Decay on Queen's Bridge in Bedford recorded years before closure - as parties clash over maintenance
Councillors have clashed over Bedford’s Queen’s Bridge – which was closed in August 2025 amid safety concerns.
Inspection reports recorded rot and timber deterioration at Bedford’s Queen’s Bridge years before the crossing was closed, with councillors rowing over whether it was properly maintained and when replacement planning should have begun.
Queen’s Bridge, constructed from Ekki hardwood, is a five-span foot and cycle bridge crossing the River Great Ouse between Queen’s Park and Kempston.
In December, the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) submitted a Freedom of Information (FOI) request asking for the structural inspection reports, principal inspections, general inspections, and condition assessments for the bridge from January 2019 until 2025.
It also asked for correspondence or briefing papers relating to the structural condition of Queen’s Bridge in the 12 months prior to closure.
This found that a principal inspection in November 2014 recorded “rot” and “fungi” near the crowns of both arches, alongside deterioration affecting parts of the U-shaped frames supporting the central span deck from the arches.
The report recommended works including removing vegetation from affected areas, investigating the extent of rot, and completing refurbishment measures, alongside addressing deck defects such as raised planks.
A general inspection in 2019 described the structure as being in a “FAIR condition” and said most defects identified were “longstanding”, while also recording “areas of rot” to timber arch beams and vegetation growth on timber elements.
The same inspection listed remedial actions including resin injection or replacement of timber arch beams “where rot is evident”, and noted that a structural assessment should be considered to determine whether U-shaped frames were fully supporting the arch beams as designed.
In July 2022, another general inspection noted “almost total erosion of existing preservative” and recorded defects including splits in timber beams, section loss at bolt connections at one U-frame, and loose deck planks identified for repair.
An engineer’s comment described the structure as being in a “satisfactory” condition while noting exceptions.
A council technical note records that a safety inspection was carried out on August 21, 2025.
It states that significant decay was identified at the crown hinge/joint of the eastern timber arch, with material loss measured to a depth of 250mm and exposed threads on bolted connections.
The note warns that in its current condition the joint could fail suddenly, potentially resulting in partial collapse, and recommended that the bridge be closed to the travelling public with immediate effect.
A council options report dated October 13, 2025 states that the bridge was “immediately closed” following the August inspection, and that clamps were proposed as safeguarding measures while options were developed.
The same report states: “Considering its age the bridge is approaching the end of its serviceable life,” adding that a bridge of this type typically has a serviceable life of 40 to 50 years depending on maintenance intervention and location.
In a statement provided to the LDRS, Conservative councillor Marc Frost said Queen’s Bridge “did not deteriorate suddenly” and claimed it had been allowed to run with “minimal capital investment for well over a decade”.
He alleged that annual spending between 2011 and 2023 was “negligible”, creating what he described as a “cumulative structural risk” without a funded replacement strategy.
Councillor Frost also said the current administration had increased inspections and intervention since May 2023, and argued that professional inspections before 2025 advised targeted repair and monitoring rather than immediate replacement.
The former Liberal Democrat administration was approached for comment on those claims.
A Bedford Liberal Democrat Group spokesperson replied: “This sounds like an excuse to me. In fact, the council’s own press office confirmed only last month that the bridge was ‘regularly maintained’.”
The LDRS asked the council why a replacement scheme was not developed sooner, as a council press release said the bridge was “reaching the end of its expected life”.
At the time of publication, the council had not responded.