excavated along the southern boundary. The land belongs to the National
Trust, who own the core area of the World Heritage site (see figure 4).
Access during construction will also require a 10 metre 'buffer zone'
on both sides of the A303 (Master plan 1998: 4-5). Brian Davidson, the
recently-retired English Heritage Inspector for Stonehenge, cautions that
experience of previous construction work shows not only that a very close
watch will need to be kept on construction work to ensure it does not
encroach beyond the designated zone, but also that contracts with construction
firms must be meticulously worded to ensure no additional disturbance
is caused by access tracks for plant, etc. (Davidson, interview 15/3/99).
Disposal of the surplus from the excavation is being discussed
with English Nature. Some would be used to cover the tunnel in Stonehenge
Bottom, some to create the flyover replacing the Countess Roundabout,
and some as infill on the Salisbury Plain army training ground. English
Heritage also expects to follow the example set by the Channel Tunnel,
where surplus material was used to create natural habitats (Wainwright,
interview 24/2/99; see also Southern Nature 1998/99).
(c) Permanent impact of the approach cuttings and portals.
While the Master Plan uses computer-modified images to illustrate the
beneficial effect in the vicinity of the stone circle of closing the A344
and placing the A303 in a tunnel, it does not illustrate the impact of
the tunnel entrances and approach cuttings on the neighbouring landscape.
Plans and sections in the Master Plan indicate the western
approach cutting would be 700 metres long, the eastern approach cutting
400 metres long. Depending on the angle of the banks, the cuttings would
be 55 to 75 metres wide at the tunnel entrances. They would have a maximum
depth of some 10 metres. Both cuttings would lie entirely within the World
Heritage site. King Barrow Ridge, on which a line of round barrows stands,
is just within the eastern limit of the cut-and-cover tunnel, 100 metres
from the eastern portal. King Barrow Ridge forms the eastern boundary
of the landscape visible from Stonehenge itself. The Avenue, a prehistoric
feature further to the east, is cut by the present A303 about 50 metres
beyond the start of the proposed eastern cutting. Wainwright reports the
eastern portal will be visible from the outskirts of Amesbury, and the
western portal from the Longbarrow Cross-roads, on the western boundary
of the World Heritage site. Having said this, the relative shallowness
of a cut-and-cover tunnel would mean that the down-grade at the portals
might actually be less than for a bored tunnel, if the latter were constructed
on level ground.
The permanent impact of the approach cuttings on the landscape
within the World Heritage site is a major disadvantage of the proposed
tunnel. While the cut-and-cover tunnel would enable visitors to roam in
the vicinity of Stonehenge, the cuttings would create uncrossable barriers
along other sections of the site.
(d) Damage or destruction of archaeological sites. Five
scheduled ancient monuments and another eleven known sites fall wholly
or partly within the construction zone of the tunnel and approach cuttings
(Master plan 1998: 5). All have been damaged and only three are extant
(see figure 4 and table 1). But if these are monuments which are considered
to be of national importance, it is still questionable whether their destruction
can be recommended (Bewley, interview 13/4/99). No-one knows how many
unknown sites will be discovered during excavations for the cut and cover
tunnel. The Longbarrow Cross-roads area includes many known sites. The
distribution of known sites implies there are fewer sites within the Stonehenge
Bowl than outside it and therefore the proposed route of the cut-and-cover
tunnel itself is likely to damage or destroy relatively few unknown sites
(Wainwright, interview 24/2/99); a view supported by Mike Parker Pearson
(Parker Pearson, interview 11/3/99). However, arguments to the effect
that this low density of known sites is 