Skip to content

WORKED EXAMPLE

Design risk register example: a refurbishment review

A fictional register entry showing information gaps, design options, evidence and communication.

Original CDMlogic guide · updated 5 October 2026 · Great Britain CDM / England Building Regulations where stated

Fictional example · record structure only

This example shows how to document a review. It is not a structural solution, risk assessment for a real site or instruction to carry out work. No risk score or “safe” verdict is assigned.

Start with the decision that needs evidence.

A fictional refurbishment proposes an opening in an existing wall. The team has a layout drawing but lacks suitable information about the existing structure. The useful starting point is to record the uncertainty and the review needed before developing or issuing the affected design.

A worked register entry.

Reference and design element
DR-014 · Opening in an existing internal wall, ground floor refurbishment.
Foreseeable hazard
The proposed opening could affect structural stability if the existing wall or supported elements are misunderstood.
Affected people and stage
People carrying out the alteration and others in the affected area; consider the completed building as part of the design assessment.
Initial information gap
Existing drawings do not establish the wall construction, load path or condition. No opening detail is agreed at this stage.
Options to review
Retain the wall and revise the layout; move or reduce the opening; develop an appropriately assessed structural solution.
Design decision record
Following the project-specific structural assessment, record the selected option, the reason and the assessed assumptions. Reference the actual design information and reviewer.
Residual information
Record the significant constraints identified by the assessment and the information needed by the construction team. Do not treat this example as a temporary works or construction method design.
Owner, status and next review
Fictional owner: project architect. Status: review. Next review: before issuing the affected design information, and again if the assessed conditions or proposed design change.
Evidence and communication
Link the relevant survey and assessed design documents. Record the issue reference, recipient, date and any outstanding acknowledgement or action.

How the record changes after review.

  1. Obtain and assess suitable information. Record the information source, scope and any limitations that matter to the decision.
  2. Review the design options. Explain what was considered to eliminate the foreseeable risk and, where that is not possible, reduce or control it.
  3. Record the actual decision. Replace placeholders with project facts, design references and the reason for the selected option.
  4. Communicate what others need. Keep the significant residual information connected to the relevant design issue and recipient.
  5. Review when conditions change. Revisit the entry if the survey findings, layout or design assumptions change. Retain the reason for the update.

What makes this more useful than a list of hazards?

The entry makes the information gap, decision and next action visible. “Structural collapse — high risk” on its own would not explain which design choice was considered, what evidence was reviewed or what the construction team needs to know.

HSE’s designer guidance sets out the importance of addressing foreseeable risks through design and providing relevant information to other dutyholders. The example’s format is an original CDMlogic illustration, not an HSE template.

Official source: HSE — designer responsibilities.

Use the same questions in CDMlogic.

The design risk register has fields for the design element, hazard, affected people, stage, design decision, controls, residual information, owner, review date and status. Link the actual supporting files and record the review history as the project develops.

Read the design risk register guide, explore the architectural practice workflow or ask about pilot access.

Continue your project review

General workflow information, not a project-specific determination. Check current official guidance and obtain appropriate professional advice for your project.

← All resources