Depends what state the rest of the Temple-of-Doom site was in. In some ways it's lucky there's a site to expand at all and they're not having to start completely from scratch.Good news for the cider imbibers, but was building from scratch really the most cost-effective option?
Rather more decades than I like to admit ago, I worked at GEC-Marconi's underwater division at Waterlooville, and Templecombe was one of our satellite sites along with Neston, Croxley Green, Filton, and a few others. Now? Waterlooville's a retail park except for one retained facility, the other sites long sold or closed, and the workforce are a small team tucked into a corner of Broad Oak down in Portsmouth.
Industry doesn't keep sites open and workforces trained, skilled and ready for a decade or two just in case MoD deigns to offer a contract: so we've seen a succession of stop-go problems where MoD has delayed and deferred for a few years, only to find that the supplier base has withered (with resulting costs, delays, & problems: see the Astute build, Nimrod MRA.4, Challenger 2 update, any effort to buy new artillery, and so on)
There was meant to be a Defence Industrial Strategy to address some of this: of course it was given a stiff ignoring.
But, unfortunately, there still seems to be an attitude that Abbey Wood can dangle a RFP over the wall and a baying crowd of suppliers will be fighting over who gets it: even where a "steady work flow" is contractually specified, you end up with the Batch 2 River-class OPVs because "delay and defer" is the low-risk option - you'll only be on that desk for two years, any extra costs or difficulties will be your successor's problem...