THE only significant legacy that Thurrock could get if a £10 billion pound road is driven through the borough is a pedestrian crossing in Tilbury costing up to £100,000.

That could be the outcome of a decision by Thurrock Council's ruling Conservative group to sign a deal agreeing a Section 106 agreement with Highways England in return for allowing them to build the Lower Thames Crossing.

Members of the authority's Lower Thames Crossing Task force heard at their meeting this week that senior councillors, probably leader Cllr Andrew Jefferies and/or highways portfolio holder Cllr Ben Maney, secretly sanctioned a deal.

Concerns over the Section 106 agreement, a legally-binding agreement between a local planning authority and developers, in this instance Thurrock Council and Highways England, had previously been aired.

The purpose of a S106 agreement is to mitigate the impact of the development on the local community and infrastructure.

No names are revealed in a report on the secret deal

Up to signing the deal, on 20th December last year, Thurrock Council has steadfastly stood its ground saying it wanted more form the agency.

However, it has now caved in, possibly in return for political concessions from the government on unconnected matters. If the crossing goes ahead will get up to £100,000 for a new pedestrian crossing on Brennan Road in Tilbury (which is totally unconnected with the crossing route) and around £250,000 to fund a number of new planning officers whose only job will be to regulate the crossing build and whose jobs appear set to go when it is completed.

Kent County Council and Gravesham Council, other authorities affected by the crossing, have reportedly told the government they will not sign off on similar agreements because they believe it to be a betrayal of their residents.

Havering Council, which is minimally affected by the proposed new route, has joined Thurrock in agreeing to a 106 deal.

The Section 106 sticking point was one of 20 objections raised by Thurrock Council to the route at a hearing into the crossing proposals. The local authority has opposed the scheme as of little benefit to the borough and over the loss of green belt.

Having bent a knee on the 106, Thurrock Council has been told all its other objections are rejected.

An infographic produced by Thurrock Council shows some of its objections that have been rejected.

Meanwhile, at their meeting on Monday, 22 January, members were told the new crossing will only relieve congestion at the Dartford crossing for five years.

Chris Stratford, the council's planning consultant said traffic modelling had been used to assess the impact the new crossing would have on congested roads around Thurrock.

Speaking at the task force meeting, Mr Stratford said: "Our modelling team have calculated, and this was rebutted by National Highways of course, that once this opens, the traffic levels will be back to now within five years of opening.

"The maybe £10billion of cost will only relieve the Dartford Crossing for something like five years.

"It will create lots of additional queuing and delays on the local road network prior to any local plan growth that might come forward. You've got to ask yourself whether it's worth it."

He also said the new road would add to fatalkities on the region's roads, adding: "They predict on the new road 26 fatalities and 182 seriously injured per year.

"There were an extra 6.6million tonnes of Co2 created by the project and a target 10 per cent bio diversity net gain will not be delivered."

Mr Stratford said the cost of the scheme per mile exceeded the scrapped norther HS2 project.

In addition, he said: "We calculated inly five per cent of the wider economic benefits come to Thurrock, a tiny fraction of Thurrock's economy and given the level of cost that the impact and the fact it's likely to impede the delivery of the local plan, we felt this was a complete failure as well."

Cllr Fraser Massey, chairman of the task force, said: "It's very expensive. It's very damaging to the green belt and our lungs to and the actual benefit to cost ratio is so low and to the local economic market so it's not going to be much good."

Cllr Massey told Thurrock Nub News he was disappointed the section 106 agreement had been signed off without any reference to the task force. At the meeting members were told the deal would have been agreed by senior councillors.

The Government, which is expected to make a decision this year, has said if the scheme is given the go ahead it will be delayed by two years. The earliest start date for the project would be 2026 with completion in 2032.

However, the task force heard some of the work compounds could be constructed ahead of the start of the scheme.

Monday's meeting can be viewed in full via the link below.