Search by the person or group making the submission or the content of the submission.
-
As a Wiltshire resident and Briton I find this proposed tunnel an absolute abomination and a disgrace and oppose its construction absolutely. It has been proven by preliminary work on this site in the...
Read more
-
The proposal will damage the setting and archaeology of the Stonehenge site and surrounding area, as it goes too close to the monument on the surface, and the tunnel is not deep enough to miss...
Read more
-
I am concerned about tge effect this proposal will have on a World Heritage site and I don’t think that alternative routes have been sufficiently considered. I have been driven and driven my children...
Read more
-
I believe that the proposed changes to the A303 in the vicinity of the Stone Henge site will irreparably damage an ancient historic site that is of global importance and as such is registered as a...
Read more
-
I object to the building of the road around the Stonehenge heritage site. The disruption to the landscape and wildlife is unacceptable. I do not want to see this beautiful place disturbed or meddled...
Read more
-
Stonehenge is a World Heritage site. It is of immeasurable cultural and archaeological value.That is why a tunnel built within the designated area of this site ,which contains as yet unrecorded...
Read more
-
I object to the ancient site being distrubed. It is a world heritage site and a sacred site. It is lovely to see the stones when driving on the A303, why not make the A303 one way going West and...
Read more
-
Following the news last week of reckless archaeological damage I have little confidence that this work can be done without further damage to a site of unparalleled significance, as well as the unknown...
Read more
-
I have listened to the fears of people who are experts in Stonehenge and it's surrounds, and believe their opinions must be respected. This project is opposed so widely, both nationally and...
Read more
-
This proposal will cause unknown and irreparable damage to a globally important historic site. It ignores other ways of opening up travel between the west and London (I.e. Improved railways)....
Read more
-
There remain a considerable number of unknowns about Stonehenge, its value and purpose go I believe, well beyond it of being of tourist interest (however important that is deemed to be). It is a...
Read more
-
1 Concern about the visual impact of an east-west bridge or flyover at the Countess roundabout.
2 Concern about the likely increase in traffic noise from traffic on the A303 in the vicinity of a...
Read more
-
I am deeply upset that the only proposal for improvement of the Stonehenge area road system will pass so close to the monument and threatens the peaceful enjoyment of the site. I believe that another...
Read more
-
1) the destruction of archaeology not yet discovered;
2) the damage to the WHS and it’s landscape;
3) potential damage to Blick Mead, a Mesolithic site:
4) increase in traffic noise;
5) lack of...
Read more
-
The proposal will cause unneccessary damage to the Stonehenge archaeological landscape World Heritage site (as evidenced by damage to the Blick Down mesolithic site during advance investigations)....
Read more
-
Igt is not understood by the promoters of this project that the whole Stonehenge site must be considered as a whole, as within the layout of the land lies an enormous encyclopedia of...
Read more
-
At a time in our history of man-made environmental and societal crisis, confusion and destruction, Stonehenge is a powerful national institution representing human achievement and co-operation...
Read more
-
Stonehenge and its surrounding area is of immeasurable archaeological and cultural value. The protection and preservation of this World Heritage Site should be paramount. Building any highways in the...
Read more
-
I feel that there has not been given any other conclusion or different way other than the stated route, and think that the traffic volume will be disruptive and very bad, to the environment, birds,...
Read more
-
Irreparable damage to the WHS, its archaeology and setting, described by UNESCO as a ‘landscape without parallel’
-
I feel that it this change to the site goes ahead we will lose a great heritage site,or the safety of it
It's considered as a holy site for us druids and friends of nature
I am disappointed that...
Read more
-
I feel that there should be more alternatives and I do not feel, as judging from the UNESCO comment, that you have explored this fully.
Why are we not more focused on the source of the problem? Why...
Read more
-
This is a world heritage site and the whole of the landscape within 5 miles of Stonehenge should be kept with minimal changes to preserve the site for future populations to enable the context and non...
Read more
-
its not a great idea
-
I am concerned by the following
That the construction of a tunnel past Stonehenge could spell the loss of a unique site that can trace the presence of people back to the last Ice Age
That the...
Read more
-
I am concerned about the damage these plans would cause to the World Heritage Site.
There will be loss of unexplored archaeology and heritage.
We need to stop these plans and preserve all the site...
Read more
-
I don't believe that the road scheme currently proposed should go ahead as it is too damaging.
-
My primary observations are about the potential damage the project would cause and the need to care for the Stonehenge heritage site.
-
This world heritage site will be irreparably damaged by the propsed development. We would be sacrificing one of the most historic sites in the world for a short-term transport benefit.
-
I feel that the new road would ruin the asthetics of the surrounding area and could cause irreparable damage to the ancient site. I am sure there is an alternative to this proposal. I live in...
Read more
-
I am against the building of this tunnel because the ancient sites in that area must not be disturbed above or below ground anywhere in the vicinity.
-
I strongly object to the distruction of such an important world heritage site.What wil the
people in future years think of the distruction of their inheritance?? They will never forgive us.
-
I am totally against the Stonehenge tunnel. I'm against any length tunnel and despair at the lack of alternative proposals. Stonehenge is known throughout the world and is one of the most important...
Read more
-
1. Disturbing ancient burial mounds
2. Disrupting energy Ley lines
3. A blot on the landscape
4. Traffic will bottle-neck further down the A303 and cause congestion in all the villages
-
I am objecting first on the basis of UNESCO's advisers comments. I don't understand how these can be ignored.
In such a sensitive, historic and valuable landscape, road-widening is a retrograde...
Read more
-
Please preserve this national treasure for the wide world
UNESCO’s international advisers advise that the scheme should not go ahead as it is.
Could there be more consultation, including...
Read more
-
any representation made will be with regard to the statement of common ground to be drawn up between the RSPB and Highways England
-
I fear that the Expressway will be another botched attempt by an inept planning department. Thirty years ago the A303 was a superb road to reach the southwest from London. It is now useless. The...
Read more
-
Ancient heritage sites should be protected not undermined. The work near to this site is irresponsible in the threat to the safety of the site. I object to it.
-
As a nation we should be moving completely away from our love affair with cars and roads, our planet can't afford any more. We're leading the way with wind farms, why can't we sort out out transport?
-
I would like to say that whilst I can see the present road A303 is consistently congested, I feel it is really unrespectful on a deep and ancient level to tunnel underneath the stones at Stonehenge....
Read more
-
I am deeply opposed to the proposed highway development works around Stonehenge. Stonehenge is an internationally significant world heritage site and the proposed road works put short term interests...
Read more
-
I'm against the development as I believe the loss of view from the road will be a huge negative towards stonehenge & its history. I also believe there will be damage to artifacts and wildlife.
-
I’m objecting to the proposals on the following grounds:
- Damage to the landscape and archaeology
- Damage to the wildlife and habitats
- Disturbance to the reasonable tranquility that...
Read more
-
Concern about the effects on a WORLD HERITAGE site.
Concern that in a time of climate emergency we continue to increase roads to make routes more effective.
A desire that monies be invested in...
Read more
-
I am deeply concerned that this application with have catastrophic implications in terms of destruction to long-established habitats of both animal and bird and also plants and ancient landscape. I am...
Read more
-
I object to this scheme as I consider that the risk of damage to a unique world heritage site (including any deep archaeology) is too great and certainly outweighs any gain in improved traffic...
Read more
-
in its current form i object to the shear lack of consideration to the location and the lasting damage it will cause. Stonehenge must be preserved and left alone when at all possible, including what...
Read more
-
The current proposals will damage the world heritage site that is not only the Stonehenge itself but a large area around it as well. This will mean the loss of features and artifacts which are of...
Read more
-
It is a mystery to me that anyone could consider this project.
It is clear that this plan will be damaging to a very significant World Heritage site.
It is a short term solution to a short term...
Read more