Filter
Lower Thames Crossing

Relevant representations (registration comments)

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

Showing 1051 to 1075 of 1148 representations, newest first.

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

  • John Conway

    This project is a waste of upwards of ten billion pounds of public money. It will increase the traffic that travels across the Thames, increasing carbon emissions and the emission of particulates from... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • John Harrison

    Noise pollution Air Pollutants Wild animal conservation Noise from night time construction at night.Pile driving ect

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • John Stewart

    I object to this project. I support policies which reduce overall levels of traffic. It will not do this.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Joshua Kay

    Opposed to the lower thames crossing due to the harmful impact it will have on local residents of the area these include: Increased pollution in an already heavily polluted area Increased noise... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Julia Broad

    1. The project will increase traffic leading to an increase in emissions which is not in line with government’s Net Zero strategy. 2. It will not solve the problem of congestion at the Dartford... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Julia Guest

    I object to this project on the basis that it can only increase carbon output in its construction and use.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Julie Cooke

    This will be a disaster for the wildlife etc in the are. Having attended public events residents of the Stanford-le-Hope end will not be able to return home direct from the crossing without going... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Julie Johnson

    Dear Sirs, I am concerned on how this tunnel will affect my and my family’s physical health with noise and pollution,with the traffic increase. And CO2 emissions I also believe it will severely affect... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Julie Wetherall

    Very briefly, my concerns regarding a new Thames Crossing include issues with destruction of the local environment, whether this is the best place for a crossing, pollution concerns for the area... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Kate Geary

    I object to this road project on two grounds: it’s destructive local impacts and it’s impacts on climate change.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Kate Styles

    I object for the following reasons: Increased traffic contributing to increased emissions and the emissions from its construction when we need to achieve 68% reductions in UK carbon emissions by 2030... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Kent County Council (Kent County Council)

    Please see attached.

    Submitted by: Local authorities
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023
    Contains attachment(s)

  • Kimberley Richardson

    This solution will not decrease traffic at the Dartford Tunnel. It will increase traffic through sole street which is already dangerous with no street infrastructure. It will rip through an AONB.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Laura Blake

    I am strongly opposed to the proposed £10billion+ Lower Thames Crossing. We are living in a time of climate emergency, we should not be pushing ahead with projects that are so destructive and harmful.... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Linda Beard

    I am concerned that the Lower Thames Crossing scheme fails to protect habitats and protected and priority species from harm, and that it fails to mitigate or compensate adequately for harm that cannot... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Liz Brandon-Jones

    A new Thames crossing will have a destructive effect on the biodiversity of this river and its river valley.

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • London Borough of Havering (London Borough of Havering)

    Please see attached.

    Submitted by: Local authorities
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023
    Contains attachment(s)

  • Lucy Bubb

    As a frequent traveller on both the M25 and the local roads around Thurrock, I am extremely concerned about the proposed plans. I have seen no evidence that the problems currently experienced on and... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Lucy Grant

    As a local resident and an employee based as Tilbury Docks this road will have a major effect on my lifestyle personally and professionally. My journey times to work will be increased as bd become... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Lynda Kay

    Loss of greenbelt Damage to the environment and wildlife Unacceptable pollution levels Not solving the problems at the existing Dartford crossing Years of disruption to communities along the route No... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Maidstone Borough Council (Maidstone Borough Council )

    Maidstone Borough Council (MBC) has regularly engaged with National Highways throughout the pre-application stage of the Lower Thames Crossing Development Consent Order (DCO). This includes... Read more

    Submitted by: Local authorities
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Malcolm McKee

    My personal view is that insufficient assessment has been made to understand the long term needs of the transportation system with the uk. This project along with a number of others seem to to be... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Pinsent Masons LLP (Pinsent Masons LLP) on behalf of Malthurst South East Limited (Malthurst South East Limited)

    Malthurst South East Limited (MSEL) is part of Motor Fuel Group and is the owner and operator of Cobham Services petrol filling station (PFS). MSEL is the owner and occupier of plots 06-175 and 06-196... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Mark Coleman

    The proposed new Thames crossing is a waste of money because it invests in in fossil fuel architecture. It will lead to a great amount of Carbon emissions, and increase the effect of climate change... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023

  • Mark Costin

    The new crossing is in completely the wrong place. It is too close to the existing crossing. Placing the the crossing closer to the mouth of the Thames I.e. further to the east, will allow for traffic... Read more

    Submitted by: Members of the public/businesses
    Date submitted: 24 February 2023