Representation by Adam Holloway MP
- Date submitted
- 20 February 2023
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
The Lower Thames Crossing (“LTC”) was originally conceived as a scheme to alleviate congestion at the Dartford Crossing. In this aspiration it will be a failure. Cars and freight will always gravitate to Dartford because the M25 runs through it: National Highways' own modelling makes it clear that even with the new crossing Dartford will operate over capacity. The solution to the problems caused by the undersized tunnels at Dartford is to improve that crossing, either with a bridge for northbound traffic, or a very long tunnel separating the long-range traffic, preserving the existing crossings for local traffic. The LTC has been seized upon by local Councils as a driver of economic development. This is a worthy ambition, but the application should not proceed until the Dartford traffic issue has been addressed; failing that costs of this project should be considered as only one part of the bill for dealing with the traffic in the region and its value for money must be assessed accordingly. The LTC will not provide resilience to the road network and, indeed, its effect will be to increase pressures locally. In the event of an incident at Dartford the northbound M25 lacks the capacity to take diverted traffic, and the A2 westbound on to the LTC will have only one lane. Congestion on the M25 will mean cars will exit at junctions 3 and 5 seeking a route to the LTC. The A2 will become gridlocked with disastrous implications for traffic around Gravesend, roads through Thong, Shorne, Cobham and Sole Street becoming rat-runs. With no meaningful mitigation scheme the travel time savings identified as a benefit of the project are thus limited. This must be addressed. I have serious concerns about capacity issues on the proposed A2/M2 link. The original plan to link the A2 and M2 with three lanes in each direction has been changed to only two lanes in each direction. This is inadequate for the likely volumes of traffic and will be a disaster. This must be addressed. In short, this costly and poorly thought-out project represents misery for the people of Gravesham both during the building phase and after. Whilst some of the increased costs represent inflation, the largest part represents the costs of building the tunnel and the vast spend on environmental mitigation. This scheme is an inherently expensive option and, having lost sight of its original objectives, it does not represent value for money. It is also a project that was born in another era – pre-pandemic and pre-net zero. The UK is on the edge of level five autonomous electric vehicles and HGV platooning represents a better way to increase freight capacity on the road system. From a 2023 perspective any number of the other options consulted on would better serve our environmental agenda and financial circumstances. Proceeding with this project represents an inter-generational betrayal of epic proportions.