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
432109rep3v4 4 Draft Report for
Client Review 29/03/17
432109rep3v5 5 Draft Report for
Client Review 31/03/17
432109rep3v6 6 Draft Report for Client Review
03/04/17
432109rep3v7 7 Draft Report for
Client Review 10/04/17
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 3 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 4 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 5 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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.
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 6 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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:
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).
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 7 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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.
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 8 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 9 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
where the occupants have a reasonable expectation of daylight; this would
include schools, hospitals, hotels and hostels, and small workshops.
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 10 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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:
Existing Surrounds Configuration – The current configuration without
the proposed Phase 1B (North) and 1A (North), Figure 2;
Maximum Parameter Masterplan Configuration – Phase 1B (North) and
1A (North) in place with the remainder of the Brent Cross Scheme
modelled using the maximum parameters (worst case scenario),
Figure 3; and
Interim Surrounds Configuration – Phase 1B (North) and 1A (North) in
place with the existing surrounds in the absence of further
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.
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 11 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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:
Existing Surrounds Configuration – The current configuration without
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:
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 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.
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 12 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 13 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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.
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 14 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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.
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 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.
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 15 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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
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 “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.
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 16 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 17 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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
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 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.
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 18 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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.
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 19 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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.
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 20 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 21 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 22 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
Figure 3: Proposed Phase 1B (North) in the context of the maximum surrounding buildings for the Impact Assessment
Proposed Phase 1B North
Assessed Surrounding Buildings
Existing Surrouding Buildings
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
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 23 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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
Proposed Phase 1B North
Assessed Surrounding Buildings
Existing Surrouding Buildings
Amenity Areas for Assessment
Realigned River Brent
Major Roads
Entire Upper Riverside Walkway
432109 Brent Cross
Figure 4 - Proposed Complex
Status:
Final
Drawing No:
432109/4
Prep: S. Cunningham
Date: 07-April-2017
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 24 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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
Proposed Phase 1B North
Assessed Surrounding Buildings
Existing Surrouding Buildings
Amenity Areas for Assessment
Realigned River Brent
Maximum Surrounds
Major Roads
Entire Upper Riverside Walkway
432109 Brent Cross
Figure 5 - Proposed Complex
Status:
Final
Drawing No:
432109/5
Prep: S. Cunningham
Date: 07-April-2017
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 25 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 26 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
Figure 7: 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 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
Existing Surrounds Maximum Parameters Surrounds
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 27 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
Figure 8: 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 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
Existing Surrounds Maximum Parameters Surrounds
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 28 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 29 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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”
BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Project 432109 Report 3 Release 8 30 of 30 432109rep3v8.docx
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”