Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Public consultation begins on Stonehenge tunnel plan

Stonehenge Closeup 3to2

The general public has been given four weeks to register views on the newly revised £1.6bn Stonehenge tunnel proposals.

The supplementary consultation is now open and will close on 14 August. Plans for the tunnel were amended after an earlier consultation this year.

Changes include removing a previously proposed link road, widening of a green bridge and moving the proposed modification of Rollestone crossroads to provide a more compact layout.

The link road was between Byways 11 and 12 in the Stonehenge World Heritage Site (WHS) and is being removed to avoid affecting the setting of the Normanton Down barrow group and tranquillity of the site.

A green bridge proposed near the existing Longbarrow roundabout is being widened to improve the “physical and visual connection” between the northern and southern parts of the WHS.

Highways England said it received more than 5,000 responses to the earlier consultation on improving the A303 route past Stonehenge, between Amesbury and Berwick Down. The new route includes a 2.9km long tunnel a dual carriageway and a “much-needed” bypass north of Winterbourne Stoke.

Highways England project director for the A303 Stonehenge scheme Derek Parody said: “We had a great response to our earlier consultation and have acted on the feedback. We now want to get people’s views on our proposed changes to our original consultation.

“The further feedback we get will allow us to make sure we have got the best scheme before we make our application later this year to build the scheme.

“Meanwhile we continue to work with heritage groups including Historic England, English Heritage, the National Trust, and experts in the field, including the Stonehenge Scientific Committee - a body of leading independent archaeologists - to ensure a new route is built sensitively to the World Heritage site.”

To respond to the consultation visit

Like what you’ve read? To receive New Civil Engineer’s daily and weekly newsletters click here.


Readers' comments (1)

  • Philip Alexander

    I attended the public inquiry into the last lot of proposals back in 2002 when the scheme was actually approved for construction. So I look forward to attending the next one in 2020. And no doubt it will get kicked into the long grass again due to the environmental opposition and cost. Pity I won't be around for the next consultation in 2040.

    Just get on and build it as a open cut with maybe a bit of cut and cover tunnel. That way the archaeological folk will see exactly what's under the ground and can put it into a museum, instead of just getting themselves worked up over what might be there. I've never understood the argument that it's better to leave stuff in the ground when that way, you never get to identify anything and then to recover it. Surely a lengthy, diligent excavation would enhance our understanding of the people who lived in the area over the last 5000-6000 years. If they had started such an excavation back in 2002 they might have actually been finished by now and we would all be marvelling at this new knowledge and insight. Instead, the archaeological terrorists would rather leave whatever might be there in the ground where we will never see it..

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.