Thames crossing backed by Essex County Council

Basildon Recorder: Thames crossing backed by Essex County Council Thames crossing backed by Essex County Council

CONTROVERSIAL plans for a lower Thames crossing have received a major boost after they were backed by Essex County Council.

Out of the three options available, the authority’s chiefs feel Option C is the way forward.

It would connect the M2 with the A13 and the M25, between junctions 29 and 30, and would pass very close to South Ockendon, Orsett, Chadwell St Mary, West Tilbury and East Tilbury, cutting across West Tilbury Marshes.

The council has told the Department for Transport it must evaluate the impact on local infrastructure.

A spokesman said: “Option C provides the greatest economic benefit to Essex.

“It relieves congestion at the existing Dartford Crossing and provides a new strategic link between the Channel Ports, Essex and much of the UK.

“However, we have noted in our consultation response that further work is necessary to ensure the new crossing and its approach roads have a minimal impact on the environment, local residents and the local road network adjacent to the proposed crossing.”

London mayor Boris Johnson has already said he favours Option C, but South Basildon and East Thurrock MP Stephen Metcalfe said it was the worst possible option for Thurrock.

He said: “The county council’s announcement doesn’t come as any surprise to me. OptionCwill be of huge detriment and is the most invasive to Thurrock.

“The environmental impacts would be huge and I have met with ministers and the secretary of state to express my views.

“We need to look east or west of the existing crossing.

“The M25 will have reached capacity in the next 30 years, so maybe we should be looking at an outer London orbital road now.”

Thurrock MP Jackie Doyle- Price’s stance is that Thurrock can’t cope with any more pressure on its infrastructure.

She has called on the Government to revisit options D and E, which were on the cards in 2009 when talks of a new crossing were raised, and would link the M2 to Canvey, or Southend to the Isle of Grain, in Kent.

They were dismissed for this consultation.

Comments (8)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:16pm Thu 7 Nov 13

pembury53 says...

so spend a few hundred million to 'relieve congestion at the dartford crossing' when you could just remove the existing tolls to achieve the same result..........I wonder what the toll charges will be for the new crossing, and the payback period after which there will be no charge........... that is how it works isn't it ?
so spend a few hundred million to 'relieve congestion at the dartford crossing' when you could just remove the existing tolls to achieve the same result..........I wonder what the toll charges will be for the new crossing, and the payback period after which there will be no charge........... that is how it works isn't it ? pembury53
  • Score: 10

2:53pm Thu 7 Nov 13

Noteworthy says...

pembury53 wrote:
so spend a few hundred million to 'relieve congestion at the dartford crossing' when you could just remove the existing tolls to achieve the same result..........I wonder what the toll charges will be for the new crossing, and the payback period after which there will be no charge........... that is how it works isn't it ?
While the tolls will still be payable, the barriers will be removed by October 2014, with cameras in place to read numberplates, and drivers to pay online or in local shops in advance, unless they have a DART-Tag account.

This should clear the congestion just as much, and is the reason why the prices have increased recently, to pay for this scheme.

Ironically, I've just taken a job in Gillingham, so a crossing such as the one proposed by Option C would be a benefit!
[quote][p][bold]pembury53[/bold] wrote: so spend a few hundred million to 'relieve congestion at the dartford crossing' when you could just remove the existing tolls to achieve the same result..........I wonder what the toll charges will be for the new crossing, and the payback period after which there will be no charge........... that is how it works isn't it ?[/p][/quote]While the tolls will still be payable, the barriers will be removed by October 2014, with cameras in place to read numberplates, and drivers to pay online or in local shops in advance, unless they have a DART-Tag account. This should clear the congestion just as much, and is the reason why the prices have increased recently, to pay for this scheme. Ironically, I've just taken a job in Gillingham, so a crossing such as the one proposed by Option C would be a benefit! Noteworthy
  • Score: -2

3:29pm Thu 7 Nov 13

pembury53 says...

Noteworthy wrote:
pembury53 wrote: so spend a few hundred million to 'relieve congestion at the dartford crossing' when you could just remove the existing tolls to achieve the same result..........I wonder what the toll charges will be for the new crossing, and the payback period after which there will be no charge........... that is how it works isn't it ?
While the tolls will still be payable, the barriers will be removed by October 2014, with cameras in place to read numberplates, and drivers to pay online or in local shops in advance, unless they have a DART-Tag account. This should clear the congestion just as much, and is the reason why the prices have increased recently, to pay for this scheme. Ironically, I've just taken a job in Gillingham, so a crossing such as the one proposed by Option C would be a benefit!
I am aware of the scheme to remove the barriers, and while welcome to tackle the congestion, it remains a fact that to continue to charge a toll is effectively state sanctioned theft.....
[quote][p][bold]Noteworthy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pembury53[/bold] wrote: so spend a few hundred million to 'relieve congestion at the dartford crossing' when you could just remove the existing tolls to achieve the same result..........I wonder what the toll charges will be for the new crossing, and the payback period after which there will be no charge........... that is how it works isn't it ?[/p][/quote]While the tolls will still be payable, the barriers will be removed by October 2014, with cameras in place to read numberplates, and drivers to pay online or in local shops in advance, unless they have a DART-Tag account. This should clear the congestion just as much, and is the reason why the prices have increased recently, to pay for this scheme. Ironically, I've just taken a job in Gillingham, so a crossing such as the one proposed by Option C would be a benefit![/p][/quote]I am aware of the scheme to remove the barriers, and while welcome to tackle the congestion, it remains a fact that to continue to charge a toll is effectively state sanctioned theft..... pembury53
  • Score: 4

5:08pm Thu 7 Nov 13

Kim Gandy says...

pembury53 wrote:
Noteworthy wrote:
pembury53 wrote: so spend a few hundred million to 'relieve congestion at the dartford crossing' when you could just remove the existing tolls to achieve the same result..........I wonder what the toll charges will be for the new crossing, and the payback period after which there will be no charge........... that is how it works isn't it ?
While the tolls will still be payable, the barriers will be removed by October 2014, with cameras in place to read numberplates, and drivers to pay online or in local shops in advance, unless they have a DART-Tag account. This should clear the congestion just as much, and is the reason why the prices have increased recently, to pay for this scheme. Ironically, I've just taken a job in Gillingham, so a crossing such as the one proposed by Option C would be a benefit!
I am aware of the scheme to remove the barriers, and while welcome to tackle the congestion, it remains a fact that to continue to charge a toll is effectively state sanctioned theft.....
Surely the tunnel was paid for donkey's years ago and the bridge well and truly sorted by now.

The prices increased last year so they've been getting the money for this "scheme" since last October and the bridge has been busier than ever.. Obviously Dart Tag customers such as myself pay less but that isn't the point.

The crossing is heavily used by large foreign vehicles. What about the proposed Bill for charging them up to £1,000 a year to use our roads. Is this going to be implemented and if so when?

How is it that the people of this country are whacked right left and centre by the government and the transport-hating hand wringers of the loony left - but the M25 is often jam packed with massive vehicles that contribute to the pothole problem - and we STILL pick up the tab?

Oh sorry I forgot, yes that's right, all we're here for is to stump up for everybody else... while our own go without.
[quote][p][bold]pembury53[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Noteworthy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pembury53[/bold] wrote: so spend a few hundred million to 'relieve congestion at the dartford crossing' when you could just remove the existing tolls to achieve the same result..........I wonder what the toll charges will be for the new crossing, and the payback period after which there will be no charge........... that is how it works isn't it ?[/p][/quote]While the tolls will still be payable, the barriers will be removed by October 2014, with cameras in place to read numberplates, and drivers to pay online or in local shops in advance, unless they have a DART-Tag account. This should clear the congestion just as much, and is the reason why the prices have increased recently, to pay for this scheme. Ironically, I've just taken a job in Gillingham, so a crossing such as the one proposed by Option C would be a benefit![/p][/quote]I am aware of the scheme to remove the barriers, and while welcome to tackle the congestion, it remains a fact that to continue to charge a toll is effectively state sanctioned theft.....[/p][/quote]Surely the tunnel was paid for donkey's years ago and the bridge well and truly sorted by now. The prices increased last year so they've been getting the money for this "scheme" since last October and the bridge has been busier than ever.. Obviously Dart Tag customers such as myself pay less but that isn't the point. The crossing is heavily used by large foreign vehicles. What about the proposed Bill for charging them up to £1,000 a year to use our roads. Is this going to be implemented and if so when? How is it that the people of this country are whacked right left and centre by the government and the transport-hating hand wringers of the loony left - but the M25 is often jam packed with massive vehicles that contribute to the pothole problem - and we STILL pick up the tab? Oh sorry I forgot, yes that's right, all we're here for is to stump up for everybody else... while our own go without. Kim Gandy
  • Score: -2

7:56pm Thu 7 Nov 13

Nowthatsworthknowing says...

The crossing bridge will have to be very tall, now the super port London Gateway is up and running...
The crossing bridge will have to be very tall, now the super port London Gateway is up and running... Nowthatsworthknowing
  • Score: 0

4:23pm Fri 8 Nov 13

pixilate says...

Is this all part of Boris's softly softly approach to a new airport on the Kent marshes at Allhallows/Cliffe, because a new bridge together with a new railway link to bypass London across the Hope Reach at East Tilbury was part of this proposal, and shown on the proposed plans about two years ago to create a new transport hub incorporated in the estuary airport plans.
Maybe someone else will remember this and confirm it.
Is this all part of Boris's softly softly approach to a new airport on the Kent marshes at Allhallows/Cliffe, because a new bridge together with a new railway link to bypass London across the Hope Reach at East Tilbury was part of this proposal, and shown on the proposed plans about two years ago to create a new transport hub incorporated in the estuary airport plans. Maybe someone else will remember this and confirm it. pixilate
  • Score: 0

1:05am Sat 9 Nov 13

whiteswan2013 says...

Nowthatsworthknowing wrote:
The crossing bridge will have to be very tall, now the super port London Gateway is up and running...
It will be on the land which the Tilbury Power Station is sitting, that's why they closed it down, to demolish it for a bridge etc
[quote][p][bold]Nowthatsworthknowing[/bold] wrote: The crossing bridge will have to be very tall, now the super port London Gateway is up and running...[/p][/quote]It will be on the land which the Tilbury Power Station is sitting, that's why they closed it down, to demolish it for a bridge etc whiteswan2013
  • Score: 1

4:04pm Sun 10 Nov 13

pixilate says...

How come Essex County Council have any influence in these proposals?
All 3 options are entirely contained within Thurrock Borough, a unitary authority and completely devolved from Essex County Council.
(It was Essex County Council's meddling in Thurrock's affairs that was responsible for the current impasse over the traveller's occupation of the Five Bell's site, preventing Thurrock Council from having them evicted immediately.)
if any organisation from outside Thurrock has any influence in transport proposals, it is limited to the Highways Agency, or the Government.

KEEP ESSEX COUNTY COUNCIL OUT OF THURROCK'S AFFAIRS
How come Essex County Council have any influence in these proposals? All 3 options are entirely contained within Thurrock Borough, a unitary authority and completely devolved from Essex County Council. (It was Essex County Council's meddling in Thurrock's affairs that was responsible for the current impasse over the traveller's occupation of the Five Bell's site, preventing Thurrock Council from having them evicted immediately.) if any organisation from outside Thurrock has any influence in transport proposals, it is limited to the Highways Agency, or the Government. KEEP ESSEX COUNTY COUNCIL OUT OF THURROCK'S AFFAIRS pixilate
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree