I'd be interested in the site as I hadn't heard that.
Hawkins’ work suffers from a bunch of problems.
Number one, there’s no inscriptions on the monuments or any surviving vintage texts in any sources that say anything about the presence of any alignments or any intent.
Number two, in order to get his alignments (and they were his, not the builders’), he used a large margin of error, different eras, and imaginary stones and holes.
Number three, building with such large stones without a long period of observations and recordkeeping wouldn’t result in some kind of stone age observatory or calendar in stone. Previously (including by Hawkins I think, I read the book nearly 40 years ago) it was claimed that the nearby “woodhenge” had been constructed to work out those details in advance — but it turned out that Stonehenge began earlier. And this doesn’t take into account the weather, the overcast, etc.
Basically, Hawkins was doing the same thing as Richard Hoagland does with the Cydonia “monuments” on Mars.