By Rob Cameron | Prague Correspondent

The Vysehrad railway bridge, an aging yet iconic structure stretching over the River Vltava in Prague, has become the centre of a growing controversy. As plans emerge to dismantle and relocate the 123-year-old steel bridge, preservationists, architects, and residents are clashing with transport authorities over its future.

Prague, often celebrated for its remarkably preserved architectural landscape, draws millions of visitors each year with its blend of medieval, Baroque, and modern styles. The potential loss or transformation of a historical landmark such as the Vysehrad bridge has ignited passionate debate.

A Historic Symbol

Architect and bridge engineer Petr Tej, a vocal advocate for the bridge’s restoration, believes the structure is integral to the city’s historic character.

“The panorama it forms with the Vysehrad fortress is as important to Prague as the view of Charles Bridge and Prague Castle,” he said, standing beside the weathered steel girders of the bridge.

Despite its rust and visible wear, Tej and the Vysehrad Bridge Foundation argue the structure is far from beyond saving. Their engineers, experienced in global restoration projects, estimate that only 15% of the steel needs replacing—far less than the 70% suggested by previous assessments.

Their proposal: repair the bridge in place, avoid disrupting rail services, and save both money and a cultural landmark. Their cause has gained traction—endorsed by UNESCO and backed by more than 25,000 citizens who signed a petition to preserve the bridge.

Rail Officials Say Replacement Is Necessary

But the Czech Railway Authority sees it differently. Pavel Paidar, head of construction preparation, insists the bridge can no longer support Prague’s growing transport demands.

“Right now, it only handles about 60% of its potential capacity because of corrosion,” he explained. “With increasing rail traffic expected, this will become a serious bottleneck.”

The proposed solution includes a completely new bridge—with a third track—designed to resemble the original’s silhouette while meeting modern transport standards. Visualisations show a bronze-toned structure with familiar arches, aiming to blend old charm with new function.

The plan also includes relocating the original bridge 8 km south to Modrany, where it would serve as a foot and cycle bridge.

A Question of Context

But moving the bridge has raised further objections. Critics argue that planting a large, urban-style railway bridge in the middle of a riverside meadow would look jarring and out of place.

Philanthropist and foundation co-founder Tomas Bistricky believes there’s a more elegant solution: build a lighter, secondary bridge beside the original to add capacity while preserving the historical landmark.

“There’s a false narrative that heritage and infrastructure are in conflict,” he said. “In reality, they can support each other.”

The Tension Between Past and Progress

This debate strikes at a broader tension in Prague—how to balance modern development with a fierce commitment to architectural heritage. The decision now lies in the hands of the Czech government, which must choose whether to prioritise rail capacity or cultural preservation—or find a compromise that honours both.

In a city that has weathered centuries with its historic heart intact, the outcome of the Vysehrad bridge debate will resonate far beyond steel and rivets. It’s a question of identity, legacy, and what kind of future Prague chooses to build.