Unesco has confirmed that Stonehenge could be stripped of its world heritage site status, over its concern that a road tunnel, backed by the government, would irreversibly damage an area of “outstanding universal value”.

A report to Unesco’s world heritage committee setting out concerns about the £1.7bn A303 road tunnel was approved unchanged on Thursday. Unless the designs for the two-mile (3.3km) tunnel are extended and changed, the committee recommends placing Stonehenge on Unesco’s list of world heritage in danger next year.

Last month the high court was told that a decision by Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, to approve the tunnel last November was unlawful because it did not properly consider damage that would be done to a string of prehistoric sites and many thousands of ancient artefacts.

Unesco’s committee found that if the high court confirms planning consent for the tunnel, Stonehenge should be placed on its danger list. It said that despite minor improvements to the original plan, the proposed cut-and-cover tunnel would irreversibly damage an area of “outstanding universal value”.

Shapps ignored advice from a Unesco mission in 2018 and his own planning inspectorate that the tunnel would cause “substantial harm” and should not go ahead. Unesco had recommend a longer, bored tunnel so more of the proposed dual carriageway would be covered.

The committee expressed dismay that Shapps chose the cheaper option of a short and shallow tunnel. It noted: “The state party [the UK government] determined that the additional landscape benefits would not justify the additional costs … It is regretted that for such an iconic world heritage property, the arguments persist that the perceived benefits of a longer tunnel do not outweigh the costs.”

It added: “The scheme should be modified to deliver the best available outcome for the OUV [outstanding universal value] of the property.”

The committee said a proposed 150m “green bridge” to the west of the proposed tunnel “could not be considered an appropriate solution”. It noted that about 1km of the proposed new dual carriageway would be “exposed in a wide cutting within open landscape”.

The committee also appeared to rule out further talks with the UK government unless it committed to abandoning the current tunnel. It said: “While it is noted that the state party is committed to engage further, if the permission which has been granted were to be upheld by the high court, it is unclear what might be achieved by further engagement, as it would not be possible to compensate for the unacceptable adverse impacts of the present scheme.”

Traffic on the A303 that runs beside the ancient monument.
Traffic on the A303 that runs beside the ancient monument. Photograph: Matt Cardy/Getty Images

Last month the Department for Transport said: “We are confident the decision taken by the secretary of state to proceed with the A303 Stonehenge project was correct, lawful and well informed. The reasons are set out in the decision letter. We cannot comment further as this is a live litigation case.”

Stonehenge Alliance, which is campaigning against the tunnel, said on Twitter: “There is no act of ‘reverse vandalism’ if #StonehengeTunnel proceeds.” It called on the government to heed the views of Unesco and its own inspectors.

By Freedom

The editors and writers of Patriots4Freedom are dedicated to searching out threats to American Freedom. Don't stand by while the nanny state takes away your choices, or Big Tech stifles your free speech. Take a stand and fight for your liberty!

11 thoughts on “Stonehenge to be Destroyed?”
  1. My dad was a Captain in the US Army during WWII. For a time he was stationed in the Salisbury Plain in England during the planning of the Invasion. He used to say that one of his more vivid memories was riding past Stonehenge every day on his way to Tidsworth. Whenever I see pictures of Stonehenge, I always picture dad going by. It’s really quite sad to me that such a landmark, with such a long history, would even be considered to be destroyed. What is happening to our world?

  2. It is disgusting that a world heritage site should be sacrificed beyond repair for the sake of a road. Reroute the highway elsewhere then everyone will be happy. Why forsake the heritage site.

  3. I am actually pleased to glance at this blog posts which carries lots of useful information, thanks for providing these kinds
    of data.

  4. certainly like your web site however you have
    to test the spelling on quite a few of your posts. Several of them are rife with spelling problems and I find it very
    troublesome to inform the truth then again I will surely come
    back again.

  5. You actually make it seem so easy with your presentation but I find this matter to be actually something that
    I think I would never understand. It seems too complex and extremely
    broad for me. I am looking forward for your next post, I will try to get the hang of
    it!

  6. I love your blog.. very nice colors & theme. Did you design this website yourself or did you hire someone to do it for you?
    Plz answer back as I’m looking to construct my own blog and would like to know where u got this from.
    thanks a lot

Comments are closed.