plot 12, phase 1b (south) reserved matters application · pdf file3. bre guidelines the...

Plot 12, Phase 1B (South)Reserved Matters Application

Brent Cross South Limited Partnership

October 2017

INTERNAL DAYLIGHT, SUNLIGHT AND OVERSHADOWING ASSESSMENT

Contacts

Brent Cross South Limited Partnership 4 Stable Street London N1C 4AB www.brentcrosssouth.co.uk www.argentrelated.co.uk @argentrelated

GIA

The Whitehouse, Belvedere Road, London SE1 8GA www.gia.uk.com

Project Number

Project Title

Report Title

Prepared by

Checked by

Dated

Type

Revisions

Architect

Client Argent LLP

Maccreanor Lavington (Plot 12); Allies and Morrison (masterplan)

Brent Cross South - Plot 12

11598

Internal Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Report

24 October 2017

MV

NC

Notes:

Planning

Signed:

Date:

Sources of information:IR_31/33_11598

Rel_11_11598_DSD

Issue No: IS15-11598Page No: 2

Date: October 2017


11598 - Brent Cross South - Plot 12

GIA, The Whitehouse, Belvedere Road, London SE1 8GA t 020 7202 1400 f 020 7202 1401 e [email protected] w www.gia.uk.com

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe purpose of this report is to ascertain whether the proposed development of Plot 12 will provide future occupants with access to adequate levels of daylight and sunlight.

GIA have worked alongside Maccreanor Lavington throughout the design stages in order to maximise the levels of light within the proposed scheme.

Alterations were made to both the massing and design during detailed design in order to achieve good levels of light, further details of which can be found within the report.

The results presented within this report demonstrate a scheme which has been optimised for daylight and sunligh.

The results of these assessments have shown overall very good levels of light in the scheme with 80% of all proposed rooms seeing the levels of Average Daylight Factor (ADF) recommended or above and the vast majority of rooms applicable for sunlight assessment seeing very high levels of Annual Probable Sunlight Hours (APSH). Where levels of light lower than recommended are seen on the living rooms’ windows, this is often a result of the provision of balconies which, acting as shading devices, intercept the sun rays especially during the summer period. An analysis of the balustrades however, confirms that future occupants would be able to enjoy the sun via the use of their balconies

In such conditions, a balance needs to be struck between high light levels, overheating and private amenity and this the design seeks to do (further detail available within the Design Statement).

In relation to the external areas of communal or public open space, the scheme provides two distinct areas, both of which exceed the recommendations provided within the BRE Guide.

Overall the design has been progressed with natural light in mind and the submitted design represents a scheme optimised in terms of daylight and sunlight conditions given the context it is set in. We therefore conclude that the proposed development will provide future occupants with good access to daylight and sunlight overall.

2. INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVEGIA has been instructed to provide a report on the potential availability of Daylight and Sunlight to the proposed accommodation within the residential scheme prepared by Maccreanor Lavington. GIA was specifically instructed to carry out the following:

• To create a 3D computer model of the proposal based upon drawings prepared by Maccreanor Lavington.

• Carry out a daylight assessment using the methodologies set out in the BRE guidance for Average Daylight Factor, No-Sky Line and Room Depth Criterion.

• Carry out a sunlight assessment using the methodologies set out in the BRE guidance for Annual Probable Sunlight Hours (APSH) to the main fenestration of living rooms facing within 90° of due south.

• Carry out an overshadowing assessment using the methodology set out in the BRE guidance for Sun Hours On Ground (SHOG) for all relevant communal open spaces.

• Prepare a report setting out the analysis and our findings.


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




3. BRE GUIDELINESThe Building Research Establishment (BRE) have set out in their handbook Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight a Guide to Good Practice (2011), guidelines and methodology for the measurement and assessment of daylight and sunlight within proposed buildings. This document states that it is also intended to be used in conjunction with the interior daylight recommendations found within the British Standard BS8206-2:2008 and The Applications Manual on Window Design of the Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE).

The guide also provides advice on site layout planning to determine the quality of daylight and sunlight within open spaces between buildings.

It is important to note, however, that this document is a guide whose stated aim “is to help rather than constrain the designer”. The document provides advice, but also clearly states that it “is not mandatory and this document should not be seen as an instrument of planning policy.” The report acknowledges also in its introduction that “in special circumstances the developer or planning authority may wish to use different target values. For example, in a historic City centre a higher degree of obstruction may be unavoidable if new developments are to match the height and proportions of existing buildings.”

It is an inevitable consequence of the built up urban environment that daylight and sunlight will be more limited. It is well acknowledged that in such situations there may be many other conflicting and potentially more important planning and urban design matters to consider in addition to the provision of ideal levels of daylight and sunlight.

3.1. DAYLIGHT

The BRE set out various methods for assessing the daylight within a proposed building within section 2.1 and Appendix C of the handbook. The summary of this, given at the end of section 2.1 of the guide, states as follows:

“In general, a building will retain the potential for good interior diffused daylighting provided that on all its main faces:

A. No obstruction, measured in a vertical section perpendicular to the main face, from a point two metres above ground level, subtends an angle of more than 25° to the horizontal;

Or

B. If (A) is not satisfied, then all points on the main face on a line two metres above ground level are within four metres (measured sideways) of a point which has a vertical sky line component of 27% or more.”

3.1.1. VERTICAL SKY COMPONENT (VSC)

This method of assessment can be undertaken using a skylight indicator or a Waldram diagram. It measures from a single point, at the centre of the window (if known at

the early design stage), the quantum of sky visible taking into account all external obstructions. Whilst these obstructions can be either other buildings or the general landscape, trees are usually ignored unless they form a continuous or dense belt of obstruction.

The VSC method is a useful ‘rule of thumb’ but has some significant limitations in determining the true quality of daylight within a proposed building. It does not take into account the size of the window, any reflected light off external obstructions, any reflected light within the room, or the use to which that room is put. Appendix C of the guide goes into more detail on these matters and sets forward alternative methods for assessment to overcome these limitations.

Paragraph 2.1.21 of the BRE states that:

“Obstructions can limit access to light from the sky. This can be checked by measuring or calculating the angle of visible sky ‘theta’, angle of obstruction or Vertical Sky Component (VSC) at the centre of the lowest window where daylight is required. If VSC is:

• at least 27% (‘theta’ is greater than 65°, obstruction angle less than 25°) conventional window design will usually give reasonable results.

• between 15% and 27 % (‘theta’ is between 45° and 65°, obstruction angle between 25° and 45°) special measures (larger windows, changes to room layout) are usually needed to provide adequate daylight.

• between 5% and 15% (‘theta’ is between 25° and 45°, obstruction angle between 45° and 65°) it is very difficult to provide adequate daylight unless very large windows are used.

• less than 5% (‘theta’ less than 25°, obstruction angle more than 65°) it is often impossible to achieve reasonable daylight, even if the whole window wall is glazed.”

Appendix C of the BRE guide: Interior Daylighting Recommendations, states:

“The British Standard for daylighting, and the CIBSE Applications manual: window design, contain advice and guidance on interior daylighting. This guide to good practice is intended to be used in conjunction with them, and its guidance is intended to fit in with their recommendations.

For skylight, the British Standard and the CIBSE manual put forward three main criteria, based on the average daylight factor, room depth, and the position of the no skyline.”

3.1.2. AVERAGE DAYLIGHT FACTOR (ADF)

“If a predominantly daylit appearance is required, then adf should be 5% or more if there is no supplementary electric lighting, or 2% or more if supplementary electric lighting is provided. There are additional

recommendations for dwellings of 2% for kitchens, 1.5% for living rooms and 1% for bedrooms. These are minimum values of Average Daylight Factor, and should be attained even if a predominantly daylit appearance is not required.”

This method of assessment takes into account the total glazed area to the room, the transmittance quality of the glazing proposed, the total area of the room surfaces including ceilings and floors, and the internal average reflectance for the room being assessed. The method also takes into account the Vertical Sky Component and the quantum of reflected light off external surfaces.

This is, therefore, a significantly more detailed method of assessment than the Vertical Sky Component method set out above.

3.1.3. ROOM DEPTH CRITERION (RDC)

Where it has access to daylight from windows in one wall only, the depth of a room can become a factor in determining the quantity of light within it. The BRE guidance provides a simple method for examining the ratio of room depth to window area. However, whilst it does take into account internal surface reflections, this method also has significant limitations in that it does not take into account any obstructions outside the window and therefore draws no input from the quantity of light entering the room.

3.1.4. NO SKY LINE (NSL)

This third method of assessment is a simple test to establish where within the proposed room the sky will be visible through the windows, taking into account external obstructions. The assessment is undertaken at working plane height (850 mm above floor level) and the method of calculation is set out in Appendix D of the BRE handbook.

Appendix C of the BRE handbook states “if a significant area of the working plane lies beyond the no skyline (i.e., it receives no direct skylight), then the distribution of daylight in the room will look poor and supplementary electric lighting will be required.” To guarantee a satisfactory daylight uniformity, the area which does not receive direct skylight should not exceed 20% of the floor area, as quantified in the BS 8206 Part2 2008.

3.1.5. SUMMARY

The Average Daylight Factor gives the most detailed assessment of the daylight within a room and takes into account the highest number of factors in establishing a quantitative output.

However, the conclusion of Appendix C of the BRE guide states:

“All three of the criteria need to be satisfied if the whole of the room is to look adequately daylit. Even if the amount of daylight in a room (given by the Average Daylight Factor) is sufficient, the overall daylight appearance will be impaired if its distribution is poor.”


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




In most urban areas it is important to recognise that the distribution of daylight within a room may be difficult to achieve, given the built up nature of the environment. Consequently, most local authorities seek to ensure that there is sufficient daylight within the room as determined by the Average Daylight Factor calculation. However, the additional recommendations of the BRE and British Standard for residential accommodation, set out above, ought not to be overlooked.

3.2. SUNLIGHT

The BRE provide guidance in respect of sunlight quality for new developments within section 3.1 of the handbook. It is generally acknowledged that the presence of sunlight is more significant in residential accommodation than it is in commercial properties, and this is reflected in the BRE document.

It states, “in housing, the main requirement for sunlight is in living rooms, where it is valued at any time of the day, but especially in the afternoon. Sunlight is also required in conservatories. It is viewed as less important in bedrooms and in kitchens where people prefer it in the morning rather than the afternoon.”

The BRE guide considers the critical aspects of orientation and overshadowing in determining the availability of sunlight at a proposed development site.

The guide proposes minimizing the number of dwellings whose living room face solely north unless there is some compensating factor such as an appealing view to the north, and it suggests a number of techniques to do so. Further more, it discusses massing solutions with a sensitive approach to overshadowing, so as to maximize access to sunlight.

At the same time it acknowledges that the site’s existing urban environment may impose orientation or overshadowing constraints which may not be possible to overcome.

To quantify sunlight access for interiors where sunlight is expected, it refers to the BS 8206-2 criterion of Annual Probable Sunlight Hours. APSH is defined as “the total number of hours in the year that the sun is expected to shine on unobstructed ground, allowing for average levels of cloudiness at the location in question.” In line with the recommendation, APSH is measured from a point on the inside face of the window, should the locations have been decided. If these are unknown, sunlight availability is checked at points 1.6m above the ground or the lowest storey level on each main window wall, and no more than 5m apart. If a room has multiple windows on the same wall or on adjacent walls, the highest value of APSH should be taken into account. If a room has two windows on opposite walls, the APSH for each can be added together.

The summary of section 3.1 of the guide states as follows:

“In general, a dwelling or non-domestic building which has a particular requirement for sunlight, will appear reasonably sunlit provided that:

At least one main window 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. “

In paragraph 3.1.11 the BRE guidance suggests that if a room faces significantly North of due East or West it is unlikely to meet the recommended levels proposed by the BS 8206-2. As such, it is clear that only windows facing within 90° of due south can be assessed using this methodology.

It is also worth noting how paragraph 5.3 of the BS 8206-2 suggests that with regards to sunlight duration “the degree of satisfaction is related to the expectation of sunlight if a room is necessarily north facing or if the building is in a densely-built urban area, the absence of sunlight is more acceptable than when its exclusion seems arbitrary”.

3.3. OVERSHADOWING

The BRE guidance in respect of overshadowing of amenity spaces is set out in section 3.3 of the handbook. Here it states as follows:

“Sunlight in the spaces between buildings has an important impact on the overall appearance and ambiance of a development. It is valuable for a number of reasons:

• To provide attractive sunlit views (all year)

• To make outdoor activities, like sitting out and children’s play more pleasant (mainly during the warmer months)

• To encourage plant growth (mainly in spring and summer)

• To dry out the ground, reducing moss and slime (mainly during the colder months)

• To melt frost, ice and snow (in winter)

• To dry clothes (all year)”

Again, it must be acknowledged that in urban areas the availability of sunlight on the ground is a factor which is significantly controlled by the existing urban fabric around the site in question and so may have very little to do with the form of the development itself. Likewise there may be many other urban design, planning and site constraints which determine and run contrary to the best form, siting and location of a proposed development in terms of availability of sun on the ground.

The summary of section 3.3 of the guide states as follows:

“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.”


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




4. METHODOLOGYIn order to undertake the daylight and sunlight assessments set out above, we have prepared a three dimensional computer model and used specialist lighting simulation software.

The three dimensional representation of the proposed development has been modelled using the scheme drawings provided to us by Maccreanor Lavington. This has been placed in the context of its surrounding buildings which have been modelled from photogrammetry, OS and site photographs. The masterplan layout and massing is built out in compliance with the S73 Planning Permission and is as described in the ‘Illustrative Reconciliation Plan’.

This allows for a precise model, which in turn ensures that analysis accurately represents the amount of daylight and sunlight available to the building facades, internal and external spaces, considering all of the surrounding obstructions and orientation.

4.1. SIMULATION ASSUMPTIONS

Where no values for reflectance, transmittance and maintenance factor were specified by the designer the following values from BS 8206-2:2008, Annex A, tables A.1-A.6 were used for the calculation of Average Daylight Factor values. These values are shown in Table 1.

Plot 12 - A light veneer has been assumed for all internal floors in the South building (12S) and all living spaces floors of the North building (12N), whilst a medium veener has been used for the balcony floors and all bedrooms floors of the North building (12N).

Table 1: Typical reflectance, transmittance and maintenance factors

Reflectance values: Maintenance factors: Tv(normal) A.3 A.4 A.5 A.6 Tv(total)

Surrounding 0.2 Triple Low-E (frames modelled) 0.63 8 1 1 1 0.58Pavement 0.2 Triple Low-E (frames not modelled) 0.63 8 1 1 0.8 0.46Grass 0.1 Triple Low-E (inclined, frames modelled) 0.63 8 2 1 1 0.53Water 0.1 Triple Low-E (inclined, frames not modelled) 0.63 8 2 1 0.8 0.42Yellow brick 0.3 Triple Low-E (horizontal, frames modelled) 0.63 8 3 1 1 0.48Red brick 0.2 Triple Low-E (horizontal, frames not modelled) 0.63 8 3 1 0.8 0.38Portland Stone 0.6Concrete 0.4 Double Low-E (frames modelled) 0.75 8 1 1 1 0.69Internal walls (light grey) 0.68 Double Low-E (frames not modelled) 0.75 8 1 1 0.8 0.55Internal ceiling (white paint) 0.85 Double Low-E (inclined, frames modelled) 0.75 8 2 1 1 0.63Internal floor (medium veneer) 0.3 Double Low-E (inclined, frames not modelled) 0.75 8 2 1 0.8 0.50Internal floor (light veneer) 0.4 Double Low-E (horizontal, frames modelled) 0.75 8 3 1 1 0.57

Double Low-E (horizontal, frames not modelled) 0.75 8 3 1 0.8 0.46

Transmittance values: Single (frames modelled) 0.9 8 1 1 1 0.83Single (frames not modelled) 0.9 8 1 1 0.8 0.66

Triple glazing: Single (inclined, frames modelled) 0.9 8 2 1 1 0.76Pilkington K Glass 4/12/4/12/4 Argon filled 90% Tv= 0.63 Single (inclined, frames not modelled) 0.9 8 2 1 0.8 0.60

Single (horizontal, frames modelled) 0.9 8 3 1 1 0.68Double glazing: Single (horizontal, frames not modelled) 0.9 8 3 1 0.8 0.55Pilkington K Glass 4/16/4 Argon filled 90% Tv= 0.75

Double Translucent Low-E (frames modelled) 0.74 8 1 1 1 0.68Single glazing: Double Translucent Low-E (frames not modelled) 0.74 8 1 1 0.8 0.54Pilkington Optifloat Clear, Annealed, 4mm Tv=0.90 Double Translucent Low-E (inclined, frames modelled) 0.74 8 2 1 1 0.62

Double Translucent Low-E (inclined, frames not modelled) 0.74 8 2 1 0.8 0.50Translucent glazing: Double Translucent Low-E (horizontal, frames modelled) 0.74 8 3 1 1 0.56Pilkington Optifloat Opal ‐ 4mm K /16/4mm Opal Tv= 0.74 Double Translucent Low-E (horizontal, frames not modelled) 0.74 8 3 1 0.8 0.45


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




5. CONCLUSIONS

5.1. MASTERPLAN DAYLIGHT ASSESSMENT

Pages 10-18 of this report focus on the assessment of daylight potential within a parameter compliant illustrative masterplan, which includes the massing proposed for Plot 12.

The study is carried out by subdividing the relevant facades in tiles 1 metre wide and 1 storey tall. A Vertical Sky Component (VSC) measurement is taken from the centre of each panel and this is then colour coded in order to give a graphical representation of the VSC levels achieved across a facade.

It is important to understand that adequate interior daylight levels are achievable by designing the apertures interior layouts, balconies and interior finishes according to the VSC level on the facade. The higher the VSC levels the greater the potential to achieve good interior daylight conditions with standard apertures and layout arrangements.

It is also worth pointing out that VSC levels depend on the view of the sky allowed by a specific streetscape, city centres, areas of growth, historic urban grains or suburban layouts all offer varying typical levels of sky visibility and hence VSC.

The levels of VSC illustrated in our study of the masterplan are typical of London’s urban grain.

According to the diagrams provided the daylight potential achieved within the proposed Plat 12 massing are in-line with the levels seen on all relevant facades of Plots 11, 13 and 18 overlooking the proposal.

A few areas can be seen, typically on the lowest four residential floors, where levels of VSC fall in the middle range of the scale (depicted in red). Careful design of the apertures and balconies location should deliver adequate interior daylight levels.

As it is typical of any urban grains there will be a percentage of the facade and therefore of the interior accommodations which may fall below the recommended levels of daylight and sunlight. Those areas are generally represented by low levels of VSC, which area depicted in blue and purple in the report.

As it will become apparent from the detailed testing of Plot 12, the optimisation process undertaken resulted in adequate interior daylight and sunlight levels. The daylight potential currently demonstrated on the facades overlooking the proposed development will allow for similar if not better interior daylight levels.

We can therefore conclude that the proposed Plot 12 massing will not hinder the development of the neighbouring Plots and they will come forward for reserved matters approval in due course.

5.2. PLOT 12 - CONCLUSION ON DAYLIGHT

GIA have worked alongside Maccreanor Lavington Architects throughout the design stage in order to maximise the levels of light within the scheme. Alterations were made to both the massing and detailed design in order to achieve the good levels of light seen including:

• Shaping the massing to allow for greater sunlight levels to reach the communal open spaces;

• Altering the massing to allow for greater daylight ingress and more dual aspect apartments;

• Amending the balcony design so as to minimise the impact of these on each apartment’s living area;

• Rearranging the flat layouts to prioritise the daylight within living areas;

• Rearranging room layouts so to ensure the potential of each window is fully realised;

• Increasing window sizes in areas of lower daylight potential.

The results presented within this report therefore propose a scheme which has been optimised for daylight and sunlight as far as possible, given the context and urban grain of the masterplan.

In order to ascertain the levels of light within the proposed scheme all proposed habitable rooms have been assessed for Average Daylight Factor (ADF), No Sky Line (NSL) and Room Depth Criterion (RDC).

The results of these assessments have shown overall very good levels of light in the scheme with 80% of all proposed rooms seeing the levels of ADF recommended or above. This is a typical overall compliance level for a scheme of this size and nature in an urban location in London.

The optimisation carried out during the design stages have prioritized the daylight levels within Living/Kitchen/Diners and living rooms, as these are the rooms where people spend the majority of their time. These rooms have therefore been relocated in areas that receive the greatest levels of sky visibility, resulting in 78% meeting or exceeding the recommendation of 1.5% ADF for living areas.

85% of all proposed bedrooms will also meet or exceed the recommendation of 1% ADF.

Kitchens, where provided as separate spaces in large family units, do not include a breakfast table and are linked to living rooms which see adequate levels of light. In the case of the maisonettes within the South block, the kitchens windows are on the ground floor, where daylight is typically lower, and often obstructed by a balcony above serving one of the house’s bedrooms. This is a normal trade off of amenities in an urban location and particularly so in London.

We therefore conclude that the results presented within this report illustrate a scheme

which has been optimised for daylight and sunlight ingress as far as possible resulting in a good overall compliance with guidance.

5.3. CONCLUSION ON SUNLIGHT

In order to ascertain the levels of sunlight within the proposed residential accommodation, all main windows oriented within 90 degrees of due south and serving a living room have been assessed for Annual Probable Sunlight Hours (APSH).

Pages 42-45 of this report illustrate the results where yellow depicts windows meeting or exceeding the recommended levels.

As it is clear to see from the diagrams the vast majority of living areas will receive levels of sunlight in-line or exceeding the recommendations.

Where lower levels of light than recommended are seen on the living rooms’ windows, this is often a result of the provision of balconies which, acting as shading devices, intercept the sun rays, especially during the summer period, when the sun is at its highest in the sky.

An analysis of the balustrades however, confirms that future occupants would be able to enjoy the sun via the use of their balconies.

In winter as the sun position in the sky is lower, the rays enter the living rooms with ease in virtually all cases.

We therefore conclude that the proposed development strikes a good balance between offering outdoor private amenity in the form of balconies and the introduction of sunlight within the living rooms.

5.4. CONCLUSIONS ON OVERSHADOWING

Plot 12 proposes 2 areas of open space, one public (Plot 12N) and one communal (Plot 12S) .In order to maximise the levels of sunlight within these areas, the massing has been shaped through an iterative testing process in order to ensure high levels of sunlight.

The image on page 47 of this report illustrates that both areas exceed BRE’s recommendation for Sun Hours on Ground. Page 48 portrays the sun exposure in hours for the 21st of March and page 49 illustrates the sun exposure for the summer solstice on the 21st of June. These are of use to understand where in each area the greatest sunlight will be enjoyed and so inform the landscape design.

With good levels of sunlight seen and both areas exceeding the levels of sunlight recommended by BRE, we therefore conclude that future occupants will be able to enjoy very well sunlit open spaces within the proposed development on Plot 12.


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




Figure 1: Top View

Site Overview

Figure 2: Perspective View

Plot 12

Plot 13

Plot 13

Plot 11

Plot 18

Plot 18

Illustrative Consented Masterplan ( Parameter compliant) Illustrative Consented Masterplan ( Parameter compliant)

Plot 12


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




Masterplan Daylight Assessment


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




Figure 3: View 1

Daylight Potential Assessment


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




Figure 4: View 2



Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




Figure 5: View 3



Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




Figure 6: View 4


Figure 7: View 5

View 4

View 5


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




Figure 8: View 6


Figure 9: View 7

View 6

View 7


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




Figure 10: View 8


Figure 11: View 9

View 9

View 8


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




Figure 12: View 10


Figure 13: View 11

View 11

View 10


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




Figure 14: View 12


Figure 15: View 13

View 12

View 13


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




Figure 16: View 15


Figure 17: View 15

View 14

View 15


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




Plot 12 Daylight Assessment


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




Table 2: Assessment Data

ROOM REF. ROOM USE ADF (%) NSL (%) RDC

PLOT NORTH - GROUND FLOOR

1 L/K/D 2.5 91 N/A2 L/K/D 3 98 MET

DAYLIGHT DISTRIBUTIONDAYLIGHT QUANTUM

Internal Daylight Assessment - Plot 12 North - Ground Floor

Figure 18: Floor Plan - Average Daylight Factor (ADF)

1

2


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017







PLOT NORTH - 1ST FLOOR

3 Bedroom 2.8 98 N/A4 Bedroom 1.1 63 MET5 Bedroom 1.5 92 MET6 Bedroom 1.2 77 MET7 Bedroom 1.2 60 MET8 Living Room 1.2 66 MET9 Bedroom 1 50 MET10 Bedroom 2.1 77 MET11 Bedroom 0.6 50 MET12 Living Room 1.4 70 MET13 Living Room 1.2 92 MET14 Bedroom 0.8 73 MET15 Bedroom 1.4 77 MET16 Bedroom 1.6 96 MET17 L/K/D 1.5 88 N/A18 Bedroom 0.6 19 MET19 Bedroom 0.6 27 MET20 L/K/D 1.4 83 N/A21 Bedroom 0.7 27 MET22 Bedroom 0.7 33 MET23 Bedroom 0.4 34 MET24 Living Room 0.7 43 MET25 Bedroom 0.7 42 MET26 Bedroom 0.5 58 MET27 Living Room 1.2 96 MET28 Kitchen 2.7 97 N/A29 Living Room 1 20 MET30 Bedroom 0.6 17 MET31 Bedroom 0.9 20 MET32 Bedroom 0.9 22 MET33 Bedroom 1.1 24 MET34 Bedroom 1.1 29 MET35 Living Room 0.7 24 MET36 Bedroom 1.6 29 MET37 Bedroom 1.1 31 MET38 Living Room 0.8 49 MET39 Bedroom 1.9 58 MET40 Bedroom 1 35 MET41 Bedroom 0.8 56 MET42 Bedroom 0.8 60 MET43 Kitchen 0.8 56 MET44 Living Room 3 99 N/A45 Bedroom 0.8 47 MET46 Bedroom 1 65 MET

Internal Daylight Assessment - Plot 12 North - First Floor


3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13 14 15 16 17

18

19

20

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45 46


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017





Internal Daylight Assessment - Plot 12 North - Second Floor



PLOT NORTH - 2ND FLOOR

47 Living Room 3.1 99 N/A48 Kitchen 1.3 91 MET49 Bedroom 1.1 90 MET50 Bedroom 1.2 87 MET51 Bedroom 0.9 50 MET52 Living Room 1.3 85 MET53 Bedroom 1.1 71 MET54 Bedroom 2.4 96 MET55 Bedroom 0.7 80 MET56 Living Room 1.5 92 MET57 Living Room 1.2 93 MET58 Bedroom 0.9 73 MET59 Bedroom 1.5 79 MET60 Bedroom 1.7 97 MET61 L/K/D 1.7 91 N/A62 Bedroom 0.7 22 MET63 Bedroom 0.8 32 MET64 L/K/D 1.6 91 N/A65 Bedroom 0.8 30 MET66 Bedroom 0.8 36 MET67 Bedroom 0.4 37 MET68 Living Room 0.8 46 MET69 Bedroom 0.8 45 MET70 Bedroom 0.5 61 MET71 Living Room 1.3 97 MET72 Kitchen 3.1 97 N/A73 Living Room 1.2 27 MET74 Bedroom 0.7 26 MET75 Bedroom 1.1 26 MET76 Bedroom 1.1 28 MET77 Bedroom 1.2 33 MET78 Bedroom 1.2 36 MET79 Living Room 0.8 30 MET80 Bedroom 1.7 35 MET81 Bedroom 1.1 35 MET82 Living Room 0.9 54 MET83 Bedroom 2.1 62 MET84 Bedroom 1.1 38 MET85 Bedroom 0.9 60 MET86 Bedroom 0.9 63 MET87 Kitchen 0.9 58 MET88 Living Room 3 99 N/A89 Bedroom 0.9 53 MET90 Bedroom 0.9 45 MET


47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57 58 59 60 61

62

63

64

65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89 90


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017





Internal Daylight Assessment - Plot 12 North - Third Floor



PLOT NORTH - 3RD FLOOR

91 Living Room 3.4 99 N/A92 Kitchen 1.5 92 MET93 Bedroom 1.2 93 MET94 Bedroom 1.3 90 MET95 Bedroom 1 64 MET96 Living Room 1.5 99 MET97 Bedroom 1.3 82 MET98 Bedroom 2.7 96 MET99 Bedroom 0.8 95 MET100 Living Room 1.7 97 MET101 Living Room 1.3 96 MET102 Bedroom 0.9 73 MET103 Bedroom 1.6 80 MET104 Bedroom 1.8 98 MET105 L/K/D 2 95 N/A106 Bedroom 0.9 34 MET107 Bedroom 1 36 MET108 L/K/D 1.8 97 N/A109 Bedroom 0.9 33 MET110 Bedroom 0.9 38 MET111 Bedroom 0.5 39 MET112 Living Room 0.9 50 MET113 Bedroom 1 45 MET114 Bedroom 0.6 62 MET115 Living Room 1.4 98 MET116 Kitchen 3.4 98 N/A117 Living Room 1.4 36 MET118 Bedroom 0.9 46 MET119 Bedroom 1.3 35 MET120 Bedroom 1.3 37 MET121 Bedroom 1.4 43 MET122 Bedroom 1.4 48 MET123 Living Room 1.1 43 MET124 Bedroom 2 44 MET125 Bedroom 1.3 43 MET126 Living Room 1.1 60 MET127 Bedroom 2.5 68 MET128 Bedroom 1.2 42 MET129 Bedroom 1 64 MET130 Bedroom 1.1 67 MET131 Kitchen 1 64 MET132 Living Room 3.3 99 N/A133 Bedroom 1 55 MET134 Bedroom 0.9 52 MET


91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101 102 103 104 105

106

107

108

109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133 134


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017





Internal Daylight Assessment - Plot 12 North - Fourth Floor



PLOT NORTH - 4TH FLOOR

135 Living Room 3.8 100 N/A136 Kitchen 1.6 96 MET137 Bedroom 1.4 98 MET138 Bedroom 1.5 97 MET139 Bedroom 1.1 74 MET140 Living Room 1.7 99 MET141 Bedroom 1.4 85 MET142 Bedroom 2.9 96 MET143 Bedroom 0.9 95 MET144 Living Room 1.8 97 MET145 Living Room 1.5 96 MET146 Bedroom 1 74 MET147 Bedroom 1.7 83 MET148 Bedroom 2 99 MET149 L/K/D 2.4 97 N/A150 Bedroom 1.2 58 MET151 Bedroom 1.2 40 MET152 L/K/D 2.2 99 N/A153 Bedroom 1.1 37 MET154 Bedroom 1.1 43 MET155 Bedroom 0.5 41 MET156 Living Room 1.1 59 MET157 Bedroom 1.1 48 MET158 Bedroom 0.7 65 MET159 Living Room 1.6 98 MET160 Kitchen 3.9 98 N/A161 Living Room 1.7 53 MET162 Bedroom 1.2 77 MET163 Bedroom 1.5 49 MET164 Bedroom 1.6 49 MET165 Bedroom 1.7 59 MET166 Bedroom 1.7 66 MET167 Living Room 1.3 66 MET168 Bedroom 2.4 60 MET169 Bedroom 1.6 59 MET170 Living Room 1.4 75 MET171 Bedroom 2.8 79 MET172 Bedroom 1.4 49 MET173 Bedroom 1.2 73 MET174 Bedroom 1.2 75 MET175 Kitchen 1.1 74 MET176 Living Room 3.5 99 N/A177 Bedroom 1.1 55 MET178 Bedroom 1.1 55 MET


135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145 146 147 148 149

150

151

152

153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177 178


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017





Internal Daylight Assessment - Plot 12 North - Fifth Floor



PLOT NORTH - 5TH FLOOR

179 Living Room 4.1 100 N/A180 Kitchen 1.8 99 MET181 Bedroom 1.6 99 MET182 Bedroom 1.7 100 MET183 Bedroom 1.2 86 MET184 Living Room 1.9 99 MET185 Bedroom 1.5 85 MET186 Bedroom 3.1 96 MET187 Bedroom 1 95 MET188 Living Room 2 97 MET189 Living Room 1.6 96 MET190 Bedroom 1.1 75 MET191 Bedroom 1.9 88 MET192 Bedroom 2.2 99 MET193 L/K/D 2.8 97 N/A194 Bedroom 1.6 74 MET195 Bedroom 1.6 48 MET196 L/K/D 2.7 99 N/A197 Bedroom 1.3 47 MET198 Bedroom 1.3 51 MET199 Bedroom 0.7 42 MET200 Living Room 1.3 78 MET201 Bedroom 1.3 53 MET202 Bedroom 0.8 69 MET203 Living Room 1.8 99 MET204 Kitchen 4.5 98 N/A205 Living Room 2.1 83 MET206 Bedroom 1.6 93 MET207 Bedroom 1.8 73 MET208 Bedroom 1.8 73 MET209 Bedroom 1.9 87 MET210 Bedroom 2 96 MET211 Living Room 1.7 99 MET212 Bedroom 2.7 87 MET213 Bedroom 1.8 86 MET214 Living Room 1.7 99 MET215 Bedroom 3.2 100 MET216 Bedroom 1.6 64 MET217 Bedroom 1.4 97 MET218 Bedroom 1.4 97 MET219 Kitchen 1.3 96 MET220 Living Room 3.8 99 N/A221 Bedroom 1.2 55 MET222 Bedroom 1.2 55 MET


179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189 190 191 192 193

194

195

196

197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

220

221 222


Rel_11_11598_DSD


Date: October 2017




plot 12, phase 1b (south) reserved matters application · pdf file3. bre guidelines the...

Documents