What a Gateway One fire statement costs to produce

Fire statement cost is driven by three things, and none of them is the length of the document. The competence of the author, how much of the fire strategy has already been designed, and how many revision cycles the consultee response triggers. A statement for a scheme with a settled core layout, agreed fire service access and a decided evacuation strategy is a short piece of work. The same statement on a scheme where none of that has been resolved is a fire engineering commission with a planning form attached.

Which is why the question to ask is not what a fire statement costs. It is how much of the strategy exists before anyone starts writing.

What the prescribed form requires

Article 9A of the Development Management Procedure Order 2015 requires a fire statement with applications for planning permission relating to a relevant building, broadly a building containing two or more dwellings or educational accommodation that is 18 metres or more in height, or seven or more storeys. The statement must be on the form published by the Secretary of State.

The form asks for the principles and approach to fire safety and then works through the matters that planning can actually influence:

• the site layout, including the position of the building relative to boundaries and other structures
• emergency vehicle access, with route widths, turning provision and hardstanding
• water supplies for firefighting, including hydrant positions and flow
• access for the fire and rescue service into and within the building
• means of escape, including the evacuation strategy and the number and position of stairs
• construction methods and materials relevant to fire spread
• how the development will function in use

Note what that list excludes. The form is not a full fire engineering strategy and it is not a Building Regulations submission. It is the evidence the planning system needs to consult the regulator, which is what Planning Gateway One is.

Who has to write it, and what that does to the fee

This report sits in the category where a competent professional is not optional. The Fire Statement is required by Article 9A and expects an author with the necessary fire engineering competence, so a drafted statement is a starting point for that professional rather than a substitute for them. Any AI-assisted draft should be reviewed, corrected and signed off by the fire engineer whose judgement the statement sets out.

Competence drives the fee in a direct way. A chartered fire engineer taking professional responsibility for the content, and carrying the insurance behind it, prices differently from a technician completing a form. The difference is what you are paying for, because the statement's value is the consultee's confidence in it.

What reduces the fee: a clear brief, complete drawings, a single point of contact, and a decision taken in advance on the evacuation strategy. What increases it: iterative design, late changes to the core, and a client who wants the engineer to make design decisions the architect has deferred.

If you need a reviewer to check a draft before submission, the professional directory is the route to sign-off by someone with the relevant discipline.

The design information needed first

The statement cannot be written before these exist, and commissioning it early means paying twice.

The measurement of height is the item most often got wrong, and it decides whether the duty applies. Establish it from the survey against the defined basis rather than from a drawing annotation, because a building a few hundred millimetres either side of the threshold changes the application's requirements.

Where the statement forces a design change

Three things surface regularly, and each has a cost that dwarfs the fee for the statement itself.

Fire service vehicle access. A scheme that leaves an undersized turning head, or an access route that crosses a podium not designed for the vehicle loading, has a layout problem rather than a paperwork problem. The fix is usually a redesign of the ground plane, with knock-on effects on landscape, drainage and parking.

Stair provision and escape strategy. Where the evacuation strategy has not been settled, the statement cannot describe it, and settling it may change the core. Changes to the core affect net to gross efficiency, which is the figure the whole appraisal rests on.

Boundary separation and facade strategy. External fire spread considerations can constrain window positions, balcony design and material choices on elevations facing a boundary.

The honest advice is to run a short fire engineering review at the massing stage, before the planning drawings are produced. It costs a fraction of a redesign and it is the single most effective way to control the overall cost of the Gateway One process.

Consultee response and revision cycles

At Planning Gateway One the building safety regulator within the health and safety executive is a statutory consultee on applications for relevant buildings. Its response goes to the local planning authority and forms part of the decision.

Budget for a response that asks questions. The common requests concern access route dimensions and vehicle loadings, hydrant provision and flow evidence, clarity on the evacuation strategy, and consistency between the statement and the drawings. Each round of questions costs engineer time, and inconsistency between documents is the most avoidable cause.

Two practical controls. Cross-check every dimension in the statement against the drawing it comes from before submission, and name the drawing numbers and revisions in the statement so the consultee can see which version was assessed. Then, if the drawings change during determination, issue a revised statement rather than hoping nobody notices.

How it connects to the later gateways

The fire statement is the first of three gateways under the building safety regime, and knowing the sequence helps with budgeting because the later work is substantial.

Gateway One is the planning stage statement described here. Gateway Two is approval by the regulator before construction begins, which requires a far more detailed set of information. Gateway Three is the completion stage, before occupation.

A fuller Fire Safety Strategy to the relevant British Standards is a fire engineering document in its own right, required for the later stages rather than for the planning application, and it also requires a competent professional author. The planning statement should be consistent with the direction that strategy will take, which is another argument for having the fire engineer involved early rather than at form-filling stage.

Building control charges under the new regime sit alongside the planning fee and are a separate line in the budget, as our note on building control charges alongside the planning fee sets out.

Programming and budgeting the work

A workable sequence for a relevant building:

1. Confirm height and storey count from the survey, and therefore whether Article 9A applies.
2. Commission a fire engineering review at massing stage, covering access, cores and boundary separation.
3. Settle the evacuation strategy as a client decision, recorded in writing.
4. Produce the planning drawings reflecting that advice.
5. Prepare the statement on the prescribed form, referencing drawing numbers and revisions.
6. Submit, and hold engineer time in reserve for the consultee response.
7. Issue a revised statement if the drawings change before decision.

On budgets, separate three lines: the fire engineering advice, the statement itself, and the reserve for revisions. Combining them into one figure is how fire costs appear to overrun when in fact the advice was never budgeted.

Where the application is in outline with matters reserved, the position needs thought, because the information available at outline stage may not support a complete statement. The staging of fees and information across outline and reserved matters is covered in our note on outline and reserved matters fees on a phased scheme.

Settle the evacuation strategy and the fire service access before anyone starts the form. See PlanScope pricing for what a draft report costs before professional review.

This is general guidance, not legal advice; check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it. For specialist technical reports, qualified professional input may be required. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.