They are a disparate bunch. Archaeologists, environmentalists, historians, transport experts, countryside campaigners and druids.
But they will come together in the Strand in central London on Tuesday with a common purpose: to stop the bulldozers from, in their mind, wreaking havoc at one of the UK’s most iconic sites.
They will try to convince the high court over three days that the government’s plan to build a two-mile road tunnel close to the great circle of Stonehenge will permanently disfigure a unique and globally important landscape.
“It’s David and Goliath stuff,” said John Adams, the chair of the Stonehenge Alliance, which has fought against the tunnel and other road projects around the stones for more than 20 years. Though lots of disciplines are represented, they lack the heft of the government machine. “We’re up against the might of the Department for Transport, National Highways and so on. We’re a small organisation – mostly retired people. But the court case is critical. It’s the only thing keeping the earth diggers away,” he said.
Yeah sorry mate, your planet needs to go, we need to make way for a hyperspace bypass.
Have you read the plans? Have you visited Stonehenge? Have you driven along the road?
This will be a genuine improvement for everyone as far as I can see.
Wtf this is the the actual Stonehenge?
I thought the government would be protective of that because it brings in tourists?You have to remember that the British government does not have any competent people left. They’re down to the dregs, in it for ego or self-enrichment, not any real attempt to govern well.
It’s worse than that. “Conservatives” enjoy destruction. If being conservative meant anything at all, conserving a site like Stonehenge would be a no-brainer. But no. They like to fuck up everything and then screech about how they’re being victimised.
Carbrain go vrooooommm
I’ve heard some people claim the project would enhance the site by “hiding” the road. Completely ignoring the enormous amount of damage that would be done to area’s archeological significance.
What damage are you expecting?
There could be countless archeological objects in the surrounding area. So digging for no good reason is a bad idea.
Though I don’t know if any specific stability risk, the vibrations and disturbance from construction is a non zero (but probably low) risk to the stability of the site.
Also roads create pollution, which in general should try to be kept as far as possible from natural or ancient archeological sites.
I think a lot of money has been spent looking at the area to confirm there isn’t anything in its way - one of the other comments has a link about how everything was paused for 4 months when they did find something nearby.
If they can dig a tube tunnel through some of the places in london that they did for crossrail, this isn’t going to be a problem.
There is already an A-road there, one that is normally practically stationary due to how the road narrows there. by sticking it in a tunnel it saves the immediate area from the pollution. Hopefully as we electrify more vehicles that will get even better too.
For reference - this is how close the road currently is - getting it underground will make the immediate area much nicer.
And you expect them to carry on digging if they find invaluable archeological artefacts?
No but they would have damaged the site
With great respect that’s not how works happen in archaeologically sensitive areas. There’ll be a full search done ahead of earth works.
If they dig under then it’s not a problem
Much of the value of the site lies underground. It’s a rich area for archaeology where significant and surprising discoveries are still being made. This is part of what makes it a World Heritage Site.
It’s on a big hill, the archeology isn’t going to be more than 10m deep right? The only issue will therefore be at the entrance and exit?
I assume that they put the portals in ‘empty’ places and will have archeologists at the site to confirm they are not digging things up. (And have/are studying the area more)
Best not to assign any kind of virtue to the current government, you’ll only be disappointed
Road infrastructure brings much more wealth than the tourism at this site. The little A road from SE to SW is always jammed because of the stones, it hasn’t been able to cope with the traffic for years, if not decades.
Of course, any other option than road expansion isn’t going to allow enormous contracts and associated bungs and favours, so destroy our heritage it is.
I feel like I just issued a press release on behalf of .gov/tfl
That is disappointing especially after what happened to Sycamore Gap.
Maybe if it is not to heavy the British Museum can steal it to keep it safe. /s
If they dig under it, then there is very little effect and it gets rid of the busy, noisy and slow main road that goes right by it.
I’m getting downvoted - what damage are you worried about?
It’s an archaeologically rich site that is still being explored:
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/news/2020/dec/stonehenge-tunnel-splits-archaeological-opinion
Opponents contend that the tunnel project may irreparably damage an ancient landscape that is only beginning to be understood and is still full of surprises. Last June the discovery of 20 deep shafts arranged in an enormous circle nearby the site forced the government to delay the decision on the project for another four months while the find could be assessed.
And there are concerns about environmental impact:
“National Highways admit the scheme would increase carbon emissions by 2.5 million tonnes over its lifetime at a time when we need to rapidly reduce emissions.”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/07/14/stonehenge-road-tunnel-project-environmental-impact/
If they can remove the overground road there is that not an improvement? It’s not like this area is pristine, there are towns there, a military base etc. this will improve the area immediately around Stonehenge.
If they are spending money on archeology in the area and discovering new things, that’s great. It means the entrance/exit are less likely to damage anything.
On the environment - that’s less of an issue if we can electrify vehicles properly, it’s a busy road because people and freight (lots of warheouses in Aimesbury) use it. We have unfortunately proved that we can’t build railways either so there isn’t much choice.
You are not wrong.
The issue folks have is whether or not due diligence has been done and actually will be done to prevent destroying what could be some major discoveries about the site.
I doubt anyone is actually upset that the road will be gone and the area less of a roadway, it’s more that folks are concerned that they’re just doing it haphazardly.
EDIT: Cut & Cover is no longer on the table. I am pretty certain it was back along.
Original response :-
I think (as an ex local) that a tunnel isn’t a bad idea per se. However the intention is to use cut and cover to construct it, which will be massively destructive - both to landscape and archaeology.
Perhaps a case could be made for reuse of the HS2 TBMs currently entombed near Euston station?
The A303 has always been a terrible road and there has never been anyone willing to commit to more than sticking plaster solutions at pinch points.
Oh shit, their doing cut and cover? That’s crazy!
The druids are right!
Edit: not sure this is correct? https://nationalhighways.co.uk/our-roads/a303-stonehenge/about-the-scheme/ indicates twin bore
Can you source the cut and fill bit - everything I can see says it’s twin bore: https://nationalhighways.co.uk/our-roads/a303-stonehenge/about-the-scheme/
Hmmm… Quite happy to sit corrected here. If they are using TBMs then other than where the west of the tunnel is going to be I don’t see a problem.
Was definitely going to be c&c originally but that may have been many years ago (the whole tunnel the A303 past Stonehenge thing has been going for 30 years or more).
I haven’t kept up with the project since moving away a few years ago.
Can you update your original comment then please. The cut and cover idea is unfortunately believable.
Cut and cover is probably a lot cheaper. The government has already cut back HS2 to save money, I doubt they would want to spend it elsewhere no matter how damaging the current A303 project is.
They’ve got to pay for those future tax cuts somehow, cultural and archeological heritage be damned.
Oh yes but they’re spending the money down south and they’re fine with that, it’s spending money in the north they are against.
The US and UK should swap governments for a few years. I don’t mean they systems, just the people. Over here they’re loathe to spend money in the south, and spend it all up north.
What the hell? This is so insane.
Tfw Brits can’t destroy any other civilization’s history and culture but that itch just. won’t. go. away.
So one of the complaints seems to be… that you won’t be able to see it from the road anymore, suggesting that the tunnel entrances will be out of sight of the monument. I haven’t seen arguments that it’ll disrupt the stability of the site or anything else either, so from the limited info I have, the complaints sound quite spurious.
I have to drive along this road from time to time. I’ve never experienced it moving smoothly. Partly there is also a slow down simply because people can see the site so there’s a fair amount of rubbernecking going on.
I’ve read the complaints against the tunnel and I still don’t really understand why people resist it.
It will mean that visiting Stonehenge will actually be a tranquil experience - at the minute all you can hear on the site itself is cars. In my understanding it will restore the site, not scar it. I really truly cannot understand why you wouldn’t go through with this.
And now, having said how I think it will benefit the site, let me just touch on the traffic issue. Traffic is APPALLING on the road - it’s the only artery moving people from South East to South West so it clogs up completely. It’s in DIRE need of improvement - and if that’s high quality public transport then fine too; but given how complicated HS2 has turned out I suspect roads or a ban on moving west SE to SW is the only two options we have.
Are there any hidden interests (e.g. environmental activists trying to make traffic a nightmare to discourage cars, someone able to profiteer from the current situation somehow, NIMBYs wanting to block the project due to some other location it affects and attacking it here because it seems easier)?
Lois Lloyd, an archdruid who speaks on behalf of Female Druids United
That’s not something that you hear about every day.
Least it’s not the United Female Druids…Splitters!
Brian?!
Has anyone actually explained why the tunnel will cause problems? Because in all the articles about this that seems to be assumed knowledge. Intuitively I would have thought putting the road in a tunnel would be better than having a main road going past it.
The problem is not having a tunnel but actually building it.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
They will try to convince the high court over three days that the government’s plan to build a two-mile road tunnel close to the great circle of Stonehenge will permanently disfigure a unique and globally important landscape.
Champions of the tunnel argue it will ease congestion on the A303, a major route from the south-east of England to the south-west, and claim the experience of visiting the stones will be more pleasant because the sight and sound of the traffic will vanish.
The SSWHS lawyers are seeking a judicial review, arguing the plan should go back before the inspectors and claim that it is irrational for the government not to give more weight to concerns from Unesco about the tunnel.
Lois Lloyd, an archdruid who speaks on behalf of Female Druids United and Open Access To Stonehenge, said a tunnel would lead to the loss of one of Britain’s great sights – the view of the circle from the A303.
“A lot of people don’t realise that, after the tunnel finishes, you will not see the stones as a distant view and you’ll have to pay to see them unless you are fit enough to be able to walk or cycle or horse ride down the footpaths,” she said.
“Whether they’re stuck in a groove or obduracy or it’s electoral considerations, I just don’t know, but a tunnel will inflict unspeakable damage on Britain’s most significant prehistoric landscape,” he added.
The original article contains 793 words, the summary contains 240 words. Saved 70%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
