New Lower Thames Crossing

The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.

There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).

Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 6072
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by jackal » Mon Nov 30, 2020 09:32

"more than £100M has been spent on ground investigations due to the chalky conditions in that part of the Thames"

It's also worth mentioning that the application is over 45,000 pages long. I can't even imagine the coordination required to put such a thing together and am willing to give HE and their consultants some slack. It's quite likely that, as HE claim, the detail requested is in there but not presented in a way acceptable to PINS.

ABB125
Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2020 19:58

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by ABB125 » Mon Nov 30, 2020 13:45

jackal wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 09:32
"more than £100M has been spent on ground investigations due to the chalky conditions in that part of the Thames"

It's also worth mentioning that the application is over 45,000 pages long. I can't even imagine the coordination required to put such a thing together and am willing to give HE and their consultants some slack. It's quite likely that, as HE claim, the detail requested is in there but not presented in a way acceptable to PINS.
Perhaps part of the problem is the length of the application? 45,000 pages is absolutely staggeringly large - a symbol of bureaucracy.

User avatar
Gav
Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 17:44

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by Gav » Mon Nov 30, 2020 16:12

ABB125 wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 13:45
jackal wrote:
Mon Nov 30, 2020 09:32
"more than £100M has been spent on ground investigations due to the chalky conditions in that part of the Thames"

It's also worth mentioning that the application is over 45,000 pages long. I can't even imagine the coordination required to put such a thing together and am willing to give HE and their consultants some slack. It's quite likely that, as HE claim, the detail requested is in there but not presented in a way acceptable to PINS.
Perhaps part of the problem is the length of the application? 45,000 pages is absolutely staggeringly large - a symbol of bureaucracy.
what did you think it would be ? Its not a small project is it ? It has significant planning and detail to go through and they will be wanting to ensure that they have it all covered. 45,000 pages isnt really that much for a project that size. try looking at some of the projects completed recently like hospitals and you would be surprised at just how big the technical literature required is.

All the differnet related subjects to be be covered, impact on roads around, environmental effects, long term impacts... lot of information to be captured.

User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 6072
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by jackal » Wed Dec 02, 2020 10:04

Full Inspectorate reasons here (includes HE response as appendix):

https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... eeting.pdf

Write up here:

https://www.highwaysmagazine.co.uk/Lowe ... ealed/8714

From a quick skim it seems pretty pedantic stuff. As HE note the Inspectorate demanded various documents and processes that there is no legal or regulatory requirement for, and which many successful applications have not provided. Perhaps most concerning are the moving goalposts, e.g.:

"Where's your environmental plan for the new jetty?"
"Er, we aren't proposing to build a new jetty"
"Okay, where's your environmental plan for using the existing one"
"Seriously?!"

User avatar
ChrisH
Member
Posts: 3804
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 11:29

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by ChrisH » Wed Dec 02, 2020 12:15

I also note on the letter back from HE's lawyers Pitmans, it refers to the A122 Lower Thames Crossing. Is this a hint of road number, or just a project reference?

User avatar
Chris5156
Member
Posts: 14399
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by Chris5156 » Wed Dec 02, 2020 15:06

ChrisH wrote:
Wed Dec 02, 2020 12:15
I also note on the letter back from HE's lawyers Pitmans, it refers to the A122 Lower Thames Crossing. Is this a hint of road number, or just a project reference?
Oh, that's a very good spot! A122 is a defunct number so it's available for use - it would be quite a coincidence if some project or correspondence reference number happened to also be a defunct road number that would be suitable for this road.

(Personally I still prefer A150, which is also defunct and is a better number.)

From the SABRE Wiki: A122 :
... Read More

User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 6072
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by jackal » Wed Dec 02, 2020 15:30

It starts with a 1 so it's in zone, it has some 2s in it because it connects the A2/M2 and M25... Leaving aside the motorway issue, HE have actually come up with a good number here. A150 might be slightly more memorable but it has nothing much to do with the A2/M2, so is better saved for something else IMO.

More credit where it's due:
frediculous_biggs wrote:
Fri Jan 29, 2016 15:41
If it's an A-road, then who knows. A122 is free and would fit, I suppose.

User avatar
Ruperts Trooper
Member
Posts: 10065
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 13:43
Location: Huntingdonshire originally, but now Staffordshire

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by Ruperts Trooper » Wed Dec 02, 2020 16:04

Chris5156 wrote:
Wed Dec 02, 2020 15:06
ChrisH wrote:
Wed Dec 02, 2020 12:15
I also note on the letter back from HE's lawyers Pitmans, it refers to the A122 Lower Thames Crossing. Is this a hint of road number, or just a project reference?
Oh, that's a very good spot! A122 is a defunct number so it's available for use - it would be quite a coincidence if some project or correspondence reference number happened to also be a defunct road number that would be suitable for this road.

(Personally I still prefer A150, which is also defunct and is a better number.)
It also signifies a road from zone 1 to zone 2 (1-2-2) - but that may be coincidence.
Lifelong motorhead
VW Touareg TDi for towing and longer journeys - Citroen C1 for shorter journeys.

From the SABRE Wiki: A122 :
... Read More

User avatar
MotorwayPlannerM21
Member
Posts: 346
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 19:08
Location: Walderslade, Kent
Contact:

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by MotorwayPlannerM21 » Wed Dec 02, 2020 16:19

A122 is alright I suppose. I'd still prefer a two-digit M number but that doesn't seem likely anymore.
"All roads lead to Rome"
What about the M25?

The A205 - The road to... oh wait I should've turned right back there!

jervi
Member
Posts: 995
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: Haywards Heath

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by jervi » Wed Dec 02, 2020 16:34

Chris5156 wrote:
Wed Dec 02, 2020 15:06
Personally I still prefer A150, which is also defunct and is a better number.
I'd prefer the A150 to be for the Lincoln's Ring Road (Zone 1, A15 passed around it, Ring road = 0)
Ruperts Trooper wrote:
Wed Dec 02, 2020 16:04
It also signifies a road from zone 1 to zone 2 (1-2-2) - but that may be coincidence.
That is a very good point! 122 is still a fairly memorable number as well.

Both of which are better than the A0(M) seen in the older fly-throughs. However a Mxx number would be the most preferred still!

User avatar
c2R
SABRE Wiki admin
Posts: 9544
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2002 11:01

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by c2R » Sun Dec 06, 2020 09:28

Climate change: Lower Thames Crossing CO2 impact figures revealed: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-55202801
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is availabile in the Digest forum.

Telstarbox
Member
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018 19:45

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by Telstarbox » Wed Dec 09, 2020 10:44

There are five uses of the A122 number in this document from HE including "The A122 road would have..." and "Temporary traffic management measures associated with: the modifications of the M25 and A2; the construction of the new junctions with the A122 road"

Looks like it may well be!

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ ... sthrough=1

Micro The Maniac
Member
Posts: 724
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 13:14
Location: B3272/A325/A331

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by Micro The Maniac » Wed Dec 09, 2020 12:18

Telstarbox wrote:
Wed Dec 09, 2020 10:44
There are five uses of the A122 number in this document from HE including "The A122 road would have..." and "Temporary traffic management measures associated with: the modifications of the M25 and A2; the construction of the new junctions with the A122 road"
Paragraph 1 "Executive Summary":
The A122 Lower Thames Crossing (the Project) ...

M11(A14(M))
Member
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Sep 20, 2019 19:01

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by M11(A14(M)) » Thu Dec 17, 2020 16:18

The age of the motorway is well and truly dead now methinks! This started as a motorway and is now some 3 digit A road! It doesn’t make it seem important either. Blackwall is just the A102, Dartford is just the A282 and you’d expect a project of this scale and size to at least be a motorway! And not to mention it would finally connect the M2 to the rest of the motorway network. At this rate all these Ax(M) expressways won’t exist either now, just look at the A14...
Motorways travelled on so far: M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, M6, M6 Toll, M11, M18, M20, M23, M25, M26, M27, M42, M62, M180, A1(M), A3(M), A14(M)

User avatar
thatapanydude
Member
Posts: 385
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2015 21:35
Location: Bedfordshire

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by thatapanydude » Thu Dec 17, 2020 21:05

I do think the A122 is a good number as it relates well to local numbers in the SE. The A150 sounds like it belongs in East Anglia, Lincolnshire.

Re. not being a motorway I am perfectly comfortable with that. I do feel uneasy about calling roads without hard shoulders (even with tech) motorways - so like with the A14 it’s the right call. That being said it should have been built to traditional motorway standards in the beginning !!
A1/A1(M) >>> M1

User avatar
Bryn666
Member
Posts: 30121
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by Bryn666 » Thu Dec 17, 2020 22:57

thatapanydude wrote:
Thu Dec 17, 2020 21:05
I do think the A122 is a good number as it relates well to local numbers in the SE. The A150 sounds like it belongs in East Anglia, Lincolnshire.

Re. not being a motorway I am perfectly comfortable with that. I do feel uneasy about calling roads without hard shoulders (even with tech) motorways - so like with the A14 it’s the right call. That being said it should have been built to traditional motorway standards in the beginning !!
Fully agree. This is quite possibly the single most vital piece of infrastructure in the south east and we're doing it on the cheap. Yes it's all very well pointing to the freeflow junctions and such which are very nice indeed but if you're already spending that level of money do a full motorway of it.
Bryn
Traffic/Road Safety Dogsbody and General Grumpy Now-a-Thirtysomething Man
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/

User avatar
EpicChef
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:47
Location: London, UK

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by EpicChef » Fri Dec 18, 2020 08:35

I bet years ago they didn’t think hard shoulders would turn into a political debate
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!

User avatar
Gav
Member
Posts: 1750
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 17:44

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by Gav » Fri Dec 18, 2020 13:23

motorway or not it will still be an important road.

doesnt really matter on the numbering, if it had been motorway what number would have been assigned to it ?

Telstarbox
Member
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018 19:45

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by Telstarbox » Fri Dec 18, 2020 13:44

In 20 years all cars will be driverless anyway, and they won't care what the road number is. It may as well be 15.FH.76.WR.

;)

User avatar
Bryn666
Member
Posts: 30121
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54

Re: New Lower Thames Crossing

Post by Bryn666 » Fri Dec 18, 2020 15:51

Telstarbox wrote:
Fri Dec 18, 2020 13:44
In 20 years all cars will be driverless anyway, and they won't care what the road number is. It may as well be 15.FH.76.WR.

;)
It keeps getting trotted out but we live in a country that can't even keep track of someone with a virus, I'd love to see how the shambolic maintenance of roads with signs and lines missing everywhere is going to play with technology that is reliant on everything being in perfect order.
Bryn
Traffic/Road Safety Dogsbody and General Grumpy Now-a-Thirtysomething Man
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/

Post Reply