News RSS Feed


Ford's Future in Southampton Paul Poolton Hannah Foster Murder Trial Echo Forums


Stonehenge tunnel plan axed

11:00am Thursday 6th December 2007

comment Comments (3)   Have your say »


THE Government today scrapped plans for a major road improvement scheme at Stonehenge because it would cost too much.

Estimates for the controversial 2.1km-long (1.3-mile) tunnel scheme under Salisbury Plain had soared from £223m to £540m.

Transport Minister Tom Harris said today that allocating such sums "cannot be justified and would not represent best use of taxpayers' money".

The Stonehenge tunnel was deemed the best alternative scheme for an area which suffers major traffic hold-ups.

The Government is still committed to improving visitor facilities at Stonehenge, a World Heritage Site, but any traffic improvements will now be of a minor nature.

Today's decision was welcomed by the Save Stonehenge organisation, whose spokesman Chris Woodford said: "Christmas has come early for Stonehenge."

In a parliamentary written answer, Mr Harris said today that a review of the Stonehenge improvement plan - which had been the subject of a public inquiry - had identified a shortlist of possible options, including routes to the north and south of Stonehenge.

He added that the Government recognised the importance of the A303 Stonehenge improvement scheme and that today's announcement would come as a considerable disappointment for the project's supporters.

He said the Highways Agency would investigate possible small-scale improvements to the A303 as part of its overall stewardship of route.

Further work will include examination of the case for closing the junction of the A344 with the A303 near West Amesbury as part of the investigation of options for improving the setting of Stonehenge.

Save Stonehenge said that only a 1.3-mile section of the proposed 7.7-mile route would have been underground and that today's decision was "the only sensible outcome as a massive road-building project was always the wrong solution in such a sensitive landscape".

Mr Woodford added: "No-one with any sense wanted a tunnel, a flyover, a dual carriageway, and two whacking great interchanges here. It's just not acceptable to build 1950s-style motorways in places like this anymore."


Your Say YourThis is Hampshire

talk about cheap, says...
12:16pm Thu 6 Dec 07

What gets me is the cheap gits who park outside and look through the fence at Stonehenge. It's not much to go in and if you pay to park they give you the money back when you go in !!!!

mike, hedge end says...
3:16pm Thu 6 Dec 07

I could never see the real need for a tunnel past the stones, I reckon it was proposed just so that folk passing through on their way to the West Country couldn't see them for free! Also, why can't English Heritage build a visitor centre without it being a part of the tunnel project?

Garry Denke, Plano, Texas, USA says...
11:37pm Thu 20 Dec 07

In April of 1985 A Texas Tycoon offered to finance a 2.4-mile (4km) long bored tunnel under Stonehenge provided: (a) That UNESCO list the monument by 1986 as a World Heritage Site and; (b) That the A344 road and all of the artefacts below Heelstone be removed. In November of 1986 UNESCO officially listed it and by 1989 A Texas Tycoon's improvement scheme for the A303 as it passes Stonehenge was finally put on the Government's Roads Programme. Fifty (50) possible routes other than A Texas Tycoon's 2.4-mile (4km) long bored tunnel scheme were considered prior to a public consultation. The Highways Agency held a Planning Conference in November of 1995 at which time it was recommended that THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE SCHEME was A Texas Tycoon's 1985 one. In November of 1996 the scheme was withdrawn from the Roads Programme because the Government was too proud to accept financing offered by A Texas Tycoon. My question is this: Do y'all still want to dig it?

Comments are closed on this article.

Video News Food & Restaurant Reviews

Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »