Permission to Occupy the Kerb: Highway Consents as a Demolition Procurement Risk

A demolition start date is usually tested against contractor mobilisation, asbestos removal, utility isolation and the availability of plant. Less often is it tested against the public highway. Yet on most urban sites the first physical act of demolition is not a hammer blow; it is the erection of a hoarding, the placing of a skip or the closure of a footway. Each of those acts depends on a highway licence, and the licence may sit on the critical path long before the contractor arrives.

The highway is a project interface, not a contractor errand

Developers sometimes assume that highway licences are a matter for the demolition contractor once the contract is awarded. That assumption is fragile. A licence is a permission from the highway authority to occupy or alter public land. It is not an internal site arrangement. The authority has duties to keep the highway safe and available, to protect statutory undertakers, to maintain access for pedestrians and businesses, and to consult where traffic regulation is required. Those duties do not disappear because a demolition programme is tight.

In London, the highway authority may be Transport for London for red routes and other strategic roads, or the borough for local roads. Outside London, it may be a county, unitary or metropolitan authority. The relevant regime depends on the road, the works and the duration. A developer who has not identified the correct authority before tender is not in a position to judge permit risk.

The permit families that matter

Highway consents are not a single product. A typical demolition site may need a hoarding licence, a scaffolding licence, a skip permit, a materials storage licence, a footway closure or pedestrian diversion approval, a parking suspension, and a temporary traffic regulation order for lane closures, one-way working or banned turns. Crane oversail, temporary crossings and abnormal loads may add further consents. Each application may have its own form, fee, consultation and conditions.

The practical risk is cumulative. A hoarding licence may be granted, but the footway closure on which the hoarding line depends may not. A skip permit may be issued for one position, while the traffic management plan requires another. A scaffold licence may carry conditions on lighting, protected walkways or hours of erection that alter the sequence. These are not administrative details. They can change the physical works and the programme.

Lead times are not a single number

It is tempting to ask for a standard permit lead time. There is no reliable single figure. Lead times vary with the road classification, traffic sensitivity, the need for statutory consultation, committee cycles, seasonal restrictions and the quality of the application. A simple parking suspension on a quiet street is not the same as a lane closure on a strategic route. A temporary traffic regulation order may require publication and a notice period that runs to weeks rather than days.

Authorities also differ in how they handle pre-application advice. Some encourage early discussion and will flag likely conditions. Others operate a formal application queue. In either case, an incomplete application, an inconsistent traffic management plan or a missing site plan will stop the clock. The developer does not control that clock once the application is submitted, which is why the work should begin before the demolition contract is let.

Conditions can alter the works, not just the paperwork

Highway licences frequently carry conditions that affect design and sequence. A hoarding may need to be set back to preserve sight lines. A pedestrian route may need to be maintained at a minimum width, with lighting and signage. Scaffolding may need protective fans or crash decks. Deliveries may be restricted to certain hours. The authority may require a condition survey, a bond or reinstatement obligations.

These conditions should be priced. If they are discovered after award, they become variations or delays. Consultation with adjoining occupiers, bus operators, emergency services and access groups can also generate requirements that were not in the tender documents. The earlier those requirements are known, the more accurately the demolition contractor can plan the soft strip, the hoarding line and the traffic management regime.

Allocating responsibility in the demolition tender

The tender is where permit risk is either managed or displaced. The contract should identify every expected highway consent, the party responsible for preparing and submitting the application, the party who signs it, the information each party must provide, and the date by which the application must be made. It should also state how fees, bonds and consultant costs are treated, and how delay caused by the highway authority is dealt with under the programme and extension of time provisions.

A permit register is a useful tender deliverable. It forces bidders to set out their understanding of the consents, lead times, conditions and sequencing. The developer can then compare assumptions rather than prices alone. Where the contractor is to apply, the developer should still confirm that it holds the necessary landowner consents and that the proposed hoarding or closure does not conflict with lease obligations or neighbouring rights.

A developer checklist before fixing the start date

Before the programme is fixed, the developer should identify every frontage and highway asset affected by the works; confirm the highway authority or authorities; map each permit to the relevant works element; seek pre-application advice where available; check local policy, conservation area controls and event restrictions; confirm landowner and landlord consents; draft a permit register with application dates and owners; build float for consultation and conditions; require tenderers to price permit conditions and state lead times; and establish a post-award tracker with named responsibilities.

The demolition start date should be a tested date, not an aspiration. If the kerbside consent is not secured or credibly programmed, the hammer should wait. Treating highway licences as procurement risk rather than site administration gives the developer a realistic programme and gives the contractor a fair basis on which to mobilise.