son, however he warns that Mesolithic post
holes, flint scatters etc. may be concealed along the route. The entire
route would need to be surveyed for magnetic anomalies and phosphate concentrations,
excavated and soil samples sieved (Parker Pearson, interview 11/3/99).
The Prehistoric Society takes a stronger stance, calculating that 13.5
ha. of ground in 'the most archaeologically sensitive land surface in
Europe' will be destroyed by the construction of tunnel and cuttings (Prehistoric
Society 1999: Appendix A). Modern groups to whom the area is sacred may
oppose disturbance from the cut and cover excavations. In addition to
the Prehistoric Society, concerns over the proposed scheme have been voiced
by the Wiltshire Archaeological Society, the Rambler's Association, Transport
2000 and the Druids (Fielden, interview 13/4/99). In any case, given the
sensitivity of the archaeological remains in the area a watching brief
on the tunnel construction would not be adequate: total surface collection,
shovel testing, and total area stripping should be seen as an acceptable
minimum for archaeological intervention.
A serious problem will develop at Longbarrow Cross-roads,
on the western boundary of the World Heritage site, as traffic increases
on the new dual carriageway. The A303 will undergo a 'grade separation'
from the A360, which it crosses here. A cluster of fifteen round barrows
are situated just to the northeast of the roundabout. They would be threatened
by slip roads or a flyover on the site of the present crossing, and the
junction should be moved as far as practicable to the west during construction
of the tunnel and its approaches, to enable future improvements to take
place without threat to the World Heritage site (Davidson interview 15/3/99).
The archaeology of Longbarrow Cross-roads is complex, including hut circles
and fields as well as a cemetery. The site appears to have been an important
node in the regional settlement pattern. The cost of, and time required
to excavate this area has not been taken into account (Peter Fowler interview
(e) The landscape in Stonehenge Bottom. Stonehenge Bottom
is a dry valley east of the ridge which forms the eastern boundary of
the Stonehenge Bowl. The top of the tunnel will be above the surface of
this dry valley. The mound covering the tunnel will be no higher than
the existing embankment but, with a width of 120 metres, it will be considerably
broader and will change the character of the landscape (Master Plan 1998:
fig 2). The dry valley floor is potentially a rich archaeological site
and the tunnel may change the underground drainage pattern. The architect
engaged by the constructors is reported to be most uneasy about this aspect
of the proposed cut-and-cover tunnel (Davidson interview 15/3/99).
(f) The view from the road. Many people enjoy being able
to see Stonehenge from the A303. People questioned by Maddison et al.
who were in favour of retaining the present A303, gave two main reasons:
they liked to see Stonehenge as they drove past, and/or they disliked
long tunnels (Maddison at al. 1998: 70). Brian Davidson suggests the people
of Wiltshire could be compensated for the loss of a free view through
a concessionary entrance fee (interview 15/3/99).
(g) Delivering visitors to the park and ride set-down.
The current proposals include a single, large visitor centre just beyond
the World Heritage site's eastern boundary, on the east side of the Countess
Roundabout (see figure 2). The presence of buildings at Countess Farm
on the west side of the Countess Roundabout, which might conceivably be
incorporated into a visitor centre, has not been actively investigated
(Fielden, interview 13/4/99). Visitors arriving from the west (about 30%
of visitors in the late 1980s) will have to drive through the tunnel to
park, then be taken back through the tunnel by minibus to the set-down
point at the end of the truncated A344. The additional time this costs
visitors, the road wear and cost of fuel will inevitably lead to demands
for a parking point west of Stonehenge. The least-damagi