Learning legacy

Lessons learned from the London 2012 Games construction project

Demolition Waste Management on the Olympic Park

Abstract Initial works on the Olympic Park involved the demolition of over 215 buildings alongside a number of walls, bridges and roads. A robust demolition methodology and process was developed which took account of health and safety, sustainability, stringent timescales and immovable programme (affecting time available for reclamation surveys), budget, storage space, and lack of existing buildings designed for deconstruction. A target for 90 per cent (by weight) of demolition material to be reused or recycled was exceeded at 98.5 per cent. The on-site processing and use of 400,000 tonnes of concrete, brick and masonry into aggregates saved over 20,000 lorry movements, which signicantly reduced impact on the local community, as well as CO2 emissions and other environmental

Key factors in the success of the demolition waste strategy included the ODAs vision for demolishing the Olympic Park site in a sustainable manner which was implemented by communicating clear sustainability objectives from the outset, establishing plans for applying the waste hierarchy, carrying out pre-demolition audits, embedding the 90 per cent diversion from landll through reuse or recycling target in contracts, establishing a data management system, allocating a dedicated resource within the delivery partner to drive sustainable materials outcomes, and acquiring the support of specialist consultants. However, only a low level of reclamation occurred. Lessons learned are that this could be improved through client targets and inclusion in supply chain contracts, additional time, and a storage area on or near site.

Author Jo Carris Former Waste Manager, CLM

Buildings were deconstructed and taken away methodically rather than demolished to optimise sustainability
1

Health and safety, cost, sustainability and impacts on the local community from demolition and the transportation of material all had to be managed simultaneously.

Introduction Before the demolition of the existing buildings located on the Park site could commence, the London Development Agency (LDA) had the task of relocating businesses and residents located within the site boundary. The LDA acquired the majority of the land through negotiating a preferred route to acquisition through private agreements. To ensure the remaining land was brought into public sector control within the agreed timescales, the LDA a issued Compulsory Purchase Orders 1 (CPOs) in 2005 . The ODA took possession of the vacant site in 2007 and the Enabling Works phase (site preparation) of the Park project commenced. The largescale, complex site which intersects four Host Boroughs was divided into two halves. Two principal contractors were appointed to undertake the works: Morrison Construction in the North Park and BAM Nuttall in the South Park. Atkins were project managers for the Enabling Works phase. Hyder Consulting and Halcrow were appointed as design advisers to Morrison and BAM Nuttall respectively. MASCo and BioRegional assisted the project teams with the reclamation aspect of the demolition phase.

It also presents the achievements and lessons that can be learned by future projects. This paper forms part of a series on waste management on the Park. Other bulletins in the series are the Waste Strategy, Designing out Waste, and Construction Waste Management. Refer to the learning legacy case study on the Waste Strategy bulletin for a high-level introduction to the waste policy context within which this bulletin sits. This paper makes reference to a report prepared by BioRegional, CLM and Atkins, Reuse and Recycling on 2 the London 2012 Olympic Park which should be read for more detailed information about this aspect. All gures are accurate up to December 2009. Methods and processes: pre-demolition Retained features The master plan for the Park was based on a large area of clear land for the construction of the venues, infrastructure and parklands. This meant that the majority of the buildings and infrastructure on the site had to be demolished. However, the Park site had a small number of cultural and historic features which the ODA sought to retain to protect and enhance both a sense of place for the Park itself and a sense of 3 ownership for the local community . This included an Edwardian building in the Kings Yard (a former sweet factory) which will house a visitors centre and ofces, as well as the Energy Centres biomass boilers and a fuel store. Various original structures such as river walls were retained, and heritage assets such as the Eton Manor war memorial (locally listed) were cordoned off and protected. Existing roads and bridges within the Park area have also been retained where required for use as haul routes for site trafc.

The Park site had a small number of cultural and historic features which the ODA sought to retain.

Over 215 buildings had to be demolished alongside a number of walls, bridges and roads. This had to be undertaken within a tight programme, to ensure the site was cleared on time for construction of the Park venues and infrastructure to commence. Health and safety, cost, sustainability and impacts on the local community from demolition and the transportation of material all had to be managed simultaneously. CLM (a consortium of CH2M Hill, Laing ORourke and Mace) were appointed as the ODAs Delivery Partner, to help achieve these objectives. This paper evaluates the methods and processes in place to meet the ODAs key sustainability targets for two key stages: pre-demolition during demolition

a CPO powers are granted to local authorities and other public bodies to enable them to assemble land required for major regeneration projects where there is a compelling case in the public interest.
2

A Demolition and Site Clearance Materials Management Plan set out the strategy for recovering and recycling demolition materials.

Demolition and Site Clearance Materials Management Plan In preparation for the demolition works, a Demolition and Site Clearance Materials Management Plan was produced (issued November 2006), which set out the strategy for recovering and recycling demolition materials. The plan took into consideration the ODAs sustainability objectives (before publication of the ODAs Sustainable Development Strategy), the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) Demolition Protocol and the Mayors Municipal Waste Management Strategy. The plan stated that demolition and site clearance materials should be managed in this order and consideration of each activity must be exhausted before moving down the hierarchy, for example, the potential to re-use a material should be fully deliberated before recycling. The plan also included a recommended route for each of the demolition material categories (for example concrete, metals, and wood), prioritising options at the top of the waste hierarchy where feasible. Pre-demolition audits Pre-demolition audits are recommended by the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) and ICE as best practice. They help to improve the potential for obtaining

maximum value from materials to be demolished. The Demolition and Site Clearance Management Plan required contractors to undertake pre-demolition and site clearance surveys to identify the type of waste material on site, estimate quantities of each material and its recovery potential (the percentage that can be reclaimed or recycled). The ODA and Delivery Partner worked with Hyder Consulting, BioRegional and Masco, design advisors, to trial four sets of demolition audit data, with the aim of improving sustainable outcomes and raising the prole of reclamation and the re-use of demolition materials. The audits carried out were: pre-demolition audits reclamation surveys (non-invasive, visual inspections) embodied carbon and recovery potential report (for four work packages) key opportunities reports: proposals for reclaiming steel frames and bricks The audits collected a range of valuable data. They included waste recovery and recycling targets for each demolition site. This approach of integrating pre-demolition audits with materials management planning was innovative for such a large, complex project.

The approach of integrating pre-demolition audits with materials management planning was innovative for such a large complex project.

Hierarchy of recommendations for demolition/site clearance materials 1 Reclaim (re-use components in their existing form) a Store and re-use locally on the (demolition) site b Store in the central processing area or in an Olympics designated reclamation yard for re-use in the Park-wide construction works c Off-site re-use (by other projects) 2 Recycle (including reprocessing, composting, on-site remediation) a Recycle, store and use locally on the (demolition) site b Recycle and store in the central processing area for use in the Park-wide construction works c Off-site recycling (by other projects) 3 Incineration a Off-site incineration for heat recovery 4 Landll 4 a Off-site disposal to landll

90%

Overall target, by weight, of the material arising through the demolition works to be re-used or recycled was aimed at signicantly improving on industry standard.

However, in hindsight, the audits could have been more extensive. The ICE Demolition Protocol recommends that the demolition audit should result in the preparation of a detailed Bill of Quantities. Due to the size of the site and the stringent timescales available for auditing, a clear Bill of Quantities detailing the quantities of buildings and external works to be demolished was not produced as a result of the audits undertaken on the Park site. This has caused the tracking and analysis of materials to be more complicated and meant that the overall level of reclamation of buildings on the Park was not known. Establishing the target for 90 per cent (by weight) re-use or recycling When the Enabling Works contracts for the Park remediation and demolition programme were awarded to BAM Nuttall and Morrison Construction in June 2006, the ODA expected that 6080 per cent of materials from demolished buildings would be used 5 within the Park . The Demolition and Site Clearance Management Plan stated that following pre-demolition audits and site clearance surveys, reclamation and recycling targets (expressed as percentages) should be set for each demolition site, with the combined targets forming the overall demolition/ site clearance works targets. In practice, an overall target for 90 per cent, by weight, of the material arising through the demolition works to be re-used or recycled was established.

6 The ICE Demolition Protocol recognises the power of the planning process to drive the sustainability of the demolition process. The 90 per cent target was established as a section 106 planning condition and was included in the ODAs Sustainable Development Strategy and in contracts between the ODA and demolition contractors. These were effective mechanisms for ensuring the 90 per cent target was truly established and clear to all stakeholders.

Specic reclamation and re-use targets were not set. The effect of this is discussed in the Achieving 90 per cent re-use or recovery section of this paper. The 90 per cent target was established in conjunction with WRAP and Hyder. The target was based on industry best practice with an aspiration for excellent practice, the contractors estimates of the materials recovery potential (identied in the pre-demolition and site clearance surveys), and the expected capacity of the Park-wide design and local companies to re-use or reprocess the demolition material. According to the 2008 ICE Demolition Protocol, recycling rates for demolition waste in the UK vary between 75 per cent (standard practice), to 95 per cent (good practice), so the 90 per cent target was aiming to signicantly improve on the industry standard. See the Re-use and Recycling on the Olympic Park report for valuable information about contractor responsibilities and benets relating to reclamation and re-use.

215

Buildings that had to be demolished, alongside a number of walls, bridges and roads.

Demolition of the long-disused University of East London accommodation blocks

4

The demolition of buildings across the Park was carried out by six demolition contractors and continued for approximately six months.

There is currently debate in the industry around the best metric to use for demolition targets. Members of the UK Contractors Group and Civil Engineering Contractors Association have agreed to use tonnes as their 7 standard metric , as it was on the Park. Tonnage can be measured on a weigh bridge and is used widely in the industry for invoicing purposes. Also, landll tax is paid on tonnage. However, soft strip materials which are generally found in landll are lighter in weight than other demolition materials of comparable volume; so their signicance can be misleading if measured in tonnes. Terry Quarmby, of the Institute of Demolition Engineers, has highlighted that many organisations are beginning to prefer cubic metres (m3) to percentage particularly within the site waste management plans (SWMPs). The ICE Demolition Protocol recommends that target setting for the re-use of buildings, deconstruction and reclamation should identify the oor area (square metres (m2)) of a building/structure to be re-used/ deconstructed. Industry consensus and clear guidance on the most appropriate metric to use is required. Contractor site waste management plans Each of the Tier One contractors produced an SWMP which detailed the requirements for which waste and materials would be managed. This ensured that optimum sustainability was achieved, material/waste movements were tracked, and Duty of Care was complied with. The SWMP helped contractors to identify appropriate waste management options for the waste types and tonnages expected to arise.

Methods and processes: during demolition Demolition methods The demolition of buildings across the Park was carried out by six demolition contractors and continued for about six months. Demolition contractors issued section 80 notices to the local authority for all buildings intended to be demolished. A six-week notice period followed within which the local authority would issue a section 81 response approving the removal. For optimum sustainability, buildings should be deconstructed and taken apart methodically rather than demolished, with the building re-used in its entirety if feasible, or the re-use of as many of the materials and components as possible. The next preferred option is recycling, with products being used in high value applications. The following internal pressures inuenced the demolition methodology and process on the Park: Health and safety Stringent timescales and immovable programme Budget Sustainability target for 90 per cent (by weight) re-use and recycling Limited dedicated storage space for reclaimed materials (the land uses on the site were constantly changing) The majority of industrial buildings and other structures had not been designed for deconstruction Lack of detailed and extensive reclamation survey data

%
Concrete Hardcore/masonry Metal Asphalt Timber Other
Figure 1: Breakdown of recycled demolition materials on the Park, in tonnes

The methods employed on the Park utilised a process designed specically to maximise material recovery and minimise landll. Specialist subcontractors were employed by Park contractors for the careful deconstruction of some portal framed buildings. See the Re-use and Recycling on the Olympic Park 2 report for a case study on the reclamation of a portal framed building from the Olympic Park. For the other buildings, the initial soft strip stage involved the removal of furniture, lighting and electrics. Asbestos was surveyed and removed. Segregation of materials prior to demolition was carried out (but this did not happen in all cases) for example, roof tiles were removed and palletised, bricks were carefully recovered and timber was separated where possible. Once complete, the building could be demolished to ground level and the teams were able to mobilise and separate the remainder of the concrete, brick and blockwork, steel and timber. Materials were segregated and stockpiled for future use. The key stockpiles were concrete, masonry, timber, metals and asphalt. Where appropriate, materials underwent primary crushing and screening and were tested to enable an assessment of their potential applications.

8 was recycled . Before the pylons were dismantled, 130 kilometres (km) of overhead cables were relocated underground into two tunnels up to 30 metres deep, each six km long.

Achieving 90 per cent (by weight) re-use and recycling The overall re-use and recycling rate achieved was 98.5 per cent above industry good practice (95 per cent) and also exceeding the original target for 90 per cent. This was a notable success. The re-use and recycling rate is based on the quantities of materials logged on SMARTWaste (see the data collection and reporting section of this document for more information on the use of SMARTWaste). Figure 1 shows the breakdown of recycled materials on the Park. This totalled 434,203 tonnes. It is clear that the vast majority of demolition materials were concrete, hardcore or masonry. All of this was processed and used on site, with none taken off site for further processing or disposal. This is a very impressive achievement, particularly considering the limited storage space available on the Park. This achievement can be accredited to execution of the plans in place to manage the demolition material, and the dedication of those involved. It is worth noting here that it is common for demolition contractors to regularly recycle high levels of aggregates and scrap metals as these have an inherent residual value. However, the picture is different for soft strip materials which are generally found in landll. The extent of soft strip material is not clear because the ODA have used tonnes as the unit of measurement (soft strip materials bulk up increasing volume rather than weight).

The methods employed on the Park utilised a process specically to maximise material recovery and minimise landll.

Dismantling of electricity pylons The 52 electricity pylons, each up to 65 metres high, that dominated the landscape in and around the Park, were dismantled to enable the major phase of construction for the Park to begin. All pylons within the Park boundary were removed by December 2008. This resulted in 1,300 tonnes of steel, all of which

The forefront of industry practice Both the Environment Agency and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) conrmed that the practice and achievement of 98.5 per cent re-use and recycling represents the forefront of industry practice. This advanced previous industry best practice experience from Heathrow Terminal 59.

The ODA had an objective to maximise re-use and recycling on-site, to limit the export of waste and the import of aggregates.

High value applications for recyclate The Demolition and Site Clearance Management Plan not only had an objective to recycle waste, but to recycle it for use on the highest possible engineering purpose. For example, demolition concrete should be crushed and reprocessed as recycled concrete aggregate rather than being used in a low value application such as general ll. However, all of the demolition aggregate was downcycled into engineering ll due to the demand for this material, and therefore this objective was not achieved. Recycled aggregates produced on site from demolition materials were required to meet the requirements of the Quality Protocol for 10 Aggregates , and the relevant highways agency specications for highways work and British Standards for aggregates. See the section on closing the materials loop for further information. Keeping material on site The ODA also had an objective to maximise re-use and recycling on site, to limit the export of waste and the import of aggregates. This aligns with the ICE Demolition Protocols ideal scenario for processing demolition waste into aggregates on site. Material was processed locally at the demolition site or at the central

processing area, in line with the Environmental Permitting and Exemptions regime for the storage and processing of materials on site. Concrete, brick and masonry were screened down to various grades (including 75mm and 40mm) and stored on segregated piles until required for use on the Park, in the new venues and infrastructure. The processing and use of recycled materials on site saved over 20,000 lorry movements, massively reducing 2 trafc loading on local roads . Storage space for reclaimed materials is necessary to maximise re-use. The reclamation specialists involved were keen to establish a reclamation centre early on. MASCo and Hyder Consulting advocated the use of the bus station in the northern half of the Park. However, due to the large volumes of soil and aggregates stored for recycling at the Park, storage space was at a premium. This led to the Delivery Partner deciding that storage could only be justied for products that would be re-used on site. This may have limited the viability of re-use by reducing the range of end users. In November 2007, an on-site storage area was created within the Park. The storage area included a secure perimeter and a part-time yard manager, and was inventoried quarterly.

Workers climbing a PKD chain EDF pylon to dismantle it using the CSS technique
7

Direct re-use of materials is more desirable than recycling in environmental terms.

Reclamation for re-use Direct re-use of materials is more desirable than recycling in environmental terms. Re-use strategies typically lead to a greater reduction in waste to landll, greater savings in carbon emissions, and more jobs in the construction and waste industries 11 than recycling alone . However, compared to mechanical demolition, reclamation requires increased health and safety processes to be put in place, and is more labour intensive and time consuming. However, it can be a very valuable procedure that reaps prots from sale of the structures, as well as supporting the reclamation industry in the UK and of course the environmental agenda. The generalised target for 90 per cent re-use and recycling and no specic target for re-use was a factor that led to high levels of recycling, and negligible levels of reclamation for re-use. Another factor was the lack of detailed reclamation surveys. Of the total 98.5 per cent re-used or recycled, it is estimated that only 0.5 per cent was re-used, which equates to 2,171 tonnes. 1,305 tonnes of this was re-used on site. However a more comprehensive reuse strategy was piloted by one waste management contractor in 2010 that involved creating a storage for contractors to deposit or takeup reusable materials. The success of one pilot led to this being fully implemented. This improved reuse of construction waste.

The pre-demolition surveys on the Park identied a total of 34 buildings containing reclaimable steel: 26 steel portal frame buildings and eight buildings containing elements of structural steel; of these, nine were reclaimed for re-use. Three of these were removed from the Park by the owners before the Compulsory Purchase Order was issued on the Park site. Once the ODA took control of the site from the LDA, specialist subcontractors were employed by Park contractors for elements of reclamation works on another six 2 steel portal frame buildings . While this is positive, the ODA did not have processes in place to track what happened to all these buildings. Future projects are recommended to implement processes for keeping track of the end destination of reclaimed buildings and materials. The steel portal framed buildings were sold at a prot, which is an incentive for future projects to reclaim and re-use similar structures. Where there was a clear demand from the Park design teams for site won re-usable materials, the Project Manager issued a Project Managers Instruction (PMI) for the careful deconstruction and storage of the materials.

Future projects are recommended to implement processes for keeping track of the end destination of reclaimed buildings and materials.

20,000

Lorry movements saved due to processing and use of recycled materials on site.

A concrete crusher producing recycled aggregates on the site

8

BioRegional had estimated, through visual site surveys focused on buildings, that around 8,601 tonnes of materials could have been reclaimed and re-used. Around 14 per cent of potentially re-usable material from buildings was actually re-used, the rest was recycled. The carbon saved through the re-use of the items surveyed can be estimated at around 1,300 tonnes. The carbon lost through recycling re-usable materials can be estimated at around 7,700 tonnes2.

However, these are reclamation gures based on a theoretical scenario; realistically, factors such as cost, time, space, market demand and health and safety all inuence a projects reclamation potential. In addition to materials surveyed, some construction products from the external works were reclaimed and re-used. The percentage re-use in this area is unknown as there was no full pre-demolition audit for these items.

Reclaimed materials The following materials were reclaimed from the demolition process on the Park. These were stored on site with the intention that they could be used to create aesthetic and practical features for the Park: 80 lampposts 160 manhole covers and 187 gulleys 18m2 of clay and slate roof tiles Two tonnes of red bricks 500 tonnes of Yellowstock bricks 117 tonnes of Yorkstone bricks 100 tonnes of cobble/granite 41 tonnes of paving bricks 35 tonnes of paving slabs 1,200m of granite kerbs 2 4,200m of concrete kerbs The majority of these have been reused both on and off the Park.

Midway through the dismantling process of a building which is to be re-used elsewhere (November 2007)
9

25%

Less material was being reclaimed in 2007 than 1998 and reclamation is becoming more difcult.

The level of re-use was low on the programme however, there were external inuences (as well as the internal pressures previously identied in this paper), which should be acknowledged: Re-use in the construction and demolition industry has declined over the last decade. This was conrmed by two recent BigREc surveys, which show that 25 per cent less material was being reclaimed in 2007 than 1998, and that reclamation was becoming 11 more difcult . Modern buildings (1950s onwards) do not generally contain materials or products that lend themselves easily to reclamation or re-use. This is particularly prevalent in industrial and commercial structures as well as medium height to high-rise domestic structures where soft wood frames, doors and architraving etc have no aesthetic or re-worked value. Demolition machines are now manufactured as bespoke equipment and tted with an array of attachments, such as shears, grapples, pulverisers, grabs and hammers which are hard edged tools and make individual selection of components within a structure more difcult to achieve without damage. The demolition industry has made a concerted effort over the last twenty years or so to remove the man from the workplace and replace with the machine to reduce the instances of accident and or injury occurring. This has had an impact on the amount of materials and products being reclaimed and or re-used.

Contract periods, in general, remain very tight for demolition operations which make reclamation activities less likely as they generally take longer than traditional demolition methods. This is a common theme and will only be addressed when the planning and development of new builds integrates the demolition process fully, as well as stipulating the use of materials and products that are reclaimable and or recyclable at the end of a building life cycle. Policy in the European Union (EU) and the UK is failing to prioritise re-use above recycling and energy from waste. By classifying re-usable construction materials as waste, policy may have contributed to the decline of re-use in the last 11 decade . Due to the large quantities of material generated by demolition on the Park site, the local reclamation and re-use sector was not resourced to cope with these volumes. There was a lack of capacity in terms of reclamation workers, storage and end users which hampered attempts to enable re-use.

10

In addition to the above, on the Park, the ODA retained possession of all buildings and materials during the demolition phase, which may have adversely affected nancial incentives for re-use compared to common practice. In common practice, ownership passes to the reclamation specialists and demolition contractors. In a case where the client retains ownership of buildings, there is less reason for contractors to maximise the sales revenue from materials by selling those for which there is a ready market as reclaimed products. Contractor ownership of materials like inerts, or their use as recycled aggregates, can be an important approach to make sure they are used in the most effective way. If ownership had passed to the specialists then the materials may have been immediately processed for recycling rather than considered for reclamation or re-use. Experience on the Park suggests that the market was not necessarily prepared to accept all of the potentially reclaimable materials available in the limited project timeframe. The 2008 ICE Demolition Protocol recommends that understanding the likely demand and supply of materials for a site, particularly a complex scheme with a number of phases, will allow the client team to decide if ownership of demolition arisings is the preferred approach, with tenders and contracts then set out to reect this. The

subsequent plans developed will identify if there are locations for the storage and reprocessing of materials 6 on site . Recommendations in the Reuse and Recycling on the London 2012 2 Olympic Park report help to show how future projects can achieve higher levels of reclamation. Without organisations like Hyder Consulting, MASCo and BioRegional working with the ODA and demolition contractors to encourage reclamation and salvage, it is likely that the levels of re-use would have been even lower. There are many other organisations in the salvage and re-use industry and it would have been benecial for them to also be engaged in this process, to help drive the most sustainable outcomes. Tyres waste to energy Edmund Nuttall investigated a number of disposal and re-use options for the waste tyres and contacted various stakeholders including the ODA, WRAP and the design team. Unfortunately, the on-site and legacy solutions discussed for the re-use of tyres were not considered to be practical. The old tyres were sent to an energy-from-waste plant and incorporated into the cement manufacturing process. This process makes the most of the energy locked within the tyres and reduces the amount of fossil fuels required to produce cement, which in turn helps to reduce CO2 emissions.

The old tyres were sent to an energy from waste plant and incorporated into the cement manufacturing process.

Disused tyres stockpiled within Thorntons Field an area used for many years as rail sidings prior to clearance to make way for the Olympic Park
11

The ODA aimed to close the materials loop between the demolition of existing buildings and the construction of the new venues and infrastructure.

Data collection and reporting As required by the materials and waste management plans, demolition contractors recorded the quantity and classication of all waste arising and where it was transferred to, using material transfer notes. A bespoke version of the Building Research Establishments (BREs) SMARTWaste tool was developed for the Enabling Works phase of the project, to track type of material, tonnages, source location, end destination and whether it was re-used/recycled, or landlled. Data was input into the system from Waste Transfer Notes, weighbridge tickets or a materials tracking spreadsheet. Research for the Reuse and Recycling on the London 2012 Olympic Park 2 report discovered that many contractors felt that SMARTWaste captured the information needed, but it was complicated to collate information from multiple sources and it was sensitive to data quality. It was also noted that data collection would have been improved if there had been an extensive system of weighbridges on site. The data was quality assured by the BRE on a monthly basis. Atkins amalgamated the data from Morrisons and Nuttalls, and provided the client with a monthly report showing performance against the waste re-use/ recycling target. See the report for more analysis of SMARTWaste.

Closing the materials loop The use of demolition material has considerable potential to improve resource efciency and reduce the environmental impacts of producing virgin materials. The ODA aimed to close the materials loop between the demolition of existing buildings and the construction of the new venues and infrastructure. The following targets were established in the ODAs Sustainable Development Strategy and were subsequently embedded into briefs and contracts for design and construction teams: At least 25 per cent recycled aggregate, by weight, for the permanent venues and associated Park-wide infrastructure. At least 20 per cent, by value, of construction materials will be from a re-used or recycled source. Various methods were adopted to raise designers awareness of opportunities to use recovered demolition materials, such as designers workshops, design team visits, a dedicated CLM Sustainability resource to manage and coordinate the process, and a materials database (see the Reuse and Recycling on the London 2012 Olympic Park report for more information). A protocol was agreed for materials testing to secure Environment Agency approval for use on site. Future learning legacy industry bulletins will investigate how the recycled aggregate and recycled content targets were achieved.

Truck laden with steel from a dismantled building

12

400,000

Tonnes of concrete, brick and masonry processed into recycled aggregates for use on site.

Achievements The strategies and processes in place to ensure the demolition of the Park site was sustainable have resulted in some signicant successes: 98.5 per cent (by weight) of demolition material was re-used or recycled, clearly exceeding the 90 per cent target. This equates to over 425,000 tonnes of waste diverted from landll. This is at the forefront of industry good practice (95 per cent) and was achieved on a project of signicant scale, within stringent timeframes. The processing of 400,000 tonnes of concrete, brick and masonry into recycled aggregates for use on site saved over 20,000 lorry movements, which signicantly reduced impact on the local community, as well as CO2 emissions and other environmental impacts. Nine steel portal framed buildings were reclaimed for re-use. Some materials were reclaimed and stored for re-use as aesthetic and practical features for the Park, including 660 tonnes of various brick types, 176 tonnes of paving material and 5,400m of kerbs.

The ODA and CLM set up various mechanisms to close the materials loop of demolition material into the new Park, including setting targets for recycled content and recycled aggregates in the new build. The Enabling Works project (demolition and remediation) achieved a Civil Engineering Environmental Quality Assessment and Award Scheme (CEEQUAL) Excellent, demonstrating the projects commitment to environmental quality and social performance. Please see the Reuse and Recycling 2 on the Olympic Park Report for more detailed lessons learned and recommendations for future projects. It is important to note that the demolition industry is constantly improving and standards have changed since the demolition of the Park started in 2007. Future projects should follow current best practice industry guidance for demolition (for example from the ICE Demolition Protocol, WRAP, BRE and Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA)).

Recommendations Future projects should aim to achieve higher levels of reclamation and re-use of demolition material. This can be achieved through: early and longer programming of demolition; engagement with designers and contractors (the new project on site and other construction projects in the vicinity); appointing specialist re-use/salvage contractors during the pre-demolition and demolition stages (not just a demolition contractor); carrying out detailed reclamation surveys and an estimation of the embodied carbon of materials; and establishing a storage area for reclaimed materials on or near site or using a local salvage/re-use centre. The planning authority and client should set clear requirements and/or targets to drive reclamation and re-use. Setting a specic re-use target rather than just a combined 90 per cent re-use and recycling target 2 will focus attention on reclamation. However, CLM/Atkins/BioRegional have concluded that it is almost impossible to determine what target would have been appropriate on the Park due to the lack of a detailed reclamation survey. Targets for reclamation will be project-specic and dependent on the buildings being dismantled, the quality of the reclamation survey undertaken, time, resources and market demand for the reclaimed materials. Designing future buildings for deconstruction is vital for facilitating higher levels of reclamation and re-use.

13

References 1 London Development Agency. Compulsory Purchase Orders. London; 2010. Available from: www.lda.gov.uk/our-work/2012-games/sitepreparation/cpo.aspx (accessed 31 August 2011). 2 BioRegional, CLM & Atkins. Reuse and Recycling on the Olympic Park. London; 2010. 3 Olympic Delivery Authority. Sustainable Development Strategy. London; 2007. Available from: www.london2012.com/documents/odapublications/oda-sustainable-development-strategy-full-version.pdf (accessed 31 August 2011). 4 Olympic Delivery Authority. Demolition and Site Clearance Materials Management Plan. London; 2006. 5 London 2012. Clean up teams for Olympic Park appointed. London; 2006. Available from: www.london2012.com/press/media-releases/2006/06/ clean-up-teams-for-olympic-park-site-appointed.php (accessed 31 August 2011). 6 Institution of Civil Engineers. Demolition Protocol. London; 2008. Available from: www.ice.org.uk/getattachment/eb09d18a-cb12-4a27-a54a651ec31705f1/Demolition-Protocol-2008.aspx (accessed 31 August 2011). 7 WRAP. Waste to Landll Reporting Portal. Available from: www.wrap.org. uk/construction/tools_and_guidance/reporting_portal.html (accessed 31 August 2011). 8 London 2012. Project of the year award for groundbreaking Olympic Park power lines project. London; 2009. Available from: www.london2012. com/press/media-releases/2009/10/project-of-the-year-award-forgroundbreaking-olympic-park-powerlines-project.php (accessed 31 August 2011). 9 Commission for a Sustainable London 2012. No Time to Waste. London; 2010. Available from: www.cslondon.org/wp-content/uploads/ downloads/2010/03/2010_Waste_Review.pdf (accessed 31 August 2011). 10 WRAP. Aggregate Quality Protocols. Available from: aggregain.wrap.org. uk/quality/quality_protocols/ (accessed 31 August 2011). 1 1 BioRegional & Salvo. Pushing Reuse. Surrey; 2009. Available from: www.bioregional.com/les/publications/PushingReuse.pdf (accessed 31 August 2011). Acknowledgements The following people were either interviewed, or assisted with the provision of information and review of this industry bulletin: Dan Epstein (ODA) Richard Jackson (ODA) Kirsten Henson (CLM) Jill Savery (BioRegional Development Group) Judith Sykes (MustRD) Supported by the London ERDF 20072013 Programme Peer reviewers Terry Quarmby, Director of Dorton Group and President of the Institute of Demolition Engineers Brian Menzies, Enscape Consulting and principal author of ICE Demolition Protocol Dr Phil Longhurst, Senior Lecturer in Waste Strategy, Craneld University Centre for Resource Efciency and Management John Barritt, Aggregates Technical Advisor, WRAP James Hurley, Technical Director, Hyder Consulting

14

 2011 Olympic Delivery Authority. The ofcial Emblems of the London 2012 Games are London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Limited (LOCOG) 2007. All rights reserved. The construction of the venues and infrastructure of the London 2012 Games is funded by the National Lottery through the Olympic Lottery Distributor, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, the Mayor of London and the London Development Agency.

Produced in association with:

For more information visit: london2012.com/learninglegacy

Published December 2011 ODA 2011/031

15