For much of 2024 and 2025, the Building Safety Regulator's Gateway 2 process was a bottleneck that threatened to stall high-rise residential development across England. Median decision times reached 51.5 weeks by mid-2025. Projects fell 12 to 18 months behind schedule.[1] The regime, born from the lessons of the Grenfell Tower tragedy, was doing the right thing in the wrong way: demanding rigorous safety evidence but lacking the operational capacity to process it.
The latest figures, published on 31 March 2026, tell a different story. The BSR's 12-week rolling approval rate now stands at 67% across 284 decisions. Under the new batching model, the median time from a case being issued to a supplier to a full assessment being returned is just four weeks.[2] Over 10,000 residential units have been approved, with legacy cases reduced to just two.[3]
What Changed
The transformation is partly structural. The BSR introduced a batching model that bundles applications to specialist external suppliers for accelerated assessment, while maintaining full regulatory oversight. It appointed account managers for major developers and streamlined internal IT systems. Applicants now receive validation feedback within a week, ending the long silences that once preceded rejections for missing information.[4]
But the numbers also reflect a broader shift in how the industry is approaching compliance. Firms that submit well-prepared, technically robust applications are moving through the system far more quickly than those that do not. The BSR has removed invalid applications from its approval metrics, signalling a clearer focus on quality over volume.
Where AI Fits In
This is where technology enters the picture. In February, a new AI-enabled compliance tool demonstrated the ability to cut the time spent checking typical Gateway 2 submissions by 73%. A document that would take a human reviewer ten working days to check was processed in roughly one hour.[1]
The tool is not replacing professional judgment. Rather, it is handling the repetitive, document-heavy verification that consumes most of the elapsed time in compliance reviews: cross-referencing fire safety evidence against design drawings, checking structural calculations against Building Regulations requirements, and assembling the digital golden thread that the Building Safety Act demands. The human reviewer then focuses on the complex interpretive questions that genuinely require professional expertise.
For quantity surveyors and project managers, this matters directly. Gateway 2 approval is a critical path item. Every week of delay in securing building control approval cascades through the programme, affecting procurement, contractor appointments, and cash flow. In an industry where over 102,000 firms are already experiencing significant financial distress[2] and 458 construction companies entered insolvency in February alone,[3] the commercial cost of regulatory delay is not abstract.
The Wider Lesson
The Gateway 2 story illustrates a pattern we are seeing across the built environment. Regulatory requirements are becoming more demanding: the Building Safety Levy launches in October 2026, expanded registration requirements will extend BSR oversight to buildings between 11 and 18 metres, and the Construction Products Reform White Paper is expected before summer.[1] At the same time, the RICS AI standard, mandatory since 9 March 2026, is setting clear expectations for how professionals should use these tools responsibly.
The 2025 RICS survey of over 2,200 construction professionals found that 45% of organisations reported no AI implementation, while another 34% remained in early pilot phases.[2] Yet the same survey found that 67% of QS professionals believe AI will help surveyors deliver greater value. The gap between aspiration and implementation remains wide.
What Firms Should Be Doing
Start with the compliance processes that consume the most professional time. Gateway 2 submissions, fire safety assessments, and golden thread documentation are ideal candidates for AI-assisted verification. The tools available today can reduce review cycles from weeks to days without compromising thoroughness.
Invest in data quality before investing in AI tools. The BSR's improving approval rates reflect better-prepared submissions as much as faster processing. Firms that maintain well-structured digital records, consistent naming conventions, and complete design documentation will benefit most from AI-assisted compliance.
Treat AI governance as a competitive advantage, not a compliance burden. The firms that adopt the RICS AI standard and implement ISO 42001-aligned governance frameworks now will be better positioned to adopt new tools confidently as they emerge, and to demonstrate that confidence to clients, regulators, and courts.
Looking Ahead
Gateway 2 was, until recently, the most visible example of how good regulatory intentions could produce poor practical outcomes. Its turnaround shows what is possible when process reform and technology investment work together. For the built environment, the lesson is clear: the firms that treat compliance as an opportunity for digital transformation, rather than a cost to be endured, will be the ones that deliver safer buildings, faster.
