Filter

A303 Stonehenge

Relevant representations (registration comments)

Search by the person or group making the submission or the content of the submission.

Showing 1251 to 1275 of 2370 representations, newest first.

Results per page 25 | View 50 results per page | View 100 results per page

  • Joanna French

    Much more research must be carried out before this site should even be thought about for this sort of developement we still know nothing of what it was used for and why. The developement will destroy... Read more

  • Joanna Herbert-Stepney

    The open space surrounding Stonehenge is part of the whole site - to damage it would be to damage Stonehenge. Secondly, Stonehenge has great dignity, which can only be appreciated in peace and... Read more

  • Joanna Rial

    The area is part of a World Heritage Site. Signifcant headway has been made in recent years in terms of archaeological investigation and we are finally beginning to grasp a greater understanding of... Read more

  • Joanne Honebon

    I believe that the proposal is unethical and morally wrong in that stonehenge was gifted to all the people for their pleasure an apriciation not for the few to view at and exorbitant cost.

  • Joely Hayes

    I have great interest in conserving the beauty of our British heritage, and my opinion is that the A303 dual carriageway and tunnel scheme would irreparably, and negatively change the archeology of... Read more

  • John Blakely

    1) Irreparable damage to the UNESCO World Heritage site. UNESCO opposes the current proposal. 2) Severe damage to the habitat of rare bird species. 3) Increased traffic - both volume and speed, both... Read more

  • John Bowley

    I am in fundamental disagreement with this unaffordable road enlargement scheme. Better alternatives have apparently not been properly investigated and evaluated.

  • John Callow

    I am writing to object that this proposed fails to meet it objective in reducing congestion on the A303, it will simply transfer the congestion creating new bottle necks at the roundabout that feed... Read more

  • John Cunningham

    I have the strongest objection to the plans because they will damage a World Heritage site and displace (or worse) rare and valuable wildlife species.

  • John Hellis

    The disturbance to the archaeology landscape will be irreversible. As a retired Military Archaeologists I realise that even the surface may have hidden archaeology such as tenuous remains of the WW1... Read more

  • Jonathan Hall

    I regularly visit Stonehenge and travel in the surrounding areas. A diversion of the A303 either by tunnel or overland in the immediate vicinity of Stonehenge would 1. Potentially damage with... Read more

  • Joseph Crawley

    - Where are alternative options in consultation that aren't damaging to a Unesco World Heritage Site - What about certain damage to the Blick Mead Mesolithic site? - WHS will be damaged, this is a... Read more

  • Joyce Field

    I object to this road scheme because the whole of the area surrounding Stonehenge is of historic importance and the scheme as planned would destroy much which can never be replaced.

  • Joyce Parker

    Stonehenge is a valuable part of our heritage and should be protected. The proposed road is in an inappropriate location far too close to Stonehenge. I object to this planning proposal.

  • Judith Fantozzi

    Dear Sirs, I am most perturbed by your intentions to build a highway so close to Stonehenge. This is an ancient site that is tremendously meaningful to many, many people. To say nothing of the... Read more

  • Judith Jannetta

    I understand from various experts that this development will cause irreversible damage to prehistoric sites of national and international importance. I feel particularly concerned about this as a... Read more

  • Julie Edmenson

    My concerns regarding the proposed changes to the A303 route in the Stonehenge area are many. As a World Heritage Site and a place of supreme importance to so many people from numerous nations beside... Read more

  • Julie Scott

    Don't destroy this sacred site. Once it is gone it is gone forever. Digging under it will csuse immeasurable harm to artifacts buried by time.

  • KAREN HARRISON

    Why not just make it a dual carriageway. With a tunnel, no-one will be able to see the stones unless they pay to go in. This is a PUBLIC amenity not a fund raiser for the NT/EH. This is a major... Read more

  • Karen Light

    These are my reasons for objecting to this abhorant suggestion: Irreparable damage to the WHS, its archaeology and setting, described by UNESCO as a ‘landscape without parallel’ UNESCO’s... Read more

  • Kate Tremain

    I represent myself as a concerned human being with an interest in preserving sites of enormous culture value to future generations.

  • Kate Unwin

    I believe that the proposal will cause irreparable damage to this unparalleled site which will be unable to be undone. International advisors from UNESCO say the plan shouldn't go ahead and there are... Read more

  • Kathleen Mitchell

    My interest is in preserving this internationally important site and all historic artifacts on it as a historic resource of the highest importance. Any activity that threatens to disrupt the important... Read more

  • Katriona Greenan

    It is an outrage that any governing authority believes it appropriate to disregard our heritage! You have no right what so ever! You believe you can do what you want to the people and the land, well... Read more

  • Kay Kirkham

    Please reject the proposals. They will have a very damaging effect on this unique monument.