The only site access was the appellant’s privately owned bridge, which also provided access to the highway maintenance business and yard. The existing bridge had replaced an earlier version and had been designed to accommodate vehicles used by the business, with a maximum weight of 27 tonnes. The inspector was concerned that with no width restriction preventing an HGV and car from passing on the bridge, overloading could result. He also had concern that heavier HGVs could be generated by the new residential use and that there was no separate refuge for pedestrians. It was also confirmed at the hearing that the existing parapet section of the bridge, a temporary arrangement, would not be sufficient to prevent a vehicle from falling into the river below. Despite the appellant’s claims that improvements could be made to the bridge to address these concerns, no details were provided for the inspector to take into account and she dismissed the appeal.
Inspector: Janine Townsley; Hearing