects\u201d<\/p>\n

Lilly Gallafent, Cast Consultancy<\/h4>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Dyecoats is one of the lucky schemes. Since April last year, when the BSR became the arbiter of whether construction work can start on taller residential buildings, it has approved only a handful out of more than a hundred applications. New high-rise residential construction has all but ground to a halt. The bottleneck is perhaps the biggest pressure point on an industry struggling to adapt to the post-Grenfell building safety landscape. This hard stop before construction, known as gateway two, was one of the key recommendations of Dame Judith Hackitt\u2019s Building a Safer Future<\/em> report, published in 2018. Of all the changes brought in to ensure the horrifying events of June 2017 are never repeated, it might be the most revolutionary. \u201cIt\u2019s a sea change in how these types of buildings are developed,\u201d says Eric Johnstone, legal director at law firm Brodies.<\/p>\n

Waiting game<\/h3>\n

At gateway two, before starting on site, contractors have to demonstrate how they are going to construct a higher-risk building (HRB), defined as being taller than 18 metres and containing more than two residential units. Work cannot start until the BSR deems that these construction plans show they meet building regulations, a level of detail provided far earlier than the construction industry is used to. \u201cYou\u2019re doing an awful lot of expensive offsite work before you get on the ground, whereas previously you would do offsite work to a certain position, get on site, and then do some iterative processes,\u201d says Charis Beverton, partner at law firm Winckworth Sherwood.<\/p>\n

Clients are still unsure how they should shape their procurement approach to meet these requirements. Many are entering formal arrangements with contractors and even subcontractors before submitting a gateway two application, so they can provide the detailed design work the BSR needs.<\/p>\n

The BSR, which sits under the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), is statutorily required to determine applications for new HRBs within 12 weeks and work on existing ones in eight weeks. But developers and contractors are widely reporting that these decisions are taking months. Some of the earliest applicants are still waiting to find out if they can start building.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere will be a learning curve for the people doing this at the BSR\u201d<\/p>\n

Eric Johnstone, Brodies<\/h4>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In an already challenging environment for construction, these delays hike up costs and push the financial reward further and further away. Having brought them on early, clients may have to pay the contractor\u2019s staff while the project goes through the system, to ensure they are available when the project starts. If the project requires external finance \u2013 as most projects of the scale of an HRB do \u2013 interest accumulates. The price of materials and labour goes up the longer a project takes to get started, and contractors face uncertainty about when they should place orders. \u201cI can imagine when the bottleneck does ease, suddenly everybody could be rushing around trying to get piling rigs and things like that. And we all know what that does to the market,\u201d says one senior housing association figure.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf jobs that are on the cusp of viability have to wait 20 weeks for gateway approval, that can destroy the whole return on investment for those projects,\u201d says Lilly Gallafent, chief operating officer of Cast Consultancy. Most developers factor a few months of wiggle room into programmes to deal with unexpected delays, she adds, \u201cbut now they don\u2019t know whether to put in three months\u2019 float or a year\u2019s float.\u201d<\/p>\n

Certain types of developments suffer more than others when delayed, says Adam Nicholson, preconstruction director at McLaren Construction. In the student accommodation sector, completing work a few weeks late means the buildings cannot be occupied until the next academic year, for example.<\/p>\n

Piling subcontractors tend to secure work by providing design free of charge, with an expectation that the client will keep them on when construction starts. They don\u2019t get paid until it does. \u201cWe\u2019re tracking over 40 projects that we\u2019ve designed,\u201d says Malcolm O\u2019Sullivan, Van Elle chief operating officer. \u201cWe would expect at least 10 of them to have come to market by now. We\u2019ve seen one.\u201d<\/p>\n

The delays are seriously threatening contractors\u2019 cashflow. O\u2019Sullivan says he\u2019s restricting investment in new plant and moving staff across sectors until his firm gets more orders. He also warns of possible redundancies at other companies.<\/p>\n

Short-staffed<\/h3>\n

With so much at stake, why is it taking so long for the BSR to approve applications? Experts cite multiple factors. One reason the new regulator has struggled to fulfil its duties is a lack of personnel. Each application to the BSR must be assessed by a multidisciplinary team (MDT). These teams are assembled for each project, consisting of a BSR case officer, local authority building inspector and fire safety inspector, although other specialists might be brought in depending on the application.<\/p>\n

Philip White, who heads the BSR as the HSE\u2019s director of building safety, is upfront about the challenges of putting the teams together. \u201cTwo thirds of the resource for assessing applications are not under our control,\u201d he says. \u201cIt is no secret that it has been a challenge to get those MDTs set up quickly, and it has been taking up nearly half of the statutory time period for determinations.\u201d<\/p>\n

Cast Consultancy worked on one of the first applications under the new regime last April. When CN<\/em> meets Gallafent in the following February, that application is still stuck in the earliest stages. \u201cThey wrote to me this morning that they still don\u2019t have the multidisciplinary team. They need a structural engineer.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cPeople have been warmed up to the legislation \u2013 it\u2019s not suddenly come in. I think there was a view that it might not happen. People never really got their heads around it\u201d<\/p>\n

Phillip White, BSR<\/h4>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The regulator has also struggled with a malfunctioning IT system. \u201cThe system didn\u2019t collapse or anything like that,\u201d says White. \u201cBut staff were finding it difficult to access some of the documents being sent in by applicants.\u201d Then, last June, private building control firm AIS Surveyors went into liquidation, which White said created a \u201cperfect storm\u201d. The regulator suddenly had to quickly assess an extra 50 complex building projects at varying stages of construction.<\/p>\n

Could these teething issues have been anticipated? In April last year, CN<\/em> asked senior BSR figures whether the regulator was equipped to deal with a sudden influx of applications. \u201cYes, I think we are,\u201d said HSE operational policy lead Annette Hall at the time. \u201cWe\u2019ve modelled a lot of this.\u201d However, White now admits the models were wrong. \u201cYou\u2019re never going to be perfect, but that\u2019s one of the challenges of setting something up new,\u201d he says. \u201cDespite all the user testing \u2013 and we worked closely with the industry in terms of testing things out \u2013 the reality is, it was taking longer to assess [applications] than was assumed in the business case.<\/p>\n

Delays aren\u2019t the only complaint the industry has about the fledgling regulator. Some believe it could better communicate what it wants. The BSR has previously told CN<\/em> that it was being slowed down by overly lengthy applications containing thousands of plans and drawings, but without the right detail. Others argue that it is unreasonable to expect them to unpick reams of complex legislation \u2013 there are 23 pieces of secondary legislation to the Building Safety Act just on the new building control regime \u2013 without a steer from the BSR on niche but important points of interpretation.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf you want to ask [the BSR] a question, you have to type it in this text box that\u2019s got about 135 characters, and I can\u2019t ask a sensible question in 135 characters,\u201d says Beverton, comparing it to texting on a 1990s mobile phone. \u201cAnd then you wait a long time for them to say: \u2018we won\u2019t answer your question because we won\u2019t engage with you, you should go back to your legal adviser.\u2019 Well, I am the legal adviser, and I\u2019m asking a question because none of the documentation is clear and neither I nor a King\u2019s Counsel can find the solution.\u201d<\/p>\n

Another fear is that the BSR is deprioritising applications submitted before the influx of projects from AIS Surveyors. One source tells CN<\/em> a local authority was advised by the BSR to withdraw its application and resubmit it to get ahead in the queue. Gallafent\u2019s application also fell within the pre-June backlog. \u201cIt seems like we\u2019re being penalised for having submitted something early, because if you submit an application now, you are more likely to get a quick response than we are on that one,\u201d she says. When CN<\/em> puts these criticisms to White, he says he does not accept them, but does not expand further.<\/p>\n

The BSR is also seriously behind on billing. Alongside an initial fee of \u00a3189, the regulator charges \u00a3151 per hour of staff time, raised from \u00a3144 in April. But many still don\u2019t know much time the BSR has spent assessing their applications, and thus how much they will have to pay. One developer of a new-build that has received gateway two approval tells CN<\/em> it still has not received an invoice.<\/p>\n

White blames the lack of invoicing on the IT issues. But the blockage may not be entirely the regulator\u2019s fault. \u201cThese are important issues,\u201d says White of the IT struggles. \u201cBut, I\u2019m afraid, [they were of a] slightly lower order compared to the quality of applications we were receiving.\u201d<\/p>\n

The BSR is currently rejecting around 69 per cent of gateway two applications, White told an online conference in March. These rejections aren\u2019t minor quibbles: the regulator constantly receives plans lacking information on fire barriers or external wall fire spread, he said. Remediation project applications regularly omit arrangements for fixing cladding to a building, or justification for their structural load, says White.<\/p>\n

BSR themselves would say that a lot of problems the quality of the information they’re being given. And I have some sympathy with that, to be honest. I don’t think the act is as opaque as a lot of people think it is. I think in some ways, actually quite clear about what’s needed. And, you know, people are not doing it because they don’t want to do it. They don’t want to hear it. They don’t feel that they have to do it. It’s not because it’s not clear.”<\/p>\n

Hackitt has faith in the industry. \u201cSome people are getting it,\u201d she says. \u201cI think we sometimes spend too long focusing on the ones who don\u2019t get it yet, but there are very encouraging signs of leadership among the bigger players.\u201d She adds: \u201cPart of the problem is that some of the people who are complaining [about delays] are people who may well have done a good job of their own gateway two applications, but they\u2019re stuck in the queue behind people who are creating a lot of problems for the regulator.\u201d A more balanced interpretation is that both the construction industry and the BSR are struggling with the heft of their new responsibilities. After all, the application process is new for both sides. \u201cThere will be a learning curve for the people doing this [at the BSR],\u201d says Brodies\u2019 Johnstone. \u201cThe first application that landed on their desk after the new regime came in will be the very first time they will have been looking at it through that lens.\u201d<\/p>\n

Beverton adds: \u201cIt\u2019s an extremely complicated and fragmented introduction of a completely new regime. It\u2019s very difficult for me even as a professional dealing with this day in, day out to make sure that I\u2019m on top of every single bit of this legislation.\u201d<\/p>\n

Click here<\/a> to read part 2 of this feature<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

High-rise residential development has virtually ground to a halt since the Building Safety Regulator took on full powers. In the first instalment of a two-part series, Charlotte Banks explores the problems\u00a0 When Leeds City Council approved plans for three new residential towers on the Dyecoats regeneration scheme in April 2022, construction was expected to start …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":141524,"featured_media":518691,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ep_exclude_from_search":false},"categories":[79552,79553,559],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\t\n\t\n\t\n