Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011

ITEM 9

APPLICATION NO. 10/02729/OUTN APPLICATION TYPE OUTLINE APPLICATION - NORTH REGISTERED 26.11.2010 APPLICANT Stannah Management Services Ltd SITE Plot 3 Andover Commercial Park (Former Andover Airfield), Road, Andover / ANDOVER TOWN (MILLWAY) PROPOSAL Outline - Erection of building for B2 use, with associated B8 and B1 uses (Revision to Plot 3 approved 09/02392/OUTN) AMENDMENTS None CASE OFFICER Mr Jason Owen

Background paper (Local Government Act 1972 Section 100D)

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The application is presented to NAPC as it represents development the Head of Planning and Building considers to be of significant local interest.

2.0 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 2.1 The application site (4.85Ha) is located to the west of Andover, south of the A303 and north west of Monxton Road. The site was previously part of an airfield, but is no longer in use as such. Indeed recent engineering and construction activity at the site has begun to transform the land into a Business Park. The current application site (which represents a smaller parcel of the approved Business Park) has been re-engineered to achieve a level site. The site is currently exposed chalk/earth.

2.2 The application site is visible (to varying degrees) from a number of locations around the site - in particular A303(T), A343, Red Post Lane and Monxton Road. The existing landscape features and change in levels, particularly where the A303(T) is in a cutting, limit the extent of views into the site.

2.3 The land is allocated in the Test Valley Borough Local Plan for Class B1, B2 and B8 uses. (Policy AND04.1)

2.4 Planning Permission for the redevelopment of circa 50 Ha of land has been granted (see Para 4.1 below).

3.0 PROPOSAL 3.1 The proposed development is to erect a building for occupation by an identified end-user (Stannah). The proposed operations at the site would comprise uses falling within Class B2 (general industrial) with ancillary B1 (offices), and B8 (storage and distribution) – as defined in the Use Classes Order.

16 Page 1 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011

3.2 The application is in Outline form with only “access” being a matter of detail to be considered at this stage. All other matters (Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale) are Reserved for later approval should Outline permission be granted. The application is submitted with plans and details in relation to anticipated elevations, appearance, site layout and areas for landscaping, parking etc. However for the purposes of determining the application these are purely illustrative.

3.3 Although the application is in Outline form it is a requirement that the applicant sets out what the development parameters are of the proposed building. These are as follows:

 The total floor space provision for the proposed development is 24,034 sq.m.  Office elements to be arranged across 2 storeys on the northern elevation of the building (facing the A303)  Industrial floor space would have a generally clear internal height of 7m  The main body of the building would be approximately 12m high  The building measures approximately 290m long and 88m wide  A separate facility to allow for the testing of lifts is provided for. Option 1 of the illustrative scheme provides for a feature 23.3m high which Option 2 is 26.9m high. See plans attached.  Plant and equipment would be installed within the building  A curved roof to the building is anticipated.

The accompanying supporting information has been formed on the basis of these parameters.

3.4 It is anticipated that the proposal would provide employment to approximately 700 employees. Access to the plot would be via the new Hundred Acre/Monxton Road gyratory that leads into the Airfield site and onto its own internal road network.

3.5 The planning application is accompanied by a full Environmental Statement (ES) that has assessed the following matters in detail:

 Alternatives  Economics  Landscape and visual impact  Transport and access  Air Quality  Noise  Water resources  Ecology  Ground conditions  Archaeology and Cultural heritage  Soils resources.  External lighting.

17 Page 2 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011

Technical Appendices and a Non-Technical Summary supporting the ES has also been included.

3.6 The application also includes  Design, Access and Planning Statement  Transport Statement.

4.0 HISTORY 4.1 There have been a number of proposals for the site since 1991. The most relevant history is set out below (reverse chronological order).

4.2 10/01918/SCRN - Screening opinion in accordance with Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 1999 - Proposed Outline Planning permission for B1, B2 and B8 uses in relation to Plot 3 as defined by 09/02392/OUTN. Response issued in September 2010.

4.3 10/01919/SCON - Scoping opinion under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 1999 - Proposed Outline Planning permission for B1, B2 and B8 uses in relation to Plot 3 as defined by 09/02392/OUTN. Response issued in December 2010.

4.4 09/02392/OUTN - Erection of business park with both outline and full details comprising: Outline - Plots 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 for uses comprising business (Class B1), storage and distribution (Class B8), hotel (Class C1) and community building (class A1/D1), biomass plant and associated works and Full Permission for Plot 4 for uses comprising storage and distribution (class B8), access roads, vehicle maintenance building, car and lorry parking, landscaping and associated works. Permission granted in March 2010.

4.5 09/01912/SCON - Scoping opinion under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 1999 - Business Park, in November 2009.

4.6 09/01911/SCRN - Screening opinion in accordance with Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 1999 - Business Park, in October 2009.

4.7 07/01951/OUTN - Erection of Business Park with both Outline and Full details comprising : Outline - Plots 1, 2, 3 and 5 for uses comprising business (Class B1), storage and distribution (Class B8), hotel (Class C1) and community building (Class A1/D1), biomass plant and associated works, and Full - Unit 4 for uses comprising storage and distribution (Class B8), access roads, vehicle maintenance building, car and lorry parking, landscaping, fuel island, vehicle wash, weigh axle reader and associated works (Amended description). Permission subject to conditions in October 2009.

4.8 06/03567/CLPN - Certificate of Lawfulness for proposed works - improvement of the A303/Monxton Road intersection, Hundred Acre Corner Roundabout and Monxton Roundabout to provide access to Andover Airfield, comprising road and footway realignments and the construction of two bridges. Certificate Issued in February 2007.

18 Page 3 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011

4.9 06/03181/SCON - Scoping opinion under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 1999 - Erection of business development (Class B1, B2 and B8 uses) and hotel conference facilities, in December 2006.

4.10 06/03172/SCON - Scoping opinion under the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 1999 - Erection of business development (Class B1, B2 and B8 uses) and hotel/conference facilities, in December 2006.

4.11 Planning permission 09/02392/OUTN This planning permission established both detailed (plot 4) and more general principles for the development of the 50Ha site. Reference to this planning permission and the accompanying Framework Plan also established how the site could be sub-divided into a number of smaller plots - of which Plot 3 (current application) is one. Each plot would cater for a particular type of occupier. The application also established thresholds of building sizes. Building sizes and uses for each of the plots under this permission are set out below.

4.12 Plot Use Max. Height Plot level (AOD) (Building)

1 Hotel & 16m 84.150 Comm. 10m 2 B8 13.5m 83.20 3 B1 12m 83.20 4 B8 18.1m (off FFL) 77.85

(internal FFL 79.050) 5 B1/B8 16m 75.850 6 B8 16m 78.50

7 Biomass 16m (28m flue) 78.50

4.13 Para 3.8 of the NAPC report for application 09/02392/OUTN (dated 28.01.10) sets out what was intended for Plot 3.

Plot 3 This Plot is located along the northern part of the site and, with the exception of the service road to Plot 4, shares a common boundary with the A303. This plot extends to 4.83Ha and is intended to be brought forward within the second Phase of development. The uses envisaged for this plot are Class B1 offices (3 storey – approx 10,405 sq.m) and smaller “office starter units” (approx. 6,781 sq.m). Details submitted for this plot are in Outline form. An indicative FFL of the buildings are stated as being 83.20(AOD).

Indicative height is stated as:  Offices – 12m.

19 Page 4 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011

5.0 CONSULTATIONS 5.1 Policy No objections. The site has been allocated as a business Park (AND04.1) that permits a range of uses including B1, B2 and B8.

5.2 Landscape Whilst I have no objection to a development of this scale on the Airfield site, it is unfortunate that the plot selected is too close to the perimeter of the site and the resulting visual impact on the A303 and views from the north is too great. It would be better sited on plot 2 which was proposed for the B8 uses in the outline permission and masterplan.

5.3 AND 04.1b The landscape infrastructure requirements for the Airfield site are set out in the AND 04 policies. These were then reflected in the masterplan that was approved with the planning permission(s) (09/02392/OUTN and 07/01951/OUTN) and in the S.106 agreement(s).

5.4 The landscape masterplan was drawn up to minimise the impact particularly on views from the A303(T) to accord with policy AND 04.1 b. This involved setting buildings back from the northern edge, presenting gable ends rather than full side profiles, use of smaller separate buildings, and the introduction of significant supplementary landscaping on the northern side to break up the bulk of buildings in views from the north – 35–65m width of on plot landscaping was shown on the landscape masterplan for plot 3.(see para 10.6.4 of the local plan). The masterplan(s) also envisaged a development of entirely B1 uses on plot 3, which would also have a requirement of 45% landscaping for each B1 plot (AND 04.2 e).

5.5 The ground level of plot 3 has already been re-graded to 83.2m AOD, this is some 4m higher than the base level for plot 4 currently under construction (79.05m). The visual impact of this proposal is compounded with the proposed siting and bulk of the building, and the lack of space for landscaping (with all the options). The opportunities for landscaping are further limited by the existing drainage swales along the existing access road and by the need for car parking in the remaining areas to the north of the proposed building.

20 Page 5 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011 5.6 There is no detailed information with the application about drainage requirements. It is however stated in the Water Resources section of the ES that swales/soakaways/ attenuation bodies will be required on site to deal with surface water. These will also take space and will need to be considered in the spatial design, these would not normally count as part of the 45% landscaping. There is no space for these elements in the sketch designs.

5.7 In relation to the proposed tower, whilst the local plan and outline planning permission envisaged landmark buildings/elements on the site, the tower illustrated does not appear to have many positive characteristics and it does not, in my view, come up to a standard expected for a landmark at the western entrance to Andover.

5.8 The illustrative material is rather too optimistic in terms of landscaping, and shows forest size trees at 12m+ height whereas new tree planting, where space permits, will be at 2-3m height with quite a long establishment period due to the prevailing soil conditions. It is likely that planting will take 15 – 20 years to become properly established, if there were space for such planting to start with.

5.9 Env. Health No objection subject to conditions. Full Consultation response contained at Appendix A.

5.10 No objections. Highways

5.11 Highways No objections. Agency

5.12 Env. Agency No objection subject to conditions.

5.13 Basingstoke No objections. and Deane BC

5.14 Hampshire The Ecology report now clarifies that the site area is County largely bare ground. No objections. Ecologist

5.15 Hampshire No objections. Site has been the subject of archaeological County assessment previously. Archaeologist

21 Page 6 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011 6.0 REPRESENTATIONS Expired 23.02.2011 Monxton PC Object but need to have some points explained:  Is there an increase in number of vehicles per hour and that the agreed position will not be exceeded.  What monitoring arrangements will be put in place to ensure traffic flow and volume keep within agreed levels?  Concern with no. of car parking spaces shown.  How can the villages be used as a ‘rat-run’?  “Landmark tower” – would like to see this with renewable energy.

Abbotts Ann Objects:  Concerned that the tower would be visually intrusive and visible over a wider area  Lighting should be designed to minimise sky-glow from direct lighting and reflection from building/surfaces  Concerned that additional B8 warehousing increases the total usage on the site which is supposed to be a mixed business park  Traffic controls imposed under 09/02392/OUTN be applied again  Suggests need for a tower could be minimised by placing, say 2-storeys, underground.

Penton Mewsey No objection: PC Some consideration should be given to the tower being located on the eastern side of the building and away from the nearby residents.

Penton Grafton No objection.

Andover Town Comments awaited (notification sent 02.02.11). Council

7.0 POLICY 7.1 Planning Policy Guidance/Statements PPS1 – Delivering Sustainable Developments; PPS1 Supplement: Planning and Climate Change; PPS4 Planning and sustainable Economic Development. PPS9 – Biodiversity and Geological Conservation; PPG13 – Transport; PPG16 – Archaeology and Planning; PPS22 – Renewable Energy PPG24 – Planning and Noise PPS25 – Development and Flood Risk.

22 Page 7 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011

7.2 South East Plan – May 2009: SP3 – Urban focus and urban renaissance; CC1 – Sustainable development; CC2 – Climate change; CC3 – Resource use; CC4 – Sustainable design and construction; CC6 – Sustainable communities and character of the environment; CC7 – Infrastructure and implementation; RE3 – Employment and land provision; T1 – Manage and invest; T2 – Mobility management; T4 – Parking; T5 – Travel plans and advice; T12 – Freight and site safeguarding; NRM1 – Sustainable water resources and groundwater quality; NRM2 – Water quality; NRM4 – Sustainable flood risk management; NRM5 – Conservation and improvement of biodiversity; NRM9 – Air Quality; NRM10 – Noise; NRM11 – Development design for energy efficiency and renewable energy; W2 – Sustainable design, construction and demolition; M1 – Sustainable construction.

7.3 Test Valley Borough Local Plan2006: (TVBLP) AND04.1 – employment land at Andover Business Park; AND04.2 – new landscape features at Andover Business Park; AND04.3 – on-site transport measures at Andover Business Park; AND04.4 – off-site transport measures at Andover Business Park; ENV01 – biodiversity and ecological conservation; ENV04 – Sites of importance for Nature Conservation; ENV08 – high quality agricultural land; ENV09 – water resources; ENV11 – archaeology and cultural heritage; HAZ02 – flooding; HAZ03 – pollution; HAZ04 – contaminated land; ESN16 – employment development within settlements; ESN30 – infrastructure provision with new development; ESN32 – renewable energy developments; TRA01 – travel generating development; TRA02 – parking standards; TRA04 – financial contributions to transport infrastructure; TRA05 – safe access; TRA06 – safe layouts; TRA07 – access for disabled people; TRA09 – impact on highway network; DES01 – landscape character;

23 Page 8 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011

DES02 – settlement character; DES03 – transport corridors; DES04 – route networks; DES05 – layout and siting; DES06 – scale, height and massing; DES07 – appearance, details and materials; DES08 – trees and hedgerows; DES09 – wildlife and amenity features; DES10 – new landscape planting; AME01 – privacy and private open space; AME02 – daylight and sunlight; AME03 – artificial light intrusion; AME04 – noise and vibration; AME05 – unpleasant emissions.

8.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 8.1 The main planning considerations are:  The principle of development;  Impact on landscape character  Impact on highway safety and highway infrastructure (local road network)  Impact on highway safety (Trunk Road – A303)  Parking provision  Noise  Air Quality  Ecology (on-site impacts)  Drainage (flooding and aquifer recharge)  Foul drainage  Archaeology  Impact on Conservation Areas  Impact on residential amenities by virtue of over looking, loss of light and shadow.  Impact on the setting of the adjacent Rights of Way network.

8.2 Principle of development The application site forms part of an already approved Business Park for uses falling within Classes B1 and B8 of the Use Classes Order (planning permission 09/02392/OUTN). This particular plot benefits from planning permission for B1 use.

8.3 The application site falls within the boundaries of the Andover Business Park (Policy AND04.1) as defined on the Inset Map of the TVBLP. The corresponding policy allocates the land for uses falling within Classes B1, B2 and B8. It is considered that the proposed development, in principle, is in accordance with the Development Plan.

24 Page 9 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011 Impact on landscape character 8.4 There are key local public views of the site from the Monxton Road roundabout, parts of Red Post Lane, and glimpsed views from the A303 (from the west and north). There are also longer distance views possible from both the local highway and the rights of way networks including from around Bury Hill Ring, around , the Abbotts Ann to Monxton road, footpath from Sarson Lane to Monxton Lane, footpath from Manor Farm, Monxton, and the footpath between Wiremead Lane and Sarson Lane.

8.5 The A303(T) physically separates the site from the built up area of Andover. However the large expanse of buildings and activity linked to the military operation to the east of the application site (also seen from the A303 from further distance), and glimpsed views of existing industrial buildings to the north (on the Portway Industrial Estate) provide some ‘built-up’ context to the site. There is also the recent construction of a large scale distribution building at adjacent Plot 4, together with the earth mounding along the western boundary of the Business Park.

8.6 Planning permission 09/02392/OUTN set development parameters for Plot 3 (Para 4.12). The height of the building permitted for Plot 3 is 12m. The main part of the building now proposed is the same height, although based on the illustrative elevations the mass of the building is likely to be greater. There is also a higher lift tower proposed. The applicant, conscious of this position, has sought to demonstrate that the building can be designed in such a way, including appropriate contrasting materials, varying roof and eaves heights where possible, recesses and elevational treatments, to avoid being overly dominant or inappropriate for it’s context. A similar approach has been successfully employed with the newly constructed building on Plot 4 helping to minimise its impact on the immediate and wider landscape.

8.7 The provision of a lift tower at the site is an essential component of the applicants operation. The tower shown indicatively fronting the A303 is designed to be seen as an integral element of the design, massing and quality of the building. The supporting text to Policy AND04.1 accepts that landmark buildings could be accommodated on the Business Park site but that their context and integration with the development needs to be considered. There are two design options for the lift tower. One option is as an aviation control tower and this approach is considered acceptable for this former Airfield site and in the design of the plot 4 building (similar to an aerodrome hanger). The second option provides a simple vertical tower. In either case the tower will be seen from a wider area than existing buildings. However that is not to say that this makes such a prominent feature unacceptable. Taking into account the applicant’s willingness to look at integrating the tower into the design of the building and to acknowledge aviation references, it is not considered that the building would be obtrusive or unduly harmful on the immediate and wider landscape setting. The proposal is considered acceptable.

25 Page 10 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011

8.8 The provision of plot specific landscaping has not been submitted with the current application as “Landscaping” is a Reserved Matter. In order to comply with the terms of the Local Plan (Policy AND04.2(f)) the proposal would need to provide 20% of the site for landscaping. Clarification is being sought from the applicant of their intention in this respect and this will be reported in the Update Paper.

8.9 Notwithstanding the ‘within plot’ landscaping the site-wide Landscape Masterplan provides for extensive areas of landscaping to be planted prior to first occupation of the Plot 4 building. This makes provision for reinforced landscaping to the existing hedge with the A303, and additional landscape strips located either side of the access roads within the Business Park. Such planting, once established will provide additional screening/softening of the development of views from the road gyratory

8.10 The proposed development is considered to represent an acceptable development for this site. The applicant has included indicative elevations of the building and tower which, it is considered, can form the basis of a scheme that responds positively to the site context. When viewed from key public vantage points both immediately adjacent and more distant to the site, and subject to satisfactory clarification on the on-site landscaping that can be provided, it is considered to accord with Policies AND04.1, DES01, DES02, DES03, DES05, DES06 and DES07 of the TVBLP. Subject to appropriate design being achieved within any subsequent Reserved Matters application(s), the proposed development is acceptable.

Impact on highway safety (local road network) 8.11 The proposal connects to the local highway network via the Business Park access road approved under 09/02392/OUTN that leads to the new junction interchange. These highway works are due to be completed in advance of first occupation of the Plot 4 building (end of March 2011). The proposal will increase the number of HCVs using this Plot compared to that modelled under planning permission 09/02392/OUTN. This is because the approved use (Uses within Class B1) would not have generated HCV movements. However the applicant has clarified that HCV movements would typically comprise:

Time In Out Time In Out 0600 1 1 0700 1 1 1300 1 1 0800 1 1 1400 1 1 0900 2 2 1500 1 1 1000 2 2 1600 1 1 1100 2 2 1700 0 0 1200 2 2 1800 0 0

26 Page 11 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011 Given the increase will be relatively small compared with that across the whole site and the HCVs will be controlled by physical and electronic restrictions already in place it is not considered that it is not considered that the proposal would give rise to an adverse impact on the local highway network.

8.12 The proposed development does not give rise to any more burden on the existing local highway network that to that which was already assessed, and subsequently catered for, within the 09/02392/OUTN planning permission. The obligations contained in the legal agreement accompanying this permission will ensure that the proposed development can be catered for without the need for additional contributions or infrastructure improvements.

Impact on highway network (strategic road network) 8.13 Any HCVs utilising the site access road will be the subject of physical control mechanisms built into the Business Park exit lane. They would similarly be the subject of electronic monitoring (ANPR system) and the ‘barred routes’ restrictions implemented under planning permission 09/02392/OUTN. In this respect the means of controlling HCVs exiting the site is already in place and will ensure the safe and free flow of traffic along both sides of the A303 and its associated slip-roads. The Highways Agency have not raised objection to the proposed development and this is considered acceptable.

Impact of noise generated by the proposed development 8.14 Policy AME04 of the TVBLP requires development to inter alia ensure that, in taking into account proposed attenuation measures (or other measures) it would not give rise to an unacceptable level of disturbance to the occupants of nearby properties. The supporting text to the Policy implies that ‘nearby properties’ would principally comprise those in a residential use, although the phrase “unacceptable level of disturbance” is not defined. The applicants have supported their application with a noise assessment which is contained in the ES. A copy of the Head of Housing, Health and Communities consultation reply is attached at Appendix A. Subject to suitable conditions that will be reported in the Update Paper the impact of the proposed development on the level of noise to nearby residential properties is considered acceptable.

Impact of air quality 8.15 The proposal is accompanied with details of likely emissions arising from the operation of the site by the proposed development. The proposal would not adversely affect local air quality and is considered acceptable.

Ecology (on-site impacts) 8.16 Given that the site has recently been re-engineered and any grassland habitat that previously existing on the site is no longer present the impact of the proposed development on any ‘plot level’ ecology is considered negligible. In this respect the proposed development would not adversely affect local biodiversity and is considered acceptable.

27 Page 12 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011 However regard should be had to the extensive habitat mitigation scheme that the developer of the whole Business Park undertook at the request of the LPA under planning permission 09/02392/OUTN which has been carried out.

8.17 It is considered that the Duty under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (NERC) has been properly addressed within the process leading up to the allocation of the land in the Local Plan, scoping the extent of the ES and consulting with the Governments statutory nature conservation organisation as part of the consultation process. Provided that the recommendations of the ES are conditioned as part of the grant of planning permission then the duty to ensure that biodiversity interest has been conserved, as far as practically possible, is considered to have been met.

Drainage (flooding and aquifer recharge) 8.18 The ES clarifies that any surface water drainage will be disposed to ground via soakaways. The rate of run-off will be controlled to appropriate levels. Subject to a suitable condition the proposed development would not create any adverse risk of flooding and will ensure the recharge of the underlying aquifer. In this respect the proposal is considered acceptable.

Foul drainage 8.19 The applicants intend to provide for all foul water generated by the development to be dealt with via a connection to the existing sewerage infrastructure. On the advice of Southern Water under the previous grant of Outline permission a condition was imposed that sought to ensure that adequate capacity to serve each of the plots exists. Subject to such a condition on the current application the proposal is considered to provide an acceptable means of foul water disposal.

Archaeology 8.20 Prior to undertaking the extensive engineering and building works across the whole of the 50Ha Business Park the applicant commissioned an archaeological watching brief. Although the final report detailing any findings have not been published to date it is considered that no further archaeological requirements are necessary.

Impact on Conservation Areas 8.21 The nearest Conservation Areas to the site are those around the settlements of Monxton and Penton Mewsey/. In these instances the proposed development would be visually separate from these such that the proposal would have no effect on the character and appearance of these Conservation Area. In this respect the proposal would preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Areas.

Impact on setting of the adjacent Rights of Way network 8.22 The public footpath network (including a Bridleways Open to All Traffic (BOAT) in the vicinity of the application site are noted in the applicants’ ES as part of the visual appraisal of the development.

28 Page 13 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011 The map identifies a number of routes within the area and it is clear that none would be physically affected, or a diversion necessary, as a consequence of the proposed development. Whilst views are possible of the application site from some parts of the footpath network it is considered that as the proposal would be seen in conjunction with the existing built form of Andover, and with the structural landscaping that already substantially exists around the Business Park, the proposed development can be satisfactorily accommodated into the landscape. A public footpath exits onto Red Post Lane close to the southern most plot of the Business Park (Plot 5). However direct views of this proposal from this direction would be significantly reduced by the presence of the structural landscaping running parallel with Red Post Lane. It is considered that the proposal is considered acceptable with regard to the setting of the local footpath network.

Impact on residential amenities by virtue of over looking, loss of light and shadow. 8.23 Given the site’s location relative to the nearest neighbouring properties (in the area of Penton Corner to the north), the existing and proposed screening provided for by on-site landscaping, and the presence of the A303 and the A343 between the site and the properties there is no reason why the proposed development should have an adverse impact on loss of light, privacy or shadow to these properties.

External lighting 8.24 Some external lighting would be required for the site both in relation to the requirement for individual plots and as a means of safely demarking the internal road network around the site. In both of these instances it is considered appropriate to attach suitable conditions to control the siting, type, direction and level of light proposed with the aim of minimising light pollution arising from the development. Subject to the imposition of such conditions the proposed development is not considered to give rise to an adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties or adversely affect the immediate and wider landscape.

9.0 CONCLUSION 9.1 The proposed development is considered to accord with the provisions of the Development Plan. In considering the indicative elevations and site layout plans submitted with the application, and the indicative maximum heights of building and the relative ground levels of the plot it is considered that the proposed development would provide an acceptable form of development. The proposal would not adversely affect the setting of adjacent Rights of Way network, or would it adversely affect highway safety and the free flow of traffic beyond the site boundary. It is not considered that the proposal would give rise to a detrimental impact of shadow, noise, loss of light or privacy to neighbouring properties. The development would not adversely affect ecology, archaeology, contamination, drainage, or air quality. The proposal would preserve the character and appearance of Conservation Areas in the vicinity of the site.

29 Page 14 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011 10.0 RECOMMENDATION OUTLINE PERMISSION subject to: 1. Applications for the approval of all the reserved matters referred to herein shall be made within a period of three years from the date of this permission. The development to which the permission relates shall be begun not later than which ever is the later of the following dates: i) five years from the date of this permission: or ii) two years from the final approval of the said reserved matters, or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved. Reason: To comply with the provision of S.92 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990. 2. Approval of the details of the layout, scale and appearance of the building(s), and the landscaping of the site (herein after called "the reserved matters") shall be obtained from the local planning authority in writing before any development is commenced. Reason: To comply with Article 4 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order). 3. Prior to development taking place samples and details of the materials to be used in the construction of all external surfaces hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure the development has a satisfactory external appearance in the interest of visual amenities in accordance with Test Valley Borough Local Plan 2006 policy DES07. 4. Prior to development taking place full details of the management and disposal of surface water within that Plot (in full accordance with the principles laid out in the accompanying Environmental Statement) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Details shall include the use of such methods as to prevent the contamination of controlled waters from car and lorry areas, and including detailed calculations of the hydrological and hydro-geological context of the development. All HGV parking areas shall drain via an interceptor. Development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To prevent flooding and contamination of controlled waters by the disposal of surface water, in accordance with Test Valley Borough Local Plan policies HAZ02, ENV09 and HAZ03. 5. Prior to development taking place full details of the disposal of foul water serving the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure the correct disposal of foul water can be made, in accordance with Test Valley Borough Local Plan policies HAZ02, ENV09 and HAZ03.

30 Page 15 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011

6. Prior to development taking place full details of car and cycle parking provision, including disabled car parking provision within that Plot shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development on each of the Plots shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details. The vehicle spaces and the associated landscaped areas shall thereafter be retained and reserved solely for the parking of vehicles. Reason: To ensure sufficient cycle and car parking exists to serve the development in accordance with Test Valley Borough Local Plan policies TRA02. 7. Prior to development taking details of any external lighting shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority before the buildings are occupied. The scheme shall be accompanied by the report of a suitably qualified person (i.e. a lighting expert) which includes the following:  A description of the lighting provision.  Cross-section diagrams to show lines of sight from all groups of sensitive receptors surrounding the development to areas of external lighting provision where there is the potential for annoyance glare or any other form of lighting nuisance.  Comment on the potential for annoying glare to residential properties in the vicinity of the site.  Recommendations for minimising light pollution as far as possible, having regard to good practice guidance, in particular that issued by the Institute of Lighting Engineers and the Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To safeguard the amenities and character of the area, reduce unacceptable visual intrusion with respect to night time light spillage in accordance with Test Valley Borough Local Plan 2006 policy AME03. 8. If during development contamination not previously identified is found to be present on the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out until the applicants has submitted, and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority for, an amendment to the Method Statement detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with. Development shall proceed in accordance with the revised Method Statement. Reason: No investigation can completely characterise a site. As such, contamination not previously expected, will still need to be assessed as part of the development work in order to ensure protection of controlled waters, in accordance with Policies AME05, HAZ03, ENV09 and ENV10 of the Test Valley Borough Local Plan 2006.

31 Page 16 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011 10. Prior to development taking place a scheme of noise mitigation measures (for both internally and externally generate noise) shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details with any noise control barriers and other noise mitigation measures put in place in accordance with the approved details shall be retained for those purposes unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of the amenities in the local area in accordance with Test Valley Borough Local Plan 2006 policy AME04. 11. No materials shall be stacked or deposited in the open. Reason: In order to protect the amenities of the local area in accordance with Test Valley Borough Local Plan 2006 policies DES01. 12. Piling or any other foundation designs using penetrative methods will not be permitted other than with the express written consent of the Local Planning Authority, which may be given for those parts of the site where it has been demonstrated that there is no resultant unacceptable risk to controlled waters. Reason: To prevent the unacceptable risk to controlled waters in accordance with Policies AME05, HAZ03, ENV09 and ENV10 of the Test Valley Borough Local Plan 2006. 13. No development shall commence until a scheme for the storage of chemicals and oil during the construction phase has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall proceed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that materials are stored with minimal risk to the environment and controlled waters, in accordance with Policies AME05, HAZ03, ENV09 and ENV10 of the Test Valley Borough Local Plan 2006. 14. Prior to the occupation of the development a scheme for the proposed operation of HGV reversing alarms between 2300 and 0700 hours shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of broadband type reversing alarms and a programme for use of broadband type reversing alarms, or confirmation that the alarms shall be turned off during this period. In the event of the latter full details of how the operator of the development shall ensure that the health and safety of workers is not compromised shall also be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The noise mitigation scheme for reversing alarms shall be implemented and thereafter retained as such in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure suitable measures, and an appropriate timescale for implementation, are in place to minimise night time noise impact on nearby residents in accordance with Policy AME04 of the Test Valley Borough Local Plan (2006).

32 Page 17 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011 15. All construction work relating to the development hereby permitted (including preparation work prior to operations) shall only take place between the hours of 0730 – 1800hrs Monday – Friday and 0730 – 1300hrs on Saturdays. No work shall take place on Sundays or Bank Holidays unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To protect the amenities of adjoining occupiers during the construction phases of the development, in accordance with Policy AME04 of the Test Valley Borough Local Plan (2006). 16. The development on this site shall be carried out in substantial accordance with the design principles and development objectives included within the 'Environmental Statement'. Reason: The proposed development is the subject of an Environmental Impact Assessment and any material alteration to the proposed development may have an impact which has not been assessed by that process, having regard to the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) ( and Wales) Regulations 1999. Notes to applicant: 1. The applicants’ attention is drawn to the provisions and terms of the Legal Agreement dated 19th March 2010 that accompanied planning permission 09/02392/OUTN. Some of the provisions contained in this agreement will affect the operation of activities at Plot 3. 2. The following policies in the Development Plans are relevant to this decision: South East Plan Policies SP3, CC1, CC2, CC3, CC4, CC6, RE3, T1, T2, T4, T5, T12, NRM1, NRM2, NRM4, NRM5, NRM9, NRM10, NRM11, W2, M1. Test Valley Borough Local Plan2006: Policies AND04.1, AND04.2, AND04.3, AND04.4, ENV01, ENV04, ENV08, ENV09, ENV11, HAZ02 HAZ03 HAZ04 ESN16 ESN30 ESN32 TRA01 TRA02 TRA04 TRA05 TRA06 TRA07 TRA09 DES01 DES02 DES03 DES04 DES05 DES06 DES07 DES08 DES09 DES10 AME01 AME02 AME03 AME04 AME05. 3. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out and completed strictly in accordance with the submitted plans, specifications and written particulars for which permission is hereby granted or which are subsequently submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority and in compliance with any conditions imposed by the Local Planning Authority. 4. The decision to grant planning permission has been taken because the proposed development is considered to accord with the provisions of the Development Plan. In considering the indicative elevations and site layout plans submitted with the application, and the indicative maximum heights of building and the relative ground levels of the plot it is considered that the proposed development would provide an acceptable form of development.

33 Page 18 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011 The proposal would not adversely affect the setting of adjacent Rights of Way network, or would it adversely affect highway safety and the free flow of traffic beyond the site boundary. It is not considered that the proposal would give rise to a detrimental impact of shadow, noise, loss of light or privacy to neighbouring properties. The development would not adversely affect ecology, archaeology, contamination, drainage, or air quality. The proposal would preserve the character and appearance of Conservation Areas in the vicinity of the site. This informative is only intended as a summary of the reason for the grant of planning permission. For further details on the decision please see the application report which is available from the Planning Service. 5. The applicant/developer is encouraged to ensure the best practice in the ILE Guidance Notes for the Reduction of Obtrusive Light (2005) and appropriate British Standard guidance is followed in the preparation of the Environmental Management Plans.

34 Page 19 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011

APPENDIX A

10/02729/OUTN - Plot 3 Andover Airfield - Erection of building for B2, B8 and B1

This response is made on behalf of the Housing, Health & Communities Service Environmental Protection Team.

Summary

No objections, subject to conditions.

Noise

The change of use of Plot 3 from offices to mixed B2, B8 and B1 is significant when considering the noise issues which were considered as part of the already-approved outline application 09/02392/OUTN. However, in this case, the proposal is for a predominantly B1/B2 (factory) use, with B8 (distribution) use apparently an ancillary component, borne out by the comparatively low HGV movement figures. For reasons outlined below, I am reassured that this proposal can be implemented with no significant additional impact to local residents, though conditions will be necessary to control this.

The Alan Saunders Associates noise impact assessment confirms that the impact on nearby housing (the MOD accommodation and housing at Penton Corner) would provide only a small and insignificant contribution to overall noise levels, which would be dominated by distribution activities at the neighbouring plots on the Andover Airfield site as well as existing A303 noise. However, the conclusion reached by the author of the noise report relies upon certain assumptions for which some kind of planning controls would be desirable. These assumptions relate to the building orientation / layout, noise insulation of the building envelope, the number and profile of HGV movements and presence of the 4m high acoustic barrier along the southeast boundary of the Andover Airfield site.

Because the proposed Plot 3 incorporates B2 (general industrial) use, break-out noise from noisy operations inside the building is also potentially significant, with housing at Penton Corner and the MOD accommodation being potentially affected. Given that the MOD accommodation would benefit from the as-approved 4m high boundary acoustic fence, the optimum orientation of the building appears to be for all loading bays and other openings (connecting directly with noisy internal process areas) to face southwards, minimising break-out noise to the Penton Corner housing.

Given the context of this application within the Andover Airfield development, it may be helpful if I refer to the two key noise issues that were associated with the already- approved application 09/02392/OUTN and provide further comments on the significance of the changed proposal for Plot 3.

35 Page 20 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011

The first issue related to the night time impact from on-site activities to nearby housing, especially around Red Post Lane (to the south) where existing background noise levels were found to be comparatively low. The outdoor activities at night on Plot 3 are likely to be of far less significance than those of Plots 2 and 4, due to the relatively small number of HGV movements anticipated at Plot 3 (corresponding to a lesser degree of unloading and loading noise). In addition, it is notable that the vicinity of Plot 3 is already subject to substantial A303 road traffic noise, meaning that the on-site noise that is produced would stand out less to the nearest housing at Penton Corner. As far as the Red Post Lane properties are concerned, the additional noise produced by Plot 3 (if operating as a factory instead of the already- approved office use) would be negligible. This is due to a combination of the lesser scale of activity at Plot 3 (compared to Plots 2 & 4), the additional distance involved and the screening provided by other buildings in between.

The second key area of concern were night time HGV movements around the site and the increase in noise on the A303 associated with increased HGV traffic. Again, the HGV movement figures indicate that scale of movements is far lower than for Plots 2 and 4 and are comparatively of very minor significance.

By condition or legal agreement, I recommend that consideration is given to conditions covering the following matters:

(a) Consideration should be given to controlling HGV movement numbers permitted without further planning consent being required. This is on the basis that the noise assessment has made noise impact assumptions relating to the intended site operator (Stannah). Without any form of restriction, there would be nothing to prevent a change in operation to a substantially more intensive B8 (distribution) use which could in fact have a significantly greater impact than that envisaged. I am happy of course for the approved limit to be moderately in excess of the stated level of movements in order to allow a reasonable degree of flexibility for peaks of demand and growth; a matter for discussion with the applicant.

(b) The orientation and layout of the building should be agreed at the reserved matters stage. As stated above, the noise assessment assumes that loading doors will face southwards. As well as providing noise screening to housing to the north, if whilst providing a similar level of screening the orientation of the loading doors could be somehow positioned to screen the MOD accommodation also, that would of course be even more desirable. Although not specifically mentioned in the noise report, the implication is that there will be no openings directly from noisy process areas on the northern elevation to minimise break-out noise.

(c) The sound insulation of the building envelope should be verified by a suitably qualified noise control specialist to ensure that noise break out would not be likely to exceed levels assumed as part of the noise report.

(d) The noise report assumes that the as-approved 4m high acoustic fence along the eastern boundary of the Andover Airfield development will be in place, which I understand is a requirement covered by condition 19 of 09/02392/OUTN.

36 Page 21 of 22 Test Valley Borough Council – Northern Area Planning Committee – 17 February 2011

(e) No B2 activities should take place outdoors, except in respect of loading and unloading activities.

(f) A condition similar to 31 of 09/02392/OUTN in respect of a scheme of white noise (broadband) type reversing alarms between 2300 - 0700 hrs. In fact, it would be preferable to extend this to all site-based vehicles operating at any time also.

(g) If not already applicable, conditions similar to condition 25 (noise from external plant and equipment) and condition 32 (construction working hours) of 09/02392/OUTN are also appropriate.

Air Quality

I have considered the air quality assessment that accompanies the application and I am satisfied that the air quality impact is not unacceptable.

Other Matters

If not already applicable, conditions similar to condition 17 (land contamination discovered during construction) and condition 18 (construction dust control) should also be applied.

Mark Lee Principal Environmental Health Officer Environmental Protection Team Housing, Health & Communities Service Test Valley Borough Council HPSN 991 7924 Tel: 01794 527924 mailto:[email protected]

Postal address: Test Valley Borough Council, Council Offices, Duttons Road, , Hampshire SO51 8XG. www.testvalley.gov.uk/eh

37 Page 22 of 22