4141414

CONSTRUCTION METHOD STATEMENT
FOR
PROPOSED SUB-BASEMENT
AT
THE CADOGAN HOTEL

73, 74 & 75 SLOANE STREET
17,19 & 21 PONT STREET
LONDON
SW1X 9SG
FOR
THE CADOGAN GROUP LIMITED
Project No. P2392
ISSUED FOR PLANNING July 2014

Document Reference: P2392/CMS/JMcS/Issue 1.1
Foundation House, 4 Percy Road London N12 8BU

Tel 020 8445 9115 Fax 020 8446 9788
Email mail@maengineers.com
The Cadogan Hotel
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CONTENTS
Page
1.00 INTRODUCTION 4
2.00 EXTRACT FROM ROYAL LONDON BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON AND 4

CHELSEA POLICY DOCUMENT
3.00 EXISTING BUILDING 6
4.00 DESK STUDY 6

Geology
Groundwater
Surface Flow and Flooding
Infrastructure
Trees
Site History
Ground Stability
Public Highway
Adjoining Property
World War 2 Bombs
Utilities
5.00 GROUND CONDITIONS 9
6.00 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 9
7.00 DETAILED ASSESSMENT 10
7.1 Geology
7.2 Basement Impact
7.3 Slope Stability
7.4 Surface Water
7.5 Ground Water
7.6 Impact on Trees
7.7 Temporary Works
8.00 OUTLINE METHOD STATEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION 12
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
P2392 Construction Method Statement_Issue 1.1 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers
Page 2 of 13
The Cadogan Hotel
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDICES
Appendix A Geological Map Figure (a)

Lost Rivers Map Figure (b)
Aquifer Map Figure (c)
Waterwells Map Figure (d)
Flooding from Rivers and Sea Map Figure (e)
Areas at Risk of Flooding from Reservoirs Map Figure (f)
Flooding from Surface Water Map Figure (g)
Surface Flooding Map Figure (h)
Underground Infrastructure Map Figure (i)
1871-72 Map Figure (j)
1885 Map Figure (k)
Topography Map Figure (l)
WWII Bomb Record Map Figure (m)
Appendix B Thames Water Asset Location Search
Appendix C Photographs
Appendix D Structural Drawings
Appendix E Structural Calculations
Appendix F GEA Ground Investigation
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 3 of 13
The Cadogan Hotel
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1.00 INTRODUCTION
1.01 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers has been appointed by The Cadogan Group to
prepare a Construction Method Statement (CMS) for the proposed construction of a sub-
basement under part of the existing building at The Cadogan Hotel 73, 74 and 75 Sloane
Street, 17, 19 and 21 Pont Street London SW1X 9SG.
1.02 The site is located within the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea and this report has
been prepared to address the requirements of Section 6 of the RBKC Supplementary
Planning document Subterranean Development, adopted May 2009.
1.03 This document has been prepared by John McSweeney BSc(Hons) CEng MICE
MIStructE, who is a Chartered Structural Engineer and reviewed by Isaac Hudson MEng
MA(Cantab.) CEng MIStructE.
1.04 The Architect for the project is Blair Associates Architecture.
1.05 This document shall be read in conjunction with all other the Planning Application
documents.
1.06 This document has been prepared to accompany the Planning Application and is for the
sole use of The Cadogan Group Limited and their advisors in connection with the
Planning Application.
1.07 The existing basement level (level -1) is currently the lowest level of the building and level
of this will remain unaltered. The proposed sub-basement (level -2) will extend under the
west section of the building, for an area of approximately 40% of the building footprint.
2.00 EXTRACT FROM ROYAL LONDON BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA

POLICY DOCUMENT
2.01 Section 6 of the RBKC Supplementary Planning document Subterranean Development,

adopted May 2009, states the following:
6 Construction Method Statements
6.1.1 The Arup Scoping Study (24) advises that: Subterranean development in a dense
urban environment, especially basements built under existing vulnerable structures, is a
significantly challenging engineering endeavour. In particular, there is a potential risk of
damage to the existing and neighbouring structures and infrastructure if the subterranean
development is ill-planned, poorly-constructed and does not properly consider the
geology and hydrology. However, successful subterranean development has been
achieved in London, and in the borough, for many years.
6.1.2 To address this issue, the Council will require a Construction Method Statement
(CMS) to be submitted with all planning applications and Listed Building Consent
applications for subterranean development. The CMS must provide specific details of the
excavation, temporary works and construction techniques, including details of the
potential impact of the subterranean development on the existing and neighbouring
structures, based on the specific site characteristics, including the type of geology and
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 4 of 13
The Cadogan Hotel
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
hydrology found in the area. This must be prepared and signed off by a Chartered Civil
Engineer (MICE) or Structural Engineer (MIStruct.E) and submitted with the planning
application, before the application will be validated.
6.1.3 The CMS will need to include borehole / soil test results, site specific construction
drawings and calculations in a detailed structural engineering report. In particular, the
CMS will need to address the following:
x whether the geology is capable of supporting the loads and construction

techniques to be imposed;
x the impact of the subterranean development, and associated construction and
temporary works, on the structural integrity and natural ability for movement of
existing and surrounding structures, utilities, infrastructure and man-made
cavities, such as tunnels;
x whether the development will initiate slope instability which may threaten its
neighbours;
x the impact of the subterranean development on drainage, sewage, surface water
and ground water, flows and levels;
x how any geological, hydrological and structural concerns have been satisfactorily
addressed;
x the engineering details of the scheme, including proposals for the excavation and
construction;
x the impact of the proposed subterranean development on the structural stability
of the existing and adjoining buildings, especially listed buildings;
x the impact of the proposed subterranean development on existing and proposed
trees;
x the sequence for the temporary works, which mitigates the effects on neighbours;
and
x the details and design of the preferred method of Temporary Works (see the
British Standards for Temporary Works).
6.1.4 The Council will cease its current practice of appointing external consultants to
assess the CMS and will rely on the professional integrity of the Chartered Civil Engineer
(MICE) or Chartered Structural Engineer (MIStruct.E), appointed by the applicant, to
ensure that the construction of a subterranean development is safe and will not impact on
the structural integrity of the existing or neighbouring properties. However, the Council
may choose to consult, at the applicant's expense, an independent Chartered Structural
Engineer with expertise in historic structures for specific cases where particularly
vulnerable historic buildings or structures may be affected.
6.1.5 The Council draws the attention of those constructing subterranean developments,
and neighbouring land owners, to the Party Wall Act which requires an agreement to
monitor and control the affects of construction on neighbouring properties. Further
information on the Party Wall Act is supplied in Appendix E of this SPD.
6.1.6 In addition to this, applicants seeking planning permission for subterranean

developments above or nearby London Underground infrastructure, such as tunnels and
stations, should contact London Underground (LU) Infrastructure Protection at an early
stage in the process to discuss the design proposals and foundation arrangements.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 5 of 13
The Cadogan Hotel
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3.00 EXISTING BUILDING
3.01 A measured survey of the existing building was carried out by Sitech and details are
shown on their drawings, which are included on Blair Architects drawings with the
Planning Application.
3.02 The island site is at the junction of Sloane Street to the east, Pont Street to the north,
Pavilion Road to the west and Pavilion Street to the south.
3.03 The existing building was originally constructed in 1887 and comprised three residential
properties, a Bank and an Hotel. In the 1920s the Hotel was expanded into the adjoining
residential properties. It is evident that the building has been the subject of subsequent
alterations, since it was reconfigured in the 1920s.
3.04 The building is four and five storeys with a single level of basement under the entire
building footprint. The structure comprises predominately traditional timber floor
construction supported on substantial load bearing masonry cross walls and external
walls. There are limited isolated elements of steel framing (beams and columns),
particularly at ground floor and basement levels.
3.05 The building is founded on traditional corbelled brick and mass concrete spread footings.
The basement slab is a ground bearing concrete construction. There are areaways
around the basement and vaults under the pavement of Sloane Street and Pont Street.
3.06 The existing west wall of the property abuts the pavement of Pavilion Road and the south
wall abuts the pavement of Pavilion Street.
4.00 DESK STUDY
4.01 A desk study has been carried out and details are provided below. In addition a desk
study has been carried out by Geotechnical and Environmental Associates Limited
(GEA) and details are included in Appendix F.
Geology
4.02 Extracts from the British Geological Survey map indicate that the site is underlain by
Kempton Gravels (Refer to Figure (a) in Appendix A).
4.03 Local geological records in the vicinity of the area have also been reviewed, which
confirm the presence of fill material over sands and gravels.
4.04 The Lost Rivers of London map indicates that the site lies approximately 80 metres west
of the River Westbourne. (Refer to Figure (b) in Appendix A).
Groundwater
4.05 Reference to the Environment Agency Aquifer Map, indicates that the site is located
above a minor secondary aquifer of low productivity. (Refer Figure (c) Appendix A).
4.06 The closest water well recorded to the site is approximately 190metres to the east of the
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 6 of 13
The Cadogan Hotel
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
site located to the south of Pont Street. A further water well is located approximately
260metres to the North of the site, located at the junction of Rysbrack Street and Pavilion
Road. (Refer to Figure (d) Appendix A).
4.07 The surface permeability of the site will not be affected by the works, as there will be no
change to the area of impermeable of the property.
4.08 The water table level at the site is not known and will be the subject of further site
investigation.
Surface Flow and Flooding
4.09 Reference to the Environment Agencys maps, indicates that the site is not at risk of
flooding from rivers. (Refer to Figure (e) Appendix A).
4.10 Reference to the Environment Agencys maps, indicates that the site is at a minor risk of
flooding from reservoirs. (Refer to Figure (f) Appendix A).
4.11 The site is not close to the banks of a river or canal (the River Thames runs
approximately 1400metres to the south of the site). The site area is less than 1 hectare.
4.12 Reference to the Environment Agencys maps, indicates that the site is at a low risk of
flooding from surface water. (Refer to Figure (g) Appendix A).
4.13 It is understood that the southern end of Pavillion Road were affected by the extreme
rainfall event on 20 July 2007, which resulted in ponding of water on roads and flooding
of some properties. (Refer to Figure (h) in Appendix A). The flood depth in Pavillion
Street was recorded as a maximum of 10cm. The Cadogan Hotel was not one of the
properties noted as being flooded during this event.
4.14 There will be no increase in the impermeable area of the site due to proposed
development and construction of the sub-basement.
4.15 Thames Water records show the combined sewers in Sloane Street, Pont Street and
Pavilion Street (Refer to Thames Water Asset Search in Appendix B).
4.16 There are no records of any sewer flooding to The Cadogan Hotel.
Infrastructure
4.17 The site is not in close proximity to the London Underground network of tunnels (Refer to
Figure (i) in Appendix A). The Piccadilly line runs in a tunnel approximately 370metres
to the north west of the site. The Circle and District lines run in a tunnel approximately
Circle and District Lines run in a tunnel approximately 390metres to the south of the site.
4.18 The nearest mainline train lines runs approximately 920metres to the east of the site.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 7 of 13
The Cadogan Hotel
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
4.19 The site is not close to the route of Crossrail, which runs to the north of Hyde Park
towards Paddington. The proposed Chelsea-Hackney line (now known as Crossrail 2)
has a safeguarded route through parts of west, central and east London. Through RBKC
the proposed route runs along Kings Road to Sloane Square approximately 490metres to
the south and is therefore remote from the site.
Trees
4.20 There are no trees in the vicinity of the property within the zone of influence of the
proposed sub-basement. The closest trees are in the garden of No.1 Cadogan Square
and are in excess of 15metres from the site.
Site History
4.21 The historic maps show the configuration of the buildings in the late 1890s and those
which occupied the site prior to their demolition in 1895. (Refer to Figures (j) and (k) in
Appendix A).
Ground Stability
4.22 The site is relatively level with a gradual slope from Sloane Street and Pont Street down
towards the south west corner of the site. The topography of the surrounding area is also
relatively level (Refer to Figure (l) in Appendix A).
Public Highway
4.23 The proposed sub-basement is adjacent to Pavilion Road and Pavilion Street. The
structural design of the sub-basement shall include for due allowance for highway loading
on the public road and pavement.
Adjoining Property
4.24 The closest adjoining property is No. 23 Pont Street; this building fronts Pont Street and
the side elevation is parallel to Pavilion Road. This property has a basement at a similar
level to the existing basement of the Hotel (approximately 5.2m AOD). The property
boundary is the back of the pavement of Pavilion Road and there is a lightwell separating
the basement of No. 23 Pont Street from this boundary. The property boundary is in
excess of 6metres from the proposed sub-basement.
World War 2 Bombs
4.25 Reference to the website bombsight.org, indicates that the nearest recorded World War 2
bombs fell approximately 80metres to the east of the site along Cadogan Place Gardens
(Refer to Figure (m) in Appendix A).
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 8 of 13
The Cadogan Hotel
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Utilities
4.26 There are public utilities in the pavements and highways surrounding the site. These
services will be maintained and unaffected by the proposed construction of the sub-
basement.
5.00 GROUND CONDITIONS
5.01 The ground conditions have been investigated through the following:
x Review of local geological information as described in 4.02 - 4.03 above.
x A site specific soil investigation carried out by Geotechnical and Environmental

Associates Limited (GEA) in May 2014
5.02 The GEA investigation comprised the excavation of Trial Pits and Window Sampling and
details are provided in Appendix F.
5.03 The site ground conditions have been found to be underlain by Kempton Gravels as
anticipated and no ground water was encountered.
6.00 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
6.01 Outline structural proposals for the sub-basement works are shown on the following
Michael Alexander drawings including in Appendix D.
P2392/CMS01 Proposed Sub-Basement Plan

P2392/CMS02 Proposed Sub-Basement Sections
6.02 The new basement will be constructed generally by excavating below the existing sub-
basement and by underpinning the existing masonry walls. The underpinning will be
laterally propped during construction and a permanent reinforced concrete structure will
be constructed inside the underpinned excavation.
6.03 The basement will be for plant rooms and storage and a Grade 2 waterproofing to
BS8102:2009 Code of practice for the protection of below ground structures against
water from the ground to provide watertight construction.
6.04 In the permanent condition the lateral loads on the basement from the earth pressures
will be resisted by the reinforced concrete construction.
6.05 The design and construction of the building structure will be in accordance with current
Building Regulations, British Standards and Codes of Practice, Health and Safety
requirements and good building practice.
6.06 Preliminary calculations have been carried out and are included in Appendix E.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 9 of 13
The Cadogan Hotel
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7.0 DETAILED ASSESSMENT
7.0.01 This detailed assessment has been carried out to address the specific requirements set
out in clause 6.1.3 of Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelseas supplementary
planning document Subterranean Development, adopted May 2009.
7.1 Geology
7.1.01 GEAs site specific soil investigations have been carried out to determine the ground
conditions for the site. These have been considered in conjunction with other local
geological records. Further exploratory work will be carried out to establish the ground
conditions to the full depth of the new construction.
7.1.02 The desk study for the site does not highlight any issues which would suggest any
unusual soil conditions across the site.
7.1.03 The basement raft slab will be designed to resist both heave pressures and hydrostatic
pressures.
7.2 Basement Impact
7.2.01 It has been established that there are no tunnels in close proximity to the site which could
be impacted by the works.
7.2.02 It is not anticipated that any trunk utilities cross the site or are in close proximity to the
site. However the presence of any services on site will also be checked by scanning and
marking on site prior to any excavation works. Any services running in the pavement to
Pavilion Road and Pavilion Street will be safeguarded during the works by the selection
of construction techniques that maintain stability of the highway and adjoining pavement.
7.2.03 The potential for impact on the existing and adjoining properties has been considered in
detail in developing the design principles for the proposed basement. The proposed
construction methods have been selected to minimise the impact.
7.2.04 It has been assessed that this will not have any significant adverse impact on the
adjoining buildings and there is no evidence of foundation problems to the property, nor
to the adjoining properties. The ground conditions do not vary significantly with depth.
Contingency plans will be in place should perched water be encountered or excavation
faces do not remain stable.
7.2.05 To estimate ground movements associated with the excavation works, reference has
been made to Table 2.4 of CIRIA C580. This empirical method is normally used for
basements formed using piled walls on all sides, but can be a useful estimate for other
forms of basement construction, provided the construction methods maintain horizontal
propping at all times and that retaining structures are stiff. The estimates have been
based on the maximum depth of excavation, which is approximately 4.8metres below
existing basement level.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 10 of 13
The Cadogan Hotel
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7.2.06 The estimate of ground surface movement adjacent to the proposed sub-basement
are as follows:
Excavation Predicted movements

depth
Location Horizontal Vertical
(m) (mm) (mm)
Pavilion Road
4.8 7 5
Pavilion Street
Table 7.2.06
Predictions of ground surface movement calculated using procedure in CIRIA C580
7.2.07 The predicted ground movements are small. It is therefore expected that any damage to
the adjacent buildings as a result of the basement works, as classified by Burland, will
generally be category 0 Negligible.
7.3 Slope Stability
7.3.01 The building is on very slightly sloping site, and with reference to local topography, there
are no steep slopes in the vicinity of the site. For this reason no further consideration of
slope stability is necessary.
7.4 Surface Water
7.4.01 There is a very low risk of flooding of the site from rivers or reservoirs and hence no
formal Flood Risk Assessment is necessary.
7.4.02 There is no change in surface permeability as a result of the works.
7.4.03 It is understood that The Cadogan Hotel was not affected by flooding as a result of
surcharging of the public sewers.
7.4.04 In accordance with normal good practice however, positively pumped devices will be
used for all new drainage from the sub-basement to the public sewer to protect the
property. These will comprise a pump and a non-return valve to prevent back-surging into
the sub-basement during extreme rain events.
7.5 Ground Water
7.5.01 The site is not underlain by a productive aquifer, and ground water was not encountered
during the excavation of the trial pits and window samples. Significant water inflows are
not anticipated during the construction of the sub-basement.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 11 of 13
The Cadogan Hotel
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7.5.02 If perched water is encountered during the excavation, construction methods may need
to be adapted to enable underpinning works to progress. Any water which collects within
the excavation will be collected in sumps and pumped.
7.5.03 The impact of the proposed basement on potential groundwater flows is considered to be
insignificant as there is ample space for ground water to flow around the proposed sub-
basement.
7.6 Impact on Trees
7.6.01 There are no trees in the vicinity of the site which could be affected by the construction of
the sub-basement.
7.7 Temporary Works
7.7.01 The proposed temporary works and suggested construction sequence are described in
Section 8.00 below. The temporary works will be installed to ensure that the external
ground and existing structure is fully supported throughout all stages of the construction.
The proposals will be developed and detailed by the specialist appointed Contractor, in
due course.
8.00 OUTLINE METHOD STATEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION
8.01 The sequence of construction of the proposed sub-basement will be subject of detailed
logistics plan and method statements prepared by a specialist Contractor; the general
sequence of construction will be as follows.
8.02 The existing basement slab will be broken out and all existing below slab drainage will be
temporarily diverted from the area of construction.
8.03 The existing structure of the ground and upper floors will be temporarily propped to allow
unimpeded access for underpinning and excavation. Temporary foundations for isolated
internal columns will be constructed, which will be founded at a level below the formation
level of the proposed sub-basement. Pynford beams may be utilised to support retained
historic structure of over the basement level.
8.04 The existing loadbearing walls will be underpinned (possibly in two stages) using
standard underpinning procedures. Individual underpins will not exceed 1.0 metre width
and adjacent sections will not be excavated simultaneously. The exposed faces of all
excavations will remain fully propped at all times with metal trench sheets. The pins will
be reinforced and concreted to within 75mm of the underside of the existing footing and
packed tight with dry pack.
8.05 Where two-stage underpinning is required, all first stage underpins will be constructed,
prior to continuing with the second stage.
8.06 On completion of the underpinning the ground level will reduced and equilibrium props
will be installed throughout the area of excavation.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 12 of 13
The Cadogan Hotel
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
8.07 Excavation will progress to the formation level of the sub-basement slab and the lower
level of equilibrium props will be installed; these may be reinforced concrete strips, below
the formation level of the excavation, or steel props above the finished sub-basement
level. Excavated material will be removed from site via conveyors.
8.08 The formation will be concrete blinded; basement slab reinforcement will be fixed and
concrete placed.
8.09 After the concrete sub-basement slab has reached sufficient strength, the lower props
will be removed and the RC liner walls will be reinforced, shuttered and concreted.
8.10 The suspended RC basement slab and beams will be reinforced, shuttered and
concreted.
8.11 After the concrete basement slab has reached sufficient strength, the high level props will
be removed.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 13 of 13
Construction Method Statement The Cadogan Hotel
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX A
FIGURES
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
P2392 Appendix A Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

Page A1
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
N

Key
Site Location
Figure (a)
Geological Map
(Extract from British Geological Survey)
N

Key
Site Location
Figure (b)
Lost Rivers Map
(Extract from Lost Rivers of London by Nicholas Barton)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page A2
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
N

Key
Site Location
Figure (c)
Aquifer Designation Map
(Extract from Environment Agency Aquifer Map)
N

Key
Site Location
Water well
Locations
Figure (d)
Waterwells Map
(Extract from British Geological Survey, Geoindex)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page A3
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
N

Key
Site Location
Figure (e)
Areas at Risk of Flooding from Rivers or Sea Map
(Extract from Environment Agency flood map)
N

Key
Site Location
Figure (f)
Areas at Risk of Flooding from Reservoirs Map
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page A4
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
N

Key
Site Location
Figure (g)
Flooding from Surface Water Map
N

Key
Site Location
Figure (h)
Surface Flooding Map
(Extract from Strategic Flood Risk Assessment)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page A5
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
N

Key
Figure (i)
Underground infrastructure Map
(Extract from maptube.org)
N

Figure (j)
1871-72 Map
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page A6
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
N

Figure (k)
1895 Map
N

Key
Site Location
Figure (l)
Topography Map
(Extract from Ordnance Survey 1:25 000 mapping)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page A7
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
N

Key
Figure (m)
WW2 Bomb Record Map
(Extract from bombsight.org)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page A8
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX B
THAMES WATER ASSET LOCATION SEARCH
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
P2392 Appendix B Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers
Page B1
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Figure B1
Extract from Thames Water Asset Search
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page B2
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page B3
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX C
PHOTOGRAPHS
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
P2392 Appendix C Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

Page C1
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Photograph 1
Photograph 2
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page C2
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Photograph 3
Photograph 4
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Page C3
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX D
STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
P2392 Appendix D Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

Page D1
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX E
STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
P2392 Appendix E Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

Page E1
CMS Appendix E Cadogan Hotel
Job ref : P2392
Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers Sheet : E2
Made By : MHH
Foundation House
Date : June 2014
4 Percy Road
Checked : JMcS
London N12 8BU
Tel: 020 84459115 Fax: 020 84469788
1. INTRODUCTION
The proposed works to the Cadogan Hotel include the construction of a sub-basement beneath part
of the existing basement.
The new sub-basement will be constructed generally by underpinning the existing external and
internal walls beneath the basement and constructing a reinforced insitu concrete base, lining walls
and new basement floor slab.
The existing walls will be temporality propped while the existing basement slab is removed until the
new reinforces basement slab is constructed.
The proposed structural modification are shown on Michael Alexander drawings
x P2392 CMS 01 Proposed Plan Sub-basement

x P2392 CMS 02 Proposed Sections Sub-basement
Preliminary exploratory works have been carried out to establish the existing wall, foundation and
floor details.
The existing floor constructions are predominately traditional timber floors supported on solid
masonry load bearing walls. The walls are founded on traditional corbelled brick and mass concrete
spread footings. The existing basement slab is a ground bearing concrete construction.
The following calculations take the spans into account and have resulted in the structural sizes
indicated on the drawings.
These preliminary calculations are for planning purposes only. Detailed calculations will be
developed in due course in respect of Part A of The Building Regulations.
E-mail: mail@maengineers.com Web: www.maengineers.com

Job ref : P2392
Made By : MHH
Foundation House
Date : June 2014
4 Percy Road
Checked : JMcS
London N12 8BU
Tel: 020 84459115 Fax: 020 84469788
2. BRITISH STANDARDS
The following British Standards will be applied in the detailed design: -
BS 648 Weights of building materials

BS 5268-2 Structural use of timber - Part 2: Code of practice for permissible stress design,
materials and workmanship
BS 5950-1 Structural use of steelwork in building - Part 1: Code of practice for design
Rolled and welded sections
BS 5977-1 Lintels Part 1: Method for assessment of load
BS 6399-1 Loading for buildings Part 1: Code of practice for dead and imposed loads
BS 6399-3 Loading for buildings Part 1: Code of practice for imposed roof loads
BS 8002 Code practice for earth retaining structures
BS 8007 Code practice for design for concrete structures for retaining aqueous liquids
BS 8110-1 Structural use of concrete Part1: Code of practice for design and construction
The following material characteristic strengths for steel and concrete are used in the structural calculations:
x 500N/mm high yield strength reinforcement
x Concrete grade to be 40N/mm grade C32/40 to BS 8500-1:2002

Job ref : P2392
Made By : MHH
Foundation House
Date : June 2014
4 Percy Road
Checked : JMcS
London N12 8BU
Tel: 020 84459115 Fax: 020 84469788
3. LOADING
Part building section taken on gridline C:

Approximate floor span between grids 1 and 2 is
approximately 5.3m.
Roof load:
Dead load:
Tiles 0.60 kN/m
Boarding and insulation 0.15 kN/m
Roof rafters 0.20 kN/m
Plasterboard 0.22 kN/m
Total load on slope (58) 1.17 kN/m
Total dead load in plan 2.20 kN/m
Imposed snow load 0.60 kN/m
Floor loads (timber floors - 5 no. thus):

Dead load:
Floor boards & finishes 0.25 kN/m
Timber floor joists 0.25 kN/m
Ceiling, services & insulation 0.50 kN/m
Total dead load 1.00 kN/m
Imposed load 1.50 kN/m

Partitions 1.00 kN/m
Total live load 2.50 kN/m
Wall loads (excluding plaster finishes)

215 thick brick wall (4th fl.) 4.30 kN/m
330 thick brick wall (3rd fl.) 6.60 kN/m
st nd
440 thick brick wall (1 & 2 fl.) 8.80 kN/m
560 thick brick wall (B & G) 11.20 kN/m

Job ref : P2392
Made By : MHH
Foundation House
Date : June 2014
4 Percy Road
Checked : JMcS
London N12 8BU
Tel: 020 84459115 Fax: 020 84469788
Surcharge traffic load: (HA loading to BD 37) 10 kN/m
Surcharge from soil:

Top of underpinning is approximately 2.9 m below existing ground level.
2.90 m x 18 kN/m = 52.2 kN/m
Line load from building (loads per linear metre):
Wall load
4.30 kN/m x 1.0 m = 4.30 kN/m
6.60 kN/m x 3.065 m = 20.23 kN/m
8.80 kN/m2 x (3.490 m + 4.335 m) = 68.86 kN/m
11.20 kN/m2 x (3.875 m + 3.230 m) = 79.58 kN/m
Corbel (assumed) 4.00 kN/m
Concrete spread footing (assumed): 0.20 m x 1.00 m x 24 kN/m = 4.80 kN/m
Total load from existing wall and footing 181.77 kN/m
Loads from roof and floors (approx 2.60 m influence from floor slabs):
Roof : 1.70 m x (2.20 kN/m + 0.60 kN/m) + 0.9 m x (1.0 kN/m + 2.5 kN/m) = 7.91 kN/m
Floors (4, 3, 2, 1 & ground floor): 5 (floors) x 2.60 m x (1.0 kN/m + 2.5 kN/m) = 45.50 kN/m
Load from walls: 182 kN/m

Load from floors: 46 kN/m
Total line load on underpinning: 228 kN/m

Job ref : P2392
Made By : MHH
Foundation House
Date : June 2014
4 Percy Road
Checked : JMcS
London N12 8BU
Tel: 020 84459115 Fax: 020 84469788
4. UNDERPINNING DESIGN
It is assumed that the underpinning will be propped at base with e.g. a reinforced blinding at toe level which will
prop opposite pins against each other. Ground water will only be considered in the permanent condition.
Total surcharge to be 10 + 52 kN/m = 62 kN/m

Total line load from building (applied at centre of underpinning): 228 kN/m
Soil parameters (assumed):

Allowable bearing pressure (Kempton Park Gravel) 200 kN/m
Soil density 19 kN/m
Soil friction 24 degrees
Minimum width: 800 mm

Minimum toe length: 1500 mm
Minimum toe depth: 500 mm
Concrete grade to be: C32/40, 20mm aggregate
To be reinforced with: H20 bars at 200 mm centres top and bottom in both directions
Cover to reinforcement bars: 40 mm
MASTERKEY : RETAINING WALL DESIGN TO BS 8002 AND BS 8110 : 1997

Underpinning GL 1
Reinforced Concrete Retaining Wall with Reinforced Base

Job ref : P2392
Made By : MHH
Foundation House
Date : June 2014
4 Percy Road
Checked : JMcS
London N12 8BU
Tel: 020 84459115 Fax: 020 84469788
Summary of Design Data

Notes All dimensions are in mm and all forces are per metre run
Material Densities (kN/m) Soil 19.00, Concrete 24.00
Concrete grade fcu 40 N/mm, Permissible tensile stress 0.250 N/mm
Concrete covers (mm) Wall inner cover 50 mm, Wall outer cover 50 mm, Base cover 50 mm
Reinforcement design fy 500 N/mm designed to BS 8110: 1997
Surcharge and Water Table Surcharge 62.00 kN/m, Fully drained
The Engineer must satisfy him/herself to the reinforcement detailing requirements of the relevant codes of practice
Additional Loads
Wall Propped at Base Level Therefore no sliding check is required
Vertical Line Load 228 kN/m @ X -400 mm and Y 0 mm - Load type Live
Dimensions Ties, line loads and partial loads are measured from the inner top edge of the wall
Soil Properties
Soil bearing pressure Allowable pressure @ front 200.00 kN/m, @ back 200.00 kN/m
Back Soil Friction and Cohesion f = Atn(Tan(24)/1.2) = 20.36
Back Wall Friction and Cohesion = Atn(0.75xTan(Atn(Tan(20)/1.2))) = 12.82
Base Friction and Cohesion = Atn(0.75xTan(Atn(Tan(24)/1.2))) = 15.55
Front Soil Friction and Cohesion f = Atn(Tan(24)/1.2) = 20.36
Front Wall Friction and Cohesion = Atn(0.75xTan(Atn(Tan(20)/1.2))) = 12.82
Loading Cases
GWall- Wall & Base Self Weight, FvHeel- Vertical Loads over Heel, Pa- Active Earth Pressure,
Psurcharge- Earth pressure from surcharge, Pp- Passive Earth Pressure
Case 1: Geotechnical Design 1.00 GWall+1.00 FvHeel+1.00 Pa+1.00 Psurcharge+1.00 Pp
Case 2: Structural Ultimate Design 1.40 GWall+1.60 FvHeel+1.00 Pa+1.00 Psurcharge+1.00 Pp
Geotechnical Design
Wall Stability - Virtual Back Pressure
Case 1 Overturning/Stabilising 264.175/587.148 0.450 OK
Wall Sliding - Virtual Back Pressure
Fx/(RxFriction+ RxPassive) 0.000/(89.023+0.357) 0.000 OK
Prop ReactionCase 2 (Serviceability) 156.5 kN @ Base
Soil Pressure
Virtual Back (No uplift) Max(190.069/200, 88.110/200) kN/m 0.950 OK
Wall Back (No uplift) Max(197.276/200, 80.903/200) kN/m 0.986 OK
Structural Design
Prop Reaction
Maximum Prop Reaction (Ultimate) 159.6 kN @ Base
Wall Design (Inner Steel)
Critical Section Critical @ 0 mm from base, Case 2
Steel Provided (Cover) Main H20@200 (50 mm) Dist. H20@200 (70 mm) 1571 mm OK
Compression Steel Provided (Cover) Main H20@200 (50 mm) Dist. H20@200 (70 mm) 1571 mm
Leverarm z=fn(d,b,As,fy,Fcu) 740 mm, 1000 mm, 1571 mm, 500 N/mm, 40.0 N/mm 703 mm
Mr=fn(above,As',d',x,x/d) 1571 mm, 60 mm, 43 mm, 0.06 480.4 kN.m
Moment Capacity Check (M/Mr) M 197.5 kN.m, Mr 480.4 kN.m 0.411 OK
Wall Axail Design (N/Ncap) N 454.8 kN, Ncap 12800.0 kN 0.036 OK
Wall Slenderness Leff/tk =2.00x3350.0/800.0 8.4 OK
Wall Axail-Mom Design (M/MrAxial) M 197.5 kN, MrAxail651.9 kN.m 0.303 OK
Shear Capacity Check F 132.8 kN, vc 0.378 N/mm, Fvr 279.8 kN 0.47 OK
Base Top Steel Design
Leverarm z=fn(d,b,As,fy,Fcu) 440 mm, 1000 mm, 1571 mm, 500 N/mm, 40 N/mm 418 mm
Base Bottom Steel Design
Leverarm z=fn(d,b,As,fy,Fcu) 438 mm, 1000 mm, 2454 mm, 500 N/mm, 40 N/mm 408 mm

Job ref : P2392
Made By : MHH
Foundation House
Date : June 2014
4 Percy Road
Checked : JMcS
London N12 8BU
Tel: 020 84459115 Fax: 020 84469788
5. SUB-BASEMENT DESIGN
Uplift due to water pressure. It is assumed that water level is at top of new sub-basement, hence 4.20 m water
pressure.
Water pressure: 4.20 m x 10 kN/m = 42 kN/m

Dead load slab: 0.30 m x 24 kN/m = 7.2 kN/m
Uplift on slab = water pressure dead load of slab = 42.0 kN/m - 7.2 kN/m = 34.8 kN/m
The uplift forces shall be resisted using a shear key between the RC liner wall and the underpinning.
6.6m
Fig 5.1 Plan sub-basement (not to scale)

Job ref : P2392
Made By : MHH
Foundation House
Date : June 2014
4 Percy Road
Checked : JMcS
London N12 8BU
Tel: 020 84459115 Fax: 020 84469788
5.1 Sub-Basement Slab Design
Design for most onerous case for a span of 6.6 m and 6.4 m. It is assumed in the design the all slab edges are
torsionally restrained on three sides, hence the slab and the wall shall be detailed to transfer the moments from
the slab into the walls.
Slab depth to be: 300 mm

To be reinforced with: H20 bars at 200 mm centres top and bottom in both directions
Note: Provide H20 U-bars and H16 starter bars for walls at 200 mm centres to transfer moments.
MASTERKEY CONCRETE - TWO-WAY SLAB

SUB-BASEMENT SLAB

Job ref : P2392
Made By : MHH
Foundation House
Date : June 2014
4 Percy Road
Checked : JMcS
London N12 8BU
Tel: 020 84459115 Fax: 020 84469788
Basic Data
Dimensions Lx=6400, Ly=6600, D=300
Grades and Covers fcu=40, fy=500, top=40, bottom=40, Aggregate = 20
Load = 1.4(gk + DenD) + 1.6qk 1.4(0.00 + 24.000.300) + 1.628.00 54.88 kN/m
Edge Fixity Edge: 1 Fixed, 2 Fixed, 3 Fixed, 4 Pinned Nd = 1
Bottom Steel at Mid-Span XX (3-4)

As bottom (0.524%) 20 @ 200 mm c/c 1571 mm OK
BM app = Fn(Wult, Lx, Coef) 54.88, 6400, 0.032 71.6 kN.m
X/d = Fn(As, fy, K1, fcu, m) 1571, 500, 0.40, 40, 0.87 = 43 / 250 0.17
Mu conc = Fn(Z, X, K1, fcu) 231, 43, 0.40, 40 157.73 kN.m OK
Tens MF=Fn(Asr, Asp, fy, M, d) 674, 1571, 500, 250 1.91 Table 3.10
Allow L/d=Fn(Basic, Ten) 26, 1.910 49.67 Cl 3.5.7
Actual L/d=Fn(L,d) 6400, 250 25.60 OK
Bottom Steel at Mid-Span YY (1-2)

X/d = Fn(As, fy, K1, fcu, m) 1571, 500, 0.40, 40, 0.87 = 43 / 230 0.19
Support Steel at Edge 3 XX (short span top)

As top (0.335%) 16 @ 200 mm c/c 1005 mm OK
X/d = Fn(As, fy, K1, fcu, m) 1005, 500, 0.40, 40, 0.87 = 28 / 252 0.11
SF app = Fn(Wult, Lx, Coef) 54.88, 6400, 0.380 133.5 kN
Vcap = Fn(As, d, fcu, vc) 1005, 252, 40, 0.61 153.92 kN OK
Support Steel at Edge 4 XX (short span bottom)

Support Steel at Edges 1&2 YY (long span)

As top (0.335%) 16 @ 200 mm c/c 1005 mm OK
X/d = Fn(As, fy, K1, fcu, m) 1005, 500, 0.40, 40, 0.87 = 28 / 236 0.12
Distribution Steel
As Min = Fn(fy, d, b, As%) 500, 300, 1000, 0.13 390 mm/m

Job ref : P2392
Made By : MHH
Foundation House
Date : June 2014
4 Percy Road
Checked : JMcS
London N12 8BU
Tel: 020 84459115 Fax: 020 84469788
5.2 RC Lining Wall Design
This design reflects the permanent case sub-basement. The walls shall be propped at bottom (sub-basement
slab) and top (basement slab).
It is assumed that the sub-basement can be fully submerged in water and the underpinning does not act as a
retaining wall.
The walls shall be torsionally restrained with the sub-basement slab (refer to sub-basement slab design for
further details).
Wall width to be: 300 mm

To be reinforced with: H16 bars at 200 mm centres each face in both directions
MASTERKEY : RETAINING WALL DESIGN TO BS 8002 AND BS 8110 : 1997

RC liner wall
Reinforced Concrete Retaining Wall with Reinforced Base
Summary of Design Data

Notes All dimensions are in mm and all forces are per metre run
Material Densities (kN/m) Dry Soil 18.00, Saturated Soil 20.80, Submerged Soil 10.80, Concrete 24.00
Concrete grade fcu 40 N/mm, Permissible tensile stress 0.250 N/mm
Concrete covers (mm) Wall inner cover 40 mm, Wall outer cover 40 mm, Base cover 40 mm
Reinforcement design fy 500 N/mm designed to BS 8110: 1997
Surcharge and Water Table Surcharge 62.00 kN/m, Water table level 4000 mm
The Engineer must satisfy him/herself to the reinforcement detailing requirements of the relevant codes of practice

4141414

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

4141414

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

CONSTRUCTION METHOD STATEMENT

THE CADOGAN HOTEL

THE CADOGAN GROUP LIMITED

Project No. P2392

ISSUED FOR PLANNING July 2014

Foundation House, 4 Percy Road London N12 8BU

2.00 EXTRACT FROM ROYAL LONDON BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON AND 4

3.00 EXISTING BUILDING 6

4.00 DESK STUDY 6

5.00 GROUND CONDITIONS 9

6.00 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 9

7.00 DETAILED ASSESSMENT 10

8.00 OUTLINE METHOD STATEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION 12

P2392 Construction Method Statement_Issue 1.1 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

Appendix A Geological Map Figure (a)

Appendix B Thames Water Asset Location Search

Appendix D Structural Drawings

Appendix E Structural Calculations

Appendix F GEA Ground Investigation

P2392 Construction Method Statement_Issue 1.1 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

1.04 The Architect for the project is Blair Associates Architecture.

2.00 EXTRACT FROM ROYAL LONDON BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA

2.01 Section 6 of the RBKC Supplementary Planning document Subterranean Development,

6 Construction Method Statements

P2392 Construction Method Statement_Issue 1.1 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

x whether the geology is capable of supporting the loads and construction

6.1.6 In addition to this, applicants seeking planning permission for subterranean

P2392 Construction Method Statement_Issue 1.1 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

3.00 EXISTING BUILDING

4.00 DESK STUDY

P2392 Construction Method Statement_Issue 1.1 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

Surface Flow and Flooding

P2392 Construction Method Statement_Issue 1.1 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

World War 2 Bombs

P2392 Construction Method Statement_Issue 1.1 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

5.00 GROUND CONDITIONS

x Review of local geological information as described in 4.02 - 4.03 above.

x A site specific soil investigation carried out by Geotechnical and Environmental

6.00 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

P2392/CMS01 Proposed Sub-Basement Plan

P2392 Construction Method Statement_Issue 1.1 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

7.0 DETAILED ASSESSMENT

7.2 Basement Impact

P2392 Construction Method Statement_Issue 1.1 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

Excavation Predicted movements

7.3 Slope Stability

7.4 Surface Water

7.4.02 There is no change in surface permeability as a result of the works.

7.5 Ground Water

P2392 Construction Method Statement_Issue 1.1 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

7.6 Impact on Trees

7.7 Temporary Works

8.00 OUTLINE METHOD STATEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION

P2392 Construction Method Statement_Issue 1.1 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

P2392 Construction Method Statement_Issue 1.1 Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

P2392 Appendix A Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

P2392 Appendix A Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

P2392 Appendix A Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

P2392 Appendix A Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

P2392 Appendix A Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

P2392 Appendix A Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

P2392 Appendix A Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

P2392 Appendix A Michael Alexander Consulting Engineers

THAMES WATER ASSET LOCATION SEARCH