BUILDING SAFETY | DESIGN AND BUILD CONTRACTS DESIGN AND BUILD WILL HAVE TO CHANGE The Building Safety Regulator tells CIBSEs golden thread event that design and build contracts in their current state cannot be used for higher-risk buildings. Molly Tooher-Rudd looks at how the procurement route will have to evolve to comply with new regulations T here was an audible sharp intake of breath when Andrew Moore, head of operations for building control, at the UKs new Building Safety Regulator (BSR), addressed CIBSEs recent golden thread building safety conference. He told delegates that current design and build (D&B) procurement methods for higher-risk buildings (HRBs) in the UK would not be possible under new building safety regulations. Design occurring at the same time as construction will not be viable, he said. D&B will have to change. The reason for the audiences collective shock is that this form of procurement makes up 58% of contracts in the UK1. The golden thread event was held at The Royal Society, London, shortly before major safety regulations came into force on 1 October (see panel, The new building safety regulations). Among the changes that Moore says will force the industry to rethink the use of D&B is the requirement for a dutyholder to be responsible for overseeing all aspects of building work through a statutory change control process. The dutyholder could be the client, principal contractor, principle designer, or any other designers or contractors. Under the new rules for HRBs, any design changes must be documented and managed after the building design has been approved for construction by the BSR, at what is known as Gateway 2. (Gateway 1 is the planning application stage, while Gateway 3 is when the BSR approves the building after construction.) Major changes after Gateway 2 need approval by the BSR before they can be made, which 22 November 2023 www.cibsejournal.com could lead to project delays. Smaller changes deemed notifiable can be carried out, but must be flagged with the BSR. The process doesnt lend itself to D&B, said Moore: Under the new regime, you have to design it and then build it. D&B for HRBs doesnt fit in with the methodology. David McCullogh, compliance manager at Balfour Beatty, closely studied the Building Safety Act to ensure his company takes the necessary steps to comply with the new regulations. Speaking at the golden thread event, he said he believed D&B procurement for HRBs is possible under the new building safety regime, but that processes would have to change significantly for contractors to comply. Regulatory impact Before the new regulations came into force on 1 October, a principal designer working on a D&B contract could incorporate additional design information, and the contractor would update the construction plan submitted to building control as required. There was no need for further statutory approval from building control if changes were made. In her independent review, Building a safer future, Dame Judith Hackitt noted that there was no over-arching statutory requirements to report or record changes to previously agreed plans, even where they will have a substantial impact on building safety (or wider Building Regulations requirements). She said the lack of oversight meant D&B contracts can often result in uncontrolled, undocumented, and poorly designed changes being made to the original design intent. Dame Judith added that building Balfour Beattys David McCullogh Design, design, design: those are my top three priorities, and its at the heart of this new regime David McCullogh, Balfour Beatty control bodies were overly reliant on the need to ensure positive, open and ongoing relationships with contractors (or sophisticated interventions at the completion stage). Under the new regime for HRBs, there is no longer the flexibility to make significant changes without having to go back to the BSR for approval. McCullogh said it was clear that the