Replacing cladding on a consented but unbuilt scheme
A facade substitution on a consented scheme engages the materials condition, the fire statement and the building control route. How to pick the route and sequence the approvals.
Changing the external wall specification on a scheme that has permission but has not been built is almost always a planning matter, because materials are nearly always controlled by condition. The route depends on how the condition is worded and how far the new specification moves from the approved one. Where a materials condition requires samples or details to be approved, a replacement cladding specification can often be dealt with by submitting the new details. Where the approved drawings describe the facade, a section 73 variation is the orthodox route.
And on a relevant building, the fire statement already submitted has to be revisited, which is the part most programmes forget.
Why a facade specification changes after consent
Four reasons account for most of it.
Product availability, because a system specified at planning stage may no longer be manufactured or supplied in the colour, format or fire classification needed. Test evidence, because a product's classification or its performance in a system test may have changed since the design was fixed. Cost, which is the honest reason behind many substitutions. And buildability, where the system cannot be installed on the frame as designed.
Fire performance is the reason that has driven the most change in recent years, and it tends to push specifications towards non-combustible systems with narrower aesthetic options. That matters because it is the appearance the planning permission controlled.
Whether the change is non material
Section 96A allows a non-material amendment to a permission. There is no statutory definition of non material, so it is a judgement for the authority, and practice varies between councils.
A change of brick manufacturer to a near-identical product, or a change of panel supplier where colour, module, reveal depth and finish are maintained, is often accepted as non material. A change from brick to a rainscreen panel, a change of colour family, a change of module that alters the facade rhythm, or a change that alters the depth of reveals and shadow lines is not.
The practical test an officer applies is whether the building would look materially different to a person standing in the street. Put the two options side by side in the submission and let the officer answer that question rather than asserting the conclusion.
| Change | Likely route |
|---|---|
| Same material, different manufacturer, matched appearance | Section 96A non-material amendment, or discharge under the materials condition |
| Same material family, slight colour or texture variation | Discharge of the materials condition with samples |
| Different material with matched module, colour and reveals | Section 96A at best, often section 73 |
| Different material changing colour, module or reveal depth | Section 73 variation |
| Change also affecting window positions, balconies or massing | Section 73, or a fresh application where the change is substantial |
Section 73 where the materials condition bites
A section 73 application varies or removes a condition and produces a new permission, which has consequences worth planning for.
The authority reconsiders the conditions as a whole, so conditions you were content with can be reworded. Community infrastructure levy liability is recalculated against the new permission, which matters where rates have changed. The application is publicised and consulted on again, and a scheme that attracted objection first time will attract it again. And the original permission remains in existence, so you end up with two permissions and need to be clear which one you are implementing.
Allow around eight weeks for determination on a minor application and longer on a major, plus the time to prepare the comparison material. The 2023 Act inserted a further route for varying permissions, and whether it is in force and what it covers should be checked against the current position.
Effect on the fire statement already submitted
For a relevant building, a Fire Statement was submitted with the original application under the development management procedure order, and the Health and Safety Executive was consulted at Planning Gateway One. A change to the external wall construction goes to the heart of that document.
Two consequences follow. The statement has to be updated to describe the new specification, its reaction to fire classification and the system test evidence relied on. And where the change is material, the Gateway One consultation is engaged again on the section 73 application, which adds consultee time to the programme.
A Fire Statement is required at Planning Gateway One for relevant buildings and must be prepared by someone with the necessary fire engineering competence. The same applies to a Fire Safety Strategy, which is a fire engineering document. A PlanScope draft of either is a starting point for that professional rather than a substitute, and qualified professional input is legally required here.
Where the building sits close to a height or use threshold, the evidence expected changes, and our note on building just below the threshold sets that out.
Coordination with the building control route
The planning route and the building control route run in parallel and neither substitutes for the other.
For a higher-risk building, the building control application goes to the Building Safety Regulator and a change of external wall specification after the application has been accepted may require a change control submission, with major changes needing approval before the work proceeds. For other buildings the change goes through the chosen building control body in the normal way.
- Establish whether the building is higher risk, because that determines the building control route and the change control obligations.
- Identify every approval the facade touches: planning condition, fire statement, building control application, warranty provider requirements and any funder technical monitor.
- Sequence them so that the building control position is settled before the planning submission describes the specification as final, since a specification rejected by building control after a section 73 wastes both applications.
- Keep one specification document as the single source, referenced by each submission, rather than separate descriptions that drift apart.
Evidence to submit with the amendment
The submission that gets determined quickly contains the following.
- A comparison drawing showing the approved and proposed facade side by side at the same scale, with elevations and a typical bay at 1:20.
- Revised elevations and typical details, with reveal depths, module dimensions and junction details drawn rather than described.
- Samples or a sample panel where the condition requires them, with the location of the panel on site agreed.
- Product data including reaction to fire classification and the system test evidence, with the test reference quoted.
- A schedule of changes, listing every drawing and document being superseded with its revision.
- An updated fire statement for a relevant building.
- A short planning statement explaining why the change is proposed and why it is acceptable in design terms, which on a heritage-sensitive site extends into a heritage assessment.
Do not submit a product brochure in place of a drawing. Officers assess the drawn information.
Records for the building file
Whatever route is used, the change has to land in the building's own record as well as in the planning file. For a higher-risk building that means the golden thread information, and for any building it means the regulation 38 fire safety information handed to the responsible person at occupation.
Record the superseded specification as well as the new one, with the date and reason for the change. A future owner trying to establish what is actually on the wall needs to know what was approved, what was changed and when. That record is also what an insurer or a lender will ask for, and reconstructing it from subcontractors who left site years earlier is slow and uncertain.
Enter your postcode on PlanScope to see which reports a facade amendment is likely to need.
This is general guidance, not legal advice. Check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.
Frequently asked questions
Is a change of cladding a non-material amendment?
Sometimes. There is no statutory definition, so it is a judgement for the authority. A matched substitution keeping colour, module, reveal depth and finish is often accepted under section 96A. A change of material family, colour or module that would look different from the street usually needs a section 73 variation instead.
What does a section 73 application bring with it?
A new permission with the condition varied, which means the condition set is reconsidered as a whole, community infrastructure levy liability is recalculated, and the application is publicised and consulted on again. The original permission also survives, so you must be clear which permission you are implementing.
Does the fire statement have to be updated?
Yes, for a relevant building. A change to the external wall construction goes to the substance of the statement, so it must be revised to describe the new specification, its reaction to fire classification and the system test evidence. Where the change is material, Gateway One consultation is engaged again.
Can I rely on a building control approval instead?
No. The two regimes are separate and neither cures a breach of the other. A specification acceptable to a building control body can still breach a planning condition controlling materials, and a planning amendment does not discharge any change control obligation on the building control side.
What should I submit with the amendment?
A side-by-side comparison of approved and proposed elevations at the same scale, a typical bay at 1:20, revised details showing reveal depths and junctions, samples where the condition requires them, product data with the reaction to fire classification and test reference, a schedule of superseded documents, and an updated fire statement.
Which approval should be settled first?
The building control position on the new specification, before the planning submission describes it as final. A specification rejected by building control after a section 73 has been determined wastes both applications, so establish whether the building is higher risk and what change control applies at the outset.
Sources and further reading
This article is general guidance about the planning system in England and, where stated, the rest of the UK. It is not legal or professional advice. Check your local planning authority’s validation requirements and take professional advice for your specific site.