The Arup Journal
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THE ARUP JOURNAL 50TH ANNIVERSARY ISSUE 1/1996 Vol. 31 No.1 Editor: David J. Brown Front cover: 1/1996 Art Editor: Edinburgh International Conference Centre Published by Desmond Wyeth FCSD (Photo: Harvey Wood) THEARUP Ove Arup Partnership Deputy Editor: Back cover: 13 Fitzroy Street Helene Murphy London W1P 680 Nynex Arena. Manchester Editorial: (Photo: Ian Lawson) Tel 0171 636 1531 Tel: 0171 4653828 JOURNAL Fax: 0171 580 3924 Fax: 0171 465 3716 Eurostar train image: Trevor Slydel 3 22 Planning high speed railways A Shropshire Lad restored into Europe: an update Graham Scull David Loosemore Neil Shepherd 24 The Private Finance Initiative: • a personal view • Duncan Michael 8 28 Edinburgh International British Airways Avionics Facility Conference Centre Chris Joteh Alastair Bisset 13 32 Pride Park, Derby Dublin Civic Offices, Phase 2 Peter Braithwaite Kevin Dolan Sue Wade Ian Roberts George Webb 16 35 Darwin College Study Centre, Turner's Glasshouse restoration, Cambridge National Botanic Garden, Dublin Simon Hancock Gerard Duffy Roger Hyde Ralph McGuckin Mick White 18 38 Hat Hill Sculpture Foundation The Nynex Arena, Manchester Roger Hyde Steve Burrows Paul Kay Darren Paine John Waite 20 44 St. Nicholas, Sevenoaks Siting nuclear generation facilities Poul Beckmann Paul Murphy Peter Lunoe Keith Rudd Fraser Smith Robert Warren Editorial Planning high On 1 April 1946 Ove Arup - at an age when speed railways many are already considering retirement - withdrew from the two commercial businesses into Europe: of which he was then a member, and 'went it alone' as an independent consulting an update engineer. Thus began the firm that has evolved into the worldwide family of practices that bear his name. David In 1995 the centenary of Ove's birth was Loose more celebrated and now, one year on , the many parts of Arups look forward on the 50th anniversary of their founding . Neil 'Ove N Arup Consulting Engineer' - which Shepherd became Ove Arup & Partners in 1948 - opened offices simultaneously in London and Dublin, so it is fitting that this, the first of two celebratory issues of The Arup Journal, should be devoted entirely to current projects in the UK and the Republic of Introduction 'Safeguarding' the high speed route Ireland. Issue 2/96 will concentrate on work Arups have been involved in the Channel The proposed CTRL route was reported to in some of the many other countries where Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL) since 1988. Various Government in October 1993. The decision Arups now practise. disciplines within the Partnership have been on the route to be safeguarded under Arups' growth has not only been in concerned, ranging from an engineering planning legislation was announced on 24 numbers and geographical spread, but - design team and town planning staff second January 1994, apart from sections at Ashford crucially - in the range of professional ed to the project, to specialist consultancy and Pepper Hill in Gravesham. disciplines which operate in the firm. advice on environmental and design matters. The safeguarding process protects it from Originally confined to structural design of Since 1992, an engineering design team has encroachment by other developments, and buildings, it has progressively embraced worked within Union Railways Ltd (URL) forces all planning applications, whether other areas of building engineering and civil in Croydon. with responsibility for a 28km partly or wholly in the 'safeguarded zone'. to and industrial engineering, as well as R&D. section of route between Barking , through be referred to URL for consideration. Arup transportation, acoustics, planning, fire, Havering, Thurrock. Dartford, and into planning staff have been assisting in the seismic, communications, environmental, Graves ham. implementation of this process. project management, and other services. The character of the area through which this Concerning Pepper Hill, Government asked All of these both work directly for external section of the route passes is diverse, made for further work, and the Arup team re-exam clients. and support each other and the up of a range of industry including the Ford ined three rail alignments under and around traditional building disciplines in the mutual motor works at Dagenham, agricultural land, it which had previously been included in the environment that has become known as residential areas, marshland, and the report to Government in March 1993. The 'seamless Arups'. Thames. The area is subject to development selected route, a shallow bored tunnel under Thus in most of the projects described in pressures, such as the Barking Reach the housing estate (Fig.1), was disliked so this edition. however much they vary in project currently under construction, and much by local residents that they formed an scale and differ in type, the 'core team' other strategically important schemes at action group and embarked on a major has been assisted to varying extents by Rainham and Ebbsfleet. This diversity, as lobbying campaign of the local MP and specialists from elsewhere in the firm: well as the need to respect major environ councillors, which undoubtedly influenced building services engineers by fire mental constraints, such as Sites of Special Government's decision for a re-examination. engineers and acousticians; structural Scientific Interest. presented major chal The choice was between the tunnel and engineers by experts in historical aspects lenges to the engineering team . either a high-level dominant viaduct across of materials: transportation engineers by In addition, Arup town planning specialists the heavily-trafficked A2 trunk road round the environmentalists, economists, and have been seconded to Union Rail in key estate, or a cut-and-cover tunnel under the planners: and so on. This kind of inter roles associated with route selection. A2 on the same horizontal alignment as the disciplinary assistance and cross-fertilisation safeguarding, and Bill preparation for the viaduct. A~er further development, including is not merely confined to UK and Irish entire length of the route. Staff from Arup many presentations to and extensive consul projects of the kind described here. That Economics & Planning , Arup Acoustics, and tations with all parties, a comparative report they are now available across the firm Arup Environmental have also provided was prepared in March 1994. On 28 April worldwide is one of its greatest strengths. specialist advice as part of the Environmental 1994 Roger Freeman, then Minister for Public Since its inception. also. Arups has been Assessment work, as well as contributing to Transport, confirmed the cut-and-cover noted for innovative engineering, and the full scheme design of the route. tunnel as Government's chosen option. increasingly for taking an assertive and This article describes the key inputs of these Together with Ashford, both sections were groups at different stages of the project, and confirmed by June 1994. The whole route pro-active role in areas outside the usual I territory of a consulting engineering updates a previous article on the CTRL. was now safeguarded. practice. On 29 February 1996 the Secretary of State for Transport announced that London & Continental Railways had Pepper Hill: This superimposition shows the final route (left) ,n a cut-and-cover tunnel under the A2182175 been successful in its bid to design, intersection. The green line (right) shows the original alignment under the housing estate. construct, and operate the High Speed Rail Link from London to the Channel Tunnel. This success is a triumph for Arups. It is eight years since the firm started work on CTRL - first investigating alternatives to British Rail's proposed route, which seemed to be unsatisfactory from many points of view, and then identifying and lobbying for the route it thought best, entering London from the east via North Kent and Stratford. Since winning the route argument in 1991 . the firm has been working with BR on the planning, engineering design and consents procedure for the CTRL, as described on the following pages. Now, as a member of the consortium that is going to design, build, and operate the Link, Arups has in its 50th anniversary year secured one of the most significant design opportunities of the 20th century. Preparation of the CTRL Bill Parliament's consideration of the Bill a petitioner's case, that petitioner has the Authority to build the CTRL will be given by On 23 November 1994 the CTRL Bill was right to cross-examine and speak again to an Act of Parliament. which started its introduced to the Commons, and copies. the Committee briefly by way of reply. process through both Houses as the CTRL plus plans and sections of the intended Committee meetings are open to the public Bill. Preparation of drawings and documents works as well as the ES. were available to the and a verbatim record is kept. During this to support the Bill began in spring 1994. The public. On 16 January 1995 the Bill had its Committee Stage a few petitioners decided to drawings differ from conventional engineer Commons Second Reading. when MPs withdraw, either as a result of more negotia ing drawings in that only the centrelines of decided that the proposed scheme of works tions sufficient to allay particular concerns, or proposed rail and road crossings are shown, should be approved in principle; this from further discussions with the petitioner to together with the Limits of Deviation (LODs) triggered the start of petitions against the Bill clarify uncertainties. In other cases petition and Limits of Land to be Acquired or Used with latest deposition dates of 6 February ers deferred to a later date, so as to have (LLAUs). The LODs. both vertically and 1995, for individual petitioners. and 30 more time to negotiate with URL horizontally, define the maximum permitted January 1995 for others. Petitions, 993 in all. By the Summer Recess on 20 July 1995, and tolerances from that alignment.