The Government’s Autumn statement will take place in early December. It will contain the results of the current feasibility study into ways in which congestion on the A303, including the section around Stonehenge, can be eased. It appears that there is a real determination to resolve the issue – perhaps because it has been calculated that many votes will be lost by not doing so – and it can therefore be anticipated that unlike previous studies this one will be speedily acted upon.
Hence it’s likely that a tunnel is well and truly back on the agenda and could actually be built, not just talked about. So will it be the “short tunnel” rather than a long one? It’s a fair bet it will be for if the question was “will it be an expensive or less expensive one” no-one would be in any doubt about the answer. Yet no clues are being given. Indeed, English Heritage who are pushing for a tunnel “with all our strength” won’t tell us which tunnel they favour.
We’ve been repeatedly banging on about this for some time – see here – but at the risk of repeating ourselves ad nauseam and for the avoidance of all possible doubt, a short tunnel will be massively damaging – so said not us but almost every archaeological and heritage organisation the last time it was proposed. It would be nice if they all started banging on about it NOW, and didn’t wait until December when the die is cast and the chances of changing anything will have all but disappeared.
Oh, and just in case the subject should suddenly be on everyone’s lips in early December (as we have a sinking feeling it may be) a tunnel that is slightly longer than a short one is still a short one, and is still massively damaging…..!
14 comments
Comments feed for this article
01/07/2014 at 09:46
Edwin
No tunnel, no cutting. Leave the road as it is. A glimpse of Stonehenge as you drive past is part of our 21st century culture.
01/07/2014 at 13:08
knotmagick
Reblogged this on Knot Magick and commented:
If you’re not aware of the threat to Stonehenge, beyond the wonton destruction every year at summer solstice, then please read this. Five months is not a long time and the difference between a long and short tunnel is no difference at all.
01/07/2014 at 13:18
Packwood
I think the difference between long and short is a big difference: harmless and harmful.
01/07/2014 at 16:29
Keith Macdonald
My take on it? Roll on a number of years (after the tunnel has been built and the traffic disappears from view).
People will be saying “Gosh, isn’t it quiet here now! So much better than when all you could hear was the noise of traffic 24×7”
Stonehenge will once again be a place for QUIET contemplation of the hidden mysteries (sorry, couldn’t resist shouting)
01/07/2014 at 16:34
Keith Macdonald
See also the Telegraph article:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1454639/Stonehenge-plea-for-tunnel-length-to-be-doubled.html
01/07/2014 at 16:47
Edwin
Absurd to put drivers through glorious Wiltshire countryside down into any tunnel.
01/07/2014 at 20:41
archer
A site is by definition, a site because of its situation, in this case between historic pathways. The modern world gives us cars- it is progress. Are we to declare the airspace over Stonehenge a no. Fly zone to prevent those pesky aircraft spoiling the site? A tunnel denies all those millions who ser Stonehenge from their cars and think ” wow”. It would be like taking the henge and putting it in a museum out of view of the public.
02/07/2014 at 06:32
Packwood
The article isn’t about whether there should be a tunnel but the form it should take if there is one.
02/07/2014 at 10:44
Edwin
There are THREE choices, short, long or no tunnel.
02/07/2014 at 11:49
Packwood
Indeed, but it looks to me as if the Government is determined to sort out the bottleneck and that a tunnel is the only viable way of doing it.
02/07/2014 at 12:00
Edwin
That will not end the bottleneck, the roundabout that is now the only route to Stonehenge will ensure that.
02/07/2014 at 12:20
Packwood
Well the analyses seem to indicate a tunnel or dualling are needed. Doubt they’d get it wrong.
02/07/2014 at 15:51
Edwin
Dualling seems a good idea.
02/07/2014 at 22:20
Butercup
Doubt they would get it wrong? Of course planners and government ministers always make the right decision when it comes to heritage protection ho hum……..