Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   What do you mean, why's it got to be built? It's a bypass. You've got to build bypasses   (theguardian.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, World Heritage Site, UNESCO, world heritage site, road-building plan, Grant Shapps, International Council on Monuments and Sites, Last month, English Heritage  
•       •       •

4321 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Dec 2020 at 8:45 PM (22 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

 
2020-12-05 5:46:37 PM  
8 votes:
i'm game, we'll see who rusts first
 
2020-12-05 9:06:58 PM  
5 votes:
But the plans were on display...
 
2020-12-05 8:53:22 PM  
5 votes:
I hope the tunneling doesn't sever any ley lines.  It could have severe consequences.
 
2020-12-05 11:15:52 PM  
4 votes:
This is what it looks like on Google Maps. It looks like there's already unfortunately been quite a bit of development around it. That's unfortunate, but unless I'm missing something, wouldn't an underground road be better than an above ground one? The above ground section could be demolished and returned to a normal appearance and that would be a measured improvement.

I get the point that there could be artifacts underground, but we have the technology to look before we dig...it's certainly possible to use underground imaging devices or just excavate the entire path beforehand and look for anything that might be of interest.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-12-05 10:38:00 PM  
4 votes:

DON.MAC: Close the road in at least one direction and fix the the one 2 km north and the one 3 km to the south.  Problem solved forever. That road is used because it is there, not because it is the best route for most of the traffic if someone properly planned the roads in that area which apparently hasn't been done properly in centuries.


You have to bear in mind that Tories are in charge of the UK right now. FTA:

Shapps accepted that the development would cause harm to the 4,000-year-old Unesco world heritage site, but concluded that it would not be substantial and would be outweighed by the public benefit.
Shapps overruled a report by five planning inspectors who recommended withholding consent for the scheme. The road improvements are intended to widen traffic bottlenecks on a major route to south-west England.


So essentially, it's a bad idea, but Tory C*nts are for it, so f*ck your feelings.

I bet some Tory c*nt will be enriching themself from this project, too - they've missed a beat if they haven't been completely corrupt assholes here.
 
2020-12-06 12:52:23 AM  
3 votes:
"As road transport is the single largest source of carbon emissions in the UK, this is insane. Building more roads simply leads to more traffic and carbon."

Fark user imageView Full Size


That is not how it works.
 
2020-12-05 9:42:31 PM  
3 votes:
Spend millions building a tunnel so you don't disturb the historical site?  That will teach you.  

No good deed goes unpunished.
 
2020-12-05 9:03:11 PM  
3 votes:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-12-06 1:31:11 AM  
2 votes:

iron de havilland: DON.MAC: Close the road in at least one direction and fix the the one 2 km north and the one 3 km to the south.  Problem solved forever. That road is used because it is there, not because it is the best route for most of the traffic if someone properly planned the roads in that area which apparently hasn't been done properly in centuries.

You have to bear in mind that Tories are in charge of the UK right now. FTA:

Shapps accepted that the development would cause harm to the 4,000-year-old Unesco world heritage site, but concluded that it would not be substantial and would be outweighed by the public benefit.
Shapps overruled a report by five planning inspectors who recommended withholding consent for the scheme. The road improvements are intended to widen traffic bottlenecks on a major route to south-west England.

So essentially, it's a bad idea, but Tory C*nts are for it, so f*ck your feelings.

I bet some Tory c*nt will be enriching themself from this project, too - they've missed a beat if they haven't been completely corrupt assholes here.


You certainly have the right muppet in chief for ignoring the advice of a panel of 5 experts in favour of what was written on the back of the plain brown envelope stuffed with cash he found on his desk.

I'm still in awe about hunting parties being exempt from the Rule Of Six. I honestly thought that was pretty brazen, even for the tories.
 
2020-12-05 9:47:12 PM  
2 votes:
Apathetic bloody country, I've no sympathy
 
2020-12-05 9:08:04 PM  
2 votes:
WHAT ABOUT THE LITTLE PEOPLE?

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-12-05 9:04:06 PM  
2 votes:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-12-05 9:01:10 PM  
2 votes:
A bypass? Are Vogons involved?
 
2020-12-06 2:00:22 AM  
1 vote:
"A small number of police officers, along with English Heritage officials and security guards, maintained a low-key presence and did not try to halt the mass trespass."

What? No tear gas, riot gear and rubber bullets? They were trespassing!  Thats breaking the law!
 
2020-12-06 1:42:27 AM  
1 vote:

DON.MAC: khatores:

I get the point that there could be artifacts underground, but we have the technology to look before we dig...it's certainly possible to use underground imaging devices or just excavate the entire path beforehand and look for anything that might be of interest.

What tehcnology would that be? Tunnel Boring Machines work deeper than the ground penetrating radar work and some of the stuff in that area is quite deep.


How deep would this be going? Is there evidence that there could even be any kind of artifacts that far down?

Stonehenge is supposedly from about 3000 BC but it wasn't excavated...it's been above ground the entire time and those are some heavy-ass rocks. It seems like the geology of this area doesn't really promote a lot of subsidence or alluvial deposits. Although, maybe the Stonehenge builders put a sturdy foundation in place and other things nearby could have subsided more easily.

I think the best way to handle this would be to GPR that path that the tunnel would be taking, and then just bore slowly. Set up some laser survey equipment on the stones to monitor shifting. They could also use GPR in front of the boring machine to anticipate anything they might run into before they bore right through it. That would increase time and expense, but it might be worth it.

The only reason to do this project the way it is being done is political grift.

Is that the only choice here? That may well play into it, but what about the benefits of not having a congested highway within view of Stonehenge? That section that was road could be converted back to grass.
 
2020-12-05 11:40:31 PM  
1 vote:
Why do we call those structures buildings? Shouldn't they be called builts?
 
2020-12-05 9:57:47 PM  
1 vote:
Close the road in at least one direction and fix the the one 2 km north and the one 3 km to the south.  Problem solved forever. That road is used because it is there, not because it is the best route for most of the traffic if someone properly planned the roads in that area which apparently hasn't been done properly in centuries.
 
2020-12-05 9:13:56 PM  
1 vote:
especially after your third heart attack.
 
2020-12-05 9:07:59 PM  
1 vote:
Spinal Tap - All Stonehenge scenes
Youtube STHKFlO-zBw
 
Displayed 19 of 19 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.