Forgive me if this comes across as incredibly naive but it seems to me that we have finally (after 40/50 years or more of debate etc) arrived at the least worst option for resolving/addressing all of the myriad issues surrounding the need to improve traffic flow around Stonehenge without desecrating the site. No scheme was ever going to please everyone and unless I've missed something, I haven't seen one that is so much 'better' than this that we should go on debating it for another 40/50 years. As someone for whom driving on that section of the A303 is, has been and will continue to be an inescapable part of my life I think it's time finally to say 'ok, let's do it', to accept the result and move on. I know that view will be unacceptable to many who use this site but what's the real (as opposed to ideal) alternative?
Going back to the situation at Stonehenge, not just any road but a tunnel road that will have a massive impact on the Stonehenge environment. You can slow down in your car, allow yourself more time, listen to some music or, heaven forfend, go a different route. Yes it may take longer. The Stonehenge environment along with its archaeology cannot be put back and will be lost to posterity when/if this scheme goes ahead. The Secretary of State for Transport, Grant Shapps has signed the deal off - the National Trust and English Heritage are all for it - at a quick glance it sounds good but something about it just doesn't add up especially when you factor in the ever increasing costs - which will doubtless multiply. You would have to ask why, will it even benefit you Ironstone - I know nothing about you but would hazard a guess you might well be living a different life by the time this scheme comes to pass. If it does.
This can't be claimed to be technically impossible as we built a rail tunnel of 4.5 miles under the Severn 150 years ago.
Nor can it be claimed to be too expensive as we are going to build a tunnel for HS2 under the Chilterns which will be 10 miles long.
The damnable thing is that the Government has managed to convince the public the alternative IS too expensive and our three heritage protection bodies have taken that as gospel without putting up the slightest challenge to it.
Oh and that the scheme will break an international treaty, although in the brave new Trump/Boris world that has hardly raised an eyebrow.
Unless otherwise stated, the copyright in each work is the property of the respective contributor. For usage or questions, contact [email protected].