|
Stevens has a vision for
the future of Stonehenge
By David Mann - Eastern Gazette Interactive News - 23/04/99
Culture Secretary Chris Smith today announced that Sir Joceyln
Stevens will continue as chairman of the executive group coordinating
the Stonehenge project after he leaves English Heritage next year.
Sir Joceyln's eight-year reign as chairman of English Heritage
comes to an end at the end of March 2000. Recently, he caused a
storm of controversy in the GLA building selection race when he
branded Will Alsop's plans for Victoria House as "fundamentally
flawed".
His comments initially caused Blackfriars Investments to pull
the Bloomsbury Square scheme from the running. Although Blackfriars
subsequently re-entered the race, the Foster-designed London
Bridge City scheme won.
Chris Smith said : "Jocelyn Stevens has made a magnificent contribution
to our built heritage in many ways during his time as Chairman of
English Heritage. He has displayed particular tenacity and enthusiasm
for solving the long-standing problems which have dogged the setting
and presentation of Stonehenge".
Welcoming this announcement, Sir Jocelyn Stevens said : "I am
absolutely thrilled to have been offered the opportunity of pushing
the Stonehenge Master Plan along - nothing could suit me more".
Comment sent in by E-Mail:
Roger D Nelson FRICS, IRRV - Reigate, Surrey - 26/04/99
The additional traffic generated at the Countess Farm roundabout
A303/A345 will be well beyond the capabilities of the existing road
system as well as ruining the amenity of the local residents in
the area. There is already a service station, a Travelodge and Burger
King and permission for an out of town supermarket was refused I
believe on appeal. The anticipated traffic from the visitors centre
and park and ride would far exceed anything considered to date,
let alone take account of the growth in use over the years.
Do we really think that the proposed park and ride system will
work? My experience is that visitors want to get as close to the
monument as possible before they leave their cars, it is a fact
of human nature. This is why I believe that any centre, car and
coach park should be located together nearer Stonehenge itself.
Surely sympathetic and imaginative treatment of the development
would assist. How about a part sunken centre with a similar feature
to a barrow with a viewing gallery overlooking the monument?
On the other hand the existing 2 way stretch of the A 303 is a
bottleneck particularly in any holiday period. Making this into
a dual carriageway is most welcome as well as the proposals to tunnel
in the stretch past Stonehenge. I also applaud the closing of the
other road past the monument from which access to the existing car
park is made.
My opinion is based on personal experience over many years. I
was brought up adjacent to the proposed centre to where I often
return although I have lived elsewhere and have been in Surrey for
the last 20 years.
Stonehenge lunacy
Jane Du Pre, 103 Countess Road, Amesbury - 03/06/99
As many people will be aware, some members of the Countess Road
Residents Group handed out thousands of leaflets to vehicles caught
up in the Bank Holiday tailbacks on the A303 and Countess Road roundabout
on Saturday.
The purpose of these leaflets was to emphasise the sheer lunacy
of English Heritage's proposal - namely to site the new Stonehenge
visitor centre adjacent to the Countess Road roundabout, with all
vehicles leaving the centre on to Countess Road.
Equally staggering is their plan that the fly-over at Countess
roundabout should not be built until three years after the new centre
is opened.
Remember that the only way to get to the stones will be by going
to the centre both before and after your visit. English Heritage
must be made to understand the absurdity of their plan.
Many people offered their support on Saturday. Please write to
English Heritage at : Major Projects Team, 23 Savile Row, London
WX1 1AB - or to me.
Stonehenge Visitor Centre
Project: - 04/06/99
A Welcome aboard the Stonehenge experience tour
The project involves improvements to the A303, one of the main
routes to the West Country, which passes Stonehenge, and the provision
of a new, greatly enhanced, visitor centre. We agree in principle
with the aims of the project - the A303 becomes grid-locked here
during the summer period - and the present visitor facilities at
Stonehenge have not been noticeably improved during English Heritage's
14 or so years of guardianship.
What we do object to is the way English Heritage is bulldozing its
way with a project that is likely to blight the lives of those living
in close proximity to it.
Yes, this is a case of 'NIMBY', but the possibility of a leisure
complex comparable to a major theme park literally up to the edge
of one's garden, and the destruction of a river environment of considerable
natural beauty, fills us with despair.
English Heritage seems only to want 'the best heritage visitor
centre in the world' regardless of where it might trample in the
process.
This seems to be reflected in its publicity material, in which facilities
and locations are presumed regardless of the planning and enquiry
processes that remain to be addressed. Local authorities seem to
be viewed as mere pawns in a game.
Siting the visitor centre at Countess East roundabout (the junction
of the A303 and A345) seems to us to be the worst possible solution
in terms of traffic congestion and noise. This junction is already
grid locked during the summer period.
It is estimated that the centre will produce a 4-fold increase in
visitor traffic at the roundabout. A grade-separated junction is
proposed, with a flyover for the A303.
This will allow its traffic to proceed at full speed - with associated
noise - to the disadvantage of the increased traffic on its feeder
roads leading to and from the A345, the visitor centre and to the
local town of Amesbury. The possibility of alternative siting for
the visitor centre to the west of Stonehenge and the World Heritage
Centre boundary, using a less sensitive archaeological area, has
been totally ignored. A similar site, which would have avoided the
added congestion, was approved by the Secretary of State for Culture,
Media and Sport; he was congratulated on the wisdom of his decision.
Unfortunately, somehow he was 'got at' and produced New Labour's
first but unheralded U-turn, approving the Countess site he had
earlier discounted.
A free shuttle service is proposed, to take visitors from the
centre to a drop-off point nearer to the monument - a round trip
of about 16km. The last part of the journey to reach the stones
requires a walk of about 1.5km each way - supposedly a 20minute
walk each way. At present, coaches allow about 40 minutes for visiting
Stonehenge; with the new visitor centre in place, a visit is likely
to need a minimum of half a day.
The ability of visitors to roam freely and unrestricted over a
natural down land landscape is featured. One envisages endless unfenced
hectares of rolling down land rich it its natural gorse, scrub and
trees. The reality appears more likely to be 'farming as usual'
with ploughing, fences, and all the current restrictions of private
land ownership. Some of the more remote archaeological sites will
not be accessible without specific permission from landowners -
unlikely for the visitor not familiar with the locale. Removal of
roads in the vicinity of Stonehenge is one of the aims, and this
will include tunnelling of the A303 tunnel past the monument, using
the most environmentally and archaeologically damaging method of
'cut and cover', rather than boring.
In creating all this, English Heritage declares that it is promoting
a safe natural habitat for birds, insects, butterflies, flowers
and plants. It doesn't say that it is also destroying an identical
habitat in order to build its visitor centre. A superb and unspoiled
river landscape, part of an Area of Special Archaeological Significance,
and including an Area of High Ecological Value, with historic water-meadows,
archaeology and ancient hedges, will be swept away.
We are pleased to note that we are not the only organisation lacking
in enthusiasm for the proposals; others much more influential seem
to share our views. However, we do feel ourselves to be in a 'David
and Goliath' situation.
We are only a small group of ordinary local people who will have
to live with this monster on our doorstep long after everyone else
involved has moved on. Something that does concern us is the speed
with which English Heritage seems to be pushing this project along
- to the extent that we wonder if there is some hidden agenda.
We notice, for instance, that in the proposals put forward by
the Tussauds Group for the Stonehenge Millennium Park, the programme
shows a 'Grand Opening' by Lord Stevens of Stonehenge. Could this
be the clue to all the haste....?
We want to try and ensure that our modest environment is not ruined
and the existing traffic problems for others are not compounded.
We have no funds to put up a fight, and we have no expertise to
equal the professionals that will be employed to fight every objection.
We would welcome some similar help.
Peter Goodhugh
Countess Road Residents Group, Amesbury.
Letter from Mrs Ann Rudkin.
Group Co-ordinator: - 04/06/99
Dear Sir,
We refer to an advertisement in your paper dated 28 April 1999
seeking tenders for The Stonehenge Visitors Centre by DTZ on behalf
of English Heritage. We believe that you may be interested in, and
even sympathetic to, the point of view of local residents who feel
that the site of the proposed new Visitors Centre will, ultimately,
prove totally unsuitable because of the extreme traffic problems
that would result.
The main road through this area is the A303 which is a part of
a designated European Trunk Route from Dover to the West, and Countess
Roundabout, adjacent to which the English Heritage proposed to site
the new Visitors Centre, is the first roundabout on this westbound
route which carried 31,000 vehicles a day.
It is at this roundabout that severe congestion occurs at weekends
and, particularly, at Bank Holidays. The proposed Visitors Centre
will empty 1.8 million visitors onto the A345 and from there onto
the roundabout.
We have made representations to the Prime Minister, the Deputy
Prime Minister, the Minister for Culture, Media and Sport, and the
Ministry of Transport and Regions. The Chair of English Heritage
knows of our concerns but chooses to ignore them.
| We are sufficiently concerned to have had a demonstration
on the A303 on Saturday 29th June when traffic was at a virtual
standstill for several miles. I enclose a sample of the 2000
leaflets that we handed to drivers. |
|
 |
We feel that Commercial Operators, who may consider the Tender
Offer, should be aware, as soon as possible, of the problems.
Yours faithfully, Mrs Ann Rudkin. Group Co-ordinator
Copies to : Rt. Hon John Prescott Deputy Prime Minister
and Minister for the Regions and Transport Rt. Hon Chris Smith Minister
of Culture, Media and Sport.
Amesbury unites in strong
protest
Salisbury Journal 10/06/99
AMESBURY risks being used to "rubber-stamp London's lunatic ideas
for Stonehenge" unless it sticks up for itself, one of its councillors
has warned. John Turner said that plans to site the new visitor
complex at Countess East were being pushed ahead by London-based
bureaucrats with no understanding of the area.
Maj Turner, who represents the town council on the Stonehenge steering
group, won his fellow councillors' backing for a letter of protest
against the plans. The letter, which will be sent to Chris Smith,
the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, suggests that
the visitor centre should be at Countess Farm. Maj Turner said :
"We now have a timetable for the new visitor centre and the A 303
trunk road improvements showing the opening of the new visitor centre
in 2003 with construction on the road starting in 2005 and continuing
until 2008. "There could not be a more compelling argument for using
Countess Farm and thus reducing the use of a bus shuttle to Fargo
North, the more so as the round trip time has been estimated at
35 minutes - on a good day."
The land at Countess Farm, which lies within the World Heritage
Site, has recently been acquired by the National Trust. Development
on the land would be possible as long as the design of the building
was not intrusive.
Welcoming Maj Turner's conclusions, Cllr Vernon Smith said : "Moving
the visitor centre makes an awful lot of sense from a traffic management
point of view. It would be a terrific advance". But other councillors
questioned whether the town council could wield enough influence
to persuade London to change the Stonehenge master plan. Cllr Jan
Swindlehurst said : "We only have one stab at this it needs to be
right first time. We need to keep stirring."
Proposed Stonehenge Visitor
Centre at Countess East
Letter to Lady Gass - Chair, Stonehenge World Heritage
Site Management Group - 11/06/99
I am writing to you on behalf of the Countess Road Residents' Group
(CRRG) to express our concerns about the siting and detail of the
proposed Visitor Centre and the lack of discussion on these matters
at Management Group or Topic Discussion Group meetings. We feel
that the concerns of ourselves and others should be addressed without
undue delay. It's probably too late for the meeting on 16 June,
the agenda etc. having already been set, but a special meeting very
soon after would be appropriate.
The overall project involves improvements to the A 303 and the
provision of a new, greatly enhanced, visitor centre. We agree in
principle with the aims of the project - the A 303 becomes 'gridlocked'
here during the summer period - and the present visitor facilities
at Stonehenge have not been noticeably improved during English Heritage's
14 or so years of guardianship. What we do object to is the way
English Heritage is bulldozing its way with a project that is likely
to blight the lives of those living in close proximity to the visitor
centre. Yes, this is a case of 'NIMBY', but the possibility of a
'leisure complex' comparable to a major theme park literally up
to the edge of one's garden, and the destruction of a river environment
of considerable natural beauty, fills us with despair. English Heritage
seems only to want "the best heritage visitor centre in the world"
regardless of where it might trample in the process. This seems
to be reflected in its publicity material in which facilities and
locations are presumed regardless of the planning and enquiry processes
which have yet to be addressed. Local authorities and inhabitants
seem to be viewed as mere pawns in a game. For instance, to try
and get a better insight into the proposal, we asked English Heritage
for information on the detail made available to prospective commercial
bidders; this was refused. We have also asked for information on
the archaeology of the Countess East site; this has not been forthcoming.
Siting the visitor centre at Countess East roundabout (the junction
of the A303 and A345) seems to us to be the worst possible solution
in terms of traffic congestion, noise and general pollution. This
junction is already gridlocked at times during the summer period.
It is estimated that the centre will produce a four-fold increase
in visitor traffic at the roundabout. A grade separated junction
is proposed, with a flyover for the A303; this will allow its traffic
to proceed at full speed - with associated noise - to the disadvantage
of the increased traffic on its feeder roads leading to and from
the A345, the visitor centre and to the local town of Amesbury.
A site which would have avoided the added congestion was approved
by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport; he was congratulated
on the wisdom of his decision. Unfortunately, somehow he was 'got
at' and produced New Labour's first but unheralded U-turn, approving
the Countess site he had earlier discounted.
A free shuttle service is proposed, to take visitors from the
centre to a drop-off point nearer to the monument - a round trip
of about 16 km. The last part of the journey to reach the stones
requires a walk of about 1.5 km each way - supposedly a 20 minute
walk each way. At present, coaches allow about 40 minutes for visiting
Stonehenge. With the new visitor centre in place, a visit is likely
to need a minimum of half a day.
The ability of visitors to roam freely and unrestricted over a
natural downland landscape is featured. One envisages endless unfenced
hectares of rolling downland rich it its natural gorse, scrub and
trees. The reality appears more likely to be 'farming as usual'
with ploughing, fences, and all the current restrictions of private
land ownership. Some of the more remote archaeological sites will
not be accessible without specific permission from landowners -
unlikely for the visitor not familiar with the locale and with limited
time. Removal of roads in the vicinity of Stonehenge is one of the
aims, and this will include tunneling of the A303 tunnel past the
monument, using the most environmentally and archaeologically damaging
method of 'cut and cover', rather than boring.
In creating all this, English Heritage declares that it is promoting
a safe natural habitat for birds, insects, butterflies, flowers
and plants. It doesn't say that it is also destroying an identical
habitat in order to build its visitor centre. A superb and unspoiled
river landscape, part of an Area of Special Archaeological Significance,
and including an Area of High Ecological Value, the historic watermeadows,
archaeology and ancient hedges, will be swept away.
Alternative sites to Countess East have been suggested. For instance,
Countess Farm on the western edge of the A345 would be appropriate
for a scaled-down version of what is proposed, although this would
not entirely deal with the traffic problem at the roundabout. A
new proposed leisure area at Folly Bottom on the eastern edge of
Amesbury would have the space for a full development. Additionally,
a site to the west of Stonehenge and the World Heritage Centre boundary,
using a less sensitive archaeological area could be considered;
this would reduce the traffic problem on the A303 and provide a
site closer to the monument, reducing the cost of tramways etc.
We are pleased to note that we are not the only organisation lacking
enthusiasm for the proposal; others much more influential seem to
share our views. However, we do feel ourselves to be in a 'David
and Goliath' situation. We are only a small group of ordinary local
people who will have to live with this monster on our doorstep long
after everyone else involved has moved on. Something that does concern
us is the speed with which English Heritage seems to be pushing
this project along - to the extent that we wonder if there is some
hidden agenda. We notice, for instance, that in the proposals put
forward by Tussauds Group for the Stonehenge Millennium Park, the
programme shows a "Grand Opening" by "Lord Stevens of Stonehenge".
Could this, we wonder, the clue to all the haste Ö.?
We want to try and ensure that our modest environment is not ruined
and the existing traffic problems for others are not compounded.
We have no funds to put up a fight, and we have no expertise to
equal the professionals that will no doubt be employed by English
Heritage and others to fight every objection. We would welcome some
similar help. Your help in arranging a meeting to discuss and resolve
our concerns will be welcomed.
Yours sincerely,
Peter Goodhugh
cc : Dr Kate Fielden : Wiltshire Archaeological
& Natural History Society Dagmar Junghams : English Nature Robert
Key MP John Lodge : Amesbury Town Council Professor Richard Morris
: CBA Rt Hon John Prescott MP John Samuel : Holly House Consultancy
Richard Sheard : Salisbury District Council Rt Hon Chris Smith MP
: Dept for Culture Media and Sport P Stevens : Salisbury Civic Society
Geoff Wainwright : English Heritage Dominic Watkins : Chris Blandford
Associates
No room for errors over visitor
centre
Letter to Salisbury Journal - Roy Dicker - Countess Road, Amesbury
- 17/06/99
I must take issue with your concerning your article in last week's
Journal which gave the impression that Amesbury Town Council, and
John Turner in particular, are somehow championing the cause of
Amesbury in respect of the siting of the Stonehenge visitor centre.
Amesbury Town Council, of which Mr Turner was a member at the time,
supported English Heritage's Stonehenge Master Plan, which included
the siting of the centre at Countess Road East, when it was presented
to them as a planning brief some three years ago.
The fact is that the town council sold out the residents of Amesbury,
and those in Countess Road in particular, in the hope that the scheme
would bring about improvements to the layout of the Countess roundabout.
To portray Mr Turner as some sort of unifying figure is totally
inaccurate. Mr Turner and his plan represents the views of no-one
but himself and only serves to confuse the objections being raised
by the community. His plan is no better than that proposed by English
Heritage, since it will do nothing to solve the main issue - that
of traffic congestion at the Countess roundabout.
The visitor centre needs to be sited at Fargo North or thereabouts.
This is the site which received wide-spread public support when
it was proposed just over a year ago. It is the site that Salisbury
District Council, representing its population, should advocate in
preference. The timetable for construction of the visitor centre
at Countess East is dependent on Salisbury District Council granting
planning permission. The Countess East scheme is contrary to the
council's current ribbon development policy. If Salisbury DC genuinely
represents the people who elect them, they will not be steamrollered
by English Heritage into accepting their crazy scheme. Mr Turner
would do well to listen to his electorate.
ROY DICKER Countess Road, Amesbury.
It would be folly to use
this site
Letter from Anne Rudkin - Countess Road, Amesbury - 17/06/99
The Stonehenge Visitor centre - why not Folly Bottom ?
I am encouraged by the Amesbury Town Council's plan to send a letter
of protest to Chris Smith (Amesbury units in strong protest, Journal
June 10). I wholeheartedly agree that it is lunacy to site the visitor
centre at Countess East in view of the inevitable increase in traffic
congestion at the roundabout and the adverse environmental impact
on the residents of Countess Road.
However, the suggestion that the visitor centre should be at Countess
Farm will surely do little to alleviate traffic congestion at Countess.
As Cllr Jan Swindlehurst said "We only have one stab at this and
it needs to be right first time.We need to keep stirring". In an
effort to stir the pot an ensure that all viable alternatives are
assessed, I would like to suggest that the proposed site for the
visitor centre is simply moved a few hundred yards from the River
Avon and accessed from the proposed new junction, which I understand
is going to be built at Folly Bottom.
ANNE RUDKIN Countess Road, Amesbury.
Nightmare could end
Letter from E.F. Thomas Durrington Car Sales, Amesbury.
- 17/06/99
As a regular user of the Countess roundabout, I fully support
the Countess Road Residents' Group's opposition to locating the
Stonehenge visitor centre on the site known as Countess East. Countess
roundabout is already a nightmare for commercial and private traffic
and with an estimated 1.8 million visitors per annum, locating the
visitor centre on the roundabout would only lead to even greater
chaos.
I have recently heard that the Folly Bottom junction, which is
only about 1 km distant, may well be improved to provide access
to and from all directions - why shouldn't this be considered as
a possible location for the Stonehenge visitor centre ? This is
an important issue which will affect all locals and all businesses
in Amesbury and we would all benefit from much greater local consultation.
E.F. Thomas Durrington Car Sales High Street Amesbury.
Not such a great idea
Letter from Jane Du Pre - Countess Road, Amesbury. - 17/06/99
AMESBURY Town Council appears to be of the opinion that we all
agree it would be a jolly good idea for the proposed Stonehenge
Visitor Centre to be on the west side of Countess Road at Countess
Farm, rather than on the east side. We don't.
The flow of traffic on the roundabout would be just as bad. Those
living in the area would be equally adversely affected. This much-needed
centre should be sited in an area such as Folly Bottom, where light
industrial development and road infrastructure is planned and local
residents will not have to live with the pollution and disruption
created, or at Fargo North which, after all, was the site originally
agreed upon by the Secretary of State, Chris Smith.
Jane Du Pre - Countess Road, Amesbury.
Letter to Salisbury Journal
from John Samuel. 21/06/99
The Countess Road Residents Group has just received a copy of the
English Heritage/National Trust document entitled "The Commercial
Opportunity - Stonehenge New Visitor Centre Information Pack". Here
are two questions arising from just a cursory examination of the
documents. We will have many others.
Projected visitor numbers are 1.8 million per annum in the information
pack, yet the Traffic Impact Assessment that accompanies it is based
on only 1 million. The difference is huge.
Question Which is the correct figure?
2. Details of the Visitor Shuttle Buses contained in the Traffic
Impact Assessment indicate that (even for the 1 million visitor
assumption) the frequency of the bus service with be every 2.5 to
3 minutes at peak periods. This represents 20 - 24 buses every hour
in each direction.
Question: Has anyone really calculated the heavy additional load
on Countess roundabout when one considers the slow moving nature
of 60 and 75 seater buses. - with or without a fly-over? And what
will be the impact with English Heritage's own estimate of 1.8 million
visitors a year?
At last, and thankfully from their own documents, the absurdity
of English Heritage's proposal to site the Visitor Centre at Countess
roundabout is being revealed. It is hard to imagine any potential
operator being remotely interested in such a flawed commercial opportunity.
Even so, we must ensure that it is not inflicted on us through lack
of awareness, or interest, or resistance, on our part.
Wake up Amesbury, it's NOT too late - YET!
Yours faithfully,
John Samuel, C.Eng, MICE, Dip TE Consultant to Countess Road Residents
Group
Flyover still a 'vital'
part of stones bypass
By Rolan Batten - Salisbury Journal - 01/07/99
A FLYOVER across the Countess Road roundabout in Amesbury is not
an option but a necessity.
|
This is the view of both Salisbury MP Robert Key and Amesbury
Town Clerk John Lodge in the wake of the Transport Minister
Lord Whitty's announcement on Friday about the Stonehenge
bypass. Both are angry that Lord Whitty has put the flyover
as one option to improve traffic conditions at the gridlocked
roundabout but has firmly not made it a priority in the £130m
A303 improvement project. The scheme includes the Stonehenge
tunnelled bypass and the Winterbourne Stoke bypass, but does
not stress the necessity for a By Roland Batten flyover at
Countess roundabout. Lord Whitty unveiled details of the proposed
new stretch of A303 dual carriageway past Stonehenge, the
cut-and-cover tunnel, and the bypass route for Winterbourne
Stoke which been given 'preferred route status'. Such a status
will protect the route of the new road from future development
while detailed plans are drawn up.
|
|
|
But his announcement brought an immediate response from Mr Key
and Mr Lodge. Mr Key praised the Highways Agency for "listening
to local people" and deciding to "nudge the Winterbourne Stoke bypass
slightly to the north".
But he slammed the decision to make a flyover at Countess roundabout
just one of the options to improve traffic conditions for local
and through traffic. "It is imperative a flyover is built. It is
essential for local people moving between Amesbury and Bulford"
said Mr Key. He said that in April a firm of consulting engineers
reported that it was clear a flyover is needed even if the Stonehenge
Visitor's Centre is not built at Countess Road.
"We must now put pressure on Lord Whitty to provide the flyover.
The quality of life for the people of Amesbury and the surrounding
villages demands it. "I understand it is not just a question of
money but requires an engineering solution". Mr Lodge said there
was no question of whether a flyover could feasibly be built. "The
space for the slip roads is already there and can be seen. The land
is already protected and Amesbury Town Council has always understood
a flyover could be built. It is a question of the will and the money.
We will have to insist it is built." John Samuel, for the Countess
Road Resident's Group said there was no commitment on the part of
the Highways Agency that the grade separation of Countess will be
part of the A303 improvement scheme.
"Regrettably the announcement on Friday by Lord Whitty of the
preferred route status takes us no further forward. "Although the
announcement made reference to improving the Countess roundabout
for local and through traffic, there is no commitment to the form
or timing of any improvement". Chairman of English Heritage Sir
Jocelyn Stevens, who joined Lord Whitty for the announcement, said
the proposals were an "acceptable and affordable" solution which
recognised the "exceptional and environmental sensitivity of the
Stonehenge World Heritage Site".
He said: "They combine the protection of the monument and the re-creation
of the historic landscape with the much needed solution to the bottleneck
on the A303". The 10.8 km route runs eastwards from the existing
dual carriageway at Berwick Down to the north of Winterbourne Stoke
avoiding a national nature reserve and a site of special scientific
interest. It rejoins the line of the existing road on the approach
to Stonehenge and has a to kilometre stretch by the stones hidden
in a cut-and-cover tunnel eventually joining up with the Amesbury
bypass.
 |
|
A study in contrasts: queues on the A303 eastern approach
to the Countess roundabout are shown in comparison with the
few cars coming off.
|
Sir Jocelyn's vision must
be resisted
Letter from A.J. Munday - Countess Road, Amesbury. -
01/07/99
ONE of the biggest problems associated with the opposition of Amesbury
residents to the proposed visitor centre is the apathy of so many
who think that, since nothing has happened since the idea was first
proposed so many years ago, "It will never happen".
They are deluding themselves by not realising how dedicated Sir
Jocelyn Stevens, chair of English Heritage, is to having this monument
to his memory built just where he wants it. His commitment to the
Countess East site is because he think there is no better site for
his grandiose schemes.
He is not concerned that the local roads cannot possibly cope with
the traffic. He is not concerned that Countess Road residents will
find a second Thorpe Park in an area of the Avon Valley which has
been sensitively farmed for many years. This area of great beauty
has, in my opinion, been deliberately excluded from the World Heritage
site so that he could not be accused of making a mess in his own
back garden. Sir Jocelyn is well aware that there are many sites
suitable for a reasonable sized visitor centre and Amesbury people
are the first to agree that the present situation is a disgrace.
No other site, however, gives him the space to build his Virtual
Reality palace with associated retail outlets. This, he believes,
will achieve his major objective which, on his own admission, is
to have nobody visiting the Henge at all. I do not quarrel with
this, but it can be achieved by a far smaller site nearer the stones
from which they can view in the same time scale as at present, thus
obviating the need for huge car parks.
The vast majority of visitors want five minutes' comfort break,
ten minutes coffee break and two minutes to say "Aren't the stones
impressive, let's take a photograph and go home". Sir Jocelyn's
tunnel vision of the prospect that his visitor centre will be the
pinnacle of his career with English Heritage deludes him into thinking
that, if he bullies Amesbury residents sufficiently, we will go
away or be too apathetic to resist. Sir, he is wrong.
A.J. Munday - Countess Road, Amesbury.
Residents in the dark
N.J. SAMUEL Consultant to Countess Road Residents Group . - 01/07/99
Further to many recent letters in Postbag on the subject of the
Stonehenge visitor centre and the proposal to site it at Countess
East, readers may be interested to hear that an announcement on
Friday by Lord Whitty, concerning improvement to the A303, leaves
us all in exactly the same position as we always have been - in
the dark! Far from clarifying the position in respect of the grade
separation of Countess roundabout, a vital element of any visitor
centre proposal, the announcement falls back on the same old ambiguities
of "improving the Countess road roundabout, for local and through
traffic".
What all residents of Amesbury and users of the A303 need to know
is : exactly what form will the roundabout improvements take and
exactly when will the improvements be implemented? Until we have
unequivocal answers to these particular questions, all local residents
should harbour the gravest doubts as to the consequences of implementing
a scheme which will focus all visitor centre traffic on to this
one, already overloaded, junction.
N.J. SAMUEL Consultant to Countess Road Residents Group .
Stones site anger "will
not go away"
By Katharine Lawley - Salisbury Journal - 08/07/99
OPPOSITION to Countess East as the site for the Stonehenge Visitor
Centre will not go away - whatever the National Trust or English
Heritage think. So says Durrington district councillor Judy Greville,
who has reacted angrily to letters from the two bodies dismissing
Amesbury Town council's bid to have the centre switched to Countess
West.
The town council has urged Chris Smith, Secretary of State for
Culture, Media and Sport, to support its bid. It hopes to have another
chance to press the point when Mr Smith visits the area on July
20, possibly with Roads Minister Lord Whitty.
The visitor centre is possibly the largest issue that the district
council has had to deal with, with estimates putting the full value
of the development at £135 million. But virtually identical letters
from monument custodians English Heritage and landowners the National
Trust dated June 30 and presented to the district's northern area
committee last week are scathing of plans to change the centre's
location.
English Heritage's letter said that it had "evaluated a number
of potential visitor centre sites before selecting Countess East,
which lies outside the World Heritage Site. This site forms part
of the "master plan" which all the agencies involved have endorsed,
it says.
The trust's letter repeated an earlier statement that owning land
at Countess West would help it protect archaeology, restore sensitive
areas to traditional pasture and provide visitors with access to
King Barrows Ridge and the henge itself while helping to spread
the pressure over the whole site. "Countess West could give some
exciting opportunities to complement the master plan proposals for
visitor access via park and ride to Fargo North drop-off point"
it said. "The trust supports the Countess East site for the new
centre and does not consider Countess West as an alternative."
Mrs. Greville, chairman of the northern area committee, said simply
dismissing the bid was just not good enough. Councillors supported
her call to seek support from the council's planning committee in
demanding an explanation. She said there was great concern locally
about the amount of extra traffic that would be generated by a Countess
East visitor centre and the effect on Countess Road roundabout.
"We would appreciate a full explanation as to why the Countess West
site is unsuitable and has been dismissed" she said. "They talk
about a five-year gap between the centre being finished and a flyover
for Countess Road. There will be traffic chaos.
Councillors said they wanted the A303 dualled and a fly-over for
Countess Road before anything else was done. "A planning application
for the visitor centre is likely to be submitted to the council
next spring.
Stones visitor centre 'will
lead to traffic chaos'
Salsibury Journal - 15/07/99
A CALL has been made by Salisbury councillors for more openness
over plans for the multi-million pound Stonehenge visitor centre.
English Heritage is aiming to build the complex on the Countess
East site at Amesbury, which has outraged locals who say it will
add to traffic chaos. Now district councillors are to seek assurances
over measures needed to cope with traffic problems.
They are to ask that the visitor centre is not opened until a flyover
and other road improvements are in place on the A303/345 Countess
roundabout. They will also call on English Heritage to be more open
and explain why it ruled out Countess West on the opposite side
of the road as a site for the new centre. The moves are in line
with action sought by the council's northern area committee, which
covers the Amesbury district.
Northern area chairman Cllr Judy Greville said there had been talk
of a possible five year gap between work finishing on the visitor
centre and the flyover and other highway proposals coming into place.
She said this would add to the chaotic weekend conditions which
exist on the Countess roundabout during the height of the summer
holiday season.
Mrs Greville said residents were already worried about the extra
traffic that will be generated on the roundabout it plans for the
Countess East site went ahead. "It is estimated that 60 per cent
of traffic coming down the A303 from London is heading to the West
Country and most of the rest to Stonehenge," she said. "If the visitor
centre was sited at Countess East, it will mean Stonehenge traffic
coming down to the roundabout in the queues and then having to double
back round it into the centre. "And on top of that we will have
buses taking people from the visitor centre to the stones every
three minutes havng to keep going round the roundabout. It will
be an absolute nightmare."
Flyover may be favourite
- 15/07/99
YOUR coverage (July 1) of the protection of the route for the A303
improvement at Stonehenge and Winterbourne Stoke, while welcome,
did not fully explain the situation which follows the decision to
add to the scheme an improvement for Countess Road roundabout.
You requested information from the Highways Agency in the light
of concerns expressed to you about Countess roundabout but, regretfully,
you did not use this. The information given to you was that two
options for improving the roundabout are under consideration and,
on the basis of analysis to date, a flyover appears the better option.
Before a final decision can be taken, detailed design and environmental
assessments are needed and the overall scheme is subject to statutory
procedures. I am anxious that local people should understand the
current position.
For the avoidance of any doubt, both Countess and Stonehenge have
a high priority and are being taken forward together.
ED BRADLEY - Project Manager - Highways Agency
(A303 Stonehenge & Winterbourne Stoke Improvement).
STOP PRESS
At 11.30 a.m. on Tuesday 20th July 1999 members
of the Group attended a meeting at Antrobus House, Amesbury, with
the Secretary of State to Culture, Media and Sport, the Rt. Hon.
Chris Smith MP, accompanied by Sir Jocelyn Stevens - Chairman of
English Heritage.
The meeting was called by the Secretary of State in
order to discuss with representatives of the local authorities and
the local community, progress on the development of the Stonehenge
World Heritage Site, including the new Visitor Centre facilities
and the routing of the A303.
After the close of the meeting the Group members handed
the Secretary of State a letter setting out their concerns with
the planning procedures, the decision to locate the Visitor Centre
at Countess East, and the failure of the authorities to make any
commitment to the implementation and timing of a grade separated
improvement to Countess roundabout.
The meeting was told that a new planning brief would
be considered by the Salisbury DC Northern area planning committee
on the 23rd September and public consultation on the brief will
precede the Committee decision.
The timetable for the Private Finance Invitation was
discussed and the meeting informed that nine PFI bids would be shortlisted
in September, and the chosen partner selected in December. It was
stated that until Salisbury DC have endorsed the revised planning
brief no PFI partner would be appointed. It is anticipated that
the chosen PFI partner will submit a planning application in the
summer of year 2000 and that a public enquiry might be held at the
end of year 2000.
Sir Jocelyn Stevens said that both Countess East and
Countess West sites would be factually assessed and the results
discussed. There were said to be problems with Countess West in
both access management, and in terms of development on part of the
World Heritage Site.
Representatives of the Highways Agency said that they
are currently appointing engineering consultants to develop the
A303 preferred route scheme announced by Lord Whitty earlier this
month. A likely start date for the scheme was 2005. No commitment
was given however as to the form that the Countess roundabout's
improvement, or to the timing of such improvement. It was said that
grade separation of the roundabout was the preferred option, but
that the new consultant would be asked to look at the issue of an
interim improvement.
During a "questions and answer" session at the end
of the meeting, the Secretary of State revealed, following a question
from CRRG, that when the planning application for the Visitor Centre
was submitted, there would be assessments of other site options
and reasons for the final choice given.
At the close of the meeting, the Secretary of State
was handed a letter, by representatives of CRRG, in which the concerns
of the group were described together with a plea for consideration
of all viable site locations.
The Group has now established a website on the Internet
(address : www.stonehenge-crrg.org.uk) and a copy of the
letter to the Secretary of State may be seen on this site.
Amesbury
Journal 10 Oct 2002
Many benefits in Parker Plan for
Stonehenge
AT last! A public airing in last week's Journal of
the Parker Plan for Stonehenge, which cannot he ignored by our district
council.
Amongst other benefits, it would provide a new visitor
centre for Stonehenge, obviate the need for a flyover at Countess
roundabout and provide the Salisbury bypass link that has been awaited
for so many years.
Now that the National Trust is pushing for a bored
tunnel at a cost of around £350m, surely this visionary and all-embracing
solution, which could he achieved at a fraction of the cost, must
be considered.
GEORGE DU PRE,
Countess Road Amesbury
|
