- Haven_Bridge,_Great_Yarmouth,_Norfolk,_England..jpg (57.9 KiB) Viewed 10334 times
The entity overseeing Haven Bridge in Great Yarmouth has finally unveiled the underlying cause for its steadfast closure since April, igniting the ire of mariners and marine industries dependent on its operation to traverse between the Broads and the North Sea.
Peel Ports had previously alluded to ambiguous 'health and safety' justifications for its stance. However, it has come to light that their reluctance to open the bridge stems from a February episode wherein the bridge malfunctioned during an opening, and frustrated members of the public took matters into their own hands.
During this turmoil, certain individuals—reportedly under the influence—attempted to manage traffic, while others breached safety barriers in a bid to ascertain if they could still cross. Additionally, drivers allegedly directed abuse toward bridge personnel.
Peel Ports harbours apprehensions about a recurrence of these disorderly events and thus refuses to open the bridge, notwithstanding its statutory obligation to facilitate river traffic.
A deadlock persists with Norfolk County Council, the proprietor of the crossing, with Peel Ports demanding enhanced measures from the council to address its health and safety concerns prior to reopening. These negotiations have thus far been unfruitful, leaving boaters and businesses at a standstill.
One enterprise has reported significant financial losses due to the continued closure, while a sailor has found himself stranded on the Broads for six weeks, his 100ft vessel too large to navigate the sole alternative route—a lock near Lowestoft.
Meanwhile, discontent within the boating community intensifies. A prominent figure remarked, "They are in violation of the law, unequivocally. They must be held accountable. They cannot forsake their statutory duty due to the misconduct of a few individuals."
YEARS OF EXASPERATION AND A DAY OF MAYHEM
The 94-year-old bridge, a vital conduit into Yarmouth across the Yare, has been plagued with issues for years.
A defect in 2019 rendered it inoperative and necessitated extensive repairs.
Pandemic-induced delays meant these repairs were only finalised at the end of the previous year.
However, merely weeks later, new issues surfaced, culminating in the bridge's breakdown on February 2, which incited chaotic scenes.
"We witnessed individuals leaping barriers, wandering onto the road, and even an intoxicated person attempting to direct traffic—all on the same day," recounted Richard Goffin, a director at Peel Ports, following the incident. He also reported staff had faced threats of violence on multiple occasions.
Over half a dozen incidents were logged in the days following the initial February 2 disruption, according to a spokesperson.
"The emphasis lies more on the occurrence rather than the frequency. No one should face threats at their workplace," he added.
He highlighted that the current scenario exposes staff to "unacceptable risks."
Efforts to address these safety concerns with Norfolk County Council have yet to yield results.
"NCC is refusing to acknowledge any health and safety responsibilities," he added.
In contrast, NCC has stated that repairs were conducted post-February incident and that the bridge is now fully operational.
BLOCKADE REPERCUSSIONS
The bridge blockade is profoundly affecting Norfolk's boating community.
The four-year closure has incurred a loss of approximately £2m for Goodchild Marine, a boatbuilding firm, and the current closure imposes additional costs due to the need for extensive detours to test their vessels via alternative routes from their Burgh Castle site.
Alan Goodchild, who manages the business alongside his wife Sue, expressed the immense frustration felt by river users.
"As a company, it creates massive logistical challenges and is highly disruptive," he stated. Insiders within the boating community have indicated preparations for legal action against Peel Ports for failing to meet its statutory obligations, potentially holding the firm liable for significant financial reparations.
POTENTIAL LEGAL CLASH?
Peter Ward of the Broom Owner's Club—a consortium of seafaring cruiser enthusiasts—has been a vocal critic of the situation.
"They are violating the law, plain and simple," he asserted. "There should be repercussions. They cannot disregard their statutory duty due to the misbehaviour of a few individuals." Members of the Broads Authority are increasingly concerned and are advocating for a resolution.
A spokeswoman emphasized, "This situation is adversely impacting local enterprises and private boat owners who are unable to transit the port to the sea."
"The Authority urges both parties to resolve the matter expeditiously."