Stonehenge - The bored tunnel option

The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.

There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).

Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
fras
Member
Posts: 2873
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 18:34

Re: Stonehenge - The bored tunnel option

Post by fras » Thu Dec 02, 2021 17:34

Why not move Stonehenge so it's out of sight of the A303 ? It'd be a lot cheaper than the tunnel, then the A303 can be dualled on the surface witout any comeback.

Just thinking.....

OK, only a joke !!

User avatar
Norfolktolancashire
Member
Posts: 1022
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 22:34
Location: Cornwall

Re: Stonehenge - The bored tunnel option

Post by Norfolktolancashire » Thu Dec 02, 2021 18:55

fras wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 17:34
Why not move Stonehenge so it's out of sight of the A303 ? It'd be a lot cheaper than the tunnel, then the A303 can be dualled on the surface witout any comeback.

Just thinking.....

OK, only a joke !!
Between a rock and a hard place :)

User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 12729
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Stonehenge - The bored tunnel option

Post by KeithW » Thu Dec 02, 2021 21:24

fras wrote:
Thu Dec 02, 2021 17:34
Why not move Stonehenge so it's out of sight of the A303 ? It'd be a lot cheaper than the tunnel, then the A303 can be dualled on the surface witout any comeback.

Just thinking.....

OK, only a joke !!
I can see it now Stonehenge Legoland Brighton :)

RichardEvans67
Member
Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:26
Location: Surrey

Re: Stonehenge - The bored tunnel option

Post by RichardEvans67 » Sat Dec 11, 2021 12:51

by Jim606 » Wed Dec 01, 2021 17:41

There's been a bit of movement re; the tunnel. As far as I am aware, National Highways have now been given notice to resubmit a proposal/plan by 11th Jan. 2022 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-w ... e-59487484
Would this mean another year, for the whole DCO process to happen again, or would some parts not have to happen again? Well either way, it's still progress towards it eventually getting built.

User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 6636
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: Stonehenge - The bored tunnel option

Post by jackal » Sat Dec 11, 2021 16:04

RichardEvans67 wrote:
Sat Dec 11, 2021 12:51
by Jim606 » Wed Dec 01, 2021 17:41

There's been a bit of movement re; the tunnel. As far as I am aware, National Highways have now been given notice to resubmit a proposal/plan by 11th Jan. 2022 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-w ... e-59487484
Would this mean another year, for the whole DCO process to happen again, or would some parts not have to happen again? Well either way, it's still progress towards it eventually getting built.
The process will be essentially the same as that taken for the A38 Derby Junctions, which also had its DCO quashed: https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... junctions/

The Stonehenge process for comparison (basically the same but has only got as far as the Statement of Matters stage): https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... tonehenge/

The DCO materials stay as they are. The applicant (NH) sends a response to the SoS's Statement of Matters - typically a point-by-point reply to the issues the SoS raises.

NH's A38 Derby Junctions response was 27 pages: https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... 021%20.pdf Compare that to the DCO application itself, which is 250 documents, and you'll see it's a pretty small job (but an important one).

Interested parties can then send in their own representations. And the SoS decides.

Post Reply