appendix 17b.1 bxc phase 1b north daylight and sunlight ... · pdf filedaylighting” [2]...

Volume 3: Environmental Statement Further Information Report Appendices

Brent Cross Cricklewood: Phase 1B (North) FIR N:\Projects\WIE11453\100\8_Reports\2. ES\Volume 3 - Appendices\ss\Volume 3 ES Further Information Report Appendices - Front

Cover_.docx

Appendix 17B.1

BXC Phase 1B North – Daylight and Sunlight Availability Study

Project No. 432109

Brent Cross Cricklewood

Phase 1B North

Daylight and Sunlight Availability Study

8th May 2017

For

Waterman Infrastructure

& Environment Ltd.

BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited

Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 2 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx

Report Title:

Brent Cross Cricklewood Phase 1B North Daylight and Sunlight Availability Study

Client: Waterman Infrastructure &

Environment Ltd.

Document No: 432109rep3v8 Release: 8 Copy No: 1

Status: Final Report

Report Date: 8th May 2017

Name: Signature: Date:

Prepared by: Dr. S. Cunningham

08/05/17

Checked by: Mr. J. Green

08/05/17

Approved by: Mr. S. Cammelli

08/05/17

Distribution: Copy no. to Client

Copy no. to BMT Records

Previous Release

History: Release No: Status: Date:

432109rep3v1 1 Draft Report for Internal Review

23/02/17

432109rep3v2 2 Draft Report for

Client Review 21/03/17

432109rep3v3 3 Draft Report for Client Review

23/03/17





432109rep3v6 6 Draft Report for Client Review

03/04/17





Brent Cross Cricklewood

Phase 1B North

Daylight and Sunlight

Availability Study

Contents

1. Introduction .................................................................................................. 6

2. Daylight and Sunlight Availability .................................................................... 7

3. Site Location & Surrounding Area ................................................................. 10

4. Assessment Methodology ............................................................................. 11

5. Results ........................................................................................................ 14

6. Conclusions ................................................................................................. 17

7. References .................................................................................................. 19

APPENDIX A. Drawing Information ............................................................... 28

APPENDIX B. Assessment Location Schemes ................................................. 29

APPENDIX C. Tabulated Data ....................................................................... 30



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Background

A daylight and sunlight availability study has been carried out by BMT Fluid

Mechanics Ltd. (BMT) to assess the natural light availability in the following

analyses associated with the Brent Cross Cricklewood scheme:

The natural light availability for the existing surrounding residential

buildings and the impact experienced as a result of the proposed

scheme; and

A “sun on the ground” assessment of various amenity spaces

surrounding / associated with the proposed Phase 1B North.

The study provides an assessment of the main daylight and sunlight indices,

Vertical Sky Component and Annual Probable Sunlight Hours for the

configurations of the proposed Phase 1B (North) in the context of the:

Existing Surrounds Configuration – The current configuration without

the proposed Phase 1B (North) and 1A (North);

Interim Surrounds Configuration – Phase 1B (North) and 1A (North) in

place with the existing surrounds in the absence of further

development; and

Maximum Parameter Masterplan Configuration – Phase 1B (North) and

1A (North) in place with the remainder of the Brent Cross Cricklewood

scheme modelled using the maximum parameters (worst case

scenario).

Conclusions

The following conclusions were drawn from the assessment, and are based on

industry standard guidelines for site layout planning in relation to natural light.

Daylight

An impact assessment was carried out on fourteen residential areas in close

proximity to the existing Brent Cross complex. For the existing surrounds, the

fourteen residential areas assessed receive adequate daylight. When the

proposed Phase 1B (North), 1A (North) and maximum parameter surrounds

for the remainder of the scheme were introduced, three of the fourteen

residential areas assessed were impacted. The areas impacted are Brent Park

Road west, Brent Park Road east and Brent Cross Gardens. The primary reason



for failing the VSC in the majority of these cases is due to the obstruction given

by the maximum surrounds for the remainder of the scheme. Houses located

on the east side of Brent Park Road are primarily affected by the proposed

Phase 1B (North) as some of the windows of these houses directly face the

proposed New Town Centre. It should be noted the maximum parameters are

representative of the worst case and may not be implemented therefore in

some cases, many of the windows will pass the VSC.

Sunlight

An impact assessment of sunlight was carried out for fourteen residential areas

within close proximity to the existing Brent Cross complex. For the existing

surrounds, all locations meet the BRE criteria in terms of the APSH annual and

winter indices. When the Phase 1B (North), 1A (North), and maximum

parameter surrounds for the remainder of the scheme are introduced all

locations assessed for the annual APSH pass the BRE criteria of 25%. However,

the percentage decrease of the sunlight availability on the residential buildings

located on Brent Park Road (east and west) after introduction of the proposed

Phase 1B (North), 1A (North), and maximum parameter surrounds is significant

when compared to the existing scheme. In these areas, the sunlight degrades

0.8 times the previous value. Only one window assessed failed the winter APSH

criteria of 5% by 1%. The introduction of the proposed Phase 1B (North), 1A

(North), and maximum parameter surrounds also have a significant impact on

the residential buildings located on Brent Park Road (east and west) and Brent

Cross Gardens for winter APSH. The primary reason causing the degradation

of below 0.8 times the previous value is due to the maximum parameter

surrounds. It should be noted the maximum parameters are representative of

the worst case and may not be implemented therefore in some cases, many

of the windows will pass the APSH annual and winter indices.

A sunlight (“sun-on-the-ground”) assessment was carried out at 11 amenity

areas at various locations around the Brent Cross Phase 1B (North). For the

amenity areas in the context of the existing surrounds, all areas pass the BRE

guideline requirement of 50%. However, two amenity areas, Tempelhof Circus

and Fenwick Place fail the BRE guideline when the proposed Phase 1B (North),

1A (North), and maximum surrounds scheme are implemented. It should be

noted the maximum parameters are representative of the worst case and may

not be implemented.



Brent Cross Cricklewood Phase 1B North Daylight and Sunlight Availability Study

1. Introduction

A daylight and sunlight availability study has been carried out by BMT Fluid

Mechanics Ltd. (BMT) to assess the natural light availability in the following

analyses associated with the Brent Cross Cricklewood scheme:

The natural light availability for the existing surrounding residential

buildings and the impact experienced as a result of the proposed Phase

1B (North); and

A “sun on the ground” assessment of various amenity spaces

surrounding / associated with the proposed Phase 1B North.

The study provides an assessment of the main daylight and sunlight indices,

Vertical Sky Component and Annual Probable Sunlight Hours for the

configurations of the proposed Phase 1B North in the context of the:


the proposed Phase 1B (North) and 1A (North);



development; and


1A (North) in place with the remainder of the Brent Cross Cricklewood

scheme modelled using the maximum parameters (worst case

scenario).



2. Daylight and Sunlight Availability

Guidelines for assessing the quality of natural light for buildings are outlined in

the BS 8206-2:2008, “Lighting for Buildings – Part 2: Code of Practice for

Daylighting” [2] and the BR 209, “Site Layout Planning for Daylight and

Sunlight” [1]. Daylight and sunlight availability for buildings are principally

assessed in terms of the Vertical Sky Component (VSC) and Annual Probable

Sunlight Hours (APSH) as described below respectively:

Vertical Sky Component (VSC) – is the ratio of direct sky illuminance

at a vertical wall to the simultaneous horizontal illuminance under an

unobstructed sky. VSC provides a measure of daylight availability. The

“Standard Overcast Sky” defined by the CIE (Commission

Internationale de l’Eclairage) is used and the ratio is expressed as a

percentage which can reach a maximum of 40% for a totally

unobstructed facade. Industry best practice guidelines [1] recommend

the VSC for vertical facades should be 27% or above. If the VSC falls

below 27%, then the proposed development should not cause a

reduction to less than 0.8 times the existing value (i.e. a reduction of

no more than 20%);

Annual Probable Sunlight Hours (APSH) – is defined as the duration

for which a location receives direct sunlight. Assessment of APSH takes

into account the cloudiness at the site. Industry best practice

guidelines [1] recommend the APSH be at least 25% on an annual

basis and at least 5% during the winter months (September to March).

For the Northern hemisphere, the sun travels along a Southerly path

relative to the ground. Therefore, planning guidelines for APSH only

apply to facades facing within 90° of South.

If a window does not meet the recommended guidelines from the VSC

assessment, another daylighting index, the Average Daylight Factor (ADF),

may be performed in conjunction with the guidelines for interior daylighting as

described in BR 209 [1].

The criteria for good ADF states if a predominantly daylight appearance is

required, the ADF should be:

5% or more if there is no supplementary electric lighting; or

2% or more if supplementary electric lighting is provided.

Table 1 states the minimum ADF values recommended for different types of

dwelling spaces.



Table 1: Minimum ADF Recommended for Dwellings

Room Use ADF Values

Kitchen >2%

Living Room >1.5%

Bedroom >1%

If the impact of a proposed development meets the above design guidance, it

is likely adequate daylight and sunlight will be available in the relevant areas

and no further measures will be necessary for improvement. If the proposed

development causes a degradation of conditions where the above guidance is

not achieved particularly in areas where previously it had been achieved under

existing site conditions, it is likely occupants of those areas may notice the

impact and may give cause for complaint. A similar perception may arise in

areas where the existing site conditions do not achieve the above guidance

and the impact of the proposed development reduces the daylight and sunlight

availability to less than 80% of the existing conditions.

It is possible for a proposed development to result in an adverse effect relative

to existing conditions, yet still comply with best practice guidelines if the

recommended minimum quantities of direct daylight and sunlight are achieved.

Where possible, areas sensitive to sunlight / daylight requirements should be

located on the south side of a development but not adjacent to a neighbouring

structure. In some cases, it may be possible to improve the availability of

natural light through design changes, e.g. layout changes, building orientation

etc. In areas where it is not possible to meet the design guidance,

consideration should be given to practical measures to provide a perception of

better natural lighting, e.g. avoiding the use of dark coloured material on

external walls and minimising dense landscaping which could exacerbate

overshadowing.

For amenity areas, it is recommended the area of interest should receive at

least two hours of sunlight on the 21st March. If as a result of a new

development an existing amenity area does not meet the above, and the area

which can receive two hours of sun on the 21st March is less than 0.8 times its

former value, the loss of sunlight will be noticeable.

The design guidance describes best practice for site layout planning and should

not be interpreted as a mandatory requirement. The guidance is flexible and

should be applied with due consideration to the general site location and the

intended use of local areas around the site. For example, long periods of

overshadowing and reduced daylight availability are likely to be more

acceptable in a city centre environment compared to residential developments

in suburban or rural areas. Similarly, in the close proximity of a development,

a car park is likely to be less sensitive to good quality natural lighting compared

to a café area with outdoor seating. The guidelines apply to areas / buildings



where the occupants have a reasonable expectation of daylight; this would

include schools, hospitals, hotels and hostels, and small workshops.



3. Site Location & Surrounding Area

3.1. Site Location & Surrounding Area

Phase 1B (North) is part of the Brent Cross Cricklewood scheme. Phase 1B

(North) is located in the London Borough of Barnet, UK. The Phase 1B (North)

is bounded by Hendon Way (A41) to the north-east, the A406 to the south and

the M1 to the west. At present, the existing Phase 1B (North) area comprises

of the existing Brent Cross Shopping Centre and car parking spaces. The area

immediately surrounding Phase 1B (North) principally comprises low-rise

residential buildings and car parks as shown in Figure 1.

Three configurations of the surrounding area are considered in the current

study, namely:


the proposed Phase 1B (North) and 1A (North), Figure 2;


1A (North) in place with the remainder of the Brent Cross Scheme

modelled using the maximum parameters (worst case scenario),

Figure 3; and



development, Figure 4.

3.2. Proposed Site

The proposed Phase 1B (North) comprises a number of development plots

which include retail, leisure, food and beverage, hotel, and community

floorspace uses, in addition to an energy centre. The residential development

will be located on Plot 113. The proposed Phase 1B (North) will be supported

by multi-storey car parks and the enhanced replacement bus station, threshold

spaces/public realm areas, in addition to the Eastern and Western riverside

parks, walkways and nature parks adjacent to the realigned River Brent, and

improvements to Sturgess Park. Refurbishment works are also proposed within

the existing Brent Cross Shopping Centre.

A model of the proposed Phase 1B (North) to be used in the impact assessment

is presented in Figure 3.



4. Assessment Methodology

4.1. Model Detail

A computational model was constructed to represent the existing Brent Cross

shopping complex within the context of the existing surrounds:


the proposed Phase 1B (North) and 1A (North).

A computational model was also constructed to represent two configurations

of the proposed Phase 1B (North) within the context of the:



development; and

Maximum Parameter Masterplan Configuration - Phase 1B (North) and

1A (North) in place with the remainder of the BXC Scheme modelled

using the maximum parameters (worst case scenario).

The models include a detailed representation of the adjacent buildings within

a distance judged to have an influence on the availability of natural light.

The model of the maximum parameter masterplan were constructed based on

drawing information supplied by Waterman Infrasructure & Environment Ltd.

A full list of drawings supplied to BMT is provided in APPENDIX A.

4.2. Daylight and Sunlight Analysis

MBS Waldram Tools v2.0 [3] was the daylight and sunlight software used to

undertake the assessment of the proposed Phase 1B (North). It is an

application which runs within an AutoCAD environment designed to process

calculations associated with daylight and sunlight.

Daylight is calculated by constructing a so-called Waldram diagram at each

location of interest. Waldram diagrams plot surrounding obstructions viewed

from that location on a vertical plane. Daylight availability is a function of the

view of the sky on this vertical plane.

Sunlight hours were calculated by simulating the movement of the sun for each

hour of the day, for the full year using accurate sun paths for the geographical

coordinates of the site. Annual and winter sunlight hours were obtained from

the appropriate hours that represent these periods for the city of London.



The proposed Phase 1B (North) was assessed in accordance with guidelines

for site layout planning for daylight and sunlight, a brief synopsis of which is

given in Section 2.

The assessment assumes the following parameters:

Average Reflectance = 0.5 (light coloured room)

Glazing Transmittance = 0.68 clear glass (double glazed)

4.3. Impact Rating

BMT classifies the impact of the development of daylight and sunlight

availability at each assessment location according to the severity ratings given

in Table 2. The impact ratings are categorised according to an 11-point scale

based on the percentage deviation of APSH and VSC from the existing

conditions at the site.

Table 2: Impact rating for sunlight / daylight indices

Impact Rating Deviation of APSH or VSC from

Existing Site Conditions

Strong Adverse Reduction of more than 40%

Moderate Adverse Reduction of between 30% - 40%

Marginal Adverse Reduction of between 20% - 30%

Slight Adverse Reduction of between 10% - 20%

Negligible Adverse Reduction of between 0.1% - 10%

None Deviation less than 0.1%

Negligible Beneficial Improvement of between 0.1% - 10%

Slight Beneficial Improvement of between 10% - 20%

Marginal Beneficial Improvement of between 20% - 30%

Moderate Beneficial Improvement of between 30% - 40%

Strong Beneficial Improvement of more 40%

4.4. Assessment Location Schemes

An impact assessment was carried out to evaluate the effect of the proposed

Phase 1B (North) on the existing residential surrounding buildings within close

proximity to the proposed Phase 1B (North). The existing shopping centre and

surrounds are presented in Figure 2, whilst the proposed Phase 1B (North)

Best practice guidelines are

adhered to



within the context of the maximum surrounds is presented in Figure 3. An

impact assessment was also carried out on the back gardens associated with

the existing residential buildings as per the BRE guidelines.

Also, eleven amenity areas were included for the “sun-on-the-ground”

assessment of the proposed Phase 1B (North) as marked in Figure 4 and Figure

5. These were as follows:

Hendon Way Access

Sturgess Park

Western Riverside Walkway

Nature Park (NP4)

Layfield Place

Tempelhof Circus

Living Bridge Approach North

Upper Riverside Walkway

Eastern Riverside Park

Fenwick Place

Nature Park (NP5)

For practical reasons, a strip representative of the areas of the Upper Riverside

Walkway most expected to be affected was assessed. This area was used to

simulate the sunlight availability for the Upper Riverside Walkway amenity

space.

Note: Nature Park (NP5) is part of 1A (North) but due to its proximity to Phase

1B (North) has been assessed as a sensitive receptor.



5. Results

A full list of impact assessment results including VSC and APSH indices

calculated where necessary for the existing residential buildings are provided

in APPENDIX C. Impact results are also presented for the amenities (back

garden spaces) associated with the existing residential buildings.

5.1. Impact Assessment

As shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3, a number of surrounding residential

buildings were assessed in order to evaluate the impact of the proposed Phase

1B (North), 1A (North), and maximum parameter surrounds for the remainder

of the scheme, on these existing surrounding residential buildings.

All the surrounding buildings assessed meet the BRE guidelines for the current

Brent Cross shopping complex and existing surrounds. Of the fourteen

residential areas assessed, three of those areas are impacted by the detailed

design for Phase 1B (North), 1A (North), and maximum parameter surrounds

for the remainder of the scheme. These are Brent Park Road west, Brent Park

Road east and Brent Cross Gardens. An example of the impact on these areas

is given in Figure 6, Figure 7, and Figure 8 respectively. The primary reason

for failing the VSC in the majority of cases is due to the obstruction given by

the maximum surrounds for the remainder of the scheme. In many cases, the

27% VSC criteria is met however a degradation of 0.8 times from the previous

value (existing scheme) is observed due to Phase 1B (North), 1A (North), and

maximum parameter surrounds. Therefore a significant impact is seen for the

residential buildings caused by the proposed Phase 1B (North), 1A (North),

and the maximum parameter surrounds. The only area primarily affected by

the proposed New Town Centre is the east side of Brent Park Road as these

windows are directly facing the complex. It should be noted the maximum

parameters are representative of the worst case and may not be implemented

therefore in some cases, many of the windows will pass the VSC.



surrounds, all locations pass the BRE criteria for the APSH annual and winter

indices. When the proposed Phase 1B (North), 1A (North), and maximum

parameter surrounds are introduced all locations assessed for the annual APSH

pass the BRE criteria of 25%. However, the percentage decrease of the

sunlight availability on the residential buildings located on Brent Park Road

(east and west) after introduction of the proposed Phase 1B (North), 1A

(North), and maximum parameter surrounds is significant when compared to

the existing scheme.



In these areas, the sunlight degrades 0.8 times the previous value. Only one

window assessed failed the winter APSH criteria of 5% by 1%. However,

similar to the annual APSH, the introduction of the proposed Phase 1B (North),

1A (North), and maximum parameter surrounds have a significant impact on


Cross Gardens for winter APSH. The primary reason causing the degradation

of below 0.8 times the previous value is due to the maximum parameter

surrounds. It should be noted the maximum parameters are representative of

the worst case and may not be implemented therefore in some cases, many

of the windows will pass the APSH annual and winter indices.

A “sun-on-the-ground” analysis for the back gardens associated with the

surrounding residential buildings was also carried out to assess the impact of

the proposed Phase 1B (North), 1A (North), and the maximum parameter

surrounds. The method used Appendix G from the BRE guideline for this

analysis where a central point was used as a simple check for the 2 hour “sun-

on-the-ground” requirement. It was found the 2 hour “sun-on-the-ground”

requirement was unaffected by the proposed Phase 1B (North), 1A (North)

and the maximum parameter surrounds and thus passes the BRE guideline.

5.2. Amenity Analysis

A sunlight assessment was carried out at 11 amenity areas at various locations

around the Brent Cross Phase 1B (North) as illustrated in Figure 4 and Figure

5. Table 3 lists the results of the amenity sunlight study. For the amenity areas

in the context of the existing surrounds, all areas pass the BRE guideline of

50% sunlight on the ground. The implementation of Phase 1B (North), 1A

(North), and maximum surrounds cause the BRE guideline failure of two

amenity areas, Tempelhof Circus and Fenwick Place. It should be noted the

maximum parameters are representative of the worst case and may not be

implemented.



Table 3: Results of the sunlight amenity study

Amenity Area

% Area Lit for the Proposed

complex in the context of the

existing surrounds

% Area Lit for the Proposed

complex in the context of the

maximum surrounds

Is there an impact due

to the maximum

surrounds?

Hendon Way Access 72% 72% No

Layfield Place 57% 57% No

Tempelhof Circus 50% 48% Yes

Living Bridge Approach North

99% 99% No

Fenwick Place 57% 45% Yes

Eastern Riverside Park 100% 100% No

Nature Park (NP5) 100% 100% No

Nature Park (NP4) 100% 100% No

Western Riverside Park 100% 100% No

Sturgess Park (NH4) 100% 100% No

Upper Riverside Walkway

100% 100% No



6. Conclusions

The following conclusions were drawn from the assessment, and are based on

industry standard guidelines for site layout planning in relation to natural light.

Daylight

An impact assessment was carried out on fourteen residential areas in close

proximity to the existing Brent Cross complex. For the existing surrounds, the

fourteen residential areas assessed receive adequate daylight. When the

proposed Phase 1B (North), 1A (North), and maximum parameter surrounds

for the remainder of the scheme were introduced, three of the fourteen

residential areas assessed were impacted. These are Brent Park Road west,

Brent Park Road east and Brent Cross Gardens. The primary reason for failing

the VSC in the majority of these cases is due to the obstruction given by the

maximum surrounds for the remainder of the scheme. Houses located on the

east side of Brent Park Road are primarily affected by the proposed New Town

Centre as some of the windows of these houses are directly facing the complex.

It should be noted the maximum parameters are representative of the worst

case and may not be implemented therefore in some cases, many of the

windows will pass the VSC.

Sunlight



surrounds, all locations meet the BRE criteria in terms of the APSH annual and

winter indices. When the Phase 1B (North), 1A (North), and maximum

parameter surrounds for the remainder of the scheme are introduced all

locations assessed for the annual APSH pass the BRE criteria of 25%. However,

the percentage decrease of the sunlight availability on the residential buildings

located on Brent Park Road (east and west) after introduction of the proposed

Phase 1B (North), 1A (North), and maximum parameter surrounds is significant

when compared to the existing scheme. In these areas, the sunlight degrades

0.8 times the previous value. Only one window assessed failed the winter APSH

criteria of 5% by 1%. The introduction of the proposed Phase 1B (North), 1A

(North), and maximum parameter surrounds also have a significant impact on


Cross Gardens for winter APSH. The primary reason which causes the

degradation of below 0.8 times the previous value are to the maximum

parameter surrounds. It should be noted the maximum parameters are

representative of the worst case and may not be implemented therefore in

some cases, many of the windows will pass the APSH annual and winter

indices.



A sunlight (“sun-on-the-ground”) assessment was carried out at 11 amenity

areas at various locations around the Brent Cross Phase 1B (North). For the

amenity areas in the context of the existing surrounds, all areas pass the BRE

guideline requirement of 50%. However, two amenity areas, Tempelhof Circus

and Fenwick Place fail the BRE guideline when the proposed Phase 1B (North),

1A (North), and maximum surrounds scheme are implemented. It should be

noted the maximum parameters are representative of the worst case and may

not be implemented.



7. References

[1] Building Research Establishment Report, “Site Layout Planning for

Daylight and Sunlight: A Guide to Good Practice”, P. Littlefair, Second

Edition, 2011.

[2] BS 8206-2:2008, “Lighting for buildings – Part 2: Code of practice for

daylighting.”, 2008.

[3] MBS Waldram Tools, Daylight / Sunlight Studies & Rights of Light

Assessment within AutoCAD, http://surveymbs.com/our-

software/mbs-waldram-tools, 2016.

http://surveymbs.com/our-software/mbs-waldram-tools

http://surveymbs.com/our-software/mbs-waldram-tools



Figure 1: Site location of the proposed Phase 1B (North)

432109 Brent Cross

Figure 1 - Site Location

Status:

Final

Drawing No:

432109/1

Prep: S. Cunningham

Date: 24-March-2017



Figure 2: Existing Brent Cross Complex in the context of the existing surrounding buildings for the Impact Assessment

Existing Brent Cross Site

Assessed Surrounding Buildings

Existing Surrouding Buildings

Assessed Amenity Areas

Major Roads

432109 Brent Cross

Figure 2 - Existing Site

Status:

Final

Drawing No:

432109/2

Prep: S. Cunningham

Date: 23-March-2017



Figure 3: Proposed Phase 1B (North) in the context of the maximum surrounding buildings for the Impact Assessment

Proposed Phase 1B North



Amenity Areas for Assessment

Realigned River Brent

Maximum Surrounds

Major Roads

432109 Brent Cross

Figure 3 - Proposed Complex

Status:

Final

Drawing No:

432109/3

Prep: S. Cunningham

Date: 03-April-2017



Figure 4: Areas for assessment for the proposed 1A (North) and Phase 1B (North) in the context of existing surrounding conditions. Amentity areas are denoted in orange






Major Roads

Entire Upper Riverside Walkway

432109 Brent Cross


Status:

Final

Drawing No:

432109/4

Prep: S. Cunningham

Date: 07-April-2017



Figure 5: Areas for assessment for the proposed 1A (North) and Phase 1B (North) in the context of the maximum surrounding conditions. Amentity areas are denoted in orange






Maximum Surrounds

Major Roads

Entire Upper Riverside Walkway

432109 Brent Cross


Status:

Final

Drawing No:

432109/5

Prep: S. Cunningham

Date: 07-April-2017



Figure 6: Vertical sky component results for an existing residential building from the perspective of the window illustrating the effect of the maximum parameter surrounds

432109 Brent Cross

Figure 6 – VSC

Status:

Final

Drawing No:

432109/6

Prep: S. Cunningham

Date: 23-March-2017

Brent Cross Road west (Building 4) – Ground Floor W12 32.41% Visibility

38.88% Visibility

Brent Cross Road west (Building 4) – Ground Floor W12

20.80% Visibility

Existing Surrounds Maximum Parameters Surrounds




432109 Brent Cross

Figure 7 – VSC

Status:

Final

Drawing No:

432109/7

Prep: S. Cunningham

Date: 23-March-2017

Brent Cross Road east (Building 14) – Ground Floor W6

35.19% Visibility 38.88% Visibility

Brent Cross Road east (Building 14) – Ground Floor W6 23.15% Visibility





432109 Brent Cross

Figure 8 – VSC

Status:

Final

Drawing No:

432109/8

Prep: S. Cunningham

Date: 23-March-2017

Brent Cross Gardens (Building 47) – Ground Floor W5 29.40% Visibility

38.88% Visibility

Brent Cross Gardens (Building 47) – Ground Floor W5

25.40% Visibility




APPENDIX A. DRAWING INFORMATION

The model of the proposed Phase 1B (North) used the approved model from the

BMT FM wind environment study “432109_Brent Cross

(Waterman)_WE_MLS_FS_v002_with landscaping.dwg” supplied and confirmed for

the daylight and sunlight study on the 25/01/2017 by Waterman Infrastructure &

Environment Ltd. In conjunction with the above scheme, drawings listed below in

Table 4 were also used to construct the daylight and sunlight model.

Table 4: List of drawings received for the daylight and sunlight

study

113 Residential Building Date Received

08069-CTA-RN-0G-DR-A-20801 - RESIDENTIAL NORTH GROUND FLOOR GA PLAN.DWG

27 January 2017

08069-CTA-RN-ZZZ-DR-A-21801 - RESIDENTIAL NORTH ELEVATIONS.DWG

27 January 2017

Amenities Date Received

20170213111956269.pdf 13 February 2017

E-mail received via Waterman Energy, Environment & Design - "RE:432109/SC - Brent Cross - Daylight, Sunlight

& Overshadowing"

08 February 2017



APPENDIX B. ASSESSMENT LOCATION SCHEMES

The location scheme for the windows and rooms are provided in the following

electronic appendixes:

See files:

“432109_Brent_Cross_Measurement_Scheme_v001.dwg”



APPENDIX C. TABULATED DATA

The results of the daylight and sunlight studies are provided in the following electronic

appendixes:

APSH:

“432109_Brent_Cross_Impact_APSH_Annual_Results.xlsx”

“432109_Brent_Cross_Impact_APSH_Winter_Results.xlsx”

VSC:

“432109_Brent_Cross_Impact_VSC_Results.xlsx”

Amenity Areas:

“432109_Brent_Cross_Impact_Amenity_Results.xlsx”

appendix 17b.1 bxc phase 1b north daylight and sunlight ... · pdf filedaylighting” [2]...

Documents