A row over a historic bridge's concrete 'infill' is building ahead of a decision over its future.
Congham Bridge near King's Lynn has been at the centre of a dispute after National Highways filled the bridge in with concrete in 2021 without prior planning permission.
It caused uproar among heritage campaigners, with West Norfolk Council looking set to force the roads agency to restore the bridge, on the former King’s Lynn to Fakenham line, to its former state.
But National Highways has defended its decision, arguing it was in the "public interest" to carry out the work which cost nearly £127,000.
READ MORE: National Highways set to be forced to restore Congham bridge
Its head of the historical railways estate, Hélène Rossiter, said: "We believe the strengthening works is in the public interest.
“We infilled the bridge under permitted development powers as we deemed there was a risk to public safety. The bridge 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.”
READ MORE: Anger mounts over filling in of Congham Bridge
Campaign group the Historic Railway Estate Group has claimed National Highways has misrepresented evidence about the bridge's state of disrepair and that the structure's risks could have been managed through repairs and the installation of crash barriers.
Graeme Bickerdike, of the HRE Group said: "The company's response was characteristically disproportionate."
It comes amid widespread concern of how the agency is managing and maintaining historic structures across the country.
The retrospective application has received more than 350 objections from locals and organisations including Save Britain's Heritage and Historic Buildings and Places.
A West Norfolk Council officer has recommended National Highways be made to restore the bridge due to the infill resulting in a "loss of historical significance", arguing the work had "severed its link" to its historic context as a railway bridge.
Councillors will decide its fate next week.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here