# New Public Exhibition for Stonehenge tunnel/road



## rowan (Jan 24, 2006)

From http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/projects/3659.aspx



> Following a Public Inquiry in 2004 into our proposals for improving the A303 past Stonehenge, the Inspector recommended a new dual carriageway should be built, along with a 2.1km long bored tunnel to remove the effects of the road and traffic from Britain's most famous prehistoric site.
> 
> However, the cost of the new road has risen significantly since then and so Government Ministers have asked us to undertake a review and identify lower cost options.   Over the coming weeks we will be holding exhibitions to illustrate our identified options and are looking for your feedback, using the enclosed questionnaire, on the best way forward. You are invited to attend an exhibition at the White Hart Hotel in Salisbury on
> 
> ...



Read the rest on the above link, and you can also sign up for email updates.
And please copy this to anywhere that might be interested


----------



## andyworthington (Jan 28, 2006)

Hi all,

The options on offer via the new review are:

1. A short bored tunnel (2.1km). This is the scheme that went to Inquiry in 2004, which was supported by English Heritage and the Highways Agency, but which was criticized - for the damage it would cause, and for light pollution and sound pollution within the World Heritage Site - by almost all other interested parties, including the National Trust, the Council for British Archaeology, Save Stonehenge, ICOMOS-UK (representing UNESCO), and the Stonehenge Alliance, which includes Friends of the Earth, the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England, Transport 2000, RESCUE and the Pagan Federation.
2. A short cut and cover tunnel (2.1km). This is the scheme that was almost universally derided after it was first proposed in 1994 because of its devastating environmental impact. It was dropped in 2002, so what is it doing back again?
3. A southern route through the World Heritage Site. This is unlikely, as there are grand houses to the south. 
4. A northern route through the World Heritage Site. This is even more unlikely, as this is MoD land.
5. A flyover for Countess, a bypass for Winterbourne Stoke and the closure of the A344 junction at Stonehenge Bottom. This looks feasible, but beware: it may well result in more pressure for the creation of horribly destructive surface-level dual carriageways.

What's particularly noticeable about the proposals is that the longer bored tunnel option, which starts and ends outside the borders of the World Heritage Site, is not included – because it's too expensive. What's also true, however, is that this is the only option that truly fulfils the government's obligations to UNESCO – to 'ensure the protection, conservation and preservation of the site, to the utmost of its resources'. 
The long struggle continues.
All the best,
Andy

Andy is the author of Stonehenge: Celebration and Subversion (Alternative Albion, 2004), described by SchNEWS as 'by far the best bit of modern British social history I've seen', and the editor of The Battle of the Beanfield (Enabler, 2005), described by Professor Ronald Hutton as 'probably the definitive work on its subject, something very rarely achieved in practice'.
http://www.andyworthington.co.uk


----------



## Wee Beastie (Jan 29, 2006)

Well thats gonna right fuck the energy even more than before innit!


----------

