A charity has publicly slammed both remaining options for a new Thames crossing ahead of wide speculation there will be an announcement on the project.

There are two remaining options, A - alongside the existing Dartford crossing, and C - to the east of Gravesend.

This week, we exclusively revealed Highways England intends to run a consultation on Option C.

The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) initially set out their policy statement on the Lower Thames Crossing earlier this month.

But today Alex Hills, chairman of Gravesham and Dartford district of CPRE Kent expanded on his concerns, ahead of the expected announcement.

He said neither A or C will work because “building new roads leads to increased traffic” and a more sustainable transport strategy is the answer - including investment in ports north of the Thames to disperse the cross channel movement of freight.

He added: “What is not sensible is for the residents of Dartford to campaign for the Gravesham crossing or vice versa – both communities need to be protected from the environmental burden of a huge new bridge which would not solve the problem it set out to.”

On option C he said: “We fear this will destroy ancient woodland, destroy important wildlife habitats which are home to protected species and destroy productive farmland, needed to feed our growing population.

"It will ruin the beautiful landscapes and panoramic views which make Gravesham so special.

"And it would have a devastating impact on Shorne Country Park, one of the area’s most important educational, environmental and recreational assets, used by so many people, including horse riders, walkers, cyclists, runners and families or those who just seek the tranquillity and peace so vital to our busy lives.

“The crossing itself would not cause all the damage.

"It is the approach road and the new transport corridor it would create that would be so environmentally damaging.

"Option C could mean the loss of all the open land between Gravesham and Medway changing the character of Gravesham for ever.”

Also nailing their colours to the mast this week was Gravesend-based Abridge2far, representatives of which wrote to the Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne, supporting an extra bridge alongside the existing crossing (option A), and raising questions of how economically sensible option C is.

A spokesman said: “At a cost of just £1.25 billion, the £80 million revenues from the Dartford Crossing would easily repay the cost of a new bridge at Dartford in 25 to 30 years, and is likely to be a very attractive option for private funding.

“The £5 billion cost of building a new crossing east of Gravesend would be over 4 times as much as a bridge at Dartford. With only half the traffic capacity of Dartford and no more than a third of the revenues, tolls at a new crossing east of Gravesend would never recover the costs.

“Only option A is economically prudent. Option C would be fiscal folly.”