LCC says mini-Hollands will be a success if they deliver "safe and inviting streets where anyone can cycle"

The London Cycling Campaign has welcomed the announcement that three boroughs – Enfield, Kingston and Waltham Forest – will each receive £30 million to build substantial cycling facilities in their town centres as part of the mini-Holland bidding process. 

Four other boroughs – Bexley, Ealing, Merton and Richmond - will share £10 million to put in place smaller projects in their town centres, while Newham is being invited to bid for another pot of TfL money in order to redesign Stratford town centre.

We believe the success of these projects will be measured against their delivery of cycle routes that are safe and inviting for people of all ages and abilities to cycle in comfort and safety.

And we're calling for these mini-Hollands to mark the beginning of significant investment in cycling in every borough in Greater London in order for the capital to gain from the tremendous benefits that mass cycling can bring in reducing congestion on our streets and on public transport, as well as the major health, economic and environmental gains.

LCC Chief Executive Ashok Sinha said, "The creation of Dutch-style town centres was one of the commitments made by Mayor Boris Johnson in the run-up to the 2012 mayoral election as a result of our 'Love London, Go Dutch' campaign, and it's great to see this promise a step closer to becoming a reality.

"We thank everyone who helped put pressure on the Mayor in 2012, and our local borough volunteers for pushing their local councils to bid for measures that, if implemented properly, could make major improvements to local cycling journeys.

"To be a success, these mini-Holland projects must deliver safe and inviting streets where anyone can cycle, which means building high-quality protected lanes on main roads and providing safe passage through major junctions. On smaller streets, councils must look at removing through motor traffic and reducing motor traffic speeds to 20mph or lower."

Adrian Lauchlan of Enfield Cycling Campaign said, "We're thrilled Enfield has won this funding, especially as, during the bid process, Enfield Council made an effort to listen to local cyclists, improving the quality of its proposals along the way." 

Jonathan Fray of Kingston Cycling Campaign said, "We're delighted with this win, and are very pleased the council's mini-Holland bid prioritises safe journeys through the borough, including providing protected space on key main roads and safe cycling through a number of major junctions in Kingston."

Simon Munk of the Waltham Forest Cycling Campaign said, "We're excited because the bid proposals are a step-change in how Waltham Forest Council treats cycling, being genuinely about attracting large numbers of people who don't currently cycle on to the boroughs roads. Most exciting of all, Waltham Forest could soon have the largest rat-run-free 'home zone' in the capital [see the graphic at the top of the page], which could be a model for every other borough to follow."

The three winning projects are:

Enfield A section of Enfield town centre will become motor-traffic free, with protected cycle lanes on key main roads to Edmonton and Palmers Green. The A1010 Hertford Road will also have cycle lanes installed, and it's essential these are high-quality protected lanes. Download bid details

Kingston New cycle routes to connect Kingston town centre to Richmond, Wimbledon and Surbiton, with protected lanes on key main roads, a Dutch-style roundabout treatment in New Malden, and a Thameside boardwalk and cycle-friendly river crossing. Download bid details 

Waltham Forest A proposed new protected cycle route along Lea Bridge Road, with a radical rework of the Whipps Cross roundabout. This proposal also includes areas of Walthamstow turned into Dutch-style cycle-friendly "home zones" by removing rat-running and through motor traffic to quieter people-friendly streets. Key north-south and east-west cycle routes will be completed to a high standard. Download bid details

The mini-Holland bids in Ealing, Merton and Richmond will have to be scaled down because of the reduced funding.


  • By showes at 10:19pm 10 March 2014

Looking at all the pdfs what is going to be deliverd even if they deliver 100% is awful, not dutch quality and to my mind is just more faffing at the edges rather than getting on fixing the problem at hand. The protected lanes in the Enfield pdf are terrifying door zone nightmares with nothing but crappy plastic lumps to protect cyclists. All in all very poor.

This is a bid document, further detailed design will be carried out i'm sure. Its great that funding has been secured in the first place. I agree withe the door zones in the Enfield image, but we should let this project mature properly before ripping it to shreds. It can only benefit in the long run.

Mmm, so they're hypeing minor improvements to a few town centres. What if you want to cycle home, away, from there? Please do some research how it should be done and show us how far London is behind Amsterdam, thanks.

  • By SimonS at 12:02pm 12 March 2014
Kingston plans better than the rest, but much of this is spin over substance and half measures. 'Innovative solutions' is the Newspeak for 'finding ways to ignore Dutch standards'. We must stay firm and say 'Go Dutch or go back to the drawing board'. I had been swayed by the idea of using semi segregation more, but much of it is awful in practice (armadillos in Manchester are awful and included in some of these plans). Let's just stick to Dutch CROW standards and get it right first time. We must have some exemplar areas with proper Dutch facilities to show that they work. Accepting poor compromises in the mini-Hollands is not something we should support.

Waltham Forest's plan looks promising, except for the Whipp's Cross Roundabout. The trouble is we don't know if these are the finished article, whether more design and tinkering can improve things, or whether things will be watered down - so much will be down to proper inplementation. I agree about continuing to campaign for the best - anything else will need replacing and thus be a waste of money.


I wish these bids and these boroughs well. I really do. But I do think we're missing the point a little here. Namely - we're never going to get good cycle infrastructure in this country (and in this city) until everyone or at least the majority of everyone (most of whom don't cycle, many of whom never will) recognise that there is something in it for them too. 

With the political will and with the imagination this city could be truly great and I mean that beyond the cyclists view of the city. The bits that would be the greatest would be the core historic centres. They would have a new lease of life and not be traffic choked arteries of which we are all so familiar: elegant streets with four lanes of parked cars (Queensgate); historic squares which are merely glorified traffic roundabouts (almost any London square you care to mention); the hell of Oxford Street (please someone pedestrianise it now and put us out of this misery!). Quite simply our streets could and should become streets for people, not streets for traffic. Yet few people, least of all the people (or businesses) which actually 'live' on these streets wants anything of the kind. And so we are condemned to endure what we have endured for decades.

I'd love to be optimistic. I like to think that many of the solutions would be quite straightforward: parking spaces lost here and there; a real look at what is a necessary burden (buses, delivery vans) and what we could live without; a charge on parents who drop-off and collect their children from school by car on a regular basis (for the same money they could lease a cargo bike instead); licensed loading bays; and an exploration of ways to open up public spaces - why are the Kings Road and Fulham Road, which often lie not a quarter of a mile apart from each other, both major two-way thorough fares?  

But it can't be sold as though this is a change that needs to happen to benefit cyclists. We're hated in this city, often by other cyclists, certainly by all too many other roads users, often by city planners for whom we just create problems. And on that score many cyclists (and would be cyclists) hate the thought of cycling here, and understandably so too. It's too hostile: from the toxic air quality; to the aggressive driving; to the lack of awareness; to the lack of space to do a peaceful, sustainable activity safely, to the sheer everyday criminality of so many road users. It's horrible and it must change. The positives have to be shouted more and more loudly. Everyone with a social conscience, with a political consience, with an interest and belief in the common good and a committment to stand against the values of the vested interests, needs to urge the great mass of apathy into action.

If there is to be the change that this city needs - it has to be for everyone and sold on that basis too. Only that way will it get the political support to make the necessary changes.    

It's crazy to ignore the positive steps here. For example, Waltham Forest Council is proposing a motor traffic removal scheme to cover a square mile of its borough's residential streets. This was unthinkable a couple of years ago.

We understand that the protected lanes proposed are largely of very good quality. The image in the Enfield bid showing lanes on the carriageway is NOT how they'll be built because local cyclists told the council this wasn't good enough.

As we say in our article above, there's a long way to go yet, and our local groups will be lobbying intensely to make sure the quality is high, but there's certainly cause for cautious optimism.

  • By paul at 4:35pm 13 March 2014

Kingston's plans are much better than ours here in Richmond so quite pleased that they got the money. They do seem to look at putting in facilities where they are useful to creating a network rather than where they are out of the way.

I hope designs are properly inclusive and future proofed.  Tricycles, central London rickshaws, cargo bikes, hand powered wheelchairs, very young children cycling safely to schools, mums with three kids and shopping, carpenters with their tools..



Sorry, forgive me for not getting excited, but when authorities will not maintain the existing roads...

"Though the most recent (2011) Department for Transport figures for road casualties don't include a category for cyclists only.. ..however the figures for all modes of transport showed that "poor or defective road surface" was a contributory factor in 11 deaths, 217 serious injuries and 913 slight injuries." can one place any faith in their 'jam tomorrow' promises?

Post a reply

Sign in to post a reply.