Opponents of Waltham Forest’s Mini Holland initiative, which is transforming the streets of the east London borough to make them safer for pedestrians and cyclists, as well as more pleasant for local residents, have today had an attempt to have the initiative blocked thrown out of court.
The group E17 Streets for All, which had claimed that the borough had not followed the consultation process correctly, was also ordered to pay the council costs of £12,000 according to a tweet from the Twitter account @WeSupportWFMH, run by backers of the £30 million scheme.
Judge rejected all @E17Streets4All claims as unfounded, appeal rejected, they have to pay council £12,000 #wfminiholland #justice
— We Support WF MH (@WeSupportWFMH) November 6, 2015
In a statement sent to road.cc, Councillor Clyde Loakes, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Environment at Waltham Forest Council, said:“Our Mini-Holland programme is designed to improve the borough for everyone and we are pleased that the High Court has dismissed the arguments put forward.
“The Council appreciates that people have concerns and hope that this provides another opportunity for us to reassure everyone in the borough that we take seriously the need to meet all the appropriate legal requirements.
“We will continue to work with the community to develop the programme, which encourages walking and cycling, as we roll it out across the borough,” he added.
This afternoon, the council tweeted these pictures.
Photos from our fun filled cycling session at St Josephs Jun Sch promoting road safety & cycling #wfminiholland pic.twitter.com/BL74PaZI6S
— WalthamForestCouncil (@wfcouncil) November 6, 2015
And earlier this week, @WeSupportWFMH tweeted this picture which provides a striking example of how Mini Holland is changing the borough.
For 1st time in over 15 yrs, every shop unit on Orford Rd is occupied. 2 restaurants expand since Oct #wfminiholland pic.twitter.com/jMtcXpjAJE
— We Support WF MH (@WeSupportWFMH) November 4, 2015

11 thoughts on “Opponents of Waltham Forest Mini Holland scheme have case thrown out of court”
E17 and cars simply don’t go
E17 and cars simply don’t go well together. #FACT
don simon wrote:
Brilliant, though wonder if anyone under age of 30 will get it? Great avatar BTW 😉
Simon_MacMichael wrote:
I wasn’t sure if it’d be too subtle or not, and yes, Alfie is an absolute legend.
don simon wrote:
Exactly, one of the blokes who was in E17 even managed to run over himself while he was driving his car
OldRidgeback wrote:
um,
The parody twitter account
The parody twitter account @E17Streets4Cars has about 10 times more followers than @E17Streets4All
Why do groups so often have
Why do groups so often have names which are really the opposite of what they mean? At present, roads are entirely dedicated to the motor vehicle, with other modes of transport kind of squashed in at the edges. A proposal is brought in to change the emphasis, to make having a private car more inconvenient, and so the group opposed to this scheme call themselves “E17 Streets for All”.
It’s like having “KKK Members for Multiculturalism” 😉
brooksby wrote:
Or in this case – the ID’s don’t have it.
(reference to an MP for a nearby constituency)
Everything is gonna be
Everything is gonna be alright …
Yipee, I really don’t know
Yipee, I really don’t know what they’re are whinging about.
Glad they got slapped (local
Glad they got slapped (local I am) and take heart that the process appears legal. Can we just get on with it now then?