|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Stonehenge and its Environs » A303 to go into a tunnel eventually? |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Sep 26, 2013, 16:17
|
||
|
Apart from quite a good article in today’s Telegraph, outlining some of the concepts behind the new Stonehenge visitor centre (due to open in December 2013) this, in the last paragraph, is encouraging - "English Heritage is continuing to push for the A303 to go into a tunnel eventually. But for the time being the road has been resurfaced with a noise-reduction coating in the hope that the sound of constant traffic might be less intrusive when the visitor is contemplating the stones and asking the big questions of how and why they were put here in the first place." Of course we’ve heard it all before but is this a sign that Stonehenge will one day get the (isolated) ambiance it so richly deserves - here’s hoping. Meanwhile, the noise-reduction coating to the A303 is good news as that (the traffic noise) really was a distraction to anyone who just wanted to sit on the grass and contemplate the monument.
|
|||
nix 201 posts |
Sep 27, 2013, 00:27
|
||
|
Littlestone wrote: Of course we’ve heard it all before but is this a sign that Stonehenge will one day get the (isolated) ambiance it so richly deserves - here’s hoping. Meanwhile, the noise-reduction coating to the A303 is good news as that (the traffic noise) really was a distraction to anyone who just wanted to sit on the grass and contemplate the monument. Hi Littlestone. Just thought I'd say that although I sympathise with that point of view, it isn't a distraction for me - well, not compared with the huge cost and impact of such a tunnel. We live in the modern world too and the closure of the road adjacent is such an improvement that I think it enough. I quite like the contrast between the two for many sites actually! very best N
|
|||
|
tomwatts 376 posts |
Sep 27, 2013, 07:06
|
||
|
http://www.sarsen.org/2013/09/unfenced-heel-stone.html Well done to Tim Daw for grabbing the pics........ I'm a bit surprised that people can walk around the place, which is at the moment a building site...
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Sep 27, 2013, 08:58
|
||
|
nix wrote: Just thought I'd say that although I sympathise with that point of view, it isn't a distraction for me - well, not compared with the huge cost and impact of such a tunnel. We live in the modern world too and the closure of the road adjacent is such an improvement that I think it enough. I quite like the contrast between the two for many sites actually! Hi nix Yes, I appreciate your point of view as well – I was just pleasantly surprised at the news that the tunnel hasn’t been totally ditched but accept that there are pros and cons for the idea. Last time I was at Stonehenge it was the traffic noise that I found most distracting, but maybe the wind was blowing from that direction on the day. The sight of moving traffic actually is not such a problem as it appears quite a long way away. Another bit of news that might be of interest is that - “Devizes Passengers is urging people to use a new shoppers’ service between Devizes and Salisbury. The A360 will be run commercially by Hatts Coaches and stops at Potterne, West Lavington, Tilshead and Shrewton. It leaves Devizes Market Place at 9.25am, arriving in Salisbury just after 10am, and returns from Salisbury at 1.50pm, arriving in Devizes at 2.40pm, Monday to Friday. “Jasper Selwyn, chairman of Devizes Passengers, said: “If the service is successful it could expand to an hourly frequency serving the new Stonehenge Visitor centre when it opens at the end of this year. This would make it easy for tourists to come from Stonehenge to Devizes, visit the Wiltshire [Heritage] Museum and then continue to Avebury on the number 49 bus.”
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Sep 30, 2013, 08:22
|
||
|
nix wrote: We live in the modern world too and the closure of the road adjacent is such an improvement that I think it enough. Indeed it is if the wrong sort of tunnel is being contemplated. There are tunnels and tunnels... http://heritageaction.wordpress.com/2013/09/30/a-tunnel-a-tunnel/
|
|||
Sanctuary 4670 posts |
Sep 30, 2013, 09:36
|
||
|
nix wrote: Littlestone wrote: Of course we’ve heard it all before but is this a sign that Stonehenge will one day get the (isolated) ambiance it so richly deserves - here’s hoping. Meanwhile, the noise-reduction coating to the A303 is good news as that (the traffic noise) really was a distraction to anyone who just wanted to sit on the grass and contemplate the monument. Hi Littlestone. Just thought I'd say that although I sympathise with that point of view, it isn't a distraction for me - well, not compared with the huge cost and impact of such a tunnel. We live in the modern world too and the closure of the road adjacent is such an improvement that I think it enough. I quite like the contrast between the two for many sites actually! very best N I'm sat on the fence somewhat with this. Stonehenge is an ancient monument which has survived into modern times and without a doubt has become an iconic sight as one drives past on the A303 so for that reason I would leave it as it is although I fully understand LS's preferred isolation of it. My biggest objection would be the cost of a tunnel. I think Stonehenge has had enough money thrown at it and would rather like to see it spent on maintaining and researching many of our other ancient sites which year by year are slowly returning to nature because many are out of the public gaze. Even with all the money spent on it, Stonehenge still seems to be as big a mystery as it ever was with a new idea one week then being dismissed the next and replaced by yet another and further reasons to raise more cash. When does it end?
|
|||
|
Mustard 1043 posts |
Sep 30, 2013, 10:11
|
||
|
Sanctuary wrote: I think Stonehenge has had enough money thrown at it and would rather like to see it spent on maintaining and researching many of our other ancient sites which year by year are slowly returning to nature because many are out of the public gaze. It's an immense amount of money, and for little gain. In an ideal world, I'd like to see the 303 buried. But in a world where we're forced to choose between different projects, it's hard to see it as being the most sensible use of cash. I can think of ten sights that could benefit hugely from a fraction of that spend off the top of my head. And what would be gained at Stonehenge for the average visitors? In normal hours, the place is swarming with tourists. Even without the 303, it would hardly be a "natural environment", and I can't imagine feeling particularly connected to the place whilst surrounded by a throng of visitors.
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Sep 30, 2013, 12:53
|
||
|
Mustard wrote: In an ideal world, I'd like to see the 303 buried. Me too, ditto sections of road past Silbury and through Avebury, but it’s not going to happen for a long time (if ever) and that’s why I was surprised and encouraged by English Heritage saying it, “...is continuing to push for the A303 to go into a tunnel eventually.” The bottom line is that Avebury and Stonehenge will continue to attract more traffic and more visitors and there’s not much we can do about that. Traffic calming measures at Avebury though are possible and could start with a further reduction in the speed limit there, safe crossing places for pedestrians, the banning of vehicles over a certain weight and single line traffic past the Diamond Stone.
|
|||
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Sep 30, 2013, 18:59
|
||
|
Sanctuary wrote: My biggest objection would be the cost of a tunnel. That would be one of mine as well. It might be worth remembering though that the new visitor centre, “...is financed almost entirely by Heritage Lottery Fund money (£10m), English Heritage commercial income and philanthropic donations including significant gifts from the Garfield Weston Foundation, the Linbury Trust and the Wolfson Foundation.” Doubt if a Stonehenge tunnel would get that sort of investment (there’d be no payback) though there might be some, and with help from the State it might be achievable. The alternative is this :-(
|
|||
tjj 3606 posts |
Edited Sep 30, 2013, 21:09
Sep 30, 2013, 20:52
|
||
|
Littlestone wrote: Sanctuary wrote: My biggest objection would be the cost of a tunnel. That would be one of mine as well. It might be worth remembering though that the new visitor centre, “...is financed almost entirely by Heritage Lottery Fund money (£10m), English Heritage commercial income and philanthropic donations including significant gifts from the Garfield Weston Foundation, the Linbury Trust and the Wolfson Foundation.” Doubt if a Stonehenge tunnel would get that sort of investment (there’d be no payback) though there might be some, and with help from the State it might be achievable. The alternative is this :-( No! The honest alternative is for us, the human race that is, to stop using cars like it is a 'god' given right. To work towards reinstating a viable (not necessarily high speed) rail network to transport goods and food. To work towards a viable public transport system accessible to all. To stop burying our heads in the sand and remember that every time 'we' get into our cars there are 50 million other people doing the same thing somewhere in the world. When we are all dead and gone leaving our grandchildren's children to shake their heads at our insane selfishness I do hope Stonehenge is still standing.
|
| Pages: 9 – [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
