Walthamstow pro-motoring protesters disrupted the opening of Walthamstow’s £27m mini-Holland cycling scheme this week, shouting “streets for all” through megaphones and carrying a coffin to symbolise he “death” of Walthamstow village.
The Dutch ambassador Simon Smits was in attendance for the launch of the local authority’s scheme, one of three that were awarded around £30 million each by Transport for London after successfully bidding for the cash in competition with five other Outer London boroughs to transform their streets by bringing in Continental-style infrastructure.
One of the aims of Waltham Forest’s project is to reduce traffic on residential streets currently used as ‘rat runs’ by motorists, and last week the council began a trial of road closures in the Pembroke Road area to assess their impact. The pilot scheme will run until 13 October.
60 protesters arrived, carrying banners reading “Please Get Rid of this Berlin Wall and Iron Curtain” and “In loving memory of our village, 1815–2015,” according to BikeBiz.
The protest was organised by E17Streets4All, organised via their Facebook page which says: “We are a group of Walthamstow residents and business owners [who have] come together … to challenge the implementation of the Mini Holland scheme in its current form and achieve the implementation of a sensible, redesigned scheme acceptable to the majority of people living or working in the area.”
Cllr Clyde Loakes, the deputy leader of Waltham Forest council, was met with jeers of “on your bike” as he arrived at the event.
Cllr Loakes said: “There are clearly people who don’t like the scheme. But we spent six months on consultation which had a high response rate and addressed a lot of people’s concerns.
“But we are living in an age where public health issues are increasing rapidly especially obesity and air pollution. More cycling and walking will combat that and make the streets safer for school runs.”
He admitted that some motorised journeys might now take a few minutes longer but that “rat-running” motorists had to be discouraged from using Walthamstow village as a short-cut between major roads. Less than fifty percent of Walthamstow residents have access to cars.
According to the council’s website, “over 67,000 vehicles travelled through the trial area from 15 Sept to 22 Sept and that over 80% of traffic in some streets, including Orford Road and Pembroke Road, is rat running through traffic.”
It aims to cut that number “dramatically” through introducing strategic road closures to prevent motorists treating the area as a rat run, while still enabling locals to access their homes and workplaces.
Add new comment
33 comments
Pro-car my ass. I drive one most days, so at least as pro-car as these tossers. They are anti-cycling, anti-safety more like.
It's inevitable that schemes like this will be unpopular among some people. There are areas in which government – in this case local, cos central still hasn't the balls – has to take actions despite their unpopularity.
Idiots. It goes much higher than that. It's a UN level conspiracy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4W1pxNzyOD0
Lolling already, this is a comedy isn't it????
Hilarious! Made my day. The twitter parody is brilliant too.
I absolutely defend the right of the protesters to have their say though.
Couple of points (I'm one of the Waltham Forest Cycling Campaign volunteers most heavily involved)...
1. The trial has actually been and gone. It was last year. The protest was at the official opening of the scheme being completed. The first of four "village" areas in Walthamstow. On top of which there are numerous main road schemes moving forward also.
2. The Kingston scheme has been watered down somewhat from the bid. But the Waltham Forest one, if anything, has been improved from the bid.
3. The sad thing about the protests is some people with legitimate concerns (no scheme is perfect) are being drawn in to a group of rather nasty, dubious individuals with axes to grind who are just futilely shouting trying to stop the entire process.
This is the absolute key for me and my experience of driving in London too. They're bloody everywhere and has to be the norm and NOT the exception.
The driversaurs are revolting!
As a walthamstonian I have been keeping well away from the debate and just quietly watching as things get better for cyclists, pedestrians, families. Mostly it's been about cutting out rat runs really, which is a winner on so many fronts it's ridiculous. Children are now playing in the street! Outrageous!
Scary how car-addicted we've become in such a short space of time...
This shows a resistance to change which is scary in its ignorance of/refusal to accept, the damage excessive use of cars does to both the users of the cars and the local community.
We've a hell of a struggle to change this pro-car, anti-everything else attitude
You can't stop me driving how else can I get my children safely to school, other than in a big two ton metal box?
The tragedy is, that of the three mini-Holland winners Waltham Forest seems to be by far the most successful. Neither Enfield or Kingston have actually done anything yet, and both seem to be experiencing a lot of opposition.
Despite all the noise about cycling in London, the success is largely in the central zones. Outer London isn't that different to the rest of the country in terms of modal share. For every proposal there's always vocal and angry opposition from a local population that can't imagine a world in which they don't drive their children to school.
And then of course there's the danger from unexploded bombs and errant golf balls...
Enfield's modal share when rounded to the nearest percentage is 0%
I hope the council has the common sense to go ahead with the A105 plans, they are actually good and wouldn't just make cycling more pleasant but also give a handful of areas much needed updates from the dreary 70's throwback look they currently have.
50/50 whether it goes ahead, I hope the mindless shouty people don't derail the project.
I dunno, I drove a van in along the A308 last week in the rush hour. Pretty much all the way in from Kingston to the middle I was among cycles. Sure, there were loads more of them by Wandsworth but it was still substantially more than I see in Eastleigh where I live.
It was possibly the best behaved van on the road that day given the amount of miles I do on my bike, the fact that my bike was strapped to the flatbed behind the cab and my helmet was doing duty as a dashcam. I was pleased to deliver the van and get on my bike to the next pick up.
What it did reveal to me was the lack of excuse *any* driver has in London for hitting a cyclist. You simply *can't* not expect there to be a cyclist because they/we are *everywhere*!
E17 & cars!
http://www.timeout.com/london/music/brian-harvey-it-happened-here
Haven't they learnt yet!!!
I don't think the council has anything to worry about. This is a nothing but a very small bunch of loud, selfish, self-centred, self-serving people whining about a special privilege being taken away from them. They have very little support. Look at their twitter site (https://twitter.com/E17Streets4All). It currently has 29 followers and a paltry 4 tweets. A parody site (https://twitter.com/E17Streets4Cars) currently has 127 tweets and nearly 10 times as many followers. I recommend taking a look at the parody site; it's a hoot!
I thought this mini holland schemes had been watered down already (less segregation than was originally planned) but if it's upset motorists I'm all for it.
I mean, a coffin, you couldn't make it up! surely it was just some hipsters being super ironic?
"The protestors marched with a coffin, which symbolised the death of irony"
I also assume that these roads for all activists are aware of the knock on effect of freeing up footpaths for cycling and more bridleways to 4x4s.
This is possibly one of the single most positive steps forward I've seen in this country for an age.
Roads4all. But not you children playing, nor you people walking, nor you cyclist, nor you delivery vans, nor you public transport.
Well done for showing the Dutch ambassador what a short-sighted nation we are!
Of course this happened. This is the inevitable kickback.
They were prioritised and don't want to lose that status.
Step 1:
Spend years making the car the easiest transport option for everyone; design cities around car travel, let people get used to cheap fuel, effectively subsidise car travel, make cheap parking plentiful so that they drive everywhere and feel entitled to be able to do so, with no regard to the effects this has on their health (obesity) and others (congestion, death by pollution or incidents).
Step 2:
Take away some of these inequalities in transport planning.
(NB -this may mean car travel is no longer the easiest option for every journey).
Step 3:
Don't be too surprised if those who use a previously prioritised transport option resent these changes.
I want pictures of these petrol heads (where they are clearly identifiable as petrol heads) demanding roads for all so that I can have them printed on to cycling tops.
You couldn't make it up.
Sounds like the council have good cause to stand their ground and go ahead with the trials. I suspect in 6 months time the true popularity of this project will be overwhelming. I just hope they keep their nerve rather than buckling and watering it down. Hopefully this will be the place other councillors visit to take inspiration for their own schemes in future!
automobile monkeys unite, streets for all they say... cyclist death toll says diferent. we cyclists are still considered idiots byt the motorists, never forget that. a vehicle consuming black gold (petrol) wins every time. it would be an entirely diferent case if bicycles consumed petrol...
Some "bicycles" do consume petrol and I can assure you receive the same hatred from (some) car drivers.
The irony impared - carrying a coffin as children die on our streets.
There's a certain irony in car drivers calling for ""streets for all"
More like keep the streets for MY use.
Ahh, they remember all those cars in 1815! Yep, Wellington commuted to the Battle of Waterloo in his Audi A4. Little known fact.
Pages