CAMPAIGNERS against the Lower Thames Crossing and its impact on Thurrock have welcomed news that the borough's council has highlighted a major flaw in its justification by National Highways and the government.

The Thurrock-based Thames Crossing Action group says the argument supporting the proposition that the project is 'not fit for purpose' is becoming insurmountable. 

The original idea for a new crossing was to ease pressure on the Dartford Crossing by reducing around a quarter of its daily traffic.

The Crossing was designed to take 135,000 vehicles per day, but often now sees 180,000 vehicles per day using it, meaning more than 25% of traffic would need to be removed  for it to be back under the design capacity. 

In the 2018 National Highways predicted the Lower Thames Crossing would take 22% of traffic away from the Dartford Crossing.

On numerous occasions, before he resigned unexpectedly in July 2019, LTC Project Director, Tim Jones had publicly stated that the LTC would not solve all the problems with due to the Dartford Crossing.

In September next year his successor  LTC Project Director, Matt Palmer also admitted that the LTC would not solve the problems.

In  2021 National Highways predicted the new crossing would take 21% of traffic away from the Dartford Crossing in its opening year, and that would drop down to just 14% by 2044.

advertisement

In the 2022 NH have not announced any change to their predictions. 

However, Thurrock Council, who have been provided with traffic modelling data by National Highways, have reached the conclusion that the proposed Lower Thames Crossing (LTC) would take as little as 4% of traffic away from Dartford.

In a statement the Thames Crossing Action group says: "It has been apparent to us for years now that the Dartford Crossing would still be over capacity even if the LTC goes ahead. 

"Not only would the proposed LTC be hugely destructive and harmful, it would not solve the congestion and pollution issues at the current crossing. National Highways have even admitted in public that it would not solve the problems.

"National Highways also claim that the new crossing would bring economic benefits, yet they refuse to share an estimated figure for the economic benefits.

"Not only that, National Highways are not considering or planning how traffic would migrate between the two crossings when there are incidents, if the LTC goes ahead, and there would not be adequate connections. The result would be more chaos, congestion and pollution.

"With the cost now up to £8.2bn, the proposed LTC is simply not fit for purpose, and certainly cannot be considered good value for taxpayers' money."