There’s much confusion in these comments, and rather than respond to each one I think it’s more helpful if I address it all in a new thread. What’s happening in the #Stonehenge World Heritage Site is complex, has a long history and has no easy solutions. Sorry for the length 🙂
No one who cares about Stonehenge would wish roadworks anywhere near it. Anyone who understands the Stonehenge landscape knows that something has to change. The tunnel proposal is the least damaging option, on the table or in anyone's imaginations. There are real benefits.
An essential rule of thumb is that if someone says there’s a simple answer, they are missing the picture. The Stonehenge Alliance thinks so. They are wrong, & are misleading the public, causing misdirected anger especially from people unable to engage from overseas
No one is proposing a new road. A busy, dangerous road crosses the World Heritage Site close to Stonehenge now, part of it dual carriageway in a deep cutting. It is a scar on the landscape. But it cannot be ignored that it is unable to cope with traffic demands
Jams create long delays on a key trunk route and force drivers to rat-run through neighbouring communities. Decades of research have shown that the only viable option for change is to upgrade the road ± on its current route. All that has changed is that traffic continues to grow 
Tunnelling the road has been exhaustively explored as an alternative to a surface dual carriageway right through the World Heritage Site. It would not be the first major works near Stonehenge in modern times. The net effect would be a reduction in area of visible road surface
The existing road divides the landscape, visually and physically (all the "Stonehenge experts" excavations have been north of the road). Removing it would transform creative, academic and leisure experiences, leading to new understandings and engagements.
Access, parking, paying etc are separate from the road. NT & EH have nothing to do with the road other than as commentators and landowners. It is not their plan. Campaigners seem for now to be interested in the road. But nothing stops other issues being addressed at any time
Roadworks mean ground disturbances, affecting archaeological remains. But that need not mean loss. Knowledge of the ancient past depends on excavations such as those conducted at iconic sites within the World Heritage Site by many of the loudest objectors to the tunnel scheme.
The proposed route has been thoroughly researched. Anything of interest likely to be damaged would be recorded to high standards ahead of the works – as has occurred with major excavations east of the World Heritage Site ahead of new housing, to which no one has objected.
The archaeology is overseen by a specialist committee. Highways is being held to very high & unusually expensive standards – more so than the MoD were asked to follow near Durrington Walls, where a causewayed enclosure, henges, burials and other important remains were excavated
In the Stonehenge Alliance video Michael Wood begins by saying how special Stonehenge is. I take it we would all agree with that. Then it goes wrong:
“Every expert witness, specialists in the Bronze Age and in the landscape, archaeologists, all agree that the tunnel will harm this unique site.” Wrong. A group of self-defined Stonehenge experts feels that the roadworks should not happen. Other experts are available
Other archaeologists have worked in & around the World Heritage Site & many feel otherwise. The “experts” are academics, & some of them have excavated key sites in the World Heritage Site that were never in danger. 79% of UK archaeologists work in industry. They would not do that
Michael Wood says “emplacements are to be dug on the line of the winter solstice”. Wrong. As a result of consultations, the proposed tunnel has been extended to take the western portal beyond the solstice alignment
Michael Wood: “our understanding comes not just from the circle of stones, but from the wide landscape around.” Right! That is precisely what removing the exiting road, out of sight & sound from Stonehenge and opening up the landscape, achieves for future engagement and research
“The route, if needed at all, should be far, far away, out of earshot and out of sight.”
Suggestions? The A303 runs from Hampshire to Devon via Stonehenge, linking the M3 and the A30 and London to the south-west. Perhaps we could move Devon?
Suggestions? The A303 runs from Hampshire to Devon via Stonehenge, linking the M3 and the A30 and London to the south-west. Perhaps we could move Devon?
“The plan was always wrong, but now in summer 2020 every calculation on which the plan was made, is now out of date.” Presumably a ref to pits at Durrington Walls. These have no bearing on the road debate. There are ancient remains around Stonehenge. This is not news
Archaeologists excavate to learn about the past. That is how research progresses. A303 works would create a gain in knowledge and public interest.
If even now you’d like more from me, you could start here:
mikepitts.wordpress.com/tag/president-…
mikepitts.wordpress.com/2017/04/08/wha…
If even now you’d like more from me, you could start here:
mikepitts.wordpress.com/tag/president-…
mikepitts.wordpress.com/2017/04/08/wha…
Existing obvs, not exciting...
