tiompan
|
Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge
Jan 16, 2017, 14:35
|
|
http://www.tunneltalk.com/UK-21Nov2014-Stonehenge-TBM-bored-road-traffic-tunnel-revived.php
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge
Jan 16, 2017, 14:52
|
|
Quite a hoot that the RSPB joined the pro-tunnel lobby (why??????????) and the announced western portal turns out to be right next to their reserve. Hohoho. Stupid bustards.
|
Lefturn
|
Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge
Jan 16, 2017, 17:07
|
|
nigelswift wrote: Quite a hoot that the RSPB joined the pro-tunnel lobby (why??????????) and the announced western portal turns out to be right next to their reserve. Hohoho. Stupid bustards.
As a long standing member of the RSPB I certainly hope they haven't. It would greatly surprise me and am assured they haven't taken a position because the manner in which this was announced caught them unawares. Indeed their position in 2006 was very much against, calling for members to object because of the threat to Normanton Down reserve. The intrusion of constructing the portal and all that goes with it let alone the use of four newly built lanes, would render the reserve useless. There is though surely something in what the Director-General of the National Trust, Dame Helen Ghosh, has remarked about skylarks - I mean that charity have coveted things in the past in the World Heritage site. Did they not take over Mike Pitts's vegetarian restaurant, the rural craft museum, and now have moved in on the Red Lion and the local shop at Avebury? The skylark reference is interesting given the RSPB reports Normanton Down's great success with "roosting and breeding stone curlews, as well as breeding skylarks"! Incidentally, the RSPB also had massive success with corn buntings, lapwings, barn owls, and wintering short-eared owls, plus common blue and grizzled skipper butterflies. No wonder the Trust fancy this tunnel, the portals are either side of their bit, perhaps thay are looking for the RSPB's success to leap over the fence. Sadly that is unlikely, the stone curlews will simply not move easily.
|
nigelswift
|
Edited Jan 17, 2017, 07:05
Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge
Jan 16, 2017, 17:34
|
Good to hear they haven't joined the pro-tunnel lobby, sorry for my misinformation. They really need to stand up and say where they stand.
Agree about the Trust. They go on about skylarks ad nauseam Tomorrow's Journal article is titled "Bloody skylarks!" It's not anti skylark, it's anti the constant citing of them by a rudderless, clueless NT that is the tunnel enabler in chief for reasons they simply haven't revealed.
|
tjj
|
Edited Jan 17, 2017, 09:12
Re: Highways England Consultation - A303/Stonehenge
Jan 17, 2017, 08:53
|
|
nigelswift wrote:
Agree about the Trust. They go on about skylarks ad nauseam Tomorrow's Journal article is titled "Bloody skylarks!" It's not anti skylark, it's anti the constant citing of them by a rudderless, clueless NT that is the tunnel enabler in chief for reasons they simply haven't revealed.
Just read the Heritage Journal's piece - which includes some interesting links.
https://heritageaction.wordpress.com/2017/01/17/bloody-skylarks/
|
thesweetcheat
|
Salisbury bypass
Jan 18, 2017, 20:39
|
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-35322444
|
Rhiannon
|
Re: Salisbury bypass
Jan 18, 2017, 21:48
|
What is this, it makes no sense. Salisbury's nowhere near the A303, it's miles south. It'd be 10s of miles of ploughing a huge road through the Wiltshire countryside and the Cranborne AONB. Surely it'd cost a squillion pounds and piss off thousands of people.
Am I just an idiot but are things SO BAD how they are at the moment? It's just a traffic jam on a road isn't it? God knows I sit in those every day. Isn't that better than cutting a big tunnel through the landscape. I'd be happy if they just left all this alone. They shut the old road off, didn't that make a bit of a difference? I don't really understand.
What are we / the government caring about here - traffic issues or returning the landscape to fields (the archaeology getting lost either way). So it looks pretty? and empty? This is the south of england. It's too late to pretend there's no road.
that's my opinion today anyway.
|
Sanctuary
|
Re: Salisbury bypass
Jan 18, 2017, 22:03
|
|
Rhiannon wrote: What is this, it makes no sense. Salisbury's nowhere near the A303, it's miles south. It'd be 10s of miles of ploughing a huge road through the Wiltshire countryside and the Cranborne AONB. Surely it'd cost a squillion pounds and piss off thousands of people.
Am I just an idiot but are things SO BAD how they are at the moment? It's just a traffic jam on a road isn't it? God knows I sit in those every day. Isn't that better than cutting a big tunnel through the landscape. I'd be happy if they just left all this alone. They shut the old road off, didn't that make a bit of a difference? I don't really understand.
What are we / the government caring about here - traffic issues or returning the landscape to fields (the archaeology getting lost either way). So it looks pretty? and empty? This is the south of england. It's too late to pretend there's no road.
that's my opinion today anyway.
It's always been mine.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Salisbury bypass
Jan 19, 2017, 06:51
|
|
There's also the fact that a longer tunnel being too expensive is a value judgement not an absolute fact. There's talk of an 18 mile tunnel between Manchester and Sheffield and 22 miles of tunnels under the Chilterns area for HS2. Then there's effing Trident.
|
tjj
|
Re: Salisbury bypass
Jan 19, 2017, 08:23
|
I've read/listened to the arguments against the short tunnel and feel clear it is a wrong course of action for the Stonehenge WHS given the damage it would cause. I cannot help but draw some comparisons with Avebury which has a busy road actually going through the stone circle itself - albeit not anything as busy as the A303. It would be unthinkable to divert or widen that road because of the damage it would cause. I hate to keep saying it but it is cars and the numbers of people using them that is the problem - a tunnel will not lessen the traffic or the traffic jams it will just take it out of view.
And then of course there is the cynical opinion that a tunnel would give EH/NT almost sole rights to the 'view of Stonehenge'.
|
