Dartford Crossing Takes Its Toll

By · July 23, 2010 at 10:20 am · No comments · Latest News · Report an error ·

dartfordcrossing.jpg The light at the end of the tunnel could be in sight for the motorists who spend hours queuing on the M25 at Dartford, as proposals for suspending or scrapping the toll charge are considered.

The crossing has become notorious for rush-hour congestion, which according to the AA has been exacerbated by the increase in the toll from £1 to £1.50 as people wait at the barriers for change or fumble down the back of the seat for the extra 50p. Ironically, if the barriers were lifted in busy times, this could create extra congestion should more people decide to take advantage of the free crossing.

It should come as no surprise that Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) technology is also being considered as this would allow charging to continue but without the impediment of toll booths. The fact that motorists are charged at all for using the crossing has been hotly debated: the former government reneged on their pledge that tolls would be abolished once building costs had been recouped and rumours of a sale to a private company led to fears of increased tolls and a honking campaign against the proposals. The oft-repeated argument that somehow motorists deserve to be ripped off and sit in queues for eons conveniently ignores the fact that creating congestion simply leads to more pollution.

Once again, the problems at Dartford highlight the lack of river crossings in the east with only the Blackwall Tunnel and the Woolwich Ferry as alternatives, both with their own severe congestion problems. Increased traffic in the area for the Eurostar terminal at Ebbsfleet and the Olympics fast approaching combined with the demise of the Thames Gateway bridge project suggest that things might not improve for some time and we think that Boris Johnson’s cable car might prove an inadequate supplement for the estimated 150,000 vehicles that cross Dartford every day.

Image by Dusty Sevens in the Londonist Flickr pool.

Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Report an error

  • http://undefined Joe Dunckley

    “The oft-repeated argument that somehow motorists deserve to be ripped off and sit in queues for eons conveniently ignores the fact that creating congestion simply leads to more pollution.”

    Good argument. “Make driving easier or we’ll spew more toxic fumes in your face.” Really, my heart bleeds for you.

    I thought Londonist was better than to perpetrate the oft-repeated nonsense that Motorists are “ripped off”. They don’t come close to covering the physical, social, medical, and environmental costs of their habit — especially in London.

  • JSDorG

    What pathetic whining. Conveniently ignoring the representative factual content of this article to simply dress portions of it up garishly, like some kind of eco-warrior Barbie doll, trying desperately to invent a condition of blackmail. Kudos nonetheless, your final comment perfectly and wholly justifies the tone of the published argument as you reel off the same old tired rhetoric that we instantly recognise like an old friend. A very stupid friend.

  • http://undefined Joe Dunckley

    Pathetic whining? Quite.

  • http://undefined Lee

    Whatever the sentiment of the original comment its worth noting that the Dartford crossing is part of the M25 which is supposed to be London’s Orbital Motorway. The problems of crossing the bridge likely creates more traffic pollution within London as people look for alternate routes.

    Besides which, I would imagine the main thrust of any campaign for improvement has to be commercial road users, who as a general rule don’t have any option but to drive and are critical to keep London working (if you live in London you more than likely rely on road transportation for some aspect of your life, even if indirectly and you are unaware of it).

    Road freight in the area is critical due to its proximity to Tilbury docks. The construction of London Gateway container terminal near Thurrock only adds to the need to significantly improve both road, and rail connections across the lower Thames estuary as when that is operational in 2011/12 (according to wikipedia) there sill be a significant increase in road freight needing to cross the Thames at Dartford.

    With the above in mind this argument is really not solely an environmental one. Yes there needs to be consideration of environmental issues but the need for improved connectivity across the river (for both rail as well as road) cannot be underestimated when looking at the economic development of the whole estuary area and arguably even London as a whole.

  • http://www.oxocubeeditorial.com/ Beth Torr

    Absolutely agree. It seems all too often with transportation issues that people think one option must automatically outweigh another when with good planning, both environmental concerns and convenience should be accommodated. The politicisation of environmental concerns does tend to lead to a certain type of knee-jerk reactionary ‘road users = bad, everyone else = good’ response in any discussion about transport.

  • JSDorG

    Statistics state that 25% of people leaving comments on news articles are likely to utterly miss the point in a spectacular fashion. Based on this article I would say those figures are staggeringly accurate. Good points from Lee though.

←
→