A year after secondary legislation was published for the Building Safety Act in England questions still linger for architects around various aspects of the new regime, its new dutyholder roles, and subsequent duties. One of these areas surround the Lead Designer and Building Regulations Principal Designer (BRPD) dutyholder roles, and what the key similarities and differences between the two are.
There’s no doubt that the two roles do have comparability and do overlap, especially in terms of scope, but there are important differences to acknowledge and understand.
We asked Dieter Bentley-Gockmann, Director at EPR Architects and author of the definitive RIBA Principal Designer’s Guide, to answer your questions.
What are the differences between the Lead Designer and Principal Designer?
"The Lead Designer role is a contractual appointment; the scope of the role is dependent on the contractual agreement between the parties, just as it has always been."
"The new BRPD role is a statutory appointment with roles and responsibilities set out in law.
"While some Lead Designer responsibilities are similar to those of a Principal Designer, there are important differences between the two, particularly in terms of scope."
"The scope and typical primary duty of a Lead Designer is to see that all aspects of the project design are coordinated and this may include duties with respect to the programming and coordination of the other designers’ services."
"The BRPD is responsible for monitoring and coordinating design work to ensure compliance with relevant requirements of Building Regulations."
"Quite separately, the responsibilities of the Principal Designer under CDM Regulations (CDMPD) are limited to coordinating the design to eliminate health and safety risks during the construction and maintenance of a project."
Is it likely that practices will have different approaches to the scoping of these duties?
"The extent to which there is commonality between the roles will depend on the contractual agreement of the parties."
"Provided that practices comply with statutory requirements, they are free to negotiate and agree with clients the extent to which they incorporate Lead Designer or Lead Consultant services within the scope of Principal Designer services."
"A lot will depend on the nature of the project, the type and experience of the client and the client’s design team. Provided that a practice ensures that it meets its new statutory obligations as a Designer (the practice must have the organisational capability and individual competence to undertake the required services), they are at liberty to agree the scope and extent of services that best meet the needs of their clients."
"Clients may seek to supplement the statutory role of the Principal Designer to include additional duties that more commonly expected of a Lead Designer, such as coordinating, compiling and submitting a Building Regulations approval application."
"I tend to envisage the roles as circles on a Venn diagram where the circles representing separate roles will overlap where there is commonality. For instance, coordination of design matters relating to Building Regulations compliance may also impact on health and safety, but there are BRPD responsibilities unique to each role. There will also be coordination of design that is not subject to building control approval or relevant to a statutory compliance declaration or completion statement."
"Overlap or intersectionality between roles is likely to be greater for less complex projects. Where the project is a high-risk building (HRB), there are additional statutory duties unique to Principal Designers, e.g. duties in respect of mandatory occurrence reporting, liaising with the Principal Contractor to coordinate controlled changes to the design, and maintaining Golden Thread information."
How could a design responsibility matrix clarify differentiation of roles?
"A design responsibility matrix is a great management tool for focusing hearts and minds on the detailed requirements of a project. A matrix can help to identify gaps in the design team’s responsibilities and provide clarity in instances where consultants may have differing or opposing views regarding their own and others’ responsibilities."
"Having identified scope gaps or differences in opinion regarding design responsibilities, the design team is then able to work together to reach a consensus on the best way to address these issues and so mitigate any risks to the project."
"A design responsibility matrix can also be used by a practice to identify which responsibilities will be undertaken in their capacity as Lead Designer versus those undertaken as Principal Designer, which might be particularly important if these duties are to be discharged by different individuals or practices."
"This can also be used to communicate responsibilities to the client and the rest of the design team to ensure that everyone understands the design team dynamic from the outset of a project."
What are the benefits of one organisation taking on the roles of Designer, Lead Designer and BRPD?
"Having one practice take responsibility for all these roles eliminates the risk of duplication or omission of services where there is commonality between the roles. It ensures a consistent approach to planning, managing and monitoring the design work, which ought to result in efficiencies in the delivery of the project."
"As a Lead Designer’s primary responsibility is to coordinate the design, and the Principal Designer’s primary duty is to plan, manage and monitor the design, it makes sense that these responsibilities are discharged by the same practice to avoid the risk of consultants pulling in different directions."
"Having one practice undertake these roles also reduces the risk of potential confusion between the extent of the responsibilities applicable to each role, because ultimately the same team will be responsible for ensuring all the duties are discharged, providing clients with a single point of responsibility."
How should a practice’s approach to Designer, Lead Designer and BRPD roles impact fee proposals?
"To ensure clients are able to fulfil their statutory duties, in particular ensuring that sufficient time and resources are available to the design team, it is essential that practices clearly communicate to their clients what services they will benefit from for their fee."
"Where a practice is providing multiple roles, it is particularly important to clearly differentiate between the fee, resources and services for each role. This is also helpful in communicating to clients the differences between what they may be used to, in terms of paying for designer and lead designer services, compared to what is required under the new regulatory regime."
"Demonstration of compliance with Building Regulations now needs more robust design and design coordination services so that clear and concise information can be submitted to the relevant building control authority."
Any other thoughts on the differences between Lead Designer and BRPD roles and responsibilities?
"There are clearly similarities between some BRPD duties and Lead Designer services, as there are with many of the core competencies."
"In the same way that nobody would expect the Lead Designer not to be the consultant central to the design team, I would not expect someone outside of the design team to undertake the BRPD duties."
"The statutory requirement for the BRPD to be the designer in control of the design for compliance purposes clearly demonstrates the expectation that these duties will be taken on by the organisation acting as Lead Designer."
Thanks to Dieter Bentley-Gockmann, Director, EPR Architects.
Text by Neal Morris and the RIBA Practice team. Send us your feedback and ideas.
RIBA Core Curriculum topic: Legal, regulatory and statutory compliance.
As part of the flexible RIBA CPD programme, professional features count as microlearning. See further information on the updated RIBA CPD core curriculum and on fulfilling your CPD requirements as a RIBA Chartered Member.
