APPEAL BY MOTO HOSPITALITY LIMITED AGAINST THE DECISION TO REFUSE AN OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR A PROPOSED MOTORWAY SERVICE AREA AT JUNCTION 50 OF THE A1(M) ON LAND COMPRISING FIELD AT 435074 475842, HUTTON CONYERS, RIPON, NORTH YORKSHIRE

LPA Ref: 18/02713/EIAMAJ PINS Ref: APP/E2734/W/20/3261729

STATEMENT OF CASE

December 2020

Chester Office | Well House Barns | Chester Road | B r e t t o n | C h e s t e r | C H 4 0 D H

South Manchester O f f i c e | Camellia House | 76 Water Lane | W i l m s l o w | S K 9 5 B B

t 0844 8700 007 | e [email protected]

CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND THE APPEAL CONTEXT ...... 1 1.1 Introduction ...... 1 1.2 The Appeal Context ...... 2 2.0 THE CASE FOR APPLEGREEN ...... 3 2.1 Need ...... 3 2.2 Which MSA Proposal Best Meets the Identified Need and is Preferable ...... 3 3.0 APPLEGREEN’S POSITION IN RESPECT OF THE APPEAL ...... 6 3.1 Policies / Documents on Which the Appellant Will Rely ...... 6 3.2 Topics and Approach ...... 6 3.3 Areas of Dispute / Agreement ...... 7 4.0 SUMMARY ...... 8

2761-01 Moto Ripon MSA Appeal i Statement of Case – Final December 2020

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND THE APPEAL CONTEXT

1.1 Introduction

1.1.1 On 31st July 2018 Harrogate Borough Council (‘HBC’) validated an Outline planning application (ref: 18/02713/EIAMAJ) submitted by Moto Hospitality Limited (‘Moto’) for a new Motorway Service Area (‘MSA’) on land off, and to the west of, junction 50 of the A1(M) in Harrogate District, North Yorkshire. The proposal is hereafter referred to as the Ripon MSA.

1.1.2 On 6th October 2020, fully consistent with the officer recommendation, members of HBC’s Planning Committee voted to refuse the planning application for one reason. The decision was formally issued on 9th October and the reason for refusal reads: “The proposal is outside the development limits and represents unsustainable development that would result in significant encroachment into the open countryside causing harm to the landscape in conflict with Policies EC3 (A&C), GS3 and NE4 of the Harrogate District Local Plan”.

1.1.3 Moto has appealed the decision and this appeal will be heard by way of a public inquiry.

1.1.4 The Moto Ripon MSA inquiry has been conjoined with that for Applegreen’s Vale of York MSA proposal, which is located between junctions 48 and 49 of the A1(M), near Kirby Hill in North Yorkshire.

1.1.5 The Vale of York MSA planning application (ref: 18/00123/EIAMAJ) was refused planning permission on 22nd November 2019, contrary to the officer recommendation for approval. Applegreen appealed this decision in January 2020 (PINS ref: APP/E2734/W/20/3245778). Applegreen’s appeal was due to be heard by way of a public inquiry commencing on 2nd June 2020. This was postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic and re-arranged for 17th November 2020. This second date was also postponed (on 20th October) to enable the Applegreen and Moto appeals to be conjoined as they are competitor schemes.

1.1.6 With regard to the now conjoined appeal, Moto has, since June 2020, had Rule 6 status for Applegreen’s appeal. As of 6th November 2020, Applegreen has Rule status for Moto’s appeal. This document is Applegreen’s Statement of Case for Moto’s Ripon MSA appeal.

2761-01 Moto Ripon MSA Appeal 1 Statement of Case – Final December 2020

1.2 The Appeal Context

1.2.1 Applegreen will agree with Moto that there is a demonstrable need for a MSA on the A1(M) north of the existing Wetherby MSA, albeit views to the extent of that need may differ.

1.2.2 However, in so far as the appeal proposals are concerned, Applegreen’s view, consistent with that of Moto in its Statement of Case as Rule 6 party to the Vale of York appeal, is that there is only need for one of the two appeal proposals.

1.2.3 Applegreen will demonstrate that the Ripon MSA would give rise to inevitable disadvantages or adverse effects and that the alternative, Vale of York MSA proposal, would not have those effects or disadvantages, or would not have them to the same extent.

1.2.4 Accordingly, Applegreen will show that HBC’s officers were correct to recommend that the Ripon MSA application be refused, and members of the Planning Committee were correct to refuse it.

2761-01 Moto Ripon MSA Appeal 2 Statement of Case – Final December 2020

2.0 THE CASE FOR APPLEGREEN

2.1 Need

2.1.1 National policy for the provision of MSAs and other services on the strategic road network is set out within Circular 02/2013. Applegreen will demonstrate that this policy is unambiguous in terms of MSA provision and its preference for on-line facilities, as opposed to off-line services located on an existing motorway junction.

2.1.2 Applegreen will show that there is a demonstrable need for new MSA provision on the section of the A1(M) lying to the north of the existing Wetherby MSA. There is a gap in MSA provision of over 60 miles between Wetherby MSA and Durham MSA. Within this gap are Leeming Bar and Scotch Corner Motorway Rest Areas (‘MRAs’). Leeming Bar MRA has minimal facilities and requires a 2.6km detour from the motorway.

2.1.3 Both appeal sites lie between Wetherby MSA and Leeming Bar MRA. The gap between these existing facilities is over 28 miles. Thus, in accordance Circular 02/2013, there is a proven need for a new MSA.

2.1.4 There is a further gap (need) between services for HGVs on the strategic road network routeing between the A1(M) and the A168 / A19 Trunk Roads going to / from the Thirsk and Teesside. This gap, between Wetherby MSA and the Excelby Truckstops, is 57 miles northbound and 57.7 miles southbound.

2.2 Which MSA Proposal Best Meets the Identified Need and is Preferable

2.2.1 Applegreen will demonstrated that the Vale of York MSA proposal is clearly preferable to the Moto Ripon MSA proposal for the following reasons:

1. The Vale of York MSA is on-line, whilst the Ripon MSA is an off-line / junction proposal. In this context, Circular 02/2013 indicates that the only scenario whereby a junction site can be justified / preferred over an on-line site is where all other factors are not equal (paragraph B14) and where the planning, safety, operational or environmental constraints prevent the delivery on an on-line MSA (paragraph B15). Applegreen will demonstrate that there are no planning, safety, operational or environmental reasons that should prevent delivery of the on-line scheme. In fact, in this case, such factors weigh against Moto’s off-line MSA proposal.

2761-01 Moto Ripon MSA Appeal 3 Statement of Case – Final December 2020

2. Whilst both appeal proposals would eliminate the gap between Wetherby MSA and Leeming Bar MRA which is in excess of 28 miles, the Vale of York MSA is fairly centrally located to this gap sitting 13.6 miles to Wetherby MSA and 16.3 miles to Leeming MRA. Conversely, the Ripon MSA proposal only lies only 11 miles from Leeming Bar MRA.

3. The Vale of York MSA would also serve trunk road users travelling to / from the A168 / A19 and, for HGVs, filling the gap between Excelby Services and Wetherby MSA, which is well in excess of 28 miles, as identified above, as well as significantly improving provision / choice for other motorists on that route. The Ripon MSA proposal would not serve this route, nor meet this need.

4. Allied to serving the A168 and A19 Trunk Roads, which take a significant volume of traffic to and from the Thirsk and Teesside area beyond, the daily average 2-way traffic flows on the A1(M) past the Vale of York MSA are 79,574 vehicles (2019). This drops to 57,124 vehicles between junctions 49 and 50, passing the Ripon MSA appeal site. Hence, the Vale of York MSA would be capable of delivering safety and welfare benefits to over 22,000 more motorway users each and every day.

5. The Vale of York MSA proposal would provide the only 2-way on-line Abnormal Indivisible Load lay-bys / parking areas on the A1(M) from the motorway start point (Darrington), up to Washington MSA.

6. The Vale of York MSA was recommended for approval by the professional planning officers at HBC and was not subject to any technical consultee objection at the point of determination. Conversely, HBC’s professional officer recommended the Moto Ripon MSA proposal be refused and it was subject to technical consultee objection when determined.

7. With regard to size and encroachment into the countryside, the Ripon MSA proposal is circa 75% the size of the Vale of York MSA in terms of developed area, yet the latter would serve circa double the traffic.

8. It will be shown that the inclusion of a hotel (lodge) in the Ripon MSA proposal unnecessarily increases the overall size of the development, with associated adverse effects, and cannot be justified in this location by reference to Circular 02/2013.

2761-01 Moto Ripon MSA Appeal 4 Statement of Case – Final December 2020

9. Both appeal proposals fall within Harrogate District Landscape Character Assessment [CD 4.5] Landscape Character Area (LCA) 81: Dishforth and surrounding farmland. It will be demonstrated that the Vale of York MSA proposal offers a far better design response to the LCA guidelines than the Ripon MSA proposal, resulting in a better integrated scheme, not reliant on locally inappropriate large blocks of woodland planting and peripheral bunding.

10. It will be shown that both appeal sites are predominantly best and most versatile agricultural land and this regard there is nothing to choose between them. At this time Applegreen has invited Moto to be party to an independent agricultural land survey of their site.

11. It will be shown that the Vale of York MSA would result in more than twice the net gain in biodiversity than the Ripon MSA scheme.

12. It will be shown that the Vale of York MSA would deliver greater economic benefits than the Ripon MSA scheme.

13. It will be shown that Moto has both a track record of not building out MSAs for which it has secured permissions, and, the probable reason for this, that they have a monopoly of the services serving the A1(M) through the Yorkshire area, already operating the next three services to the south of the proposed Ripon MSA appeal site and the next two to the north. Accordingly, in the event that Applegreen’s appeal is allowed, there is a far greater likelihood the Vale of York MSA would actually be delivered, and there would be increased competition in services provision, which would benefit motorway users.

2761-01 Moto Ripon MSA Appeal 5 Statement of Case – Final December 2020

3.0 APPLEGREEN’S POSITION IN RESPECT OF THE APPEAL

3.1 Policies / Documents on Which the Appellant Will Rely

3.1.1 At this juncture Applegreen does not intend to rely on policies and documents beyond those: • Identified in its Statement of Case for the conjoined Vale of York appeal; • Included as Core Documents for the conjoined Vale of York appeal; • Which form part of the Ripon MSA planning application and relate to its determination i.e. are within Moto’s appeal bundle and HBC’s questionnaire.

3.2 Topics and Approach

3.2.1 The original Vale of York appeal Inspector identified the following main issues: a) The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area. (For the avoidance of doubt the Inspector confirmed this included landscape and visual effects). b) Whether the loss of agricultural land would be acceptable. c) The need for the proposal. d) ….not used ….. e) Highway safety, with particular regard to the suitability of access arrangements. f) Whether the proposal would be acceptable with regard to drainage, flood risk and climate effects. g) The effect of the proposal on the local economy. h) Planning policy and the planning balance (perhaps including the benefits of the scheme if not a separate issue) and conclusion.

3.2.2 He determined that matters a) and h) would be subject to formal presentation of evidence in chief and cross-examination. Issue c) would be heard informally, in a round table discussion format which the Inspector would lead. All other / remaining issues would be subject to the submission of written statements on each topic.

3.2.3 Moto has not set out in its Statement of Case for the Ripon MSA precisely what topics it will provide discrete evidence, nor do they suggest how matters should be presented. However, in their response to the Inspector’s Procedural Note (of 20th October) in relation to the Vale of York appeal, they suggest: • Planning policy and balance, need, landscape and visual effects via formal presentation of evidence in chief and cross-examination;

2761-01 Moto Ripon MSA Appeal 6 Statement of Case – Final December 2020

• Agriculture via either formal presentation of evidence in chief and cross- examination, or round table; and • All / any other matters presumably by written statements.

3.2.4 Cognisant of the foregoing, in so far as the Ripon MSA appeal is concerned, Applegreen proposes to cover the following topics and suggested approaches: • Landscape and visual effects via formal presentation of evidence in chief and cross-examination; • Planning policy and the planning balance via formal presentation of evidence in chief and cross-examination; • Need via round table; and • Agriculture – yet to be determined pending Moto responding on Applegreen’s suggestion that the Ripon MSA site should be subject to an independent agricultural land classification survey.

3.3 Areas of Dispute / Agreement

3.3.1 Applegreen has engaged with Moto over the production of a Statement of Common Ground (SoCG) and understands the latter is preparing a first draft. Applegreen is committed to working with Moto to produce a SoCG in advance of the appeal.

2761-01 Moto Ripon MSA Appeal 7 Statement of Case – Final December 2020

4.0 SUMMARY

4.1.1 There is a clear and demonstrable need for a new MSA on the A1(M) to the north of the existing Wetherby Services. There are two competing MSA proposals seeking to address this need and only one can be approved.

4.1.2 For the reasons identified previously, the Ripon MSA would only partially and less effectively meet the identified need when compared to the Vale of York MSA. Further, the Ripon MSA would give rise to inevitable disadvantages or adverse effects, whilst the alternative Vale of York MSA proposal would not have those effects or disadvantages, or would not have them to the same extent.

4.1.3 Accordingly, HBC decision to refuse the Ripon MSA planning application was correct.

4.1.4 The Ripon MSA appeal should be dismissed such that the Vale of York MSA appeal can be allowed; and thus deliver much needed safety and welfare benefits for motorway users.

2761-01 Moto Ripon MSA Appeal 8 Statement of Case – Final December 2020