
How a controversial cycle lane is tearing apart one of the UK's prettiest villages
The only discernible flicker of drama on a sunny Thursday morning in the tranquil Cambridgeshire village of Grantchester is when a gust sweeps a charming steel bucket off the lid of a wheelie bin (a tasteful royal-blue wheelie, at that).
The crash startles those outside The Blue Ball Inn overlooking the idyllic Grantchester Meadows, where the Bloomsbury set once lolled by the River Cam. But sleepy serenity is quickly restored. Or so it seems.
This is, after all, the medieval village and conservation area that hosts filming for the eponymous ITV detective drama, Grantchester (formerly starring James Norton), in which sleuthing vicars might appear cosy as toast, but tension never prickles too far behind its picket fences.
And so it appears in the real-life village, too – its quaint thatched cottages masking a long-running drama of their own. A drama that, last week, peaked (some might argue farcically so) in the theatre of London's Royal Courts of Justice, where villagers found themselves a long way from their daffodils, battling a threat they claim puts their beautiful home at risk: a cycleway.
On March 25, a three-day judicial review opened at the High Court, hinged around Grantchester Parish Council's objection to the construction of a greenway – a route for cyclists, walkers and horse riders – through the heart of its village, linking nearby Haslingfield to Cambridge.
The case was brought against Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) – the committee behind the Haslingfield Greenway, made up of representatives from Cambridgeshire County Council, South Cambridgeshire District Council and Cambridge City Council – not because the parishioners (who raised £55,000 for their days in court) object to greenways, but because they insist the section through Grantchester will destroy its unique aesthetic and character.
Crucially, they also allege that, in a 2022 meeting with councillor Bridget Smith (then a GCP executive board member), they were 'promised' it would be re-routed if villagers overwhelmingly objected – which they did in a subsequent public consultation by 73 per cent. It's a 'promise' that the GCP insists was never made.
The court case essentially boiled down to a 'they said, we said' row around whether the alleged 'promise' not to 'impose' the greenway on the village had been 'clear and unambiguous'. If found so, the parish council's legal team say the decision to build a greenway 'through Grantchester' should be subject to a quashing order.
Either way, it's safe to say that recollections from that meeting vary.
In fact, Judge Mrs Justice Lieven struggled to contain her exasperation at times. 'This is just verging on insanity,' she uttered on day one, after an intense cross-examination more befitting of a criminal trial than a judicial review. 'There is an incredibly narrow issue of fact as far as I can see here,' she said. 'It will merit very few questions.'
How wrong she was.
Summing up concluded on March 27, after an intense 30 pages of cross-examination by Mr Charles Streeten, who was representing the GCP – and Mrs Justice Lieven reserved judgement. She hasn't given a timescale for making her decision, but the parish council's legal team think it might be months.
In the village on Thursday, as summing up was closing, villagers expressed dismay at the escalation.
'If I was the judge at the end of the first morning I'd have said, 'Why is this in court?'' says Ray Steward, 75, while perched in The Rupert Brooke pub (named after the former Grantchester-dwelling poet).
Indeed, on the face of it, a greenway seems positive. A spokesperson for the GCP explains: 'The 12 greenways in Cambridge would introduce more than 150km [93 miles] of new, improved and safer routes for people to get around the local area.'
Certainly some visitors (mostly non-Grantchester residents) support this view. Take cyclist Steven, 70, who stops outside the cafe, for example. He can't talk for long, he'll get chilly; helmet on, shades down, he says: 'I think it would be useful. The other option is going up the A10, and through the busier parts there you have to be careful – some bits there's cycle paths and some, it's non-existent. It would be safer [to have a cycle path], I think. A lot of people come to this village anyway – I don't think it would bring that many more.'
But the problem is not visitor numbers, Steward insists. After all, the history, beauty and now TV fame of the village is already attracting more people than ever to Grantchester and, on a midweek morning, there's a smattering of day trippers tightening their backpacks here. 'We are on series 10 [of the show] – it's not going to make any difference,' he laughs. His wife Judy, 75, adds: 'It's always going to be popular; we are not worried about suddenly another 600 cyclists arriving.'
They argue that there won't be many more visitors, rendering the cost and impact of implementing the greenway needless. Estimates predict a 25 per cent rise in visitors, but, in real terms, the villagers say this doesn't equate to big numbers. For one Grantchester section, Burnt Close, for example, cycle usage per 24 hours would potentially go from 26 journeys to 33 – just seven more. Although on another key stretch, the Broadway, a narrow road bordering the Meadows, the uplift is estimated to rise from 148 to 185.
Instead, the key concerns for most are safety and appearance; the rural idyll eroded by signage and markings, road humps, lighting: 'Yellow paint all over the place.'
Peter Scrase, 82, has lived in the village for 55 years – first in the vicarage that appears on TV ('They put up fake wisteria when they film'), now in another rectory (Grantchester has three).
He describes the narrowness of the roads, especially the Broadway, where parked cars hem Charterhouse Terrace – 1870s cottages with charming front gardens dotted with hyacinths. 'If you are getting out of a car and you have a cyclist coming, you could have a very nasty accident,' he says.
Even on this quiet morning, cars regularly back up eight-strong to allow others to pass, and the double decker number 18 to St Neots stands off with traffic as it navigates double bends. Scrase doesn't believe a greenway will reduce cars. 'That traffic is nothing to do with Haslingfield,' he says. 'At 7am, it's [people] trying to avoid the M11 junction.'
Scrase stresses this is an 'important conservation area, a unique village… a breathing space for people,' before adding: 'The greenway will be unsightly.'
The Blue Ball Inn's landlord, Toby Joseph, 65, agrees. 'It's total madness. The road is not adequate to cope with a cycle route,' he says. Even as a business-owner he sees little advantage: 'We are blessed by cyclists from Cambridge, but this would cater for something like 10 cyclists a day from Haslingfield.
'There are days when sometimes the village is a little full. I don't object at all, but this cycleway isn't to bring tourists and visitors, it's to enable people to commute from Haslingfield and they can do that perfectly adequately today.'
The latter argument is the one made by the parish council, which claims other routes already exist and favours improving the pathway through the Meadows. In fact, plenty of cyclists pedal it today under circling red kites.
Philip Driver, 65, from nearby Great Shelford, has walked to Grantchester for lunch. He is an 'avid cyclist' and agrees 'that would do the job'.
But sitting in The Orchard Tea Garden with her newborn, Dr Emily Gomersall, 34, who lives in Haslingfield, disagrees. She cycles to Cambridge with her children, and her husband commutes by bike.
Currently they go over 'bumpy' farmland with a permit, then join the roads in Grantchester anyway. She says the greenway would be safer and more direct. 'I think there are other longer options, but it's already quite a long cycle, and I think it needs to be as short as it can be to encourage people to use it,' she says. The route currently takes her husband 25 minutes, and she believes seven or eight minutes could be shaved.
But where cyclists' wheels will turn now rests some 60 miles away in Mrs Justice Lieven's hands.
'We now await the judge's decision and will comment further once legal proceedings have concluded,' said the GCP. The parish council declined to comment at this stage.
Mrs Justice Lieven herself might need a relaxing cycle through the Grantchester Meadows after this case concludes.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Scottish Sun
an hour ago
- Scottish Sun
Coronation Street fans slam Eileen Grimshaw's ‘ridiculous' exit as she waves goodbye to the cobbles after 25 years
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) CORONATION Street fans were left baffled by Eileen Grimshaw's emotional farewell tonight after 25 years. Eileen, played by Sue Cleaver, told her heartbroken boyfriend George she didn't love him anymore before hopping in a cab with son Jason and announcing: 'I'm moving to Thailand.' Sign up for the Entertainment newsletter Sign up 4 Eileen was greeted to a big treat by the Street Cars drivers Credit: ITV 4 She left behind an emotional George after breaking up with him 4 Eileen declared 'I'm moving to Thailand' A cheery Eileen was waved off outside the Rovers after a few drinks with her Streetcars co-workers Steve and Tim. Eileen was greeted to a big treat by the Street Cars drivers, who beeped as she drove away. George was left in tears, having confronted Eileen with his suspicions that she wasn't attracted to him anymore. George was due to fly to Thailand with Eileen - and fans couldn't believe he'd throw away the money he spent on the ticket. Others slammed the idea of Eileen as a barmaid in Thailand, and moving halfway across the world on a whim. 'It's hilarious how they make moving so simple in soaps… 'She couldn't just up and leave to live permanently in Thailand without the correct visa,' one fan wrote. 'Can't see Eileen as a Thai barmaid,' another added, while a third joked: 'Seems they're giving Eileen a boring, miserable exit!' Long-time viewers also felt the storyline was a letdown compared to Eileen's dramatic past. 'Remember when Eileen got her head stuck in the railings? This has been mostly dull and miserable — which sums up Eileen in recent years,' one fan said. Even George's tearful goodbye was mocked, as one said:'George! You're not a murderer, a liar, thief, womaniser… that's why Eileen isn't interested in you, hon!' She also made the decision to make a fresh start in Thailand after being worn down by being suspected in her sister Julie's tragic death. In Friday's episode, Eileen's mind is turned to leaving the cobbles after hearing Theo's impassioned speech to his daughter Millie. Theo explains to his teenage daughter, that he can't return to live with her mum, his ex, because "it didn't feel right," after realising he was attracted to men and wanted to see where is his relationship with Todd went. George realised how Theo's speech moved Eileen and went to confront her after she'd been at the police who had just cleared her of any wrongdoing in Julie's death. The Sun exclusively revealed in January that she had quit the show after 25 years on the Salford set to look for new acting opportunities. 'The door is still firmly open but as I reached my 60th year, I decided it was time to embrace change, look for new adventures and live fearlessly,' she explained. One of Sue's major next steps is to become a a regular panellist on Loose Women after first appearing on the daytime panel show in 2023. Sue took a break from Corrie last year to star in Sister Act The Musical as Mother Superior and appeared in reality show I'm A Celebrity in 2022. Last year, Sue released her memoir A Work In Progress and revealed she was embracing being in her 60s.


Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Coronation Street fans slam 'dreadful' exit for Eileen Grimshaw after 25 years
It was an emotional night in Coronation Street tonight, as Eileen Grimshaw waved goodbye to Weatherfield after 25 years - but some fans wanted a better exit for the star It was the end of an era on Coronation Street tonight, as Eileen Grimshaw (Sue Cleaver) waved goodbye to the street she'd lived on for 25 years. Actress Sue Cleaver joined the ITV soap in 2000, when her character moved into number 11 with sons Jason and Todd Grimshaw. However, some fans weren't impressed with her exit scenes. The character quickly became a fan favourite, winning numerous awards for her portrayal of the role, and her feud with Gail Platt (Helen Worth) will go down in history. However, after 25 years, it was time for Eileen to wave goodbye to Weatherfield, and hello to Thailand as she made a big move. It comes after a tough time for the character, who was being suspected in her sister Julie's tragic death. In tonight's episode, Eileen was cleared by the police of any wrongdoing in Julie's death. She then decided to make the move to Thailand, and invest in her son Jason's bar. It wasn't the only big change for the character, as she ended her relationship with George after admitting she only loved him as a friend. In her final scenes, Eileen who worked at the StreetCars taxi service alongside Steve McDonald (Simon Gregson), was seen hopping into the back of his cab with Jason. Showing their appreciation, Tim Metcalfe (Joe Duttine) and the other cabbies lined up the taxis on the street, honking their horns and saluting her as she waved out the window. Despite the 'touching' scenes, some fans weren't happy about the exit Eileen was given after 25 years, as they expected more. One penned: "This will go down in history as one of the most drawn out exits ever," as another wrote: "This is a dreadful last episode for a long term character." "Well, that send off, wasn't very exciting," tweeted a third, while another agreed: "Goodness. Eileen's exit storyline is very, very, VERY bland." However, others took to the social media platform to praise the exit. "Wow todays episode of Corrie had me happy crying what an ending for an iconic character," wrote one fan, as another said: "Loved how all the taxis lined the street to wave eileen off. Nice touch." Previously speaking about her exit scenes, Sue gushed that the ITV soap had given her "the perfect ending." Speaking on Kelvin and Liz Fletcher's Off Script podcast, the star said: "When I read it and saw it, I was really emotional. It's the perfect ending. It is everything that I wanted."


The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Only in UK could we be forced to pay for BBC then have to cough up for best TV on streaming services – it's got to stop
TURN on your TV today and you'll find schedules filled with true crime thrillers and celebrity reality shows or, at the other extreme, indulgent tripe pandering to Gen Z snowflakes. But unless the Big Five channels stop making so much b****ks and grow some balls, they're going to kill British TV as we know it. 5 5 5 Because BBC One and BBC Two, ITV, Channel 4 and 5 — whose listings increasingly read like a suicide note — are entering the final stages of a fight for their survival. They're up against Netflix, Sky, Prime Video and countless other corporations with deep pockets and big ambitions. Proof came this week in the unlikely form of Blind Date, a much-loved TV format that was once on ITV but has now been snapped up by Disney+. Yeah, that's right, Disney+. Paying through nose Years ago, the subscription services started out providing an alternative to traditional telly, then they began copying the traditional providers and, recently, they've started stealing their big-name talent — Jeremy Clarkson, Emma Willis, Amanda Holden, Holly Willoughby. Now the Blind Date deal shows that the super streamers are literally out to thrash the Big Five at their own game. The gloves have come off . . . but the increased competition won't stop us paying through the nose. Only in Britain could we be forced by law to shell out for a home-grown broadcasting service, only to find the best TV shows are increasingly made by largely foreign-owned streamers. Then — in the ultimate rip-off — we have to cough up even more money to watch them. That's the enraging situation we find ourselves in in the year 2025. Although there are some notable exceptions on the BBC, ITV and Channel 4, the consensus is that subscription services are now making the most electrifying programmes on the planet. Brassic Bids Farewell: Michelle Keegan's Final Series Think about it. Dramas including Adolescence, Baby Reindeer, Rivals, The White Lotus, Slow Horses. And consider the shows that have given us the biggest laughs over the past few years — hits like Last One Laughing, Ted Lasso, Brassic, Clarkson's Farm. None of the above was delivered by the traditional Big Five terrestrials. So, why can't the channels we already pay for make more of the TV that gets us excited? The obvious response from the top UK channels would be that they are still giving us blockbusters — Strictly, I'm A Celebrity, Bake Off, The Traitors, Love Island and dramas like Happy Valley or Mr Bates Vs The Post Office. 5 They are all, to be fair, brilliant. But so much of it is old now. It's predictable. And the new hits are few and far between. Though the streamers obviously have pots of cash to spend, it's not just a money problem either. Look no further than the recent co-production between Disney+ and the BBC on Doctor Who. It's easy to understand why other shows that are laden with CGI and big Hollywood stars end up on the streamers, but why is it that comedies like Ted Lasso never seem to pop up on ITV? Rod It was, by most people's standards, an unmitigated disaster. The studio giant pumped millions into cutting-edge special effects, sets that dazzled rather than wobbled and genuinely monstrous monsters. And what did the BBC do? They squandered it by turning a sci-fi classic into a series of woke lectures that had viewers turning off in droves. Now the Disney+ deal is hanging in the balance and they're having to bring back David Tennant. It's easy to understand why other shows that are laden with CGI and big Hollywood stars end up on the streamers, but why is it that comedies like Ted Lasso never seem to pop up on ITV? ITV, by the way, recently spent millions launching The Genius Game, with David Tennant as host, only to end up with one of their most expensive flops in years. And the one thing I thought while watching the brilliant, gritty drama Adolescence was, this could easily have been done by Channel 4. Neither Adolescence nor Ted Lasso would have cost that much to produce, surely? It's not Star Wars or Bridgerton. Pure extortion Part of the problem, it seems, is that a lot of creatives and execs now don't just chase the money — they also chase trends and credibility. At last month's TV Baftas, around a third of the nominations went to streamers — a figure that's been growing rapidly over the past decade. That, too, could reach a tipping point in a couple of years. The solution is glaringly obvious, but not easy. If Disney+ steal Blind Date, come up with the next Blind Date. If they lose Clarkson to Prime Video, find the next Jeremy. If Netflix do Bridgerton, come up with another twist on the period drama. They need to stop the rot in terrestrial telly, because one day a cluster of these streamers will start offering a one-price-buys-all subscription deal that will make the licence fee look like pure extortion. Then public service broadcasting's days really will be numbered.