Stonehenge Tunnel Poll

[ska invita]

I get the arguments both ways
I think Im a bit more pro tunnel over all though

 

[A380]

It’s better that the current set up, but they probably should take the A303 much much further away…

 

[Elpenor]

I must go this way 10 times a year and did a round trip at the weekend. I feel like I know the entire 303 like the back of my hand.

Cant see it doing much for traffic unless the tunnel also eliminates the traffic light controlled roundabout at Amesbury; even if it did it would just move the pinch point a few miles west to Winterbourne Stoke.

Edit - just googled the plans and it would also involve bypassing WS and presumably rejoining the existing dualled area a mile or so on from WS

From a selfish perspective I love being able to look at the stones as I drive past as have some good memories of going with a friend.

 

[mx wcfc]

The plan includes a by pass for Winterbourne Stoke.

Likewise, I use the A303 quite a bit. If I'm going west on a Friday, I avoid it and go via Salisbury to avoid the traffic jam.

Build it. Just build it right, with all the archaeology done properly. Phil Harding could do it. It's just up the road from him.

At the moment, the traffic interferes with the enjoyment and surroundings of Stonehenge.

Either that, or close the A303.

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

Build it. Just build it right, with all the archaeology done properly. Phil Harding could do it. It's just up the road from him.

Now Time Team is back on YouTube they could make it a running series.

 

[keybored]

I can't see how they could possibly ruin it anymore than they have done.

 

[Ground Elder]

It would be cheaper to just move the stones . In a few thousand years no one will remember where they were before

 

[Wilf]

It would be cheaper to just move the stones . In a few thousand years no one will remember where they were before

Sell it to Trump, he'd make a mad crazy golf out of it.

 

[Yossarian]

It would be cheaper to just move the stones . In a few thousand years no one will remember where they were before

It was a dumb move to have erected them so close to the motorway in the first place

 

[Raheem]

It was a dumb move to have erected them so close to the motorway in the first place

No, silly, the stones were put up thousands of years before cars were invented, so no-one will have understood what the motorway even was.

Think it's an A road, though.

 

[Wilf]

No, silly, the stones were put up thousands of years before cars were invented, so no-one will have understood what the motorway even was.

Think it's an A road, though.

Err, dude, futureproofing.

 

[Dystopiary]

2,000-odd years ago: "They can't put those whacking great stones on our nice quiet bit of land, the bastards."

 

[gosub]

It would be cheaper to just move the stones . In a few thousand years no one will remember where they were before

Nobody remembers what they looked like in 1913

 

[NoXion]

Will the construction and operation of this tunnel present more or less of a risk to the site than the current route of the road? I vaguely remember hearing that vibration from traffic was causing problems, so if a tunnel will help then I'm all in favour.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Was all in favour of preserving the magnificence of the site, but then this came along....






Knock 'em down and grind 'em up to be used as hardcore for the new road.

 

[ID47]

Nobody remembers what they looked like in 1913

 

[Silas Loom]

Was all in favour of preserving the magnificence of the site, but then this came along....


View attachment 412909



Knock 'em down and grind 'em up to be used as hardcore for the new road.

We could probably get a few bob for them from a midwestern US city with pretensions of grandeur. Actually, we could sell them a few times over.

 

[danny la rouge]

Will the construction and operation of this tunnel present more or less of a risk to the site than the current route of the road? I vaguely remember hearing that vibration from traffic was causing problems, so if a tunnel will help then I'm all in favour.

My concern is that tunnel building is very destructive, and takes up a much wider area than just the tunnel itself. The area around Stonehenge is so rich in archaeology much more than the stones themselves, and as techniques and technology improve more and more is being learned about the wider ritual landscape.

Of course building work happens all the time and we have to balance the needs of the community with the academic advantages, and of course excavations are lost beneath roads and car parks and office blocks and that’s life. But this is such an important site and so much more than just the monument itself that I worry for what will be lost.

 

[JimW]

It's a ritual landscape as much as the stones themselves. Might as well preserve the lot. Used to be down that way regularly during Cruisewatch days but missed the iconic convoy stop with the stones in background.

 

[scalyboy]

Was all in favour of preserving the magnificence of the site, but then this came along....


View attachment 412909



Knock 'em down and grind 'em up to be used as hardcore for the new road.

If you ask me, all this meddling with the sacred landscape is playing with fire; it’s only a matter of time before the vengeful spirit of a Bronze Age shaman is roused from their 4,000 year sleep and starts to stalk the land and wreak a dreadful revenge on everyone in the locality, innocent motorists just passing through the vicinity will have ancient beakers flung at high speeds through their windscreens – and you can bet the insurance companies won’t pay out, they'll just say 'nutter'. The only winners in this sorry affair will be auto glass repair firms

 

[Elpenor]

Nobody remembers what they looked like in 1913

That’s being unfair to some of our older posters

 

[JimW]

That’s being unfair to some of our older posters

Sass of course helped transport the bluestone.

 

[Artaxerxes]

Dig away

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

Was all in favour of preserving the magnificence of the site, but then this came along....


View attachment 412909



Knock 'em down and grind 'em up to be used as hardcore for the new road.

Bit of an overreaction to LARPing.

 

[pogofish]

It would be cheaper to just move the stones . In a few thousand years no one will remember where they were before

Quite a lot already seem to think they are there already TBH but if they moved them to near Windsor or Bath, the tour companies and a large proportion of international tourists would find it a lot more convenient for packing these three "must see" places into one day.

 

[danny la rouge]

Quite a lot already seem to think they are there already TBH but if they moved them to near Windsor or Bath, the tour companies and a large proportion of international tourists would find it a lot more convenient for packing these three "must see" places into one day.

That might actually be a way of protecting the archeology! (Not entirely serious. But I am a bit. I’m open to being convinced).

 

[NoXion]

My concern is that tunnel building is very destructive, and takes up a much wider area than just the tunnel itself. The area around Stonehenge is so rich in archaeology much more than the stones themselves, and as techniques and technology improve more and more is being learned about the wider ritual landscape.

Of course building work happens all the time and we have to balance the needs of the community with the academic advantages, and of course excavations are lost beneath roads and car parks and office blocks and that’s life. But this is such an important site and so much more than just the monument itself that I worry for what will be lost.

Unless they have to be blasting through solid rock, I'm not sure that constructing a tunnel would be any more destructive than typical construction works, which to my understanding do not necessarily rule out future discoveries, whether during construction or afterwards.

I would hope that any tunnel construction work would be planned in consultation with archaeological experts, so that care is taken during construction and any discoveries made in the course thereof are dealt with appropriately.

Doing some digging (heh) online, professional opinion seems somewhat divided. The Council for British Archaeology are opposed to the plans as they currently stand, as they apparently think the proposed tunnel isn't long enough. On the other hand, Historic England, the National Trust and and English Heritage have welcomed an ICOMOS/UNESCO report which recognises the benefits of a tunnel of at least 2.9km in length. I have been unable to determine the opinion of the British Archaeological Association.

 

[danny la rouge]

Historic England, the National Trust and and English Heritage

Wouldn’t be the first time I disagreed with any of these bodies. But I take your point.

 

[zahir]

My concern is that tunnel building is very destructive, and takes up a much wider area than just the tunnel itself. The area around Stonehenge is so rich in archaeology much more than the stones themselves, and as techniques and technology improve more and more is being learned about the wider ritual landscape.

Of course building work happens all the time and we have to balance the needs of the community with the academic advantages, and of course excavations are lost beneath roads and car parks and office blocks and that’s life. But this is such an important site and so much more than just the monument itself that I worry for what will be lost.

An archaeologist's view

 

[Silas Loom]

It all sounds too complicated for me to have an opinion on, so my vote is available to the highest bidder.