Highways England may be forced to reverse the infilling of a 159-year-old masonry arched bridge in Cumbria following a nationwide backlash, as Eden District Council has informed Highways England that it will have to apply for retrospective planning permission to cover the infilling work.
image: for illustration purposes only – By RuthAS – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=50687148
… Council’s acceptance of Highways England’s Permitted Development Rights does not constitute permission for the infilling to be retained…
New Civil Engineer writes:
If the application is denied, Highways England could be required to remove the 1,000t of concrete poured beneath the Great Musgrave bridge arch.
Highways England carried out the work earlier this month under its Permitted Development Rights, after informing the council that infilling was needed to “prevent further deterioration of the bridge from occurring and remove the associated risk of structural collapse and harm to the public”.
The council accepts that Highways England acted appropriately under Class Q of its Permitted Development Rights; which effectively allows Highways England to carry out work without planning permission in cases of emergency.
However, an update circulated to Eden District councillors – and seen by NCE – reveals that Highways England will now have to apply for retrospective planning permission within the next year.
The council update adds that a Highways England examination report from January provides “evidence of a high risk in respect of the bridge’s load capacity and the earlier reports evidence this risk increasing over time leading to action being necessary now”.
The update adds that Highways England provided “sufficient reasons […] evidencing why infilling has been chosen over further repointing”.
It continues: “It should also be noted that Highways England consider that the filling works are not being done in a permanent way, but in a manner which would allow for them to be reversed should organisations become interested in re-opening the structures in the future.”…
The HRE Group and two local railway groups (the Eden Valley railway and Stainmore railways) claim that there were no real concerns about the Great Musgrave bridge’s condition.
They add that while infilling the bridge cost £124,000, a £5,000 repair job would have made it safe for all vehicles to pass over.
For more background see the NewsBlog
