Representation by Catherine Le Grice-Mack
- Date submitted
- 12 December 2018
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
An imperfect “consultation” process 2014 Corridor Study County Hall, Taunton. I attended as representative of CPRE SW. I had experience of the Halcrow study of this corridor from my role on the Regional Assembly, and was alarmed at the paucity of evidence and analysis that HE was relying on to show the “benefits” of the proposals. At the same meetings I asked about alternatives, whether they be different alignments, split alignments, or investment in much needed parallel railway infrastructure. These suggestions were dismissed as “not on the agenda” and never followed up. To state now that a road through the World Heritage Site is the “preferred route” is highly misleading.
At the last meeting of this group we were finally shown slides illustrating the predicted increase in traffic on the route. This ranges from +20% to +40%. However A303 Public Information brochure “improving journeys” makes no mention of this predicted increase, and the illustrations are frankly misleading. They exclude lorries, the anticipated numbers of cars, gantries, signage and lighting.
Having signed the World Heritage Convention, governments pledge to protect and present their Sites for this and future generations. The Stonehenge area is a whole landscape, not just a few upstanding monuments, and we already know that within this landscape there is much more of the cultural heritage to be discovered. The Government will be breaking its pledge in digging up and levelling so much of this internationally recognised site.