View Single Post
Unread 30-01-2007, 14:45   #14
Thomas J Stamp
Chairman/Publicity
 
Thomas J Stamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: The Home of Hurling
Posts: 2,708
Default

Quote:
The fact that the metal portion of the viaduct is not the original must lessen the value of its status as a listed structure, and replication of the steel in the original position on the bridge supports would, as suggested, allow the bridge be again doubled ( or with a design cantelevered off the masonry structure, possibly trebbled).
Not necessarily, once a structure is listed you cannot do anything to it without planning permission. Now, that's just a pain for IE/OPW but it can be done. However, beware. It may be entirely reasonable for the planners to turn down (or for an tascie to appeal) a planning that would radically alter the bridge. Granted, its a railway bridge, it should do the job its supposed to do, but I have seen some crazy decisions in my time. It could even go as far as a direction that another bridge be built. Given the potential for such a calamity I'd be surprised if IE want to touch that with a 20 foot barge pole.
__________________
We are the passengers
Thomas J Stamp is offline   Reply With Quote