• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

A303 Stonehenge tunnel works.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

LUYMun

Member
Joined
15 Jul 2018
Messages
776
Location
Somewhere
I wonder who exactly was responsible for making the effort to build the A303 near Stonehenge in the first place?
 

ABB125

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2016
Messages
3,746
Location
University of Birmingham
Ridiculous, just get the blooming thing built!
Quite!

A cynic might suggest that the more delays there are, the more money the consultants get paid to fix it...
I wonder who exactly was responsible for making the effort to build the A303 near Stonehenge in the first place?
"What idiot decided to build a stone circle next to a busy road?" :D
 

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
15,688
Location
Devon
I wonder who exactly was responsible for making the effort to build the A303 near Stonehenge in the first place?

There are parts of the A303 that were former Roman Roads but I don’t think this was one of them. The whole route was developed properly from the early 1930s (instead of what is now the A30 which runs parallel but a good few miles away) I believe and I wouldn’t be surprised if this was one of the sections that was either put in new around then or was widened from an existing lane to connect the sections either side of it up.
Interesting question though.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,420
There are parts of the A303 that were former Roman Roads but I don’t think this was one of them. The whole route was developed properly from the early 1930s (instead of what is now the A30 which runs parallel but a good few miles away) I believe and I wouldn’t be surprised if this was one of the sections that was either put in new around then or was widened from an existing lane to connect the sections either side of it up.
Interesting question though.
It’s a road via the bridge at Amesbury on this 1878 OS map
https://maps.nls.uk/view/102348061
I assume that the milestones quoting the distance to London suggest it was a major road.
Wikipedia thinks it’s an ancient trackway ‘Harrow Way’
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrow_Way
The Harrow Way (also spelled as "Harroway") is another name for the "Old Way", an ancient trackway in the south of England, dated by archaeological finds to 600–450 BC, but probably in existence since the Stone Age.[1][2] The Old Way ran from Seatonin Devon to Dover, Kent.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,050
Not buying this at all. If they are digging they will find the archeology rather than it being unfound.
And they are just fields, they aren’t demolishing buildings! It’s a waste of huge amounts of money to build such a long tunnel.
As for Liverpool, from the other side of the Mersey the new buildings to the east of the three graces are jarringly minging, but replacing a near abandoned dock with a spectacular football stadium should be encouraged.
But a spectacular new football stadium by definition isn't heritage... Come back in 100 years...

The point I'm making is: why don't the 2 teams in Liverpool / Manchester et al, share a stadium with each other like AC / Inter Milan do?
From a business point of view, it's a much better use of assets.
Of all the teams in the country to ask that question of these two are quite possibly the worst. You'd need to know the history of their early years to get that comment.

"What idiot decided to build a stone circle next to a busy road?" :D
Don't go there. I heard some Americans at Windsor Castle saying that it was beautiful but why had it been built so close to the airport (Heathrow!)....
 
Last edited:

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
15,688
Location
Devon
Just a gentle reminder that this thread is to discuss the upgrade works and tunnel at Stonehenge on the A303.
The thread discussing Liverpool losing its UNESCO status is here:

 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,050
Ridiculous, just get the blooming thing built!
Without seeing all of the material presented to the Court l wouldn't presume to question the rationale behind it's judgement. Don't forget though that politicians legislate and judges interpret and adjudicate. It annoys the hell out of me when politicians whinge over Court judgements when all that the judges have done is implement the laws that they agreed. Power but no responsibility....
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,420
Without seeing all of the material presented to the Court l wouldn't presume to question the rationale behind it's judgement. Don't forget though that politicians legislate and judges interpret and adjudicate. It annoys the hell out of me when politicians whinge over Court judgements when all that the judges have done is implement the laws that they agreed. Power but no responsibility....
Apparently they didn’t show the impact on every single asset, ie not enough money thrown at consultants to chuck out pdfs about every single bump in the field, and didn’t consider alternatives (what possible alternatives?!).
ie it’s blocking technicalities which will end with the same result at a much higher price (unless the DfT is as stupid as the Welsh Government…..)
 

LSWR Cavalier

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2020
Messages
1,565
Location
Leafy Suburbia
More roads = more traffic = more roads = more traffic, etc etc

I guess lots of people drive from the Metropolis to Newquay, if they can not fly or go by train they drive.

We should accept that places are far from each other and just go once a year for a few weeks instead of many weekends and thousands of miles.

I am a railway enthusiast!
No. More. Roads. Anywhere!
 
Last edited:

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,227
Location
Bristol
Apparently they didn’t show the impact on every single asset, ie not enough money thrown at consultants to chuck out pdfs about every single bump in the field
This is a globally important archealogical site, and who knows what future techniques and technology might allow us to discover about these sites as long as there isn't a pseudo-motorway on top of them. You also seem to have a pathological hatred of consultancies, bodies which on the whole save far more money than they cost.
and didn’t consider alternatives (what possible alternatives?!).
Going a very long way round, or going a very deep depth under.
ie it’s blocking technicalities which will end with the same result at a much higher price (unless the DfT is as stupid as the Welsh Government…..)
If the minister didn't act within the law, the decision should not stand. It's also important to remember the distinctions between the Minister's role and the Department's role.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,420
This is a globally important archealogical site, and who knows what future techniques and technology might allow us to discover about these sites as long as there isn't a pseudo-motorway on top of them. You also seem to have a pathological hatred of consultancies, bodies which on the whole save far more money than they cost.
On top? Is there any evidence that anything is that deep?
Consultancies make their own work, it’s gone too far
Going a very long way round, or going a very deep depth under.
Neither of those is viable. This is already an incredibly expensive solution doing more than enough to improve the are.
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,227
Location
Bristol
On top? Is there any evidence that anything is that deep?
Consultancies make their own work, it’s gone too far
Or disturbed in any way, particularly around the portals and in construction. Consultancies only win work that somebody wants completing. Much of this is required by legislation. And if consultancies didn't do it it'd be twice as expensive for other bodies to do it.
Neither of those is viable. This is already an incredibly expensive solution doing more than enough to improve the are.
I agree, but you asked what alternatives there were.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
6,050
Apparently they didn’t show the impact on every single asset, ie not enough money thrown at consultants to chuck out pdfs about every single bump in the field, and didn’t consider alternatives (what possible alternatives?!).
ie it’s blocking technicalities which will end with the same result at a much higher price (unless the DfT is as stupid as the Welsh Government…..)
If the legislation says that must be done then guess what....
 

ABB125

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2016
Messages
3,746
Location
University of Birmingham
More roads = more traffic = more roads = more traffic, etc etc
You've missed something out there. More roads = car dependent housing development = more traffic = more roads etc.
Until planning policy in this country changes to something other than development at any cost, that cycle will continue. Don't build car-dependent housing, and most of the additional traffic won't materialise.
 

vlad

Member
Joined
13 May 2018
Messages
749
"What idiot decided to build a stone circle next to a busy road?" :D

So it's easy to get to! ;)

(You jest but the road, which is prehistoric, was definitely there before Stonehenge was built. There's a theory that it even predates humans.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top