Avebury forum 222 room
Image by Big Al
Avebury

Stonehenge — Avebury WHS Management Plan

close
more_vert
nigelswift N
nigelswift Jan 24, 2015 09:49:29
Replying to tjj

"3. Reduce the dominance and negative impact of roads and traffic and ensure any improvements to the A303 support this.
4. Improve the interpretation and enhance the visitor experience of the wider landscape."

Both of those look to have been carefully designed to provide ticks if they succeed in achieving a short tunnel.

"5. Ensure any development is consistent with the protection and where appropriate enhancement of the monuments and their settings and wider WHS landscape and its setting."

... and that looks like a further attempt to provide scope for another tick, but IMO it can only be earned by spinning the reality. Affecting or destroying features is unavoidable if you're going to build massive entrance trenches inside the WHS so you're going to have to tell the public it's worth it as it'll enhance the rest. I don't think that's either true or within their remit but they're being forced to do it to help the Tories win the election.

T tjj
tjj Jan 24, 2015 15:18:20
Replying to nigelswift

Hello Nigel, I did ask the question (see below). The word 'tunnel' made the Stonehenge WHS Coordinator a bit twitchy but she took in good humour.

I asked a few questions about roads, specifically the A303 and possible tunnel. Before any commitment is made to a tunnel (or its length) there will an ICOMOS Historic Impact Assessment process to evaluate impacts on the ‘Outstanding Universal Value’ of the WHS.

I admit to not knowing much about ICOMOS until yesterday - it looks as though they have made a statement on the subject of the tunnel and its length, see their website.
http://www.icomos-uk.org/icomos-uk-home/

To quote from their web-site:
"ICOMOS-UK appreciates the very real need to address the issue of the A303 at Stonehenge and welcomes the Government’s announcement to do just that. We recognise that a tunnel could help to preserve the Outstanding Universal Value of this important World Heritage Site.
However, we are concerned that associated portals and dual carriageways could have a significant and adverse impact on archaeology across the wider World Heritage landscape and believe that any such threat should be very carefully considered as part of a full impact assessment of the proposed project, taking account of the United Kingdom’s obligations under the 1972 World Heritage Convention."

If Heritage Action want to write an additional piece (I know you already have done so) on the issue of the tunnel, please feel free to use any of the information in my previous two posts.