11. ASSESSMENT
11.1 The former Arnewood Court Turkey Farm (the wider site) lies to the west of Barrows Lane. It comprises a collection of barns, sheds and other structures in a mix of materials and states of repair (many now either undergoing repair or have recently been re-clad) lying either side of a central spine road. There are also other areas of hardstanding, and a parking area with a below ground waste treatment plant adjacent to Barrows Lane. To the west, the buildings are mainly residential, but there is another smaller employment site opposite. The site lies opposite the Sway Tower Conservation Area, in which and lying close to the application site, are several listed buildings.
11.2 Plots D and F, the subject of this application, formed part of the certificate of lawfulness application relating to establishing the sui generis use (for pet fish breeding, hatching and rearing under 17/00520). The remaining building (Plot F) is a long nissen hut-shaped building with brick end elevations and a corrugated roof, whilst Plot D comprises a concrete base with a low brick wall. The proposal is to remove these structures and replace them with a single building. The dimensions of this building would be 20m x 14m with a height to ridge of 4m (the existing nissen hut has a height of 2.8m and external footprint of 105.9 square metres). The external materials would comprise profiled steel cladding (green) with a profiled roof containing eight rooflights (a reduction from the initial plan). It is also proposed to change the use of this building to B8/ B1 (b-c) use, i.e. storage or light industrial uses.
11.3 The key considerations for the proposed change of use and the redevelopment of the plots are:
- The principle of the development;
- Its design and impact on the adjoining conservation area;
- Traffic issues; and
- Whether there would be any impact on the amenities of adjoining dwellings.
11.4 Policy SP43, which seeks to retain existing employment uses, and Policy DP44, which relates to redeveloping existing employment sites, are both relevant to this proposal. The latter policy permits redevelopment where there would be minimal additional effect on the visual impact of the site in the landscape, or amenities of nearby properties or on traffic and other disturbances. As the two plots have already been confirmed as having an employment use, the change to B8/ B1 would not affect this principle and would maintain this status in a more productive manner. The proposal would therefore comply with policy.
11.5 It is acknowledged that there has been a gradual change to the wider site recently with improvements made to the former buildings (many of which were in a very poor state of repair), and this proposal would continue that change. In terms of the size of the resulting building, this would be similar to a number of the other buildings on the site, and the materials would also match those that have been used elsewhere. In this respect, the proposal is therefore considered to be acceptable, and would not have a detrimental visual impact outside the site. Its location adjacent to a conservation area and listed buildings is acknowledged, but it is not considered that this proposal, which would improve the appearance of the particular plots, would harm their character and appearance.
11.6 Rooflights are proposed (8 reduced from 16) and, although few of the buildings have rooflights, it is not considered that these would give rise to significant light pollution of the area. The applicant's agent has advised that activities at the site take place during normal working hours and night-time pollution is therefore very unlikely. A condition is included restricting external lighting.
11.7 Objections have been received in relation to traffic and the likely increase in HGVs. However, these objections refer to the current level of traffic which is argued to have increased, and the existing damage to the lanes. Given that these plots already had an employment use, it is not considered that the new use for Plots D and F would generate a significant increase in traffic. There are no objections from Hampshire Highways.
11.8 The Parish Council is concerned with the introduction of a B1 use because of its impact on the amenities of adjoining dwellings. Whilst the majority of the wider site is used for B8 uses, B1 uses (light industrial/ research and development, but not offices), are considered appropriate in close proximity to residential development as they tend to include quiet activities, and therefore would be acceptable in this location without adversely harming adjoining amenities.
11.9 For the above reasons, permission is therefore recommended.