• Syldon
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wouldn’t it be cheaper and more effective to just plant some trees? I would rather the money was spent elsewhere. This is a shocking waste.

    • GreatAlbatrossMA
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’m not sure what you mean?
      It’s a two-part problem, the road going from dual carriageway to single, and people wanting to grab a look on the way past.
      Stonehenge is a unesco site on a plain, so widening the existing road, or planting a huge row of trees, is not going to go down well with the druids.

      Getting the road out of site (by either tunnel or diversion) will go a long way to de-modernising the surroundings. (And a fun fact: Half of stonehenge was underpinned with concrete in the last century! So any ways to make it more natural are a plus.)

      • Syldon
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t object to a road being built. I object to £2.3b being spent on it. If the view is so much of a problem then spent a lot less and block it. Add a mound, put some trees there, even a wall would be cheaper.

        If de-modernising is such a good thing can we all have it? OFC not because it would be bloody stupid, much like this hair-brained scheme is.