It’ll take many years to fully achieve but the direction of travel of ruthless developers together with a compliant Council is very clear in the image below.
As early as 2016 we implied there was a long term plan (in an article about the sudden banning of metal detecting from one field, perhaps for fear of important archaeology coming to light). The title said it all about the long-term nature of what’s happening: “Keep off our pension fund!”
The Heritage Journal 
2 comments
Comments feed for this article
27/03/2019 at 09:13
georgionashio
Just to add to the comments above, Shropshire Council (and their faceless planners) appear to be driving a coach and horses through the hillfort landscape, claiming that there are no plans to development within the vicinity of the southern section of the hillfort. If this is the case that why allocate fields (marked in blue) for potential long-term development? I would also like to know what Historic England’s current view is on this – surely the term ‘setting’ applies, and surely, using NPPF and SC’s Core Strategy, any development within this and other areas of the hillfort’s immediate landscape is a complete no-no?. Based on FOI data there has been a rather cosy relationship between SC and HE for many years. It’s about time we started to see transparency and impartiality.
27/03/2019 at 13:51
heritageaction
As for whether Historic England will act as a barrier to Shropshire planners driving a coach and horses through the hillfort landscape, no-one should hold their breath. After all, Historic England are openly and enthusiastically supporting the driving of a mile of new dual carriageway through the World Heritage Landscape of Stonehenge.