end of May. A management
plan for Stonehenge will be published by November 1999. Future land use
will be determined according to this plan (Wainwright, interview 24/2/99).
Benefits of cut-and-cover tunnel
The Master Plan reports that the proposed tunnel will reduce traffic noise
at Stonehenge to 'bird song level', enable the re-creation of areas of
permanent down land and restore the setting of the stone circle in relation
to the other 450 sites in the World Heritage area. Use of footpaths and
cycle ways within the area will be encouraged. An editorial in Antiquity
further reports the network of footpath and bridle ways in the area will
be extended (anon 1998: 733). Farmers will be compensated for no longer
ploughing land within the World Heritage site, although this step could
be taken independently of tunnel construction. Wainwright reports that
small ploughed areas would remain (interview 24/2/99). 'There will be
free access for the public to walk among the Stones' (Master plan 1998:
10). It should be noted, however, that the current barrier around the
stone circle is not a consequence of the proximity of roads, but a response
to public demonstrations during the 1980s. A fear of vandalism remains
in some quarters, which must be overcome before the barrier can be removed
(Wainwright, interview 24/2/99).
Costs of the cut-and-cover tunnel
(a) Financial cost. The estimate for the cut-and-cover tunnel is reported
to have been submitted to the Government by Ove Arup, not commissioned.
If excavations are delayed by popular demonstrations, the cost will increase.
Demonstrations against the Newbury By-pass are said to have cost about
£20 million. Similar demonstrations would raise the reported cost
of the cut and cover tunnel to 150 million pounds.
(b) Impact of tunnel construction. The cut and cover tunnel
will not disturb land outside existing the northern [Stonehenge side]
boundary of the A303, except in the western approach cutting, but a 35
metre strip would be added to the width of the existing road when land
is 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 met