Closure of Cookham Bridge

[Cookham Webmaster]

The Cookham Society is calling on the council to reduce business rates and change plans for its Cookham Bridge closure to soften the blow on businesses and residents.

The grade II-listed river crossing, built in 1867, requires essential maintenance and is set to close to motorists for 20 weeks from Monday, October 16.

Windsor and Maidenhead council will decide at a planning committee meeting on Wednesday whether to grant listed building consent to carry out the works.

[Thomas Lee]

I sure wish that the bridge could be repaired to the level of supporting bi-directional traffic. Given the huge increase in traffic that all the new development WILL bring, it would make long-terrm sense. Yes, it would be more expensive and might take more time - but a free running bridge across the Thames would be a benefit.

[Roger]

I think they decided the A404 bridge compensated for Cookham and Marlow bridge. .

[Watchman]

Disagree with the above post.
Keep the bridge one way only.
As an historic monument, if you like, its extended life span is far more important to this community than having any "benefit" whatsoever
in making it bi-directional and, as a direct consequence, have its foundations loosened towards collapse under the weight of traffic.
Regarding the proposed developments and over-bearing traffic, people have just got to show patience.
Or else use another bridge.

[Scotty]

If Cookham Bridge had two-way traffic, it would encourage a rat-run of through traffic to Cookham from both directions, drawn from far and wide. The village street, Pound and Sutton Road would be constantly full of heavy traffic and frequently blocked.

We may grumble about our historic bridge with its limitations, but they are protecting Cookham from a far worse fate.