30/09/04 Contempt for non-paying
30/09/04 No decision as yet
30/09/04 Implications of planning application
10/05/04 Leave Stonehenge alone
01/04/04 Travel agents visit
11/03/04 US Visitors come to see the sights.
12/02/04 Tunnel idea is frivolous
12/02/04 Tunnel proposal causes concern
12/02/04 Safety action will be better
05/02/04 Last chance to have a say
05/02/04 A cutting would do the job
15/01/04 Last chance
21/01/04 Visitor Centre will increase traffic
01/01/04 More houses hit by traffic noise
01/01/04 Residents near Stones accuse 'clutter planners'
01/01/04 Highways DO listen
04/09/03 A303 Broad study needed
04/09/03 Public Inquiry date set
28/08/03 Support Road Plan
07/08/03 NT Stonehenge Consultants
21/06/03 Guardian Article
16/06/03 No stones unturned
01/05/03 SDC to examine Parker Plan
06/03/03 Journal Front Page Residents pack meeting
13/02/03 Residents air concerns
10/10/03 Benefits in Parker Plan
03/10/02 Eleventh Hour Bid
11/08/02 Stonehenge does not need a tunnel
04/08/02 Stonehenge lifts a driver’s spirits
18/06/01 Stones plan must be rethought
22/05/01 Proposal: pt 3
05/04/01 Proposal: pt 2
15/03/01 New Stones Group meets
28/03/01 Proposal: pt 1
13/07/00 Double Landmark
28/10/99 Flyover will be built
26/10/99 Meeting notes 26th Oct
26/10/99 Amesbury clears the air
21/10/99 Comments of the CRRG
21/10/99 Stonehenge Plan faces two hurdles
21/10/99 A long way to go
21/10/99 Meeting notes 21st Oct
14/10/99 Losing faith in Democracy
14/10/99 Amesbury’s hand forced
27/09/99 Letter to Sir Jocelyn Stevens
22/07/99 Confusion reigns
20/07/99 Letter to Chris Smith MP
20/07/99 Stop Press (Archive #1)
15/07/99 Flyover may be favourite
15/07/99 Traffic Chaos
08/07/99 Stones Anger
01/07/99 Residents in the dark
01/07/99 Sir Jocelyn’s vision
01/07/99 Flyover bypass
21/06/99 EH letter
17/06/99 Not such a great idea
17/06/99 Nightmare could end
17/06/99 It would be folly
17/06/99 No room for error
11/06/99 To Site Management
10/06/99 Amesbury unites
14/06/99 Letter about plans
04/06/99 Visitor’s Centre Project
03/06/99 Snarl-ups protest warning
03/06/99 Stonehenge Lunacy
26/04/99 Comments by e-mail
23/04/99 Vision for the future

We publish to our Web site any literature that helps the cause. Either E-mails, letters, magazine or newspaper reports and journals. We would appreciate your comments.
Please use the Have Your Say section. Thanks.

We publish to our Web site any literature that helps the cause. Either E-mails, letters, magazine or newspaper reports and journals. We would appreciate your comments.
Please use the Have Your Say section. Thanks.

We publish to our Web site any literature that helps the cause. Either E-mails, letters, magazine or newspaper reports and journals. We would appreciate your comments.
Please use the Have Your Say section. Thanks.

We publish to our Web site any literature that helps the cause. Either E-mails, letters, magazine or newspaper reports and journals. We would appreciate your comments.
Please use the Have Your Say section. Thanks.

We publish to our Web site any literature that helps the cause. Either E-mails, letters, magazine or newspaper reports and journals. We would appreciate your comments.
Please use the Have Your Say section. Thanks.

The nearest that anyone will be able to get to the actual stones without having to walk will be almost a mile away and then only if they pay for the privilege of travelling on a bumpy old land train. Try walking two miles (there and back again) across the middle of Salisbury Plain in typical English weather, ie. cold and wet, where there is absolutely no shelter and the wind drives straight through you and see if you think it was an enjoyable tourist experience. I think not!

The main outcome of the plans will be to make the stones an elitest destination. Those with only a passing interest will not be welcome and unless you have a deep-seated urge to discover the archeological, cultural or spiritual nature of the site you will be positively discouraged from getting to the stones themselves.

Stonehenge was never meant to be in solitude. It took thousands of people hundreds of years to build and do you think that after putting that much effort into it they would simply down tools and walk away, leaving it in "splendid isolation"? No, it would have been thronging with people there for worship, gatherings and festivities of all kinds throughout the centuries and was never intended to only be viewed from a distance.

The monument itself was given to the nation and English Heritage are merely the custodians who should be looking after it on our behalf rather than denying us free and easy access to it. According to their own figures 250,000 visitors a year visit without paying, well Mr Cossons, they have every right to do so and long may it continue. I urge anyone who has ever visited stonehenge to simply have a look at it or to show visiting relatives this remarkable monument of a Sunday afternoon to object to this elitest plan now before it is too late and unfettered access to all is denied.

Pete Robinson  Fargo Road  Larkhill

Letter Salisbury Journal 30 Sep 04
As part of the public consultation exercise by Salisbury district council concerning the proposed Stonehenge visitor centre, a leaflet has been issued purporting to answer our questions.In this leaflet, the statement is made and repeated that the A303 will be in a tunnel past Stonehenge by the year 2008.

It should be noted that, following the recent three-month a inquiry, the inspector has only recently made his findings known to the relevant minister of state and a final decision will be made known at the end of the year.

Certainly, the decision to build a tunnel has not as yet been made (and, if common sense prevails, never will be).

Unless the council has prior knowledge of the minister's decision, the leaflet is deliberately wrong and potentially misleading, so I thought that a correction ought to be made through the Journal, pointing out these more correct facts.

R WARE, Secretary, Amesbury Society

Letter Salisbury Journal 30 Sep 04
THE planning application for the proposed Stonehenge visitor centre has been submitted to Salisbury district council and now people in the area will realise the implications.

How many will realise that they are footing the bill for the largest part of the cost of this enormous white elephant, in the form of government grant and money from the Heritage Lottery fund?

I could think of better ways to spend our £39m slice.

It has always been the intention of English Heritage, since the time of the previous chairman, to limit the number of people actually visiting the stones to those who have an academic interest in them.

This visitor centre would certainly help to achieve this object.

We must ask, who is likely to visit it after the initial interest has worn off? Certainly not the vast majority of people who currently pay a flying visit of 20 minutes to refresh their memories or to take visiting Aunt Mabel for a quick look and then ‘back home for tea’.

Visiting our Stones will now be a minimum two-hour safari - and let’s hope Aunt Mabel is up to walking nearly a mile after she steps off the land train at the final drop-off point!

If Aunt Mabel is disabled, happily there will be a golf buggy available for her, but you and your children will all have to walk the mile (and back again) in the rain and wind.

You will all be so much healthier for the experience, even if you don’t get home in time for tea.

TONY MUNDAY Countess Road, Amesbury

Leave Stonehenge alone
Stop the tunnel plans and let us all continue to enjoy the view of our magnificent and mysterious monument, says Mark Allen.

REACHING COUNTESS roundabout on the A303 from London, my heart rate begins to quicken. The road sweeps upwards, narrowing into single file before descending.

It is at this stage that I catch a glance on my right of Stonehenge. an archaeological mystery that has intrigued generations and provided a literary trigger for Thomas Hardy. Stonehenge is the symbolic capital of Wiltshire, the lifeblood of the county.

It is rare that I do not hold Stonehenge in my focus for a fraction of a second and ponder upon its significance when I whiz by. Sometimes when passing at sunset the view is breathtaking. Stonehenge puzzles and it perplexes and it always will do so.

What to do about this world heritage site represents one of the biggest challenges facing the authorities, inspiring conflicting passions. It is almost as if Wiltshire is in a time warp, unable to move forward until this issue is resolved.

The inquiry into Stonehenge’s future has been taking place recently. It has been considering eight alternatives to the 2.1 kilometres tunnel, which English Heritage has proposed. So where do I stand?

Iam no expert on this subject but I consider English Heritage’s master plan for the tunnel an extravagant folly that should be resisted. The magic of Stonehenge is that it can be seen for miles around. It is an essential part of the landscape.

I am ashamed to say I have only once examined Stonehenge from close quarters, before the hideous, but necessary, fence had been placed around it many years ago. But this does not mean that I have not appreciated its presence when speeding by in a car or when walking in its vicinity. It is from afar that you have the most spectacular view of Stonehenge and when it is at its most impressive.

If Stonehenge had been positioned in the United States, a lavish theme park would have been constructed around it. However, this is not America and thank goodness for that. The real charm of Stonehenge is that it is natural and understated.

This does not mean that the visitor amenities, which I understand to be pretty lamentable, should not be improved at the site. Clearly, English Heritage should have done more over the past years to enhance the facilities for tourists and can still do so now.

Defenders of the tunnel scheme would argue that doing nothing is not an option because Stonehenge is endangered as an archaeological site, as a result of the volume of traffic on the A303. This being the case, the logical conclusion would be for the traffic flow to be curtailed by taxing motorists who wish to use this part of the A303, and providing an alternative route for those who do not want to pay this road toll.

That seems to be the most sensible and practical conclusion. So I hope we can say goodbye for good to the ridiculous tunnel idea, which would be very expensive, would create more problems than it solved and would stop thousands of people, both locals and motorists, from enjoying the site as they go by, which is how the majority of people suddenly come across the awe inspiring sight of Stonehenge.

Letter Salisbury Journal 1 Apr 2004
TRAVEL agents from the USA were shown around Stonehenge on a typical English Heritage publicity exercise, so that they could "see for themselves the attraction of a visit" (The Journal, March 11).
It is quite certain that English Heritage will have played down the fact that the 30 to 40-minute visit US visitors presently enjoy will, under current plans, in future extend to a minimum of three hours.
More importantly, most of that time will be spent actually travelling from their coach to the Stones and, even more importantly, the last mile will be on foot for all except the disabled.
In the present climate of obesity and the fact that US visitors are mostly of a certain age, we wonder just how many would actually make it to the monument if the present scheme came to fruition.
How many would return to the US and report that they didn’t actually see Stonehenge itself but: "Here is a nice photograph we bought at the visitor centre".?
What is worrying is that, despite writing to the travel agents who were on this exercise, telling them of this problem and inviting them to discuss it, I have not even had the courtesy of a reply so who is
kidding whom?
TONY MUNDAY
Countess Road
Amesbury

Article Salisbury Journal 11 March 2004
US visitors come to see the sights

Under a photograph of;
Dennis Rajchel, of Elm Grove Travel, Stuart Maughan, visitor operations manager at Stonehenge, MaryTodt, ofTravel World. and KatharineTrichel, ofTurner,Trichel & Associates.

A GROUP of American travel agents have visited Stonehenge to see for themselves the attraction of a visit to one of Britain's greatest monuments.
The visit to Stonehenge was part of a familiarisation trip to the south-west organised for US agents by VisitBritain, to tie in with this year's British Travel Trade Fair, taking place this week at the National Exhibition Centre, in Birmingham. The aim of the visit was to raise the profile of the south-west as a key UK tourist destination, so that the travel agents would include visits to Stonehenge and the region as part of their itineraries

..............................................................................................

Amesbury Journal 12 Feb 2004
Stonehenge: Tunnel idea is ‘frivolous’ Comparable surface road would be safer and £200m could be better spent
I FIND it incomprehensible that our MP, who should know better, can ask the question: "Just how dangerous would a tunnel past Stonehenge be?" (Journal, January 22). I note that he does not answer his own question but, since the tenor of his article was about the over-estimation of risks, perhaps I might be allowed to answer.
Any tunnel is more dangerous than a comparable road on the surface. No person in their right mind would build a tunnel where there is no need for one and, make no mistake, the idea of a tunnel past Stonehenge is frivolous.
A recent short poll in Amesbury by the Campaign Opposing Stonehenge Tunnel found that the idea of a tunnel was rejected by 866 people and supported by a mere seven.
Your electors, Mr Key, can think of safer and more productive ways to spend £200m of our money.
A J MUNDAY
Countess Road
Amesbury

Amesbury Journal 12 Feb 2004-02-14
Tunnel proposal causes concern
AMESBURY town council has reaffirmed, in principle, its support of the A303 Stonehenge Improvement scheme. At a meeting last week, all but three councillors voted to support the published scheme and oppose the six alternative routes that have been put forward by various objectors.

However, they were unanimously against the Highways Agency's proposal to build a 2.1km tunnel between Stonehenge Cottages and Long Barrow, designed to keep traffic hidden from visitors to the World Heritage Site. Councillor Westmoreland said "..my own belief is that a tunnel would be criminal"

Safety action will be better, say Greens
SALISBURY Green Party has criticised the A303 Stonehenge Improvement scheme, saying that if the proposals were approved, the new road cutting would become the most prominent monument within the Stonehenge World Heritage Site. This is the view the Salisbury Greens will present to the public inquiry when it opens at the Guildhall in Salisbury, at 10am on Tuesday.

Spokesman Hamish Soutar will tell the inquiry that the damage caused by the new road will far outweigh any benefits from closing the existing roads. He will call for a return to the consensus reached at the 1995 Red Lion planning conference.

"The conference agreed with the aim of removing the roads entirely - at least from the area known as the Stonehenge Bowl," said Mr Soutar, who is the party's parliamentary candidate. "There is no surface route for a new road that would meet either with that objective, or with the government's international obligations to protect the World Heritage Site. "English Heritage and the present government are betraying the public by backing the proposed road scheme."

Local Greens say no new road should be built, but a number of safety measures should be implemented along the current A303, such as closing the junction with the A344. However, if the government is determined to press ahead with its plan, the Salisbury Green Party said the only solution would be a long tunnel under the entire World Heritage Site.

"We don't really want the tunnel, but we are putting it forward because it is important that the inquiry consider it," said Mr Soutar. "We shall argue that any tunnel design has to include every available safety feature, whatever the cost.

“We shall also argue that there are benefits to be had from putting the whole project on hold for 20 years or so. "Technology is changing, transport policy changes and Stonehenge itself is old enough to wait". He added: "The most important World Heritage Site that we need to protect is the world itself. "Our uncertain future will not be helped by continuing to spend hundreds of millions of pounds on vast new roads. "Our duty to conserve Stonehenge for future generations is pointless unless we ensure that they have a world fit to live in."

Amesbury Journal 5 Feb 2004
Last chance to have a say
ANTHONY BROWN-HOVELT was right to draw attention to the-serious weaknesses of the 2. 1 km Stonehenge tunnel plan (Postbag, last week).

There are, however, more shortcomings with the tunnel than simply interfering in the unpredictable consequences of underground water flow.

There is the unnecessary extra risk to life from a tunnel accident or fire, the huge cost of £1 92m to the taxpayer and, most importantly, it will only solve one of many local traffic problems.

If you want to reduce Salisbury's excessive vehicle pollution, improve the traffic flow on Churchill Way and Southampton Road and solve the ongoing Wylye and Bourne Valley traffic challenges, then support the Salisbury Eastern Link/Parker Plan.

The Parker Plan also saves about £30m when compared with the proposed tunnel route.
If we do not seize this opportunity now, it will be lost, perhaps forever. We shall all be doomed to queuing and slowly polluting our way round Salisbury's inner ring road, along with the other 42 per cent of Salisbury's through traffic.

Sadly, according to the Highway Agency's own statistics, traffic is only going to get worse.
So, wake up, Salisbury, and register your preference for the Salisbury Eastern Link/Parker Plan (Route AR4), by writing before February 10 to Chris Jones, Highways Agency, Temple Quay, Bristol, BSI 6HA. His remit is to ensure that the inspector is duly informed of your views (whatever they are) at the public inquiry, which starts in Salisbury on February 17.

Also, write to Wiltshire county council and ask them why they support the expensive Stonehenge tunnel plan.
JOHN GREENHALGH
Coombe Bissett

A cutting would do the job
HOW can we justify the enormous extra expense of a tunnel at Stonehenge, when only recently we built a giant park-and-ride car park dominating the view from Old Sarum? If seeing cars from one site is acceptable, 1 cannot see how you argue the case for a tunnel. A cutting would do the job equally well and a great deal more safely.
SARA WILLIAMSON

Letter to Salisbury Journal 15 Jan 04
Last chance
Local Councillors will be speaking in support of the A303 road scheme at the public inquiry.
I firmly believe that this is contrary to the opinion of the local electorate, particularly in Amesbury district. A group of concerned residents has decided to test public opinion by holding a referendum, to be known as the Campaign Opposing the Stonehenge Tunnel (Cost) on Friday, January 16, and Saturday, January 17, in Amesbury.

Members of the public will be invited to sign a petition showing their support for or opposition to this most contentious part the road plan. Please be there. Please give us your view. This matter is too important be left in the hands of local councillors if their views differ from yours.

This will be the last opportunity for you to have your say before the public inquiry starts.
If apathy reigns, Arnesbury will live to regret it.
DR TONY MUNDAY
Countess Road
Amesbury

Official! A Visitor Centre at Coun tess East will increase Traffic in Countess Road.
Highway Agency figures contained in its Environmental Impact Assessment predict that between 2003 and 2023 a maximum traffic growth of 29% could be expected in Countess Road if the A303 tunnel is not built and the Stonehenge visitor centre remains at its present site.

If the Stonehenge Project is implemented, with its tunnel past the monument and a visitor centre at Countess, over the same 20-year period a 37% rise in traffic could be expected. And this is only the average level on a road already considered to be at capacity.

Does anyone remember the Stonehenge Master Plan? This is the EH document setting the underlying principles for the project. Its Executive Summary includes the statement: “The minimum of disruption to local residents with no new traffic using Countess Road and the Packway”.

Amesbury Journal 1 January 2004
More houses to be hit by traffic noise
By Joanna Snell
A FURTHER 184 homes in Amesbury will be affected by an increase in traffic-related noise after the new flyover is built at the Countess Road roundabout, it was announced last month.

The environmental statement published in June indicated that only 322 properties would be affected by the changes but, following a number of amendments, the Highways Agency has written to residents in Amesbury to explain why this number should have read 506.

Of these, the majority will only experience a rise of between one to three decibels undetectable by the human ear but 22 homes will notice a rise of between three and five decibels.

Speaking at a meeting of Amesbury town council, councillor Dennis Brown told fellow members that the Highways Agency had made a number of errors in their original calculations that had resulted in the new figures.

These included a failure to include houses in and around Ratfyn Road in the total number of potential properties affected by the scheme and setting some receptors at an incorrect height.

Mr Brown added: "What is annoying is this moving of the goalposts after the public consultation process has been finished.

"I believe this town council should write formally and ask for some indication to be given on what noise-alleviation meas-ures are available for those whose houses will be affected and how much could be claimed, if you like, in the form of compensation."

Councillor John Noeken seconded Mr Brown's proposal and urged the town council to write to the chairman of the public inquiry, the Highways Agency, Salisbury district council and Wiltshire county council to express their concerns over the matter.

"It is the contention of many that any improvement to the roundabout situation is welcome but improvement at any price is not acceptable, thus any increase in noise levels should not be allowed," said Mr Noeken. "I am sure we are aware of the soundproofing measures that have been taken in other parts of the country, very noticeably for instance, on the M3 and M25. "Indeed 1 believe soundproof barriers are to be put in place on parts of the Winterbourne Stoke bypass. "These must be included for residents of Amesbury. "We have but one chance to get this proposal right and to make it beneficial to the residents of Amesbury."

Amesbury Journal January 1 2004
Residents near Stones accuse ‘clutter’ planners
By Roland Batten
RESIDENTS living on the edge of the Stonehenge World Heritage Site have accused heritage bosses of placing more importance on life 4,000 years ago than the quality of life of today's inhabitants who live close to the ancient stones.

People living in Fargo Road and Strangways, near Larkhill, say English Heritage and the National Trust plan to remove "20th century clutter" from the site but will he replacing them with "21st century clutter".

The accusations were made at a public meeting in Figheldean last week, when English Heritage and the National Trust revealed their plans for the multi-million-pound Stonehenge visitor centre and the revolutionary land trains that will ferry tourists to and from the stones.

Within the next week or so, a planning application will be submitted to Salisbury district council for the new centre and for the route the land trains will use even though the ministry of defence has not yet agreed to part with land needed from them for the route.

Residents living in Fargo Road and Strangways were notified just before Christmas that English Heritage and the National Trust had chosen their preferred route.

The meeting was held to give residents an opportunity to have their say and raise issues that English Heritage and the National Trust can consider before submitting their planning application.

John Maloney, assistant project director for English Heritage, told the meeting the route chosen for the land trains would be a northern one, starting at the visitor centre and running along the back of houses in Fargo Road and Strangways and into a terminus at Durrington Farm.

Drop-off points containing just a shelter will be at strategic points along the route and, once at the terminal, visitors will have a ten-minute walk along a bridleway to the stones.

The bridleway will be upgraded, so that it can he used by disabled visitors and people in wheelchairs.

The route the land trains will travel goes within 50m of the backs of houses in Fargo Road and Strangways but tree-screening and fencing will help obscure the trains from the houses, said Mr Maloney.

Keith Rowe, assistant project director for the National Trust, said that, of the six possible routes, the northern one was the only option and he said residents’ concerns would be taken into consideration.

Jane Danser, of English Heritage who is based in Salisbury assured those present they would meet residents in the New Year individually or as a group, to talk over concerns.
Penny Worboys, who lives in Fargo Road, said the plans for Stonehenge only replaced 20th century clutter with 21st century clutter.

She said: "There are no land trains or tracks there now, no visitor centre. They are being introduced. You are putting something at the back of our houses that is not there now."

Residents were told that, on peak days, up to six land trains an hour would operate.

On other days, there were likely to he between two or three an hour but during the winter months perhaps only one an hour.

Pete Robinson told the meeting: "The quality of life of today's residents seems to be less important than those of 4,000 years ago."

Harvey Clarke asked if English Heritage had considered the effect on the valuation of homes in Fargo Road and Strangways and whether compensation would be paid.

Another questioned the tree-screening, which could cast shadows over their gardens.
Residents suggested that the land train route be sunk into the ground slightly, to reduce the impact, and they asked that any screening be as close to the route as possible, to maximise its effect.

Mr Maloney promised that all suggestions made at the meeting would be looked at and discussed further with local people in the new year, prior to the planning application.

One problem still facing English Heritage and one that could jeopardise the land train project is the ministry of defence's reaction.

The ministry has not yet agreed to sell land it owns near Larkhill and which is needed for the land train route.
Without that permission, the scheme is a ‘no go’.

Amesbury Journal 1 Jan 04
Highways DO listen..
FOLLOWING the exhibition at the Antrobus Arms Hotel in Amesbury of the proposed "improvements" of the A303 past Stonehenge, I wrote to the Highways Agency listing my reasons for opposing the tunnel.

I have received a letter stating that several letters have been received suggesting that all that is needed is the upgrading of the existing road and, I quote, "We have therefore asked our contractor to work up an alternative scheme that could he compared with the published scheme at the public inquiry."

Since a large map is enclosed showing both schemes, it has obviously been gone into in great detail already. So, take heart you tunnel opposers - they do listen.

The people do own Stonehenge - not English Heritage, as is often misclaimed -but we are in danger of losing it if it is invisible from any approach road, and visitor numbers are bound to plummet when a marathon has to be undertaken to reach the stones.

At a meeting of the museum many years ago, Lord Montagu stated: "If visitors are only prepared to stay 20 minutes, we don't want them." That period would now have to he extended to about two hours, thus killing the coach trade stone dead.

Meanwhile, as estimated costs of the tunnel scheme spiral astronomically, Salisbury NHS Trust is struggling to raise £1m for a cardiac unit at the hospital. A friend of mine was bed-blocking there for some weeks recently while awaiting a vacancy at the Southampton cardiac unit. She finally went about three weeks ago but has still not had surgery.
Is it any wonder heart patients become distressed and depressed?

MARY UNDERWOOD
Earls Court Road
Amesbury

Amesbury Journal 4 Sept 2003-10-15
A303: broad study needed
THE A303 Stonehenge improvement scheme indicates that a dual carriageway within the Stonehenge world heritage site could he suitable in 2023.

The Highways Agency needs to consider the long-term effects of the increase in commercial and holiday traffic to the south-west.

Can the Highways Agency provide conclusive evidence that a dual carriageway within the Stonehenge heritage site would he suitable after 2030?

The inquiry of the Highways Agency was restricted to a section of the A303 within Wiltshire.
Congestion occurs on the A303 dual carriageway between Micheldever and Amesbury. High annual increases in traffic are recorded. If acute congestion is to he avoided in the future, three lanes each way are needed.

It would be expensive to widen the existing section of the A303 near Andover. It could be used as a bypass for Andover. The A303 could be rerouted further south.

A shortened A303 would be less expensive to maintain. There could be a fairly straight road between Sutton Scotney and Wishford. It could pass south of the Stonehenge WHS. In summer, long delays occur on the A31 dual carriageway between Cadnam and Ferndown. Three lanes each way are now needed to avoid acute congestion.

The Highways Agency needs to carry out a long-term inquiry

There is a need for a wide-ranging study of the increase in the commercial and holiday traffic to the
south-west that passes through Hampshire and Wiltshire.

RICHARD WORT
Murray Road
Wimbledon

Amesbury Journal 4 Sept 2003
Public inquiry date for Stones’ roads plan is set
THE public inquiry into the major improvements to the A303 at Stonehenge is set to take place in February.

The Highways Agency announced today that February 17, 2004, has been chosen as the likely start date for the inquiry before an independent inspector appointed by the Secretary of State.

The 12.4km long scheme includes the 2.1km twin bore tunnel, a bypass for Winterbourne Stoke and a flyover taking the A303 over Countess roundabout, Amesbury.

Highways Agency project sponsor Chris Jones, told the Journal that detailed plans for the scheme were published in June and the three month public consultation period ends today.

He said: "A number of objections and representations have now been received as well as letters supporting the scheme.

"Over the coming months the Highways Agency will be working with the objectors and where possible will address their concerns.

"Where this is not possible, objectors will have the opportunity to present their case at the public inquiry".
If the inquiry inspector recommends that the scheme should go ahead work could start in 2005 and be completed by 2008.

Amesbury Journal 28 Aug 2003
Support road plan
I SHOULD like to think that all your readers read the last three paragraphs of D Barnes's letter (Postbag, last week), and were favourably impressed with its contents.

Let us hope the Parker Plan continues to gather its much-needed support.
JIM HOPPE
Durrington

Amesbury Journal 7 August 2003
Stonehenge consultants
THE National Trust has appointed Humberts as consultant surveyors for the Stonehenge project, following the publication of draft orders for the new road scheme around the monument.

Humberts will assist with projects including improving public access and traffic circulation.

They will represent the Trust in negotiating with the Highways Agency over issues such as tunnelling operations, landscaping and construction works.

Jason Lewis, of Humberts' Salisbury office, said: "It is exciting and challenging to be involved with this innovative scheme, which will improve public access and the viewing potential of this historic site without damaging the surrounding ecological and archaeological features.

"The Stonehenge project has been extensively researched and evaluated and is likely to take six to seven years to complete."

Guardian Article. Plans are afoot to transform Stonehenge in the next few years.
John Ezard visits the focus of this weekend's summer solstice
Road to ruins
You still feel it, however long it is since you last saw Stonehenge - an odd lurch in the pit of the stomach when your car crests Countess Hill on the A303 and it first comes into view: this little cluster of partbroken stone toadstools in the middle of open countryside.

The road dips, then begins to climb again. When it reaches its highest point, it is still lower than the monument, which now looks sturdy and formidable, particularly when the sun is behind it. It still draws the eye from all over this area of Salisbury Plain, as it was meant to.

The lurch in the stomach is as primitive as the instinct for flight, but opposite to it. This is the urge to get closer, to look, possibly to take part with other people in some ceremony whose moves, words and purposes have been forgotten. It is a profound, formless urge, hardly ever felt in daily modern life, but one element of it is familiar from other travel experiences. This element is awe at seeing a wonder of the world, at
encountering a great work of human skill and human hands, however unfathomable the reasons for the labours that went into its creation. Stonehenge is Britain's most important ancient monument, unique in the world.

I first felt its pull as a schoolboy, decades ago, when our Morris 8 came over the same hill on the A303, then called the A30, the Great West Road from Devon to London. At that time, when there was virtually no traffic on the roads, my parents' reaction was uncomplicated. We came to a sudden halt on the grass verge, got out our Thermos flask and sandwiches, walked over and gawped. We could have touched - even hugged - the stones with nobody and nothing to stop us.

We were among the earliest of the 20th century Thermos Folk to visit the site. It was the Beaker Folk who started building Stonehenge 5,000 years ago. But statistics prove that it was us Thermos Folk who put this neck of Wiltshire on the tourist map and created its modern difficulties - hordes of us, with our flasks and picnics, greater in number than all the historic and prehistoric migrations of Europe, created by the explosion
of postwar leisure motoring.

Until the early 1960s, the monument received only 300,000 to 400,000 visitors a year. By 1977, this had doubled to 800,000, in a tide sometimes running at 2,000 an hour in the summer. The following year, the government began to restrict public access to limit erosion. The curbs temporarily cut numbers to 500,000, but they rose through the 1980s.

Now - with the Morris 8 a classic car and Thermos long gone to Germany - visitors currently total about 1m. The experience has been transformed. Any parent who brakes hard on the A303 these days gets a juggernaut up their Baby On Board sticker. Instead, you turn on to the A344 and park for free in a well-concealed car park near the stones: if you can find a space in summer. Otherwise, you search for a verge space possibly miles up the A344 and walk back. Up to 200,000 motorists do that each year, often peering through the metal fence without paying for admission. A more civilised way is the hourly bus from Salisbury station, except that the bus and train timetables inflict half-hour waits at each end.

Once arrived, you go through a tunnel under the A344, flanked by atrocious Conan The Barbarian-style murals, to a rough, circular path 10 metres from the monument. This is where the stones still rule. Here, in this small fenced enclave with no intrusive signage or litter bins, the stones are free to impose themselves on you.

The bigger stones are pinched at the waist or the neck, so that their tops look bulbous, knobbled into odd shapes like the 700,000-year-old limestone stalagmites in the caves at Petralona in Halkidiki, northern Greece. One smaller bluestone has tilted over. Grass roots have drawn up earth over its base, as if it were an unreadable tombstone in a neglected English country churchyard. Tits peck for grubs in the crevices, an aerobatic cloud of starlings prattles overhead. Standing in front of one of the trilithons, a US sightseer asks his son, "Want me to look as if I'm holding it up?" No, indicates the son with the camera, I don't think you do that here. This is a place that may once have been a cathedral, and was certainly a cemetery.

On the car park side of the underpass stand a book-and-souvenir shop and a refreshment counter, both high quality, but too cramped for current numbers. Rustic wooden benches only offer rest for about 30 people.
The site is by no means the "national disgrace" alleged by MPs in 1997, but nor does it live up to the pomp of its designa-tion as a World Heritage Site. At present, it's good for a visit of about two hours. You could look, brood, discuss, walk or read for far longer - but not, unless you have vice-like concentration, in the traffic noise. The A303 passes within 100 metres of one section of the perimeter path, the less busy A344 within 20 metres. The monument may have been intended to stand beside a great westward public track; but these two modern tracks assault the ears and blank the mind.

And so, within the next four to six years, the Stonehenge experience will be transformed yet again, this time drastically. The awesome view from Countess Hill will disappear - a regrettable loss. That stretch of the A303 will be tunnelled, the A344's traffic will be diverted, restoring comparative silence.

More dubiously - in what English Heritage trumpeted in August last year as "a new dawn" - motorised visitors will also be diverted, to a mammoth new £57m visitor centre near the Countess A303 roundabout about two miles away. From there, they will be taken closer to the monument by bus; but they will reportedly be expected to walk 20 minutes (about a mile) there and 20 minutes back. The only excep-tions are disabled people, who will get "mobility assistance" vehicles.

For those with stamina, fitness and time, the gains will be immense. The site offers just a few clues to them at present. Between the current visitors' path and the stones, you can see puzzling dips, banks, mounds and scallops in the ground. Moreover, frosty weather exposes the lines of a causeway, called The Avenue, stretching like an eight-lane highway from the Heel Stone across the A344 to the horizon.

These form part of a prehistoric ceremonial landscape of 3,110 hectares (7,700 acres), comprising hundreds of barrows, burial mounds and tracks in which Stonehenge is merely the most central and intact jewel. With roads gone and fences down, future visitors should be able to roam this National Trust land-scape of 590 hectares (1,450 acres) on ' footpaths and tracks as if it were a history park.

The oldest of its 15 major relics, the rings of neolithic ditches called Robin Hood's Ball, was created as early as 4,000BC, around 1,000 years before Stonehenge. Next oldest are Winter-bourne Stoke Barrows and Coneybury Pit. The others are Bush, Normanton Down, Cursus and Lesser Cursus, New King and Old King (all these are barrows), Wilsford Shaft, Coneybury Henge, Woodhenge, The Avenue, Durrington Walls and Vespasian's Camp.

Exploring this network of remnants, ending with the most modern, Vespasian's Camp, a fanciful name given to an iron-age hillfort built in about 1,100BC, should fill a week's break for the most hyperactive family. It should provide a context and perspec-tive, missing at present, for Stonehenge itself, which has proved to be a relative latecomer.

Pits discovered under the current visitors' car park once held huge timber posts, shown by carbon dating to originate from 7,000 to 8,000BC, , during the mesolithic era. Were they totem poles? one scholar asks. Not
until 4,000 years later did the first earth monument go up on the site, not until 1,000 years after that did the first stones arrive.

From these high Wiltshire downs, you can see enemies coming far away. They were a good place for hunter-gatherers to stop wandering, to start cultivating and to begin thinking collectively about the universe. This is the prosaic explanation for their extraordinarily long record of dense human habitation.

The Stonehenge bookshop bristles with stimulating, unproven explanations. Take your pick from primeval computers, celestial observatories, calendars, sun worship, human sacrifice, ley lines, orgies, aliens, and psychic powerhouses. The down-to-earth message, from a loyal and nostalgic descendant of the Thermos Folk, is this: if you want a quick, restricted but rewarding look at the place and its mysteries without having to leave your car and walk for miles, get there very quickly, before English Heritage starts digging up the roads.

Guardian Travel: 21 June 2003

Letter to "The Times" 16 Jun 2003
No stones unturned
Sir, A massively expensive tunnel planned to remove the sight of the A303 from Stonehenge (T2, June 16) seems to me to be a very odd way of speeding the traffic to the West Country.Tunnels going through mountains and under rivers are all well and good,
but a tunnel as a cosmetic exercise is an engineering concept that would be laughable were it not so serious.A better solution would be to move the road and put the tens of millions saved thereby to use elsewhere.

Yours faithfully,
A.J. MUNDAY,
92 Countess Road,
Amesbury, Wiltshire 5P4 7AT.

June 16 2003.

Front Page, Amesbury Journal, March 6th 2003.
Countess Road residents pack meeting to oppose Stonehenge proposals

Visitor centre plan ‘will blight our lives’
by David Vallis
WORRIED Countess Road residents packed out a meeting at Amesbury last week and spoke of their fears of increased traffic and tumbling house prices if the green light were given to current plans for the new multi-million- pound Stonehenge visitor centre.
They claimed that the proposal to build the complex on their doorsteps off the A303 roundabout at Countess East would blight their lives.

The concerns were made plain when between 80 and 100 of the residents attended a meeting hosted by English Heritage and the National Trust at the George Hotel in Amesbury to give residents an overall view of the latest plans for the visitor centre and access scheme for Stonehenge.

It was a private meeting, but afterwards, a spokesman for the Countess Road residents Peter Goodhugh said: "If the English Heritage and National Trust Stonehenge project team had any preconceptions about a cosy relationship with local residents, they were swiftly dispelled."
The project team gave a presentation on the styling and layout of the proposed visitor centre and how the 800,000-or-so visitors per year would access the building and the wider world heritage site.

But Mr Goodhugh said there was considerable scepticism among residents and deep-rooted concerns about the impact of the project.

Principal among those was the extra traffic that would be imposed on Countess Road by siting the centre in what was, viewed by residents, as the wrong place - a traffic hotspot and a residential area.

A peak-period 5,000 visitors a day could result in 200 vehicles an hour coming on to Countess Road, claimed residents, and they said the situation would be further aggravated by the introduction of traffic lights at the roundabout, causing tailbacks northwards.

Residents felt they were already experiencing extreme difficulty entering and leaving their homes, without this additional congestion.

Another significant concern was the effect of the project on property values.
Mr Goodhugh said: "English Heritage said property values would be enhanced as a result of the visitor centre, but it was quickly pointed out to them that local estate agents with considerable experience of the area, were already saying that property prices were falling as a result of the proposals."

English Heritage public and community affairs manager Jane Danser, who chaired the meeting, said: “We felt this was a really constructive meeting and we were pleased to have an opportunity to try to address some of the key concerns of all Countess Road residents.

`We had a team of experts from the project on hand, who were able to deal in detail with specific aspects of the scheme and also listen to the major concerns of residents.
"We fully understand that many residents are worried that the proposed visitor centre and access plans will affect their quality of life.
We want to reassure everyone that we are listening to their views and concerns and that we want to work with them to ensure our scheme has the minimum impact on their daily lives and enjoyment of the area.
"We are preparing to put on a mobile exhibition at the end of this month, to ensure as many people as possible in the Amesbury and Salisbury areas are able to discuss our latest plans with us. 'We look forward to talking to as many people in the area as possible!'

Meanwhile, English Heritage said it believed a flyover planned for Countess Road would offer a much-needed solution to traffic problems, and claimed that comments attributed to it about house prices had been taken out of context.

It said the meeting was told that English Heritage would be commissioning experts to look into the effects on property prices in Countess Road, following concerns raised by residents, and the impact was therefore not yet known.

Residents air their Stonehenge concerns
RESIDENTS living in the Countess Road area of Amesbury are growing increasingly worried about the effects on their lives of the proposed new Stonehenge visitors' centre. Town councillors heard last week that residents were concerned at possible flooding problems and with more than a million visitors a year descending on the area there were-fears of traffic difficulties.

One of the main worries is that the visitors' centre access is very close to the exit of the Little Chef restaurant and petrol filling station. Residents fear having two access roads close together could lead to conflict between drivers.

Recent flooding of the River Avon along the Avon Valley has prompted serious concerns among local people that major developments planned for the Amesbury area may increase the risk of more frequent serious flooding.

Councillors were told that as well as the visitors' centre there were other big developments planned for the area including the massive tunnel and dual-carriaging of the A303, the Countess Road flyover, the new £250m Solstice Park business estate, the re-development of Amesbury town centre and its new supermarket and the re-building of military accommodation blocks at Larkhill and Bulford. Residents say all these proposals will have a major impact on the area's water table.

Cllr John Noeken said as far as the water table issue was concerned a full environmental impact study had been carried out involving all the local authorities and English Nature.

Mayor of Amesbury, Cllr Neil Morrison, supported the need for a 30mph speed limit along the length of Countess Road.

All councillors agreed the closeness of the visitors' centre access to the restaurant exit road would also have to he closely studied before approval is given.

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

Amesbury Journal 3 Oct 2002
Eleventh-hour bid on Stonehenge
By Roland Batten

AN 11th-hour bid is being made to persuade the government to ditch the multi-million-pound scheme to tunnel the A303 at Stonehenge, in favour of a cheaper and less damaging road.

The plea comes from the south Wiltshire group of the Association of Council Taxpayers, which is urging the government to evaluate their ACT Parker Plan more closely.

The group's project officer, John Ellis, said time was running out because, during October, government ministers would "seal the fate of the world-famous sacred site".

Mr Ellis said: "Our inside information suggests they will opt to build either a short cut--and-cover tunnel, gouging a huge, deep trench through the world heritage site and then adding a roof, or a short, bored tunnel.

"Either would result in the construction of a massive four lane highway and both would damage a site held sacred by millions of people and protected under the World Heritage Convention."

Mr Ellis went on. "Completely sidelined is a carefully researched plan promoted by a local organisation

"The ACT Parker Plan diverts the A303 south, allowing the roads by the stones to be grubbed up and grassed over but using a stretch of the existing road to give access and provide ample parking for a visitor centre close to, but out-of-sight of, the monument. "The saving is enormous but it doesn't end there.

Going south far enough to avoid a protected river valley, it comes close to Salisbury, bringing easy access for tourists and with a simple link road giving the city the bypass it so badly needs.

In the process, it also brings peace to two other village-strewn valleys acknowledged as need-ing to be bypassed - the Bourne and Wylye valleys."

The Association is urging the public to write to the government English Heritage and the National Trust, registering their opposition to both mooted schemes.

Mr Ellis said the association was also trying to persuade Salisbury district council to promote an evaluation of the ACT Parker Plan to the south west regional assembly, Wiltshire county council and the government office south-west.

Daily Telegraph 11 August 2002
Stonehenge doesn't need a tunnel

Sue Prideux's letter (August 4) gives an imaginative and appealing reason for retaining the view of Stonehenge from the A303.

The current proposal to cut off the view by burying the road in a tunnel would be a complete waste of money. Tunnels are very expensive due to the need for complex drainage, firefighting, ventilation, and lighting installations.

The reasons given for concealing the road are to restore the remote nature of the place. This will not be achieved, as it is already overshadowed by the industrial buildings of Boscombe Down airfield and the housing at Larkhill. Surely it is not proposed to waste even more money moving those!

Adrian Siddall
Iver, Bucks

Daily Telegraph 4 August 2002
Stonehenge lifts a driver's spirits

The diversion of the A303 away from Stonehenge, as reported in The Daily Telegraph on August 1, would be a sad move for the country.

Every day hundreds of vehicles pass within sight of the stones. While some drivers may curse the road, a large proportion must experience some uplifting of spirit or feeling of awe.

Over the years we have seen its grandeur against a blood-red sunset, in snow, ice, fog, moonlight, and with thick black storm clouds framing it. It is never ignored.

Once Stonehenge is out of sight of roads, who will view it at such odd unexpected times? Who will pay to see it when the weather is imperfect? Who will see it more than once in their lifetime? Who will see it in isolated splendour as evening road-users can see it now, without attendant crowds? It will become yet another nine-to-five historical site with a few special openings.

Before our heritage is taken away and sanitised forever please think again!

Sue Prideaux
Taunton, Somerset

Stones plan must be rethought
Letter to Salisbury Journal
NOW that local and county councillors can see that the new, wonderful upgrading of the A303 seems to be 'coming good', perhaps the time is opportune for them to reconsider their abject tacit approval for the Stonehenge visitor centre at Countess East site.

It was always incomprehensible to us, who could foresee the traffic chaos that would ensue at Countess roundabout and the A345 leading to it, that the councillors had such a 'blind spot.

The clue, if any were needed, was given to me in a conversation with a local councillor who said the only reason it was approved was because that was the only way to get A303 improvements.

How pathetic! Road improvements in some form or other had to come. How could the main artery to the West Country remain as the first bottleneck from Dover to Land's End?

It remains to be seen whether the 'cork' produced by a tunnel past Stonehenge will make the situation easier.

In passing it has to be said that, despite the claims that the 'Parker plan' has come too late as a cheaper and better alternative to the present Highways plan, it is never too late to correct nonsenses.

It would, however, take councillors of vision to say 'perhaps we were wrong', but is there such an animal? If there is, perhaps they will come out of hibernation now that elections are imminent.

It matters not a jot that English Heritage has paid an obscene amount of money for the Countess East site. That is their problem not ours.

EH will find that traffic problems were always Sir Jocelyn Stevens's 'blind spot' which clouded his unswerving dedication to having HIS visitor centre just where HE wanted it.

If Countess East is developed, I really do not want to be around, even to say 'we told you so'.

I remain ever the optimist, even if I am the only person in Wiltshire to believe that Countess East visitor centre can never be built.

A. J. MUNDAY
Countess Road
Amesbury

Salisbury Journal 15 March 2001
New stones group meets

THIRTY people representing 28 groups attended the inaugural meeting of the A303 Stonehenge Improvement Liaison Group held in Amesbury. Representatives of the Highways Agency and consultants Mott MacDonald had the chance to talk to delegates from a range of community groups.

Present were members of the Ramblers Association, Amesbury Chamber of Trade, the Countess Road Residents' Association, Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society, Friends of the Earth as well as county, district and parish councillors.

Highways Agency spokeswoman Theo Wood said the liaison group had been set up to provide a forum for groups and individuals not represented within the Master Plan Organisation handling the A303 Stonehenge Improvement Plan.

She said the meeting discussed a number of topics including the impact on rights of and bridleways, tourism during construction work and how important archaeological sites will be protected.

David Ward, Highways Agency south-west director said the Meeting was interesting and raised a number of issues which could be examined further.

He said: "We were pleased with the fact that so groups were represent-ed and we had been able to hear their views at first hand."

Amesbury Journal 13 July 2000
A double landmark for Countess Road

RESIDENTS of Countess Road, Amesbury, hardly knew whether to laugh or cry this week when two separate announcements on the same day brought a promise of a traffic panacea and the threat of a new gridlock nightmare to come.

The Highways Agency said that Countess Road roundabout will get its longed-for flyover, taking east-west traffic on the A303 over the top of Countess.

Moments later, English Heritage confirmed that the new Stonehenge visitor centre will be sited at Countess East, bringing an extra 1.8m traffic movements per year to the A345. Countess Road residents' group member Mike Rudkin said: "We are left expecting the situation to get worse, not better.

"All of the traffic going into the visitor centre will have to cross all the traffic on the A345.

"Even with all of the West Country traffic taken away, it still leaves us with a massive problem. "On a busy summer day, there could be 250 cars and 30 to 40 coaches coming and going every hour.

The Journal, 28th October 1999
Heritage says flyover will be built before visitor centre
By Duncan Craig

A firm pledge has been given to the people of Amesbury that the proposed multi-million pound Stonehenge visitor centre will not be opened until a flyover across the countess Road roundabout has been built. The promise was given by English Heritage chairman Sir Jocelyn Stevens at an emotion-charged meeting of Salisbury District Council's northern area committee in Amesbury on Thursday night.

At the end of a three-and-a-quarter hour meeting, councillors endorsed English Heritage plans to site the visitor centre at Countess Road East. They also gave their approval to the future management proposals for the Stonehenge World Heritage Site, which include the closure and grassing over of the A344 alongside the stones and the dualling and creation of a tunnel on the A303.

"English Heritage are committed to attaining from the Government a promise that the flyover will be built", said Sir Jocelyn. "We are obviously concerned about those living in the area, but purely from a commercial point of view, long queues of visitors would be counter-productive to our aims. We will stay at the present visitor centre until that flyover is built".

But many councillors expressed concern about whether or now the Government would honour its road improvement promises once a new visitor site had been constructed. John Samuel, highway consultant for the Countess Road Residents' group said: "We've had verbal commitments to a flyover before, but there is still no certainty.

"There should be no development constructed before the completion of a flyover at Countess Roundabout. Then the traffic and environmental impact surveys could be accurately conducted". Throughout the lengthy consultation process, much indignation has centred on the perceived view that the people of Amesbury have been issued with a fait accompli over the Countess Road East site.

The opinion that the promised A303 road improvement scheme was being used as currency to encourage acceptance of the plans was not helped by Sir Jocelyn's comments which were greeted with cries of "blackmail". "Amesbury can benefit tremendously from this if it chooses to do so" he said. "I've got you £125m for your roads, but if you want that money to be taken away then throw away this historic opportunity to save Stonehenge once and for all".

Issues raised by the public and comments made by councillors on the northern area committee, were due to be considered at a full planning committee meeting in Salisbury yesterday.

Amesbury clears the air!
Planners and English Heritage were left in no doubt whatsoever on Amesbury residents' views on the Stonehenge Visitor Centre proposed for Countess East.

At the Northern Area Planning Meeting on 21 October an above-average public attendance kept the questions and comments flowing as the Draft Stonehenge Management Plan and the visitor Centre Planning Brief were discussed. Cllr Greville, chairing the meeting, strove to maintain order as peoples' concerns and emotions poured out. Attempts by English Heritage representatives to dismiss Countess East as an area of little relevance were met by robust reaction from the floor. Questions were pressed as to why the eastern boundary of the World Heritage Site followed the river Avon except for the Countess East area when it conveniently follows the centre of the road. Coincidentally with the inception of the WHS in the early 1980s, the first plans for siting of the visitor centre were being laid, and it was perhaps that Countess East was conveniently available which has led to its natural and historical character being rubbished in an attempt to provide a 'blameless' site for a centre totally out of character for the area.

A distinct feeling also emerged that local people had been hoodwinked over the siting of the visitor centre; in spite of all the paraded alternatives, Countess East had been English Heritage's long-standing favourite for commercial reasons rather than more laudable desires.

Concerns ranged through the policy of returning the WHS central area to grassland - this was criticised by farmers, WHS boundaries - should include Countess East, the site desired by locals and recommended by Chris Smith - Fargo North to the timings of A303 improvements and visitor centre opening. All these aspects produced less than satisfactory responses from English Heritage and Council Officers. A particular point made was that of visitor centre opening hours and effect on the nearby residential area; opening hours of 9am to 7pm were proposed from the floor, but again there was no useful response from councillors or English Heritage.

One councillor made the constructive point that the visitor centre should not be commenced before the Countess roundabout flyover is complete; an eminently sensible suggestion as the combination of visitor traffic, normal traffic, transit buses and site traffic will combine to produce a chaotic situation. Considerable concern was expressed over the possibility that the visitor centre might be completed before the roundabout improvements were commenced and would haemorrhage its benefits onto the existing road layout. English Heritage, however, stuck to their tunnel vision view (no pun intended) that the visitor centre will be started but won't open before the roundabout improvements are completed. It seems impossible to get them to see sense. Unfortunately the councillor's proposal got lost in the chaos of the meeting, but it must not be forgotten. Meanwhile, English Heritage avoids reality and proceeds along its visionary path of open fields, abundant wildlife, and idyllic expanse of downland and an eternally grateful Amesbury.

The debate by councillors was a washout, with the majority abstaining and the Chair vacillating in trying to determine the final recommendation, which from the public viewpoint seemed somewhat confused. It seems that the Planning Brief was accepted with reservations or caveats that will be compiled by the Council Officers as it was clear that by the time a vote was taken councillors were wanting to get home to their slippers and cocoa after an evening of pure theatre!


Letter to the editor of The Journal, 14th October, 1999
Losing faith in democracy
I HAVE been a long-time advocate of parish and town councils as the first line of representation for the ordinary person, but I am now revising my view.

At a time when the future of parish and town councils is under scrutiny, the performance of Amesbury Town Council in considering the latest visitor centre planning brief on October 5 leaves, in my mind, much to be desired. The council's chosen meeting date fell outside the generous time given for consultation by the district council, so a dispensation was acquired in order to respond. Eleven town councillors attended the meeting.

Although the brief had been made available to them via their clerk and to the public for several weeks, only two councillors had seen the full 70+ page document. The rest had a two-page report prepared by a councillor who was not at the meeting.

Councillors complained of not having had access to the brief. One councillor spoke against the brief. He later withdrew his views. One councillor spoke for it - passionately and, we would say, misguidedly as we understand he had not read the full brief.

His views seemed to be that improvements to the A303 at Amesbury are essential, with which we would agree, but they would only be obtained if English Heritage's Stonehenge visitor centre can be built at Countess East - a ploy we feel is being adopted by English Heritage to try to create some viability to its project.

The final vote was one against and three for the town council's endorsement of the planning brief - subject to examination of details.

The rest of the councillors, seven in number, sat on their hands and said nothing.

On this showing, the extremely contentious brief was accepted in just a few minutes and a great deal of public opinion and concern was thrown out of the window. Such is democracy.

PETER GOODHUGH
Countess Road Residents' Group
Countess Road, Amesbury



Article in The Journal, 14th October, 1999
'Amesbury's hand being forced' on Stonehenge
AMESBURY is being railroaded into endorsing a vision of Stonehenge which was drawn up and is being implemented behind its back. Town councillors, at their meetings last week, accused London of forcing them to accept Countess East as the site of the visitor centre by presenting a package of measures which civil servants and English Heritage already regard as a fait accompli.

Just three votes were cast in favour of approving the document which will serve as the blueprint for the detailed planning application, with councillors still expressing serious reservations about the choice of Countess East. But members shied away from rejecting the plan outright, saying that rejecting the worrying parts of the plan could cause the whole scheme to fall.

Cllr John Haywood urged acceptance of the document on pragmatic grounds. He said: "If we do not endorse this we will lose everything we have fought for all these years, including the dualling of the A303 and the improvements at Countess roundabout. "The gains for the area if the plan goes through must outweigh the disadvantages. We have got to look at the pay-out we are going to get for supporting this site." But other councillors said that they had yet to be persuaded that the government would honour its road improvement promises.

Cllr Allan Peach said: "The details of the road are still too up in the air. Until we get that sorted out, I am not prepared to endorse anything". Cllr Fred Westmoreland said: "English Heritage have tried to railroad this proposal through time and time again. Once this document is agreed, Amesbury Town Council will have signed up to Countess East."

Salisbury District Council's head of development services Cliff Lane urged Amesbury to commit to something rather than miss the opportunity to comment on the plan. He said: "We have all been discussing this for nigh on ten years. The sooner we can get behind a visitor centre site the better. "The traffic issues are an integral part of any plan. Substantial monies Substantial monies are coming to this district and it is up to you to say whether you want them or not."

The town council grudgingly accepted the Countess East plan by just three votes to one. The rest of the council abstained. The document will now go forward for consideration by the district council's northern area committee on October 21. Stonehenge will then be the subject of a special planning meeting on October 27, when the fate of the plan will be decided.

The fate of the Stonehenge Master Plan, as it has been dubbed by English Heritage and the National Trust, could hinge on what is decided at two vital Salisbury District Council planning meetings - tonight and next Wednesday. The council's northern area committee will have first crack when members air their views on the proposals at a meeting at Redworth House, Amesbury; starting at 7pm tonight and expected to last up to two-and-a-half hours.

Their recommendations will be taken into account when the Master Plan goes before the council's full planning committee in Salisbury six days later At both meetings the plan will be dealt with as two separate issues -future management proposals for the World Heritage site and a development brief for the visitor centre, planned for a controversial site about a mile away front the monument at Countess Road East.

Council officers are recommending endorsement - subject to some amendments - of the management plan proposals, which include the closure and grassing over of the A344 alongside the stones and dualling and creation of a tunnel on the A303. Chief planning officer Cliff Lane said this week that for the sake of planning guidance they would also recommend endorsement in principle for the visitor centre on the Countess Road East site. But the hope was that an alternative site would be still be found.

The site is fiercely opposed locally, particularly by residents of Countess Road, who fear it will add to the existing summer time chaos on the A303/A345 roundabout. People are also worried about the additional pressure that would be placed on local roads if there was any delay between the opening of the visitor centre and completion of promised highway improvements.

The English Heritage case is expected to be presented to councillors tomorrow by the organisation's chairman Sir Jocelyn Stevens. Northern area committee chairman Cllr Judy Greville has promised to allow people on both sides of the argument longer than the normally permitted time to put their views. "We want members of the public to go away feeling that they were given a really good opportunity to state their case," she said.

I can think of many past councillors who would be saddened by the lack of commitment. Vernon Smith decries any suggestion that the lowest forms of local government should be abolished. On last week's showing in Amesbury would it make so much difference?
MARY UNDERWOOD
Earls Court Road Amesbury

Amesbury Journal - 22/07/99
Confusion reigns over visitor centre
By Sarah McQuillen
A MEETING called to calm anxiety over the siting of the Stonehenge visitor centre at Countess East has left people more confused than ever.