Objectives
This will mainly be set out in the original brief. Once we have that but we can speculate for now: From the literature we can see the following:
To convert under used land into a park for public use and to
provide biodiversity improvement by the creation of different habitat types.
To provide, a barrier and buffer to the noise and
disturbance of the A40 motorway for the park (the 100ha Northolt &
Greenford Countryside Park).
To provide varied topography or land art to provide interest
to an otherwise featureless landscape and possible views from these land forms.
[These are obviously guesses from me as I know the end result but there are
clues to this as in Valintinos’s forth point from Ealing Council “In the autumn
of 2000, the London Borough of Ealing through open invitation sought design
proposals from land artists for a limited restoration of Northala Fields.”]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi All here is the list of all the questions from people (as is now), as we talked about on Friday we will have to wiltle down the questions to what we need but here is the full list:
Questions:
1.
Confirm
site size - generally said to be 18.5ha but Ealing Council website says
27.5ha? [Ealing Council]
2.
Competition
- What was the competition brief? Other entries? [Ealing Council]
3.
Who was
involved in winning entry & when? [FoRM Assoc]
4.
Roles and
responsibilities throughout? Were these formally recorded (written down)?
[Ealing, FoRM, all?]
5.
What were
Techniker/Peter Brett Assoc roles? (listed as engineers) [FoRM]
6.
How well
did the team work together? How was it structured - contractual
relationships? [All]
7.
Have
members of the team worked together on other projects, before or after
Northala? [All]
8.
Any
difficulties? How were these overcome? [All]
9.
What was
the consultation process? Who was involved? How? How effective was it?
10.
What
impact did this have on the design & outcomes? [Ealing, FoRM,
Consultees/Steering Group members]
11.
Compromise
between amenity use and ecology/biodiversity: [ecologist]
12.
How
effective is creation of the distinct (and isolated) habitat types?
13.
Wetland
topped up from deep aquifer in periods of low rainfall - not truly
sustainable?
14.
To what
extent have Phase 2 plans been implemented - what has happened, what
hasn't and how have these been funded? [Ealing, FoRM, LDA?]
15.
LDA taking
over from Art2Architecture/Form Assoc. - when, why? [Ealing, FoRM,
LDA]
16.
How did
change of design team work (e.g. design copyright issue)? [Ealing,
FoRM, LDA]
17.
Did Peter
Fink continue to have a design role (for LDA?) after A2A/Form Assoc were
sacked? [FoRM (Peter Fink)]
18.
Where was
the funding going to come from for the aspirational Phase 2 - Ealing Council
seem to think they would have had some liability but Peter Fink insists not?
19.
Was it
ever realistic to think another £5m could be found? Did Cascaid produce any
report on this (that we could look at)? [Ealing, FoRM, Cascaid?]
20.
How did
the design team worked while design proposal done, and spread the work load
themselves?
21.
Any one in charge of particular things?
22. How
far their design proposal was build?
23. What
exactly was build from Phase 2?
24. Is
the council planning to develop more of it at a later date?
25.
Did the
council come with the idea of the waste been imported on site? Original brief?
26.
Did they
have spare money left from the generated income? What they did with them?
27.
. Anyone
find more info on the project managers (not Ealing)? EDAW?
28.
Regarding the contractors :
29.
C J Pryor: What extent was the extent of
their design in put? Ask LDA/Peter Fink
30.
CR Swift:How much of the actual work was
done by Pryor and how much by Swift?
31.
It would be good to understand the process of
how Pryor got involved & how Swift got involved & whether there is a
history of subcontracting there.. abd all the other relationships between the players some of them must work together on various projects..
32.
When did LDA come on board?
33.
What was their relationship with Peter Fink?
34. If
the concept belonged to Peter Fink and Igor Marko what was their
35. input
to the design process.
36.
What was their brief?
37.
who set their brief.
38.
What were the constraints?
39. (LDA) What was the greatest achievement of the
project?
40. Were
they Happy with the result and if so why or why not?
41.
Who
was on the old the Steering Committee (compared to the new 'Steering Board')? [Ealing,
Members of Steering Gp]
42.
What was the public's
opinion about the "contaminated rubble" sourced from different
construction/demolition sites
43.
"contaminated rubble" How was the above
mitigated in order to satisfy or calm the general public concern?
44.
Considering that the
design did not consider an ecologic function of the site, was the idea in the
end brought in to reduce the concerns in regards with the possible contamination
of the materials used as infill?
45.
the engineering part only
talks about the details that are visible as result. Was truly the design and
technical detailing about what it can be seen today or it was more
comprehensive and detailed than it could be accomplished?
46.
Considering that the first phase was
financed by the infill site, which were the organisations to finance the phase
two works? Council, HLF, Government Grants)
47.
The engineering participation in phase two
is not very clear apart from the crib wall installation. Techniker/Peter Brett
Assoc. were employed to provide the engineering consultancy by the Landscape
Architects. Once this has been accomplished in the first stage were the same
companies involved in the second stage? In either of the stages what were the
contractual relationship between the designers and the engineering companies?
48.
How did the engineers influence the design?
Were the engineers employed to provide the solution or they were involved in
the design stage as well? The later is not confirmed as there is no evidence
the two engineering companies taking credit of any involvement. Not in their
portfolio, nor in other documents.
49.
What was the planning involvement in the
whole design? Considering the visual impact of the scheme on the surrounding
area how did the planning process influence the design? What were the issues
they had to mitigate and what was the engineering response to that?
50.
Could we get hold of a copy of the planning
application to see the details and the visual impact assessment and how this
impacted the consultation process?
51.
What was Rob Cairns' (Project manager) role
in the implementation of the project management plan for phase 2?
52.
what was his responsibility, as a project
manager, when the park was downgraded?
53.
what happened with CASCAID (leading
fundraising consultancy)commissioned to produce a fundraising strategy?
54.
what happened during the
"conspiracy" risk assessment? (when the Conservative parties was
elected the councils saw the park no longer as a corporate priority but as a
convenient source of ready cash. To justify this, the project underwent an
uninformed and highly misleading risk assessment)
55. could the consultant/stake holder
committee be ignored and excluded from the undergoing assessment?
56. Could the steering
committee be suspended and politically gagged?
-----------
I have picked out some clear questions that we could pursue this is only some that I picked so start the ball rolling. Its important to not be protective/precious about our questions.
Anyway these are a the ones that jumped out for me, please pick out your top few too then we can decide/whittle down the ones we want..
Have members of the team worked together on other projects, before or after Northala? [All]
Compromise between amenity use and ecology/biodiversity: [ecologist]
CR Swift:How much of the actual work was done by Pryor and how much by Swift?
It would be good to understand the process of how Pryor got involved & how Swift got involved & whether there is a history of subcontracting there.. abd all the other relationships between the players some of them must work together on various projects..
(LDA) What was the greatest achievement of the project?
Who was on the old the Steering Committee (compared to the new 'Steering Board')? [Ealing, Members of Steering Gp]
"contaminated rubble" How was the above mitigated in order to satisfy or calm the general public concern?
How did the engineers influence the design? Were the engineers employed to provide the solution or they were involved in the design stage as well? The later is not confirmed as there is no evidence the two engineering companies taking credit of any involvement. Not in their portfolio, nor in other documents.
What was Rob Cairns' (Project manager) role in the implementation of the project management plan for phase 2?
what was his responsibility, as a project manager, when the park was downgraded?
what happened with CASCAID (leading fundraising consultancy)commissioned to produce a fundraising strategy?
Right that's probably my last post for now as I,m in Lille
Cheers K
No comments:
Post a Comment