Jump to content

The Haven Bridge


Vaughan

Recommended Posts

When we hired a larger boat than we have now Reedham bridge swung even though we didn't need it but when we contacted St. Olaves they said they couldn't swing as a train was due, we waited for an hour...no train! Seems to me that it all depends on who is on duty at the time.

Sent from my Moto C Plus using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, tonplus said:

When we hired a larger boat than we have now Reedham bridge swung even though we didn't need it but when we contacted St. Olaves they said they couldn't swing as a train was due, we waited for an hour...no train! Seems to me that it all depends on who is on duty at the time.

Sent from my Moto C Plus using Tapatalk
 

Sorry cannot help myself, :default_norty:

That must have been a long long time ago! There hasn't been a swing bridge at St Olaves for many years since they built the new tall bridge and the low iron one is fixed. :default_beerchug:

I'm guessing you mean Somerleyton bridge which is the swing rail bridge, but it is ironic that way back there did used to be a swing bridge over the cut for road traffic before the high road bridge was built.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the very point of a Forum - to be open, to discuss, and I can see no reason why this being discussed here need to be 'restricted' to members areas, closed, stopped, hindered call it what you like. All the information that Charlie and myself are sharing is factual not hearsay, not alleged to have happened and so on, but we will of course choose to share (or not) as the case may be what is heard back from Peel Ports as to this case.

I think the fact is Peel Ports as an organization is a large respected operator and that on the face of matters some local failures took place especially  with communication and service. If nothing more comes of this than people 'at the coal face' are to appreciate that better communications with what are effectively are their customers (even if one is not paying) can be very helpful then that would be a good thing. As Charlie has said, if I was told something like we will need another 24hr notice, or there was a fault with the bridge - anything - other steps could have been taken, for example to come in at Lowestoft having eased right back when at sea to make things easier on crew and have to have spent less time at sea in those conditions.

 

 

 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry cannot help myself, :default_norty:
That must have been a long long time ago! There hasn't been a swing bridge at St Olaves for many years since they built the new tall bridge and the low iron one is fixed. :default_beerchug:
I'm guessing you mean Somerleyton bridge which is the swing rail bridge, but it is ironic that way back there did used to be a swing bridge over the cut for road traffic before the high road bridge was built.
Yes, I just couldn't remember what it was called! Suffering from early onset of I can't remember where my dam car keys are!

Sent from my Moto C Plus using Tapatalk

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn’t want the thread in full members area either. There maybe some points later from Peel that might have to go in there if I make them public at all. I along with everyone else will just have to wait and see

As Robin has said, all our points to date have been and will continue to be factual 

Griff

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Hockham Admiral said:

It can be moved into full members  if Vaughan, Robin & Griff wish?

Sorry to be late replying - I have been having me lunch!

Personally I don't see that we have been saying anything out of order, even if a formal complaint is now to be made against Peel Ports.

As the OP, I started this thread with no knowledge of the events themselves, as I wasn't there. I was trying to emphasise the historical position of the Yare as a maritime navigation and the importance, therefore, that bridges both road and rail, have to give priority to vessels on a tidal river.

This is therefore a general discussion which goes much further than just last weekend's episode.

 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting point. It would seem from what we hear, that the bridge gave immediate passage to a commercial vessel but resisted passage to a pleasure boat.
 


I’m not saying that’s the case, I don’t know.
But I can understand why it might be.
I doubt pleasure vessels could ever be expected to be given the same priority as commercial traffic by a company that makes the majority of its income from commercial traffic could we?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if there is written down anywhere a time limit that they can hold a vessel for a bridge lift, either within their own documentation or within legislation, there you go everyone, a nice little research project while I get on and get some work done.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure that the legislation around not blocking tidal waterways takes into account whether the vessel is commercial or pleasure, in fact I'm fairly certain it doesn't. So that got me thinking about a few things;

Firstly, why isn't the bridge manned 24hrs a day like the railway bridges? It would appear that you can arrange an out of hours lift at a price? Shouldn't it be free at all times of the day, like the railway bridges?

Secondly, the legislation around not blocking the navigation was probably drafted when the river traffic was mainly commercial and there was little if any pleasure traffic around. Would such legislation ever get passed now given that the balance of traffic, especially for those bridges has been very much reversed in terms of more pleasure than commercial traffic? and balanced against the need of the very many more road traffic users than there would have been when such laws were first put in place. With my sensible non boating hat on, I can see that not holding up many commuters on their way to work, should have priority over any pleasure activity.

The fact is off course that regardless of whether such laws would be put in place now, it is currently in place and should be adhered to, even if some leeway has to be given, as long as it is properly explained.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

I'm not sure that the legislation around not blocking tidal waterways takes into account whether the vessel is commercial or pleasure, in fact I'm fairly certain it doesn't. So that got me thinking about a few things;

Firstly, why isn't the bridge manned 24hrs a day like the railway bridges? It would appear that you can arrange an out of hours lift at a price? Shouldn't it be free at all times of the day, like the railway bridges?

Secondly, the legislation around not blocking the navigation was probably drafted when the river traffic was mainly commercial and there was little if any pleasure traffic around. Would such legislation ever get passed now given that the balance of traffic, especially for those bridges has been very much reversed in terms of more pleasure than commercial traffic? and balanced against the need of the very many more road traffic users than there would have been when such laws were first put in place. With my sensible non boating hat on, I can see that not holding up many commuters on their way to work, should have priority over any pleasure activity.

The fact is off course that regardless of whether such laws would be put in place now, it is currently in place and should be adhered to, even if some leeway has to be given, as long as it is properly explained.

Very well explained and I think you are quite right.

I don't think it's off topic, but I have an example of this. The Canal du Midi was built as a commercial waterway and cargo barges (Peniches) have always been given priority in locks, especially on the staircase at Fonserrannes. The last two wine carrying barges - appropriately named "Hebe" and "Bacchus" - ceased trading in 1983. Since then, old Peniches converted into hotel barges for rich Americans have taken to claiming priority as they say that they are commercial traffic. We in the hire fleets, counter this by saying that they are simply hire boats, so we are also "commercial".

Suffice to say that the argument is on-going, but the point is this - if it were not for the use of the canal which is now made by pleasure boats, it would have fallen into dis-use in the early 80s and yet it is now a UNESCO site of world heritage.

I think this links us to the other discussion about the BA's responsibility to navigation, and resistance to the Sandford principle.

The Canal du Midi is proof of how pleasure boats can keep a waterway alive and we can only do this by insisting on ancient rights of navigation on the waterways, even if they are no longer "commercial".

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peel ports bridge lift information

http://www.eastportuk.co.uk/bridge-lifts.aspx

And this from here from the Harbour Revision Order 2015

HRO pdf 2015

 

51.
By virtue of section 14(2)(b) a harbour revision order shall not be made in relation to a harbour unless the MMO is satisfied that the making of the order is desirable in
the interests of securing the improvement, maintenance or management of the
harbour in an efficient and economical manner, or of facilitating the efficient and economical transport of goods or passengers by sea or in the interests of the recreational use of sea-going ships.
 
Maybe the Marine Management Organisation should be infomed of such goings on inthis organisation
 
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

Very well explained and I think you are quite right.

I don't think it's off topic, but I have an example of this. The Canal du Midi was built as a commercial waterway and cargo barges (Peniches) have always been given priority in locks, especially on the staircase at Fonserrannes. The last two wine carrying barges - appropriately named "Hebe" and "Bacchus" - ceased trading in 1983. Since then, old Peniches converted into hotel barges for rich Americans have taken to claiming priority as they say that they are commercial traffic. We in the hire fleets, counter this by saying that they are simply hire boats, so we are also "commercial".

Suffice to say that the argument is on-going, but the point is this - if it were not for the use of the canal which is now made by pleasure boats, it would have fallen into dis-use in the early 80s and yet it is now a UNESCO site of world heritage.

I think this links us to the other discussion about the BA's responsibility to navigation, and resistance to the Sandford principle.

The Canal du Midi is proof of how pleasure boats can keep a waterway alive and we can only do this by insisting on ancient rights of navigation on the waterways, even if they are no longer "commercial".

 

Actually Vaughan the canals in the UK prove exactly the same , they keep the system alive with leisure boats these days after the IWA took the government to task and a certain well know minister stepped in .

Most canal's have bridges that  even narrow boat's can't get under , Leeds Liverpool for example , even though its a,r

A boat has been built to a safe standard, and spent a few years on the coast and been maintained by its previous and current owners. The same boat has been subject to a weekends meticulous scrutiny by the crew who's very lives would depend upon her. She has now completed an exhausting journey from Plymouth to The Broads where she will now require a BSS!! If ever there was a test of how safe a boat is, then I would have thought the journey just completed would be its a right of way for the land owner he has no right to do anything that would impede navigation .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, EastCoastIPA said:

It would appear that you can arrange an out of hours lift at a price?

Sorry, Where did that come from?

1 hour ago, EastCoastIPA said:

Secondly, the legislation around not blocking the navigation was probably drafted when the river traffic was mainly commercial and there was little if any pleasure traffic around.

Sorry again but which bit of legislation is this referring to and how did it apply here?

And finally, No John, putting this in "members only" was not what I meant. Forwarning Peel Ports folk about the details of any complaint in the pipeline is what I meant. Taking the whole thread into members does not secure it, I merely suggest that posters be careful what they say. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

Sorry, Where did that come from?

Sorry again but which bit of legislation is this referring to and how did it apply here?

And finally, No John, putting this in "members only" was not what I meant. Forwarning Peel Ports folk about the details of any complaint in the pipeline is what I meant. Taking the whole thread into members does not secure it, I merely suggest that posters be careful what they say. 

Seems when I quote it will only include your text, not my original text, so you'll have to fill in the gaps :default_laugh:

From bits I've read here and on Facebook I got the impression from Robin that an out of hours lift could be arranged for the passing of some shillings from one person to another? and actually upon checking FairTmiddlin's link to Peel Ports it does state there that Haven bridge can be lifted between sunset and sun rise in exchange for £200.

I cannot think of the exact legislation and maybe totally wrong, but I understood that if you build a railway bridge or road over a tidal navigation it has to be lifting so as to not block the navigation to river traffic? I was also under the impression that river traffic had priority over non river traffic, although in practise that very rarely seems to be the case. I've probably read this forum since it's inception 10 years or so ago and back then there used to be a lot more sea going members and the subject of bridges, especially railway ones were very hot topics. To answer your question in terms of how it applies here? I was trying to keep the topic general as suggested rather than specific to this one passage.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, grendel said:

OOps dont know what happened there Ricardo, looks like your post had a hiccup, you have a short while to edit it (30 minutes from posting) before it become permanent. 

Its OK its been a day of rubbish internet and weird things happening :default_biggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can inform forumites that I have received a reply to my points / questions raised with Peel Ports GYA

Some of the questions have been answered satisfactorily,  However some of them have not, so I have discussed it with Robin then sent the document back electronically for them to look at it again with a bit of encouragement from yours truly

Griff

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

For details of our Guidelines, please take a look at the Terms of Use here.