Paving the way

In 2020, mostly during the spring, Jacobs sent letters to local planning authorities in which it fished for the go-ahead to infill or demolish several dozen HRE bridges under permitted development (PD) rights - the proposed class of which was not specified - painting a picture of rising risk and the need to act.

LPA responses were inconsistent. In 67 known cases, 19 letters were not acknowledged (28%), 16 schemes were identified as requiring planning permission (24%), nine were the subject of objections or concerns (14%) and eight prompted non-committal replies (12%). PD was potentially accepted for just 15 structures (22%).

None of the three infill schemes involved in the ‘test’ application of Class Q had met any opposition from the relevant LPAs and, in one case, the notification letter was not answered. It seemed likely therefore that wider misuse of Class Q would not be noticed except, possibly, in isolated cases.

On 7 August 2020, Jacobs wrote again to the Borough Council of King’s Lynn & West Norfolk, this time informing them that Class Q would be invoked for the demolition of a pair of abutments at Wiggenhall St Mary Magdalen - works which, by definition, could not be temporary. No consent for permanent retention was requested, but the letter did state that the work would “prevent an emergency arising”. The structures had longstanding cracks and, according to NH, “significant ongoing movement” was being recorded. The Council reserved its position about the suitability of Class Q - leaving it for NH to determine - and the demolition took place in spring 2021.

Then, on 10 September 2020, came a mailout of letters to LPAs from Northumberland to Cornwall, detailing proposals for 29 infill schemes under Class Q (or its equivalent in Scotland), arising from “an ongoing and increasing risk to public safety”. Two further letters were sent in early October. At least nine of the affected structures (29%) were potentially needed for active travel routes in various stages of development; three had heightened heritage or ecological value.

The letters briefly described the bridges and their defects, before recipient planning officers were left in no doubt that “Specifically, and for the avoidance of any ambiguity, the works are being undertaken in order to prevent an emergency arising”.

Amongst those facing burial in stone and concrete was an attractive masonry arch bridge on Isambard Kingdom Brunel’s original St Germans alignment of the Cornwall Railway, dating from 1859 and located south-west of Saltash. Even the most risk-averse engineer would struggle to find anything here to provoke brow-mopping.

NH claimed the bridge to be in “a deteriorating condition with damp and calcite deposits throughout the arch barrel. There is standing water beneath the structure”. And that was it - no specific defects. Moreover, the bridge had not been subject to a capacity assessment as it sat between two fields - 200 yards from the nearest road - carrying a narrow and little-used farm track over the former trackbed. But there it was in black and white: action was needed “to prevent an emergency arising”.

This was systematic misapplication, in the full knowledge that the requirements for Class Q were not even close to being met. The threshold had been set at floor level.

The tide turns

Cornwall Council did not reply to the Brunel bridge letter - or five others it was sent - as it regarded them simply as notifications; Maldon and West Berkshire took the same approach. Northumberland County Council initially expressed no objection to six infill schemes, but revised its position after no works had started within six months (thus demonstrating there were no emergencies), thereafter specifying the need for planning permission. Herefordshire Council received three letters, but told NH to submit planning applications as there was nothing to suggest an emergency had developed. Hampshire, Mendip, Lewes, Stratford-on-Avon, West Devon, Glasgow, South Oxfordshire and the South Downs National Park Authority all followed suit. Telford & Wrekin received two letters and pointed out that Class Q required the structures to be returned to their previous state. Wakefield and Wiltshire offered non-committal responses.

This substantial rejection of Class Q seriously clipped the wings of National Highways. Only one of the 31 schemes went ahead - at Rudgate bridge near Tadcaster, North Yorkshire, which had been subject to an expression of ‘no objection’ from Selby District Council, albeit in response to one of the earlier ‘generic’ PD letters which had then been superseded by another citing Class Q.

This outcome offered the clearest evidence that schemes were actually being prioritised on the basis of opportunism, in contrast to NH’s media claim in which it insisted that they were undertaken “to maintain the safety of communities…and the drivers who use the roads that cross them…”.

In May 2021, after a contractor had been mobilised to infill Cumbria’s Great Musgrave bridge, NH plucked Class Q off the shelf to successfully fend off Eden District Council’s attempt to halt the works following vociferous complaints from the local community and two heritage railways whose longstanding unification ambition involved relaying the track beneath the structure. A retrospective planning application was then demanded as the Council’s position meant there was no prospect of written consent being granted for retention beyond the maximum period. The application was refused in June 2022 and the infill removed 16 months later. The full story of the Great Musgrave saga is told here.

The egregious events in Cumbria and the storm they provoked proved to be the last straw for the Government and it intervened to pause NH’s Major Works programme in July 2021 due to its negative social impacts and misalignment with policies promoting active travel. Infilling and demolition started again in summer 2024, on a smaller scale and with multiple checks and balances introduced.