albert quay build to rent shd€¦ · albert street residential building ... the shadow analysis...

Page | 1

Albert Quay Build To Rent SHD

11/07/2019

Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Study

Report For: Coakley O’Neill

Project No:14508

Confidential

https://www.iesve.com/

Page | 2

Document created by: Integrated Environmental Solutions Limited

International Sustainability Consulting Developers of the IES Virtual Environment

Prepared by: Checked by:

Eirini Mouroutsou

Project Consultant

Douglas Bell

Senior Project Leader

Version: Date: Revision Details: Approved by:

4 16/10/2019 Final Report John Gleeson


Page | 3

Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 4

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 6

Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 7

Orientation ......................................................................................................................................... 7

Proposed Model ................................................................................................................................. 8

Potential Sensitive Receptors ............................................................................................................ 9

BRE – Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight (2nd edition) .................................................. 10

Impact Classification Discussion ...................................................................................................... 10

Conventional Windows .................................................................................................................... 11

Shadow Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 12

Plan View .......................................................................................................................................... 13

Discussion ......................................................................................................................................... 15

Daylight Analysis of Existing Buildings ................................................................................................ 16

Guidance Requirements ................................................................................................................... 16

VSC Values .................................................................................................................................... 17

Assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 18

Albert Street Residential Building ............................................................................................... 18

Discussion ......................................................................................................................................... 21

Sunlight to the Proposed Amenity Spaces .......................................................................................... 22

Requirements ................................................................................................................................... 22

Proposed Amenity Areas ................................................................................................................. 23

Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 27

Average Daylight Factors ..................................................................................................................... 28

Assumptions ..................................................................................................................................... 30

Discussion ......................................................................................................................................... 31

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................ 32

Appendix A ........................................................................................................................................... 34

Average Daylight Factors ................................................................................................................. 34

First Floor ...................................................................................................................................... 35

Third Floor .................................................................................................................................... 37

Fifth Floor ..................................................................................................................................... 39


Page | 4

Executive Summary This report was completed to quantify the Daylight performance of the proposed development

at Carey Hire, Albert Quay in Cork. The site itself is a built up urban city centre area of Cork,

situated to the south west of Ireland.

The following can be concluded based on the studies undertaken:

Shadow Analysis

The Shadow analysis shows different shadows being cast at some times of the year for the

proposed scheme. The impact of the proposed development on the surrounding amenity

spaces during the summer months, when the impact caused by overshadowing is generally

most noticeable, can be describe as negligible.

Daylight Analysis of existing buildings

All of the windows of the residential building at Albert Street achieve a vertical sky component

of at least 27% or no less than 0.80 that of the value for the existing situation in line with the

BRE requirements.

Sunlight to the Proposed Amenity Spaces

The proposed scheme shows that on the 21st of March, 93% of the total external amenity

areas would receive at least 2 hours of sunlight exceeding the BRE recommended of 50%.

Overall 59% of the existing amenity spaces would receive at least 2 hours of sunlight, exceeding

the BRE recommendations.

Average Daylight Factors

All of the tested rooms in the proposed scheme are projected to have an Average Daylight

Factors (ADF) above the recommended Average Daylight Factors (ADF) in line with the BRE

guidelines.


Page | 5

Discussion

It should be noted that the guidance in 'Site layout planning for daylight and sunlight: a guide

to good practice' is not mandatory and the Report itself states ‘although it gives numerical

guidelines these should be interpreted flexibly because natural lighting is only one of many

factors in site layout design.

Whilst the results shown relate to the criteria as laid out in the BRE guidance targets it is

important to note that the BRE targets have been drafted primarily for use in low density

suburban development and should therefore be used with flexibility and caution when dealing

other types of sites. Despite this, the site performs well in relation to the metrics considered

in this report.

When comparing the proposed development against the existing situation the following can

be concluded:

The impact of the proposed development during the summer months when the

impact caused by overshadowing is generally most noticeable, can be describe as

negligible.

100% of the resultant VSC values for the residential properties tested exceed the BRE

recommendations.

The proposed scheme shows that on the 21st of March, 93% of the total external

amenity areas would receive at least 2 hours of sunlight exceeding the BRE

recommended of 50%.

In terms of Average Daylight Factors (ADF), a number of sample spaces were selected

on the first, third and fifth floors. The results show that all of the spaces are above the

recommended Average Daylight Factors (ADF) in line with BRE guidelines.

Overall, the results demonstrate that the proposed development performance is in line with

BRE recommendations in the BRE ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight’ guide,

sometimes referred to as BRE Digest 209.


Page | 6

Introduction

This report was completed to quantify the Daylight performance of the proposed development

at Carey Hire Albert Quay in Cork.

Development Description The proposed development will consist of a Build-to-Rent Strategic Housing Development of

201no. 1 (93), 2 (104) and 3 (4) bed apartments in a building that ranges in height from 8, 11

to 24 storeys over ground floor. The proposed will consist of resident support facilities

(concierge, management facilities, post and parcel areas, and laundry and waste

management facilities) and resident services and amenities (lounge area, library, workspace,

meeting rooms, coffee dock, games room, cinema room, dining area, gym, 2no. rooftop

terraces and an internal amenity area on Level 24). The proposed development will also

comprise a ground floor cafe; public plaza; rooftop plant; canopies; two basement levels, to

include 402no. cycle spaces, 62no. car parking spaces and plant/services, as well as an

additional storage area; and all associated site development, ancillary development, including

2no. ESB substations, and landscaping and public realm works. The total above ground gross

floor area proposed is 21,220m2 (including existing buildings).

The proposed development involves the demolition of the three-storey former Sextant pub,

and the reuse and renovation of 2no. Protected Structures, the two-storey former Cork,

Blackrock and Passage Railway Offices, Ref. No. PS 1137, and the adjoining single-storey

former Blackrock and Passage Railway Terminus – Ticket Office, Ref. No. PS 1138, which is

also a Recorded Monument, CO074-119002, which are to be retained and initially reused as a

temporary construction compound for the proposed development, and then refurbished as

part of the proposed development for an office and bar/restaurant use respectively. The

proposed development also involves the retention of the Albert Road Post Box, which is also

a Protected Structure Ref. No. PS942. The proposed development site is located in the Albert

Quay, Albert Road, Victoria Road Proposed Architectural Conservation Area.

Analysis Performed The focus of the study considers the following items with respect to the proposed new

development:

Shadow Analysis - A visual representation analysing any potential changes that may arise

from the proposed development on to the neighbouring existing developments.

Daylight Analysis of Existing Buildings - via consideration of Vertical sky component (VSC).

Sunlight to the Proposed Amenity Spaces – via annual sunlight hours comparison.

Average Daylight Factors – via average daylight factor calculations carried for floor plans

across Carey Hire Albert Quay site of the proposed development.

The analysis was completed using the IES VE software. The design team’s objective is to exceed

the recommendations given in BRE – Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight guide.


Page | 7

Methodology

Orientation

The model orientation has been taken from drawings provided by the Architect and the

resulting angle shown below is used in the analysis.

Orientation


Page | 8

Proposed Model


Page | 9

Potential Sensitive Receptors

To help understand the potential impact to surrounding buildings potential sensitive receptors

were identified as illustrated below.

Albert Street – Residential


Page | 10

BRE – Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight (2nd edition)

Access to daylight and sunlight is a vital part of a healthy environment. Sensitive design should

provide sufficient daylight and sunlight to new housing while not obstructing light to existing

homes nearby.

The BRE Report, “Site layout planning for daylight and sunlight: a guide to good practice

(BR209)”, advises on planning developments for good access to daylight and sunlight, and is

widely used by local authorities to help determine the impacts of new developments.

Impact Classification Discussion

BRE guidance in Appendix I – Environmental Impact Assessment suggests impact classifications

as minor, moderate and major adverse. It provides further classifications of these impacts with

respect to criteria as follows;

Where the loss of skylight or sunlight fully meets the guidelines in the BRE guide, the impact is

assessed as negligible or minor adverse. Where the loss of skylight or sunlight does not meet

the BRE guidelines, the impact is assessed as minor, moderate or major adverse.

Negligible adverse impact

Loss of light well within guidelines, or

only a small number of windows losing light (within the guidelines) or

limited area of open space losing light (within the guidelines)

Minor adverse impact (a)

Loss of light only just within guidelines and o a larger number of windows are affected or o larger area of open space is affected (within the guidelines)

Minor adverse impact (b)

only a small number of windows or limited open space areas are affected

the loss of light is only marginally outside the guidelines

an affected room has other sources of skylight or sunlight

the affected building or open space only has a low level requirement for skylight or sunlight

there are particular reasons why an alternative, less stringent, guideline should be applied

Major adverse impact

large number of windows or large open space areas are affected

the loss of light is substantially outside the guidelines

all the windows in a particular property are affected

the affected indoor or outdoor spaces have a particularly strong requirement for skylight or sunlight (living rooms / playground)


Page | 11

Conventional Windows

The BRE Guide talks about Conventional window design based on the discussions around these

it could be determined that this term refers to windows typical with a sill height of 800mm –

1000mm as shown in the images below.


Page | 12

Shadow Analysis

The statistics of Met Eireann, the Irish Meteorological Service, show that the sunniest months

in Ireland are May and June.

The following can also be shown:

During December, Cork receives a mean daily duration of 1.7 hours of sunlight out of a

potential 7.6 hours sunlight each day (i.e. only 22% of potential sunlight hours).

During June, Cork receives a mean daily duration of 5.8 hours of sunlight out of a

potential 16.0 hours sunlight each day (i.e. only 36% of potential sunlight hours).

Therefore, impact caused by overshadowing are generally most noticeable during the summer

months and least noticeable during the winter months.

This section will consider the shadows cast for the Proposed development for the following

dates;

March 21st / September 21st (Equinox)

June 21st (Summer solstice)

These images will show shadows cast for ‘prefect sunny’ conditions with no clouds and

assuming that the sun is out for every hour shown. Given the discussion above it is important

to remember that this is not always going to be the case.


Page | 13

Plan View March 21st

Plan View

Perspective View

8:00 AM 10:00 AM 12:00 PM 14:00 PM 16:00 PM


Page | 14

June 21st

Plan View

Perspective View

8:00 AM 10:00 AM 12:00 PM 14:00 PM 16:00 PM


Page | 15

Discussion

Shading from the proposed development is summarised as follows based on analysis of the

previous images.

On March 21st the shading on the boardwalk is minimal since the proposed

development sits distantly to the south-east.

During the month of June, no shading is visible on the boardwalk as shadows cast by

the proposed development are restricted to the development site and River Lee.

Page | 16

Daylight Analysis of Existing Buildings

Guidance Requirements

BRE Site layout planning for daylight and sunlight (Section 2.2)

When designing a new development, it is important to safeguard the daylight to nearby

buildings. The BRE’s 2011 guidance provide numerical values that are purely advisory. Different

criteria may be used based on the requirements for daylighting in an area viewed against other

site layout constraints. Another issue is whether the Permitted building is itself a good

neighbour, standing a reasonable distance from the boundary and taking no more than its fair

share of light. Any reduction in the total amount of skylight can be calculated by finding the

vertical sky component at the centre of key reference points. The vertical sky component

definition from the BRE’s 2011 is described below;

The maximum possible VSC value for an opening in a vertical wall, assuming no obstructions,

is 40%. This VSC at any given point can be tested in the Radiance module of the IES VE software.

For typical Schemes the BRE’s 2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and

Sunlight which states the following in Section 2.2.7

As such this study will compare the Existing Scheme and Proposed Schemes and consider

whether the VSC values are greater than 27% and if not, any reduction will be no greater

than 20%.

Page | 17

VSC Values

The BRE Guide also states the following in Section 2.1.6 that the amount of daylight a room

needs depends on what it is being used for, but roughly speaking if the VSC is:

≥ 27%, conventional window design will usually give reasonable results

between 15 % and 27 % special measures (larger windows, changes to room layout)

are usually needed to provide adequate daylight

between 5 % and 15 % it is difficult to provide adequate daylight unless very large

windows are used

<5 % it is often impossible to achieve reasonable daylight even if the whole window

wall is glazed

As such, these values will be referred to as part of the analysis for the adjacent properties.

Page | 18

Assessment

Albert Street Residential Building

Based on the above the following location has been modelled:

Points Existing Situation VSC Proposed Scheme VSC Proposed VSC % of Existing Situation

Comment

1 38.96 37.53 96%

2 38.85 37.22 96%

3 38.84 37.16 96%

4 38.82 36.97 95%

5 38.46 33.47 87%

Page | 19


Comment

6 38.26 34.71 91%

7 38.49 37.16 97%

8 38.56 36.82 95%

9 38.54 36.71 95%

10 38.55 36.47 95%

11 37.36 32.03 86%

12 36.27 32.36 89%

13 38.02 36.04 95%

14 37.99 35.81 94%

15 13.79 12.46 90%

16 18.00 15.39 86%

17 24.07 21.22 88%

18 36.53 33.70 92%

19 32.09 27.33 85%

20 26.74 26.74 100%

21 30.71 26.74 87%

22 29.70 26.89 91%

23 37.72 35.31 94%

24 37.79 35.08 93%

25 12.91 11.72 91%

26 16.28 14.86 91%

27 17.00 14.76 87%

28 18.36 16.13 88%

29 28.54 23.77 83%

30 26.94 23.57 87%

31 26.11 23.10 88%

32 25.21 22.93 91%

33 37.22 35.18 95%

34 37.18 34.35 92%

35 12.64 11.04 87%

36 16.25 14.09 87%

37 16.16 14.35 89%

38 17.73 14.29 81%

39 24.97 20.86 84%

40 22.97 20.08 87%

41 21.92 19.62 90%

42 21.30 19.16 90%

43 36.39 33.90 93%

44 36.48 33.62 92%

45 12.40 10.29 83%

46 14.70 13.35 91%

47 15.42 13.08 85%

48 16.99 13.61 80%

49 22.05 17.74 80%

50 19.68 17.39 88%

51 18.81 16.80 89%

52 17.76 16.32 92%

The points tested on the adjacent residential building have a vertical sky component of at least

27% or not less than 0.80 of the existing situation.

Therefore, these points exceed the BRE recommendations.

Page | 20

Albert Road Residential Building

Based on the above the following location has been modelled:


Comment

1 16.73 16.85 100%

2 16.86 16.69 99%

3 17.56 16.77 96%

Page | 21


Comment

4 17.34 17.58 100%

5 18.12 17.66 97%

6 14.82 14.55 98%

7 14.56 14.50 100%

8 14.45 14.48 100%

9 14.82 14.67 99%

10 15.37 15.04 98%

11 15.13 15.28 100%

12 16.14 16.04 99%

13 25.01 24.85 99%

The points tested on the adjacent residential building have a vertical sky component of at least

27% or not less than 0.80 of the existing situation.

Therefore these points exceed the BRE recommendations.

Discussion

For the following locations considered:

Albert Street – Residential

All of the spaces achieve a vertical sky component of at least 27% or no less than 0.80 that of

the value for the existing situation, exceeding BRE requirements.

Albert Road – Residential

All of the spaces achieve a vertical sky component of at least 27% or no less than 0.80 that of

the value for the existing situation, exceeding BRE requirements.

As such, there is no impact of the proposed development on the existing residential building.

Page | 22


Requirements

The impact of the development proposal on the sunlight availability in the amenity areas will

be considered to determine how they perform when assessed against the BRE’s 2011 guidance

document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight which states the following in Section

3.3.17;

BRE’s 2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight states in 3.3.17

that for a space to, appear adequately sunlit throughout the year, at least half of a garden or

amenity area should receive at least 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March.

Page | 23

Proposed Amenity Areas

As stated above for a space to appear adequately sunlit throughout the year, at least half of a

garden or amenity area should receive at least 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March.

This analysis will be performed on the following development at Albert Quay and the proposed

amenity spaces shown in the images below:

Proposed Scheme Amenity Areas

Existing Amenity Area (Boardwalk)

Page | 24

The following images show the predicted results with respect to this space receiving at least 2

hours of sunlight on 21st March, across the gridded cells.

Proposed Shared Private Amenity Space

Plan View

Perspective View

Page | 25

Public Plaza

Plan View

Perspective View

Page | 26

Existing Amenity Area (Boardwalk)

Plan View

Perspective View

Page | 27

Discussion

Section 3.3.17 of BRE’s Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight states that for a space to

appear adequately sunlit throughout the year, at least half of the garden or amenity area

should receive at least 2 hours of sunlight on the 21st of March.

Overall 93% of the proposed amenity spaces would receive at least 2 hours of sunlight,

exceeding the BRE recommendations.



Amenity Total Area receiving 2

hours of Sunlight

% of Area receiving 2

hours of Sunlight

External Private Shared

Amenity Space ~625 m2 ~579 m2 93%

Existing Amenity Space

(Boardwalk) 1781 m2 1057 m2 59%

Page | 28


This section addresses daylight to the proposed apartments.

BRE’s 2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight states the

following in Appendix C with respect to Average Daylight Factors (ADF);

From BRE’s 2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight

From this the recommended Average Daylight Factors (ADF) are therefore;

Bedrooms - 1.0%

Living Rooms - 1.5%

This study will consider the predicted average daylight factor to the subject application.

Analysis has been carried by using the Radiance module of IES VE software to quantify the

metrics describe below.

Daylight is constantly changing, so its level at a point in a building is usually defined as an

average daylight factor.

Page | 29

This is the ratio of the indoor illuminance at the point in question to the outdoor

unobstructed horizontal illuminance.

Both illuminances are measured under the same standard sky, a CIE overcast sky. Since the

sun is in a particular position for only a short period each day, direct sunlight is excluded.

Instead diffuse sunlight is used for average daylight calculations. Diffuse sunlight describes

the sunlight that has been scattered by molecules and particles in the atmosphere but has

still made it down to surface of the earth.

For average daylight factor there are three possible paths along which diffuse light can get

into a room through glazed windows.

a) Light from the patch of sky visible at the point considered, is expressed as the sky

component.

b) Light reflected from opposing exterior surfaces and then reaches the point, is

expressed as the externally reflected component.

c) Light entering through the window but reaching the point only after reflection from

internal surfaces, is expressed as the internally reflected component.

Daylight Factor Methodology

E = illuminance on unobstructed plane e = illuminance at point in interior

Daylight Factor = e/E (often expressed as a percentage)

SC – Sky Component

ERC – Externally Reflected Component

IRC – Internally Reflected Component

Page | 30

Assumptions

The following assumptions are used in the study:

Sky Conditions: Standard CIE overcast sky

Time (24hr): 12:00

Date: 21 September

Working Plane: 0.85m

Floor to Ceiling Height for First Floor 3 m

Floor to Ceiling Height for Third Floor 2.7m

Floor to Ceiling Height for Fifth Floor 2.7m

External Wall Thickness 360mm

The following Surface Reflectance's are to be used in the study:

Material Surface Reflectance

External Wall 0.50

Internal Partition 0.50

Roof 0.20

Ground 0.20

Floor/Ceiling (Floor) 0.20

Floor/Ceiling (Ceiling) 0.70

Glazing Transmittance:

Light Transmittance: 70%

Assumed Window Frame thickness: 80 mm

Page | 31

Discussion

The full results for the rooms considered can be seen in the Appendix. It should be noted that

the ‘worst’ case locations have been tested on the lower floors i.e. rooms on the upper floors

will generally have unobstructed views and should meet the BRE recommendations.

These are summarised as follows:

First Floor

Tested 21

Bedroom above BRE recommendations 12

Living Room above BRE recommendations 9

Below BRE recommendations 0 100%

Third Floor

Tested 38




Fifth Floor

Tested 17




Total

Tested 76




Page | 32

Conclusion

The following can be concluded based on the studies undertaken:

Shadow Analysis

The Shadow analysis shows different shadows being cast at some times of the year for the

proposed scheme. The impact of the proposed development on the surrounding amenity

spaces during the summer months, when the impact caused by overshadowing is generally

most noticeable, can be describe as negligible.

Daylight Analysis of Existing Buildings

All of the windows of the residential building at Albert Street achieve a vertical sky component

of at least 27% or no less than 0.80 that of the value for the existing situation in line with the

BRE requirements.


The proposed scheme shows that on the 21st of March, 93% of the total external amenity

areas would receive at least 2 hours of sunlight exceeding the BRE recommended of 50%.




All of the tested rooms in the proposed scheme are projected to have an Average Daylight

Factors (ADF) above the recommended Average Daylight Factors (ADF) in line with the BRE

guidelines.

Page | 33

Discussion

It should be noted that the guidance in 'Site layout planning for daylight and sunlight: a guide

to good practice' is not mandatory and the Report itself states ‘although it gives numerical

guidelines these should be interpreted flexibly because natural lighting is only one of many

factors in site layout design.

Whilst the results shown relate to the criteria as laid out in the BRE guidance targets it is

important to note that the BRE targets have been drafted primarily for use in low density

suburban development and should therefore be used with flexibility and caution when dealing

other types of sites. Despite this, the site performs well in relation to the metrics considered

in this report.

When comparing the proposed development against the existing situation the following is

concluded:

The impact of the proposed development during the summer months when the impact

caused by overshadowing is generally most noticeable, can be describe as negligible.

100% of the resultant VSC values for the residential properties tested exceed the BRE

recommendations.

The proposed scheme shows that on the 21st of March, 93% of the total external

amenity areas would receive at least 2 hours of sunlight exceeding the BRE

recommended of 50%.

In terms of Average Daylight Factors (ADF), a number of sample spaces were selected

on the first, third and fifth floors. The results show that all of the spaces are above the

recommended Average Daylight Factors (ADF) in line with BRE guidelines.

Overall, the results demonstrate that the proposed development performance is in line with

BRE recommendations in the BRE ‘Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight’ guide,

sometimes referred to as BRE Digest 209.

Page | 34

Appendix A


The following key:

All these rooms have an average daylight factor of not less than the recommended

minimum values (1.5% for living rooms and 1.0% for bedrooms) as stated under BRE’s

2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight. Therefore,

these rooms are all compliant with BRE recommendation.

x All these rooms have an average daylight factor of less than the recommended

minimum values (1.5% for living rooms and 1.0% for bedrooms) as stated under BRE’s

2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight. Therefore,

these rooms are all compliant with BRE recommendation.

Page | 35

First Floor

Page | 36

Room Reference Room Name Average Daylight Factor BRE Recommendation

1 L1: Apt 01_Living 2.08

2 L1: Apt 01_Bedroom 01 1.72

3 L1: Apt 02_Bedroom 01 1.41



6 L1: Apt 03_Bedroom 01 1.15

7 L1: Apt 04_Bedroom 01 1.12



10 L1: Apt 05_Bedroom 01 1.25

11 L1: Apt 06_Bedroom 01 1.38


13 L1: Apt 06_Bedroom 02 5.81

14 L1: Apt 07_Bedroom 02 8.72


16 L1: Apt 07_Bedroom 01 7.66

17 L1: Apt 08_Bedroom 02 6.99


19 L1: Apt 08_Bedroom 01 6.51

20 L1: Apt 09_Bedroom 01 4.51


Page | 37

Third Floor

Page | 38

Room Reference Room Name Average Daylight Factor BRE Recommendation

1 L3: Apt 10_Bedroom 02 2.05


3 L3: Apt 11_Bedroom 1.83








11 L3: Apt 15_Bedroom 01 1.73


13 L3: Apt 15_Bedroom 02 5.30

14 L3: Apt 16_Bedroom 02 8.08


16 L3: Apt 16_Bedroom 01 7.20

17 L3: Apt 17_Bedroom 02 5.72


19 L3: Apt 17_Bedroom 01 6.02







26 L3: Apt 21_Bedroom 02 6.81


28 L3: Apt 21_Bedroom 01 4.75




32 L3: Apt 23_Bedroom 01 6.96


34 L3: Apt 23_Bedroom 02 3.14



37 L3: Apt 10_Bedroom 01 8.30


Page | 39

Fifth Floor

Page | 40

Room Reference Room Name Average Daylight Factor BRE Recommendation 1 L5: Apt 27_Bedroom 02 4.12 2 L5: Apt 30_Bedroom 01 3.92 3 L5: Apt 30_Living 4.70 4 L5: Apt 30_Bedroom 02 5.49 5 L5: Apt 29_Bedroom 01 8.25 6 L5: Apt 29_Living 6.56 7 L5: Apt 29_Bedroom 02 7.51 8 L5: Apt 28_Bedroom 4.55 9 L5: Apt 28_Living 4.42

10 L5: Apt 25_Bedroom 01 7.13 11 L5: Apt 25_Living 8.75 12 L5: Apt 25_Bedroom 02 5.55 13 L5: Apt 26_Bedroom 01 7.00 14 L5: Apt 26_Living 7.74 15 L5: Apt 26_Bedroom 02 3.35 16 L5: Apt 27_Bedroom 01 8.35 17 L5: Apt 27_Living 8.75

Page | 41

albert quay build to rent shd€¦ · albert street residential building ... the shadow analysis...

Documents