Red Tape:
Described as ‘one of the most wanton acts of destruction ever visited on a piece of Britain’s architectural heritage,’ the 1962 demolition of Euston station’s Doric arch did not go down without a fight. Designed in 1837 by Philip Hardwick, the 72-ft-high sandstone arch was an architectural triumph in a modernising London. Demolition throwback: The Euston Arch
Apt to trip up recycling efforts
The circular economy in demolition is far from being a new phenomenon – in fact recycling was often easier back in the day, believes General Demolition’s founder and chairman, Colin McLoughlin.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions, said the Cistercian abbot St. Bernard in 1153. Plus Ça Change, because nearly 900 years later that phrase could just as easily be attributed to the unintended consequences of government legislation to encourage recycling. “Years ago – when there was no legislation – we recycled everything we could. Today because of rules, it seems like we could end up having to recycle things that once, we would have saved and re-used” says Colin McLoughlin, General Demolition’s founder and current chairman. “Protecting the climate wasn’t an issue we were as aware of back then. We wanted to make money by working hard and being innovative wherever we could”.
It wasn’t just metal that the young Colin recycled, but ‘everything,’ including wood and crushed concrete. And there was a thriving band of niche specialists to serve the various elements of a building – a subsector of the industry that has largely died out. “I miss the old yards that focused on particular materials,” says Colin. “Some wanted just iron, while others separated mixed metals into copper, brass, aluminum etc. Some even focused on just rags. And they all made a living from it. They’re mostly gone now – pushed out by the effects of often well-meaning legislation.” Modern legislation and licensing rules restrict who demolition companies can sell to. “I can’t just take an office chair from a strip out and sell it to anyone on the High St,” says Colin. “That would be illegal – unless that ‘anyone ’ had a waste licence. That is because my poor chair has technically ‘fallen out of the chain of utility’ – and is therefore classed as ‘waste.’
And by law you cannot move ‘waste ’ from one location to another without the requisite licence. Sadly, because of these essentially well-meaning rules, things – like my chair – get put in the skip rather than given a new lease of life. “It feels to me like we might have re-used more in the 1970’s than we do today”
The solution?
One way around this issue is to form a closer partnership with clients and partners such as Material Index. Many developers have multiple projects ongoing at any one time. So, to get the best out of re-using materials that are surplus to requirements on one strip- out or demolition project could be reused in another new build development. The need to re-use, recycle and the creation of a truly circular society will require a more holistic view of whose responsibility it is to find new homes for arisings. More re-use and recycling, less red tape. We think St. Bernard would give it his blessing.
The grandeur of the arch was emphasised to symbolise a gateway opening the London metropolis to the northern parts of the U.K. This in turn would encourage a transmission of workers and ideas to and from the capital. The Doric arch echoed the splendour and greatness of ancient Roman architecture that Hardwick had marvelled at when travelling through Italy shortly before he was commissioned to design the arch. By echoing the architectural ornamentation of ancient Rome, Hardwick’s design signalled the possibility of success offered by improved transport between the North and South.
Yet the glory of this symbolic arch was only short lived. In January 1960 the British Transport Commission served the London Council with notice of its intention to demolish Euston station. This was to facilitate what they saw as paramount plans to upgrade and electrify the main line between Euston and Scotland. These practical improvements to the railway line were deemed as more important than mere decoration. The upgrades required the demolition of the entire station and so the arch was destined to be destroyed. This decision was not met without resistance, however. In October 1961, a group of campaigners including the editor of Architectural Review went to see Harold Macmillan who was the conservative Prime Minster at the time to push back against the decision and insist on the importance of the arch and its preservation.
The group of campaigners demanded that the arch should be dismantled and then re-erected elsewhere due to its architectural and cultural significance. In two weeks, Macmillan gave his response. He told the campaigners that every avenue had been explored to preserve the arch but it sadly, would not be possible. He cited lack of funds for removal costs, lack of available land and the operational requirements of the station as the main inhibitors. The campaign to save the Euston arch had failed.
Years ago – when there was no legislation – we recycled everything we could. Today because of rules, it seems like we could end up having to recycle things that once, we would have saved and re-used” “
19
www.General-Demoliton.co.uk
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker