Wider angles

As lighting design adviser to the Olympic Delivery Authority, Speirs and Major’s remit was to take a broad view of the Park’s external lighting scheme. Ben Cronin talks to practice co-founder Mark Major

What is Speirs and Major’s role in London 2012?

Our first Olympic appointment was as lighting designer for the public realm lighting at the Olympic Athletes’ Village. We were then appointed as lighting design advisers to the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) to take an overview of the Olympic Park lighting and how this could develop for Games and then in legacy.

More lately we have been working with the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) in scoping out aspects of the public lighting overlay – that is the additional and more temporary lighting that will be used during the Games.

What does the advisory role involve?

The lighting design adviser role is a broad and overarching remit. We worked with the ODA to review the initial lighting strategy, develop it further and to assist with its delivery.

By that, we mean the initial lighting strategy was largely concerned with the Olympic Park itself and looked primarily at the creation of safe routes between different thresholds and venues. In our role we built on this to develop a wider vision that took account of links to other schemes – such as the Olympic Athletes’ Village, Westfield, and the development around Stratford International Station – and also took account of wider aspects, such as the role of architectural lighting to the main venues, landscape lighting and art, among other things.

What was the degree of liaison with other lighting consultants?

We held meetings with the various construction teams and their lighting designers both to try and understand what they needed to achieve and also to relate to how that might inform the wider decision-making processes. It must be remembered that our remit was external lighting only. The teams included those involved in the design and construction of the Olympic Stadium, the Aquatics Centre, the Velodrome, the Handball Arena and the International Broadcasting Centre. These venues in particular were critical, as they not only have a life during the games but will be retained as public facilities after the event.

We also had insight into plans for the more temporary venues, such as Basketball, Hockey, and Water Polo. In each case, we wanted to understand the briefing requirements for the external appearance after dark. We were very clear from the outset that we were not there to legislate nor to control but rather provide sufficient flexibility that the whole piece might move in the right direction, while maintaining the rich diversity of the individual designs.

How much will the lighting change during the Games and in legacy?

It was always understood that the Games themselves would inevitably bring their own layer of colour and celebrations to the Park next summer. What was more important was to consider how the venues might be lit after that – particularly in the more environmentally sensitive northern parts of the Park.

Did you specify any lights, or was it more a case of directing what the other lighting companies specified?

Obviously, with the Olympic Athletes’ Village, we specified the public realm lighting, including ranges of street and landscape lighting. Like the other firms that were engaged with lighting the public realm, however, we were obliged to adhere closely to one of the successful outcomes of the Lighting Design Advisory role, which was an approach to common procurement. This was developed in conjunction with the ODA, Allies & Morrison (the Olympic Park masterplanners) and Arup.

“It occurred to us very early on in our involvement that an opportunity existed for most of the legacy lighting,” Mark Major, Speirs and Major

What type of lighting technology did you use?

It occurred to us very early on in our involvement that an opportunity existed for most of the legacy lighting, which would also serve the Games, to be procured from a single supplier. This had considerable advantages in terms of cost benefits, co-ordination, delivery, spare parts and the potential for easy upgrading of the lighting systems. The latter emerged from early discussions – indeed debate – as to the relative merits of introducing LED street lighting into the park. In 2009 this remained a challenging question, but careful study ultimately anticipated that this was the right way to go, as long as proper upgradability and maintenance could be ensured, both in terms of light sources and controls.

Did this result in a common procurement strategy?

The overall supply was tendered through a highly complex, and very demanding process, which was ultimately secured by Philips Lighting. As a result a special catalogue was produced for the project, from which the public realm lighting could be selected by designers who needed access to that type of equipment. While working with a limited palette might seem restrictive at first glance, it greatly helped simplify what would otherwise have become a more piecemeal proliferation of lighting assets that would then have to be managed after the Games. We have all seen from the way in which our cities have often been lit over the past century in this fashion that this doesn’t lead to the best results.

Has this resulted in a uniformity or consistency to the lighting in the Olympic Park?

One of the key things that we focused on early on was the lighting standards that were required both during the Games and in legacy. It would have been easy to ask what lighting levels were needed Games-time only and then those becoming fixed for the future. Inevitably, requirements for safety and security during an event in which there will be tens of thousands of visitors in the park are somewhat different than what you’d expect to find in a typical London parkland in the future. To that end we helped arbitrate and agree that high-quality and safe lighting would be procured in a form appropriate for the future.

A temporary layer of lighting will be brought in key areas, where required, during the games. This is seen as progressive and highly sustainable, especially when we acknowledge the combination of broadcast lighting, field of play lighting, media screens and event lighting that will naturally occur as part of the Games and make a significant and temporary contribution to the overall effect anyway. It is also important to note that it is a summer games, and the need for large amounts of lighting for long periods is limited. At the same time, it has been acknowledged that the night-time image of the park is likely to be broadcast around the world as the backdrop to TV coverage, in countries in different time zones. In that sense, presenting a cohesive lighting solution is critical.

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.