The Bascule Bridge, Lowestoft.

Could Lowestoft get a new bascule bridge?

BY Anthony Carroll Friday, November 30, 2012
6:30 AM

The A12 Bascule Bridge in Lowestoft could be replaced by a new four-lane road crossing over Lake Lothing as part of multi-million pound proposals to regenerate the town, it emerged this week.

The new bridge – which could be built further inland than the existing one – forms part of an ambitious scheme to improve radically the town’s infrastructure and open up parts of the port for redevelopment.

But the plans being drawn up by Waveney District Council and Suffolk County Council would see the town’s ageing bridge replaced rather than the creation of a long-awaited third crossing, which many people believe is crucial to combat Lowestoft’s chronic congestion and attract much-needed inward investment.

It is understood that the proposal for a new four-lane Bascule Bridge – which would link Commercial Road on the north bank of Lake Lothing to roads on the south side – is being seriously considered as the solution to the long-standing traffic problems that have dogged the town for decades.

Although the two councils refused to discuss their plans in detail this week, it is believed that the new bridge is being earmarked to cross Lake Lothing further inland than the existing 40-year-old three-lane bridge, with new roundabouts built to control traffic. The old bridge would be removed to make way for a new cycle and pedestrian crossing.

News of the bridge plans emerged as senior politicians revealed they would be meeting in January to “progress the development of a vision for Lowestoft which will seek to radically improve the town’s infrastructure and create genuine economic prosperity”. They are expected to unveil more details in the new year.

Colin Law, leader of Waveney District Council, said: “Lowestoft has long- standing infrastructure issues and high levels of deprivation and this is a golden opportunity to do something about his. This is not just about a third bridge and hoping in isolation that it would attract new businesses and employment opportunities.

“This is a broad but detailed review of the economic opportunities Waveney has and we are developing a comprehensive vision to address the constraints that currently hold back delivery of those opportunities.

“We are seeking growth and prosperity and this vision is a clear indication that Waveney means business.”

The town’s three-lane Bascule Bridge was built in 1972 and was designed to have a 30-year lifespan.

Because of its age, it requires regular maintenance – the latest round completed on Monday – and it was revealed in February that it had been closed for repairs on more than 151 nights over five years.

As well as scheduled closures, the bridge is a constant source of frustration for motorists as big queues of traffic build up in the town centre whenever it is raised to let ships enter or leave the harbour.

It is believed that a replacement could be built at a higher level over the water, to ensure that more vessels can pass underneath without the need for it to open – thereby reducing traffic disruption.

And any new bridge would be likely to lift and close more quickly, thanks to its modern design.

Guy McGregor, county council cabinet member for roads and transport, has lobbied for his authority to take over the current bridge’s maintenance from the Department of Transport to resolve its problems.

Looking forward to the ambitious proposals, he told The Journal: “Lowestoft has long-standing and well-recognised infrastructure issues which we are determined to resolve once and for all. This will not just be achieved with isolated projects but with a concerted, co-ordinated and sustainable approach to the town’s needs.”

He added: “Any vision for Lowestoft must have at its heart a determination to create jobs, prosperity and help the town become an improved destination for leisure, retail and business.”

By moving the road crossing further inland, the plans could also see the Station Square area transformed – as envisaged within previous proposals to improve rail and bus links at the town’s train station.

Waveney MP Peter Aldous, who is involved in drawing up the plans, said: “It’s important that any scheme relieves congestion around Lake Lothing, helps make the town centre a more attractive shopping and leisure destination and enables port-related businesses to realise their full potential... Improving Lowestoft’s transport system is vitally important to create jobs, improve accessibility to the town centre and to relieve congestion.”

However, he stressed government funding still had to be secured. He added: “In recent months a variety of proposals have been put forward. It is important to consider them all to establish if they are practical in both technical and financial terms before a comprehensive package is put forward for public consultation prior to full plans being worked up, which can then be promoted and on which I can lobby government for funding.”

The demand for a third road crossing in Lowestoft has led to businessman Peter Colby coming up with plans for a tidal barrage comprising a lock and two lifting bridges that would allow traffic to continue flowing at all times.

His proposals – based on a Dutch polder dam – would cost an estimated £30m but would also aim to protect the town from flooding and, in doing so, open up acres of low-lying dockside land for redevelopment.

Mr Colby, who hails from Lowestoft and owns Sprowston-based Peter Colby Commercials Ltd, welcomed the councils’ new plans but doubted whether moving the Bascule Bridge would solve the town’s congestion problems.

He said: “It is a good thing that they are talking about it, but I do not believe it will solve anything. What it does show is that they may have got the money and just need to spend it in what I believe is the right place.”

9 comments

Mr J.L Cooper its a good thought-but in all truth its just not going to happen with this bunch of Marsh Mallows in charge. Succumb to Lowestoft being trashed for the 21st Century and beyond. By the way I live in Kessingland and things are moving well here with the turbines.

Report this comment

Colin James Watling

Monday, December 3, 2012
NOW Lowestoft is talking sense Its jobs that are needed and permanent ones With a Bridge further upstream getting rid of the Bascuel Bridge will give Lowestoft an open to the sea port No Bridges No Lock THAT is what industry needs USE the river for the towns prosperity all this worry about cars getting over the river The Port should come first, at Yarmouth those fools in charge want to shut the Yare off from the sea Lowestoft don't go down that road, OPEN IT UP FOR INDUSTRY

Report this comment

John L Cooper

Saturday, December 1, 2012
Whats up with these overpaid idiots! We don't need to move the current bridge we need a third bridge! This wont solve any of the traffic issues when the bridge opens!

Report this comment

lpeek

Saturday, December 1, 2012
So what if they trash the Town up more than what it already is-their very good at doing soo and wasting money and resources on messy things that make it worse-I just thank God I don't have to use any of it or rely on it.

Report this comment

Colin James Watling

Friday, November 30, 2012
@vinny.p - For once, I agree with you! This scheme would be the final straw for the viability of Lowestoft town centre for all the reasons you state.

Report this comment

point du jour

Friday, November 30, 2012
What a load of rubbish yet again brought up by our councils. This is just stupid to make a bridge further inland away from the town centre fair enough but to then make the current bridge pedestrian is beyond belief. Where will all the traffic go from battery green road and belvedere road they will be dead ends I take it. So then for traffic to cross they have to go inland taking all holiday traffic away from our town and seafront. Come on councils get a grip and no doubt this will get the go ahead so to travel into town locals will have to travel further how will this be good for the enviroment This makes Me colbys idea better so that we will still have 3 road traffic crossings.

Report this comment

vinny.p

Friday, November 30, 2012
Once again, the only people making money in Lowestoft are the ones that draw up these plans. How much does all this planning cost? Could Lowestoft have saved all this through the years and bought it's own bridge? We need a decent crossing in the town. Do I get a fee for that?

Report this comment

BabyDavid

Friday, November 30, 2012
The solution for Great Yarmouth is far simpler and more urgent. Storm surge barrier that pays for itself. It can be used as a bridge since the foundations are full width 96m at north or south location.Norfolk Broads saline ingress is getting worse.. Any real angler will confirm this...they survey rivers every day at no cost ..Please don't put WDC with SCDC decisions unless you want eroded beaches, yes both councils do not understand basic sediment cycles..I'm wasting my time writing this, as we all know we can't interupt the palpable tea and biscuits and zero stress of council thinkers who say 'we are not paid to think' I heard that from another council recently..even WDC say we are " facilitators" aka regen is sit back and do we need more biscuits.. or Broadland we can go to Saudi, we are really clever...same old stories.. Councils are so boring in East Anglia, they are 30, 40 years behind reality.. imo.. I dare say there are real public council folk, yet to meet them yet..imo..

Report this comment

Dave01

Friday, November 30, 2012
Crikey.. here we go again.. the problem has been circulating for 80 years (1930s) and they didn't have cars then! Old 70s bridge (LT), made of steel, worn out and needs replacing.. fact, ok replace as 3 or 4 lane..that will take 2 or 3 years for councils to decide... Fact. both LT and YH need 3rd river crossings to create 'free flow' of commercial and local traffic. Can this be raised an issue with SCC and NCC OK, another 2 years to get a decision to place on a 'wish list'....The engineering solution to both towns is simple. YET it will cost umpteen thosands more in endless reports for councils to make wrong decisions.. as normal.. We have this 'news story' every year....Peter Colby's solution to Lowestoft is achievable. Might need a tweek or two, i.e. to resolve inland sedimentation.. and natural progression of sediments.. fixable via bypass channels to the lake.. we shall see..

Report this comment

Dave01

Friday, November 30, 2012