London 2012 Basketball Venue

Olympic Delivery Authority

Twelve thousand seat temporary arena for the Olympic Games basketball competition and the Paralympic Games wheelchair basketball and wheelchair rugby competitions.

We reviewed the application for the approval of external materials on 30 October 2009.

We are encouraged by the assurance in the letter from Paul Snoddy to Vivienne Ramsey of 9 December 2008 that the design team for this project will be retained beyond the planning application stage. This will be particularly important because of the unwillingness so far on the client’s part to commit to a particular façade.

In overall terms we think this building can be a satisfactory element in the Olympic Park subject to a number of matters which we list here:

• Because of the significance of this 'temporary' building in the park, we believe the façade treatment should be a reserved matter to ensure that the aspirations of both the client and design team do not end up being compromised.
• The alternative façade treatments in the design and access statement accompanying the planning application seem to us to have merits. We believe the indicative drawings accompanying the application are the stronger of the two.
• The above points may become even more relevant if temporary uses beyond the Games become part of future approaches to the site. While we note that the LDA has given its support to the dismantling and removal strategy currently envisaged, we also note that the LDA is 'exploring possible post-Games uses for the temporary Basketball structure' as stated in Gareth Blacker’s letter to Simon Wright on 21 November 2008. Until the LDA’s Legacy Masterplan Framework strategy is completed, it is impossible to say what may be the most desirable outcome for this development in the short and long term. Under these circumstances we suggest a precautionary principle is appropriate whereby demolition is predicted but alternative uses anticipated.
• We are pleased to note that lighting design arrangements are now being put into place.

We would, of course, have preferred to see a detailed planning application in which a crucial element of the design, the façade, had been resolved and one in which the implications of lighting arrangements had been fully explored. With this proviso, we are nevertheless prepared to offer our overall support for the project not least in recognition of the very considerable efforts of the design team to address the budgetary and other constraints within which it has had to work.