Staged submissions and the Building Safety Levy: the devil’s in the detail 

The forthcoming Building Safety Levy as well as recent changes to the Building 
Safety Regulator’s (BSR) position on staged submissions has generated much interest in the industry. 

Since the new building control regime for higher-risk buildings (HRB) went live on 1 October 2023, the route for building control approval applications (or Gateway 2) is for a full submission that demonstrates a design, if built, should be fully compliant with all relevant requirements. 

Staged submissions break this down into smaller sections, with the potential for the subsequent building work to be completed in separate stages. Originally seen by the BSR as a mechanism to be used for complex multi-tower constructions, their stance has since changed. New guidance, recently published, states that in addition to complex multi-tower designs, staged submissions will now also be accepted for single towers.

The regulation’s expectation is that stage 1 will most commonly cover piling, foundations and structure up to the ground floor slab. Subsequently, stage 2 would cover the remaining aspects of design for the rest of the building. Further subsequent stages would be suitable in a multi-tower or single-podium-type design. 

Each staged submission is therefore treated as an application in its own right, with a multi-disciplinary team (MDT) appointed to assess and provide a determination. The expectation from the BSR is that a single regulatory lead and MDT would assess all stages of a project, giving consistency to decisionmaking and an improved user experience in terms of communication and clarity for the applicant.

However, a consequence of this, confirmed during recent dialogue with the BSR, is that subsequent stage applications can only be made once the preceding (or first) stage has been approved.

Along with the updated guidance from the BSR, the Construction Leadership Council published updated guidance to support Gateway 2 submissions at the end of 2025. 

In addition to providing further detail for “regular” applications. The guidance aims to clarify the level of detail required as well as any additional requirements that will need to be met for a staged submission. These include additional supporting documents, revised folder structures and sets out what is expected of different elements of the design at each stage.

The expectation is that the outline design and coordination, RIBA stage 3, for the wider building will be complete at stage 1. For the work seeking approval at this stage 1 (or subsequent stages), the full and final RIBA 4 design needs to be submitted. 

The detailed design information needed to demonstrate compliance with that stage of work must be supported by the outline design of the wider building, demonstrating that any assumptions being made are realistic and in accordance with the wider compliance strategy.

This is a critical part of the staged application, that design work for the whole building is sufficiently progressed to allow these assumptions to be justified. Giving the BSR comfort that what is being approved at stage 1 will realistically be able to sustain subsequent stages without major changes be required. 

Smaller, more focused applications may allow the BSR to review and determine the application more quickly, meeting the statutory timelines for applications. Subsequent stages may also benefit from greater engagement with the BSR regulatory lead and MDT during earlier stages. 

It also allows for more overlap in programme schedules, with detailed design work for the stage 2 submission ongoing while stage 1 is being determined.

There is also potential for construction work to start on site for stage 1 while stage 2 design work is being finalised or assessed by BSR. Particularly on schemes with more complex, and time consuming, piling and foundation designs this would give significant programme benefits. 

Finally, it means the full design does not need to be finalised prior to the stage 1 submission, with potential for benefits in procurement of long lead time items, sub consultant appointments and reduced programme timescales.

Despite the advantages, this a relatively new process with only limited numbers of applications currently made to the BSR. Members of the MDT may also have different interpretations on the required levels of information for each stage that could cause delays while requests for information are issued or risk a rejection.

Furthermore, coordination of the design must be effective to ensure that the stage 1 submission can support the design in subsequent stages. If design work for the subsequent stages isn’t sufficiently advanced, then justifying assumptions made on compliance pathways become difficult.

Finally, there is a risk of having to stop work on site if subsequent stages are delayed in determination or rejected by the BSR.

With the Building Safety Levy due to come into force on 1 October this year, it will require developers to pay a charge for residential developments based on the size of the development and the area in which it is built. 

From this date, applications for building control approval will be subject to paying the levy prior to completion of the building. For new-build HRBs, this means that applications to the BSR must be made prior to 1 October in order to be exempt. 

Importantly, if this application was subsequently invalidated or rejected by the BSR, it would require a new application to be made. In this case, the project would become subject to the levy. 

For staged submissions, it is important to note that each stage is considered to be a separate application under regulation 3 of The Building (Higher-Risk Buildings Procedures) (England) Regulations 2023. This means that if a subsequent stage application were made after 1 October, the section relating to this application becomes liable to pay the levy. In a single-tower-type construction with two staged applications, this would likely mean the whole structure becoming liable for the levy.

While the October deadline for submissions before the Building Safety Levy goes into effect seems to still be far off, the current 22-week average determination period for a new-build HRB means the window for submissions is closing rapidly. Indeed, if a stage 1 application followed this timescale, it would need to have been made prior to the end of April to allow the stage 2 submission to be follow before the October deadline.

With timescales already tight and deadlines looming, any further delays are likely to significantly impact projects. However, many feel that although the BSR has made significant recent progress in reducing determination periods, the upcoming Building Safety Levy deadline is likely to lead to a glut of applications over the summer period, stretching resources still further. 

The relaxation of the BSR’s position on staged applications has opened the door for a wider range of projects to benefit from this submission pathway. One which, if utilised correctly, has the potential to bring significant benefits to programmes, especially for complex and very large schemes.

However, the positives must be weighed against the very real risks, meaning staged applications will not be the most effective strategy for all buildings. Early consideration of the submission strategy is key to ensuring the most suitable pathway is chosen. 

It is likely that the implementation of the Building Safety Levy will make staged applications less attractive in the short term. However, post implementation, staged applications may deliver tangible benefits to project timelines and determination periods when employed on suitable projects.