Tackling the challenges of building regulations

Two years on from the introduction of the UK Building Safety Act, new regulations are driving a fundamental shift in how compliance is managed in construction and real estate projects.  

Compliance management ensures control and accountability throughout the project lifecycle. Yet, gaps in the market’s understanding and in the necessary capabilities in this context risk creating significant challenges, increased costs and delays if not addressed. 

Since the UK's Building Safety Act came into force, considerable attention has, understandably, been focused on higher-risk buildings (HRBs). These are defined, in general terms, as structures that are at least 18 metres in height, or have at least seven storeys, and contain at least two residential units.  

Developers with exposure to the HRB Building Safety Regulator regime are starting to adopt new processes and procedures needed for HRB projects to ensure the UK’s HRB buildings are safe.

“But the reality is that these building regulations apply to most real estate projects - and not just HRBs.”   

Many clients responsible for buildings which are not categorised as HRBs are currently overlooking the fact that their assets still fall under the scope of the act. Suppliers specialising in non-HRBs are also proving slower to pick up what the regulatory changes mean for their projects and the advice they provide clients. 

As the sector gets to grips with fresh and evolving guidance at varying speeds, all asset owners and developers need to have a greater understanding of the scope and impact of the act and regulations.  

This includes defining where responsibility lies, being explicit on exactly what’s required from each supplier, and understanding the capabilities of their supply chain. 

Setting responsibilities clearly and early 

Clients need to place a greater focus on appointing two key roles early on in the planning, design and procurement phases of their project:

1. Building Regulations Principal Designer (BRPD), and
2. Principal Contractor (BRPC).

These roles are both now mandated for almost every project where the building regulations apply. However, not all suppliers are willing to take on this role, which can lead to challenges further down the line. 

To begin, when looking at BRPD, in the vast majority of cases, the architect’s lead designer will need to take on this role.

However, if the requirements of the role aren’t included within the initial procurement phase, or aren’t detailed specifically enough, clients often find the architectural or design practice which has been appointed either isn’t willing to take on the BRPD responsibility or will only do so for an additional fee.  

As a result, clients may be forced to enlist a third party to carry out this role alongside the lead designer. This brings its own significant added costs, which could have been reduced with robust initial procurement of the role. 

The challenge is even more acute when it comes to appointing the BRPC role, as there can typically only be one contractor in control of a site.

“Bringing on a third party if the main contractor refuses to carry out the BRPC role is, simply, not typically an option.”  

Instead, the whole procurement process may need to be rerun to appoint a replacement main contractor. This is not only expensive but will potentially delay the project and may entail contractual compensation to the party that has already been appointed.  

Prioritising compliance in procurement 

These regulatory changes place greater scrutiny on procurement as a key function.  

“Across the real estate sector, procurement processes need to evolve to put a greater emphasis on compliance with building regulations.”

This includes focusing on competent statutory appointments and explicit accountability for managing compliance at each stage of the project lifecycle. This is particularly important given the supply chain’s varied maturity in this area. 

Traditional procurement strategies that give precedence to cost or speed can often overlook critical compliance requirements, exposing projects to regulatory breaches. Building design and development face broader impacts, such as aligning with new HRB gateways and the inability to ‘value engineer’ later, as designs must be finalised before construction starts. 

A procurement approach, with a greater focus on compliance, will help to ensure that all stakeholders are aligned with, and meet, the required regulatory expectations throughout the project. Overall, this reduces the risk of non-compliance and potential penalties. 

This comes down to closer consideration and analysis by clients of potential suppliers’ competence and ability to meet standards set by the new regulations. This is especially vital in the case of the principal contractor, which will be responsible for ensuring contractors’ and suppliers’ compliance throughout the construction phase.  

For those working in HRBs, getting all of this right from day one will also help to set up and manage gateway processes and keep consistent records later on.  

Preparing for further supply chain change 

A better understanding of the supply chain’s handle on building safety will also provide greater flexibility to adapt to what is still a new and dynamic regime. Interpretation of the act itself is still subject to developing guidance.  

This has included a recent ruling over the treatment of roof gardens in relation to defining whether a building is a HRB, as just one example.

“Ensuring that supply chain partners are up to speed with these changes, and that there is sufficient flexibility in contracts to respond to them, is vital.”

Overall, the sector will need to adopt the new legislation. The challenge is to establish capability and competence quickly enough. Some clients and suppliers are already embracing the new requirements.

Until this is true of the whole sector, relying solely on the supply chain for advice, or waiting until there is case law to guide decisions, risks greater costs, delays and breaches of regulation.