2011
DOI: 10.1680/cien.2011.164.6.59
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Delivering London 2012: temporary venues

Abstract: This paper describes the innovative and complex process of planning and designing a major programme of temporary venues for the London 2012 olympic and Paralympic Games. It sets out the unique challenges of designing high-quality temporary venues and at the same time meeting sustainability, technical and cost parameters. The paper explains the early decision-making process and key drivers that influenced the overall approach to deciding whether venues would be permanent, temporary or a mix of both. It also dis… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
(2 reference statements)
0
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Implementing a strategy to deliver 300,000 temporary seats, London 2012 delivered 32 competition venues: seven new temporary venues, eight new permanent venues and 17 existing venues with overlay and minor permanent works. But whilst the notion of temporality appears to resolve many resounding legacy issues in practice, given the technical requirements and scale of venues for London 2012, the temporary arenas were delivered as bespoke solutions with the same performance specification as for a permanent building (Nimmo et al , 2011); removing the benefits of reduced costs and delivery timescales that the use of temporary building implies. The major permanent venues of the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, designed by a variety of International architects rather than the same architect throughout, were not predetermined in terms of aesthetics or materiality.…”
Section: London 2012: a Case Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Implementing a strategy to deliver 300,000 temporary seats, London 2012 delivered 32 competition venues: seven new temporary venues, eight new permanent venues and 17 existing venues with overlay and minor permanent works. But whilst the notion of temporality appears to resolve many resounding legacy issues in practice, given the technical requirements and scale of venues for London 2012, the temporary arenas were delivered as bespoke solutions with the same performance specification as for a permanent building (Nimmo et al , 2011); removing the benefits of reduced costs and delivery timescales that the use of temporary building implies. The major permanent venues of the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, designed by a variety of International architects rather than the same architect throughout, were not predetermined in terms of aesthetics or materiality.…”
Section: London 2012: a Case Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Figure 1 illustrates an example of coarse RCA. This novel construction material has been applied in real building construction as seen in Asia, Europe and North America (see Table 1 for an arbitrary selection of at least ten different buildings using sustainable concrete with RCA [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11]). …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…54 In a more positive perspective, the London 2012 games addressed sustainability by making maximum use of existing venues and facilities and breaking the record for the number of temporary venues. 55 It was also the first edition to have an Olympic legacy plan in execution before the games, a concept that, afterwards, became a candidature requirement. 56 The legacy plan was committed to producing benefits for local populations through the regeneration of the Stratford area and the delivery of affordable housing.…”
Section: The Supremacy Of Public Opinionmentioning
confidence: 99%