Assuming it is safe under the road then it, like the remaining section(s) of the Mary Rose, is as safe as it probably can be (though from a purely conservation point of view I wonder how safe it actually is under a vibrating ribbon of tarmac compared to an underwater bank of sand). The point here however (and the subject of this thread) is the Government's position that it, "...remains committed to the principle that there should be a presumption in favour of the physical preservation of nationally important archaeological remains (whether scheduled or not) that are affected by proposed development...”

I'd like to see how English Heritage and co will manage to wriggle out of that position every time one of our megalithic sites is threatened ;-)