Tolls on drivers, imposing weight limits and more suggestions to ease traffic have been made as hopes for a third bridge over the River Thames have re-emerged.
The Labour administration at Reading Borough Council has rekindled a suggestion that a third bridge over the River Thames could be built to help alleviate traffic in the town.
A third bridge which would connect the A329(M) with the Henley Road and Caversham Park Road junction forms part of the council’s Transport Strategy 2040 and its Air Quality Action Plan 2024-29.
READ MORE: Reading council leader encourages residents to give their views on Air Quality Action Plan
Neighbours have put forward their own suggestions for what could be done to alleviate traffic in reaction to a Local Democracy Reporting Service article on The Reading Chronicle website.
One commenter with the username Resi Dent said: “Put traffic cameras on Reading and Caversham Bridges and charge any vehicle that’s not travelling to or from an address in Reading.
“That’ll cut down the traffic just cutting through the town.”
A fellow user appeared to agree. Discerning Pallet said: “Just stick electronic tolls in for anyone not a resident of Reading Borough Council and see the traffic levels drop dramatically.
“Wanna get from east to west Reading? Use the M4.”
However, that suggestion was not fully welcomed, as it was pointed out that people from suburbs and villages commute into Reading for work.
Commenter ‘Im in trouble’ said: “What about those who are not resident in Reading but working in Reading and have to drive to get in to work?
“I start work at 7am and cannot use buses to get there due to where I live. Do I have to pay this charge you propose?”
While there are hopes that a third Thames crossing could be established, the project would require the consent of Oxfordshire County Council and Wokingham Borough Council, as the proposed location of the bridge would cut across council boundaries.
While South Oxfordshire District Council is not the relevant highway authority, it is a consultee.
The project has proven unpopular in South Oxfordshire, with councillor Mike Giles, (Liberal Democrats, Sonning Common) recently calling it ‘half-baked’, ‘very expensive’ and potentially harmful to the environment.
Commenter ‘Road Rage’ suggested imposing weight restrictions of 7.5 tonnes on roads coming into Reading from South Oxfordshire.
READ MORE: Clash over prospect of third Thames Bridge to ease traffic through Reading
Johnjones106 called for the councils to work together to move ahead with the project. He said: “This conversation is as old as the hills?
“Just get it sorted and work together or maybe the decision should be given by central government if they can’t work together.
“I’m so sick of South Oxfordshire blocking every proposal so yes charge all non Reading drivers a toll until South Oxfordshire see sense!”
Addressing South Oxfordshire council, TTA -T2A-TO-C3 Retired said: “They object to taking Reading’s Traffic, which is why the A329(M) does not cross the Thames.
“Do they not realise Traffic flows both ways, into and out of Oxfordshire?”
Planners at South Oxfordshire council were called ‘smug’ by Discerning Pallet. They said: “Half of South Oxfordshire uses Reading as a cut-through.
“They then block the third bridge as they don’t want their precious villages polluted.
“They are happy for my kids to choke on their fumes though.”
READ MORE: Parking charge hikes, more 20mph zones in Reading measures to tackle poor air quality
A consultation on Reading council’s Air Quality Action Plan, which includes the Third Thames Bridge proposal, can be found on the Consult Reading website.
The deadline for responses is January 17.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel