Stonehenge Update for Rescue News No.100 (Autumn 2006)

Just over 7 years ago the first public discussion of the Stonehenge 'Master Plan' was hosted by RESCUE at the Society of Antiquaries in July 1999 (RN 79). English Heritage's 'Master Plan' was to upgrade the A303, including a 2km cut-and-cover tunnel close to the henge, and to provide a new visitor centre on the edge of the World Heritage Site (WHS), at Amesbury.

RESCUE's well-attended meeting agreed by a large majority that a long bored tunnel was the only satisfactory solution for the A303 at Stonehenge and that international funding should be sought to implement it. The view that the A303 should, as far as possible, be removed from the surface of the WHS is still shared by a significant number of organisations who continue to press for solutions that do not impact on this internationally outstanding cultural landscape (see RN 99).

Since 1999, the EH 'Master Plan' has been renamed 'The Stonehenge Project'. The cut-and-cover tunnel has been modified to a bored 2.1km tunnel but the road and visitor-centre schemes continue to threaten archaeology and settings right across the WHS. There is now growing consensus that the Stonehenge Project is unaffordable and impractical. A more realistic, step-by-step approach could bring less expensive but immediate improvements without damaging the resource.

For accounts of the Stonehenge Saga since 1986, see E Young and W Kennet, 'Stonehenge: the saga continues', Journal of Architectural Conservation, 3 (November 2000), 70-85; and articles on the subject in Rescue News since RN 78 1999).

The outcome of the A303 Options Review, promised this summer, has not yet been announced. English Heritage has been joined by the RAC motorists' organisation in lobbying actively for the published 2.1km tunnel scheme for the A303.

A second planning application for the new Stonehenge visitor centre was approved by Salisbury District Council on 10 July. The Stonehenge Alliance raised significant concerns about the Case Officer's Report on the application: it did not mention the County Archaeologist's objection to the scheme largely on the grounds of its impact on the setting of the Scheduled Cursus monument (alongside which the northern visitor-access route or 'land train' would be constructed); nor reveal that trial trenching north of the Cursus had not been done, despite PPG 16 recommendation that such work should be undertaken in advance of determination in a case of this kind. The assertion that the new land train could be well screened seemed to us not to be valid, since only if trial trenching were undertaken, could the significance of any as yet unknown archaeology be assessed, or a decision be made on whether tree planting would be appropriate so close to the Cursus and over an adjacent barrow cemetery.

Following referral of the application to the Secretary of State for a final decision, the application was called in for a Public Local Inquiry to be held in December this year, alongside EH's Appeal against refusal by the LPA of permission for an exactly similar application in July 2005. Since the joint Inquiry was announced, EH has withdrawn its latest application, leaving only the Appeal to be heard, on which a final decision will be made by the Secretary of State. This unusual situation could result in Salisbury District Council deciding not to defend the Appeal. The visitor-centre has major HLF funding, despite the many objections to it; the majority from local people whose amenity and quiet enjoyment of the nearby WHS are threatened by the impact of the land-train from and the access to the new centre close to their houses. The Inquiry and its outcome will be of interest to many people, not only those whose principal concerns are for the well-being of the Stonehenge WHS. RESCUE will participate in the Inquiry as a member of The Stonehenge Alliance.

Kate Fielden