Filter
Lower Thames Crossing

Relevant representations (registration comments)

Search by the person or group making the submission or the content of the submission.

Showing 926 to 950 of 1148 representations, newest first.

Results per page 25 | View 50 results per page | View 100 results per page

  • Linda Catton

    I strongly oppose option C

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • London Friends of the Earth Network (London Friends of the Earth Network)

    We are now in a climate emergency so dire that if we do not radically change our ways, will make th Earth largely uninhabitable for humans and most other creatures. We got a taste of that last year... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Lumen Technologies UK Limited (formerly CenturyLink) (Lumen Technologies UK Limited (formerly CenturyLink))

    Lumen Technologies UK Limited is a Communications utility who owns 80% of the worlds Sub-Sea fiber optic cables, the Lower Thames Crossing project will impact and affect 2 x separate Fibre Optic... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Madeleine Wells

    1. Biodiversity loss 2. Fragmentation of local habitats and corridors for wildlife. 3. Damage to ancient woodland 4. Noise pollution and light pollution blighting the lives of insects, particularly... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Margaret Moore

    This scheme creates massive environmental and social issues and does not solve the problems at Dartford Crossing. The cost is prohibitive, especially given the economic challenges in this country.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Marianne Longhurst

    All options to view what is going to be developed have been limited and last minute, thereby not providing communities with sufficient time to question what is happening. This has been concealed in... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Matthew Fooks

    Concerns about -cost -envioronmental impact -a poor solution to solve the traffic problems at the Dartford Crossing -will cause unacceptable congestion on the M2 and A229 -Changes to A2/M2 junctions... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Meopham Parish Council (Meopham Parish Council)

    Meopham Parish Council has participated in all the many consultations run on this project and have concerns that have not been addressed in the consultation materials. Below is a summary of the... Read more

    Submitted by: Parish councils
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Knight Frank (Knight Frank) on behalf of Metropolitan Police Service (Metropolitan Police Service)

    Knight Frank act on behalf of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC), in relation to the Metropolitan Police Service Training Centre (MPSTC)... Read more

    Submitted by: Other statutory consultees
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Metrotidal Limited (Metrotidal Limited)

    Post-Brexit, Post-Covid there is less demand for the road-only Lower Thames Crossing Midland-Dover HGV hypotenuse as freight can and will be diverted from Dover by the climate change, carbon-pricing,... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Michael Shipway

    Build the tunnel. Trying to drive through the existing Dartford Tunnel is a conjecturing nightmare

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Michael Spurr

    I am against the crossing because it will not solve the problems at Dartford and make Gravesend more congested. The noise and pollution levels east of Gravesend will greatly increase and people's... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Mnika Davis

    I think this could be resolved in way good for environment and people too

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Moira Brock

    Having lived in this area all my life I find this proposal completely unrealistic. Every time you increase the road capacity you increase traffic, which in turn increases pollution and destroys the... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Mr Peter Johnson

    I have serious concerns about the impact on wildlife and habitats in Essex, including: - Biodiversity loss, such as water voles, larger mammals, reptiles and rare insects. - Damage to and... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Mr Robin Bull

    I do not believe the proposals will solve the problems suffered due to the Dartford Crossing (the original brief). The proposals will induce demand and increase cross river traffic (around 50%),... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Mrs Patricia Dobinson

    I am against the proposed crossing as it will be built on a large amount of green belt land. The placement takes traffic back onto already extremely busy motorways. The area in Essex already has high... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Mrs S Hadwin

    I am very much against this project particularly at a time when we are becoming more aware of the damage to our environment and the need to protect it. The loss of biodiversity in the UK has been... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Mrs. F. Ball

    Rising cost of the LTC. Length of time to complete the project is estimated at approx. 5 years Cost could rise again substantially. Increase in congestion during construction due to Construction... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • National Gas Transmission (National Gas Transmission)

    Relevant Representation of National Gas Transmission Plc in respect of the Lower Thames Crossing DCO (the “Project”) This relevant representation is submitted on behalf of National Gas Transmission... Read more

    Submitted by: Other statutory consultees
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Vicky Cashman (Vicky Cashman) on behalf of National Grid Electricity Transmission Plc (National Grid Electricity Transmission Plc)

    Relevant Representation of National Grid Electricity Transmission Plc in respect of the Lower Thames Crossing DCO (the “Project”) This relevant representation is submitted on behalf of National Grid... Read more

    Submitted by: Other statutory consultees
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Nicola Ovey

    As a resident, I whole heartedly object to this project through disruption to diverted traffic, being closed in a triangle of motorways subjected to increased pollution and increased noise levels.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • North Kent Marshes Internal Drainage Board (North Kent Marshes Internal Drainage Board)

    As both permanent and temporary works fall within the drainage district of the North Kent Marshes Internal Drainage Board, we would like to make comments regarding flood risk from primarily surface... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023

  • Winckworth Sherwood LLP on behalf of Northumbrian Water Limited (operating as Essex & Suffolk Water) (Northumbrian Water Limited (operating as Essex & Suffolk Water))

    Please see attached.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023
    Contains attachment(s)

  • BTF Partnership (BTF Partnership) on behalf of Orsett Fen Right Holders (Orsett Fen Right Holders)

    following and then if required, full reps can be submitted at the next stage. Anything to add? INTERESTED PARTY 1. Orsett Fen Right Holders PLOT NUMBERS 2. 35-11, 35-13, 35-14, 35-15, 35-16, 35-21,... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 23 February 2023