Post by cerridwen on Dec 6, 2007 14:35:29 GMT
Stonehenge: "International jubilation" as £540-million road scheme is finally scrapped
News release: For immediate release: 09:00 Thursday 6 December 2007
The British government's decision [1] to scrap a proposed £540-million dual-carriageway through the Stonehenge World Heritage Site (WHS) should be greeted with international jubilation, according to Save Stonehenge!, a pressure group that has opposed the plan for almost a decade [2].
Along with other opponents of the scheme, Save Stonehenge! has consistently argued that any road improvement near Stonehenge must respect the integrity of the entire 6500 acre (2600 hectare) World Heritage Site, not just the stone circle at its centre.
Disingenuously billed as an "exceptional environmental scheme", the proposed road would have been "exceptional" for all the wrong reasons. Less than one fifth (only the central 2.1km/1.3-mile section of the 12.4 km/7.7-mile route) would have been underground. About 3.4 km (2 miles) of four-lane dual carriageway road would have been bulldozed at ground level or in deep cuttings through the heart of the World Heritage Site and within earshot of the stone circle. Two giant roundabout-interchanges would have scarred the eastern and western approaches to the famous site [3].
Arguments over the road date back almost 20 years to when Stonehenge first became a World Heritage Site in 1986. The current scheme was launched in 1998 as the "Stonehenge Master Plan", jointly promoted by the Highways Agency, English Heritage, and the National Trust. English Heritage found itself increasingly isolated after the National Trust distanced itself and ultimately withdrew its support [4]. Whatever it may claim to the contrary, English Heritage has always privately regarded the tunnel scheme as "a major compromise" [5]. When the original plan for a cut-and-cover tunnel was scrapped in December 2002, chief archaeologist Dr Geoffrey Wainwright confessed: "... the thought of gouging that massive trench across such a precious landscape just brought tears to my eyes." [6]
Today's cancellation of the Stonehenge scheme has been inevitable since January 2006, when the Highways Agency revealed that the tunnel's estimated construction cost had soared to over half a billion pounds [7]. Five last-ditch options the Agency put forward to salvage the scheme were unanimously rejected by a dozen leading environmental groups, including the National Trust, which owns most of the land around Stonehenge, the Council for the Protection of Rural England, and the Stonehenge Alliance [8]. The new options were even rejected by ICOMOS-UK, UNESCO's adviser on UK world heritage sites, which said they fell "far short of serious consideration of possible alternative schemes that are appropriate for this iconic World Heritage site." [9].
Far from being a lost opportunity, as English Heritage suggests [10], today's decision is the only sensible outcome: a massive road-building project was always the wrong solution in such a sensitive landscape.
Save Stonehenge! has campaigned against the proposed road scheme since 1999. In an informal survey of over 300 written comments posted on its website between 2001 and 2004, Save Stonehenge! found overwhelming opposition to the plan, with 288 people from 18 countries opposing the scheme and only 12 people supporting it [11].
A spokesman for Save Stonehenge, Chris Woodford, said:
"Christmas has come early for Stonehenge. 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."
News release: For immediate release: 09:00 Thursday 6 December 2007
The British government's decision [1] to scrap a proposed £540-million dual-carriageway through the Stonehenge World Heritage Site (WHS) should be greeted with international jubilation, according to Save Stonehenge!, a pressure group that has opposed the plan for almost a decade [2].
Along with other opponents of the scheme, Save Stonehenge! has consistently argued that any road improvement near Stonehenge must respect the integrity of the entire 6500 acre (2600 hectare) World Heritage Site, not just the stone circle at its centre.
Disingenuously billed as an "exceptional environmental scheme", the proposed road would have been "exceptional" for all the wrong reasons. Less than one fifth (only the central 2.1km/1.3-mile section of the 12.4 km/7.7-mile route) would have been underground. About 3.4 km (2 miles) of four-lane dual carriageway road would have been bulldozed at ground level or in deep cuttings through the heart of the World Heritage Site and within earshot of the stone circle. Two giant roundabout-interchanges would have scarred the eastern and western approaches to the famous site [3].
Arguments over the road date back almost 20 years to when Stonehenge first became a World Heritage Site in 1986. The current scheme was launched in 1998 as the "Stonehenge Master Plan", jointly promoted by the Highways Agency, English Heritage, and the National Trust. English Heritage found itself increasingly isolated after the National Trust distanced itself and ultimately withdrew its support [4]. Whatever it may claim to the contrary, English Heritage has always privately regarded the tunnel scheme as "a major compromise" [5]. When the original plan for a cut-and-cover tunnel was scrapped in December 2002, chief archaeologist Dr Geoffrey Wainwright confessed: "... the thought of gouging that massive trench across such a precious landscape just brought tears to my eyes." [6]
Today's cancellation of the Stonehenge scheme has been inevitable since January 2006, when the Highways Agency revealed that the tunnel's estimated construction cost had soared to over half a billion pounds [7]. Five last-ditch options the Agency put forward to salvage the scheme were unanimously rejected by a dozen leading environmental groups, including the National Trust, which owns most of the land around Stonehenge, the Council for the Protection of Rural England, and the Stonehenge Alliance [8]. The new options were even rejected by ICOMOS-UK, UNESCO's adviser on UK world heritage sites, which said they fell "far short of serious consideration of possible alternative schemes that are appropriate for this iconic World Heritage site." [9].
Far from being a lost opportunity, as English Heritage suggests [10], today's decision is the only sensible outcome: a massive road-building project was always the wrong solution in such a sensitive landscape.
Save Stonehenge! has campaigned against the proposed road scheme since 1999. In an informal survey of over 300 written comments posted on its website between 2001 and 2004, Save Stonehenge! found overwhelming opposition to the plan, with 288 people from 18 countries opposing the scheme and only 12 people supporting it [11].
A spokesman for Save Stonehenge, Chris Woodford, said:
"Christmas has come early for Stonehenge. 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."