New Lower Thames Crossing

[Herned]

No, they are just the area between the carriageways where they split into the tunnel.

[Jon Waters]

HE have withdrawn the DCO last night on the advise of the Planning Inspectorate. They hope to reapply early next year. Hoping to get construction going in 2022 is a abit far fetched given the opposition to the project.

[roadtester]

HE have withdrawn the DCO last night on the advise of the Planning Inspectorate. They hope to reapply early next year. Hoping to get construction going in 2022 is a abit far fetched given the opposition to the project.

More information here, for anyone who is interested:

https://www.kentonline.co.uk/gravesend/ ... ed-237837/

[Herned]

HE have withdrawn the DCO last night on the advise of the Planning Inspectorate. They hope to reapply early next year. Hoping to get construction going in 2022 is a abit far fetched given the opposition to the project.

How much opposition has there been? I haven't seen it mentioned in the national media, which is a bit odd considering the cost and size of the scheme

[Big Nick]

The local councils had "doubts over the adequacy of the local consultations conducted by Highways England". I knew about it and I live 20 miles away. I saw the protest signs that went up years ago. I even signed up to the consultation emails. My Dad lives not far from the proposed route and his street know all about it.

So what exactly was wrong with the consultation? Was it because much of it had to be done online as public meetings were stopped due to Covid?

[jackal]

Yes, I think it's been the most substantial consultation ever held in the UK. Some of the local councils oppose the scheme, and as adequacy of consultation is one of the main grounds on which a scheme can be rejected, that's what they're clinging to, though it's not their actual grounds for opposition.

[Bryn666]

Yes, I think it's been the most substantial consultation ever held in the UK. Some of the local councils oppose the scheme, and as adequacy of consultation is one of the main grounds on which a scheme can be rejected, that's what they're clinging to, though it's not their actual grounds for opposition.

What is their actual objection, "increased traffic"? It strikes me as hard to qualify this as an actual threat to the local road network given the LTC very specifically avoids having junctions with it, so the only journeys it could possibly induce are from much further afield - e.g. strategic freight movements.

It would be interesting to see if the LTC, even despite tolls, weans Channel ports traffic off the SW side of the M25. Now the A14's two worst bits have been resolved, it must be starting to look more attractive to come from the north west via M6/A14/M11 again than M42/M40?

[jackal]

Well to be fair there are valid environmental concerns with any scheme of this size. One does rather suspect that there's more than a little NIMBYism in there though.

A little more detail about the Planning Inspectorate's concerns has come out:

https://www.highwaysmagazine.co.uk/Lowe ... ilure/8702
https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... 0FINAL.pdf

From the above it is a little hard to work out if it's simply a matter of the way the application was presented (apparently it initially didn't include the consultation responses) or if there are substantive problems.

[Micro The Maniac]

Perhaps the Inspector is puzzled why a strategic motorway-to-motorway link is being green-lined, not blue-lined

[Bryn666]

Well to be fair there are valid environmental concerns with any scheme of this size. One does rather suspect that there's more than a little NIMBYism in there though.

A little more detail about the Planning Inspectorate's concerns has come out:

https://www.highwaysmagazine.co.uk/Lowe ... ilure/8702
https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... 0FINAL.pdf

From the above it is a little hard to work out if it's simply a matter of the way the application was presented (apparently it initially didn't include the consultation responses) or if there are substantive problems.

I'd suspect the biggest environment related challenge is ensuring the tunnels aren't likely to be flooded if there's another North Sea storm surge of 1953 proportions - but frankly the entire Thames Gateway is at risk of that so it's not a unique problem to this scheme.

The 'environment' at the Tilbury side is already ruined beyond repair thanks to the presence of a container port, quarry, sewage works etc, although on the south side there are wetlands to consider. Compared with Stonehenge this is a complete wasteland.

[Bryn666]

Perhaps the Inspector is puzzled why a strategic motorway-to-motorway link is being green-lined, not blue-lined

We can only hope! It's a completely bonkers decision to not have this as a motorway.

[booshank]

Perhaps the Inspector is puzzled why a strategic motorway-to-motorway link is being green-lined, not blue-lined

I suspect at least part of it is that the public will prefer what they see as a good dual carriageway than an inferior motorway (ie without hard shoulders).

[Bryn666]

Perhaps the Inspector is puzzled why a strategic motorway-to-motorway link is being green-lined, not blue-lined

I suspect at least part of it is that the public will prefer what they see as a good dual carriageway than an inferior motorway (ie without hard shoulders).

The public don't care about hard shoulders, this is a media whip-up.

The A56 past Haslingden has been referred to as "the motorway" ever since it was opened in 1981 and extended in 1985. It has at-grade junctions and roundabout and people still call it a motorway. People will call the LTC a motorway as well.

Given the design standards for a 120km/h dual carriageway and motorway cross-section are virtually identical barring hard shoulders the reason is HE won't spend the money on building a motorway.

[c2R]

Well to be fair there are valid environmental concerns with any scheme of this size. One does rather suspect that there's more than a little NIMBYism in there though.

A little more detail about the Planning Inspectorate's concerns has come out:

https://www.highwaysmagazine.co.uk/Lowe ... ilure/8702
https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... 0FINAL.pdf

From the above it is a little hard to work out if it's simply a matter of the way the application was presented (apparently it initially didn't include the consultation responses) or if there are substantive problems.

I'd suspect the biggest environment related challenge is ensuring the tunnels aren't likely to be flooded if there's another North Sea storm surge of 1953 proportions - but frankly the entire Thames Gateway is at risk of that so it's not a unique problem to this scheme.

The 'environment' at the Tilbury side is already ruined beyond repair thanks to the presence of a container port, quarry, sewage works etc, although on the south side there are wetlands to consider. Compared with Stonehenge this is a complete wasteland.

There is also some bleakly sterile farmland, as depicted nicely on GSV here: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.455699, ... 376!8i2688

This could actually be somewhere that considerably benefits from the wildflower verge plantings etc. that the road would bring....

[jervi]

Perhaps the Inspector is puzzled why a strategic motorway-to-motorway link is being green-lined, not blue-lined

I bloody hope so!

[A9NWIL]

Yes, I think it's been the most substantial consultation ever held in the UK. Some of the local councils oppose the scheme, and as adequacy of consultation is one of the main grounds on which a scheme can be rejected, that's what they're clinging to, though it's not their actual grounds for opposition.

What is their actual objection, "increased traffic"? It strikes me as hard to qualify this as an actual threat to the local road network given the LTC very specifically avoids having junctions with it, so the only journeys it could possibly induce are from much further afield - e.g. strategic freight movements.

It would be interesting to see if the LTC, even despite tolls, weans Channel ports traffic off the SW side of the M25. Now the A14's two worst bits have been resolved, it must be starting to look more attractive to come from the north west via M6/A14/M11 again than M42/M40?

Time to fix the fact that the A14 is only 2 lanes from the M6 to the A1 then and the M11 northern section. If it was a D3/D3M route throughout to the M25 then it would be extremely useful. Ideally the A14 new bit should have been D4 as there will undoubtedly be an increase of traffic along these routes now.

[ManomayLR]

So we're seeing the rise of smart pseudo-motorways now. Can be expected from a government that can't even get something as simple as contact tracing right.

[Vierwielen]

It would be interesting to see if the LTC, even despite tolls, weans Channel ports traffic off the SW side of the M25. Now the A14's two worst bits have been resolved, it must be starting to look more attractive to come from the north west via M6/A14/M11 again than M42/M40?

One way would be to introduce E-route markers: the relevant part of the E15 is Edinburgh-Newcastle-London-Folkstone-Dover...Calais though something coud be done about removing Folkstone from the route definition.

[Bryn666]

It would be interesting to see if the LTC, even despite tolls, weans Channel ports traffic off the SW side of the M25. Now the A14's two worst bits have been resolved, it must be starting to look more attractive to come from the north west via M6/A14/M11 again than M42/M40?

One way would be to introduce E-route markers: the relevant part of the E15 is Edinburgh-Newcastle-London-Folkstone-Dover...Calais though something coud be done about removing Folkstone from the route definition.

Not sure of the value, given it is impossible to drive into the UK without using a train or ferry, whereas when travelling across a giant landmass like the mainland of the continent, it makes much more sense to have a consistent route to follow.

[JF2309]

Perhaps the Inspector is puzzled why a strategic motorway-to-motorway link is being green-lined, not blue-lined

We can only hope! It's a completely bonkers decision to not have this as a motorway.

Hypothetically of course here, indulge me, but could they after the consultation period decide to change there mind and make it a Motorway by just calling it one, or would that require a restarting of the whole process?