A second act of “vandalism” by the government’s roads agency on another historic railway bridge looks set to be reversed, following the intervention of council planning officers.
King’s Lynn and West Norfolk council planning committee is being urged by its officers to refuse retrospective planning permission next week for a £127,000 scheme in 2021 by National Highways (NH) to bury a 97-year-old bridge in concrete.
The recommendations come after 363 letters of objection to the scheme, and just five in support. One of the themes of the public’s objections was that infilling the bridge was “equivalent to vandalism”, the committee was told in a report.
If the committee agrees to refuse permission at a meeting next Monday it will force NH to remove hundreds of tonnes of stone and cement on a second historic railway bridge.
Last week it completed undoing a similar bridge infilling scheme at Great Musgrave, Cumbria, after Eden district council refused planning permission for the controversial scheme. The original work, also in 2021, cost £124,000, whilst up to £431,000 has been allocated for its removal and strengthening, amid widespread criticism aimed at the agency.
In their report to next week’s meeting, planning officers said burying the Congham Bridge, under St Andrews Lane, flouted a number of local planning strategies. It said: “The development does not protect the countryside for its intrinsic beauty and the diversity of its heritage, does not preserve, protect or enhance the historic environment and its not sensitive to the historic context of the surrounding area.”
It added: “The infilling of the bridge arch means the line of the railway is unable to be experienced through the bridge, resulting in the a loss of legibility and a loss of evidential historic significance.
“The bridge is now obscured, severing the visual link and ability to appreciate the historic context of the locality and the structure itself.”
The public were blunter in their assessment, according to a bullet point summary of the objections compiled by the committee. One said: “Resultant works are an eyesore and equivalent to vandalism.” Another said the original 1926 bridge, which is one of only three surviving examples of its precast design type in the country, should be listed.
NH insisted the work was necessary. But the council’s conservation officer said it was “evident that other alternative solutions to the conversation of this structure were possible”. The council’s report added: “It is not clear that infilling the bridge was the only viable option.”
The HRE (Historical Railways Estate) Group – an alliance of engineers, walkers and cyclists – has been leading a national campaign to safeguard historical railway structures and routes against NH’s plans to block or demolish them.
Graeme Bickerdike, a member of the group said: “As we transition to greener forms of transport, viable structures such as St Andrew’s Lane bridge should be recognised and protected for potential repurposing as part of new sustainable transport routes. Managing these assets as blots on a spreadsheet reflects a 70s culture that has no place in today’s more enlightened times.”
Hélène Rossiter, NH’s head of its historic railways estate, said: “We are continuing to work with the borough council of King’s Lynn and West Norfolk as we seek planning permission to retain the strengthening works at Congham Bridge, which we believe is in the public interest.
“We infilled the bridge in 2021 under permitted development powers as we deemed there was a risk to public safety. When we took over management of the bridge it was in a very poor condition and was showing signs of ongoing movement.
“We consulted with the local planning and highway authorities before commencing work, and they confirmed they had no objection to the works and that the scheme didn’t impact any of their active travel plans.”
NH was forced to pause its plans to infill or demolish other historical railways structures, as part of a programme that had already resulted in the loss of 50 structures since 2013. But it is seeking ministerial approval to infill six structures and demolish a pair of railway abutments in this financial year.
