New Lower Thames Crossing

[Truvelo]

Now let's see if the big GSJs shown in the initial consultation material make it through to the final design.

[darkcape]

The best choice IMO but I would've preferred the eastern leg to the south side rather than western.

[Glom]

Now let's see if the big GSJs shown in the initial consultation material make it through to the final design.

Was this the option with the four level stack? *bursts with excitement*

[jackal]

Unfortunately not, that was route 4, the preferred route is 3. This is the route 3 A13 junction:

The connection to the A13E is inadequate, going through the existing Orsett Cock roundabout.

At the A2, the recommendation at the consultation was for the Eastern Southern Link, but the preferred route is for the Western Southern Link. This was planned with the 30mph trumpet shown below:

HE now think 't is possible to improve the performance of the WSL and provide a full standard free-flowing junction solution at the new A2 junction' (link).

[fras]

All experience of road schemes in the last 30 years is they will be heavily delayed, or not built at all. Is this to be another example ?

The boss of HE says they want it there in 2025 so work must start in 2020, a mere 3 and a half years away. I can't see it myself, frankly.

[Scratchwood]

The best choice IMO but I would've preferred the eastern leg to the south side rather than western.

I guess the advantage of the western connection to the A2 rather than the eastern one, is that it makes it a shorter alternative to the existing M25 for drivers already on the M25 or coming out of London, for days like today when one of the tunnels was closed due to a breakdown...

[Scratchwood]

All experience of road schemes in the last 30 years is they will be heavily delayed, or not built at all. Is this to be another example ?

The boss of HE says they want it there in 2025 so work must start in 2020, a mere 3 and a half years away. I can't see it myself, frankly.

I think this will be built, the area will grind to a halt without the extra crossing, and with the existing crossing having raked in vast sums of money over the years, it's not as if it'll require controversial new road tolls either...

[fras]

All experience of road schemes in the last 30 years is they will be heavily delayed, or not built at all. Is this to be another example ?

The boss of HE says they want it there in 2025 so work must start in 2020, a mere 3 and a half years away. I can't see it myself, frankly.

I think this will be built, the area will grind to a halt without the extra crossing, and with the existing crossing having raked in vast sums of money over the years, it's not as if it'll require controversial new road tolls either...

It will surely be tolled as if not nobody will use the Dartford crossing ! The new Mersey bridge is tolled, the old bridge will be tolled when the new bridge opens.

[Scratchwood]

All experience of road schemes in the last 30 years is they will be heavily delayed, or not built at all. Is this to be another example ?

The boss of HE says they want it there in 2025 so work must start in 2020, a mere 3 and a half years away. I can't see it myself, frankly.

I think this will be built, the area will grind to a halt without the extra crossing, and with the existing crossing having raked in vast sums of money over the years, it's not as if it'll require controversial new road tolls either...

It will surely be tolled as if not nobody will use the Dartford crossing ! The new Mersey bridge is tolled, the old bridge will be tolled when the new bridge opens.

What I meant, is that because the existing crossing is already tolled, it won't require a controversial new toll! Introducing a toll for the first time is always the controversial bit

Obviously they'll have the same tolls on both crossings

[jackal]

Here's an improved version of the A13 interchange, with the A13E<->LTC movements added:

This is the original with the missing movements:

[Lewis1997]

Obviously it's quite irrelevant at this stage and for a few years to come yet, but i wonder on what number will be allocated to the new crossing?

[roadtester]

Obviously it's quite irrelevant at this stage and for a few years to come yet, but i wonder on what number will be allocated to the new crossing?

I'm not that bothered about the actual number but it would be nice if it started with an M...

Possibly A2000 if what handshandy was saying about the old Forth crossing becoming the A9000 turns out to be correct.

[Glom]

A9000? That's a Dragonball Z meme.

[orudge]

Possibly A2000 if what handshandy was saying about the old Forth crossing becoming the A9000 turns out to be correct.

There are various bits of documentation on the Transport Scotland web site referring to A9000, and some recently erected signs that state "A90" with a suspicious blanking plate to the right of it, so A9000 looks likely indeed.

[sotonsteve]

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the rumours that the Labour party might scrap the preferred route announced, go back to the drawing board with regards the Lower Thames Crossing and start re-examining the discarded options such as expanding the Dartford Crossing again.

[jackal]

Andy McDonald, the Shadow Secretary of State for Transport, said that 'all options' would be considered again if Jeremy Corbyn becomes Prime Minister next week, with Chris Grayling's decision to approve the new route linking Kent and Essex having divided opinion.

He said: “Before we agree to spending £6.5 billion we have to be sure that we will actually resolve the problem of congestion around the existing crossing and that is then done in a way that does as little damage as possible.”

http://highwaysmagazine.co.uk/labour-sa ... -decision/

[A9NWIL]

Obviously it's quite irrelevant at this stage and for a few years to come yet, but i wonder on what number will be allocated to the new crossing?

I'm not that bothered about the actual number but it would be nice if it started with an M...

Possibly A2000 if what handshandy was saying about the old Forth crossing becoming the A9000 turns out to be correct.

It would have to start with a 1 to be in zone as an A or M road, the A282 is really out of zone as its clockwise end is in the 1 zone.

[Chris5156]

Possibly A2000 if what handshandy was saying about the old Forth crossing becoming the A9000 turns out to be correct.

It would have to start with a 1 to be in zone as an A or M road, the A282 is really out of zone as its clockwise end is in the 1 zone.

This is true, but unfortunately the chances that the person who chooses its number will know or care about the zoning system are pretty slim. My money says they'll give it whatever vacant, catchy number they like the sound of.

If a vacant number is wanted my vote would go to A150, which would be correct by the zoning rules, is an easy to remember "round" number, has been vacant since 1935 so won't be confused with any existing road, and sounds important. I'd vote against a four-digit number because four-digit numbers sound unimportant. The A9000 is suitable for the old Forth Bridge because it's the old bypassed road - it wouldn't be suitable for the new main road.

[A9NWIL]

Possibly A2000 if what handshandy was saying about the old Forth crossing becoming the A9000 turns out to be correct.

It would have to start with a 1 to be in zone as an A or M road, the A282 is really out of zone as its clockwise end is in the 1 zone.

This is true, but unfortunately the chances that the person who chooses its number will know or care about the zoning system are pretty slim. My money says they'll give it whatever vacant, catchy number they like the sound of.

If a vacant number is wanted my vote would go to A150, which would be correct by the zoning rules, is an easy to remember "round" number, has been vacant since 1935 so won't be confused with any existing road, and sounds important. I'd vote against a four-digit number because four-digit numbers sound unimportant. The A9000 is suitable for the old Forth Bridge because it's the old bypassed road - it wouldn't be suitable for the new main road.

If an M number then M15 then.

[MotorwayPlannerM21]

I find it crazy that they are not doing anything to the A229. It is rubbish now, and ideally needs to be D3 between the M2 and M20 now. I can't imagine the traffic levels after the crossing is built. I personally think there should be a new motorway between the M2, slightly east of Junction 3 (at a junction 3A, which is combined into J3) and the M20 between J7 and 8 (new J7A). It would have a couple of junction in between, one for the A278 (which would be extended form J4 on the M2 to this motorway) and one for the A249. It would be D3M or D4M throughout and would be called the M22. It could also be extended to Hastings.

But that's just fantasy and would never see the light of day.

If an M number then M15 then.

I would use this but extend it north to York and have it starting at M2 J1 (current, of course, the M2 should be extended to at least the M25)
It would borrow part of the A289 (widened, of course), avoiding Shorne Woods. My M21 also starts at this junction, which would serve as an Outer London Orbital of sorts, until it meets the M17 which completes the route back round London (but running anti-clockwise from zone 1, unlike the M21 which would run clockwise), but again, they would never build that.