Minutes:
The Assistant Director LTC introduced the
report and commented that the briefing note referenced
supplementary consultation, and although this had been reported by
a newspaper in Kent, the dates or consultation itself had not yet
been confirmed by HE. She added that the views in the technical
note were the views of Thurrock Council, and had not been checked
with HE, so therefore were subject to change.
The Representative from Peter Brett Associates (PBA) added that the
technical note was separated into three sections: an explanation of
the cordoned model; a list of requests for HE and Thurrock Council;
and next steps/actions to be taken. She began by explaining the
cordoned model, which was a section taken from the larger traffic
model and only showed the borough of Thurrock. She explained that
because of this, it did not show traffic south of the river or the
two crossings themselves, so incidents on the crossings could not
be tested. She stated that the effect of the Lower Thames Crossing
(LTC) could be tested and from this, they could draw conclusions
and possible outcomes from bringing the LTC into the highway
network. The PBA Representative explained that there was a neutral
impact on the local road network, and not much change could be seen
after the introduction of the LTC, with only small variation on
many local road junctions. She stated that there were adverse
impacts on the strategic road network in peak periods after the
introduction of the LTC due to induced traffic. She added that this
was to be expected in traffic modelling as it showed changes in
people’s routes into and out of the borough on the strategic
highway due to the LTC. She stated that the largest adverse impacts
could be seen on the operation of junctions to the east of the LTC
such as the Orsett Cock Roundabout and Manor Way. She added that
because of these concerns PBA and Thurrock Council were taking a
more detailed look at these junctions in the cordoned model. The
PBA Representative stated that beneficial impacts could be seen due
to the LTC on local roads such as speed improvements, and reduction
of traffic on the current Dartford Crossing, on the A13 west of the
LTC, and at junction 30 on the M25, as the LTC provided relief to
the network. The PBA Representative summarised the audit of the
cordoned model and stated that this was the view of PBA and
Thurrock Council, and more investigation was still to be done on
the Manor Way junction, and Orsett Cock Roundabout. She added that
PBA also wanted to see the effect of the port expansion and Local
Plan, as neither of these had been considered within the
model.
The PBA Representative then moved on to describe section two of the
technical note and the requests that had been made to HE. She
described how Thurrock Council and PBA had asked for the model to
be updated to include any design changes; the results of
consultation; updated freight data and national road forecasts; the
updated statutory consultation model; and for the model to include
the A13 widening drawings.
The PBA Representative finally moved onto discussing section three
of the technical note and the upcoming actions for HE and Thurrock
Council. She stated that Thurrock Council were going to provide HE
with the A13 widening drawings, to allow the model to be updated.
She also stated that HE were being asked to provide more data, as
they had completed more surveys than were currently listed on their
website. The PBA Representative added that HE were also being asked
to include a sensitivity test for the Local Plan. She described how
Thurrock would also provide a Tilbury Link Road junction option, as
the LTC might include passive provision for this junction in the
future. She added that Thurrock were asking HE to reuse the
arisings from the tunnel for new housing developments or port
expansion. She explained that the Port had also been asked to
provide more detail on their planned expansion, and workshops had
been requested regarding the Asda Roundabout on the A1089, as the
LTC would bring about lots of change to this roundabout, and
planned development. The PBA Representative summarised and stated
that the Task Force would receive another update if the cordoned
model was updated, and if any updates arose out of additional
modelling for the Manor Way junction or the A13 east of LTC.
The TCAG Representative began questions and asked how accurate the
cordoned model was at predicting real traffic flows in the borough.
The PBA Representative replied that the model was based on a
‘typical day’ in March 2016, but there were always
traffic variations. She stated that the model was only a tool to
test relative change, but met industry standard web-tag guidance.
The Assistant Director LTC added that although web-tag was the
industry standard, it was known to be relatively outdated, but this
could only be updated by the Department for Transport who were not
planning an update in the near future. She added that traffic
modelling was not an exact science, and most modelling for major
schemes did not accurately predict traffic or people’s
behaviours. She stated that if the traffic modelling did not work,
it could send the project back in the Development Consent Order
(DCO) process.
The Resident Representative asked what pricing system had been used
to run the traffic model, as the price of the tolls could have an
impact on which crossing people used. The PBA Representative
replied that the tolls had been run as like-for-like in the traffic
model. Councillor Spillman asked if officers and PBA had been
surprised at the outcome of the modelling, as it seemed like there
were some benefits to the scheme. The Assistant Director LTC
replied that traffic modelling was difficult to analyse as the data
was from 2016 and therefore out of date. She stated that the
Council’s aim now was to update the model, but because roads
and traffic changed so quickly, models were always in deficit. She
clarified that the modelling could be used to identify mitigation,
but that significant housing development and employment factors
were not factored in. Councillor Spillman stated that he felt the
recommendations in the note were fair and reflected the situation,
and felt that adding the A13 widening scheme into the model would
be useful. He asked how the Council would ensure that the
model’s data was as up to date as possible. The Assistant
Director LTC answered that PBA and officers would continue to ask
for an updated model from HE, but in the meantime would work on
potential ‘pinch points’ such as the Manor Way junction
and access to DP World and London Gateway. She added that the
Council would be seeking mitigation throughout the process, as well
as future mitigation such as a Section 106 agreement stating that
when traffic reached a certain level, additional mitigation could
be added.
Councillor Mayes asked how often guidelines stated that models
should be updated, or if they could be updated on an ad-hoc basis.
The PBA Representative responded that guidelines suggested models
be updated every five years, but pressure could be put on HE to
update sooner as the model was now out of date. Councillor Mayes
questioned the Tilbury Link Road as part of the scheme. The
Assistant Director LTC replied that the Tilbury Link Road was not a
part of the scheme, but provision for future access for the road
was a desire of the Port of Tilbury and Thurrock Council, and
stated that discussions were taking place with HE to ensure this
design happened at a future point. She added that the scheme could
only come from HE as the Tilbury Link Road would be funded through
the Road Investment Strategy (RIS), and RIS1 was ending in April
2020. She commented that if the Tilbury Link Road was delivered, it
would not be until RIS3 in 2025-2030.
Councillor Jefferies asked if the traffic modelling outcomes could
change if PBA and Thurrock Council had access to the entire model.
He also asked if the modelling data from 2016 had included the A13
widening scheme drawings, as this scheme had already been devised
at that point. The PBA Representative replied that HE provided a
base and a future model, which considered road capacity with or
without the LTC, so the Kent model was not necessary unless
Thurrock wished to undertake its own traffic modelling. She added
that the future modelling included 2026, 2041 and 2051 and had
included the A13 widening scheme, although not in its final design
stage.
The Chair asked if the workshop with HE and the Port of Tilbury
could include plans for a flyover at the Asda Roundabout to
separate local traffic with freight. The Assistant Director LTC
commented that this was known as a grade separated roundabout,
which was the same design as the Rayleigh Weir. She stated that she
had already suggested this to HE, as they were concerned by the
impact of the LTC on the Asda Roundabout.
Councillor Muldowney questioned whether it was normal to receive a
cordoned model from HE for schemes of this nature. The Assistant
Director LTC answered that it was unusual to receive any model from
HE as they usually only shared traffic modelling outputs. She
clarified that this was the first time HE had shared a model, and
the Council had worked hard to enter into a data sharing agreement
with HE to be able to have access. She explained that as the
Council had entered into the data sharing agreement, they could not
share the model as it was classified confidential, but other local
authorities had not signed an agreement yet, so did not have access
at all. Councillor Spillman then asked if Thurrock could run their
own model to have a primary data source, and asked what resources
would be necessary to do this. The PBA Representative stated that
discussions had taken place regarding building a similar model and
if this would be worthwhile, so they could test the effect of new
developments, port expansion, and incidents at the crossings. She
added that traffic models needed constant updating, and HE would
not necessarily believe the results of Thurrock’s modelling.
She stated that discussions were still ongoing over this issue, as
it could be a useful tool. The Assistant Director LTC added that
this would be an expensive project as it could cost hundreds of
thousands of pounds.
Councillor Shinnick expressed her concern that HE had not attended
a Task Force meeting recently, and asked if they could be invited.
The Assistant Director LTC commented that they could be invited to
any Task Force meeting, although they would need to be invited for
a specific purpose, so they could answer specific questions. The
TCAG Representative questioned the fact that the current Dartford
Crossing would remain over-capacity, even with the new LTC, and the
over-capacity was one factor that caused incidents. The PBA
Representative replied that the modelling showed improved journey
times over the Dartford Crossing due to the opening of the LTC,
which would potentially increase capacity at both crossings. The
Assistant Director LTC added that the traffic model could not model
people’s behaviour, so even with an incident modelled at
Dartford; it could not model for local people using rat-runs to get
to the LTC. She stated that this had to be factored in through
mitigation, although this could become complex. She commented that
the Council would aim for future mitigation too, which would
include future traffic management, as well as environmental
mitigation for new technology such as self-driving cars and the
increase of electric cars.
The Chair asked if a workshop could be held with HE regarding the
proposed rest and service area in Tilbury, as he felt it would be
better positioned on the M25 at Brentwood, or at the junction with
the A127. The Assistant Director LTC responded that HE liked to put
a service area near a tunnel entrance to prevent breakdowns within
the tunnel. She added that currently there was an Esso garage at
the A2/M20 junction but this would be removed due to the LTC, so
the strategic road network would lose one petrol station. She
clarified that guidelines suggested one service area every 26
miles. She stated that the Council were currently pressuring HE to
close the services at junction 30/31 and build a newer, modern
facility before the road split at Dartford Crossing. The Chair
agreed with this idea as he felt that a proposed rest and service
area at Tilbury would stop traffic and increase environmental
concerns.
The TCAG Representative commented that she understood that the
Local Plan could not be confirmed until the LTC was agreed, and
asked for confirmation that this was the case. She also asked what
environmental mitigation HE would have to take into account, as
they had stated that as a delivery agency, they would not consider
the proposed government ‘climate emergency’. The
Assistant Director LTC responded that this was the case regarding
the Local Plan, but HE would have to consider the new Net Zero
agreement to mitigate environmental factors. She stated she would
email Members with more information regarding Net Zero. The TCAG
Representative added that the London Mayor had recently pledged to
reduce PM2.5, and Michael Gove had suggested a new bill to enshrine
World Health Organisation guidelines regarding PM2.5. She asked
that if these bills were passed, would this make the LTC scheme
untenable. The Strategic Lead – Transportation Development
replied that the environmental protection team monitored
particulates across the borough, and the Council were currently
refreshing the Air Quality Strategy, and would potentially use a
new air quality model. He added that although this strategy was
only in its infancy, it could affect the LTC and the amount of
particulate the scheme would be allowed to produce.
Councillor Spillman stated that a new budget was expected on 6
November 2019, and asked if this would have an impact on the LTC
project. The Assistant Director LTC replied that a delay regarding
the comprehensive spending review had been expected in the November
budget, but nothing had been announced regarding this. She added
that an announcement could be made regarding RIS2 spending, but
nothing was confirmed. Councillor Spillman also questioned the
relationship between the LTC and Local Plan. The Assistant Director
LTC answered that the Local Plan could not be confirmed due to
uncertainty regarding the LTC, but certainty would only be provided
when the scheme was submitted for DCO, which would potentially
happen in 2021. She stated that discussions were underway with the
MHCLG, and Homes England as the Council were in a difficult
position. She added that advice was also being sought from the
Planning Inspectorate, but that progress could still be made
regarding the Local Plan, including the plan passing through
statutory phases.
Supporting documents: