’s nest, cork -...
Post on 11-Mar-2018
213 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Report for: McCullough Mulvin Architects
Our ref: 13621
UCC Crow’s Nest, Cork
Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Study
Document created by:
Integrated Environmental Solutions Limited
International Sustainability Consulting Developers of the IES <Virtual Environment>
Issued For: Prepared by: Checked by:
Comment Kiran Tati
Project Consultant
Bruce Elrick
Consultancy Operations Manager
Version: Date: Revision Details: Approved by:
0 14/08/2017 Draft Issue for Comment John Gleeson
1 06/09/2017 Clients comments update John Gleeson
2 20/11/2017 Clients comments update John Gleeson
P a g e | 1
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................... 3
1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 4
2 Proposed Scenario ............................................................................................................. 5
2.1 Orientation .................................................................................................................. 5
2.2 Proposed models ......................................................................................................... 6
2.3 Model Geometry ......................................................................................................... 7
2.4 Potential sensitive receptors ....................................................................................... 8
3 BRE – Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight (2nd edition) .................................. 9
3.1 Room type discussion .................................................................................................. 9
3.2 Impact classification discussion ................................................................................ 10
4 Shadow Analysis ............................................................................................................... 11
4.1 21st March – 3D View ............................................................................................... 12
4.2 21st March – Plan View ............................................................................................. 13
4.3 21st June – 3D View .................................................................................................. 14
4.4 21st June – Plan View ................................................................................................ 15
4.5 21st December – 3D View ......................................................................................... 16
4.6 21st December – Plan View ...................................................................................... 17
4.7 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 18
o The Village .......................................................................................................... 18
o Victoria Cross (rear elevations) .......................................................................... 18
o Carrigrohane Road (front elevations) ................................................................ 18
5 Daylight / Skylight ............................................................................................................ 19
5.1 View 1a – The Village – East Block (east elevation) .................................................. 20
5.2 View 1b – The Village – East Block (east elevation) .................................................. 22
5.3 View 02 – The Village – North Block (east elevation) ............................................... 27
5.4 View 03 – Victoria Cross (rear elevations) ................................................................ 30
5.5 View 04 – Carrigrohane Road (front elevations)....................................................... 33
5.6 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 37
o The Village - View 1a and View 1b – East Block (East Elevation) ....................... 37
o Victoria Cross – View 03 .................................................................................... 38
o Carrigrohane Road - View 04 ............................................................................. 38
6 Sunlight to existing amenity spaces ................................................................................. 39
6.1 Victoria Cross - Garden Spaces.................................................................................. 40
o Existing Scenario ................................................................................................ 41
o Proposed Development ..................................................................................... 42
6.2 Carrigrohane Road - Garden Spaces ......................................................................... 43
o Existing Scenario ................................................................................................ 44
o Proposed Development ..................................................................................... 45
P a g e | 2
6.3 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 46
7 Sunlight to proposed amenity spaces .............................................................................. 47
7.1 Amenity Solar Exposure March 21st ......................................................................... 48
7.2 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 50
8 Average Daylight Factors ................................................................................................. 51
8.1 Average Daylight Factor Criteria ............................................................................... 52
o Area of Interest .................................................................................................. 53
o Area of Interest configuration ........................................................................... 53
o Assumptions ....................................................................................................... 54
o Daylight Factor Analysis ..................................................................................... 54
8.2 Results ....................................................................................................................... 55
o Blocks ................................................................................................................. 55
o Block A ................................................................................................................ 56
o Block B ................................................................................................................ 57
o Block C ................................................................................................................ 58
o Block D ............................................................................................................... 59
o Courtyards .......................................................................................................... 60
o Courtyard 01 ...................................................................................................... 61
o Courtyard 02 ...................................................................................................... 61
8.3 Discussion .................................................................................................................. 62
9 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 63
9.1 Recommendations .................................................................................................... 64
P a g e | 3
Executive Summary
Integrated Environmental Solutions (IES) have been commissioned by McCullough Mulvin
Architects to undertake a Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing impact study of the proposed
Crow’s Nest development on neighbouring buildings.
It should be noted that the guidance in 'Site layout planning for daylight and sunlight: a guide
to good practice' is not mandatory and the Report itself states ‘although it gives numerical
guidelines these should be interpreted flexibly because natural lighting is only one of many
factors in site layout design.
Whilst the results shown relate to the criteria as laid out in the BRE guidance targets it is
important to note that the BRE targets have been drafted primarily for use in low density
suburban development and should therefore be used with flexibility and caution when
dealing other types of sites. Despite this, the site performs well in relation to the metrics
considered in this report.
The overall impact may need to be considered alongside the other social, economic and
environmental benefits of the development.
Based on this study the proposed development is broadly in line with the recommendations
in the BRE ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight’ guide, sometimes referred to as
BRE Digest 209.
Therefore, there is no significant basis for a refusal on issues relating to shadow/daylight
impact based on the results as demonstrated in this report.
P a g e | 4
1 Introduction
Integrated Environmental Solutions (IES) have been commissioned by McCullough Mulvin
Architects to undertake a Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing impact study of the proposed
building of Crow’s Nest, Cork on neighbouring buildings.
The BRE’s 2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight (2nd edition)
is used to consider the important factors.
The study will consider the existing and proposed situations brought about by the Proposed
Scenario with respect to:
• Shadow Analysis - a visual representation of any potential changes that may arise
from the Proposed Scenario.
• Daylight / Skylight - via consideration of Vertical sky component.
• Sunlight to existing Garden spaces - via consideration of BRE requirements for at
least half of a garden area should receive at least 2 hours of sunlight on 21st
March.
• Sunlight to proposed amenity spaces - via consideration of BRE requirements for
at least half of a garden or amenity area should receive at least 2 hours of sunlight
on 21st March.
• Average Daylight Factors – across typical rooms in proposed development
Both existing scenario and proposed scenario models have been created to quantify the items
below and to understand shading impact to existing neighbouring buildings.
All analysis has been undertaken using the IES <Virtual Environment> software tool.
P a g e | 5
2 Proposed Scenario
2.1 Orientation
The model orientation has been taken from architectural information provided, and the
resulting angle shown below used in the analysis.
Orientation
P a g e | 6
2.2 Proposed models
The following images show the two scenarios modelled and used for this analysis.
• Existing Scenario
• Proposed Scenario
Existing Scenario
Proposed Scenario
P a g e | 7
2.3 Model Geometry
The models have been created using the Architects information / drawings provided as
detailed below;
P a g e | 8
2.4 Potential sensitive receptors
To help understand the potential impact to surrounding buildings potential sensitive receptors were
identified as illustrated below.
The Village – East Block (east elevations)
The Village – North Block (east elevations)
Victoria Cross (rear elevations)
Carrigrohane Road (front elevations)
P a g e | 9
3 BRE – Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight (2nd edition)
3.1 Room type discussion
The intention of this study is to consider surrounding buildings to determine any potential impact
resulting from the Proposed Scenario. As such the intention would be to consider all appropriate
elevations and windows of neighbouring buildings.
It should be noted that the BRE guide states the following with respect to light from sky:
“2.2 Existing Building
2.2.2 The guidelines given here are intended for use for rooms in adjoining dwellings when daylight is
required, including living rooms, kitchens and bedrooms. Windows to bathrooms, toilets, storerooms,
circulation areas and garages need not be analysed.”
It goes on to state
“2.2.8 ……bedrooms should be analysed although they are less important ”
Also with respect to sunlight, it states in:
“3.2.3 Kitchens and bedrooms are less important, although care should be taken not to block too much
sun.”
P a g e | 10
3.2 Impact classification discussion
BRE guidance in Appendix I – Environmental Impact Assessment suggests classifications of
potential impacts with respect to criteria as follows;
Negligible to minor adverse impacts
Fully meets guidelines in BRE report
Negligible adverse impact
Loss of light well within guidelines, or
only a small number of windows or
limited area of open space losing light (within the guidelines)
1
Minor adverse impact (a)
Loss of light only just within guidelines, or
A large number of windows or
large areas of open space areas affected (within the guidelines)
Minor adverse impact (b)
only a small number of windows or limited open space areas are affected
the loss of light is only marginally outside the guidelines
an affected room has other sources of skylight or sunlight
the affected building or open spaces only have a low level requirement for skylight or sunlight
there are particular reason why an alternative, less stringent, guideline should be applied
2
3
Major adverse impact large number of windows or large open space areas are affected
the loss of light is only substantially outside the guidelines
all the windows in a particular property are affected
the affected indoor or outdoor spaces have a particularly strong requirement for skylight or sunlight (living rooms / playground)
Criteria that apply as a results of the study are highlighted above in bold.
P a g e | 11
4 Shadow Analysis
This section will consider the shadows cast for both the existing scheme and proposed scheme for the
following dates:
• Solar shading images - 21st March
• Solar shading images - 21st June
• Solar shading images - 21st December
Aerial views/images of the shadows cast from any sun position, defined by date, time, orientation and
site location are provided on a bi-hourly basis from 10am to 4pm for March, June and December.
This provides a visual representation of any potential changes that may arise from the Proposed
Scenario with comment offered with respect to the potential sensitive receptors identified above.
P a g e | 12
4.1 21st March – 3D View
Existing - 10h00
Proposed - 10h00
Shading shown on The Village – North and East Block
Existing - 12h00
Proposed - 12h00
No visible impact on receptors highlighted at this time
Existing - 14h00
Proposed - 14h00
Shading shown on Carrigrohane Road (front elevation)
Existing - 16h00
Proposed - 16h00
Shading shown on Carrigrohane Road (front elevation)
P a g e | 13
4.2 21st March – Plan View
Existing - 10h00
Proposed - 10h00
Shading shown on The Village – North and East Block
Existing - 12h00
Proposed - 12h00
No visible impact on receptors highlighted at this time
Existing - 14h00
Proposed - 14h00
Shading shown on Carrigrohane Road (front elevation)
Existing - 16h00
Proposed - 16h00
Shading shown on Carrigrohane Road (front elevation)
P a g e | 14
4.3 21st June – 3D View
Existing - 10h00
Proposed - 10h00
Shading shown on The Village – North and East Block
Existing - 12h00
Proposed - 12h00
No visible impact on receptors highlighted at this time
Existing - 14h00
Proposed - 14h00
No visible impact on receptors highlighted at this time
Existing - 16h00
Proposed - 16h00
No visible impact on receptors highlighted at this time
P a g e | 15
4.4 21st June – Plan View
Existing - 10h00
Proposed - 10h00
Shading shown on The Village – North and East Block
Existing - 12h00
Proposed - 12h00
No visible impact on receptors highlighted at this time
Existing - 14h00
Proposed - 14h00
No visible impact on receptors highlighted at this time
Existing - 16h00
Proposed - 16h00
No visible impact on receptors highlighted at this time
P a g e | 16
4.5 21st December – 3D View
Existing - 10h00 Proposed - 10h00
Shading shown on The Village – North and East Block
Existing - 12h00
Proposed - 12h00
No visible impact on receptors highlighted at this time
Existing - 14h00
Proposed - 14h00
Shading shown on Carrigrohane Road (front elevation)
P a g e | 17
4.6 21st December – Plan View
Existing - 10h00 Proposed - 10h00
Shading shown on The Village – North and East Block
Existing - 12h00
Proposed - 12h00
No visible impact on receptors highlighted at this time
Existing - 14h00
Proposed - 14h00
Shading shown on Carrigrohane Road (front elevation)
P a g e | 18
4.7 Discussion
The images illustrate the potential impact with respect to shading, commentary was provided
under each image and this is summarised below:
o The Village
Additional shadows are shown across the adjacent student accommodation building located
west of the proposed development.
Some additional shading is shown on The Village – North and East blocks during the morning
(10h00) however beyond this it is generally unaffected with respect to direct shading by the
proposed development.
o Victoria Cross (rear elevations)
This sits to the South of the proposed development and is therefore unaffected with respect
to direct shading by the proposed development.
o Carrigrohane Road (front elevations)
Additional shadows are shown across these buildings located North- East of the proposed
development.
Some additional shading is shown during periods of low sun (Spring/ Autumn), shown on
March 21st in the afternoon (14h00) however until this time it is generally unaffected with
respect to direct shading by the proposed development.
P a g e | 19
5 Daylight / Skylight
The impact on neighbouring buildings will be considered by comparing vertical sky
component (VSC). Vertical Sky Component is the ratio of direct sky illuminance falling on a
vertical wall/window at a reference point (usually the centre of the window), to the
simultaneous horizontal illuminance under an unobstructed sky (%).
This is tested in the Radiance software module of the <Virtual Environment>.
BRE’s 2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight which states
the following in Section 2.2.7;
BRE’s 2011 guidance state in its in Introduction that “Although the BRE guide gives numerical
guidelines, these should be interpreted flexibly since natural lighting is only one of many
factors in site layout design. In special circumstances the developer or planning authority may
wish to use different target values. For example, in a historic city centre, or in an area with
modern high rise buildings, a higher degree of obstruction may be unavoidable if new
developments are to match the height and proportions of existing buildings.”
P a g e | 20
5.1 View 1a – The Village – East Block (east elevation)
The following image indicates the Vertical Sky Component on 21st Sept with a CIE Overcast
sky for Existing and Proposed Situations
• denotes
Eye position of VSC view
• denotes
Focus position of VSC view
P a g e | 21
The following images show the VSC values for different test points on the adjacent buildings
Existing Scenario
Proposed Scheme
P a g e | 22
5.2 View 1b – The Village – East Block (east elevation)
The following image indicates the Vertical Sky Component on 21st Sept with a CIE Overcast
sky for Existing and Proposed Situations
• denotes
Eye position of VSC view
• denotes
Focus position of VSC view
P a g e | 23
The following images show the VSC values for different test points on the adjacent buildings
Existing Scenario
Proposed Scheme
P a g e | 24
The following result can be seen based on the analysis above
View_1a
VSC Points Floor Room Type Existing VSC Proposed VSC Result
1 Third Floor Bedroom 30.4 9.3 3
2 Third Floor Bedroom 30.0 5.6 3
3 Third Floor Bedroom 31.4 5.2 3
4 Third Floor Bedroom 32.1 4.2 3
5 Third Floor Bedroom 32.5 4.6 3
6 Third Floor Bedroom 32.5 3.8 3
7 Second Floor Bedroom 34.3 11.0 3
8 Second Floor Bedroom 37.2 9.3 3
9 Second Floor Bedroom 35.4 5.3 3
10 Second Floor Bedroom 34.6 4.8 3
11 First Floor Bedroom 25.0 9.6 3
12 First Floor Bedroom 28.9 7.6 3
13 First Floor Bedroom 32.5 4.7 3
14 First Floor Bedroom 33.5 4.9 3
15 Ground Floor Bedroom 17.7 9.1 3
16 Ground Floor Bedroom 22.2 6.9 3
17 Ground Floor Bedroom 29.4 3.9 3
18 Ground Floor Bedroom 31.4 4.0 3
View 1b
1 Third Floor Bedroom 32.7 29.8 1
2 Third Floor Bedroom 30.3 27.4 1
3 Third Floor Bedroom 27.0 25.1 1
4 Third Floor Bedroom 25.3 24.0 1
5 Third Floor Bedroom 30.9 28.1 1
6 Third Floor Bedroom 30.9 27.5 1
7 Third Floor Bedroom 32.7 28.3 1
8 Third Floor Bedroom 30.5 25.3 1
10 Third Floor Bedroom 31.3 25.8 1
11 Third Floor Bedroom 31.5 25.1 3
12 Third Floor Bedroom 32.5 24.7 3
13 Third Floor Bedroom 32.0 22.6 3
14 Third Floor Bedroom 29.5 17.5 3
15 Third Floor Bedroom 30.7 16.0 3
17 Third Floor Bedroom 31.3 15.7 3
18 Second Floor Bedroom 33.9 32.4 1
22 Second Floor Bedroom 34.4 32.7 1
24 Second Floor Bedroom 27.5 25.4 1
25 Second Floor Bedroom 28.1 27.7 1
27 Second Floor Bedroom 35.4 32.3 1
28 Second Floor Bedroom 34.9 29.8 1
29 Second Floor Bedroom 34.6 30.8 1
30 Second Floor Bedroom 25.3 25.3 1
31 Second Floor Bedroom 26.0 24.1 1
P a g e | 25
32 Second Floor Bedroom 36.4 29.6 1
33 Second Floor Bedroom 35.2 28.7 1
34 Second Floor Bedroom 26.3 21.9 1
35 Second Floor Bedroom 27.3 20.9 3
36 Second Floor Bedroom 35.4 23.9 3
37 Second Floor Bedroom 34.7 22.8 3
38 Second Floor Bedroom 34.4 20.2 3
39 Second Floor Bedroom 34.4 18.3 3
40 First Floor Bedroom 33.9 30.6 1
44 First Floor Bedroom 33.9 30.6 1
45 First Floor Bedroom 27.4 25.6 1
46 First Floor Bedroom 24.9 22.6 1
47 First Floor Bedroom 34.7 29.8 1
48 First Floor Bedroom 33.2 30.0 1
49 First Floor Bedroom 33.5 29.1 1
50 First Floor Bedroom 27.0 23.5 1
51 First Floor Bedroom 25.4 20.9 1
52 First Floor Bedroom 34.2 28.7 1
53 First Floor Bedroom 34.9 27.4 3
54 First Floor Bedroom 26.2 21.8 1
55 First Floor Bedroom 26.2 20.1 3
56 First Floor Bedroom 32.2 23.0 3
57 First Floor Bedroom 30.1 20.7 3
58 First Floor Bedroom 27.7 19.4 3
59 First Floor Bedroom 25.6 18.1 3
60 Ground Floor Bedroom 28.1 25.3 1
64 Ground Floor Bedroom 31.7 28.3 1
65 Ground Floor Bedroom 25.3 23.2 1
66 Ground Floor Bedroom 25.3 23.6 1
67 Ground Floor Bedroom 31.5 27.9 1
68 Ground Floor Bedroom 32.0 27.5 1
69 Ground Floor Bedroom 32.5 28.3 1
70 Ground Floor Bedroom 24.2 20.6 1
71 Ground Floor Bedroom 24.9 21.6 1
72 Ground Floor Bedroom 31.5 26.8 1
73 Ground Floor Bedroom 31.7 25.6 1
74 Ground Floor Bedroom 24.3 18.9 3
75 Ground Floor Bedroom 22.9 18.2 3
76 Ground Floor Bedroom 26.9 20.7 3
77 Ground Floor Bedroom 24.6 19.7 1
78 Ground Floor Bedroom 18.6 16.5 1
79 Ground Floor Bedroom 16.0 14.9 1
P a g e | 26
The following conclusions can be made
1
All points have a VSC values greater 0.8 times their former value meaning that there is no
reduction greater than 20% reduction in line with BRE guidelines.
3
These areas would be deemed as a minor adverse impact in line with Appendix 1 of the BRE
2011 Guide.
The BRE guide differentiates between the impacts on different room types. The guide notes
states that Kitchen and Bedrooms are less important, although care should be taken not to
block too much sun. See Section 3 of this report which explains the classification of impacts
further.
Furthermore, in the context of the proposed site, given its inner urban location (developed
pre1920’s), and the objective to ensure a sustainable and efficient use of scarce urban land, it
is to be expected that any new development may have minor adverse impacts on adjoining
buildings.
The impacts therefore should be assessed holistically alongside the other criteria noted in
this report and the urban, social, economic and environmental benefits of the development
as a whole.
P a g e | 27
5.3 View 02 – The Village – North Block (east elevation)
The following image indicates the Vertical Sky Component on 21st Sept with a CIE Overcast
sky for Existing and Proposed Situations
• denotes
Eye position of VSC view
• denotes
Focus position of VSC view
P a g e | 28
The following images show the VSC values for different test points on the adjacent buildings
Existing Scenario
Proposed Scheme
P a g e | 29
The following result can be seen based on the analysis above
View_02 Point Level Type Existing VSC Proposed VSC Result
1 Third Floor Bedroom 34.6 10.4 3
2 Second Floor Bedroom 35.1 9.8 3
3 First Floor Bedroom 34.2 9.5 3
4 Ground Floor Bedroom 32.6 7.8 3
The following conclusions can be made
3
These areas would be deemed as a minor adverse impact in line with Appendix 1 of the BRE
2011 Guide.
The BRE guide differentiates between the impacts on different room types. The guide notes
states that Kitchen and Bedrooms are less important, although care should be taken not to
block too much sun. See Section 3 of this report which explains the classification of impacts
further.
Furthermore, in the context of the proposed site, given its inner urban location (developed
pre1920’s), and the objective to ensure a sustainable and efficient use of scarce urban land, it
is to be expected that any new development may have minor adverse impacts on adjoining
buildings.
The impacts therefore should be assessed holistically alongside the other criteria noted in this
report and the urban, social, economic and environmental benefits of the development as a
whole.
P a g e | 30
5.4 View 03 – Victoria Cross (rear elevations)
The following image indicates the Vertical Sky Component on 21st Sept with a CIE Overcast
sky for Existing and Proposed Situations
• denotes
Eye position of VSC view
• denotes
Focus position of VSC view
P a g e | 31
The following images show the VSC values for different test points on the adjacent buildings
Existing Scenario
Proposed Scheme
P a g e | 32
The following result can be seen based on the analysis above
View_03 Point
Type Existing VSC Proposed VSC Result
1 First Floor Bedroom* 33.1 9.8 3
2 First Floor Bedroom* 31.6 9.4 3
3 First Floor Bedroom* 31.9 15.8 3
4 First Floor Bedroom* 28.5 11.4 3
5 Ground Floor Kitchen / Dining * 23.6 4.7 3
6 Ground Floor Kitchen / Dining * 32.7 9.5 3
7 Ground Floor Kitchen / Dining * 20.1 8.3 3
8 Ground Floor Kitchen / Dining * 25.0 8.1 3
* assumed room type
The following conclusions can be made
3
These areas would be deemed as a minor adverse impact in line with Appendix 1 of the BRE
2011 Guide.
The BRE guide differentiates between the impacts on different room types. The guide notes
states that Kitchen and Bedrooms are less important, although care should be taken not to
block too much sun. See Section 3 of this report which explains the classification of impacts
further.
Furthermore, in the context of the proposed site, given its inner urban location (developed
pre1920’s), and the objective to ensure a sustainable and efficient use of scarce urban land, it
is to be expected that any new development may have minor adverse impacts on adjoining
buildings.
The impacts therefore should be assessed holistically alongside the other criteria noted in this
report and the urban, social, economic and environmental benefits of the development as a
whole.
P a g e | 33
5.5 View 04 – Carrigrohane Road (front elevations)
• denotes
Eye position of VSC view
• denotes
Focus position of VSC view
P a g e | 34
The following images show the VSC values for different test points on the adjacent buildings.
Existing Scenario
Proposed Scheme
1 .
2 .
3 4 5
. .
1 .
2 .
3 .
4 . . 6 7 .
P a g e | 35
The following result can be seen based on the analysis above
View_04 Point Level Type Existing VSC Proposed VSC Result
1 First Floor Bedroom* 30.8 19.8 3
2 First Floor Bedroom* 28.7 20.3 3
3 First Floor Bedroom* 30.5 20.5 3
4 First Floor Bedroom* 31.4 22.6 3
5 First Floor Bedroom* 31.6 26.8 1
6 First Floor Bedroom* 32.4 27.4 1
7 First Floor Bedroom* 32.2 27.7 1
8 First Floor Bedroom* 32.5 29.2 1
9 Ground Floor Living* 28.8 18.2 2
10 Ground Floor Living* 29.2 19.2 2
11 Ground Floor Living* 30.2 21.5 2
12 Ground Floor Living* 29.7 22.5 2
13 Ground Floor Living* 29.6 26.8 1
* Assumed Room type
The following conclusions can be made
1
All points have a VSC values greater 0.8 times their former value meaning that there is no
reduction greater than 20% reduction in line with BRE guidelines.
2
These areas would be deemed as a minor adverse impact in line with Appendix 1 of the BRE
2011 Guide as only a small number of windows are affected in the neighbourhood.
Furthermore, in the context of the proposed site, given its inner urban location (developed
pre1920’s), and the objective to ensure a sustainable and efficient use of scarce urban land, it
is to be expected that any new development may have minor adverse impacts on adjoining
buildings.
The impacts therefore should be assessed holistically alongside the other criteria noted in this
report and the urban, social, economic and environmental benefits of the development as a
whole.
P a g e | 36
3
These areas would be deemed as a minor adverse impact in line with Appendix 1 of the BRE
2011 Guide.
The BRE guide differentiates between the impacts on different room types. The guide notes
states that Kitchen and Bedrooms are less important, although care should be taken not to
block too much sun. See Section 3 of this report which explains the classification of impacts
further.
P a g e | 37
5.6 Discussion
The images above illustrate the potential impact with respect to shading
o The Village - View 1a and View 1b – East Block (East Elevation)
The rooms on both elevations considered are all bedrooms, based on our
understanding of the internal layouts.
Ground Floor Layout
Overall the following observations can be made:
VSC points considered
View 1a 18
View 1b 79
Total along East elevation 97
%
VSC values greater 0.8 times their former value in line with BRE guidelines
61.86%
Minor adverse impact 38.14%
P a g e | 38
Two thirds of this East elevation remain unaffected and/or in line with BRE guidelines
with the other having a minor adverse impact.
o Victoria Cross – View 03
These areas affected would be deemed as a minor adverse impact in line with
Appendix 1 of the BRE 2011 Guide.
o Carrigrohane Road - View 04
These areas affected would be deemed as a minor adverse impact in line with
Appendix 1 of the BRE 2011 Guide.
As stated above any areas affected would be deemed as a minor adverse impact in line with
Appendix 1 of the BRE 2011 Guide.
The BRE guide differentiates between the impacts on different room types. The guide notes
states that Kitchen and Bedrooms are less important, although care should be taken not to
block too much sun. See Section 3 of this report which explains the classification of impacts
further.
A small number of living spaces will be affected on Carrigrohane Road, these areas would be
deemed as a minor adverse impact in line with Appendix 1 of the BRE 2011 Guide as only a
small number of windows are affected.
Furthermore, in the context of the proposed site, given its inner urban location (developed
pre1920’s), and the objective to ensure a sustainable and efficient use of scarce urban land,
it is to be expected that any new development may have minor adverse impacts on adjoining
buildings.
The impacts therefore should be assessed holistically alongside the other criteria noted in this
report and the urban, social, economic and environmental benefits of the development as a
whole.
P a g e | 39
6 Sunlight to existing amenity spaces
BRE’s 2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight states in Section
3.3.17 that for a space to, appear adequately sunlit throughout the year, at least half of a
garden or amenity area should receive at least 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March.
From BRE’s 2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight
P a g e | 40
6.1 Victoria Cross - Garden Spaces
The following images illustrate the amenity areas considered for both existing scenario and
proposed development.
Residential Garden Spaces
1
4
5
2
3
P a g e | 41
o Existing Scenario
The following images shows the results for the amenity areas highlighted above. The areas
shown below are split in 1m2 cells.
Image shows all cells coloured dependant on the number of hours they receive on 21st March
Images shows cell coloured if they receive more than 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March
P a g e | 42
o Proposed Development
The following images shows the results for the amenity areas highlighted above. The areas
shown below are split in 1m2 cells.
Image shows all cells coloured dependant on the number of hours they receive on 21st March
Images shows cell coloured if they receive more than 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March
P a g e | 43
6.2 Carrigrohane Road - Garden Spaces
The following images illustrate the amenity areas considered for both existing scenario and
proposed development.
Sheltered Accommodation – Amenity Spaces
1
2
3
P a g e | 44
o Existing Scenario
The following images shows the results for the amenity areas highlighted above. The areas
shown below are split in 1m2 cells.
Image shows all cells coloured dependant on the number of hours they receive on 21st March
Images shows cell coloured if they receive more than 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March
P a g e | 45
o Proposed Development
The following images shows the results for the amenity areas highlighted above. The areas
shown below are split in 1m2 cells.
Image shows all cells coloured dependant on the number of hours they receive on 21st March
Images shows cell coloured if they receive more than 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March
P a g e | 46
6.3 Discussion
The results can be summarised as follows
Area Considered Existing Proposed BRE recommendations
Victoria Cross - 1 ex pro 1
Victoria Cross - 2 ex pro 1
Victoria Cross - 3 ex pro 1
Victoria Cross - 4 ex pro 1
Victoria Cross - 5 ex pro 1
Carrigrophane Road - 1 ex pro 1
Carrigrophane Road - 2 ex pro 1
Carrigrophane Road - 3 ex pro 1
Legend ex Existing Scenario meeting BRE Guidelines
ex Existing Scenario not meeting BRE Guidelines
pro Proposed situation meeting BRE Guidelines
pro Proposed situation not meeting BRE Guidelines
The following conclusions can be made:
1 These spaces can be described as adequately sunlit throughout the year, with at least half
of a garden or amenity area receiving at least 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March in line with
BRE recommendations.
P a g e | 47
7 Sunlight to proposed amenity spaces
The study considers the predicted sunlight to the amenity spaces on Cork’s Nest development. The
Suncast module of IES VE software was used to quantify the metrics describe below.
BRE’s 2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight states in Section 3.3.7
that for a space to, appear adequately sunlit throughout the year, at least half of a garden or amenity
area should receive at least 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March.
From BRE’s 2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight
P a g e | 48
7.1 Amenity Solar Exposure March 21st
The images below show amenity space on March 21st– with cells coloured red above 2 hours.
Image shows all cells coloured dependant on the number of hours they receive on 21st March
P a g e | 49
The following images shows the results for the amenity areas highlighted above. The areas
shown below are split in 1m2 cells.
Images shows cell coloured if they receive more than 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March
P a g e | 50
7.2 Discussion
The results can be summarised as follows
Area Considered Proposed BRE recommendations
Proposed building Amenity Space pro 1
Legend ex Existing Scenario meeting BRE Guidelines
ex Existing Scenario not meeting BRE Guidelines
pro Proposed situation meeting BRE Guidelines
pro Proposed situation not meeting BRE Guidelines
The following conclusions can be made:
1 These spaces can be described as adequately sunlit throughout the year, with at least half
of a garden or amenity area receiving at least 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March in line with
BRE recommendations.
P a g e | 51
8 Average Daylight Factors
The study considers the predicted average daylight factor for the Cork’s Nest development using the
Radiance module of IES VE software to quantify the metrics describe below.
Daylight is constantly changing, so its level at a point in a building is usually defined as an average
daylight factor. This is the ratio of the indoor illuminance at the point in question to the outdoor
unobstructed horizontal illuminance.
Daylight Factor = e/E (often expressed as a percentage)
Both illuminances are measured under the same standard sky, a CIE overcast sky. Since the sun is in a
particular position for only a short period each day, direct sunlight is excluded. Instead diffuse sunlight
is used for average daylight calculations. Diffuse sunlight describes the sunlight that has been
scattered by molecules and particles in the atmosphere but has still made it down to surface of the
earth.
For average daylight factor there are three possible paths along which diffuse light can get into a room
through glazed windows.
a) Light from the patch of sky visible at the point considered, is expressed as the sky
component.
b) Light reflected from opposing exterior surfaces and then reaches the point, is expressed as
the externally reflected component.
c) Light entering through the window but reaching the point only after reflection from internal
surfaces, is expressed as the internally reflected component.
Daylight Factor Methodology
E = illuminance on unobstructed plane e = illuminance at point in interior
SC – Sky Component
ERC – Externally Reflected Component
IRC – Internally Reflected Component
P a g e | 52
8.1 Average Daylight Factor Criteria
BRE’s 2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight states the following in
Appendix C with respect to Average Daylight Factors (ADF);
From BRE’s 2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight
This study will consider the predicted average daylight factor for Bedrooms and Living
Rooms/Kitchens areas. As the Living Rooms and Kitchen are within the one room, with the
Kitchen being the secondary space, the 1.5% value will be used for Living rooms / Kitchens.
Therefore minimum recommended average daylight factors are;
Bedrooms – 1.00 %
Living Rooms/Kitchen - 1.50 %
There are no such minimum recommended for non domestic room however the following
would be described as good practice;
Consulting Room – 2.0%
Treatment/Nursing Rooms – 2.0%
P a g e | 53
o Area of Interest
In Radiance when an image is created for an Average Daylight Factor for a room individual values are
created for multiple points across the room. For each room we are able to define a specific area within
an image and only generate statistics on this region. This is defined as the “Area of Interest” (AoI)
within the image. This can be any shape, as shown below;
Typically, the Area of Interest is set-up to include a ‘margin’ from the zone boundaries where
illuminance data is not to be calculated or included in summary results.
Also this follows CIBSE Light design conventions and can be used to help avoid inclusion of potentially
misleading illuminance data close to rear walls and windows where tasks may not be undertaken due
to furniture, etc.
A typical margin recommended by CIBSE is 0.5m and this is what is used in our calculations.
o Area of Interest configuration
In some instances, dependant on the layout and function of a room, the Area of Interest may be
further reduced beyond the 0.5m margin.
The following images detail where how this may be typically amended as part of the analysis to ensure
the occupied space is considered.
0.5m Boundary Ammended based on function
P a g e | 54
o Assumptions
The following assumptions are to be used in the study
Sky Conditions: Standard CIE overcast sky
Time (24hr): 12:00
Date: 21 September
Working Plane: 0.70m
The following Surface Reflectance's are to be used in the study:
Material Surface Reflectance
External Wall 0.50
Internal Partition 0.50
Roof 0.20
Ground 0.20
Floor/Ceiling (Floor) 0.20
Floor/Ceiling (Ceiling) 0.70
The following Glazing Transmittance values are to be used in the study:
Light Transmittance: 70%
Assumed Window Frame thickness: 100 mm
o Daylight Factor Analysis
The following areas have been considered with resulting Average Daylight factors overlaid on the floor
plans below for
Bedrooms – 1.00 %
Living Rooms/Kitchen - 1.50 %
Consulting Room – 2.0%
Treatment/Nursing Rooms – 2.0%
P a g e | 55
8.2 Results
o Blocks
P a g e | 56
o Block A
First Floor
Room Name Average Daylight
Factor > minimum recommended
ADF
L01: Block A Common Room 003 2.60 Yes
L01: Block A Bedroom 004 3.42 Yes
L01: Block A Common Room 007 2.13 Yes
Second Floor
Room Name Average Daylight
Factor > minimum recommended
ADF
L02: Block A Common Room 004 3.34 Yes
L02: Block A Bedroom 005 3.26 Yes
2.13
2.60
3.42
3.26
3.34
P a g e | 57
o Block B
Second Floor
Room Name Average Daylight
Factor > minimum recommended
ADF
L02: Block B Bedroom 012 1.28 Yes
L02: Block B Common Room 018 1.92 Yes
1.28
1.92
P a g e | 58
o Block C
First Floor
Room Name Average Daylight
Factor > minimum recommended
ADF
L01: Block C Bedroom 017 2.99 Yes
L01: Block C Common Room 019 3.07 Yes
L01: Block C Bedroom 021 2.72 Yes
Second Floor
Room Name Average Daylight
Factor > minimum recommended
ADF
L02: Block C Common Room 027 2.45 Yes
L02: Block C Bedroom 030 1.80 Yes
2.99 3.07
2.72
2.45
1.80
P a g e | 59
o Block D
First Floor
Room Name Average Daylight
Factor
> minimum recommended ADF
L01: Block D Common Room 023 1.75 Yes
L01: Block D Bedroom 026 2.97 Yes
L01: Block D Common Room 029 1.75 Yes
Block D
Room Name Average Daylight
Factor > minimum recommended
ADF
L02: Block D Bedroom 035 1.87 Yes
1.75
1.75
2.97
1.87
P a g e | 60
o Courtyards
100 % glass was assumed on elevation to these rooms based on drawings provided
P a g e | 61
o Courtyard 01
Room Name Average Daylight Factor > Good practice
L00: Nursing Room 037 5.59 Yes
L00: Psychiatric Room 038 5.69 Yes
o Courtyard 02
Room Name Average Daylight Factor > Good practice
L00: Meeting Room 004 5.08 Yes
L00: Bedroom 006 5.78 Yes
L00: Bedroom 008 6.97 Yes
L00: Meeting Room 018 4.48 Yes
5.59 5.69
4.48
6.97 5.78
5.08
P a g e | 62
8.3 Discussion
For the areas considered the resulting Average Daylight factors are above the minimum
recommend average daylight factors or suggested good practice:
• Bedrooms – 1.00 %
• Living Rooms/Kitchen - 1.50 %
• Consulting Room – 2.0%
• Treatment/Nursing Rooms – 2.0%
P a g e | 63
9 Conclusion
Based on the analysis undertaken, the following can be concluded:
Shadow Analysis
The Village
Additional shadows are shown across the adjacent student accommodation building located
west of the proposed development. Some additional shading is shown on The Village – North
and East blocks during the morning (10h00) however beyond this it is generally unaffected
with respect to direct shading by the proposed development.
Victoria Cross (rear elevations)
This sits to the South of the proposed development and it therefore unaffected with respect
to direct shading by the proposed development
Daylight/Skylight Analysis
Any areas affected would be deemed as a minor adverse impact in line with Appendix 1 of
the BRE 2011 Guide.
The BRE guide differentiates between the impacts on different room types. The guide notes
states that Kitchen and Bedrooms are less important, although care should be taken not to
block too much sun. See Section 3 of this report which explains the classification of impacts
further.
Furthermore in the context of the proposed site as an inner urban areas (developed pre
1920’s) and the imperative to propose a sustainable use of urban land, it is understandable
that the development may have a minor adverse impact on adjoining buildings.
The impacts therefore should be assessed holistically alongside the other criteria noted in this
report and the urban, social, economic and environmental benefits of the development as a
whole.
Solar Exposure Hours to existing garden spaces
The spaces considered can be described as adequately sunlit throughout the year, with at
least half of a garden or amenity area receiving at least 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March in
line with BRE recommendations.
Solar Exposure Hours to proposed development amenity Area
The amenity spaces within the proposed building spaces can be described as adequately sunlit
throughout the year, with at least half of a garden or amenity area receiving at least 2 hours
of sunlight on 21st March in line with BRE recommendations.
P a g e | 64
Average Daylight Factor
For the areas considered the resulting Average Daylight factors are above the minimum
recommend average daylight factors or suggested good practice.
9.1 Recommendations
It should be noted that the guidance in 'Site layout planning for daylight and sunlight: a guide
to good practice' is not mandatory and the Report itself states ‘although it gives numerical
guidelines these should be interpreted flexibly because natural lighting is only one of many
factors in site layout design.
Whilst the results shown relate to the criteria as laid out in the BRE guidance targets it is
important to note that the BRE targets have been drafted primarily for use in low density
suburban development and should therefore be used with flexibility and caution when
dealing other types of sites. Despite this, the site performs well in relation to the metrics
considered in this report.
The overall impact may need to be considered alongside the other social, economic and
environmental benefits of the development.
Based on this study the proposed development is broadly in line with the recommendations
in the BRE ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight’ guide, sometimes referred to as
BRE Digest 209.
Therefore, there is no significant basis for a refusal on issues relating to shadow/daylight
impact based on the results, or existing precedent nearby, as demonstrated in this report.
P a g e | 65
g value.
top related