Some land uses, notably highways, are notorious for their hierarchically dominant behaviour. As public resentment has grown, a few concessions have been made. Like the 'reforms' granted by Nicholas III in pre-revolutionary Russia , they have been grudging and inadequate: too little and too late. Some roads have been delayed and others diverted. But when the roads come to be built, it is still done in accordance with a standard set of so-called 'design criteria' which cover a host of details: horizontal and vertical curves, kerbs and drainage, location of junctions, storm detention basins, sight lines at junctions, fencing and bank profiles. Although the UK Highways Agency permits a few minor 'relaxations' and 'departures', the consequence of the 'design criteria' is that roads do not respond to local conditions or the wishes of local people. Nor can they be integrated with urban design or the local environment. At one time, a Cornish road was very different from a Northumbrian road. Now they are the same. It is like the Stalinist practice of constructing identical blocks of flats in the Crimea , Siberia and Germany [Fig 1.17].
The aspirations and skills of local people and community groups deserve a central place in the planning process. Ornithological clubs can plan for birds, conservation societies for conservation, angling clubs for fishing, bus companies for busses, schools for children's travel, ethnic minorities for their own communities, chambers of commerce for business, cycling clubs for cycling. Each group can contribute a layer to the planning process and each must be respectful to other layers in the cake. The group must obtain geographical information and then produce plans.
