14. Daylight, Sunlight & Overshadowing - Embankment, Cardiff · 2021. 1. 18. · 14. Daylight,...

14.1

14. Daylight, Sunlight & Overshadowing

Introduction

14.1 This Chapter reports the outcome of the assessment of likely significant environmental effects arising from the Proposed Scheme in relation to daylight, sunlight and overshadowing.

14.2 The Chapter describes the consultation that has been undertaken during the EIA, the scope of the assessment and assessment methodology, and a summary of the baseline information that has informed the assessment.

14.3 A number of effects have been avoided in advance of the assessment and where relevant these are clearly stated. The assessment reports on the likely significant environmental effects, the further mitigation measures required to prevent, reduce or offset any significant adverse effects, or further enhance beneficial effects. The conclusions are provided both in terms of the residual effects and whether these are considered significant.

14.4 This Chapter, and its supporting Figure 14.1 and Appendix 14.1-14.4, is intended to be read as part of the wider ES with particular reference to the introductory Chapters of this ES (Chapters 1 - 5).

14.5 In addition, this Chapter should be read in conjunction with Chapter 17. Cumulative Effects Assessment.

Legislative Framework and Guidance

14.6 The following guidance has informed the assessment of effects within this Chapter:

• Planning for Sustainable Buildings – Practice Guide 20141

• Under the section Orientation and Solar Access says:

“The impact on the opportunity of adjacent buildings to achieve sufficient daylight should be considered when new buildings are proposed”

14.7 The following guidance has informed the assessment of effects within this Chapter:

• BRE Guidelines 20112

14.8 Paragraph 1.6 in the Introduction of the BRE Guidelines states:

“The guide is intended for building designers and their clients, consultants and planning officials. The advice given here is not mandatory and the guide should not be seen as an instrument of planning policy; its aim is to help rather than constrain the designer. Although it gives numerical guidelines, these should be interpreted flexibly since natural lighting is only one of many factors in site layout design (see Section 5). In special circumstances the developer or planning authority may wish to use different target values. For example, in an historic city centre, or in an area with modern high rise buildings, a higher degree of

14.2

obstruction may be unavoidable if new developments are to match the height and proportions of existing buildings”3.

14.9 Based on the above, care should be taken to apply the BRE Guidelines with a degree of flexibility relative to the site context and the opportunities the Proposed Scheme offers.

Summary of Consultation

14.10 Table 14.1 provides an overview of the consultation that has been undertaken to inform the Proposed Scheme and EIA, including the consideration of likely significant effects and the methodology for assessment.

Table 14.1: Summary of Consultation

Body / Organisation Contact Date and Form of Consultation

Summary

Cardiff Council (CC) Operational Manager, Strategic Development Management & Placemaking

EIA Scoping Opinion (Appendix 2.2)

Confirmation that an assessment on the existing sensitive receptors, i.e. neighbours and open spaces, will be completed as part of the EIA submission.

Scope of the Assessment

14.11 An EIA Scoping Report was submitted to CC on 6 August, 2020, as presented as Appendix 2.1. An EIA Scoping Opinion was provided by CC on 23 October, 2020 (Appendix 2.2). This section provides confirmation on the scope of the assessment presented within this Chapter following submission of the EIA Scoping Report.

Not Significant Effects 14.12 The following not significant effects were identified as part of the EIA Scoping Report and are

not considered further in this Chapter. The evidence to support this are represented are outlined within the EIA Scoping Report (Appendix 2.1):

• Effects associated with Solar Glare

14.13 The following effect is also not considered significant and the evidence base to support this is outlined below.

Temporary changes to daylight, sunlight and overshadowing levels during demolition and construction stages 14.14 Due to the levels of daylight and sunlight evolving throughout the demolition and

construction stage, it is not possible to determine what the effect is on the surrounding sensitive receptors at any given time. The use of scaffolding, hoardings and, to a lesser extent, cranes, would temporarily increase the obstruction to daylight, sunlight and overshadowing very slightly beyond that caused by the buildings themselves.

14.3

14.15 The potential daylight, sunlight, and overshadowing effects relating to demolition and construction works would vary throughout the construction programme and gradually increase to the likely effects identified for the completed Proposed Scheme. It is therefore considered that the completed Proposed Scheme represents the worst-case assessment in terms of likely daylight, sunlight and overshadowing.

14.16 Accordingly, a quantitative assessment of the Proposed Scheme during the demolition and construction stage has not been undertaken

Likely Significant Effects 14.17 The following effects (Table 14.2) are considered significant and are reported within this

Chapter. Future receptors did not form part of the agreed scope of this chapter, as set out within the EIA Scoping Report (Appendix 2.1) or Scoping Opinion (Appendix 2.2). Through the analysis of Approved Projects as part of the cumulative assessment (presented in Chapter 17. Cumulative Effects Assessment), a number of projects have been identified for further analysis given proximity to the Proposed Scheme and are therefore now scoped into this chapter as future receptors. In-combination effects from these projects to existing receptors alongside the Proposed Scheme are considered in Chapter 17. Cumulative Effects Assessment.

Table 14.2: Likely Significant Effects

Likely Significant Effect Receptors Applicable Development Phase*

Reduction in daylight to adjacent existing properties

Cardiff and Vale College, 1-30 Heol Staughton, The Shire Hall Care Home, Overstone Court, residential properties on Taff Embankment (sample tested between 2-136), Turner Court

O

Reduction in sunlight to adjacent properties

Cardiff and Vale College, 1-30 Heol Staughton, The Shire Hall Care Home, Overstone Court, residential properties on Taff Embankment (sample tested between 2-136), Turner Court

O

Increase in overshadowing to adjacent amenity spaces

Canal Park Children’s Playground

O

Reduction in daylight to adjacent future properties

Former Brownings Dumballs Road, Suffolk House Trade Street, Eveleigh site 14 Dumballs Road

O

14.4

Likely Significant Effect Receptors Applicable Development Phase*

Reduction in sunlight to adjacent future properties

Former Brownings Dumballs Road, Suffolk House Trade Street, Eveleigh site 14 Dumballs Road

O

*C = Demolition/Construction, O = Operation

Extent of the Study Area

14.18 The study area has been determined by means of professional judgement and expertise and considers the existing sensitive receptors in the immediate vicinity of the Site. The study area incorporates all new and existing residential and educational sensitive receptors as suggested by the BRE Guidelines, which are in the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme. Properties at a greater distance from the scheme have been scoped out as they would not be able to see the Proposed Scheme over intermediate buildings, and/or they do not have windows that face directly towards the Proposed Scheme. The sensitive receptors identified are labelled on Figure 14.1.

Background Studies to Inform the ES

14.19 The following background studies have informed this Chapter:

• Desk study - In order to establish baseline conditions in the study area, relevant data was reviewed and assessed. Data was obtained from the following sources:

‒ Cardiff Council planning records;

‒ Valuation Office Agency; and

‒ Residential sales documents (i.e. Rightmove).

These sources were used to establish the property uses and the likely internal configurations of the sensitive receptors. Where room layout information was unavailable, reasonable assumptions have been made as to the likely use and internal configuration of the rooms behind the fenestration. In addition, the uses of the surrounding properties have been established from external observation from online sources such as Google Earth.

• Field study - Field study/data collection was not required at the Site as the data provided by a laser scan survey4 and the sources listed above were deemed to be adequate and representative of the site conditions

Assessment Methodology

14.20 The following assessment scenarios have been considered:

• Scenario 1: Existing Baseline

14.5

• Scenario 2: Existing Baseline + Proposed Scheme

• Scenario 3: Existing Baseline + Proposed Scheme + Cumulative Development (in combination effects with other Approved Projects is reported in Chapter 17. Cumulative Effects Assessment)

14.21 A laser scan survey of the adjacent building elevations together with a photogrammetry model for the building massing was obtained in order to build the three-dimension computer model in AutoCAD. The model includes the existing site, surrounding receptors, the Proposed Scheme and any other background context massing which may have a bearing on daylight, sunlight and overshadowing.

14.22 Specialist software, which uses the Waldram method of analysis as described in Appendix B of the BRE Guidelines, was used to quantify the level of daylight and sunlight in the various assessment scenarios. These assessments are described in more detail below.

14.23 The BRE Guidelines recommend carrying out two detailed daylight tests, namely the vertical sky component (VSC), which assesses the daylight at the window plane and no skyline tests (NSL) also known as daylight distribution (DD), which assesses the daylight within the room. The Guidelines further suggest a sunlight assessment for neighbouring properties, namely annual probable sunlight hours (APSH) assessing the sunlight available at the window, and sunlight to any amenity areas by way of the 2 hours sun on ground assessment.

14.24 The BRE Guidelines are not mandatory, and, as already explained above, they explicitly state that the numerical target values should be interpreted flexibly. While local planning authorities will consider the acceptability of a proposed scheme in relation to the BRE Guidelines, consideration will be given to the context within which a scheme is located, and daylight and sunlight will be one of a number of planning considerations. The BRE Guidelines state:

“This guide is a comprehensive revision of the 1991 edition of Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight: A Guide to Good Practice. It is purely advisory and the numerical target values within it may be varied to meet the needs of the development and its location.”

14.25 A full explanation of each of the assessment tests is included in Appendix 14.4.

Reporting of the Environmental Effect and Significance Criteria

14.26 The assessment of likely significant environmental effects as a result of the Proposed Scheme has considered the operational phases.

14.27 The duration of the effect has been assessed as either ‘short-term’, ‘medium-term’ or ‘long-term’. Short-term is considered to be up to 1 year, medium-term is considered to be between 1 and 10 years and long-term is considered to be greater than 10 years.

14.28 Thus, in considering the significance of an effect, consideration has been given to the duration of the effect, the geographical extent of the effect and the application of professional judgement.

14.6

Determining Sensitivity of Receptor 14.29 The sensitivity of affected receptors has been considered on a scale of high, medium, low or

negligible.

14.30 When considering the sensitivity of the receptors, the BRE Guidelines offers advice. It considers living rooms, dining rooms and kitchens to be more important than bedrooms in terms of daylight, while living rooms are clearly of principal importance in terms of sunlight. It also states that “windows to bathrooms, toilets, storerooms, circulation areas and garages need not be analysed”. Consequently, for the purposes of this assessment: for daylight, living rooms, dining rooms and kitchens have been attributed high sensitivity, bedrooms low sensitivity. Student Accommodation and educational spaces have been attributed Medium sensitivity due to their transient use and their need for reduced natural light levels. Classrooms often require less direct light to avoid glare on screens. Bathrooms, toilets, store rooms and circulation areas are attributed as negligible sensitivity and therefore, in accordance with BRE Guidelines, have not been tested.

Table 14.3: Receptor Sensitivity Criteria

Sensitivity Criteria

Negligible Bathrooms, Toilets, Storerooms, Circulation Areas and Garages

Low Bedrooms

Medium Student Accommodation and Educational spaces

High Living rooms, Dining rooms, Kitchens and Amenity Area’s

Determining the Magnitude of Change 14.31 The magnitude of change has been considered as the change experienced from the baseline

conditions at the sensitive receptor and has been considered on a scale of large, medium, small or negligible. The definition of magnitude differs between daylight and sunlight effects, set out further in Tables 14.4 and 14.5 below.

Table 14.4: Impact Magnitude Daylight Criteria

Magnitude of Impact Criteria

Negligible No BRE Transgression - Reduction of under 20% or in the case of VSC retained VSC at 27% or more. In the case of DD retained skylight to 80 % of the room area.

Small Reduction of 20 % or more but under 30 %

Medium Reduction of 30 % or more but under 40 %

Large Reduction of 40 % or more

14.7

Table 14.5: Impact Magnitude Sunlight Criteria

Magnitude of Impact Criteria

Negligible No BRE Transgression – For rooms/windows - achieves at least 25 % APSH for annual sunlight hours with 5 % APSH in the winter months or reduction in light is no greater than 20 % of the existing condition. For amenity areas – achieves 50% of the area or reduction in light is no greater than 20 % of the existing condition

Small Reduction of 20% or more but under 30%

Medium Reduction of 30% or more but under 40%

Large Reduction of 40% or more

Determining the Level of Effect 14.32 In determining the scale of effect by considering the BRE Guidelines, it must be noted that

the default guidance was curated and established in relation to a suburban environment. The BRE numerical criteria is therefore based on a 25-degree development obstruction angle, which is often unachievable in urban areas. A uniform 25-degree development obstruction angle equates to the default BRE VSC target of 27%.

14.33 Appendix F of the BRE Guidelines provides advice on setting alternative targets for access to daylight and sunlight. In relation to the suggested guidelines, the BRE state:

“These values are purely advisory and different targets may be used […] for example, in a mews in a historic city centre, a typical obstruction angle might be close to 40 degrees. This would correspond to a VSC of 18%, which could be used as a target”.

14.34 In urban locations, development obstruction angles of 40-degrees, and sometimes angles significantly higher, are increasingly common. As above, this is equivalent to a VSC of 18%, which is considered a reasonable level of daylight for urban areas. In the current climate, there is the need to make best use of the land available, which has led to an increase in development density, which as a consequence increases the angle of development obstruction around a site and thus causes constrained light levels.

14.35 When determining the overall scale of effect per property for daylight and sunlight, as per Appendix I of the BRE Guidelines (set out below), consideration has to be given to the proportion of rooms / windows affected, as well as the percentage alterations, absolute changes, existing levels, and retained levels. As such, the assessment criteria should not be strictly applied, and professional judgement is used from review of all the assessment results.

14.36 Appendix I of the BRE Report 209 explains how to apply the daylight and sunlight criteria in Table 14.4 and 14.5 to Environmental Impact Assessments.

14.8

14.37 Appendix I, paragraph I3 of the BRE Guidelines states:

“Adverse impacts occur when there is a significant decrease in the amount of skylight and sunlight reaching an existing building where it is it required, or in the amount of sunlight reaching an open space.”

14.38 Paragraph I5 states:

“Where the loss of skylight or sunlight fully meets the guidelines in this book, the impact is assessed as negligible or minor adverse. Where the loss of light is well within the guidelines, or only a small number of windows or limited area of open space lose light (within the guidelines), a classification of negligible impact is more appropriate. Where the loss of light is only just within the guidelines, and a larger number of windows or open space area are affected, a minor adverse impact would be more appropriate, especially if there is a particularly strong requirement for daylight and sunlight in the affected building or open space.”

14.39 Paragraphs I6 and I7 continue:

“Where the loss of skylight or sunlight does not meet the guidelines in this book, the impact is assessed as minor, moderate or major adverse. Factors tending towards a minor adverse impact include:

• only a small number of windows or limited area of open space 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.”

“Factors tending towards a major adverse impact include:

• a large number of windows or large area of open space 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, e.g. a living room in a dwelling or a children’s playground.”

14.40 The level of effect attributed has therefore been assessed based on the magnitude of change due to the Proposed Scheme and the evaluation of the sensitivity of the affected receptor, as well as a number of other factors that are outlined in more detail in Chapter 2. Approach to EIA. The level of effect has been based on of professional judgement using the above guidance and Table 14.6 has been a tool which has assisted with this process.

14.9

Table 14.6: Matrix to Support Determining Level of Effect

Mag

nitu

de o

f cha

nge

Sensitivity (or value/importance)

High Medium Low Negligible

Large Major Moderate to Major

Minor to Moderate

Negligible

Medium Moderate to Major

Moderate Minor Negligible

Small Minor to Moderate

Minor Negligible to Minor

Negligible

Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible Negligible

14.41 Whilst Table 14.6 provides ranges, the level of effect is confirmed as a single level and not a range, informed by professional judgement. For each effect, it has been concluded whether the effect is ‘beneficial’ or ‘adverse’. A statement is also made as to whether the level of effect is ‘Significant’ or ‘Not Significant’, again based on professional judgement.

14.42 The following terms have been used to define the significance of the effects identified and these can be ‘beneficial’ or ‘adverse’:

• Major effect: where the Proposed Scheme is likely to cause a considerable change from the baseline conditions and the receptor has limited adaptability, tolerance or recoverability or is of the highest sensitivity. This effect is considered to be ‘Significant’;

• Moderate effect: where the Proposed Scheme is likely to cause either a considerable change from the baseline conditions at a receptor which has a degree of adaptability, tolerance or recoverability or a less than considerable change at a receptor that has limited adaptability, tolerance or recoverability. This effect is considered more likely to be ‘Significant’ but will be subject to professional judgement;

• Minor effect: where the Proposed Scheme is likely to cause a small, but noticeable change from the baseline conditions on a receptor which has limited adaptability, tolerance or recoverability or is of the highest sensitivity; or where the Proposed Scheme is likely to cause a considerable change from the baseline conditions at a receptor which can adapt, is tolerant of the change or/and can recover from the change. This effect is considered less likely to be ‘Significant’ but will be subject to professional judgement; and

• Negligible: where the Proposed Scheme is unlikely to cause a noticeable change at a receptor, despite its level of sensitivity or there is a considerable change at a receptor which is not considered sensitive to a change. This effect is ‘Not Significant’.

Baseline Conditions

14.43 This baseline condition is shown on drawings ROL00419_02_001 to 003 in Appendix 14.1. Daylight and Sunlight 3D Visuals and Tables.

14.10

14.44 The baseline conditions for daylight and sunlight around the Site have been quantified and compared against the BRE criteria summarised in the tables above.

Table 14.7: Summary of Baseline VSC Results

Receptor Number of windows tested

Number of windows

≥ 27 % VSC <27 % VSC

Number % Number %

Cardiff and Vale College 124 67 54 57 46

1-30 Heol Staughton 54 37 69 17 31

The Shire Hall Care Home 37 37 100 0 0

Overstone Court - Unit 2A 24 15 62 9 38

Overstone Court - Unit 2B 45 32 71 13 29

Overstone Court - Unit 2C 60 44 73 16 27



136 Taff Embankment 10 10 100 0 0









Turner Court 54 44 81 10 19







Total 872 693 79 179 21

14.45 The VSC baseline results show that overall, 79% of windows in the existing baseline condition adhere to the guidelines.

14.11

Table 14.8: Summary of Baseline DD Results

Receptor Number of Rooms

tested

Number of rooms

≥ 80 % daylit area <80 % daylit area

Number % Number %


1-30 Heol Staughton 42 39 93 3 7



Overstone Court - Unit 2B 36 33 92 3 8




















Total 517 505 98 12 2

14.46 The DD baseline results show that overall, 98% of rooms in the existing baseline condition adhere to the guidelines.

14.12

Table 14.9: Summary of Baseline Annual Probable Sunlight Results


Number of windows

≥ 25 % probable sunlight hours

<25 % probable sunlight hours

Number % Number %


1-30 Heol Staughton 29 25 86 4 14
















Total 401 346 86 55 14

Table 14.10: Summary of Baseline Winter Probable Sunlight Results

Receptor Number of windows

tested

Number of windows



Number % Number %


1-30 Heol Staughton 29 25 86 4 14



14.13


Number of windows



Number % Number %














Total 401 307 77 94 23

14.47 The APSH baseline results show that overall, 86% of windows in the existing baseline condition adhere to the annual sunlight guidelines, and 77% adhere to the winter sunlight guidelines.

14.48 The baseline sun hour on ground conditions for Canal Park Children’s Playground shows that 99.62% of the area receives 2 hours of direct sunlight which adheres to the guidelines.

Future Baseline

14.49 There are a number of Approved Projects in the vicinity of the Site, described further in Chapter 17. Cumulative Effects Assessment. The focus is therefore on only those that are in sufficient proximity to the Proposed Scheme and the neighbouring sensitive receptors. This decision is based on professional judgement. These adjacent consented schemes are:

• Land At Suffolk House on Trade Street (17/01292/MJR),

• Former Browning Jones and Morris on Dumballs Road (18/02383/MJR) and;

• and north-east of Dumballs Road (20/01543/MJR).

14.50 These Approved Projects will be placed in Scenario 3 to assess the complete cumulative impact on the sensitive receptors. This incombination assessment is presented in Chapter 17.

14.14

Cumulative Effects Assessment. The impact of the Proposed Scheme on these consented schemes has also been assessed and is explained in the future receptors section below.

Sensitive Receptors

The following sensitive receptors have been identified and assessed within the ES, and are labelled on Figure 14.1.

• Cardiff and Vale College;

• 1-30 Heol Staughton;

• The Shire Hall Care Home;

• Overstone Court - Unit 2A;

• Overstone Court - Unit 2B;

• Overstone Court - Unit 2C;

• Overstone Court - Unit 3A;

• Overstone Court - Unit 3C;

• 136 Taff Embankment;









• Turner Court;






14.15


• Canal Park Children’s Playground;

• Former Brownings, Dumballs Road;

• Suffolk House, Trade Street; and

• Eveleigh site, 14 Dumballs Road.

14.51 Along the Taff Embankment, given the large number of properties sharing a similar property style, it was considered appropriate to model a sample of the properties at regular intervals to be able to quantify the impacts. For the adjacent untested properties, a similar conclusion can be drawn regarding the impacts.

Primary and Tertiary Mitigation

Operational Phase 14.52 The following primary and tertiary mitigation which has been evaluated as part of the

operational phase assessment is outlined below.

14.53 Daylight and sunlight have been key considerations throughout the design process and have led to changes in the layout and height of the Proposed Scheme. These mitigation measures are therefore in built into the design. The final layout as assessed is as per the parameter plans as described in Chapter 4. The Proposed Scheme and these have been built into a 3D model provided by the Architects for assessment in this chapter.

14.54 No tertiary mitigation is relevant to the daylight and sunlight assessments.

Assessment of Effects, Secondary Mitigation and Residual Effects

Operational Phase

Reduction in daylight to adjacent existing properties 14.55 The potential daylight effects of the Proposed Scheme have been assessed against the

baseline conditions with respect to the VSC and NSL. Full details of the results can be found in the tables in Appendix 14.1. These have been summarised below in Table 14.11 and 14.12.

Table 14.11: Summary of Proposed Scheme VSC Results

Receptor

Number of

windows tested

Windows satisfying BRE

Guidelines

Windows not satisfying BRE Guidelines

Number % 0.79–0.70 x former

value

0.69–0.60 x former

value

< 0.60 x former value

Cardiff and Vale College 124 0 0% 0 1 123

1-30 Heol Staughton 54 54 100% 0 0 0

14.16

Receptor

Number of

windows tested


Guidelines



value

0.69–0.60 x former

value


The Shire Hall Care Home 37 22 59% 6 9 0

Overstone Court - Unit 2A 24 13 54% 2 1 8

Overstone Court - Unit 2B 45 0 0% 0 8 37

Overstone Court - Unit 2C 60 9 15% 0 37 14



136 Taff Embankment 10 1 10% 2 7 0









Turner Court 54 54 100% 0 0 0







Total 872 391 45% 33 85 363

14.17

Table 14.12: Summary of Proposed Scheme DD Results

Receptor Number of rooms

tested

Rooms satisfying BRE Guidelines

Rooms not satisfying BRE Guidelines


value

0.69–0.60 x former

value



1-30 Heol Staughton 42 42 100% 0 0 0

The Shire Hall Care Home 26 20 77% 0 6 0


Overstone Court - Unit 2B 36 0 0% 0 0 36













Turner Court 28 25 89% 3 0 0







Total 517 230 44% 13 18 256

14.56 The sensitivity of 1 to 30 Heol Staughton, 88, 84, 80, 36, 26, 16, 8, 2 Taff Embankment are each considered to be high to low. The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible.

14.18

Therefore, there is likely be a direct, permanent, long-term adverse effects which is considered to be negligible.

14.57 The remaining properties are set out below.

Cardiff and Vale College

14.58 The Cardiff and Vale College scheme was submitted for planning in 2013 and began construction in 2014. The internal layout plans used for the modelling were therefore taken from the planning submission documents available online. Only the adjacent rooms labelled as teaching/learning spaces have been tested as per the BRE Guidelines. The majority of the teaching/learning areas do not have windows and rooms facing the Site and therefore will not be impacted.

14.59 All of the windows tested would fall beneath the VSC BRE Guidelines. One window would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9% from the baseline condition, and the remaining windows would experience a reduction of more than 40%. The majority of these windows retain between 15% and 6% VSC in the proposed condition.

14.60 Of the 24 rooms tested for DD, 4 rooms would adhere to the BRE Guidelines. Of the remaining rooms, 1 room would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9% from the baseline condition, 2 rooms would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9% from the baseline condition and 17 rooms would experience a reduction of more than 40%.

14.61 All of these rooms currently look out over low rise light industrials building and therefore have very high daylight levels in the current baseline condition. Therefore, any material change in massing proposed on the Site would cause a reduction in the daylight levels. In order for this site to be optimised, a change in the light levels is to be expected. In the proposed condition, the majority of rooms would still retain a view of sky to at least 40% of their room areas.

14.62 Given the reductions in VSC and DD levels, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be large to the windows and rooms with a view of the Proposed Scheme.

14.63 The sensitivity of Cardiff and Vale College is considered to be medium. The magnitude of change is considered to be large. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be moderate to major.

The Shire Hall Care Home

14.64 This care home is located to the south of the Site. Plans could not be obtained of the layouts and therefore assumptions have been made based on Google imagery and Street view tools. Only the rooms on the northern elevation have been tested as those on the west, east and south facing elevations will not be impacted by the Proposed Scheme.

14.65 Of the 37 windows tested, 22 windows would adhere to the VSC BRE Guidelines. Of the remaining windows, 6 windows would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9% from the baseline condition and 9 windows would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9% from the baseline condition.

14.66 Paragraph F4 of the BRE Guidelines states: “...a typical obstruction angle for a mews in a historic city centre might be 40° with a corresponding VSC of 18%...”. This highlights the

14.19

flexibility that needs to be applied when considering different proposed schemes and the desired level of density for the area. In the daylight industry, it is therefore now considered acceptable, particularly in urban areas where multiple block sites are proposed, that a value of circa 15% VSC is considered a good level of daylight to be retained for residential dwellings.

14.67 All of the care home windows retain more than 20% VSC in the Proposed condition, which is therefore considered a good daylight level for an urban area.

14.68 Of the 26 rooms tested for DD, 20 rooms would adhere to the BRE Guidelines. Of the remaining 6 rooms, all would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9% from the baseline condition. These 6 rooms would each still all retain a direct view of sky to more than 64% of their room area.

14.69 Given the good daylight adherence rate and the good retained VSC and DD levels, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be small.

14.70 The sensitivity of the Shire Hall Care Home is considered to be high. It is not known the exact use of the rooms and therefore it is considered a worst case to assume all rooms as high sensitivity as some residents may be confined to their rooms. The magnitude of change is considered to be small. Therefore, based on the high sensitivity, there is likely to be direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be minor to moderate.

Overstone Court

14.71 The Overstone Court buildings are located to the south of the Proposed Scheme and for this chapter Units 2A, 2B, 2C, 3A and 3C have been considered. It is understood that all units apart from Unit 3C is in residential use. Unit 3C is noted as student accommodation. The internal layouts of the flats/accommodation could not be obtained and therefore assumptions have been made based on flat location plans obtained online and external observations.

Unit 2A

14.72 Of the 24 windows tested, 13 would adhere to the VSC BRE Guidelines. Of the remaining 11 windows, 2 windows would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9% from the baseline condition, 1 window would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9% and the remaining 8 windows would experience a reduction of more than 40%.

14.73 The larger percentage reductions are partly due to their projecting balconies/building overhangs. Paragraph 2.2.11 of the BRE Guidelines states:

“Existing windows with balconies above them typically receive less daylight. Because the balcony cuts out light from the top part of the sky....”.

14.74 That said, the majority of these windows retain more than 15% in the proposed condition, which, as explained above, is considered good for an urban area.

14.75 Of the 16 rooms tested for DD, 12 rooms would adhere to the BRE Guidelines. Of the remaining rooms, 1 room would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9% from the baseline condition and 3 rooms would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9%.

14.20

Each of these 4 rooms have an overhanging balcony and would still retain a direct view of sky to more than 66% of their room area.

14.76 Given the good daylight adherence rate and the good retained VSC and DD levels, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be small.

14.77 The sensitivity of Overstone Court Unit 2A is considered to be medium. It is not known the exact use of the rooms, but one can assume a mixture of living rooms and bedrooms which range from high to low sensitivity. The magnitude of change is considered to be small. Therefore, based on the medium sensitivity, there is likely to be direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be minor.

Unit 2B

14.78 All of the 45 windows tested would fall below the VSC BRE Guidelines. 8 windows would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9% from the baseline condition, and the remaining windows would experience a reduction of more than 40%.

14.79 This property currently experiences uninterrupted views across the current low-level, light industrial buildings and therefore have very high VSC levels in the baseline condition. Any material massing coming forward for the Site will necessarily reduce the daylight levels these apartments currently experience. That said, the vast majority of these windows would retain above 15% VSC in the proposed condition.

14.80 All of the 36 rooms tested would fall beneath the DD BRE Guidelines. All of these rooms would experience reductions of more than 40%.

14.81 From external inspection, it is likely that these rooms are all bedrooms, with the main habitable living spaces being located on the south facing elevation overlooking the amenity spaces. The balconies are also located on this southern elevation which would again support this conclusion. The BRE guidelines state that bedrooms are less important than main habitable rooms in terms of light requirements.

14.82 Despite the good level of retained VSC, given the overall reduction in daylight, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be large.

14.83 The sensitivity of Overstone Court Unit 2B is considered to be low due to the conclusion of only bedrooms being tested. The magnitude of change is considered to be large. Therefore, there is likely to be direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be minor to moderate.

Unit 2C

14.84 Of the 60 windows tested, 9 would adhere to the VSC BRE Guidelines. Of the remaining windows, 37 windows would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9% and the remaining 14 windows would experience a reduction of more than 40%.

14.85 This property is similar to Unit 2B above, in that the windows and rooms currently experience uninterrupted views across the current low-level, light industrial buildings and therefore have very high VSC levels in the baseline condition. Any material massing coming forward for the Site will necessarily reduce the daylight levels these apartments currently

14.21

experience. That said, the vast majority of these windows would retain above 15% VSC in the proposed condition.

14.86 Of the 50 rooms tested for DD, 9 rooms would adhere to the BRE Guidelines. Of the remaining rooms, 1 room would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9% from the baseline condition and 40 rooms would experience a reduction of more than 40%.

14.87 As discussed above, it is likely that these rooms are all bedrooms, with the main habitable living spaces being located on the south facing elevation overlooking the amenity spaces.

14.88 Despite the good level of retained VSC, given the overall reduction in daylight, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be large.

14.89 The sensitivity of Overstone Court Unit 2C is considered to be low due to the conclusion of only bedrooms being tested. The magnitude of change is considered to be large. Therefore, there is likely to be direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be minor to moderate.

Unit 3A

14.90 Of the 70 windows tested, 60 would adhere to the VSC BRE Guidelines. Of the remaining windows, 2 windows would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9% and the remaining 8 windows would experience a reduction of more than 40%.

14.91 Of the 55 rooms tested for DD, 45 rooms would adhere to the BRE Guidelines. Of the remaining 10 rooms, all would experience a reduction of more than 40%.

14.92 The impacts are isolated to the northern elevation, which has two banks of smaller windows. The modelling has assumed a single aspect room, but this room may be a bathroom and, if so, would be scoped out of the analysis, as per the BRE guidelines. If this window were to light a living room then it is likely that the living room would be dual aspect given the larger windows on return elevations. If this were the case, then these rooms would remain BRE adherent. Another alternative is that these windows light a kitchen and given the fenestration pattern, this would mean these apartments have internalised bathrooms with no windows, as the windows on the return elevations would seem too large for a bathroom. This would seem unlikely given the depth of the building. Lastly, these small windows could light a bedroom, which the BRE Guidelines state as less important.

14.93 Given the overall high adherence rates and the explanation above, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be small.

14.94 The sensitivity of Overstone Court Unit 3A is considered to be low, given the above explanation of possible room uses. The magnitude of change is considered to be small. Therefore, there is likely to be direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be negligible to minor.

Unit 3C

14.95 Although planning records had originally stated this building as student accommodation, research shows a number of these flats for private rent and therefore an assumption has been made that all these apartments are in residential use and room layouts have been assumed

14.22

14.96 Of the 233 windows tested, 51 would adhere to the VSC BRE Guidelines. Of the remaining windows, 5 windows would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9%, 4 windows would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9% and the remaining 173 windows would experience a reduction of more than 40%.

14.97 Of the 188 rooms tested, 24 would adhere to the DD BRE Guidelines. Of the remaining rooms, 6 rooms would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9%, 5 rooms would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9% and the remaining 153 rooms would experience a reduction of more than 40%. The corner rooms of this property are likely to be main habitable living spaces and all adhere to the guidelines. There are thought to be a number of other main habitable living spaces on the elevation tested and these appear to have overhanging balconies, which necessarily restrict the light levels both the windows and rooms below experience. The remaining rooms are all likely to be bedrooms.

14.98 This property is similar to Unit 2B and 2C above, in that the windows and rooms currently experience uninterrupted views across the current low-level, light industrial buildings and therefore have very high levels in the baseline daylight condition. Any material massing coming forward for the Proposed Scheme will necessarily reduce the daylight levels these apartments currently experience.

14.99 Additionally, once the detailed massing is designed, the block positioning will be analysed in terms of allowing light penetration between blocks rather than the continuously obstruction current proposed for outline massing parameters.

14.100 Given the above reduction in daylight, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be large.

14.101 The sensitivity of Overstone Court Unit 3C is considered to be medium. It is not known the exact use of the rooms, but one can assume a mixture of living rooms and bedrooms which range from high to low sensitivity. The magnitude of change is considered to be large. Therefore, there is likely to be direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be moderate to major.

136 Taff Embankment

14.102 This residential property is sat across the River Taff and has been modelled from plans found for adjacent similar properties. The assumption is that ground has a living room and first and second floors contain bedrooms.

14.103 Of the 10 windows tested, one adheres to the VSC BRE Guidelines. Of the remaining windows, 2 would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9% and 7 windows would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9%. All of these windows would still retain VSC levels of more than 21%, which is considered good.

14.104 Of the 4 rooms tested, 3 adhere to the DD BRE Guidelines. The remaining room experiences a reduction of 34%. These rooms are very well lit in the baseline condition, with unobstructed views across the river onto low rise, light industrial buildings. This room that falls beneath the guidelines is at first floor and therefore likely to be a bedroom and would still retain a view of sky to 64% of the room area.

14.23

14.105 Given the good DD adherence rate and the good retained VSC levels, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be small.

14.106 The sensitivity of 136 Taff Embankment is considered to be medium given that the property is likely made up of one living room, which is considered to be high and a further 3 bedrooms which are considered to be low. The magnitude of change is considered to be small. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be minor.

132 Taff Embankment

14.107 This residential property is sat across the River Taff and has been modelled from plans found for adjacent similar properties. The assumption is that ground has a living room, and first floor contains two bedrooms.

14.108 Of the 9 windows tested, all fall beneath the VSC BRE Guidelines, 2 would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9% and 7 windows would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9%. All of these windows would still retain VSC levels of more than 18%, which is considered good.

14.109 Of the 3 rooms tested, 2 adhere to the DD BRE Guidelines. The remaining room experiences a reduction of 31%. These rooms are all very well-lit in the baseline condition, with unobstructed views across the river onto low rise, light industrial buildings. This room that falls beneath the guidelines is at first floor and therefore likely to be a bedroom. Despite the reduction, this room would still retain a view of sky to 64% of the room area.

14.110 Given the good DD adherence rate and the good retained VSC levels, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be small.


128 Taff Embankment


14.113 Of the 9 windows tested, all fall beneath the VSC BRE Guidelines, 2 would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9% and 7 windows would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9%. All of these windows would still retain VSC levels of more than 18%, which is considered good.

14.114 Of the 3 rooms tested, 2 adhere to the DD BRE Guidelines. The remaining room experiences a reduction of 24%. These rooms are all very well-lit in the baseline condition, with unobstructed views across the river onto low rise, light industrial buildings. This room that falls beneath the guidelines is at first floor and therefore likely to be a bedroom. Despite the reduction, this room would still retain a view of sky to 73% of the room area.

14.24

14.115 Given the good DD adherence rate and the good retained VSC and DD levels, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be small.


124 Taff Embankment


14.118 Of the 9 windows tested, all fall beneath the VSC BRE Guidelines, 2 would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9% and 7 windows would experience a reduction of between 30% and 39.9%. All of these windows would still retain VSC levels of more than 18%, which is considered good, and the majority would retain 26% VSC.

14.119 All 3 of the rooms tested adhere to the DD BRE Guidelines.

14.120 Given the full DD adherence rate and the good retained VSC levels, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be small.


118 Taff Embankment


14.123 Of the 9 windows tested, 6 windows adhere to the DD BRE Guidelines. The 3 remaining windows would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9%. These windows would still retain VSC levels of more than 20%.




14.25

110 Taff Embankment


14.128 Of the 9 windows tested, 7 windows adhere to the DD BRE Guidelines. The 2 remaining windows would experience a reduction of between 20% and 29.9%. These windows would still retain VSC levels of more than 21%.




Turner Court

14.132 This residential property is sat across the River Taff and has been modelled based on assumptions from external inspection. This property is made up of various flats over four floors

14.133 All of the 54 windows adhere to VSC BRE Guidelines.

14.134 Of the 28 rooms tested, 25 adhere to the DD BRE Guidelines. The remaining 3 rooms experience small reductions of between 21% and 24%, which are only just below the 20% BRE Guideline.

14.135 Given the full VSC adherence rate and high DD levels, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be small.

14.136 The sensitivity of Turner Court is considered to be medium given that the property is likely made up of all residential room types ranging from high to negligible sensitivity. The magnitude of change is considered to be small. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be minor.

42 Taff Embankment

14.137 This residential property is sat across the River Taff and has been modelled from plans found for adjacent similar properties. The assumption is that this property is made up of multiple separate flats.

14.138 Of the 18 windows tested, 16 windows adhere to the DD BRE Guidelines. The 2 remaining windows would both experience a reduction of 21%, which only just misses the BRE 20% Guideline. These windows would all still retain VSC levels of 23% and 24%.


14.26

14.140 Given the full DD adherence rate and the high VSC adherence and retained levels, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be small.

14.141 The sensitivity of 42 Taff Embankment is considered to be medium given that the property is likely made up of all residential room types ranging from high to low sensitivity. The magnitude of change is considered to be small. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be minor.

Secondary Mitigation or Enhancement 14.142 Secondary mitigation or enhancement will occur through the detailed design stages of the

Proposed Scheme. Further review, analysis and assessment will occur by way of an appropriately worded condition to be met for each subsequent application. The Proposed Scheme design, as part of this process, will seek to improve the daylight effects stated above.

14.143 Anstey Horne carried out an exercise whereby an example illustrative scheme was tested. The daylight and sunlight results showed a very high adherence rate to the BRE guidelines for each assessment, with only very few results transgressing the BRE guidelines. This demonstrates that it will be possible to deliver an acceptable solution as part of reserved matters submissions.

14.144 At this time, as further work is required as part of detailed design considerations, this cannot be relied upon for the purposes of a robust worst case conclusion. Residual effects, as set out below, are therefore the same as above, albeit it is anticipated that these would reduce substantially during detailed design.

Residual Effect 14.145 In the absence of secondary mitigation, the residual effect is considered to be the same as

that presented in the pre-mitigation scenario.

14.146 The daylight residual effects to 1 to 30 Heol Staughton, 88, 84, 80, 36, 26, 16, 8, 2 Taff Embankment are considered to be Not Significant

14.147 The daylight residual effects to Cardiff and Vale College, The Shire Hall Care Home, Overstone Court - Unit 2A, Unit 2B, Unit 2C, Unit 3A and Unit 3C, 136, 132, 128, 118, 110 Taff Embankment, Turner Court and 42 Taff Embankment are considered to be Significant.

Reduction in sunlight to adjacent existing properties 14.148 The potential sunlight effects of the Proposed Scheme have been assessed against the

baseline conditions with respect to the annual and winter probable sunlight hours. Full details of the results can be found in Appendix 14.2. These have been summarised below in Tables 14.13 and 14.14.

14.27

Table 14.13: Summary of Proposed Annual Probable Sunlight Hours Results

Receptor

Number of

windows tested


Guidelines



value

0.69–0.60 x former

value



1-30 Heol Staughton 29 28 97% 0 1 0


6 6 100% 0 0 0


Overstone Court - Unit 2C

10 10 100% 0 0 0



58 44 76% 6 0 8




Turner Court 22 22 100% 0 0 0







14.28

Table 14.14: Summary of Proposed Winter Probable Sunlight Hours Results

Receptor

Number of

windows tested


Guidelines



value

0.69–0.60 x former

value



1-30 Heol Staughton 29 29 100% 0 0 0


6 6 100% 0 0 0



10 10 100% 0 0 0



58 58 100% 0 0 0




Turner Court 22 22 100% 0 0 0







14.149 The sensitivity of The Shire Hall Care Home, Overstone Court Units 2A, 2C and 3A, 84 and 80 Taff Embankment and Turner Court are each considered to be high to medium. The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, permanent, long-term adverse effects which is considered to be negligible.

14.150 The remaining properties are set out below.

14.29


14.151 Of the 114 windows tested, 8 adhere to the annual sunlight BRE Guidelines and 26 adhere to the winter sunlight BRE Guidelines. All of the windows that fall below the guidelines experience reductions of more than 40%.

14.152 Where rooms are lit by more than one window, an aggregate is calculated. On this basis, of the 22 rooms considered, 3 rooms adhere to the annual sunlight BRE Guidelines and 6 rooms adhere to the winter sunlight BRE Guidelines.

14.153 Given the impacts explained above and the aggregate room adherence, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be large.

14.154 The sensitivity of Cardiff and Vale College is considered to be medium. The magnitude of change is considered to be large. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be moderate to major.

1-30 Heol Staughton

14.155 Of the 29 windows tested, 28 adhere to the annual sunlight BRE Guidelines and all adhere to the winter sunlight BRE Guidelines.

14.156 Where rooms are lit by more than one window, an aggregate is calculated. On this basis, all of the 17 rooms considered, adhere to both the annual and winter sunlight BRE Guidelines.

14.157 Given the impacts explained above and the aggregate room adherence, the overall magnitude of change is considered to be small.

14.158 The sensitivity of 1-30 Heol Staughton is considered to be medium given that the property is likely made up of all residential room types ranging from high to low sensitivity. The magnitude of change is considered to be small. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be minor.

Overstone Court Unit 3C


14.160 Where rooms are lit by more than one window, an aggregate is calculated. On this basis, of the 33 rooms considered, 32 rooms adhere to the annual sunlight BRE Guidelines and all rooms adhere to the winter sunlight BRE Guidelines.


14.162 The sensitivity of Overstone Court Unit 3C is considered to be medium given that the property is likely made up of all residential room types ranging from high to low sensitivity. The magnitude of change is considered to be small. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be minor.

14.30

88 Taff Embankment


14.164 Where rooms are lit by more than one window, an aggregate is calculated. On this basis, all of the 3 rooms considered, adhere to both the annual and winter sunlight BRE Guidelines.



42 Taff Embankment

14.167 Of the 18 windows tested, 14 adhere to the annual sunlight BRE Guidelines and 14 adhere to the winter sunlight BRE Guidelines.

14.168 Where rooms are lit by more than one window, an aggregate is calculated. On this basis, of the 6 rooms considered, all adhere to the annual and winter sunlight BRE Guidelines.



36 Taff Embankment





26 Taff Embankment


14.31




16 Taff Embankment





8 Taff Embankment





2 Taff Embankment



14.32



Secondary Mitigation or Enhancement 14.191 Secondary mitigation or enhancement will occur through the detailed design stages of the

Proposed Scheme. Further review, analysis and assessment will occur by way of an appropriately worded condition to be met for each subsequent application. The Proposed Scheme design, as part of this process, will seek to improve the daylight effects stated above.

14.192 Anstey Horne carried out an exercise whereby an example illustrative scheme was tested. The daylight and sunlight results showed a very high adherence rate to the BRE guidelines for each assessment, with only very few results transgressing the BRE guidelines. This demonstrates that it will be possible to deliver an acceptable solution as part of reserved matters submissions.

14.193 At this time, as further work is required as part of detailed design considerations, this cannot be relied upon for the purposes of a robust worst case conclusion. Residual effects, as set out below, are therefore the same as above, albeit it is anticipated that these would reduce substantially during detailed design.



14.195 The sunlight residual effects to The Shire Hall Care Home, Overstone Court Units 2A, 2C and 3A, 84 and 80 Taff Embankment and Turner Court are considered to be Not Significant.

14.196 The sunlight residual effects to Cardiff and Vale College, 1-30 Heol Staughton, Overstone Court - Unit 3C, 88, 42, 36, 26, 16, 8 and 2 Taff Embankment are considered to be Significant.

Increase in overshadowing to adjacent amenity spaces 14.197 The proposed sun hour on ground conditions for Canal Park Children’s Playground show that

99.55% of the area receives 2 hours of direct sunlight which adheres to and exceeds the guidelines.

14.198 The sensitivity of the Canal Park Children’s Playground is considered to be high. The magnitude of change is considered to be negligible. Therefore, there is likely to be a direct, permanent, long-term, adverse effect which is considered to be negligible.

Secondary Mitigation or Enhancement 14.199 No secondary mitigation or enhancement is required.



14.33

14.201 This residual effect is considered to be Not Significant.

Reduction in Sunlight and Daylight to Adjacent Future Properties 14.202 The in-combination daylight and sunlight effects are included incorporated into Chapter 17.

Cumulative Effects Assessment.

14.203 Below are the impacts on the Approved Projects identified.

Reduction in Daylight to Adjacent Future properties

Table 14.15: Summary of Absolute ADF results

Property Number of

Rooms Tested

Rooms adhering to absolute ADF minimum guidelines Rooms not

satisfying BRE Number %

Land at Suffolk House, Trade Street

205 0 0% 205

Former Brownings-Dumballs Road-South

137 99 72% 38

Former Brownings-Dumballs Road-North

116 106 91% 10

Land North-East Of Dumballs Road – North

451 284 63% 167

Land North-East Of Dumballs Road - South

387 245 63% 142

Total 1296 734 57% 562

Table 14.16: Summary of Reduction in ADF results

Property Number of

Rooms Tested

Rooms with a less than 20% reduction in ADF results

Rooms with more than a

20% reduction Number %

Suffolk House, Trade Street

205 128 62% 77

Former Brownings-

137 58 42% 79

14.34

Property Number of Rooms Tested

Rooms with a less than 20% reduction in ADF results

Rooms with more than a

20% reduction Number %

Dumballs Road-South


116 142 100% 0

Land North-East Of Dumballs Road - North

451 218 48% 233


387 255 66% 132

Total 1296 801 62% 495

14.204 Table 14.15 sets out the rooms of the Approved Projects which adhere to the absolute minimum guidelines. Overall, 57% of the adjacent consented scheme rooms adhere to the minimum ADF guidelines.

14.205 In order to quantify the effects of the Proposed Scheme on the consented scheme’s ADF values, the assessment has been run in the baseline condition and then the proposed condition. As mentioned above, there is no guidance on how to assign criteria for the significance of ADF levels and so it is considered inappropriate to do so.

14.206 Instead, the 20% BRE Guideline for the impact on existing neighbours has been used to provide an explanation as to the level of reduction, which for the existing neighbours assessments, would otherwise be deemed as negligible.

14.207 Table 14.16 therefore shows that overall, 62% of the Approved Projects rooms would have no more than a 20% reduction in their light levels assuming they were built and occupied before the Proposed Scheme and were to experience light levels before and after the Proposed Scheme.

Reduction in Sunlight to Adjacent Future Properties

Table 14.17: Summary of Absolute APSH results


Rooms adhering to absolute guidelines for APSH/WPSH

Number %

Suffolk House, Trade Street 122 114/64 93%/52%

14.35


Rooms adhering to absolute guidelines for APSH/WPSH

Number %

Former Brownings-Dumballs Road-South 137 85/76 62%/55%


116 115/100 99%/86%


317 197/94 62%/30%


264 164/152 62%/58%

Total 956 675/486 71%/51%

Table 14.18: Summary of Reduction in APSH results


Rooms with less than a 20% reduction in APSH/WPSH

Number %

Suffolk House, Trade Street

122 116/68 95%/56%

Former Brownings-Dumballs Road-South

137 85/76 62%/55%


116 116/116 100%/100%


317 211/110 67%/35%


264 180/185 68%/70%

Total 956 708/555 74%/58%

14.208 Table 14.17 sets out the rooms of the Approved Projects which adhere to the absolute minimum annual (APSH) and winter (WPSH) guidelines. Overall, 71% of the adjacent consented scheme rooms adhere to the minimum APSH guidelines and 51% adhere to the minimum WPSH guidelines.

14.209 In order to quantify the effects of the Proposed Scheme on the consented scheme’s APSH/WPSH values, the assessments have been run in the baseline condition and then the

14.36

proposed condition. As mentioned above, there is no guidance on how to assign criteria for the significance of APSH absolute levels for future receptors and so it is considered inappropriate to do so.

14.210 Instead, the 20% BRE Guideline for the impact on existing neighbours has been used to provide an explanation as to the level of reduction, which for the existing neighbours assessments, would otherwise be deemed as negligible.

14.211 Table 14.18 therefore shows that overall, 74% of the Approved Project rooms would have no more than a 20% reduction in their APSH levels. 58% of the Consented Scheme rooms would have no more than a 20% reduction in their WPSH levels, assuming they were built and occupied before the Proposed Scheme.

14.212 From the above daylight and sunlight assessments, if one utilises the 20% BRE Guideline for these assessments, the impact of the Proposed Scheme on Suffolk House, Former Browings (South) and Land North-East Of Dumballs Road – North and South is considered Significant. The impact on Forming Brownings (North) is considered Not Significant.

Limitation and Assumptions

14.213 To ensure transparency within the EIA process, the following limitations and assumptions have been identified.

• A 3D computer model has been built of the existing Site, Proposed Scheme and surrounding properties using a photogrammetric model, measured survey, site photography and planning information.

• Regarding Cardiff and Vale College and the Consented Schemes; Suffolk House, Former Brownings-Dumballs Road and Land North-East Of Dumballs Road, detailed floor layout plans and elevations from the CC planning website have been used to build the 3D computer model.

• Except for the properties named above, in the absence of floor plans, internal layouts and levels of the rooms within the neighbouring receptors have been assumed from external inspections and photographs.

• In relation to the room layouts for these assumed surrounding properties, 4 metre room depths have been assumed for residential spaces, unless the building form dictated otherwise. Floor levels have been assumed for the surrounding properties. This dictates the level of the working plane and is therefore relevant to the DD analysis.

Summary

14.214 Detailed daylight, sunlight and overshadowing assessments have been completed based upon a 3D computer of the existing Site, Proposed Scheme and surrounding properties. This has been created using a photogrammetric model, measured survey, site photography and planning information.

14.37

14.215 A total of 872 windows serving 517 rooms within 24 properties have been assessed for daylight. A total of 40 windows were relevant for a sunlight assessment within 6 properties. For overshadowing, 1 amenity area was assessed.

14.216 The residual daylight effects to 1 to 30 Heol Staughton, 88, 84, 80, 36, 26, 16, 8, 2 Taff Embankment are considered to be Not Significant.

14.217 The residual daylight effects to Cardiff and Vale College, The Shire Hall Care Home, Overstone Court - Unit 2A, Unit 2B, Unit 2C, Unit 3A and Unit 3C, 136, 132, 128, 118, 110 Taff Embankment, Turner Court and 42 Taff Embankment are considered to be Significant. These range in significance from negligible to minor to moderate to major.

14.218 The residual sunlight effects to The Shire Hall Care Home, Overstone Court Units 2A, 2C and 3A, 84 and 80 Taff Embankment and Turner Court are considered to be Not Significant.

14.219 The residual sunlight effects to Cardiff and Vale College, 1-30 Heol Staughton, Overstone Court - Unit 3C, 88, 42, 36, 26, 16, 8 and 2 Taff Embankment are considered to be Significant. These range in significance from minor to moderate to major.

14.220 This residual effect to Canal Park Children’s Playground is considered to be Not Significant.

14.221 From the above daylight and sunlight assessments, if one utilises the 20% BRE Guideline for these assessments, the impact of the Proposed Scheme on Suffolk House, Former Browings (South) and Land North-East Of Dumballs Road – North and South is considered Significant. The impact on Forming Brownings (North) is considered Not Significant.

14.222 It should be noted that the conclusions drawn are upon the maximum parameters. In reality, the Proposed Scheme would be below these parameters in much of the Site and an illustrative scheme was also appraised showing that effects will be ameliorated through detailed design.

14.223 Table 14.19 provides a summary of the effects, receptors, residual effects and a conclusion as to whether the effect is Significant or Not Significant. As mentioned above, the cumulative assessments do not change the Operational Phase conclusions.

Table 14.19: Summary of Effects, Receptors and Residual Effects

Effect Receptor Residual Effect Is the Effect Significant?

Operational Phase

Reduction in daylight to adjacent existing properties

1 to 30 Heol Staughton, 88, 84, 80, 36, 26, 16, 8, 2 Taff Embankment

Negligible NO

Overstone Court - Unit 3A

Negligible to Minor Adverse

YES

136, 132, 128, 118, 110 Taff Embankment, Turner

Minor Adverse YES

14.38


Court and 42 Taff Embankment Overstone Court - Unit 2A, Unit 3C

The Shire Hall Care Home, Overstone Court - Unit 2B, Unit 2C.

Minor to Moderate Adverse

YES


Moderate to Major Adverse

YES

Reduction in sunlight to adjacent existing properties

The Shire Hall Care Home, Overstone Court Units 2A, 2C and 3A, 84 and 80 Taff Embankment and Turner Court

Negligible NO

1-30 Heol Staughton, Overstone Court - Unit 3C, 88, 42, 36, 26, 16, 8 and 2 Taff Embankment

Minor Adverse YES


Moderate to Major Adverse

YES

Increase in overshadowing to adjacent amenity spaces

Canal Park Children’s Playground

Negligible NO

Reduction in daylight to adjacent future properties

Land at Suffolk House, Former Browings (South) and Land North-East Of Dumballs Road – North and South

Adverse YES

Former Browings (North)

Negligible Adverse NO

Reduction in sunlight to adjacent future properties

Land at Suffolk House, Former Browings (South) and Land North-East Of Dumballs Road – North and South

Adverse YES

14.39


Former Browings (North)

Negligible NO

14.40

References

1 Welsh Government (2014) Planning for Sustainable Building – Practice Guide. Practice Guidance. Available at https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2018-09/planning-sustainable-buildings.pdf Accessed 22.10.2020. 2 PJ Littlefair, 2011, BRE Report 209, Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight: A guide to good practice 3 PJ Littlefair, 2011, BRE Report 209, Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight: A guide to good practice. Page 1 4 Laser scan survey data by Cloud 10 Ltd. Received 11 September 2020

https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2018-09/planning-sustainable-buildings.pdf

https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2018-09/planning-sustainable-buildings.pdf

14. Daylight, Sunlight & Overshadowing - Embankment, Cardiff · 2021. 1. 18. · 14. Daylight,...

Documents

Transcript of 14. Daylight, Sunlight & Overshadowing - Embankment, Cardiff · 2021. 1. 18. · 14. Daylight,...