Moderator: Site Management Team
The A303 project is much more complex with more aspects to it and it is of more national significance. It only makes sense that it will take longer to dot the Is and cross the Ts due to the multiple aspects.
Why would you start all the procurement process, if there was a chance the decision may be no.Following the selection of three bidders for the main works procurement, today marks the start of a four-month process to select a world class team of archaeological experts to undertake work, should planning consent be granted
A campaign group called Heritage Action often have some interesting (anti/longer tunnel) things to say about the Stonehenge tunnel saga; their latest post on the matter can be found here; Stonehenge-delayA320Driver wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 22:36 Disappointing, and can’t help but wonder if this is the first of several kicks into the long grass (again).
Hopefully if consent is granted then this delay won’t affect a start date next year.
Stonehenge: more than just a delay, grounds for optimism?
17/07/2020 in Stonehenge
We think the headlines, “Stonehenge tunnel decision delayed by archaeological find” aren’t quite right, even though the Government’s announcement seems to say so, viz: “to enable further consultation on and consideration of this matter”. The fact is, as the Government knows full well, the newly discovered monument is not in the path of the new road so can’t be directly damaged by it or require further “consultation and consideration”. Normally they’d say just that and crack on, but they haven’t.
However, it seems probable that what the new discovery has done is to bring home to Ministers that this is an incredibly rich prehistoric landscape and carrying out major work anywhere on it is bound to bring to light further unknown archaeology which would have to be destroyed along with the reputation and political futures of whoever was in charge.
That, together with the fact the country’s finances are in a parlous state, the scheme’s value-for-money has declined, there are huge technical issues regarding the chalk and water and Blickmead would be further damaged, all suggest the Government may now be looking for a way out. Fingers crossed they’ve found one. Digging here was always irresponsible but now they (and their yes-bodies) can pretend new circumstances have arisen and Mr. Shapps won’t take over from John Gormley as that man who caused the damage!
Yes, agreed. Heritage Action (whether you agree with them or not) have a good understanding of many the Stonehenge tunnel issues. I think it is highly likely that the approval delay could represent the whole project being 'kicked into the long grass'? Is the scheme simply too problematical and expensive in the current climate? Perhaps so? I think there is a strong argument about tunnel being too short and in my opinion too close to the centre of the stone circle. Although underground it would be less than 200m away.Truvelo wrote: ↑Sat Jul 18, 2020 20:38 I actually agree with that Heritage Action comment. An archaeological find wouldn't delay the decision as there's a set period for archaeological digs to take place prior to construction work starting. It does seem that this is being used as a feeble excuse for delaying/aborting the scheme.
Yup. I often use the M27/M3/A34*/A303 from Portsmouth to Exeter as it takes barely any longer and more of it is of better quality than the A31 after Ringwood (which I think should qualify as a national disgrace) and the A35 from Bridport to Honiton which is pretty dire. They've made the 30mph even longer on the other side of Chideock too, so you can't even use the crawler lane to pass. Not that my beat up old Focus managed to pass anyone anywaythatapanydude wrote: ↑Sat Jul 18, 2020 22:24 How about dual the A36 from the 303 to the M27 or the A35 from Exeter and leave Stonehenge as it is with the strategic route being the M4/M5 from the South West.
I hope there's an A34 leg in there otherwise you really are going the long way round.matt-thepie wrote: ↑Sun Jul 19, 2020 22:11Yup. I often use the M27/M3/A303 from Portsmouth to Exeter as it takes barely any longer and more of it is of better quality than the A31 after Ringwood (which I think should qualify as a national disgrace) and the A35 from Bridport to Honiton which is pretty dire. They've made the 30mph even longer on the other side of Chideock too, so you can't even use the crawler lane to pass. Not that my beat up old Focus managed to pass anyone anywaythatapanydude wrote: ↑Sat Jul 18, 2020 22:24 How about dual the A36 from the 303 to the M27 or the A35 from Exeter and leave Stonehenge as it is with the strategic route being the M4/M5 from the South West.
How could I forget that wonderful interchangeIf the section near the stones is scrapped then there's no point in constructing the Winterbourne Stoke Bypass, Countess Flyover or the A358 upgrade for that matter. In all reality if the Stonehenge tunnel is scrapped it will mean the other improvements will also be scrapped. There's no point in spending millions on providing a freeflowing route if there's a single bottleneck near the stones.Jim606 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 19, 2020 11:55 However, if approval, in its current form, isn't granted, where does the project go from here? Well as mentioned before; the Winterbourne Stoke bypass and Countess Flyover could be constructed as 'stand alone schemes' with 'interim measures' put in place on the section running past the stones; average speed cameras, unnecessary signage removal, screening fences etc. There is also the option of P&R from Solstice Park?
Don't agree. Dump Winterbourne Stoke bypass, put up a massive fence past Stonehenge, but do Countess flyover & the A358.Truvelo wrote: ↑Sun Jul 19, 2020 22:33 If the section near the stones is scrapped then there's no point in constructing the Winterbourne Stoke Bypass, Countess Flyover or the A358 upgrade for that matter. In all reality if the Stonehenge tunnel is scrapped it will mean the other improvements will also be scrapped. There's no point in spending millions on providing a freeflowing route if there's a single bottleneck near the stones.
I agree about the Winterbourne Stoke bypass and the Countess flyover as all they do is get traffic to the bottleneck quicker, but the A358 is worth doing regardless. It's much busier than most single carriageway sections of the A303 now, 30k+ vpd
Yes. Those confounded shafts...A9Dan wrote: ↑Thu Jul 16, 2020 14:14 Just heard on the news that a decision has now been delayed until November due to an archaeological discovery within the World Heritage Site (presumably the Durrington Shafts).
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/ ... y-for-a303 confirms that the deadline is now 13 November 2020.
The decision on Sparkford-Ilchester has now also been delayed to November 20th : https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/ ... n-the-a303A320Driver wrote: ↑Mon Jul 20, 2020 22:29 Surely if the government wanted to bin the scheme, then surely all Shapps needed to do was refuse DCO consent? Instead he has chosen to defer the decision; maybe it is the case that this archaeological find is quite significant and further work needs to be done. Although it does beg the question as to what the archaeologists have been doing for the last 30 years....
Agree though - if this gets cancelled then the Sparkford-Ilchester scheme will likely share its fate.
