Harston Neighbourhood Plan Submission Version

Comment

Representation ID: 200634

Received: 13/02/2025

Respondent: Cambridge Group of the Ramblers

We consider that an opportunity has been missed to state clearly that there is the need for an improved network of public rights of way (PRoWs.
The draft Plan is constrained by relegating the discussion of all recreational walking, horse-riding and off-road cycling routes to the heading ‘Active Travel’.
It is of great concern that no mention at all is made of the same County Council’s ‘Rights of Way Improvement Plan’.
We recommend changing the heading of Chapter 12 to ‘Active Travel and Recreational Routes’, reflecting the discussion and proposals.
When considering the ‘aspirations’ for rural routes, as shown on Map 18 and detailed in Policy HAR 21, it is clear that only some of these are underpinned by the ‘active travel’ objective – routes (1), (3), (4) and route (6). Routes (2), (5), (7) and (8) are all about recreation! So PLEASE make it clear that Chapter 12 is about far more than reducing car use; it should promote the use of appropriate off-road, non-motorised paths for recreation.
It would be very helpful if local landowners with ‘permissive paths’ and who are unwilling to support new public rights of way could be encouraged to enter into agreements with the Highways Authority (Cambridgeshire County Council), to provide permissive paths for a specified length of time.
We suggest that it would be useful if Map 17 could show Public Rights of Way in adjacent parishes, for example the public footpath to Barrington. Could the dead-end public footpath to St Margaret’s Mount and the Obelisk be continued as a circular path back to Harston?
Finally, it is of concern that ‘aspirational rural route 3’, on the road verge to Newton, has been allowed by Cambridgeshire County Council to get into a poor state of repair.