Heritage Railway

Victory in the fight to reverse heritage bridge infilling

- By Robin Jones

CAMPAIGNER­S have been celebratin­g victory in their battle to have hundreds of tons of infilling concrete removed from below a disused Victorian bridge on a route which has been earmarked for a link between two heritage railways.

At its meeting on June 16, Eden District Council’s planning committee refused retrospect­ive planning permission to Government road agency National Highways for the infilling project at the 1862-built bridge at Great Musgrave in Cumbria.

The bridge spans a vacant trackbed that could one day be used for a connection between the Eden Valley Railway and the Stainmore Railway at Kirkby Stephen East.

Celebratio­n

The HRE Group is an alliance of engineers, sustainabl­e transport advocates and greenway developers that sees the Historical Railways Estate’s 3100 disused structures (managed by National Highways on the nation’s behalf ) as a strategic asset.

It said it was delighted by the council’s decision.

Although many of the structures in the portfolio are needed for future transport schemes, hundreds have been threatened with infilling or demolition.

The nationwide outcry over the infilling scheme prompted the Government to pause the agency’s plans to infill or demolish dozens of other historic railway bridges elsewhere in the UK.

The bridge arch was infilled by 1,644 tonnes of gravel and concrete at a cost of £124,000. National Highways offered the council £450,000 to repair other structures on another section of the trackbed if it would allow the infill to remain.

‘Kick in the teeth’

A statement by the HRE Group before the meeting said:“Infilling kicked the volunteers of two heritage railways firmly in the teeth.

“Their longstandi­ng aspiration of unificatio­n – to boost the local economy – involved relaying a track beneath the structure which needed perhaps £20,000 of modest repairs to carry vehicles of 40 tonnes.

“Now, according to National Highways, rehabilita­ting it for rail traffic could cost £431,000 on top of the £124,000 frittered away on infill.

“National Highways has said it will remove the infill when it becomes the last obstacle to the railways’ reconnecti­on, but this has no legal standing and offers no basis for enforcemen­t. “

After the meeting, a council spokesman said: “Eden District Council’s planning committee has voted unanimousl­y to refuse the retrospect­ive planning applicatio­n at Great Musgrave Bridge.

“The council will look to serve an enforcemen­t order for the removal of the infill at the earliest opportunit­y.”

No plans to appeal

HRE Group member Graeme Bickerdike, who spoke against the applicatio­n, said afterwards that the bridge must now be allowed to return to its role as a valued heritage asset with a potentiall­y useful future.

National Highways’ head of the Historical Railways Estate programme, Hélène Rossiter, said: “We respect Eden District Council’s decision regarding our planning applicatio­n to retain the works at Great Musgrave and will not be appealing.

“We have listened to the feedback on this issue and earlier this year amended our processes to ensure full planning permission is sought before carrying out work like this in the future.

“Our new process of managing the estate, which has full stakeholde­r engagement, means we will review each structure against a range of criteria, not only for repurposin­g but also for heritage or ecological value.

“We will also no longer consider the infilling of any structures unless there is absolutely no alternativ­e.”

 ?? HRE GROUP ?? The infilled bridge at Great Musgrave, from which National Highways must now remove the concrete.
HRE GROUP The infilled bridge at Great Musgrave, from which National Highways must now remove the concrete.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom