Cunningham’s report on Orange Line project questioned

LAHORE: Expressing their views over the news regarding report of Professor Robin about Lahore Orange Line Metro Train Project, engineering experts have expressed the view that Professor Robin is a professional in the field of archaeology.

They said he is not associated with structural engineering and therefore did not have the expertise to reverify NESPAK’s reports about impact of vibration on archaeological monuments in Lahore.

The said professor has overstepped his mandate and discussed visual impacts and legal aspects of the project rather than giving his opinion about technical aspects of NESPAK’s reports. Professor Robin discussed these reports in terms of visual impact of Orange Line/ aesthetics, Antiquities Act, 1975 and Punjab Special Premises (Preservation) Ordinance, 1985. He failed to discuss its technical aspects. He failed to comment that the vibration values given in these reports are within permissible limits or not. 

It is to be remembered that the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan during its hearing on 13 October 2016 had ordered appellants and respondents to submit three names of consultants who could reverify the credibility of M/s NESPAK reports dated July 2015 & February 2016.

In compliance of the Supreme Court order, appellants & respondents submitted three names of consultants. Out of these six consultants, Supreme Court selected M/s TYPSA-Asian Consulting Engineers (Pvt.) Ltd. JV and Professor Robin Coningham, Department of Archaeology in its order on 14 October 2016 for reverification of credibility of NESPAK report dated July 2015 and February 2016. 

Both the experts submitted their reports to the Chief Secretary, Punjab which were later submitted to Supreme Court of Pakistan.

It is pertinent to mention here that TYPSA is a Spanish company of international repute having joint venture with Asian Consulting Engineers (Pvt.) Ltd. TYPSA-Asian JV has a vast experience in the field of Planning, Engineering, Structural Analysis, Architecture and designing. TYPSA has experience of more than 50 years of many projects related to metro trains in more than 60 countries including Spain, France, Portugal, Brazil, America Saudia Arabia and Qatar etc.  

TYPSA have evaluated these NESPAK reports and after detailed deliberations concluded that “the approach adopted by NESPAK is conservative that gives vibration velocities higher than actual.

The NESPAK reports rightly conclude that the levels obtained by calculation will be within the permissible limits and there will be no adverse effect on any of these sites. It is concluded that the reports of NESPAK are comprehensive and complete with reference to the subject and the results are correct/within acceptable limits.”

It is important to note that appeal of Government of the Punjab against the decision of Lahore High Court is pending in the Supreme Court which will decide this appeal after reviewing the reports of these experts.