Potter Bridge Closed To Road Traffic

[Meantime]

19 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

The author of the article appears to have a deep and thorough understanding of what 'locals" think and say.

By "locals" I assume you mean Paul Rice and Richard Price? Who I hope have really taken on board the views of those they represent, rather than just seeking column inches!!!!

I'd have a lot more faith in the article if Mr Sanford had been interviewed and quoted.

[expilot]

Thank you Meantime, for the endorsement, but there are very many "locals" much more knowledgeable than me. I've owned a riverside property four hundred yards upriver from THAT BRIDGE for only the past thirty-four years! I'm still an incomer.

Thirty years ago, as the then Chairman of the River Thurne Tenants Association (RTTA), I was advocating that the bridge to be pedestrianised - on safety grounds initially.  As a bridge pilot I had to cross the bridge many, many times each day of a seven-day-a-week job. I have no wish to exaggerate the danger, but I have witnessed mums with push chairs trying to cross the bridge at the same time as lorries and buses. The bridge width is barely able to cope with both.

There has never been a time when the traffic lights have been set up to allow both sets to show red at the same time and for long enough to allow pedestrians to cross without vehicles trying to cross at the same time. A very unreliable memory suggests that, thirty years ago, local businesses were against the idea because such any such proposed pedestrianisation would, they believed, have had an adverse effect on their businesses and local residents were against the idea because of an inevitable increase in traffic along Bridge Road and Station Road.

The 7.5 tonne weight limit has never been enforced.  Buses - albeit only now nine tonne single deckers - and lorries cross the bridge several times a day.

About a decade ago, the RTTA commissioned a Potter Bridge Enhancement Study. Its author came up with the idea, too, of pedestrianising the bridge, but this time as part of a complete regeneration scheme for the area.  It envisaged making the bridge a genuine tourist destination, landscaped, lit at night to allow al fresco dining and drinking and with occasional entertainment.

For the record, I have received very helpful and positive responses to recent emailed requests for information.  The first came from Norfolk County Council Highways' site engineer (Bridges and VRS).  The engineer tells me that the initial survey is being reviewed and consents being sought for proposed works. The second from the Broads Authority assuring me that closure to navigation was the responsibility of the BA and that no application had yet been made by any agency for any closing of the bridge to navigation - short-term, long-term or permanent - to navigation. The BA assured me that permanent closure to navigation was highly unlikely.

The biggest problem about the latest events at the bridge is that issues get sensationalised - and, with the power and scope of social media and a less than reliable local press, myths, suppositions, comment and speculation quickly assume the status of fact.  In my various roles, I have learned to take nothing at face value.  I believe nothing until I have seen the evidence.

Expilot

[BroadAmbition]

Hi Expilot, the good news is that the agencies / authorities are at least communicating with your good self so at least one person has their finger on t pulse 

Griff

[Bernard]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0dyf0sb?at_campaign_type=owned&at_format=video&at_medium=social&at_bbc_team=editorial&at_link_type=web_link&at_ptr_name=facebook_page&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_link_origin=BBC_Radio_Norfolk&at_link_id=8193BB24-9BDA-11ED-8B84-6C6696E8478F

 

 

[Bernard]

[Turnoar]

Interesting. So, over the summer repairs at night. How does that bode for 3rr competitors who don’t transit in daylight?

[grendel]

how does it bode for boaters moored up there and construction noise?

[FlyingFortress]

Shame it does not involve demolition of that blooming bridge.

Can't believe they are going to re instate 2 way traffic. But then I support they will happen to take away the traffic lights 😫

[FlyingFortress]

Highways Norfolk love traffic lights 🫣

[PaulN]

I think it would be a good idea in order to reduce traffic and preserve it for ever, to try and sell it to the Americans who could dismantle it and rebuild in the Arizona desert like they did with London Bridge. Then replace with a modern footbridge with a ten foot air draught. A modern road bridge already exists.

[Bikertov]

How about we tie a weather balloon to the bridge, on a very short tether, and let the USAF in Lakenheath sort it out from there ?

[grendel]

1 hour ago, PaulN said:

I think it would be a good idea in order to reduce traffic and preserve it for ever, to try and sell it to the Americans who could dismantle it and rebuild in the Arizona desert like they did with London Bridge. Then replace with a modern footbridge with a ten foot air draught. A modern road bridge already exists.

the ten foot draft wouldnt help a lot- the modern road bridge is only about a foot higher then the old bridge.

[FlyingFortress]

2 hours ago, grendel said:

the ten foot draft wouldnt help a lot- the modern road bridge is only about a foot higher then the old bridge.

Enough for me.😁

My how selfish is that 😩

[FlyingFortress]

But then mine was designed to pass under Potter Bridge 😫

[BroadAmbition]

But then mine was designed to pass under Potter Bridge 😫

Ditto

And so were countless other hire / private boats that also cannot now do so

I don't blame that chuffin bridge one iota, I quite like it, it looks kinda 'Just Right' exactly where it is

However:-

If only the Blessed Authority would recommence dredging the Lower bure like their predecessors did, then PHB would not be a problem

Griff

[FlyingFortress]

11 hours ago, BroadAmbition said:

But then mine was designed to pass under Potter Bridge 😫

Ditto

And so were countless other hire / private boats that also cannot now do so

I don't blame that chuffin bridge one iota, I quite like it, it looks kinda 'Just Right' exactly where it is

However:-

If only the Blessed Authority would recommence dredging the Lower bure like their predecessors did, then PHB would not be a problem

Griff

I am not wedded to the idea that dredging the lower Bure is the answer as I don't really know enough about it to have a strong opinion. However there does seem to be a strong contingent that believes that this is a solution.

So why not give it a go?

The worst thing that could happen is that the lower Bure gets deeper.😥

Or am I missing something here?

[grendel]

34 minutes ago, FlyingFortress said:

The worst thing that could happen is that the lower Bure gets deeper.😥

or all the water empties out of hickling broad

[Meantime]

I used to be of the opinion that dredging the lower Bure would help, but I think the time for action has passed and a much larger amount of dredging would be needed to keep the upper Thurne navigable.

20 years ago the current on the lower Bure used to be a lot more noticeable especially on the bends. It has definitely slowed down and if the lack of dredging is the cause then surely it is helping to hold water back up in the system. I'm sure that places such as the Horning Ferry and the road opposite that leads to Woodbastwick flood a lot more than they used.

However the last time I got through that bridge which was only about 5 years ago, we barely scraped through and got called back by the pilot the next day as the tide was rising again. Yet on that occasion we nearly touched the bottom in a number of places that we had no issues with before. Parts of Hickling were very shallow, as was the river leading to Horsey Mere. We never even attempted Catfield.

So I fear that if the lower Bure is the cause of the reduced bridge clearance and the lower Bure was dredged to the point that the levels under the bridge dropped noticeably then I think a lot of the upper Thurne would become to shallow without a shedload of dredging.

[Meantime]

3 minutes ago, grendel said:

or all the water empties out of hickling broad

Was just typing similar as you replied.

 

[BroadAmbition]

Well Grendel, that didn’t happen when it was maintained properly 

Griff 

[grendel]

Griff, I quite agree with that statement.

[jeffbroadslover]

Why not spend some of the extra cash from the increased tolls and dredge the whole system.

The spoil could be used to slightly increase the height of the low lying banks to prevent any flooding in the future.

A bit of thinking and public opinion could be incorporated into the landscaping of the "new" banks to make the area safe and accessible to all ( kayakers, paddleboarders, anglers etc)

As well as improving the area it should help to solve the problem of low bridges and would keep some people in work for a while

Just going to try and get my tongue out of my cheek now

Jeff

[Smoggy]

When it drained harder it would have taken more silt down with it, the stuff they dredged from the lower bure was probably from the thurne/hickling in the first place, as soon as flowing water slows anything being carried drops out, hence the insides of bends are usually much shallower.

Of course then the salt surges from higher sea levels would likely go further upstream.

[FlyingFortress]

See I knew it would not be simple 

[FlyingFortress]

Just knock the flaming monstrosity down