Search by the person or group making the submission or the content of the submission.
-
Stonehenge and the surrounding area is probably the most important region of prehistoric monuments in the UK and perhaps in the world. It stands to reason that, in the region there remain, many as...
Read more
-
As an archaeology graduate, while I understand the desire and perhaps necessity to create an improved route for traffic on the A303 in the environs of Stonehenge, I am convinced that the current plans...
Read more
-
No to the road at Stonehenge world heritage site
-
The proposals do not adequately protect the landscape, the archeology, or the experience of a monument of national and global importance.
-
The destruction of neolithic sites. The destruction of ancient archilogical sites along the path of the proposed road. The closure of ancient rights of way.
-
I am registering to become an Interested Party to take part in the Examination of the above application for development consent which has been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate. My reasons for...
Read more
-
The Trail Riders Fellowship (“TRF”) responded to the consultation on 23 April 2018, and to the supplementary consultation on 13 August 2018. TRF objects to the application for the following...
Read more
-
I firmly object to any major development around this important historical monument of world wide status and it would be a disaster to unearth land for roads any where near this site which has many...
Read more
-
As a regular user of this road, I am totally opposed to the tunnel. The cost would be an outrageous waste and could be much better spent on other needy projects in the area.
The traffic chaos during...
Read more
-
I am very concerned about the proposed dual carriageway expressway past Stonehenge. This would potentially damage the World Heritage Site and the archaeological findings below Stone Henge. The...
Read more
-
I strongly OBJECT to this application. I agree with the Council for British Archaeology when they say : "... they will cause considerable damage to the surviving archaeological remains within the WHS...
Read more
-
I have always loved the Stonehenge site since my schooldays. It is at the core of my appreciation of heritage and that has value for me.
I have visited a handful of times and been witness to the...
Read more
-
I believe Stonehenge to be of significant international cultural, religious and spiritual value, not to mention its value to British history, which is unparalleled in the U.K. There is no other site...
Read more
-
I wish to object to the proposed A303 Stonehenge Expressway in the strongest possible terms. UNESCO have described this World Heritage Site as a 'landscape without parallel' and its international...
Read more
-
I am against the project, and would make arguments against commencement on the following grounds:
* Permanent damage to the World Heritage Site, its archaeology and setting.
* UNESCO's advisers...
Read more
-
My concern is for the integrity and conservation of Stonehenge and the surrounding archaeological heritage. Irreversible damage will be done by the excavation and construction and incalculable future...
Read more
-
Irreparable damage to the World Heritage Site, its archaeology and setting, described by UNESCO as a ‘landscape without parallel’. UNESCO’s international advisers say the scheme should NOT go ahead in...
Read more
-
1. There are significant archaeological sites still being discovered including in the very areas HE intend to cut huge holes e.g. Blicks Mead, That this site has only recently been discovered clearly...
Read more
-
UNESCO have objected to the new road, which will encroach upon a World Heritage Site.
This is one of Britain's most iconic Historical Sites.
Nature in all it's abundance on the site (thing...
Read more
-
Please do not dig a tunnel underneath Stonehenge. Thank you.
-
I would like to express my objection to the scheme as outlined below.
I am concerned about damage to the World Heritage Site and Blick Mead Mesolithic site, their archaeology and setting. This...
Read more
-
This work is not needed at all- we have enough mototlrways and the roads around Stonehenge are fine as is. I drive through frequently and never have any problems.
Money wasted, and potentially an...
Read more
-
Founded in 1993 the A36/A350 Corridor Alliance (ACA) is an umbrella group of organisations campaigning against damaging road schemes on a broad corridor of roughly NW alignment from the South Coast...
Read more
-
I am not able to support the proposals as they will cause considerable damage to both the surviving archaeological remains within the WHS and the setting of key monuments within the landscape. This...
Read more
-
The area around Stonehenge is a unique, irreplaceable landscape. Dramatic changes to this landscape could have a detrimental effect on the site's ecology, its archaeological value, its tranquillity...
Read more
-
The site of Stonehenge is much larger than the site of the standing stones. So much of its processional route had already been destroyed by modern farming and other methods.
It is an essential...
Read more
-
I am deeply concerned about the potential damage to this iconic World Heritage Site, including its archaeology and setting. UNESCO have described the World Heritage property Stonehenge, Avebury and...
Read more
-
My representation is that I am a layperson unconnected geographically to the area, but who disagrees with the proposals in the strongest terms.
-
The flyover over the countess roundabout will be unsightly, cause noise pollution to the residents of Amesbury and put Blickmead at further risk
-
I have to object to this idea: Stonehenge is a World Heritage site of phenomenal archaeological importance, this scheme will likely cause damage. It may restrict or prevent visiting and may thus also...
Read more
-
The stones are connected to the land, the land needs to stay connected to the earth which means directly beneath the stones, so nothing must be taken away from the ground underneath the stones, nor...
Read more
-
It is my understanding from learned historians, archaeologists and UNESCO that this proposal risks irreparable damage to England’s most important Neolithic site. And for what? We need to reduce our...
Read more
-
I object to the damage which will be inflicted on the WHS.
I object to disturbance of rare and declining bird species.
I object to the alteration in visual access to the stones
-
The site - and area around it - is of global importance and should be protected and not damaged.
Consultation with the public has been inadequate.
Traffic issues have been grossly exaggerated....
Read more
-
The benefits of the site in terms of tourism, national and international ethos, aesthetic appeal, archaeological and historical importance, continuing cultural significance, heritage, and...
Read more
-
The proposed plans will ensure the unnecessary and careless destruction of one of Britain's most significant archaeological sites, and much of the material there has yet to be properly excavated and...
Read more
-
I object to the likely damage to an archaeological site of immense significance, against which many experts from UNESCO down have warned.
-
Losing the view of this icon from the road would be a great shame. It has always a highlight to see. UNESCO advise against the scheme in its current form, due to irreparable damage to the archaeology...
Read more
-
Damage to a world heritage site and disruption to archaeological remains.
-
I have concerns about the possible impact that these plans may have on the countryside.
-
To build a tunnel directly under Stonehenge contravenes the special qualities of this ancient site. It is an energetic site of national importance with unique qualities which should be retained...
Read more
-
Hiding Stonehenge with a tunnel is not an exceptable reason to spend this obscene amount of money on it. Such a small project that does not need this amount of money spent on it to widen the road, It...
Read more
-
I think the plan is an grave mistake as it will make irreparable damage to wildlife and the ancient Monoliths there. UNESCO have not approved this and there has been no consideration for the ruination...
Read more
-
This is not only a proposal of destruction with possible catastrophic consequences for our heritage and future generations it is also an unbelievable waste of public money and resources. There is...
Read more
-
That a tunnel under Stonehenge is a big mistake. We have no long term knowledge of how this wpuld affect this site and it is far too important a site to risk in this way.
-
As a local who grew up around Stonehenge, I wish to register my objection to this scheme. It will inevitably cause irreparable damage to the World Heritage Site - it goes against the advice of UNESCO,...
Read more
-
Submission by Amesbury Museum and Heritage Trust
I write in my capacity as chairman of the board of trustees of the Amesbury Museum and Heritage Trust, a charity whose objects include “the...
Read more
-
Stonehenge is an internationally known tourist and World Heritage Site. The proposed tunnel would likely damage it, which could in turn cause tourist numbers to drop. This would also be bad for the...
Read more
-
I am concerned about the following points:
It goes against UENESCO advice.
It will damage neighbouring sites of historical interest.
The consultation did not include less-damaging options.
Further...
Read more
-
This scheme will destroy an archeological site of global importance forever.
Already exploratory drilling has destroyed unique fossil footprints.
It is easy enough to go round Stonehenge when...
Read more