Venue: Council Chamber, Civic Offices, New Road, Grays, Essex, RM17 6SL. View directions
Contact: Lucy Tricker, Democratic Services Officer Email: email@example.com
Apologies for Absence
Councillors Tom Kelly, Andrew Jefferies, Terry Piccolo, and Gerard Rice (Vice-Chair) sent their apologies, as well as Linda Mulley, Resident Representative.
To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Lower Thames Crossing Task Force meeting held on 10 December 2018.
The minutes of the Lower Thames Crossing Task Force meeting held on 10 December 2018 were approved as a correct record.
Items of Urgent Business
To receive additional items that the Chair is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency, in accordance with Section 100B (4) (b) of the Local Government Act 1972.
There were no items of urgent business.
Declaration of Interests
There were no interests declared.
The representative from Peter
Brett Associates began by briefly explaining the report and
explaining that there had been a number of documents relating to
traffic modelling available on Highways England’s (HE)
website as part of the statutory consultation, but these had been
of limited detail and did not include options testing on how the
scheme had been configured. She continued by stating that meetings
had been held between Thurrock Council and HE in November and
December 2018, as well as on 11 January 2019 on how the scheme had
been selected and how the Council could work on the modelling with
HE. She added that at the 11 January meeting, the Council and Peter
Brett Associates (PBA) had been hoping to analyse traffic data, but
this had not occurred. She described how instead HE had offered the
Council future access to the cordoned model, which would allow
Thurrock to run traffic modelling, but would not provide detailed
modelling results. She stated that it would give the Council
increased freedom to run their own traffic models.
Development Consent Order Process: Next Steps (Verbal Update)
The Assistant Director LTC
began by stating that the statutory consultation had closed on 20
December 2018, and HE had received over 20,000 responses which they
were currently analysing. She commented that they were analysing
for potential changes they might have to make, and if changes were
identified, if any additional consultation would be needed. She
added that consultation responses would not be made public until
submitted as part of the DCO, but only main statutory consultation
responses would be published in full, with individual responses
being summarised and grouped. She stated that a number of technical
meetings had been set-up between HE and the Council up until April,
and although other local authorities met monthly, Thurrock Council
were meeting on a weekly basis. She stated that Thurrock would be
called upon by the Planning Inspectorate a month before DCO
submission to consult on the Adequacy of Response, and the Council
were currently also working on a Local Impact Report. She added
that a skeleton version of the Local Impact Report would be brought
before the Task Force before it was submitted. She explained that
the Council were also producing a Statement of Common Ground which
highlighted areas of agreement and dis-agreement between HE and the
Council, and explained that although this was not a statutory
document, it would help to shape the examination phase and which
topic-specific hearings would take place.
Summary of Consultation Responses (Verbal Update)
The Thurrock Business Representative began by stating the Port of Tilbury had submitted their formal consultation response, which was 52 pages long and was a comprehensive report including factors such as ecology, traffic and comments from consultants. He stated that the Port of Tilbury did not support the scheme without the Tilbury Link Road and also had concerns about traffic at the Manorway junction. He added that they had received no feedback from HE yet. The TCAG Representative explained that the Action Group had submitted their response, as well as individual responses, and the general consensus was negative. She added that even people who supported the crossing, had objections on some level. Councillor Spillman added that he felt the accessibility to the consultation online had been acceptable, and questions had been very thorough although leading in places.
The Chair stated that as HE had been on Christmas break until this week, no response had been received, so no changes could be made to the Priorities List.
Councillor Spillman asked if a report on potential funding for the action groups could be added to the Work Programme, and the Assistant Director LTC responded that it would be added.