Sequencing planning conditions with gateway two
Planning conditions and gateway two approval come from different bodies against different tests. Run them in parallel with one source of truth for the external envelope.
On a higher-risk building, two separate approvals stand between planning permission and a start on site, and they are granted by different bodies against different tests. Planning conditions are discharged by the local planning authority. Building control approval at gateway two comes from the Building Safety Regulator, and construction must not begin until it is given. Schemes lose months when those two processes are run in sequence by accident rather than mapped deliberately, usually because a design change forced by one requires a fresh application to the other.
Two regimes with different triggers
The planning regime applies to the development. The building safety regime applies to the building, and only where it meets the higher-risk definition of at least 18 metres in height or at least seven storeys, containing at least two residential units.
Gateway one sits inside the planning application. Article 9A of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 requires a fire statement to accompany applications for relevant buildings, with the Health and Safety Executive as a statutory consultee. That part is familiar to most development teams because it happens inside a process they already run.
Gateway two is different in kind. It is an application for building control approval to the Building Safety Regulator, made under the Building Safety Act 2022 regime, and it carries a statutory prohibition on starting work before approval. There is no equivalent of starting at risk.
The mistake is to treat gateway two as building control in its old form, submitted when the contractor is appointed. It is a consent with a decision period, and the decision period has to sit in the programme like a planning determination does.
What must be approved before work starts
The gateway two application asks for a level of design development that is well beyond a traditional building control submission at the same stage.
The Regulator expects the design to be sufficiently developed to demonstrate compliance with the functional requirements, with a fire and emergency file, a construction control plan, a change control plan and the arrangements for the golden thread of information. What that means in practice is that the design team has to be substantially finished before the application, not after it.
Decision periods are set by regulation and are measured in weeks rather than days, with a longer period for a new higher-risk building than for work to an existing one, and provision for extension by agreement. Requests for further information stop and restart the clock in practice, so the realistic programme allowance is longer than the headline figure. The detail of what gateway two requires before construction starts is worth reading before setting any date.
Conditions that clash with the control application
The conflict is nearly always about the external envelope.
Planning conditions routinely require materials, façade details, balconies, window reveals and external lighting to be approved before development starts or before the superstructure goes up. The gateway two application fixes the external wall construction, cavity barrier positions, balcony construction and the fire strategy that depends on all of them.
If the planning materials condition is discharged first and the Regulator then requires a change to the wall build-up, the approved sample panel is wrong. If the gateway two submission is made first and the planning authority then refuses the proposed brick, the fire engineering may need revisiting.
Neither order is right in every case. What works is to run them in parallel with a single source of truth for the envelope, and to agree with the planning officer that the materials condition will be discharged against a specification that names performance requirements as well as appearance.
Second staircase provision is the change that has reshaped more schemes than any other, and what changed for buildings above 18 metres has consequences for core layout, unit mix and therefore for the approved planning drawings.
Design changes between the two approvals
Assume there will be changes. Plan the route for them before they arrive.
On the planning side there are two mechanisms. A non-material amendment under section 96A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 is quick and suits small changes that do not alter the character of the permission. A section 73 application to vary a condition, including the approved drawings condition, handles anything larger, takes around eight weeks and produces a new permission with a fresh condition set.
On the building safety side, the change control plan governs what can proceed and what requires the Regulator's approval before it does. Major changes need approval. Notifiable changes must be recorded and notified.
- Identify the change and classify it under both regimes at the same meeting.
- Where a planning amendment is needed, decide between section 96A and section 73 on the facts, not on the timetable.
- Submit the planning amendment before or alongside the building safety change, because the Regulator will ask whether the planning position supports the design.
- Update the fire strategy and the fire safety strategy documentation so that both files say the same thing.
The one to avoid is a change that is non-material in planning terms and major in building safety terms, handled quickly on one side and slowly on the other, leaving two approved designs that differ.
Sequencing the programme for a higher-risk building
A workable order for a new build scheme looks like this.
- Planning application including the fire statement, with HSE consulted at gateway one.
- Planning permission, then immediate triage of every condition into those needed before any works, those needed before superstructure, and those needed before occupation.
- Design development to the level gateway two requires, with the envelope specification agreed with the planning officer in draft.
- Discharge of the pre-commencement planning conditions that do not depend on the envelope, such as archaeology, ecology and construction management.
- Gateway two application, with the decision period in the programme as a fixed block.
- Discharge of the envelope-related conditions against the specification that the Regulator has seen.
- Start on site only after building control approval is in hand.
Demolition and enabling works need their own analysis. Whether they fall inside the prohibition depends on what is being done and to what, so take advice on the specific scope rather than assuming site clearance is outside it.
An illustrative example
A 21 storey residential scheme receives permission in March with a pre-commencement condition requiring approval of external materials. The team discharges it in May against a brick slip system. The gateway two submission in July leads the Regulator to require a change to the cavity barrier arrangement, which changes the slip fixing detail. A fresh materials discharge and a section 96A amendment follow, and the start slips by eleven weeks. This example is illustrative.
Where schemes lose months
Three patterns account for most of the lost time.
The first is treating gateway two as a formality and submitting an incomplete application, which produces a request for further information and a restarted clock. The second is discharging envelope conditions too early, before the fire engineering is settled. The third is discovering at gateway two that the approved planning drawings show a core that no longer works, and needing a section 73 application that was never in the programme.
None of these is a regulatory problem. They are programme problems, and the fix is a single change control process that looks at both regimes at once, with one person responsible for keeping the planning position and the building safety position aligned.
Write that into the appointment documents. It costs less than the alternative.
Enter your postcode on PlanScope to see which reports a higher-risk residential scheme 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. For specialist technical reports, qualified professional input may be required.
Frequently asked questions
Which buildings need gateway two approval?
Higher-risk buildings, defined by reference to a height of at least 18 metres or at least seven storeys, containing at least two residential units. The same threshold governs the fire statement requirement at gateway one under Article 9A of the Development Management Procedure Order 2015. Confirm the measurement method early, because a building close to the threshold changes regime entirely.
Can work start before the Building Safety Regulator decides?
No. The regime carries a statutory prohibition on beginning construction of a higher-risk building before building control approval is granted. There is no equivalent of starting at risk, and no way to implement a planning permission around it. The decision period must sit in the programme as a fixed block, like a planning determination.
Should planning conditions be discharged before or after gateway two?
Split them. Conditions unrelated to the external envelope, such as archaeology, ecology and construction management, can be discharged early. Envelope conditions covering materials, balconies and façade details should wait until the fire engineering is settled, because a change required by the Regulator can invalidate an approved sample panel or specification.
How are design changes handled across both regimes?
Classify every change under both at the same time. In planning, a non-material amendment under section 96A suits small changes and a section 73 application handles larger ones, taking around eight weeks. Under the building safety regime, the change control plan determines whether a change is major and needs the Regulator's approval before proceeding.
Do demolition and enabling works fall inside the prohibition?
It depends on the scope and on what is being demolished or altered. Site clearance on a cleared site raises different questions from works to an existing higher-risk building. Take advice on the specific scope rather than assuming enabling works sit outside the regime, because getting it wrong means an unlawful start on a building that cannot easily be regularised.
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.