Grantchester Parish Council claims it was ‘given assurances’ about Haslingfield greenway route through village
Grantchester Parish Council is objecting to a new cycle route through its village – and has claimed it was given reassurances that an alternative path would be taken if a majority of those consulted in the village objected.
The Haslingfield Greenway walking and cycling route is part of the wider 150km network of greenways being created by the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP), linking the city and surrounding villages.
However, Cllr Bridget Smith, the Liberal Democrat leader of South Cambridgeshire District Council, has categorically denied that she gave any such assurance to the parish council.
And although a majority of Grantchester respondents did oppose the route when consulted, the wider consultation – which included responses from people outside Grantchester – was in favour of the village route.
The decision on which route the proposed Haslingfield Greenway will take – either through the village or bypassing it on the Baulk Path and adding on 0.7 miles – is set to be made by the GCP executive board at a meeting today (January 4).
In a letter to the GCP’s executive board members, the parish council wrote that after a “flawed” online consultation that “disenfranchised” many villagers who did not have internet access, a second paper consultation was carried out by the GCP, following a meeting with them, Cllr Bridget Smith and GCP transport director Peter Blake.
The parish council clerk writes: “If a local majority was still opposed to the route through the centre of the village, Cllr Smith stated that it would not then be imposed upon Grantchester against its residents’ will.”
He continues: “The parish council participated in the second consultation in good faith but the results were that 75 per cent of Grantchester residents still opposed the route through the centre of the village… the response rate from Grantchester residents was very much higher than for non-residents as a percentage of all those who could have replied. Grantchester residents were outnumbered because it’s a small village, but proportionately far more cared enough to respond and express themselves passionately than in the wider population.”
He added that respondents were asked if they were Grantchester residents during the consultation and that “failing to take that into account in a decision about whether or not to proceed with this section undermines the whole point of the consultation process.”
The GCP agenda papers show that overall, 87 village respondents (73 per cent) opposed the route through the village, with 74 respondents (62 per cent) strongly opposing, and 13 respondents (11 per cent) tending to oppose it.
When the consultation was widened to include responses from outside Grantchester, 416 people answered the question “Overall, to what extent do you support or oppose the Haslingfield Greenway route through Grantchester village?”. The GCP found a total of 267 respondents (64 per cent) were in support of the route through the village, and 31 per cent opposed this section.
Following these results, GCP officers have advised the board to agree to progress the Haslingfield Greenway through Grantchester village.
Cllr Smith said: “Contrary to what was stated in the emails circulated by Granchester Parish Council, I have never given any undertaking to influence the voting of the South Cambridgeshire members on either the GCP board or the GCP assembly regarding approval or otherwise of the Granchester leg of the Haslingfield Greenway. I trust I made this crystal clear in the meeting I recently had with the Granchester Parish Council and at which Peter Blake [GCP transport director] confirmed mine and his recollections of no such undertaking being made in a previous meeting.
“I did, however, make it clear before Christmas that I would communicate all of their concerns to my members but that members on the assembly and board would be required to have open minds in their respective meetings and to base their decisions on the information in the papers and gleaned through debate. This I have done, but have made it clear to all of my members that I am in no way influencing their decision making.”
The GCP said: “By suggesting using the Baulk path from Haslingfield, it is estimated the greenway would be approximately 50 per cent longer, increasing from approximately 2.4km to 3.6km. It is important to remember the network is not just for cyclists but walkers and other active travel users. While an extra kilometre may be easy for an experienced cyclist, it is significant distance for a child cycling or for parents walking children on a school run. We know from consultation that people want the most direct route between two places or they won’t use it.
“While the majority of the public supported the whole route, the paper acknowledges Grantchester resident respondents opposed this section of the route. Should this section proceed, the GCP will continue to work with local stakeholders and the community going forward to make sure the Greenway is sympathetic to the environment it runs through, including specific protected areas such as Grantchester.”