f002 b 140614 autosaved - islingtonplanning.islington.gov.uk/northgatepublicdocs/00327224.pdf ·...

$: F002 B 140614 Autosaved - Islingtonplanning.islington.gov.uk/NorthgatePublicDocs/00327224.pdf · J:\220000\225540-21 CITY NORTH\60_OUTPUT\1_REPORTS\01 NR\FORM 2\REV B\F002 B 140614$
Network RailCity North - Finsbury Park Form 2, Statement of Design Intent

225540/NR/F002

B | 17 June 2014

This report takes into account the particular instructions and requirements of our client.

It is not intended for and should not be relied upon by any third party and no responsibility is undertaken to any third party.

Job number 225540

Arup Ltd 13 Fitzroy Street London W1T 4BQ United Kingdom www.arup.com

Network Rail City North - Finsbury ParkForm 2, Statement of Design Intent

225540/NR/F002 | B | 17 June 2014 J:\220000\225540-21 CITY NORTH\60_OUTPUT\1_REPORTS\01 NR\FORM 2\REV B\F002 B 140614 AUTOSAVED.DOCX

Contents

Page

Parties involved 1

1 PART 1: DETAILS 21.1 Scope of Design Works 21.2 Proposals for the staging of the Design and Design check

submissions 61.3 Design Statement 121.4 Standards to be used in the Design 201.5 Derogations and Temporary Non-Conformances to Standards221.6 Any Other Relevant Information 22

Tables

Table 1 Summary of proposed worksTable 2 Schedule of Form 3 SubmissionsTable 3 Anticipated stratigraphyTable 4 Anticipated parameters

Figures

Figure 1 Proposed development layoutFigure 2 SLS ground water conditions (~+36.5mOD = top of rail embankment)Figure 3 ULS Ground water profile worst credible (~+36.5mOD = top of rail embankment)Figure 4 SLS ground water conditionsFigure 5 ULS Ground water profile (worst credible)

Appendices

Appendix ATechnical Design Requirements

Appendix BPlan of existing buildings to be demolished

Appendix CSite hoarding and locations of tower cranes



Appendix DConstruction Sequence sketches February 2013

Appendix EBerms and temporary prop arrangement

Appendix FStage E Drawings



Page 1

Parties involved There are a number of parties involved in the project and whom have responsibilities under various specification, design and construction elements.These parties are summarised below:

Party Abbreviation Role on project

Arup Arup Structural Engineer

Balfour Beatty Ltd BBGE Piling (and piled wall) designer and sub-contractor

Business Design Centre Group Ltd

BDC JV Partner Client

Dunne Group Ltd DBCE Enabling Works subcontractor

Robert Bird Group Ltd RBG Temporary Works Designer

Rolfe-Judd Ltd RJ Architect

United House Ltd UHL JV Partner Client

Main Contractor MC Main Contractor - Yet to be appointed



Page 2

1 PART 1: DETAILS Project title City North - Finsbury park Project Number 225540CR-T Ref. Number Not applicable CR-T Ref. Number Location City North, Finsbury Park, London, N4 3HQ ELR Not known ELR Not known OS grid reference 531250 186750 OS grid reference 531250 186750

1.1 Scope of Design Works Refer to Form 1: NR/L2/CIV/003/F001.

An updated layout of the proposed works is provided in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Proposed development layout

The Table 1 summarises the proposed temporary and permanent works which can affect Network Rail assets. To re-emphasise the F001, the proposed development does not involve direct changes to the Network Rail assets. The development does involve the replacement of the current embankment support upon which the Network Rail assets are located will cause ground movements which have potential to impact on Network Rail assets.

To assist understanding of the locations of the permanent and temporary works listed in Table 1, the following information in the appendices should be referred to:



Page 3

Appendix B: Plan of existing buildings to be demolished (partial demolition completed Summer/Autumn 2013).

Appendix C: Plan showing site hoarding and locations of tower cranes on piled foundations for construction of superstructure

Appendix D: Construction sequence information including the latest construction sequence sketches

Appendix E: Plan showing berms and temporary prop arrangement

Table 1 Summary of proposed works Asset Description of activity affecting

asset Permanent or Temporary Works Involved

1. Finsbury Park Overground Station including structure ECM1/14.01

Site preparation Temporary Work: Erect the protective hoardings around the site boundary, in particular along the boundary adjacent to the existing railway line, to prevent any site activity affecting the railway system and public. Set up monitoring points of rail infrastructure at agreed locations to monitor induced ground movement due to the later construction activities.

Demolition of existing buildings Temporary Work: All existing buildings to be demolished down to the existing ground level excluding retaining walls.

Removal of existing pumping station tunnel and northern section of pedestrian tunnel

Temporary Work: Existing tunnels running underneath the City North site obstructing works (but not requiring retention into the permanent case) are to be removed to facilitate construction.

Construction of berm and piling mat

Temporary Work: Earthworks to support embankment and provide stable surface for large plant (support platform)

Piling to rear boundary wall Permanent Work: New piled retaining wall along the east boundary next to the existing railway line. New bearing piles. Refer to F001

Excavate office area to new ground level

Temporary Work: Excavate the areas to the new ground level (+ 31m AOD approx.) and provide struts or props to the new retaining wall to limit deflection and settlement adjacent to railway.

Excavation of basement area Temporary Work: Excavate the basement area, adjacent to the new retaining wall, down to the reduced basement level (24.5mOD approx.). Demolish the remaining existing retaining walls on site.

Construction of new internal substructure

Permanent Work: Construction of new internal substructure and remove temporary propping.



Page 4

Construction of new superstructure Permanent Work: Construction of new superstructure Temporary Work: Use of temporary tower cranes with piled foundations – design required.

2. Existing non- Network Rail retaining walls



Temporary Work: Earthworks to support embankment and provide stable surface for large plant.

Piling to rear boundary wall Permanent Work: Construct the new piled retaining wall along the east boundary next to the existing railway line.


Temporary Work: Excavate the areas to the new ground level (+ 31mOD approx.) and provide struts or props to the new retaining wall to limit deflection and settlement adjacent to railway.




3. Railway Operational Cables



Removal of existing pumping station tunnel and northern section of pedestrian tunnel

Temporary Work: Existing tunnels running underneath the City North site obstructing works (but not requiring retention into the permanent case) are to be removed to facilitate construction.



Piling to rear boundary wall Permanent Work: Construct the new piled retaining wall along the



Page 5

east boundary next to the existing railway line.






4. Existing railway bridge over BTP Yard (Milk Dock area) (ECM1/14b)





Piling to rear boundary wall Permanent Work: Construct the new piled retaining wall along the east boundary next to the existing railway line.



Excavation of basement area Temporary Work: Excavate the basement area, adjacent to the new retaining wall, down to the reduced basement level (up to 24.5mOD approx.). Demolish the remaining existing retaining walls on site.





Page 6

Key considerations relating to the protection of Network Rail assets are the

Stability of the existing retaining walls until the new retaining wall is in place Stability of the new retaining walls Bearing capacity failure of the new building alongside the tracks Interfering with rail operations with temporary works or plant/machinery

In design of the retaining wall, foundation and substructure elements, key activities are those which impact on or have potential to impact on the aspects that will most affect Network Rail:

Removing support from the existing retaining wall (through demolition of existing buildings) before new retaining wall is in place Removal of the pumping station tunnel and northern section of pedestrian tunnelControl of excavation depth by the contractor Deflection control in the new retaining wall Resisting the imbalance earth pressure loading New piled foundation behaviour Boundary security

1.2 Proposals for the staging of the Design and Design check submissions

Table 2 gives the proposed checking regime and schedule for the proposed development design elements.

The DBCE construction sequence is illustrated in Appendix D. Refer also to Figure 1 for the proposed layout and to Appendices B, C, and E for the existing layout, extent of site hoarding and locations of tower, and for the berms and temporary prop arrangement respectively.

Design and checking

The designer for the permanent substructure works will be Arup.

The designer for the permanent structure is Arup to RIBA Stage E, when the technical design and General Arrangement drawings are fixed. The detailed design drawings for construction in Stage F will be the responsibility of DBCE.

The designer for the temporary works will be DBCE (and their subcontractors).

The design checker for the Works will be as follows as appropriate for the element of works (see Table 2):

CAT III an independent design checker CAT II Internal Design Checker CAT I Internal Design Checker – part of the design team No formal design checking required for Network Rail purposes.



Page 7

Programme

Important project milestones are summarised below:

Start on site 1st August 2014 Meaningful demolition starts 2 nd October 2014 Pre-piling excavation 20 th October 2014 Piling starts 17 th November 2014 Excavation starts 16 th February 2015 Substructure construction 23 rd March 2015 Topping out 24 th June 2016 End of fit out 7 th September 2017

NR assets affected by the proposals (refer to Appendix A of Form 1) are numbered as follows:

Asset No. 1 Finsbury park Overground Station including structure ECM1/14.01 Asset No. 2 Existing Retaining wallsAsset No. 3 Electric and Signal Cables Asset No. 4 Bridge over BTP Yard (Milk Dock area) 14b

Net

wor

k R

ail

City

Nor

th -

Fins

bury

Par

kFo

rm 2

, Sta

tem

ent o

f Des

ign

Inte

nt

2255

40/N

R/F

002

| B |

17 J

une

2014

J:

\220

000\

2255

40-2

1 C

ITY

NO

RTH

\60_

OU

TPU

T\1_

RE

PO

RTS

\01

NR

\FO

RM

2\R

EV B

\F00

2 B

1406

14 A

UTO

SAV

ED

.DO

CX

Pag

e 8

Tabl

e 2

Sch

edul

e of

For

m 3

Sub

mis

sion

s Fo

rm 3

subm

issi

on

Tem

pora

ry/P

erm

anen

t W

orks

A

ffec

ted

Ass

et

No.

Det

ails

C

heck

C

AT

Scop

e of

ch

eck

CR

E

resp

onsi

ble*

3 Su

bmis

sion

da

te fo

r de

sign

Subm

issi

on d

ate

for

chec

king

sign

of

f

Arc

hite

ctur

al

Blo

ck A

, ret

ail a

nd B

(s

ee F

ig 2

) roo

f te

rrac

es/w

indo

ws

open

ing

onto

rail

side

Perm

anen

t 1

Mea

sure

s to

prev

ent p

erso

ns a

nd

arte

fact

s fal

ling

onto

the

railw

ay fr

om

the

new

dev

elop

men

t are

to b

e pu

t in

plac

e.

S -

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

N

/A N

/A

NR

bou

ndar

y fe

nce

Perm

anen

t 1,

2

Mea

sure

s to

prev

ent t

resp

ass

acci

dent

al o

r del

iber

ate

onto

Net

wor

k R

ail l

ad a

re to

be

put i

n pl

ace.

I -

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

N

/A N

/A

Ligh

ting

alon

g N

etw

ork

Rai

l bo

unda

ry

1

Des

ign

of n

ew li

ghtin

g sh

all b

e su

ch so

th

e ris

k of

trai

n dr

iver

s bei

ng d

azzl

ed

is e

limin

ated

. In

add

ition

, the

loca

tion

and

colo

ur o

f lig

hts m

ust n

ot g

ive

rise

to th

e po

tent

ial f

or c

onfu

sion

with

si

gnal

ling

arra

ngem

ents

on

the

railw

ay.

D

etai

ls o

f ext

erna

l lig

htin

g ad

jace

nt to

th

e ra

ilway

shal

l be

subj

ect t

o N

R

acce

ptan

ce. D

urin

g de

sign

de

velo

pmen

t NR

requ

est p

rovi

sion

of a

re

port,

supp

orte

d by

site

pla

ns

deta

iling

ligh

ting

prop

osed

for t

he

railw

ay e

leva

tion.

S -

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

N/A

N/A

Civ

il an

d St

ruct

ural

Eng

inee

ring

Sub-

stru

ctur

e B

1 to

L0

1Pe

rman

ent 1

,2,

3,4

New

subs

truct

ure

up to

L01

will

be

supp

ortin

g th

e ne

w re

tain

ing

wal

l in

reta

inin

g th

e ra

ilway

em

bank

men

t.

III D

esig

n &

Im

pact

A

sses

smen

t

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

Ju

ly 2

014

Sept

embe

r 201

5

Net

wor

k R

ail

City

Nor

th -

Fins

bury

Par

kFo

rm 2

, Sta

tem

ent o

f Des

ign

Inte

nt

2255

40/N

R/F

002

| B |

17 J

une

2014

J:

\220

000\

2255

40-2

1 C

ITY

NO

RTH

\60_

OU

TPU

T\1_

RE

PO

RTS

\01

NR

\FO

RM

2\R

EV B

\F00

2 B

1406

14 A

UTO

SAV

ED

.DO

CX

Pag

e 9

Bas

emen

t Wal

l and

Fo

unda

tion

pile

s Pe

rman

ent 1

, 2,

3,4

New

pile

d re

tain

ing

wal

l to

be in

stal

led

arou

nd th

e pe

rimet

er o

f the

new

ba

sem

ent a

nd a

roun

d an

exc

avat

ion

to

grou

nd le

vel f

rom

the

railw

ay

emba

nkm

ent t

o th

e ea

st o

f the

pe

dest

rian

tunn

el.

III D

esig

n &

Im

pact

A

sses

smen

t

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

Ju

ne 2

014

Aug

ust 2

014

Foun

datio

n pi

les

Perm

anen

t 1,

4 Fo

unda

tion

solu

tion

is fu

lly p

iled.

II

I D

esig

n &

Im

pact

A

sses

smen

t

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

Ju

ne 2

014

Aug

ust 2

014

Ber

ms*

2 Te

mpo

rary

1,

2,3,

4 D

urin

g ex

cava

tion

of th

e ba

sem

ent,

berm

s will

be

used

to su

ppor

t the

ex

cava

tion

befo

re te

mpo

rary

pro

ps a

re

in p

lace

III D

esig

n &

Im

pact

A

sses

smen

t

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

A

ug 2

014

Oct

201

4

Tem

p pr

oppi

ng to

ex

istin

g re

tain

ing

wal

l le

ft af

ter d

emol

ition

*2

Tem

pora

ry 1

,2,3

,4

Bef

ore

hard

dem

oliti

on c

omm

ence

s te

mp.

pro

p ex

istin

g re

tain

ing

wal

l w

ithin

exi

stin

g bu

ildin

gs to

supp

ort

railw

ay e

mba

nkm

ent

III D

esig

n &

Im

pact

A

sses

smen

t

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

A

ug 2

014

Oct

201

4

Tem

pora

ry p

ropp

ing*

2Te

mpo

rary

1,

2,3,

4 D

urin

g ex

cava

tion

of th

e ba

sem

ent,

it is

ant

icip

ated

that

tem

pora

ry p

rops

will

be

requ

ired

to su

ppor

t the

exc

avat

ion

until

per

man

ent s

labs

are

inst

alle

d.

III D

esig

n &

Im

pact

A

sses

smen

t

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

A

ug 2

014

O

ct 2

014

Hoa

rdin

g*2

Tem

pora

ry

1,3

Pre-

cons

truct

ion

inst

all t

emp.

hoa

rdin

g to

isol

ate

site

from

3rd

par

ty a

sset

s II

Des

ign

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

Ju

ne 2

014

July

201

4

Pilin

g Pl

atfo

rm*2

Tem

pora

ry

1,2,

3 Pi

ling

mat

to b

e de

sign

ed to

car

ry

prop

. Pili

ng ri

gs fo

r bot

h se

cant

&

bear

ing

pile

inst

alla

tions

. Pili

ng m

at a

t co

mm

on le

vel f

or b

oth

activ

ities

.

III D

esig

n M

ain

Con

tract

or

July

201

4 Se

pt 2

014

Plun

ge c

olum

ns fo

r to

p do

wn

slab

sect

ion

at G

roun

d flo

or*1,

*2

Tem

pora

ry

1,2,

3,4

Req

uire

d to

inst

all p

lung

e co

lum

ns a

s pa

rt of

foun

datio

n pi

ling

wor

ks to

su

ppor

t sla

b at

gro

und

floor

as

perm

anen

t pro

ppin

g to

bas

emen

t pe

rimet

er w

all p

iles

III

Des

ign

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

A

ug 2

014

Oct

201

4

Net

wor

k R

ail

City

Nor

th -

Fins

bury

Par

kFo

rm 2

, Sta

tem

ent o

f Des

ign

Inte

nt

2255

40/N

R/F

002

| B |

17 J

une

2014

J:

\220

000\

2255

40-2

1 C

ITY

NO

RTH

\60_

OU

TPU

T\1_

RE

PO

RTS

\01

NR

\FO

RM

2\R

EV B

\F00

2 B

1406

14 A

UTO

SAV

ED

.DO

CX

Pag

e 10

Rem

oval

of

(ped

estri

an a

nd

pum

ping

stat

ion)

tu

nnel

s

Tem

pora

ry

1,3

Req

uire

d to

faci

litat

e co

nstru

ctio

n ac

ross

the

site

. R

emov

al p

lann

ed n

ot

to c

ompr

omis

e sa

fe o

pera

tion

of th

e ad

jace

nt ra

ilway

.

III D

esig

n &

Im

pact

A

sses

smen

t

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

A

ug 2

014

Oct

201

4

Cra

nes (

incl

udin

g fo

unda

tions

) *2

Tem

pora

ry

1 C

rane

s will

be

requ

ired

to fa

cilit

ate

cons

truct

ion

the

supe

rstru

ctur

e, th

e po

sitio

n an

d st

abili

ty o

f the

se

stru

ctur

es w

ill re

quire

car

eful

co

nsid

erat

ion

in re

latio

n to

thei

r siz

e an

d pr

oxim

ity to

the

railw

ay

infr

astru

ctur

e.

III D

esig

n M

ain

Con

tract

or

Sept

201

4 N

ov 2

014

Acc

ess s

caff

olds

ad

jace

nt to

the

Rai

lway

*2

Tem

pora

ry

1A

cces

s sca

ffol

d / p

rote

ctio

n fo

r de

mol

ition

& h

igh

leve

l edg

e pr

otec

tion

to fl

oor p

late

s of

supe

rstru

ctur

e,

III D

esig

n M

ain

Con

tract

or

Sept

201

4 N

ov 2

014

Acc

ess s

caff

olds

el

sew

here

*2

Tem

pora

ry

Nosubm

issionwillbe

madefora

ccess

scaffoldaw

ayfrom

therailw

ayinterface.

N -

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

N

/A N

/A

Ligh

ting

alon

g N

etw

ork

Rai

l bo

unda

ry *

2

Tem

pora

ry

1 D

esig

n of

tem

pora

ry w

orks

ligh

ting

shal

l be

such

so th

e ris

k of

trai

n dr

iver

s be

ing

dazz

led

is e

limin

ated

. In

ad

ditio

n, th

e lo

catio

n an

d co

lour

of

light

s mus

t not

giv

e ris

e to

the

pote

ntia

l for

con

fusi

on w

ith si

gnal

ling

arra

ngem

ents

on

the

railw

ay.

D

etai

ls o

f ext

erna

l lig

htin

g ad

jace

nt to

th

e ra

ilway

shal

l be

subj

ect t

o N

R

acce

ptan

ce. N

R re

ques

t pro

visi

on o

f a

repo

rt, su

ppor

ted

by si

te p

lans

de

taili

ng li

ghtin

g pr

opos

ed fo

r the

ra

ilway

ele

vatio

n.

S -

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

N

/A N

/A

Net

wor

k R

ail

City

Nor

th -

Fins

bury

Par

kFo

rm 2

, Sta

tem

ent o

f Des

ign

Inte

nt

2255

40/N

R/F

002

| B |

17 J

une

2014

J:

\220

000\

2255

40-2

1 C

ITY

NO

RTH

\60_

OU

TPU

T\1_

RE

PO

RTS

\01

NR

\FO

RM

2\R

EV B

\F00

2 B

1406

14 A

UTO

SAV

ED

.DO

CX

Pag

e 11

Supe

rstru

ctur

e fo

r B

lock

A, r

etai

l & B

Pe

rman

ent

1 Su

pers

truct

ures

A a

nd B

will

line

the

Net

wor

k R

ail b

ound

ary.

Blo

ck A

is 2

3 st

orey

s hig

h w

here

as B

lock

B is

up

to

10 st

orey

s hig

h (P

ropo

sed

build

ing

layo

ut sh

own

in F

igur

e 1

and

bloc

ks

are

show

n in

Fig

ure

2)

S D

esig

n M

ain

Con

tract

or

N/A

N/A

Supe

rstru

ctur

e fo

r B

lock

C, D

Pe

rman

ent 1

N

o su

bmis

sion

will

be

mad

e fo

r the

se

Blo

cks C

and

D a

re 2

3 st

orey

s and

up

to 5

stor

eys r

espe

ctfu

lly.

They

are

po

sitio

ned

away

from

the

Net

wor

k R

ail b

ound

ary

(Pro

pose

d bu

ildin

g la

yout

show

n in

Fig

ure

1 an

d bl

ocks

ar

e sh

own

in F

igur

e 2)

N -

Mai

n C

ontra

ctor

N

/A N

/A

II

I

Net

wor

k R

ail C

ateg

ory

III c

heck

requ

ired

II

N

etw

ork

Rai

l Cat

egor

y II

che

ck re

quire

d I

N

etw

ork

Rai

l Cat

egor

y I c

heck

requ

ired

N

N

o fo

rmal

che

ckin

g re

quire

men

t for

Net

wor

k R

ail p

urpo

ses

S

D

etai

ls to

be

subm

itted

to N

R fo

r com

men

t. N

R is

sue

lette

r of n

o ob

ject

ion

*1 Ref

eren

ce to

top-

dow

n co

nstru

ctio

n re

late

s to

a pa

rticu

lar s

ectio

n of

the

site

whi

ch th

e co

ntra

ctor

(rec

ently

app

oint

ed) w

ishe

s to

use,

top

dow

n m

etho

ds

shou

ld b

e be

nefic

ial i

n te

rms o

f con

trolli

ng re

tain

ing

wal

l def

lect

ion.

*2

The

tem

pora

ry w

orks

are

list

ed h

ere

for c

ompl

eten

ess.

Sepa

rate

For

m 2

and

For

m 3

subm

issi

ons w

ill b

e su

pplie

d fo

r the

tem

pora

ry w

orks

*3 M

ain

Con

tract

or h

as y

et to

be

appo

inte

d, u

pon

appo

intm

ent d

etai

ls o

f the

ir C

RM

and

CR

E de

tails

will

be

supp

lied

for a

ccep

tanc

e.



Page 12

1.3 Design Statement

1.3.1 General The Design submission will be prepared to a sufficient level of detailed design in readiness for it to be issued ‘For Construction’ purposes. The submission will include all related

DrawingsCalculationsDetails ScheduleMaterialsWorkmanship specification Testing requirements, and Inspection plans

For the design a number of completed NR/L2/CIV/003/F003’s will be submitted by the CRE. This will record that the design has been:

a) Carried out in accordance with the signed and approved NR/L2/CIV/003/F002 form, and

b) Checked in accordance with the agreed Design Check Category.

Additionally the CRE will confirm which matters have been considered by completing the Design checklist that forms part of the NR/L2/CIV/003/F003.

Software to be used is described below:

WALLAP or Oasys FREW software will be used to carry out analyses to size wall elements (both Serviceability Limit State (SLS) and Ultimate Limit State (ULS) cases will be considered), and to predict wall movement and prop reactions.

WALLAP or Oasys ALP software will be used to carry out bearing pile design and to predict pile head movements

Oasys PDisp software will be used to help assess potential ground movements due to loading and unloading of the ground.

The Oasys structural suite, Etabs and REVIT will be used for structural design

1.3.2 Design Check Category The design check category will be as set out in Table 2 of this Form and will be in accordance with Table 1 of NR/L2/CIV/003 Issue 4.



Page 13

1.3.3 Temporary Works All temporary works will be controlled by the Clients appointed contractor.

Refer to F001 and Appendices C, D and E for an overview of temporary Works required for the development.

Table 2 lists in more detail the temporary works submissions.

1.3.4 Permanent Works The construction sequence and architectural drawings provided in F001 Appendix A show key dimensioned cross sections of the development relative to the Network Rail and London Underground structures.

Refer to F001 for an outline of proposals for the foundations and substructure up to Level 01. Stage E drawings in F001 Appendix A3 set out the latest basement alignment and substructure general arrangement.

To fully understand the impacts of the development there are a number of structures for which more information is required. Some of this information has been obtained by DBCE and is included in Appendix E. It is anticipated that remaining information will be gained from additional intrusive investigation planned for early summer 2014.

1.3.4.1 Basements Basement finished floor levels are shown on the Stage E drawings in Appendix F.

The basement slab will be subject to uplift from water pressure and from heave due to unloading of the soil during excavation and will be accounted for in the detailed design of the slab and through provision of a heave void below the slab.

The movements of the retaining walls will be influenced by the construction sequence and will be limited by the requirement to maintain the integrity of the adjacent rail structure.

1.3.4.2 Load paths The vertical loads are transferred from slabs to walls and columns down to pile caps and piled foundations. Lateral soil pressures (including rail surcharge loads) are transferred through the perimeter retaining wall to the basement, ground and first floor diaphragms to concrete shear walls located as shown on the GAs. All substructure walls contribute in transferring the loads to the basement slab which is restrained in turn by the piled foundations acting together.

1.3.4.3 Water protection The basement is completely protected against groundwater ingress. The basement slab is underlain by a waterproof membrane and the perimeter wall has a cavity containing a waterproof drainage layer.



Page 14

1.3.5 Design changes The design process and general design changes for City North will be managed by the Design Team using the change control process set out in NR/L2/INI/02009.Where a design change is fundamental to the design proposals and the design statements made within this submission of NR/L2/CIV/003/F002 then this will lead to a supplementary submission of F002 and may also result in the re-submission made under NR/L2/003/F003.

1.3.6 Geotechnical

1.3.6.1 Regional Geology The City North site is located within the London Basin. Geological maps of the area indicate a typical succession of (shallowest first) London Clay, Lambeth Group, Thanet Sand and Chalk.

An embankment was constructed over the site in the 19th century to house sidings for the elevated mainline railway. As a result of this and previous anthropogenic activity, there is a significant thickness of Made Ground across the site.

The desk study did not identify any old watercourses or scour hollows in the vicinity of the site which might influence the shallow geology.

Ground conditions have been interpreted from available Site Investigation information. Information reviewed includes the following:

RPS, City North Finsbury park London Phase II Environmental and Geotechnical Site Investigation Draft Factual Report For United House HLEI 21287/001R (November 2012) RPS Draft borehole logs and drillers logs for Ground Investigation Sept-November 2012 RPS AGS data for boreholes, some trial pits, geotechnical and some environmental testing. Norwest Holst, Draft Factual Report on a Ground Investigation for proposed Step Free Access to Finsbury Park Underground Station January 2008 Nearby Arup sites (City and Islington College)BGS records

TQ38NW33bTQ38NW626TQ38NW89TQ38NW442

1.3.7 Ground Investigation The recent Site Investigation by RPS comprised:

8 boreholes ranging in depth from 10mbgl to 55mbgl, proving stratigraphy to the Thanet Sand;



Page 15

7 No. Hand-dug trial pits to investigate existing foundations on site and of neighbouring buildings; 3 No. hand-dug trial pits to confirm extents of LUL pedestrian tunnel and brick chamber structure; 5 No. machine dug trial pits for environmental sampling; In-situ testing (SPT) Groundwater and gas monitoring Geotechnical and Environmental laboratory testing

The Site Investigation commenced on 24th September 2012 and investigative field works were complete 30th November.

Additional ground investigation is proposed to assess the impact of our works on the ‘British Transport Police’ wall to the northeast of the site which is understood to be owned by LUL. Permissions to carry out the investigative work has been agreed from LUL, Network Rail and British Transport Police.

1.3.8 Stratigraphy This site specific data has been reviewed alongside the desk study information to determine the anticipated stratigraphy summarised in Table 3.

The following stratigraphy has been defined:

Table 3 Anticipated stratigraphy Stratum Top level Thickness

Made Ground (embankment fill)

+36 mOD <5 m

Made Ground (Re-worked natural soils)

+31 mOD 3 m

London Clay +28 mOD 21 m

Lambeth Group* +2 mOD 25 m

Thanet Sand -20 mOD 6.7m (based on BGS logs)

Chalk -26.7mOD (based on BGS logs) unproven

Lambeth Group surface is interpreted from the available logs. It is believed to have been misidentified in borehole BH3 of the 2012 Ground Investigation. RPS have confirmed this verbally and corrected borehole logs are awaited.

1.3.9 Soil parameters for design Geotechnical parameters for preliminary checks to produce the Stage E scheme have been adopted based on the site specific data, as well as information from nearby Arup projects and previous experience with these strata. These are summarised in Table 4.



Page 16

Table 4 Anticipated parameters Stratum Design Level for

Top of Stratum (mOD)

b

(kN/m3

)

’ (deg)

cu

(kPa) E’v

(MPa) Eu

(MPa)

E’h

(MPa) Euh

(MPa)

Made Ground above +31mOD in embankment areas where existing gl > +35mOD

Varies 19 28 - 9 - -

Made Ground above +31mOD in site areas where existing gl < +35mOD

Varies 19 25 - 5 - -

Made Ground below +31mOD in embankment areas where existing gl > +35mOD

+31 19 28 - 18 - -

Made Ground below +31mOD in site areas where existing gl < +35mOD

+31 19 25 - 12 - -

London Clay +28 19.5 24 70 + 7.5z 0.32cu 0.4cu 0.75cu cu

Lambeth Group - Clay +2.0 21 - 200 0.320cu

0.4cu

Lambeth Group - Sand -8.0 21 33 - 200 -

Thanet Sand -20 21 33 - 200 -

Chalk -26.7 Assumed to act as a rigid boundary for design purposes

1.3.10 Soil aggressivity The following assessment of the chemical environment for concrete is in accordance with BRE Special Digest 1 ‘Concrete in Aggressive Ground’ (SD1), published 2005. This document supersedes BRE Digest 363 and introduces new terminology.

The following assessment is based on the following assumptions:

The site has been classed as brownfield because the desk study and investigation have shown that the risk of encountering aggressive chemicals is present;London Clay is potentially pyrite bearing, based on current proposals there is potential that concrete will be exposed to disturbed London Clay.

Sulphate tests were carried out on 24 soil samples. Sulfate contents in water extract were found to be in the range 0.16 to 6.7 g/l SO4 with a characteristic value of 4.5 g/l SO4. One groundwater sample has been tested, it showed sulfate levels of 0.7 g/l SO4

Determination of pH was carried out on 35 soil samples (the same as were tested for sulfate). The pH was found to be in the range 6.7 to 10.1 with a characteristic value of 7.2.



Page 17

These results indicate a DS (Design Sulfate) class of DS-4.

Based on the additional assumption that the groundwater is mobile, the ACEC (Aggressive Chemical Environment for Concrete) class for the site is AC-4.

The specification of concrete mix and requirements for additional protective measures are a function of ACEC class and the type and size of structural element under consideration. This subject is covered in details in BRE SD1 (Parts 2 to 4) and further discussion is beyond the scope of this report. However, it is important to note that some of the additional protective measures permitted by SD1 may not be appropriate in all circumstances for certain types of foundation element.

1.3.11 Groundwater Conditions The groundwater conditions at the City North site comprises:

a perched water table in the Made Ground overlying the London Clay; a deep aquifer in the Thanet Sand / Chalk, classified as a principal aquifer.

The perched water levels within the Made Ground are thought to be controlled by the topography of the London Clay surface.

The groundwater inform ation across the site appears to vary. Based on the site specific inf ormation availab le, water levels were typically recorded below +31.5mOD with the exception of 1 reading taken in BH2 in Decem ber 2012. A preliminary groundwater level of +31.5m OD has been adopted for prelim inary design of structural elements of the new development; this will be reviewed by the Contractor for their detailed design.

The London Clay stratum acts as an aquiclude, separating the perched water table from the deep aquifer. It is anticipated that the piezometric profile in the London Clay will be under-drained due to the historic water abstraction from the chalk aquifer and resulting lowered water level.

During the recent Site Investigation, observations have been made during pitting works monitoring of the shallow ‘perched’ water table has been carried out, results are recorded in the RPS Factual Report (2012) and in drillers logs and RPS draft logs.

Based on the recent Site Investigation, water levels are expected to be as high as approximately 0.75m below the general natural ground level.

Typical ground water profiles are presented in Figure 2and Figure 3. As ground water has been found perched in the embankment fill and due to its clayey nature a burst pipe or cracked drain or heavy rain could cause build-up of water pressures behind the wall. The clayey nature of the embankment fill means that over a short period of time, flooding is unlikely to fill the full embankment and therefore for the ULS state, a sub hydrostatic profile has been assumed through these layers from embankment ground level.

A hydrogeological study will be presented separately for consideration by Network Rail. The study considers the impact that the new development will have on ground water flow through the embankment area and the impact this change will have on Network Rail/LUL structures.



Page 18

The damming effects of the new retaining wall and consequences of this on nearby Network Rail and LUL assets will be considered in the new design.

Figure 2 SLS ground water conditions (~+36.5mOD = top of rail embankment)

Figure 3 ULS Ground water profile worst credible (~+36.5mOD = top of rail embankment)

1.3.12 Contamination Some testing of soil, water and gas samples was carried out during the 2012 RPS Ground Investigation. The results are reported in the RPS Interpretive Environmental and Factual Geotechnical Report (January 2013).

During the RPS ground investigation, asbestos and suspected asbestos was found in a number of trial pits. Details are recorded in the RPS Interpretive Environmental and Factual Geotechnical Report (January 2013).

The Environmental assessment was made by RPS and has been included in the final Ground Investigation Report (January, 2013) report.

1.3.13 Heaving Ground Across the site, unloading due to excavation will vary from ~100kPa to 230kPa. In places this will be approximately equal to or greater than the proposed loading from the new development (where there is low-rise only or no superstructure), meaning that there will be a net tension or very low compressive load.

As the foundations are fully piled, a heave void of will be required to limit the pressures experienced by the base slab due to the upward movement (heaving) of the ground.

1.3.14 Methods of analysis of basement wall and ground movements and the consequent impact on NR assets

The structural analysis of the basement wall, wall movements and prop forces (temporary and permanent) will be carried out using WALLAP or Oasys FREW

Red

uced

Lev

el (m

OD

)

Red

uced

Lev

el (m

OD

)

Water pressure (kPa) Water pressure (kPa)

+37



Page 19

software. These programmes incorporate soil-structure interaction and construction sequence to output bending moments, shear forces, wall deflection, prop forces and soil pressures on the wall at the different stages of construction modelled. A long term stage will also be included.

Ground movements due to unloading and reloading of the ground during construction will be modelled using the OASYS software PDISP. The analysis will be carried out using linear-elastic soil parameters and a Boussinesq stress distribution to calculate ground movements in the short and long term.

Vertical and horizontal movements of the ground behind the walls due to basement excavation will be based on the deflected profile of the wall and the guidance given in CIRIA C580 based on extensive case history data.

1.3.15 Design Check Category The Design of the permanent and temporary works is to be checked in accordance with Table 2 of this document and with Table 1 of NR/L3/CIV/003.

The Design of the Temporary Works is to be checked in accordance with Category III of NR/L3/CIV/003.

1.3.16 Design Changes The design process and general design changes for City North will be managed by the design team using the change control process set out in NR/L2/INI/02009.Where a design change is fundamental to the design proposals and the design statements made within this submission of NR/L2/CIV/003/F002 then this will lead to a re-submission of this form and may also result in the re-submission of a submission made under NR/L2/CIV/003/F003.

Any significant change to the design necessitated by site conditions will require asupplementary Form 2 and possibly Form 3 documentation.

1.3.17 Design Methodology The design process has progressed using the following stages:

(i) Feasibility Stage - to identify the project scope (RIBA Stage B)

(ii) Schematic Design – (RIBA Stage D)

(iii) Design Development (Quasi-RIBA Stage E)

1.3.18 Design Life Refer to the F001 for Design Life criteria for the new development. The contiguous bored pile wall is designed for the Design Life criteria for the development details in F001. No additional provision is made for the maintenance or inspection of the wall due to its location outside of the main waterproofed basement box.



Page 20

1.4 Standards to be used in the Design

1.4.1 Date of standards freeze In the design the Standards listed in Section 1.4 will be used. The date of the Design Standards Freeze is the date of F001 sign off.

1.4.2 List of Design standards The design and documentation will be in accordance with the following codes and standards. The latest revisions of all documents are to be used unless stated otherwise.

Structural

1.4.2.1 Railway Group Standards GC/RC5511 Recommendations for the Safe Management of Structures GC/RT5100 Safe Management of Structures GC/RT5101 Technical Approval Requirements for Changes to the Infrastructure GC/RT5110 Design requirements for Structures GC/RT5203 Infrastructure Requirements for Personal Safety in Respect of Clearances and Access GI/RT7003 Management of Work in the Operational Railway Environment GC/RC8505 - Recommendations for Fire Safety of Materials at Operational Premises

1.4.2.2 Network Rail Standards NR/SP/CIV/003 Technical Approval of Design, Construction and Maintenance of Civil Engineering Infrastructure NR/SP/CIV/035 Assessment of Structures. NR/SP/CIV/039 Specification R.T.98 – Protective Treatments for Railtrack Infrastructure NR/SP/CIV/088 Examination of Buildings and Station Structures NR/L2/INI/02009 Engineering Management of Projects NR/L2/CIV/003 Engineering Assurance of Building and Civil Engineering Works NR/L1/FIR/100 Company Fire Safety Handbook NR/L3/FIR/101 Fire Safety – Managed Stations NR/L3/FIR/102 Fire Safety – Operational Estate NR/L3/CIV039 Specification for the assessment & certification of protective coatings



Page 21

NR/L3/CIV040 Specification for the use of Protective Coatings Systems NR/GN/CIV/002 The use of Protective Coatings & Sealants NR/L3/MTC/SE0112 Managing Asbestos Risk NR/L2/INI/02009 Application of the CDM Regulations to Network Rail Construction Works

1.4.2.3 British Standards BS 5499: Safety signs, including fire safety signs. Code of practice for escape route signing BS 9999: Code of practice for fire safety in the design, management and use of buildings BS476: Fire tests on building materials and structures BS 8102: Code of practice for protection of below ground structures against water from the ground BS 8500 2: Concrete - Complementary British Standard to BS EN 206-1. Specification for constituent materials and concrete

1.4.2.4 Eurocodes BS EN 1990: Basis of structural designBS EN 1991: (Eurocode 1) Actions on structures BS EN 1992: (Eurocode 2) Design of concrete structures BS EN 1993: (Eurocode 3) Design of steel structures BS EN 1994: (Eurocode 4) Design of composite steel and concrete structures BS EN 206 1: Concrete for normal uses BS EN 1997: (Eurocode 7) Geotechnical Design

1.4.2.5 Miscellaneous London District Surveyor’s Association Note 1 Design of Straight Shafted piles in London Clay (2009) CIRIA C580 Embedded Retaining Walls: Guidance for economic design (2003)CIRIA C517 Temporary of propping of deep excavations – guidance on design

1.4.2.6 Technical References The design and documentation will make reference to industry standard design guides:

CIRIA C517

CIRIA C580



Page 22

1.4.2.7 Guidance Notes, Codes Of Practice And Other Regulations

The Construction (Design & Management) Regulations, 2007 and revised Approved Code of Practice Latest editions and amendments of the UK Building Regulations and ApprovedDocuments A – P and including Regulation 7 Health and Safety at Work etc Act,1974 Workplace Health, Safety and Welfare Regulations, 1992 The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order, 2005 The Disability Discrimination Act, 1995 APCO Secured By Design Principles: Secure Stations Railway Safety Principles: Part 2 Section B Guidance on Stations

Temporary Works

These will be confirmed by the Contractor in the individual Form 2s for each element of temporary works.

1.5 Derogations and Temporary Non-Conformances to Standards

Architectural – none: proposed to new elements of the works.

Civil/Structural – none: proposed to new elements of the works.

Temporary Works – none: proposed to new elements of the works.

1.6 Any Other Relevant Information

1.6.1 Fire Strategy All walls, columns, slabs and cores shall be designed with the following fire protection:

Wells Terrace and retail buildings: 1 hour Bar building, twin building and circular building: 2 hours Electrical substation: 4 hours

1.6.2 Site Condition Surveys Available topographical (3D) survey of the Network Rail structures is provided in the Form F001.

The design has progressed without a full condition survey of the existing structures, tracks and embankment retaining walls nor topographical survey of the undercroft chamber.



Page 23

The design is based on visual inspections made to date, available topographical survey and use of existing record drawing information. Full survey details and condition details are not known, and assumptions should be verified through condition survey and full 3D survey as necessary prior to commencement of demolition/ construction works in each area to ensure the design solutions are appropriate.

Full proposals are outlined in the Instrumentation and Monitoring specification (Arup, 2014).

1.6.3 Matters to be considered in the Design We believe that the standard words used do not properly represent the situation for this outside party project. We have proposed alternative words below and highlighted the changes in bold.

Matters to be considered:

1. So far as is reasonably practicable, the Asset affected will be safe in use when used in accordance with its intended purpose.

2. Hazards are managed in accordance with requirements of the CDM Regulations. Residual risks are documented in a Risk Register. Risks to both (a) health and safety during construction, maintenance, use, railway operations, and (b) occupational health and safety, are as low as reasonably practicable or better.

3. The provisions for examination, maintenance, and eventual renewal/removal are satisfactory.

4. The overall Design concept and the appearance of the works infrastructure are appropriate for their purpose, location, and site conditions.

5. Where the proposal includes the strengthening, partial renewal, or removal of structures, the stability of the whole structure and all its parts/elements at all stages of the Works are addressed, including the long-term adequacy of the remaining parts/elements of the structure and supporting soil.

6. The effects of the proposals on existing infrastructure are adequately considered.

7. Arrangements for liaison and consultation with external bodies (such as Local Authorities, statutory undertakers, the Environment Agency, and landowners) are satisfactory, and the likely effects of the proposals on external organisations are addressed. Required Permissions/Approvals have been obtained to support the proposals.

8. The impact of the proposals on services and service routes is adequately investigated and appropriate mitigation measures have been agreed with the appropriate Authority and incorporated into the Design.

9. The effects on other rail engineering disciplines including track, signalling (including signal sighting), telecommunications, electrification, lighting, and other operational electrical and mechanical equipment have been satisfactorily considered.

10. The requirements/recommendations of Railway Group Standards and Network Rail standards have been addressed, and proposed departures from these standards are identified and justified.

11. The requirements of the Building Regulations are met.

12. The proposed Design loadings are appropriate, and any non-standard accidental loadings are correctly identified.

13. The requirements of NR/L2/CIV/003/F1990 to F1997 have been considered, and the selected options/choice recorded.



Page 24

14. The proposed Design standards and methods of Design are suitable for a Design that requires a Category III Design Check.

15. A Geotechnical Design Report (which meets the requirements of BS EN 1997) is available. That Report justifies the selection of the Geotechnical Design parameters, and outlines any further work required for implementation.

16. The Design complies with structure clearance and platform stepping distance requirements.

17. Important Design matters not covered by standards are identified.

18. The proposals are appropriately economic and sustainable.



Page 26

PART 3: CONSTRUCTION ORGANISATION’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SUBMISSION BY A SUB-CONTRACT DESIGNER The organisation named in PART 2 is engaged as a sub-contractor to the organisation stated below. I acknowledge this submission to Network Rail in support of our contract/sub-contract delete as applicable obligation for the provision of this Statement of Design Intent on behalf of insert name and address of organisation responsible for Construction Works.

I confirm that, unless stated in PART 2, the submission complies with the CR-T.

Signed Title

Name (print) Date

To be signed by the Contractor’s Responsible Engineer appointed for the Construction phase.



Page 27

PART 4: PROJECT ENGINEER’S COMMENTS I have considered the submission and confirm that the information specified in NR/L2/CIV/003 and the CR-T is included in the submission. My comments on the submission are as follows:

I have reviewed the submission and confirm that, unless stated in PART 2, it complies with the Approval in Principle, and the Asset Manager’s requirements for this project as set out in the PRS.

I confirm that the Design is to be checked in accordance with the Categories detailed in Table 2 of this Form.

Unless this submission warrants a more onerous requirement (for example, due to a change in anticipated complexity) the Categories are to align with the requirements of the Approval in Principle for this Project. For Temporary Works, where no Approval in Principle is in place, the Project Engineer (B&C) shall state the expected Design Check Category.

Signed Title

Name (print) Date

To be signed by the Project Engineer (Building and Civil Engineering).



Page 28

PART 5: ASSET MANAGER’S APPROVAL This Part is only to be used where the outline Design deviates from the PRS.

I have considered the submission and confirm that the proposed deviations to the PRS are acceptable subject to any comments listed below being addressed within the detailed Design.

Signed Title

Name (print) Date

To be signed by the Asset Manager (Structures).

Signed Title

Name (print) Date

To be signed by the Asset Manager (Geotechnical).

Signed Title

Name (print) Date

To be signed by the Asset Manager (Buildings).

Appendix A

Technical Design Requirements



Page A1

A1 Technical Design Requirements: Particular Specification

A1.1 BS EN 1990 Basis of Structural Design Project specific design events for assessing robustness:

Retaining walls will be designed for Eurocode 7 combination 2 SLS and ULS Requirements for design of structural elements subject to accidental actions are discussed in A1.2

Serviceability Requirements

F001 defines the serviceability requirements of the proposed development.

The ground movements caused by deflections of the retaining wall or the loading/unloading of the ground due to the development works shall present only acceptable risks to the safe use or performance of the railway infrastructure and the safety of the public at large.

Accidental Actions

Flood conditions shall be considered outlined in the design submission for ultimate limit state design of the earth retaining wall:

Figure 4 SLS ground water conditions Figure 5 ULS Ground water profile (worst credible)

Seismic Design

Seismic design has not been considered for City North.

Serviceability Criteria

Maximum settlement of any pile is limited to 10mm.

Red

uced

Lev

el (m

OD

)

Red

uced

Lev

el (m

OD

)

Water pressure (kPa) Water pressure (kPa)



Page A2

Differential heave/settlement between columns is limited to no more than 1 in 1,500.

Ground movement limits govern the serviceability limit state. In analyses, serviceability limit state movements will be limited such that predicted ground movements at Network Rail infrastructure in the long term will not exceed 25mm in any direction and that predicted retaining wall deflection due to excavation during construction does not exceed 25mm.

Movements of the tracks during construction will be due to the following:

Installation of the contiguous piled walls Wall movements due to excavation to construct the basement Rotation and translation of the walls to transfer load from the higher ground at the railway, to the lower ground on the other side of the development. Removal of the pumping station and pedestrian tunnels

The long term ground movements of the track are likely to increase from those at the end of construction due to:

Some additional deflection of the walls as drained ground conditions occur Some additional movement due to transfer of load across the development under drained ground conditions.

The individual components and sum of these track movements will be assessed during design.



Page A3

Additionally to check the safety of Network Rail assets to this during construction, the following trigger levels are proposed based on Network Rail guidance for track and OLE tolerances:

Location Parameter Trigger Values (mm)*

Green Amber Red Black

Track Prisms Transverse horizontal displacement (alignment fault)

8 20 23 -

Settlement/heave** 8 20 23 -

Cant (cross level) 5 10 15 -

Twist (difference in cant over 3m) 12 (1:250) 15 (1:200)

24 (1:125)

33 (1:90)

Stanchion Settlement/heave** 8 20 23 -

Horizontal displacement 8 20 23

OLE Line of cable 3D To check against track level for clearance requirements

Bridge 14b 3D position of its relative components

TBC upon more details of bridge and abutment becoming available

Undercroft 14.01

3D relative position of wall and roof

TBC upon further analysis of the roof-wall connection detail

* Trigger values are based on NR/L2/TRK/001/mod11 and may increase following final design analysis and assessment of actual asset limits. ** Clearance between track and OLE to be checked

Vibrations

a) Ground-borne vibration

Arup report 225540-A-REP-004 Stage E Acoustics Report describes analysis undertaken to determine the effects of ground-borne vibrations from LUL and Network Rail trains.

The report concludes that it is not necessary to isolate the structure from the ground borne vibrations, provided that the Cinema spaces will be acoustically treated as recommended in the report.

b) Wind induced lateral accelerations:

i. 1 year return period. 5-7mg

ii. 10 year return period 10-15mg

c) Occupant induced floor response

Maximum Response Factor = 6.

Design Supervision and inspection during execution

Category of design check is established in Table 1 of this Document.

A Resident Engineer from the Designer for each F003 submission will be on site during construction to inspect the works. A separate document will set out their detailed responsibilities for checking and reporting.



Page A4

Any operation involving ground vibration that could have an effect of Network Rail’s infrastructure will be limited to a maximum peak particle velocity of 10 mm per second at Network Rail’s boundary. If the works can affect a Network Rail structure this value will be further reduced to a maximum peak particle velocity of 5mm per second at the structure.

A1.2 BS EN 1991 Actions on structures All structures shall be designed in accordance with BS EN 1991.

Actions during execution

A separate F002 submission will be made by the concrete frame subcontractor to cover issues relating to construction of the City North development, including stored materials and temporary works.

Storage loads

No project specific loading is required for storage.

Vehicular actions

Transport vehicles will travel along the external roadways, on the Lvl 00 slab. A vehicular ramp provides access to car-parking in the basement. These structural elements are designed for a uniformly distributed load of 9.0kN/m2 or 300kN point load.

Fire

Reference should be made to H+H Fire strategy report (July 2012)

Snow loading

Snow loading has been considered in the design of structural elements, but does not affect global stability.

Wind actions

In considering soil-structure interaction, the design of bearing piles has made use of BS 8004 clause 2.3.2.4.3. This code of practice is listed as an item of Non- Contradictory Complimentary Information to Eurocode 7 (See EC7-1 UK National Annex Cl NA.4. The clause states:

“Where the foundation loading beneath a structure due to wind is a relatively small proportion of the total loading, it may be permissible to ignore the wind loading in the assessment of the allowable bearing pressure, provided the overall factor of safety against shear failure is adequate. For example, where individual foundation loads due to wind are less than 25% of the loadings due to dead and live loads, the wind loads may be ignored in this assessment. Where this ratio exceeds 25%, foundations may be proportioned that the pressure due to combined dead, live and wind loads does not exceed the allowable bearing pressure by more than 25%”

Structurally, the piles are designed for full Ultimate Limit State loads.



Page A5

Accidental actions

Different strategies for considering accidental loads arising from vehicular impact are adopted for different vertical structural elements on the site:

At ground floor (road) level. Where the design of an individual element cannot withstand accidental impact, protection is offered through traffic bollards or concrete planter structures (BS EN 11001-1-7:2006 Figure 3.1: “Preventing or reducing the action”). The load applied to these supporting floor slab by the protective element will be considered. Along the ramp from ground floor to basement and in basement car parking areas, vertical elements are designed to withstand accidental impact (BS EN 11001-1-7:2006 Figure 3.1: “Preventing or reducing the action”).

Derailed railway traffic

No part of the development will be situated within 5 metres of the nearest rail. Therefore no consideration of impact loading from this source is required.However, the surcharge of derailed railway traffic at close proximity to the perimeter retaining wall is considered.

Robustness

The buildings have been designed for robustness in accordance with BS EN 1991-1-7:2006 are as follows:

Blocks A and B Circular Tower

Consequence class 3 (>15 storeys) Provide horizontal and vertical ties as required by the code. Check that on removal of each supporting column the structure remains stable and damage is limited as defined in the code. Undertake a systematic risk assessment as set out in the code.

Block C and B Linear block

Consequence class 2b (>4 storeys) Provide horizontal and vertical ties as required by the code. Check that on removal of each supporting column the structure remains stable and damage is limited as defined in the code.

Block D

Consequence class 2a (<4 storeys) Provide horizontal and vertical ties as required by the code.

Actions induced by cranes and machinery

Services plant rooms are located on the lowest storeys of the development and do not have specific serviceability requirements.

Fire Strategy

Refer to the City North Fire Strategy Report UK00703 (July 2012) by H+H Fire provided separately to this document.



Page A6

A1.3 BS EN 1992 Design of concrete structures All concrete structures shall be designed in accordance with BS EN 1992.

Cover to reinforcement

No deviations from standard cover requirements have been made in design of structural elements

Method of analysis for second order effects

The simplified method based on nominal curvature has been adopted for analysis for second order effects.

A1.4 BS EN 1993 Design of steel structures City North does not include any primary steelwork.

A1.5 BS EN 1994 Design of composite steel and concrete structures

City North does not include any composite steel and concrete structures.

A1.6 BS EN 1997 Geotechnical Design The minimum requirements for extent and geotechnical investigation shall be in accordance with BS EN 1997 and NR/L3/CIV/071.

The Geotechnical category for the proposed works in Category 2 (NR/L3/CIV/071).

Piles shall be designed to Eurocode 7 and specifically the LDSA Note for designing straight shafted piles in the London Clay (2009).

Design Actions

Design Actions include surcharges due to neighbouring structures and infrastructure and will be determined directly.

Design value for the surcharge due to the neighbouring railway tracks is determined using Eurocode 1 Part 2.

Design values for the surcharge of neighbouring structures has been estimated based on visual inspection of the buildings to estimate loading and where possible, intrusive investigation to confirm footing details. Where intrusive investigation has not been possible assumptions have been made as to these details based on experience of buildings of a comparable age and construction.

Section A1.1 presents the assumed groundwater conditions for design (both Serviceability Limit State and Ultimate Limit State).

Geotechnical Parameters

Geotechnical parameters will be assessed directly, design values are presented in Section 1.3.9.



Page A7

Combination 2 partial factors will be used to check the sensitivity of the design and will form the ultimate limit state condition.

Geometrical data

Geometrical data will be assessed directly.

Sensitivity checks on locations and magnitudes of surcharges will be carried out to account for unfavourable deviations the actual surcharge where footings have not been exposed as part of the intrusive investigative works.

Partial Factors

Neither more severe nor less severe partial factors shall be used for design.

Model Factors

Walls subject to traffic loading (ie Analysis Section along Wells Terrace) will be subject to model factors on earth pressure coefficients given in PD 6694-1.

No other additional model factors will be applied.

Pile Foundation Movement limits

Any individual pile shall not settle more than 10mm.

Geotechnical Design Report

A Geotechnical Design Report will not be submitted.

Monitoring

A separate monitoring proposal document has been submitted. The specification for monitoring works is attached to this report but details of frequency of readings are still under discussion with Network Rail and will be confirmed in the F003 for the substructure.

Maintenance

Some form of access for inspection of the retaining wall shall be provided for (in the form of a ‘window’ rather than man entry to a cavity area).

Anchorages

No permanent anchorages are proposed.

Resistance to uplift by friction

Foundation piles will be used to resist the uplift forces across the basement area. The geotechnical tension capacity will be calculated using LDSA guidance (2009) and piles will be reinforced over their full length for the tension load.

Partial Resistance Factors

Partial resistance factors shall not be used.

Appendix B

Plan of existing buildings to be demolished

G O O D W I N

S T R E E T

W E L L S

T

E R R A C E

F O

N T

H I

L L

R O

A D

CLIFTO

N

FINSBURY P

ARK STATIO

N

Exi

stin

g S

tora

ge

Existin

g Gara

ges

Exi

stin

gB

uild

ing

Existin

g Gara

ges

Exist

Store

Sub Stn

Exi

stin

g B

usin

esse

s

Exi

stin

g B

usin

esse

s

Exi

stin

g co

vere

d lo

adin

g do

ck

Existin

gFin

sburyPark

pedestr

ian

tunn

el

(sho

wn

dott

ed)

Job

Num

ber

Dra

win

g N

umbe

r

Sca

le

Rev

isio

n

Dat

e

Dra

win

g

Pro

ject

Clie

nt

Rev

Dat

e

NO

TES

1Th

e C

ontra

ctor

mus

t ch

eck

and

con

firm

all

dim

ensi

ons

All

dis

crep

anci

es m

ust

be r

epor

ted

and

res

olve

d b

y th

eA

rchi

tect

bef

ore

wor

ks c

omm

ence

2

This

dra

win

g is

not

to

be

sca

led

3

All

wor

k a

nd m

ater

ials

to

be

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith c

urre

ntap

plic

able

Sta

tuto

ry L

egis

latio

n a

nd t

o c

ompl

y w

ith a

ll4

rele

vant

Cod

es o

f P

ract

ice

and

Brit

ish

Sta

ndar

ds

Sta

tus

Cop

yrig

ht R

olfe

Jud

d Lt

d

ww

wT 02

0 75

56 1

500

SW

8 1N

Z

Interio

rsPlanning

Architecture

.rolfe

-judd

.

Lond

onTh

e O

val,

Cla

ylan

ds R

oad,

Old

Chu

rch

Cou

rt,

co.u

k

Uni

ted

Hou

se L

imite

d

City

Nor

th -

Fins

bury

Par

k

5181

Gen

eral

Site

Pla

nA

s E

xist

ing

1:25

0 (A

1)A

ug '1

2P

relim

inar

y

A_-_90_-02

AG

:\518

1\A

_Ser

ies\

Gen

eral

\A-9

0\A

_-_9

0_-0

2

AIs

sued

for s

tage

D.

10/0

8/12

Appendix C

Site hoarding and locations of tower cranes

HO

AR

DIN

G

HO

AR

DIN

G(T

O E

DG

EO

F K

ER

B)

HO

AR

DIN

G

G O O D W I N S T R E E T

W E L L S T E R R A C E

CLI

FTO

N

FINSBURY PARK STATION

TC02

TC01

TC04

TC03

LUL

PE

DE

STR

IAN

AC

CE

SS

TU

NN

EL

TOW

ER

CR

AN

E P

RE

�E

NTE

DFR

OM

O�

ER

SA

ILIN

G B

Y L

OC

KO

UT

CO

NTR

OL

SY

STE

M

FIN

SB

UR

Y P

AR

K S

TATI

ON

(NE

TWO

RK

RA

IL /

LUL)

CIT

Y N

OR

TH S

ITE

TOW

ER

CR

AN

EO

PE

RA

TIN

G R

AD

IUS

KE

Y

SIT

E H

OA

RD

ING

BU

ILD

ING

S T

O B

ED

EM

OLI

SH

ED

TOW

ER

CR

AN

ELO

CA

TIO

NS

TC��

Lock

ed A

cces

s G

ate

Onl

y Fr

om O

ne S

ide

Appendix D

Construction Sequence sketches February 2013

WALL ALONGSIDE RAILWAY By MP Date 14 Rev 07Alongside RailwayEast side of site Note Levels and dimensions are all approximate, and will vary along the wall's lengthWhere wall supported by raked props - bottom up construction

Stages1 Install platform at approximately +36.0 mOD

mOD2 Model railway surcharge

57.3 kN/m² at mODm wide with edge to m from piles

Position of Assets from wallare indicative, and not to 3 Model general surcharge as zero on rail land andscale. 10.0 kN/m² at mOD from wall to rail land

4 Construct contiguous bored pile wall.

5 Construct bearing piles that lie in berm (see stage 9)

Pedestrian TunnelLevel and distanceFrom wall vary

Piccadilly Line Tunnel

Level and distance fromwall vary

Stages6 Trim wall piles

mOD7 Construct capping beam (DO NOT BACKFILL TO REAR)

8 Model lowering of water table to formation

9 Excavate batter, top at mOD m widebottom at formation

10 Construct basement slabPedestrian and Piccadilly Line TunnelsOmitted for Clarity

02-Jun

36.0

3635.3

32

31

30

29

28

27

35 3.0 3.3

3436.0

33

36

35

34 33.00 5.3

26

25

24

23

22

36.0

28

27

26

25

24

33

32

31

30

29

23

22

21

20

19

3.6


02-Jun

Stages11 Install raked prop from basement slab to wall at +33.5mOD

mOD12 Excavate berm down to 30.0 mOD

13 Install raked prop from basement slab to wall at +31.0mOD

Pedestrian and Piccadilly Line TunnelsOmitted for Clarity

Stages14 Excavate to formation

mOD15 Model softening of formation

16 Trim bearing piles construct pile caps and base slab toprop wall at 26.75 mOD


33

32

36.0

36

35

34

26

25

24

23

22

31

30

29

28

27

34

33

36.0

36

35

27

26

25

24

23

32

31

30

29

28

22


02-Jun

Stages17 Construct slab to act as prop at approximately 30.3mOD

mOD18 Remove raking prop at 31.0mOD


Stages19 Construct slab at 36.65 mOD to prop wall at 36.5 mOD

(and slab at 33.5mOD if applicable)

mOD mOD 20 Backfill capping beam excavation

21 Remove raking prop at 35.0 mOD

22 Change soil and wall to long term parameters. Allowfor flood conditions


33

32

31

36.0

36

35

34

25

24

23

22

36.2 36.65

30

29

28

27

26

23

22

28

27

26

25

24

33

32

31

30

29

36

35

34

Appendix E

Berms and temporary prop arrangement