Gateway Two and Gateway Three after planning permission

Gateway Two and Gateway Three are the hard stops that sit after planning permission on a higher-risk building. Gateway Two is building control approval from the Building Safety Regulator, and no construction work may start until it is granted. Gateway Three is the completion certificate, and the building cannot be occupied until it is issued. Neither is a planning process, yet both can force design changes that send you back to the local planning authority for a fresh consent.

The sequencing problem is the part developers underestimate. A permission granted in year one can be unimplementable in year two because the regulator requires a change the permission does not cover.

What each gateway controls

The regime applies to higher-risk buildings, which in England means buildings of at least 18 m in height or at least seven storeys containing two or more residential units, with care homes and hospitals brought in during design and construction.

Gateway One is the planning stage. For relevant buildings, Article 9A of the Development Management Procedure Order 2015 requires a fire statement with the planning application, and the Health and Safety Executive is a statutory consultee. It must be prepared by someone with the necessary fire-engineering competence, because the Building Safety Act framework and Planning Gateway One treat it as a technical document rather than a planning narrative.

Gateway Two is an application for building control approval to the Building Safety Regulator, which sits within the Health and Safety Executive. The statutory decision period is 12 weeks for a new higher-risk building and eight weeks for work to an existing one, extendable by agreement. Work must not begin until approval is granted.

Gateway Three is the completion certificate application. The regulator assesses whether the building as built complies with the Building Regulations, and the building cannot lawfully be occupied until the certificate is issued and the building is registered.

Where the gateways sit against the planning permission

The order on paper looks tidy. Planning application with a fire statement, planning permission, Gateway Two application, construction, Gateway Three, occupation.

In practice Gateway Two demands a level of design development that most schemes do not reach before planning permission. The regulator wants the full fire strategy, the compartmentation drawings, the cavity barrier details, the smoke control design, the structural calculations and the competence declarations for the dutyholders. That is stage four design or beyond, while planning permission is usually granted on stage two or three.

So the design matures between the two gateways, and maturing design changes buildings. Core positions move to accommodate a second staircase. Riser sizes grow. Facade build-ups thicken, which pushes the external face outward or reduces internal floor area. Plant moves to the roof and the roofline changes.

Each of those may or may not be within the scope of the planning permission, and the test is the ordinary one: whether the development is in accordance with the approved plans and conditions.

Design changes the regulator can force

The clearest example is the second staircase requirement for new residential buildings above 18 m, introduced with transitional arrangements that are worth checking against your own programme dates. A single core building designed before the change becomes a two core building, and that is not a minor amendment.

Other changes that commonly follow a Gateway Two review:

• Compartmentation changes that relocate or add walls, affecting unit layouts and window positions.
• Smoke shaft or mechanical smoke ventilation requirements that add plant and roof-level equipment.
• Facade specification changes to reaction to fire performance, altering materials approved by condition.
• Balcony construction changes, including the removal of combustible decking and balustrade materials.
• Firefighting access and water supply requirements affecting the layout of the external areas and the position of the dry riser inlet.
• Evacuation lift provision, which changes core sizes.

A fire safety strategy to BS 9991 or BS 9999 is a fire-engineering document and must be prepared by a competent fire engineer. The draft is the starting point for that professional rather than a substitute.

The three year clock and the problem of starting work

This is the risk that costs money. A planning permission normally has to be implemented within three years by carrying out a material operation. Building work on a higher-risk building cannot start before Gateway Two approval, and Gateway Two cannot be applied for until the design is well advanced.

Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 cannot be used to extend the time limit for implementation, because the subsection dealing with conditions as to time expressly excludes it. The only routes are a fresh application or implementation by something that counts as a material operation and is lawful to carry out.

What that means for programme:

1. Work backwards from the three year expiry date, not forwards from permission.
2. Allow for the statutory Gateway Two period plus realistic extensions, because the regulator can and does request further information.
3. Take advice on what can lawfully be carried out to implement the permission before building work starts, since demolition and site preparation are not always sufficient and the position depends on the terms of the permission.
4. Factor in the separate obligations that bite at the point of starting, including the commencement notice required for the Community Infrastructure Levy, which we cover in commencement notices and the CIL amendment regulations.
5. Decide early whether to seek a longer implementation period or a phased permission at application stage.

And resist the instinct to submit the planning application as early as possible. On a higher-risk building there is a case for developing the fire strategy further before you apply, so that the permission you get is one Gateway Two will not break.

Golden thread information and change control

The golden thread is the structured, accessible information about the building's design and construction, held digitally, kept current and handed over at each gateway. It is a legal requirement rather than a good habit, and the dutyholders are responsible for it.

Change control during construction splits changes into categories. Major changes require an application to the regulator and approval before the change is made. Notifiable changes must be recorded and notified. Everything else is recorded in the change control log.

The planning consequence is that a major change approved by the regulator may also need a planning amendment, and the two processes run on different timetables. A non-material amendment under section 96A is quick but narrow in scope. A section 73 variation of conditions takes the usual determination period and reopens the conditions being varied. A fresh application restarts consultation.

My practical advice is to maintain a single register that tracks every design change against both regimes, with a column for the planning route and a column for the building safety route. Teams that keep two separate logs discover the mismatch at the worst moment.

Occupation, registration and the final gateway

Gateway Three is where a scheme can be finished and still not earn anything. The completion certificate application goes to the regulator with the as-built information and the golden thread handover, and occupation without it is unlawful.

Allow time for it in the programme and in the funding assumptions. Practical completion under the building contract and the issue of a completion certificate are different events, and lenders increasingly distinguish between them.

Occupied higher-risk buildings also have to be registered with the regulator, and the accountable person and principal accountable person duties begin. Those are asset management obligations rather than planning ones, but they sit on the same asset and the same information.

Planning conditions that collide with the gateways

Three collisions come up repeatedly.

Pre-commencement conditions requiring approval of materials, samples or details before any development is begun, where the applicant also cannot begin until Gateway Two approval. The conditions can usually be discharged in parallel, but a condition drafted to require approval before any works at all, including site clearance, creates a sequencing knot. Ask for it to be reworded at application stage.

Conditions fixing external materials by reference to an approved schedule, where the regulator subsequently requires a different cladding or balcony specification. Build flexibility into the wording, for example by referring to materials to be approved rather than to a fixed product, and keep the heritage or design justification ready.

Conditions tying the development to approved drawings that show a single core, where a second staircase becomes necessary. That is a change to the approved plans and needs a planning route, chosen with an eye on how much consultation you want to reopen.

Follow the reform programme as it develops, since the regime has changed several times since 2022: the UK planning law updates timeline is one place to track it.

This is general guidance, not legal advice; the building safety regime is technical and changing, so take advice from a fire engineer and a planning solicitor on any higher-risk building.

You can browse all 66 report types to see which fire and technical documents a scheme is likely to need. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.