Campaigners who have been fighting plans for a new motorway service station on the A1(M) for 30 years are hoping to derail the proposals at the 11th hour.

Kirby Hill Residents Against Motorway Services successfully opposed the building of the development dubbed “the most controversial in Britain” three times since 1997.

However in 2021, a planning inspector granted developers Applegreen and Welcome Break outline planning permission for the scheme covering around 20 hectares of open countryside near Boroughbridge following a 14-day public inquiry.

The planning application is due to return before North Yorkshire Council’s (NYC) strategic planning committee shortly for final sign off for “reserved matters” covering details like lay-out and drainage.

2026 marks thirty years since plans for a motorway service area on the A1(M) at Kirby Hill were first submitted

placeholder image — 2026 marks thirty years since plans for a motorway service area on the A1(M) at Kirby Hill were first submitted

However Kirby Hill RAMS says they have put NYC on notice that they believe the application “may not lawfully be determined, because the outline planning permission for the development may already have expired”.

Gareth Owens, the group’s chair, is a long-time resident of Kirby Hill which is 500 yards over open fields from the site. The controversial proposals, costed at £40million in 2021, would see a new motorway junction, overbridge and large motorway service area built, including fuel stations, restaurants and parking for hundreds of cars and lorries.

He said: “The environmental impact on the community, its identity and its setting would be very significant. For over 25 years the scheme was refused on landscape grounds – it was too big a blot on the landscape. What’s changed is the lawyers they bought in and how hard they pushed the scheme.”

The group claims developers did not submit all the information required for the reserved matters application before the outline planning permission expired.

Campaigners say key drawings and technical details were submitted after the deadline of 13 April 2024. Mr Owens said: “If the outline consent has lapsed, the reserved matters application would have no legal foundation. In those circumstances the council may have no lawful power to determine the application.”

However Mr Owens said NYC’s monitoring officer had written to the group the council was “confident that this permission has not expired.”

The dispute comes only months after the High Court quashed NYC’s decision to approve another motorway service area at Catterick, after a judge ruled that key planning tests had not been properly applied by officers before approval was recommended.

“The council has already had one motorway services decision struck down by the High Court,” Mr Owens said.

“Proceeding with another application when there is a serious unresolved legal question about whether the underlying planning permission still exists would be extraordinary.

"It’s members who take the legal risk when they make a planning decision.

"Officers need to brief the members of the committee about what legal risk they are taking.”

Welcome Break declined to comment.