RESIDENTIAL AMENITY - planning.ucc.ieplanning.ucc.ie/wp-content/uploads/sites/86/2017/11/2.-Residential... · guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight which

UCC Crow’s Nest Development

RESIDENTIAL AMENITY

UCC-CN-E1-ResidentialAmenity-roc-171117

S4 – For Planning

17th November 2017

Revision Details:

UCC Crow’s Nest Development Architects Design Statement

2

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION 3

2. IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT 5

3. OVER-SHADOWING 6

A) OVER-SHADOWING OF EXISITING ADJOINING BUILDINGS

B) OVER-SHADOWING WITHIN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 9

C) OVER-SHADOWING & SUNLIGHT TO AMENITY SPACES – EXISTING AMENITY SPACES 10

D) OVER-SHADOWING & SUNLIGHT TO AMENITY SPACES – PROPOSED AMENITY SPACES 12

4. OVER-LOOKING OF ADJOINING BUILDINGS 13

A) FROM THE PODIUM GARDEN TO THE EXISTING HOUSES TO THE SOUTH. 17

B) PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND EXISTING HOUSES TO THE SOUTH & EAST 18

C) PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND THE EXISTING STUDENT VILLAGE TO THE WEST 22

5. OVER-LOOKING WITHIN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 25

6. DAYLIGHT / SKYLIGHT, EXISTING BUILDINGS 28

7. DAYLIGHT, PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 31

8. WIND MICRO CLIMATE ASSESSMENT 32

9. VISUAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 33


3

1. Introduction

The Crow’s Nest is a well known landmark in Cork, the site of a famous public house of the same name located at

the junction of city and hinterland where Wilton Road comes downhill to meet the Lee valley at the Carrigrohane

Road. The public house was destroyed in a fire in 2004, and since that time the site has been derelict.

Image: The now derelict Crow’s Nest public house & restaurant

The land was acquired by University College Cork (UCC) for their new Student Housing and Student Wellness

Centre. Its location at the junction of the city and the suburbs makes it an appropriate position for an important

College facility which will extend the public and semi-public realm at an important node in the city, and enhance

the streetscape with activity and life with student facilities and a café at a location which has become degraded by

dereliction and high volumes of traffic.

UCC have appointed a design team to make a flagship project to create the best student housing in the city

supported by the highest quality student communal facilities, a state of the art medical/wellness centre and a café

which will become an important meeting place for members of the public, students and staff of the University.

The proposed development consists of the demolition of the existing buildings onsite and the construction of a

distinctive building clad in light coloured clay brick, with a gross floor area of approximately 8,664 sq.m. The form

of the building is proposed as four slender vertical elements rising from a plinth or podium containing a students’


4

garden, set over an entrance and reception zone at street level, open and welcoming to the public as well as to

the student population. The building will vary in height from nine storeys over podium to seven storeys over

podium, with a smaller gateway element sheltering a lift and generous staircase linking entrance to podium level

and mediating the scale between two storey houses on Wilton Road and the new building. The accommodation

includes 255 student bed-spaces, ancillary student facilities, a medical facility / wellness centre and a café / snack

bar onto the Carrigrohane Road as well as bicycle spaces, ancillary site and landscaping works.

Image: View of the proposed development from Victoria Cross


5

2. Impact of the Development

The impact that the proposed development has on adjoining buildings been assessed on an on-going basis

throughout the design evolution. This on-going assessment has been a driver for a number of design decisions in

relation to the proposed massing, window locations and internal arrangements. In parallel with the impact on

adjoining buildings the amenity of the residents in the proposed building has also been considered and assessed

continually. The first action has been to eliminate impacts where they exist. Where this was not possible the

impacts have been minimized and mitigation measures proposed. This report sets out the possible impacts on

residential amenity together with the design measures to eliminate and mitigate these impacts. This report should

be read in conjunction with the accompanying architectural drawings.

The metrics used to assess the impact on both the adjoining buildings and the proposed residents are set out

below;

- Over-shadowing of buildings, existing

- Over-shadowing of amenity spaces – existing

- Over-shadowing of amenity spaces – proposed

- Over-looking of existing buildings

- Over-looking within the proposed development

- Daylight / Skylight, existing buildings

- Daylight, proposed development

- Pedestrian Level Wind Micro-Climate Assessment

- Visual Impact Assessment

These metrics are expanded upon in this report and in a number of technical reports contained as Appendices to

this document and submitted with the application.

The following naming convention is used throughout this report to refer to the proposed development;

Image: Terminology - Block Numbers


6

3. Over-shadowing

A) Overshadowing of Existing Adjoining Buildings

Over-shadowing of existing adjoining buildings has been minimized throughout the design evolution.

This has been achieved in a number of ways, naturally due to the building’s orientation to the north and

east of existing adjoining building and also by carving out spaces between the vertical blocks, allowing

sunlight, air and views through. Instead of a perimeter scheme, blocking all light penetration, a more

open, permeable scheme is proposed as set out in the diagrams below;

The design evolution has concentrated on ensuring that these blocks could be as slim as possible, allowing

sunlight and views to permeate, (see proposed View 15 in the photomontage report for a visual representation of

this). This manipulation produces a less “bulky” massing compared to the more traditional perimeter scheme

indicated in the diagram above and allows the accommodation to read as slim vertical clusters with space, light

and air between instead of an oppressive “wall” of accommodation.


7

The over-shadowing impacts of the proposed development on adjoining buildings could be summarized as

follows;

o As demonstrated in the shadow studies contained in separate report the proposed building

has no overshadowing impact on the two-storey dwellings to the south at Victoria Cross,

(currently in short term rental use). This is due to the orientation of the proposed site to the

north of these buildings. An additional study assessing the impacts on the residential amenity

spaces of these dwellings is contained in Section 3 of the IES report.

o The proposed development has minor over-shadowing impacts on adjoining buildings to the

north at Carrigrohane Road. This impact is limited to late afternoon/early evening time during

Spring & Autumn. An additional study assessing the impact on the residential amenity spaces

of these dwellings is contained in Section 3 of the IES report.

o The proposed development has a minor over-shadowing impact on some sleeping

accommodation and bathrooms in the existing student village (‘The Village”) to the west of the

proposed building. No kitchens or common rooms/living rooms are affected. The impact

occurs in the morning only, after 10am throughout the year, the proposed building has no

over-shadowing impact. The impact here is assessed at minor in line with the guidance in the

BRE report – Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight which states “2.2.8….bedrooms

should be analysed although they are less important”. For full details please refer to the

Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Report.


8

Image: 10H00 on 21st March, - Existing Image: 10H00 on 21st March - Proposed

The Images above show the additional over-shadowing on the student village to the west in the morning.

Image: 12H00 on 21st March - Existing Image: 12H00 on 21st March - Proposed

Summary

The Images above show that this additional over-shadowing impact is no longer visible after 10am in the morning.

This impact is assessed at minor in line with the guidance in the BRE report – Site Layout Planning for Daylight

and Sunlight which states “2.2.8….bedrooms should be analysed although they are less important”. For full details

please refer to the Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Report.


9

B) Over-shadowing within the proposed development

Over-shadowing within the proposed development has been assessed in conjunction with the impact on adjoining

buildings. The design approach of breaking down the massing into slim vertical clusters is of significant help in this

regard, allowing sunlight and daylight to penetrate deep into the building throughout the course of a day and

throughout different times of the year. This can clearly be seen in the images below where different facades of the

building all receive direct sunlight at different times of the day, (excluding the north façade outside of mid-

summer). Facades receiving direct sunlight are highlighted in red for clarity. For full details please refer to the

Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Report.

Image: 12H00 on 21st March Image: 14H00 on 21st March

Image: 12H00 on 21st June Image: 14H00 on 21st June

Summary

All facades, excluding north facing facades outside of mid-summer, receive direct sunlight throughout the day and

throughout the year. This, when read in conjunction with the daylight studies in Section 7 of this report, will provide

adequate sunlight and daylight for the proposed development.


10

C) Over-Shadowing & Sunlight to Amenity Spaces – Existing Amenity Spaces

Over-shadowing of adjoining and proposed amenity spaces has also been assessed in detail. It is demonstrated

that the adjoining amenity spaces, (existing gardens), to the south are unaffected by the proposed development

and can be described as being adequately sunlit throughout the year. This is in accordance with the BRE’s 2011

guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight which states that for a space to appear

adequately sunlit throughout the year, at least 50% of the garden area should receive at least 2 hours of sunlight

on 21st March.

Existing houses to the South, (currently in short term residential use):

Image: Cells coloured if they receive more than 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March - Proposed

Summary

The proposed development has no overshadowing impact on the existing residential amenity spaces to the south.

Furthermore, these spaces can all be said to be adequately sunlit throughout the year.

For full details please refer to the Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Report.


11

Existing Houses to the North of the Proposed Site:

Image: Existing Images: Proposed

As demonstrated by the images above the proposed development has a negligible impact on the amenity space,

(private rear gardens), of the dwellings to the north of the proposed site. These spaces, (other than a portion of the

spaces shaded by the dwellings themselves), can all be said to be adequately sunlit throughout the year. This is in

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

that for a space to appear adequately sunlit throughout the year, at least 50% of the garden area should receive at

least 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March.

Summary

The proposed development has a negligible overshadowing impact on the existing residential amenity spaces of

the dwellings to the north of the proposed site. Furthermore, these spaces can all be said to be adequately sunlit

throughout the year.



12

D) Over-Shadowing & Sunlight to Amenity Spaces – Proposed Amenity Spaces

The predicted sunlight to the amenity spaces within the proposed development has been assessed to verify that

the amenity for residents will fall within acceptable parameters.

It is demonstrated that the proposed amenity space, (the podium garden), can be described as being adequately

sunlit throughout the year. This is in accordance with the BRE’s 2011 guidance document Site Layout Planning for

Daylight and Sunlight which states that for a space to appear adequately sunlit throughout the year, at least 50%

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

The design approach of breaking down the massing into slim vertical clusters allows sunlight and daylight to

penetrate deep into the site throughout the course of a day and throughout different times of the year.

Image: Cells coloured if they receive more than 2 hours of sunlight on 21st March - Proposed


Image: Permeability of light & views maintained by manipulating the massing of the building


13

B) Over-looking of Adjoining Buildings

Over-looking from the proposed development has been assessed in detail and minimized in a number of ways.

The manipulation and detailed placement of the vertical clusters has been arrived at with a view at all times to

minimizing over-looking. The proposed building seeks to present gable ends where adjoining structures are in

closer proximity and allows views where this is possible without overlooking. Over-looking of existing private

amenity spaces has also been assessed and minimized, with the more private areas close to the dwellings

prioritized. Mitigation measures, (screening), have also been incorporated to minimize over-looking of these areas.

Over-looking minimized by:

Image: Gables indicated in red

A) Gables used to reduce overlooking

B) Adequate separation distances

C) Screening of windows within acceptable separation distances


14

Over-looking – Guidance Used.

Except in the most isolated rural location, few households can claim not to be overlooked to some degree. Even in

suburban terraced houses the rear of a household’s back garden is typically over-looked from the first floor of a

neighbour’s house. What this document seeks to arrive at is what degree of over-looking is considered reasonable

in an urban environment. For example, overlooking of gardens may be unacceptable where it would result in an

intrusive, direct and uninterrupted view from a main room, to the most private area of the garden, which is often

the main sitting out area adjacent to the property. As a general rule of thumb this area is the first 3-4 metres of a

rear garden, closest to the residential property, which is not yet overlooked by its neighbour at first floor level.

The nature of the proposed site in an inner urban area, (developed pre 1920’s), requires a detailed assessment of

what is acceptable in terms of overlooking. Detailed guidance has been sought in various guidance documents

around the developed world to arrive at a best balance between the sustainable use of urban land and protecting

the residential amenity of existing dwellings, buildings and private spaces.

Detailed guidance is not currently available in Ireland for what is considered reasonable in urban areas. The

detailed guidance used here to assess the proposed development is taken from the UK and is considered the

most relevant available in terms of legal system, (common law), as well as the relevant social & economic

sensibilities. The guidance is sourced from the Department of Infrastructure in the UK with more detailed guidance

from a number of individual councils, (referenced below where relevant). The guidance noted ties in well with the

primary metric typically used in suburban Irish houses of 22m between opposing first floor windows – see Table 1:

Main to Main, Minimum Distance of 21m.


15

Table 1 below seeks to ensure good design, particularly in residential areas, by ensuring that adequate space

about buildings is achieved, preventing obtrusive over-looking.

Table 1, the definitions, and the diagrams below are taken from Annex 2 “Space About Dwellings” from Calderdale

Council in the UK, (Wrexham & Leicester councils amongst others have similar guidelines). These documents are

based on the guidance issued in the Policy Planning Statements PPS 7, Annex A of the Department of

Infrastructure in the UK which sets out regional planning guidelines to ensure orderly and consistent development.

Relevant Definitions:

Habitable rooms - include: Lounge/Living Room, Dining Room, Conservatory, Kitchen, Bedroom, Study

Non-habitable rooms - include: Bathroom, Lavatory, Utility Room, Hall, Storm Porch, Stairway, Landing, Garage

Main Aspect - Main windows to Lounge/Living Rooms, Dining Rooms and Conservatories.

Secondary Aspect - windows to habitable rooms, but not the Main Aspect.

Possible Exceptions to Standards

The reference documents above note that there may be a need for making exceptions to the standards,

particularly when assessing alterations or conversions to Listed and historic buildings, developments in

Conservation Areas, change of use proposals, conversions, flat developments, infill developments, developments

in town centres, and other forms of residential proposal which may achieve wider Local objectives. In such cases

proposals will be assessed on their individual merit.


16

Screening - screening between habitable room windows may allow distances of less than those stated. However,

the screening should result in no undue loss of light to habitable room windows. Screens should generally rise 2m

above ground level and be built of appropriate durable materials.

In assessing a proposed development against Table 1 above it is necessary to define what is meant by “Primary

Sector” and “Secondary Sector”, see diagram below;

Image: A primary sector of view will be defined from habitable room windows by drawing a 45 line from both sides

of the window

In the sections hereunder, the proposed development is measured against the guidance noted above. This is dealt

with on an area by area basis:


17

A) From the podium garden to the existing houses to the south.

Image: Excerpt of P-006 First Floor Plan

Over-looking from ground floor level and the podium at this location is prevented by way of a landscaped screen

wall, constructed to a minimum height of 1.8m along this boundary at ground and first floor level, (see diagram

below). This wall is held back from the boundary on first floor level as indicated on Drawing P-006-First Floor Plan.

Drawing P-021-Section BB describes this area in detail.

Image: Section diagram along the southern boundary showing boundary screening to prevent overlooking. See

plan above for section marker.

Summary:

There will be no overlooking possible from this location.


18

B) Proposed development and existing houses to the South & East


The proposed distance between opposing windows in this location is far in excess of the 21m noted between Main

and Main, or front to Back, in Table 1, (ie between the student Common Room & the rear elevations).

The distance between glazed areas of the proposed development and the most private amenity spaces of these

dwellings is also in excess of 21m – see diagram below. The most private amenity area is taken as being the 4m

of garden space adjacent to the rear elevations of the houses.1

1 Refer to PPS 7, Annex A of the Department of Infrastructure in the UK which sets out regional planning guidelines to ensure orderly and

consistent development. Also to Annex 2 “Space About Dwellings” from Calderdale Council in the UK.


19

Image: Separation distances identified with red hatch. Most private amenity area identified with blue hatch

As an additional measure, to alleviate direct and uninterrupted overlooking of private amenity spaces to the south,

it is proposed to screen windows on the southern facade with vertical fins that will significantly reduce the area of

visibility from the windows on this elevation to narrow linear slots as per the diagram below.

Image: Plan diagram of visibility without screening


20

Image: Plan diagram of visibility with screening provided

This screening will be applied to all windows on the southern elevation of Block D as indicated on the architectural

drawings submitted, (excerpt below). This screening will have the effect of limiting over-looking, and the

perception of over-looking, of the middle and ends of the long rear gardens of the houses to the south. No view

will be possible of the more private amenity space close to the rear of the dwelling and no intrusive, direct and/or

uninterrupted views of this area will be possible.

Image: Extent of screening – refer to architectural plans submitted


21

Image: Typical screening detail

Summary

Overlooking between opposing windows is in the order of 26m – 30m with overlooking of the most private amenity

space in excess of the 21m recommended in Table 1 above, (and the common Irish referenced norm of 22m

between opposing windows above ground floor).

It is submitted that reasonable space has been provided between buildings in this area in order to minimise

overlooking into existing buildings.

Reasonable space has also been provided to prevent direct overlooking of the most private residential amenity

space adjacent to the rear of the dwellings.

Screening has been provided to windows on the southern elevation of Block D to prevent intrusive, direct and/or

uninterrupted views of the less private amenity area of the houses to the south, (these area will already attract an

element of over-looking from the first floor of the adjoining houses and the eastern block of the student village).


22

C) Proposed development and the existing student village to the West


The relevant separation distance noted in Table 1 between the side of the proposed new development and the

side of the existing student village development is 15m, (Secondary Aspect to Secondary Aspect).

As can be seen in the diagram below the dimension proposed between these opposing windows, (face of glass to

face of glass - in plan), is 14.356m. It is submitted that this minor deviation from the recommendations is not of

material effect and once the distances between windows in section is taken into account the distance between

opposing windows is in excess of the recommended 15m, (see Section Detail image below).


23

Image: Plan detail at western boundary to Student Village

Image: Section detail at western boundary to Student Village


24

It is also worth noting that there are a limited number of windows that directly overlap with the bedroom windows

of the student village development. An abstract overlay of the proposed windows in the western elevation of Block

A and existing windows of the eastern elevation of the student village is given below. Landscaping to the boundary

edge will aid in screening and prevent overlooking from the lower levels. Separation distances are also in excess

of those proposed in the extant permission on the site, (planning reference 09/33647).

Image: Windows in Block D, (in red), overlaid with the windows of the student village development.

Summary

The separation distance between windows on opposing elevations, when measured at the relevant angle, is in

excess of the 15m guidance given in Table 1.

It is submitted that, in line with the detailed guidance available and the nature of this urban site, reasonable space

has been provided between buildings in this area in order to minimise overlooking at this location, (see also

reference to relevant urban street widths in Section 5 below).


25

C) Over-looking within the Proposed Development

Over-looking between rooms and spaces within the proposed development has been assessed in detail and

minimized in a number of ways. The manipulation and detailed placement of the vertical clusters has been arrived

at with a view at all times to minimizing over-looking. The proposed clusters are positioned and rotated to present

gable ends where adjoining structures are in close proximity and allows views where this is possible without

creating overlooking issues. Although the gable ends do have windows they are minimized and significantly fewer

in number to the windows along the length of the blocks.

Image: Gables indicated in red – Block orientated to reduce over-looking

The careful positioning of common room at opposing corners of the individual blocks also works aids is allowing

more generous view where this is possible whilst restricting views in sensitive locations as indicated in the

diagram below.

Image: Dynamic Common Room Views


26

The proposed development is an urban piece of architecture on a gateway site in the inner urban area of Cork

City, developed pre 1920’s. The expression and “feel” of the development is unmistakably urban as are the

spaces created within the development. In this regard the distances between the blocks have been judged with

regard to the distances provided in urban streets. The distance between the gable of block A and Block B is 11.9m

and the distance between Block B and the Gable of Block C is 12.22m. These dimensions are generous in urban

terms compared with cities around Ireland, Curved St in Temple Bar is approximately 7m wide, Cow’s Lane

nearby is approximately 9m wide and Grafton Street, Dublin varies in width between 10m and 11m wide at its

narrower points. In Cork, Oliver Plunkett St, Princes St, Marlboro St and Cook St are all between 8.5m and 12.5m

in width and all would have traditionally had residential uses above ground floor.

It is submitted that the separation distances between the proposed blocks within the development are acceptable

in this regard and also comparable with the guidance in Table A above of “Main to Side” of 12m or “Secondary to

Side” of 9m.

One area of the proposed development that has closer separation distances than noted above is between the

southern elevation of Block A and the Northern elevation of Block D. The separation in this location between

windows is 6.9m, (from plane of glass to plane of glass). This is still comparable with numerous urban situations,

(eg Curved St, Temple Bar), and at this location the position of windows has been carefully judged to avoid direct

opposing windows as indicated in the diagram below.

Image: Offset windows between Block A and Block D


27

Summary

It is submitted that in the proposed urban context, and with the design and mitigation measures incorporated, the

proposed development is acceptable in terms of over-looking between opposing rooms within the development

with the separation distances provided.


28

D) Daylight / Skylight, existing buildings

The impact on neighboring buildings has been considered using the Vertical Sky Component metric or VSC in line

with the recommendations of 'Site layout planning for daylight and sunlight: a guide to good practice' published by

the BRE.

It should be noted that the guidance in the BRE document is not mandatory and the Report itself states ‘although it

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

in site layout design”.

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

development and should therefore be used with flexibility and caution when dealing other types of sites. The VSC

metric is a particularly blunt instrument and should be judged in conjunction with the array of other studies on

residential impacts carried out and detailed in this report. BRE’s 2011 guidance state in its own Introduction that

“Although the BRE guide gives numerical guidelines, these should be interpreted flexibly since natural lighting is

only one of many factors in site layout design. In special circumstances the developer or planning authority may

wish to use different target values. For example, in a historic city centre, or in an area with modern high rise

buildings, a higher degree of obstruction may be unavoidable if new developments are to match the height and

proportions of existing buildings.”

The overall impact should be considered alongside the other criteria noted in this report and the urban, social,

economic and environmental benefits of the development as a whole. These benefits relate to the immediate site

environs, Cork City as a whole, the Munster region and national policy.

Despite the limitations noted in the BRE 2011 documents, the site performs well in relation to the metrics

considered in this report. Based on this study the proposed development is broadly in line with the

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

It is acknowledged that a number of windows in the Student Village to the west of the proposed development will

have a reduction in VSC. These windows are all to bedroom and bathroom areas as identified on the layout plans

of the building, as identified on the drawing below;


29

Image: Bedrooms & bathroom located on eastern boundary with kitchens/livings rooms to internal courtyard.

It should be noted that a differentiation is recognised in the BRE guide between impacts on different room types.

The guide notes that “2.2.8 ……bedrooms should be analysed although they are less important” and that

“Kitchens and bedrooms are less important, although care should be taken not to block too much sun.” In this

regard it is worth directing the reader to the over-shadowing study detailed in Section 3 of this report noting that

the proposed development will have a minor impact in terms of over-shadowing on the Student Village.


30

The resultant impact of the proposed development in this area is therefore identified as a “Minor Adverse” impact

on the scale contained in Appendix 1 of the BRE guidance.

The impact on adjoining buildings to the south has also been assessed in the Daylight, Sunlight and

Overshadowing Study submitted. It is noted that these buildings are currently in short term residential use, (short

term lets and student accommodation). This was established during a leaflet drop to all of the adjoining

neighbours undertaken by UCC in advance of submitting this application.

The first building directly to the south of the proposed development is owned by the vendor of the site that is the

subject of this application and he is aware that UCC are lodging an application for student accommodation on the

site.

It is acknowledged that a number of windows in these buildings will have a reduction in VSC. Due to the same

factors as referenced above this would result in a “Minor Adverse” impact on the scale contained in Appendix 1 of

the BRE guidance.

Summary

In the context of the proposed site as an inner urban area, (developed pre 1920’s), and the imperative to propose

a sustainable use of urban land, it is considered reasonable that the development may have a minor adverse

impact on adjoining buildings. The use of the adjoining buildings as student accommodation / short stay summer

accommodation is taken into account in this regard as are the recommendations/guidance of the BRE 2011

document in relation to the requirements of bedrooms and the limitations of its guidance outside of low rise

suburban locations.

The overall impact should be considered alongside the other criteria noted in this report and the urban, social,

economic and environmental benefits of the development as a whole. These benefits relate to the immediate site

environs, Cork City as a whole, the Munster region and national policy.


31

E) Daylight, Proposed Development

A full study of the daylight amenity of the proposed development has been undertaken using a 3D modelling and

specialist radiance software. Average daylight factor is used as the most relevant metric in considering the quality

of the spaces proposed.

A full range of spaces throughout the development are modelled with the daylight factor indicated in the attached

Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Study contained in separate report.

The report demonstrates that all of the spaces considered meet or exceed the minimum average daylight factors

suggested as good practice in the BRE 2011 Guide.

Summary

It is submitted that the amenity and quality of natural daylight in the proposed development is sufficient to ensure a

high quality internal environment for all residents and staff.


32

F) Wind Micro Climate Assessment

The Wind Micro-Climate created by the proposed development has been assessed with a full report including in

this planning submission. This report notes that with localised mitigation measures the proposed environment

would be suitable for its intended purpose, (ie walking or strolling). These local mitigation measures have been

indicated on the submitted landscaping drawings P-050 and P-051.

The report indicates that there is no significant impact on the adjoining residential properties from the proposed

development.

For full details refer to the Pedestrian level wind microclimate report provided in separate report.

Image: Wind microclimate study


33

G) Visual Impact Assessment

A Visual Impact Assessment has been carried out using 15 verified photomontages. The evaluation method used

for the appraisal makes reference to the “Guidelines on the information to be contained in Environmental Impact

Statements” prepared by the Environmental Protection Agency 2002, with reference to Advice Notes on Current

Practice (in the preparation of Environmental Impact Statements), EPA 2003 and “Guidelines for Landscape and

Visual Impact Assessment”, by the Landscape Institute, 3rd Edition 2013.

A survey of the potential visibility of the proposed development was carried out by McCullough Mulvin on

numerous occasions between October 2016 and November 2017. This onsite survey, together with a desktop

survey of possible locations was assessed having regard to the contents of the Cork City Development Plan 2015

– 2021 and in particular the maps objectives in Volume 2, Views & Prospects. This assessment lead to the

selection of viewpoints from which the verified photomontages have been produced. Viewpoints were chosen to

correspond to the relevant Views and Prospects noted in the Cork City Development Plan and to place the

proposed building in its local and citywide context.

This report details the predicted impacts on the visual environment, local to the site and in the wider city context.

For full details please refer to the Visual Impact Assessment submitted together with the Verified Photomontage

Report.

Documents

RESIDENTIAL AMENITY - planning.ucc.ieplanning.ucc.ie/wp-content/uploads/sites/86/2017/11/2.-Residential... · guidance document Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight which