Lower Thames Crossing Parliamentary Reception: Unlocking growth in the Thames Estuary

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 พ.ย. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 5

  • @robertquick959
    @robertquick959 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    If you want to fix the problems at Dartford you need to go the A14 route, a tunnel all the way which doesn’t negatively impact the residents of Kent and Thurrock..

  • @thamescrossingactiongroup5525
    @thamescrossingactiongroup5525 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    When will National Highways/LTC do videos where they interview those opposed to the proposed LTC, and voice our concerns and present evidence of why it is not fit for purpose?

  • @thamescrossingactiongroup5525
    @thamescrossingactiongroup5525 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The same Tim Aker who actively campaigned against LTC and said he'd never stop opposing a new Thames Crossing, will clearly change his opinion to suit his agenda.

  • @thamescrossingactiongroup5525
    @thamescrossingactiongroup5525 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Spreading more biased propaganda purely from supporters of the scheme. Why didn't MPs and others opposed to the proposed LTC get to attend or have their say? Well you wouldn't want the truth getting out would you?!
    The proposed £10bn+++ Lower Thames Crossing would not solve the problems at the Dartford Crossing. Gareth Johnson MP for Dartford can't event get the Dartford Crossing figures correct. The design capacity of the Dartford Crossing is 135,000 vehicles per day, and it regularly sees 180,000 vehicles per day, those are the official National Highways figures, not what Mr Johnson said.
    That means we'd need to see a reduction of more than 25% to bring it back below design capacity, which means it would be free flowing again. Yet NH estimate the proposed LTC would take around 19% dropping to 13% by 2045.
    Independent assessment of official NH traffic modelling concluded that the LTC would take as little as 4% in the am peak hour and 11% in the pm peak hour. Also that traffic at the Dartford Crossing would be back to today's levels within 5 years of the LTC opening.
    There are currently more than 3000 incidents at the Dartford Crossing each year, and since it would remain over design capacity high numbers of incidents are likely to continue. Yet NH are not planning how traffic would migrate between the two crossings when there are incidents, if the LTC goes ahead, and there wouldn't be adequate connections for traffic to migrate.
    For instance, incident at the Dartford Tunnels, traffic comes off the M25 onto the A2 coastbound, only to find there would be just one single lane from the A2 on to the LTC.
    When there's an incident at the QE2 Bridge NH shut one of the Dartford Tunnels to allow two way traffic to continue at the Dartford Crossing, they still intend on doing this even if LTC goes ahead. So traffic trying to migrate to the LTC to avoid congestion at the Dartford Tunnels would be stuck trying to filter through the one single lane from the A2 onto the LTC. Plus traffic in Essex north of the river would try to come off the M25 onto the A13 eastbound to get to the LTC. But there would be no direct connection from the A13 to the LTC, instead traffic would have to go down to the A1014 Stanford junction, up around an already busy traffic lighted roundabout alongside port traffic, then back westbound on the A13 to the LTC slip road which would be just past (but not accessible from) the A128/Orsett junction.
    If instead traffic tries to come off the M25 directly onto the LTC, the M25 at this point would be 5 lanes wide and the LTC southbound between the M25 until just past the A13 would be 2 lanes wide. When that junction starts getting busy traffic would likely start trying to come off the M25 at junctions 29 and 28 hoping to cut along the A12 and A127 to the A128 to get to the LTC, but there is no access to the LTC from the A128/A13 junction, that would all have to take the Stanford Detour too. It would be more congestion, pollution and chaos.
    The proposed LTC would be hugely destructive and harmful, fails to meet all scheme objectives, and is simply not fit for purpose. There are better, more affordable, and more sustainable alternatives. The proposed LTC needs to be scrapped NOW, as we all need and deserve better. #NoLTC