LAMB'S CROSS Sunlight, Daylight & Shadow Assessment (Impact Neighbours and Development Performance)
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
LAMB’S CROSS
Sunlight, Daylight & Shadow Assessment (Impact Neighbours and Development Performance)
V2a
Chris Shackleton Consulting
19 Waterside Crescent
Swords Road, Malahide,
Co Dublin, K36 DF74
email: info@shackleton.ie
Tel: +353-1-5653239
Mob: +353-86-8206374
[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Executive Summary Performance of the proposed design
• Light Distribution ADF - ADF (average daylight factors) for all tested rooms on the representative floors
This report examines the impact the proposed Development will have on neighbours in terms of daylight,
sunlight & shadow. We will also examine how the proposed development performs in terms of light. The comply with the relevant requirements.
report is, in accordance with "Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight: A Guide to Good Practice” and BS o The development shows excellent ADF results.
8206 Lighting for Buildings, Part 2: Code of Practice for Daylighting. o Average ADF for all tested living rooms is 2.3% and for bedrooms 2.1%
• Sunlight to Living rooms:
It should be noted at the outset that the BRE document sets out in its introduction that: o If we include the few marginal results for the windows to proposed living rooms
o 85% of Living rooms achieve the BRE Annual APSH and
“Summary Page . . . It is purely advisory and the numerical target values within it may be varied to meet
o 81% the Winter WPSH requirements.
the needs of the development and its location.”
o This is in accordance with what the guidelines define as “careful layout” design 80%.
" 1.6 . . . The advice given here is not mandatory and the guide should not be seen as an instrument of o These results should be considered in conjunction with the high daylight ADF results achieved
planning policy; its aim is to help rather than constrain the designer. Although it gives numerical throughout.
guidelines, these should be interpreted flexibly since natural lighting is only one of many factors in site • Shadow:
layout design. . . . " o 76% of the private balconies comply with requirements.
o This is in generally in accordance with what the guidelines define as “careful” design 80%.
o The shared Amenity space receives sunlight over 61% of its area and is compliant with the BRE 2-hr
Change/Impact to neighbouring buildings in the adjoining residential areas. check.
• Skylight- VSC
o All windows to Building groups B1 .. B3 pass the relevant VSC checks.
o Building Group B4 the Extant permission for apartments has been analysed as a mirror development The application generally complies with the recommendations and guidelines of Site Layout Planning for
as per guideline recommendations for buildings close to boundaries: Daylight and Sunlight: A Guide to Good Practice (BRE 2011) and BS 8206 Lighting for Buildings and Part 2: Code
▪ The primary windows to the front and rear of the apartments comply with the requirements. of Practice for Daylighting.
▪ When we average the VSC of all windows to these rooms the results generally comply.
• Sunlight APSH & WPSH
o All tested windows comply with the annual APSH requirements for sunlight This development has been successfully designed to maximise the occupant’s access to light and reduce the
o All but one window also comply with the winter WPSH requirements. impact on existing buildings. As such the design has used the guidelines in the spirit they have been written and
o The average change ratio for annual sunlight APSH: 0.85 balanced the requirements of this report with other constraints to arrive at this design.
• Shadow
o All tested neighbouring amenity spaces pass the 2-hour test requirements for the 21st March.
o The average change ratio for shadow/sunlight is 0.97
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 2
[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Introduction Design Model
Chris Shackleton Consulting (CSC) have been asked to examine the impact that the proposed development will A 3D model of the proposed development and the surrounding neighbouring properties was provided by the
have on the existing neighbouring properties in terms of sunlight, daylight & shadow. The proposed Architect. These had been modelled from survey information and drawings provided in plan, elevation and
development consists of three apartment blocks on a greenfield site. We have also been asked to examine how section formats. The model was geo-referenced to its correct location and an accurate solar daylight system was
the proposed development performs in terms of light.
introduced. Here “Cream” indicates surrounding environment, “Purple” the existing development to be
This analysis has been carried out in accordance with the recommendations of Site Layout Planning for Daylight demolished, “Blue” this proposal.
and Sunlight: A Guide to Good Practice (BRE 2011) and BS 8206 Lighting for Buildings and Part 2: Code of Practice
The analysis is based on the information provided.
for Daylighting.
All references quoted in this report are from BRE document “Site Layout Planning for
Daylight and Sunlight: A Guide to Good Practice – Second Edition – 2011 (BR 209) by Paul
Littlefair” unless specifically noted otherwise.
Preliminary Overview
The aerial view shows the context for the site and the closest neighbouring window groups.
Existing Model
Proposed Model
Google Earth extract © Google 2021
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 3
[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Scope of this Report Adjacent Properties Details
We have been asked to address the following specific items in this report and our scope is limited to the same: The numbering used later for windows in each of the blocks is detailed below.
Neighbours – West (Window Group B1)
Impact on Existing Neighbours Oblique imagery © Google 2021
In this document we will assess the potential impact of the proposed development on the neighbouring
residential houses. We will test for the following in relation to impact:
• Existing facing windows for:
o Impact/Change for Skylight – Vertical Sky Component - VSC
o Impact/Change for Probable Sunlight Hours – Annual APSH and Winter WPSH
• Existing amenity spaces for impact/change on Sunlight/Shadow
Development Performance
For the proposed development we will examine the performance of the development under the following
headings:
• Light distribution Average Daylight Factor – ADF – All habitable rooms
• Sunlight availability - Living room spaces APSH/WPSH.
• Shadow performance proposed shared and private (balcony) amenity spaces
Windows facing the development
When examining the internal performance of the development we note that the layout and rooms follow
similar design principles floor to floor. When testing the blocks performance, we have chosen to test an
entire floor for each block at floor at 1st floor level (2nd on Block B which has an undercroft) which provides a
good representative indication of the overall building performance for each block.
The Ground floor was discounted for analysis since it has many non-standard spaces in its layout, communal
facilities, bike store, bin store, entrances, etc. which would not provide a representative analysis.
The numbering used later in this report for this group of windows is indicated in cyan above.
Amenity spaces are noted in green
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 4
[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Neighbours– South (Window Group B2) Neighbours – East (Window Group B3)
Oblique imagery © Google 2021 Oblique imagery © Google 2021
Windows facing the development
Windows facing the development
The numbering used later in this report for this group of windows is indicated in cyan above.
The numbering used later in this report for this group of windows is indicated in cyan above.
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 5
[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Impact on neighbours
Neighbours – North (Window Group B4)
(New Granted application under development)
Oblique imagery © Google 2021 Adjacent Properties - Light from the Sky impact on neighbouring properties
Tests were carried out to establish the quantity and quality of skylight (daylight) available to a room's windows.
Locations tested are based on guideline recommendations for the closest facades which have windows with
potential for impact.
We have investigated this impact under clause 2.2.7
2.2.7 If this VSC is greater than 27% then enough skylight should still be reaching the
window of the existing building. Any reduction below this level should be kept to a
minimum. If the VSC, with the new development in place, is both less than 27% and less
than 0.8 times its former value, occupants of the existing building will notice the reduction
in the amount of skylight. The area lit by the window is likely to appear more gloomy, and
electric lighting will be needed more of the time.
Windows facing the development 2.2.6 Any reduction in the total amount of skylight can be calculated by finding the VSC at
the centre of each main window. In the case of a floor-to-ceiling window such as a patio
door, a point 1.6 m above ground (or balcony level for an upper storey) on the centre line
of the window may be used. For a bay window, the centre window facing directly
outwards can be taken as the main window. If a room has two or more windows of equal
size, the mean of their VSCs may be taken. The reference point is in the external plane of
the window wall. Windows to bathrooms, toilets, storerooms, circulation areas and
garages need not be analysed. . . .
The numbering used later in this report for this group of windows is indicated in cyan above.
Amenity spaces are noted in green
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 6
[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Tabulated results Window Group B4
The granted application Window Group B4 have not yet been constructed. As such there are are not built, and
Skylight to habitable rooms so there are no current residents who would notice any loss of light. A typical floor is shown below (Level 2) and
VSC we can see that the primary light to these rooms face to the front and rear of the building (4.x.1 & 4.x.7) and
there is little impact on the same. Additional windows are provided along the façade facing the proposed
Report Check > 27% or ratio > 0.8 development 4.x.2 to 4.x.6
Group Floor Win Ref Existing Proposed Ratio Result
B1 F0 W1 1.0.1 38.6 33.2 0.86 Pass
B1 F0 W2 1.0.2 37.3 32.4 0.87 Pass
B1 F0 W3 1.0.3 34.5 30.3 0.88 Pass
B1 F0 W4 1.0.4 21.6 19.5 0.90 Pass
B1 F0 W5 1.0.5 23.4 19.2 0.82 Pass
B1 F0 W6 1.0.6 36.3 26.2 0.72 Marginal
B1 F0 W7 1.0.7 37.7 27.0 0.72 Pass
B2 F1 W1 2.1.1 37.3 32.4 0.87 Pass
B2 F1 W2 2.1.2 37.7 32.8 0.87 Pass
B2 F1 W3 2.1.3 37.7 32.9 0.87 Pass
B2 F1 W4 2.1.4 37.4 32.8 0.88 Pass
B2 F1 W5 2.1.5 38.3 35.8 0.94 Pass
B3 F0 W1 3.0.1 36.3 32.6 0.90 Pass
B3 F0 W2 3.0.2 36.4 32.5 0.89 Pass
B3 F0 W3 3.0.3 36.5 32.3 0.89 Pass
B3 F0 W4 3.0.4 35.5 31.5 0.89 Pass
B3 F0 W5 3.0.5 35.5 31.4 0.88 Pass
B3 F0 W6 3.0.6 35.7 31.7 0.89 Pass
B3 F0 W7 3.0.7 36.0 32.6 0.91 Pass
B3 F0 W8 3.0.8 35.9 33.3 0.93 Pass
B3 F1 W1 3.1.1 38.3 34.7 0.91 Pass
B3 F1 W2 3.1.2 35.7 32.1 0.90 Pass
B3 F1 W3 3.1.3 38.2 34.4 0.90 Pass
B3 F1 W4 3.1.4 35.5 31.8 0.90 Pass
B3 F1 W5 3.1.5 38.1 34.2 0.90 Pass
B3 F1 W6 3.1.6 35.7 31.9 0.89 Pass
B3 F1 W7 3.1.7 37.6 33.8 0.90 Pass
B3 F1 W8 3.1.8 34.1 30.5 0.90 Pass
B3 F1 W9 3.1.9 37.5 33.7 0.90 Pass
B3 F1 W10 3.1.10 34.0 30.4 0.90 Pass
B3 F1 W11 3.1.11 37.5 33.9 0.90 Pass
B3 F1 W12 3.1.12 34.4 31.1 0.90 Pass
B3 F1 W13 3.1.13 37.6 34.5 0.92 Pass
B3 F1 W14 3.1.14 35.4 32.6 0.92 Pass
B3 F1 W15 3.1.15 37.4 35.0 0.94 Pass
B3 F1 W16 3.1.16 35.3 33.0 0.94 Pass
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 7
[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
The guidelines provide clear direction in how developers and planners should approach cases and how numerical Mirrored Extant Model
target values within it may be varied to meet the needs of the development and its location. Appendix F explains Below see the mirrored Development in “red” which in accordance with Appendix F may be considered as the
how this can be done in a logical way, while retaining consistency with the British Standard recommendations on baseline reference for proposed targets for skylight. Other details as per the original analysis.
interior daylighting.
Clause 2.2.3 Refers
2.2.3 Note that numerical values given here are purely advisory. Different criteria may be
used based on the requirements for daylighting in an area viewed against other site
layout constraints. Another important issue is whether the existing building is itself a
good neighbour, standing a reasonable distance from the boundary and taking no more
than its fair share of light. Appendix F gives further guidance.
And Appendix F clarifies how to handle neighbours whose windows are close to site boundaries as is the case for
this extant apartment development whose gable is close to the boundary line, deriving light to these windows
over the applicant’s property.
F5 A similar approach may be adopted in cases where an existing building has windows
that are unusually close to the site boundary and taking more than their fair share of
light. Figure F3 shows an example, where side windows of an existing building are close to
the boundary. To ensure that new development matches the height and proportions of
existing buildings, the VSC and APSH targets for these windows could be set to those for a
‘mirror-image’ building of the same height and size, an equal distance away on the other
side of the boundary.
Extant Mirrored Model
Since the building has windows which are close to the boundary and to the proposed development. We have
examined these in terms of the rooms where multiple windows serve the same rooms/spaces and averaged the
VSC results as per the following clause.
2.2.6 … If a room has two or more windows of equal size, the mean of their VSCs may be
taken. The reference point is in the external plane of the window wall …
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 8
[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
The Primary Windows (front and rear) all comply with the requirements.
The average results for the windows which light individual rooms on the adjacent gable wall either comply or are
just marginal to the 0.8 change ratio, see table above.
**1 While the Primary window BB/F0/W1 facing to the front of the development complies with the
requirements, the average of the other windows GFL level is lower than expected but that is mainly due to the
excavation down at ground level on this adjacent site which itself limits light.
Conclusion
Building Groups B1 .. B3 all comply with the requirements.
Building Group B4 the Extant permission for apartments has been analysed as a mirror development as per
guideline recommendations for buildings close to boundaries:
The primary windows to the front and rear of the apartments comply with the requirements.
When we average the VSC of all windows to these rooms the results show general compliance.
The proposed development generally complies with the requirements of the BRE guidelines in relation to
maintaining skylight availability for neighbours.
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 9
[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Adjacent Properties - Sunlight into living spaces
Tests for the amount of sunlight that windows to living room and/or conservatory can receive over both annual
and winter periods. Conclusion
3.2.3 To assess loss of sunlight to an existing building, it is suggested that all main living
rooms of dwellings, and conservatories, should be checked if they have a window facing When tested with the proposed development in place:
within 90˚of due south. . . . All windows comply with the annual APSH requirements for sunlight
All windows (other than the GFL one **2 in the excavation) also comply with the winter WPSH requirements.
3.2.11 . . . sunlighting of the existing dwelling may be adversely affected. This will be the
The average change ratio for annual sunlight is APSH:0.85
case if the centre of the window:
• receives less than 25% of annual probable sunlight hours, or less than 5% of annual
The proposed development generally complies with the requirements of the BRE guidelines in relation to both
probable sunlight hours between 21 September and 21 March and
annual and winter sunlight availability to neighbours as it applies to living rooms and conservatories.
• receives less than 0.8 times its former sunlight hours during either period and
• has a reduction in sunlight received over the whole year greater than 4% of annual
probable sunlight hours.
Note only windows relating to living rooms which face within 90˚of due South require testing (B3 & B4).
For Window group B3 windows outside this test arc are notionally labelled as “North” in the table below.
For window Group B4 with multiple windows serving living rooms we have reported only on the window which
receives the best light.
The results are tabulated below:
Note: When the proposed value exceeds the minimum requirement the ratio check is not required, and the result is coloured grey.
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 10[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Adjacent Properties - Shadow/Sunlight - Gardens and Open spaces
Tests for the availability of sunlight in amenity areas.
Shadow/Sunlight - Clause 3.3.17
It is recommended that for it to appear adequately sunlit throughout the year, at least
half of a garden or amenity area should receive at least two hours of sunlight on 21
March. If as a result of new development an existing garden or amenity area does not
meet the above, and the area which can receive two hours of sun on 21 March is less than
0.8 times its former value, then the loss of sunlight is likely to be noticeable. If a detailed
calculation cannot be carried out, it is recommended that the centre of the area should
receive at least two hours of sunlight on 21 March.
3.3.3 The availability of sunlight should be checked for all open spaces where it will be
required. This would normally include: Shadow Existing – Window Group B1
• gardens, usually the main back garden of a house
• parks and playing fields
• children’s playgrounds
• outdoor swimming pools and paddling pools
• sitting out areas such as those between non-domestic buildings and in public squares
• focal points for views such as a group of monuments or fountains.
The amenities of the following properties were tested.
• Adjacent rear garden to Window Group B1
• Adjacent Balconies on Window Group B4 currently under construction
BRE 2-hour Shadow Plots
The graphic below indicates the areas which receive 2 hours of sunlight on the 21st March in accordance with the Shadow Proposed – Window Group B1
BRE guidelines.
• Green represents areas which exceed the 2-hour requirement - pass Window Group B4 – Under Construction
• Red is less than the 2-hour requirement - fail
• Orange are marginal or borderline - just below the 2-hour requirement
Existing Proposed
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 11[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
The results are tabulated below:
Summary - Adjacent Properties
Neighbouring properties will generally not be affected by the proposed development and the impacts on
Skylight, Sunlight and Shadow have been tested in accordance with the best practice guidelines.
Change/Impact to neighbouring buildings in the adjoining residential areas.
• Skylight- VSC
o All windows to Building groups B1 .. B3 pass the relevant VSC checks.
o Building Group B4 the Extant permission for apartments has been analysed as a mirror development
as per guideline recommendations for buildings close to boundaries:
▪ The primary windows to the front and rear of the apartments comply with the requirements.
▪ When we average the VSC of all windows to these rooms the results generally comply.
• Sunlight APSH & WPSH
o All tested windows comply with the annual APSH requirements for sunlight
Note: When the proposed value exceeds the minimum requirement the ratio check is not required, and the result is coloured grey. o All but one window also comply with the winter WPSH requirements.
o The average change ratio for annual sunlight APSH: 0.85
• Shadow
Please note that passing the BRE requirements does not imply that shadows will not be cast over an amenity o All tested neighbouring amenity spaces pass the 2-hour test requirements for the 21st March.
space at all. Shadows which are transient by nature may not impact on the percentage of the space which o The average change ratio for shadow/sunlight is 0.97
receives 2 hours of sunlight on the 21st of March.
The potential impact of the proposed development on neighbours complies with the requirements of “Site
Conclusion layout planning for daylight and sunlight a guide to good practice Second Edition" - 2011 by Paul J Littlefair -
BR209
All tested neighbouring amenity spaces pass the BRE requirement relating to the area receiving 2 hours of
sunlight on the 21st of March > 50% or not breaching the 0.8 times its former value limit. When tested with the proposed development in place:
The average change ratio for the tested amenity spaces 0.97 All windows comply with the annual APSH requirements for sunlight
The proposed development has no BRE impact on these areas at all and complies with the requirements of the
All windows (other than the GFL one **2 in the excavation) also comply with the winter WPSH requirements.
BRE guidelines.
The average change ratio for annual sunlight is APSH:0.85
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 12[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Development Performance
Table 2 - Minimum average daylight factor
Room type Minimum Average daylight factor %
Bedrooms 1
Living rooms 1.5
Development Performance - Average Daylight Factor - ADF Kitchens 2
Internal light distribution within a room is examined by testing ADF (Average Daylight Factor) against pre-defined Where one room serves more than one purpose, the minimum average daylight factor
parameters. Calculation of average daylight factor is based the BRE guidance document BR 209 and the should be that for the room type with the highest value. For example, in a space which
referenced BS 8206-2:2008 Lighting for buildings – Part 2: Code of practice for daylighting. combines a living room and a kitchen the minimum average daylight factor should be 2%.
This is defined under Clause 2.11.3
Daylight Factor In accordance with BRE 209 & BS 8206-2 computations are based on the standard CIE (Commission Internationale
de l´Eclairage) overcast sky model. With the exclusion of direct and reflected sunlight from the computation of
Ratio of illuminance at a point on a given plane due to light received from a sky of known room average daylight factor it may be considered as worst-case scenario.
or assumed luminance distribution, to illuminance on a horizontal plane due to an
unobstructed hemisphere of this sky [BS 6100-7:2008, 59011] Light distribution was computed by modelling the internal configuration of rooms and windows placed within
the existing topography and the adjacent buildings and then running a radiance analysis on the same. This
analysis was based on a standard working plane for residential of 0.850m and results are provided in terms of
Defined in the BRE 209 Glossary (similarly in the BS code Clause 2.11.4 and 5.5)
Average Daylight Factor for selected rooms. See code for definitions.
Average daylight factor:
The following reflectance/transmittance values were used for the analysis
Ratio of total daylight flux incident on the working plane to the area of the working plane,
These are generally from BS 8206 Part 2 - tables A.1 & A.2
expressed as a percentage of the outdoor illuminance on a horizontal plane due to an
unobstructed CIE standard overcast sky. Thus a 1% ADF would mean that the average
Surface Description Reflectance
indoor illuminance would be one hundredth the outdoor unobstructed illuminance
External Plane Earth 0.2
External Walls Grey render / concrete 0.4
The average daylight factor (see 2.11.4) is used as the measure of general illumination from skylight. It is Floor Light Wood / cream carpet 0.4
considered good practice to ensure that rooms in dwellings and in most other buildings have a predominantly Internal Wall Cream 0.7
daylit appearance. In order to achieve this the average daylight factor should be at least 2%. Ceiling White 0.8
Frame Medium Grey 0.5
If the average daylight factor in a space is at least 5% then electric lighting is not normally needed during the
daytime, provided the uniformity is satisfactory (see 5.7 BS or 2.1.8 BRE 209). If the average daylight factor in a Glass Sealed double glazed unit 0.63[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx] Layouts Blocks A (1st) & B (2nd) – Naming Convention Tabulated Results 1st Floor Analysis [Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 14
[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Layouts Blocks C (1st) & D (1st) – Naming Convention Tabulated results
Blocks C (1st) & D (1st) – Analysis
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 15[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Development Performance - Sunlight Annual APSH & Winter WPSH
Clause 3.1.2 of the guidance document BRE indicates that special checks should be applied to living rooms to
ADF Check – Summary ensure that these core rooms receive the necessary sunlight.
In Housing, the main requirement for sunlight is in living rooms. where it is valued at any
time of day but especially in the afternoon.
ADF (average daylight factors) for all tested rooms comply with the relevant requirements.
The development shows excellent ADF results. Check Clauses
Average ADF for all tested living rooms is 2.3% and for bedrooms 2.1% Clause 3.1.15 In general a dwelling, or non-domestic building which has a particular
requirement for sunlight, will appear reasonably sunlit provided:
The proposed development complies with the requirements of the BRE guidelines in relation to ADF light
distribution.
• at least one main window wall faces within 90˚ of due south and
• the centre of at least one window to a main living room can receive 25% of annual
probable sunlight hours, including at least 5% of annual probable sunlight hours in
the winter months between 21 September and 21 March
3.1.16 Where groups of dwellings are planned, site layout design should aim to maximise
the number of dwellings with a main living room that meets the above recommendations.
3.1.12…….. If a room has two windows on opposite walls, the APSH due to each can be
added together.
The guidelines accept the difficulty imposed by this requirement and that it will not always be possible to
achieve this requirement for ALL living spaces. While it is preferred to have sunlight the guidelines are
pragmatic in this regard.
The guidelines further define:
3.1.8……….. For larger developments of flats, especially those with site constraints, it may
not be possible to have every living room facing within 90° of south…….
……Arranging the flats so that living rooms are placed at the end corners of the building
and hence can be dual aspect. That way, living rooms on the north side of the building can
also have an east- or west-facing window which can receive some sun…..
It then follows with an example
of a careful layout for a relative
small block where 4/5 flats have
south facing living rooms, and
one North which would receive
no sunlight at all. From this
layout and results we can
conclude that an 80% pass rate is
considered good design.
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 16[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Tabulated results
Sunlight to Living rooms – Summary
If we include the few marginal results
85% of Living rooms achieve the BRE Annual APSH and
81% the Winter WPSH requirements.
This is in accordance with what the guidelines define as “careful layout” design 80%.
These results should be considered in conjunction with the high daylight ADF results achieved throughout.
The proposed development generally complies with the requirements of the BRE guidelines in relation to
Sunlight availability and careful layout design.
Where rooms are dual aspect we have tested both and used the best value.
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 17[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Development Performance - Shadow/Sunlight - Gardens and Open spaces
Tests for the availability of sunlight in amenity areas.
Shadow/Sunlight - Clause 3.3.17
It is recommended that for it to appear adequately sunlit throughout the year, at least
half of a garden or amenity area should receive at least two hours of sunlight on 21
March. ………
3.3.3 The availability of sunlight should be checked for all open spaces where it will be
required. This would normally include:
• gardens, usually the main back garden of a house
• parks and playing fields
• children’s playgrounds
• outdoor swimming pools and paddling pools
• sitting out areas such as those between non-domestic buildings and in public squares
• focal points for views such as a group of monuments or fountains.
The amenities of the following proposed spaces were tested.
• Private Balconies
• Shared Amenity Space.
Blocks AB
BRE 2-hour Shadow Plots
The graphic below indicates the areas which receive 2 hours of sunlight on the 21st March in accordance with the
BRE guidelines.
• Green represents areas which exceed the 2-hour requirement - pass
• Red is less than the 2-hour requirement - fail
• Orange are marginal or borderline - just below the 2-hour requirement
Blocks CD
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 18[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Balcony results are tabulated below: Shared Amenity Space
Shadow / Sunlight Amenity
>50% receives 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March)
Shared % 2hr Sunlight Check
Shared 61% Pass
Conclusion
The shared Amenity space receives sunlight over 61% of its area and is compliant with the BRE 2-hr check.
76% of the private balconies comply with requirements.
This is in generally in accordance with what the guidelines define as “careful” design 80%.
The tested spaces generally comply with the requirements of the BRE guidelines.
Please note that passing the BRE requirements does not imply that shadows will not be cast over an amenity
space at all. Shadows which are transient by nature may not impact on the percentage of the space which
receives 2 hours of sunlight on the 21st of March.
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 19[1362-LightStudy-LambsCross-20210409.docx]
Summary – Development Performance Overall Summary
This report is in compliance with: "Site layout planning for daylight and sunlight a guide to good practice Second Change/Impact to neighbouring buildings in the adjoining residential areas.
Edition - 2011 by Paul J Littlefair - BR209". It also references "BS 8206-2:2008 Lighting for buildings – Part 2: • Skylight- VSC
Code of practice for daylighting" as and where called for in the above BRE guidance document. o All windows to Building groups B1 .. B3 pass the relevant VSC checks.
o Building Group B4 the Extant permission for apartments has been analysed as a mirror development
as per guideline recommendations for buildings close to boundaries:
Performance of the proposed design ▪ The primary windows to the front and rear of the apartments comply with the requirements.
• Light Distribution ADF - ADF (average daylight factors) for all tested rooms on the representative floors ▪ When we average the VSC of all windows to these rooms the results generally comply.
comply with the relevant requirements. • Sunlight APSH & WPSH
o The development shows excellent ADF results. o All tested windows comply with the annual APSH requirements for sunlight
o Average ADF for all tested living rooms is 2.3% and for bedrooms 2.1% o All but one window also comply with the winter WPSH requirements.
• Sunlight to Living rooms: o The average change ratio for annual sunlight APSH: 0.85
o If we include the few marginal results for the windows to proposed living rooms • Shadow
o 85% of Living rooms achieve the BRE Annual APSH and o All tested neighbouring amenity spaces pass the 2-hour test requirements for the 21st March.
o 81% the Winter WPSH requirements. o The average change ratio for shadow/sunlight is 0.97
o This is in accordance with what the guidelines define as “careful layout” design 80%.
Performance of the proposed design
o These results should be considered in conjunction with the high daylight ADF results achieved
• Light Distribution ADF - ADF (average daylight factors) for all tested rooms on the representative floors
throughout.
comply with the relevant requirements.
• Shadow:
o The development shows excellent ADF results.
o 76% of the private balconies comply with requirements.
o Average ADF for all tested living rooms is 2.3% and for bedrooms 2.1%
o This is in generally in accordance with what the guidelines define as “careful” design 80%.
• Sunlight to Living rooms:
o The shared Amenity space receives sunlight over 61% of its area and is compliant with the BRE 2-hr
o If we include the few marginal results for the windows to proposed living rooms
check.
o 85% of Living rooms achieve the BRE Annual APSH and
o 81% the Winter WPSH requirements.
The application generally complies with the recommendations and guidelines of Site Layout Planning for
o This is in accordance with what the guidelines define as “careful layout” design 80%.
Daylight and Sunlight: A Guide to Good Practice (BRE 2011) and BS 8206 Lighting for Buildings, Part 2: Code of
o These results should be considered in conjunction with the high daylight ADF results achieved
Practice for Daylighting.
throughout.
• Shadow:
o 76% of the private balconies comply with requirements.
o This is in generally in accordance with what the guidelines define as “careful” design 80%.
o The shared Amenity space receives sunlight over 61% of its area and is compliant with the BRE 2-hr
check.
The application complies with the recommendations and guidelines of Site Layout Planning for Daylight and
Sunlight: A Guide to Good Practice (BRE 2011) and BS 8206 Lighting for Buildings and Part 2: Code of Practice
for Daylighting.
[Chris Shackleton Consulting] Page 20You can also read
