WILTSHIRE, England – The legal appeal against Highways England’s proposal to divert the A303 road into a tunnel beneath the Stonehenge site has been upheld this month, with the High Court upholding two out of the ten grounds submitted. This means that the plans for the tunnel are now suspended until further notice.
Stonehenge view from the highway – Image credit: Basspildstelle – CC BY-SA 4.0
TWH has reported extensively on this project throughout the last year and this recent ruling is yet another stage in the ongoing saga. TWH examines the views on the recent decision below, first assessing the legal basis of the decision itself. It is equally important to understand that the heritage and archaeological communities, local people, and the pagan community are divided on this issue.
The decision has been dependent on points of law, not on the archaeological or heritage basis of the claims made. Justice Houlgate ruled that the Secretary of State did not have legally sufficient material to make the assessments that are required by law.
The Transport Secretary, Grant Shapps, was obliged to consider alternative proposals, including the much longer tunnel and a cut and cover option, but did not do so: this omission has vitiated his decision in the eyes of the Court. The primary reason why these options were not considered is presumably cost: the cut and cover option would cost a further £264m; the tunnel extension would cost £578m.
The Court also said that Shapps did not give adequate weight to the impact on individual heritage assets within the site, “unlawfully” disagreed with the Planning Inspectorate (who had counselled him to reject the proposal), had also “misconstrued” Historic England’s advice, and “adopted an unlawful approach” to the degree of harm that the project would cause to the site.
The two counts which the Court upheld were the impact on heritage assets and the failure to consider alternative schemes.
Justice Holgate remarked: “The relative merits of the alternative tunnel options, compared to the western cutting and portals, were an obviously material consideration which the transport secretary was required to assess. It was irrational not to do so. This was not merely a relevant consideration which he could choose whether or not to take into account. I reach this conclusion for a number of reasons, the cumulative effect of which I judge to be overwhelming.”
In response, Highways England says that:
“We are hugely disappointed by the decision, and we know this will also dismay many people in the local community who have waited decades for a solution and all those who use the road to travel to work or on holiday in the south west.”
However, David Bullock, Highways England’s project manager for the A303, has reported that the procurement process for a contractor for the site will nonetheless be going ahead, presumably as a contingency measure should this ruling be overturned or amendments made to the plans.
“In terms of our initial work, we plan to update local communities via a virtual public information event when we know a little more, and in the interim we are continuing to communicate our plans with all stakeholders and interested parties.”
Business leaders have also told the Western Daily Press that they regret the decision, saying that it is estimated to cost the South West over £1bn in investments, maintaining the view that a faster road would mean greater access to the region as a whole.
View from a nearby road – Image credit: Papouten – CC BY-SA 4.0
However, the Stonehenge Alliance (which includes the British Archaeological Trust, The Council for British Archaeology, and the Consortium of Archaeologists), and the Save Stonehenge World Heritage Site Ltd, the group that actually brought the appeal, are pleased by the decision.
“We could not be more pleased about the outcome of the legal challenge,” said John Adams, director. “The Stonehenge Alliance has campaigned from the start for a longer tunnel if a tunnel should be considered necessary. Ideally, such a tunnel would begin and end outside the World Heritage Site.”
Leigh Day solicitor Rowan Smith, who took the case, said: “This is a huge victory, which means, for now, Stonehenge is safe. The judgment is a clear vindication of our client’s tremendous efforts in campaigning to protect the World Heritage Site. The development consent for this damaging tunnel has been declared unlawful and is now quashed, and the government will have to go back to the drawing board before a new decision can be made.”
Opinions among local residents are mixed, with some saying that the traffic problems at this stage of the A303 urgently require a resolution that would be adequately addressed by the new project, but others holding the view that a temporary relief road for construction purposes across the river Till would be too disruptive to those living in Winterbourne Stoke.
Resident Ian West, for example, who wrote in a letter published by the Salisbury Journal saying that he has been campaigning for a bypass for over 60 years, feels that the new tunnel’s construction would be problematic but supports the idea of a deep cutting for the road.
The World Heritage Committee has also expressed concerns about the tunnel, commenting that they would recommend a longer version which does not have such an impact on the site, and UNESCO has also warned that the site’s heritage status could be placed under review if the tunnel goes ahead.
Wessex Archaeology, who is the site’s archaeological investigation team ahead of the contractors, comment:
“We are disappointed by the outcome of the Judicial Review. The World Heritage site is a special landscape, and the works represented an unprecedented opportunity to investigate and share our discoveries with the public. However, we respect the decision made and will continue to work positively with our suppliers, communities and clients to investigate and protect this special landscape into the future.”
We asked the UK’s Pagan and Pagan-adjacent community for its views:
“I’m normally against building more roads as it generally leads to more traffic rather than reducing it. However in this case I think it would be justified. The areas that would be affected would have archaeological digs to see what was there, traffic would be hidden away from the site and congestion reduced. I’m not really sure what the negative points are,” archaeologist Malcolm White said.
UK pagan, Mel told TWH, “The A303 has been a thorn in Wilshire’s side for decades. If you know the area well you actively try to avoid it. That being said, the monumental destruction of Ancient Archaeology would be a tragic loss for the British Isles. By tunneling. The best compromise would be a bypass. Could’ve already been built by now. It hasn’t. We are where we are but tunnelling like Wombles can never be the answer. The utter destruction to arguably one of the most sacred sites in the UK has to be factored in.”
Mel continued, pointing out past construction impacts, “I’d just like to reference what the M3 route did to St Catherine’s Hill on the outskirts of Winchester. Considering, the damage and destruction to St Catherine’s Hill, where the M3 cuts like a maw through the landscape and so close to this Sacred Site itself is incredibly important from an Energetic point of view. Also loss of natural flora and fauna. It’s too late for St C’s but it’s not too late for Stonehenge. Would it not be better to allow Stonehenge to recover from this continuous, vehicular response?”
The Wild Hunt is not responsible for links to external content.
To join a conversation on this post:
Visit our The Wild Hunt subreddit! Point your favorite browser to https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Wild_Hunt_News/, then click “JOIN”. Make sure to click the bell, too, to be notified of new articles posted to our subreddit.