Forum Topic

How do we want our roads to look?

As this forum seems to be dominated by comments about our roads, I thought I would open up an interesting topic for conversation:What, ultimately, do we want our roads to look like? What is the end goal?Each of us may have a different ideal in mind. And this is what I’m interested in.Is it to have traffic perpetually moving, but always free-flowing? Is it a waste to have empty roads? Should we have more roads? Fewer roads? More pedestrianised roads? No pedestrianised roads?For once I’m not talking only about allocation of roadspace, so I’m deliberately avoiding the same old cycling/car/pedestrian debates. I’m simply interested to know how each person on this forum considers the the ideal use the public space we call roads. Not just now, but in the near and far futures.It’s not a trick question. Maybe it’s a bit of a philosophical one? There’s no rush to answer.

Dominik Klimowski ● 114d86 Comments

Your prediction seems right, Hounslow council introducing seven different parking bands based on emmissions at end of this month

Kim Yoo ● 109d

DK, you definitely support the council/TfL view, not exactly promoting the car.That’s fine if it suits your needs, but for the majority it doesn’t.I wouldn’t think anyone doesn’t know about cycling though.Drivers here express their opinion at unnecessary obstacles- ltns, which have proved to congest other roads.Still can’t find any complaints of empty roads however

Peter Yale ● 109d

Peter, I haven’t imposed a blanket rule nor would I want to. I am also not forcing anyone to walk or cycle or use public transport. Please point me to any posts I’ve made which is ‘anti-car’. You won’t be able to, because I haven’t written any.What I have done is promote cycling as an option for people who may not know much about it. I do this because I cycle to work every day. I have mentioned on previous posts how I initially made the decision for financial and health reasons. I have also probably made comments about public transport (such as the Elizabeth Line) as it gets you to the other side of London and everywhere in between very quickly and efficiently. I am in no way forcing anyone to board a train they don’t want to get on.Each to their own, but please don’t berate me for expressing my opinion and sharing my experience. That’s partly what a forum is for, is it not? For this reason I’ve asked people their ideas on the future of Ealing, London, and living in a city. I thought it would be interesting and might make a welcome break from people casting assumptions and calling each other silly names.

Dominik Klimowski ● 109d

People have answered many times how they want the roads to look. Free flowing, no ltns - which were rejected by Ealing, hinder traffic/roads, which is why I mentioned them.You didn’t say where you read or heard anyone complain about empty roads either.I purposefully asked you 3, due to your constant anti car posts.I can gauge your lifestyle & perhaps you can see others, that they want & NEED cars.This blanket rule of promoting or rather forcing people to walk, cycle, public transport. It might suit you but not others.This does not seem acceptable to some. & indeed hypocritical from others

Peter Yale ● 109d

The question posted is ‘how do you want your roads to look? and some people have got engaged with the idea and thought about it. I don’t expect everyone to be interested in the concept and people are free to ignore the post and comment on other things they’re more interested in.It was just a conversation starter really. Just something to ponder and discuss. I'm not 'pushing an agenda', nor have I mentioned LTNs once (what inspired you to bring them up, Peter?)You asked me questions such as whether I have pets and how much money I earn. I don’t see how this is relevant to the post, nor why only three people have been singled out to answer, so forgive me if I don’t get back to you on that one. All the best.D

Dominik Klimowski ● 110d

Yes, and it’s supposed to be for discussion. Yet certain people don’t answer direct questions and just post the same rubbish time after time, without any evidence to support what they say. Mostly your cycling chums, David.If Domink Klimowski is looking for validation for his extreme ideas he’s looking in the wrong place.

Simon Hayes ● 110d

This is a public forum open to all.

David Burke ● 110d

I think your question has been answered umpteen times, however it’s phrased.The same answer roads are for transportation of goods & getting people, goods from A to B,Ltns which Ealing rejected, hinder traffic & congestion other roads,Try telling that to your compadres, who want a blanket rule, anti car environment.You do seem to constantly side with that.As for personal question, it’s out in the open (asked 3 times now) & ignored by all.I say again, you are pushing, promoting an agenda which is not popular, doesn’t work either

Peter Yale ● 110d

So ‘roads largely empty’ means removing everything parked on it, is that what you mean Dominik? Do please clarify.And an earlier point I raised was how many cars is an acceptable number for you and your friends?Who gets to use them?This isn’t really the forum for you to post entire anti-car rhetoric. Which is what you write, despite your denials. Stick to X.

Simon Hayes ● 110d

Hi Peter, the question I posed here was out of curiosity to know how people view an ‘ideal’ road, or the future of roads, because it’s fair to say there is a lot of tension and disagreement about, and part of it is due to our roads not being used in the best way possible, imo.It’s not ‘ant-car rhetoric’ to ask the question. I have got a few considered answers, and I appreciate differing points of view. I suppose what I’m getting at is to make this post more of a forum in the truest sense of the word. A place to throw around ideas.I think the ‘empty roads’ phrase might be a bit confusing. From my point of view, it’s a suggestion to have roads largely empty, so that traffic can move perpetually (wishful thinking I know, but that’s the point). I don’t think it helps anyone to have roads that are full of vehicles because this slows movement down, makes travelling inefficient, and makes for a more unpleasant city to live in. Is this such a radical observation?I haven’t answered your personal questions for the same reason I haven’t asked anyone else the same.

Dominik Klimowski ● 110d

All you say you hear a lot of people complain about empty roads. Where, when?A free flowing road is great. That’s not empty.An empty road is nothing, a waste, or pavement, not a road.I asked you &  Ben & Paul/David your circumstances.I’m not asking personal details but your relentless anti car rhetoric , constant attempts at berating cars & their use.Might suit you, but not all

Peter Yale ● 110d

Dominik is being deliberately obtuse. Seems to be a common thread with him and Paul (eg ‘driving for fun’).To explain simply for you Dominik, as you clearly can’t grasp the concept. It’s not roads empty of everything, which in your strange world means having no vehicles parked along them. It means roads that are not artificially blocked by planters, bollards or unnecessary traffic lights. That’s what an empty road is.Under your plan, if parking is to be removed, so would bike hangars, lime bike bays, park lets and any other nonsense thrown in.Incidentally, in Wandsworth residents are now asking for parklets abd the like to be removed.As for cars getting bigger and heavier, there’s a red herring you and others are putting out there. The current size of EVs and hybrids are well within the size limits of standard on street parking bays. There are a number on my Rudd and none extend beyond the marked lines. There’s plenty of space for vehicles to manoeuvre without removing any parked vehicles, or bike hangars. That’s true on most roads locally.If a council bin lorry can pass unhindered down our roads as currently laid out you must agree that there’s plenty of scope for cars, which are considerably smaller.

Simon Hayes ● 110d

Once again you leap to conclusions, assume what others think and get it woefully wrong. That is not what I said at all as I have made perfectly clear. Whatever infrastructure is implemented needs proper planning  I object resolutely to the acquisition of road space by a whining minority. Planners need to back to the drawing board. I cannot wait to witness the increased pollution that will ensue from the stationery traffic by St.Marks school. To make sure to tell the other parents and there was you and people of your ilk who campaigned for this scheme while their children choke on the fumes.

N V Brooks ● 110d

Hi Peter, sorry, what is this in reference to? A few people have mentioned empty roads as it means vehicles can then travel freely. You yourself mentioned that ‘Never ever heard anybody complain about an empty road’. All this points to the fact that empty roads are a good idea. If they're not empty, nothing will move anywhere.I think maybe people see the term 'empty roads' as a waste of space, possibly.What questions are you referring to? I answered one of your questions in a thread some time ago all about my commute but you never followed it up, so I assumed you were satisfied with the answer.

Dominik Klimowski ● 110d

Paul has such simple solutions. It must take a very simple mind to think them up! Congratulations to Dominik for turning this thread into his cycling echo chamber, even wheeling in his chums to bump up the figures.Cycling for most is a leisure activity, according to Cycling UK (a far less obnoxious bunch than the LCC). https://www.cyclinguk.org/statisticsNumbers have declined since the pandemic because people don’t have the luxury of time to go for a spin if they have proper jobs, unlike the ‘photographer’ and ‘film maker’ on here.It’s also very seasonal. Not many out and about on bikes today in Ealing and Chiswick. Bit too cold and wet for most.Saying you want roads empty is just bullshit, Dominik. What you want and what most other people want are two different things. Now I suggest you stick to X and enjoy a conversation with chums who don’t disagree with you!

Simon Hayes ● 110d

>rather than the poorly designed disjointed and frankly unsafe offering thrown togetherThe boston road cycle lane. It's really good up to Elthorne park, just after that it gets a bit messed up, it can be fixed though I think, but get it in sooner rather than later it will help many.So your answer is to not do it at all then and just keep the status quo, well, not status quo, as we discussed, ever more motor vehicles and soon we won't just have traffic jams with just a driver in, we'll have jams of cars with NO drivers!I don't think so.

Paul James ● 110d

It does Paul but wouldn't it be better for ALL users if that change wasn't based on a poorly planned and poor executed infrastructure build that actually ket a need rather than the poorly designed disjointed and frankly unsafe offering thrown together to simply appease a vocal minority? Whatever the answer is, it kost certainly is not further restricting existing volumes. Economic suicide.

N V Brooks ● 110d

Dominik, who or where has anyone complained about empty roads.I noticed you 3 didn’t reply to my questions.Paul/Dave/sadiq, tear up your license

Peter Yale ● 110d

There is a very real possibility that was we want, what we are used to, and what we will have to accept, are not one and the same.

Dominik Klimowski ● 110d

Thanks for taking the time, Simon. All very interesting observations.However as I mentioned to Mr Brooks when he referred to the size of EV vehicles, cars have already been getting steadily bigger for the past 20 or so years. This brings about an issue not only with limiting roadspace for passing, but cars have increased in size to become safer for those within at the expense of those outside.But I digress. Your conclusion about car ownership becoming expensive and only HNW people being able to afford a car has already happened. It happened a long time ago. It is one of the reasons I and others I know have re-evaluated the economic sense of owning a car. The younger generation are already squeezed with unaffordable living costs, so a privately owned car is slipping further down the list of priorities.When we consider how roads will look and work for society as a whole, we will have to carefully consider and evaluate what we have been used to so far.But anyway, thanks again for your comments.

Dominik Klimowski ● 110d

>Simon Hayward>and our relationships with our cars Most households in ealing don't have a car Simon.I don't own one, and many people on my street don't, lucky for those that do or we'd have to stack them three high!

Paul James ● 110d

>Nigel Brooks>and it would probably take more than a generation or two to engender something like that.How to do that when the roads are chaotic with motor vehicles and nobody feels like cycling along them? (see below) > So in the meantime [] we must sweat the assets we have by making the roads as available as possible to all vehicles rather than limiting vast tracts to a very small minority of road users.Change has got to start somewhere Nigel.

Paul James ● 110d

We don't however have an historical culture of cycling in this country Paul and it would probably take more than a generation or two to engender something like that. So in the meantime, in the medium term and I'm talking the next 30 years, we must sweat the assets we have by making the roads as available as possible to all vehicles rather than limiting vast tracts to a very small minority of road users.

N V Brooks ● 110d

In many cities in the world many people cycle well into their 90s Nigel. I guess if you've had the fitness and the attitude to cycle in your 10s, 20s 30s etc... rather that drive everywhere it carries on for many.

Paul James ● 110d

Agree with some parts, but it’s not how I want the roads (as the question implies)

Peter Yale ● 110d

Many of the comments here have made me think further about this. I believe that we are looking at how the evolution of road use will impact our daily lives and our relationships with our cars and other road users.Let's assume that road demand increases; we will then have dynamic pricing for road users (for travel and parking) to manage demand at peak periods.As Mr Brooks has correctly pointed out, EVs and Hybrid cars are bigger and heavier, which will reduce the amount of space on the roads. This will reduce usable road space. Cars on narrow streets will only be allowed to park on one side of the road, creating demand for parking spaces for individual users (see point about parking pricing above). Also note that households will no longer be able to tarmac drives to prevent additional water flooding into storm drains.Driverless cars require more road space to avoid accidents and have greater gaps between vehicles. Again, roads will accommodate fewer vehicles.Driverless cars require roads without excessive road furniture and no potholes.The maximum speed at which a driverless car can be driven is out of the driver's control and will be defined by road regulations, traffic, and other road users. Our 999 service vehicles will get larger for the reasons above, potentially restricting parking and introducing more one-way streets.In short, car ownership could become extremely expensive, and the situation could return to one in which only HNW people can afford to run a car. More people will need to make hard choices between road use, food, family size, clothing, and holiday choices.

Simon Hayward ● 110d

As the population ages there will simply be a 'rebalancing' with fewer young drivers but many more older drivers who take up driving agian when they realise how poor and non-inclusive is the public transport offering.

N V Brooks ● 111d

ICE is Internal Combustion (petrol/Diesel) engine.Busier roads and total gridlock unless restricted routes are reopened. Simply banning vehicles does not work as, despite the claims of fantasists, traffic does not evaporate but is simply displaced.

N V Brooks ● 111d

True cars are huge now

Kim Yoo ● 111d

My fear is that much of what you say has already been happened, Nigel. Cars have been getting inexorably bigger over the past 20 years. ‘Gridlock’ is a word that has been around to describe our roads for over 40 years.My one beacon of hope is that there has been a steady decline in the younger generation taking up driving, or driving as often.

Dominik Klimowski ● 111d

What do you thin will happen in future also what is ICE?

Yasha Ortega ● 111d

Given that the number of vehicles will stabilise or even marginally increase over the next ten years according to the RAC Foundation (who actually look at this scenario objectively) then there will be even greater demand on roadspace. There are currently 5.9 million licence holders aged 70 or over in Britain so we know given the poor provision for the older traveller that the demand for mobility is there amongst those of a senior age.This will demand that the roads, now closed to accommodate minorities are reopened if we are not to face gridlock and economic decline. This does not even factor in the 7 million predicted increase in UK population. What is inevitable is that the mix of engines will change from ICE to EV and Hybrid. These vehicles and wider and heavier so there will be even more demand on roadspace.

N V Brooks ● 111d

Roads reopened to all vehicles. 20mph speed limits removed from roads that don’t need it. Removal of cycle lanes that aren’t necessary.Labour will be defeated at some point locally and nationally within the next decade and plenty of the bonkers ideas they’ve imposed will be changed.Don’t forget Dominik, that what us done can be undone.You seem somewhat obsessed with this topic. Maybe make a film about it.

Simon Hayes ● 111d

We'll get through it. Sending hugs.

Yasha Ortega ● 111d

Wise words indeed, the world is in a rather dangerous place at the moment.

N V Brooks ● 111d

Thanks for engaging so far. Some interesting points raised, but there are still more comments bemoaning what we have, rather than what we could have.Think ahead to 2035. How could the public highways look in 10 years time, in an ideal scenario? Don't hold back!

Dominik Klimowski ● 111d

Best not to think about it too much, but keep our communities alive so we can help each other whatever happens.

Yasha Ortega ● 111d

But wait........Northolt may soon be, albeit five years late, the second accessible underground station in the borough. Perhaps, one day the elderly and disabled may be treated as equal members of society.

N V Brooks ● 111d

So they’re not empty then. The residents park outside their houses, people drive down them to get places. So they can’t be empty unless you pedestrianise

Peter Yale ● 111d

We may disagree about roads Yasha but I pray that you are right about Trump. None of us has a nuclear trigger.

N V Brooks ● 111d

So what’s the optimum number of cars allowed on the roads? Who gets to drive them?As for looking after the most vulnerable, frankly laughable coming from cycling lobbyists. They got their cycle parking, or rather ‘storage’ to use the new vernacular, right next to the entrance of Ealing Broadway station while zero drop off for disabled passengers wanting to use the station. Meanwhile the bulk of TfL stations remain inaccessible to those with mobility issues or those with push chairs.Dominik, you aren’t convincing anyone but your mates who have recently joined here that what you say makes sense. If you just want the roses for cyclists and deliveries you won’t achieve that, so maybe save your phone batteries.

Simon Hayes ● 111d

I like that people disagree here and then discuss and find common ground. Gives me hope for society when Trump and Musk so childish.

Yasha Ortega ● 111d

Yes Peter, I think that’s what we’re getting at. Keeping roads empty so that vehicles can move freely. If roads are full then nothing moves.Absolutely, roads are essential for transporting goods. Mainly door-to-door.

Dominik Klimowski ● 111d

This sounds sensible, most vulnerable first

Yasha Ortega ● 111d

I share your frustration with the state of pavements Nigel, absolutely. In my post I meant ‘roads’ as all parts of the public highway, including pavements. I suppose I could have written ‘public highways’, but I don’t know if many people would be as familiar with that term and what it includes.What frustrates me the most is when they are repaired and refurbished (such as the corner of Northfield Avenue and Mattock Lane) and a week later the paving slabs are cracked again. I don’t want bollards protecting pavements, but how else to keep them from getting damaged again so quickly?There are also many streets in the neighbourhood which I’m sure you’ve seen have very limited space, even for an able-bodied person to pass (often due to mature trees). What would be a good solution here? Maybe building out around the trees, as I’ve seen suggested at some consultations, and seen in other boroughs. One of the wonderful side effects of cycleways such as C9 and CS3 is the number of mobility scooters I’ve seen on them. It’s certainly something I didn’t foresee. This and the cycleways appropriation by emergency vehicles (which I’ve shown evidence of in another post) is a welcome sight, and difficult to argue against.Financial investment helps, but also investment in ideas and solutions. It’s no good repairing pavements if they go back to how they were almost immediately.Maybe roads should be designed with the needs of the most vulnerable, the poorest, and the emergency services first?

Dominik Klimowski ● 111d

Oh, look who's surfaced.What's todays fantasy Ben?Unicorns, flying saucers, Ben telling the truth?

N V Brooks ● 111d

I didn't know that you are interested in any opinion that doesn’t chime with your own, Simon.

Ben Owen ● 111d

I'm not sure Dominik would agree with your definition of 'empty'. Not sure I do. How about 'effective' instead?

Eric Alan Leach ● 111d

By empty roads I mean a road where traffic can drive from 1 end to the other without unnecessary hold ups No problems with cars parked outside their houses.Do object to LTNs as did Ealing publicRoads are essential for transporting goods.

Peter Yale ● 111d

Just think how much mobility scooter, wheelchair users and the mobility impaired's lives would be improved with flat and maintained pavement Unfortunately in Ealing we waste millions on pandering to the whims of a few whining cyclists by building bike lanes that very few people use. Only goes to prove quite how bloody selfish cyclists are, doesn't it?

N V Brooks ● 111d

Eric, I think the idea of empty roads means everyone can move more freely along them. As you say, there will be more residents and more people travelling around, so it makes sense to think carefully about what we want the roads to look like.We should already have be adding mobility vehicles and wheelchair users to the mix. We don’t need to wait until each of us is 95. The idea of asking what we want our roads to look like is precisely to plan ahead, but also for us to use our imagination, which is the reason for my post.

Dominik Klimowski ● 111d

You are allowing your cognitive bias to show, Dominik.I’m not sure you are interested in any opinion that doesn’t chime with your own.

Simon Hayes ● 111d

This post is asking what people would ideally like to see. You yourself commented with ‘Never ever heard anybody complain about an empty road’. From that we can presume that empty roads are something we desire.They are ideal for all types. As Yasha says, ‘the ideal road is empty and quiet, because everyone has moved safely through’.It's interesting how every single car advert has no other vehicles on the road.

Dominik Klimowski ● 111d

Empty roads , cuckoo. Get real

Peter Yale ● 111d

Empty roads? This truly is madness.If the roads are to be empty we ought to get rid of them completely.Cars aren't going away. Pedestrians are not going to go away. Cyclists are not going to go away, Delivery vans are not going to go away. Refuse/recycling trucks, Ambulances, Police vans, fire engines and taxis aren't going away.I accept that getting the balance right can be tricky.Adding 80,000 more residents in Ealing by 2039 will make creating and maintaining this balance between different road users extremely difficult. However 41,000 new homes by 2039 is what Ealing Council's 2024-2039 draft Local Plan specifies.And by 2039 I'll be 95, so let's add mobility vehicles and wheelchairs to the road user mix....

Eric Alan Leach ● 111d

I obviously can't speak for Yasha, but I don't see how her view is incompatible with city dwelling. A big city has thousands, if not millions of people. I don't see how you can avoid walking or speaking to one another. Isn't that a benefit of living in the city? What do you see as the benefits of city dwelling Nigel, and how are they incompatible to Yasha's?

Dominik Klimowski ● 111d

‘An asset is not an asset unless it is being utilised’.  I don’t agree. Some assets are more valuable when they are not being used. Some are best when they’re not used. By definition, an asset is something that can be of value in the future.Obviously roads must be useful, but I would argue that there is a tipping point between their use being beneficial and detrimental (to society). It’s this tipping point, and how to stay on the right side of it, that I’m interested in.

Dominik Klimowski ● 112d

Yasha. You live in a 24/7 CITY.Ever thought that you may be in the wrong place, or do you enjoy/ benefit from city dwelling?

N V Brooks ● 112d

Thanks Yasha,I imagine this is probably the closest to what everyone would like. Maybe empty roads are the way forward.

Dominik Klimowski ● 112d

I gave thought about this, and the ideal road is empty and quiet, because everyone has moved safely through.But not really empty and quiet, because people are walking and talking to each other, and birds are singing.If you are asking what I want, it is this.

Yasha Ortega ● 112d

Ha , Simon . Wait until paul/dave sees this.As for roads, no potholes, no bloody stupid  restrictions

Peter Yale ● 112d

Pink roads = Shap granite.Incredibly tough, high friction road surface. I used to have clients who specified Shap for its durability.

N V Brooks ● 113d

But what does Dominik Klimowski think roads should look like?In the north east of England a lot of roads have pink tarmac. Maybe he’d like that. Rainbow crossings? Cows and horses roaming free?Do tell us Dominik.

Simon Hayes ● 113d

Thanks for taking the time think and respond, Simon.

Dominik Klimowski ● 113d

Here you go 1 All road users should pay to use the road and this should be in line with the amount of usage.2 Roads should not be a cash cow for governments and local authorities3. All roads must be well maintained and safe to use4. Road users who are unable to obey the rules of the road should have the priveledge to use them removed5 All road users should be fully insured to compensate other roasd users for any damage in the result of accident.6.Road users should recognise that all users have equal rights to the road and should recognise that they may not have priority.7 The road is an important link between people communities and employment and should not be dominated by individuals and companies.8. Changes to roads in all areas must be allowed to improve the quality of life for individuals, commerce and community.

Simon Hayward ● 113d

An asset isnot an asset unless it is being utilised.I think that is one of my key objections tom the pathetic attempts to provide cycling infrastructure in Ealing Millions of 'active travel pounds' have been spent to achieve very little beecause of an aject failure to follow the 5P principle.ProperPlanningPreventsPoorPerformanceThis was something drummed into us on the SixSigma courses I attended years ago.So much more could and should have been done to realise the benefits of the money spent, as example, better pavements.I drove this morning atnoon from home in Boston Manor via Greenford and then to West Ealing. During my journey I saw two cyclists, just two. It was cold and sunny. What an abject waste of resources.

N V Brooks ● 113d

People complain about empty roads a lot. That they're a waste of space unless filled.It's an interesting premise, which is what made me think of the question in this post in the first place. We all assume that something is worthless unless it is being used. But does that apply to everything?Like I said in the original post, maybe the question is a philosophical one?

Dominik Klimowski ● 113d

Great! :)

Dominik Klimowski ● 114d

This is a very interesting question, I am new to this discussion so I will read the answers and think about my response.

Yasha Ortega ● 114d

Slow day at the office, Dominik?Perhaps the main thing that could be done is stop pandering to minority pressure groups about transport planning and engage properly with the majority of people who live and work in this city.This thread js just a rabbit hole to occupy your day. The circumstances differ from road to road. Isn’t that obvious?

Simon Hayes ● 114d

Yes, I think maybe Eric lead us down a topic I didn’t intend to cover.If we stick to the roads in this post. How do you see roads ideally? Would they be busy but free-flowing, or would they be empty the majority of the time? Would pavements be wider in places with more pedestrians or should they remain the same width? Should we still have dual carriageways, or have more of them? Is noise a problem, or is it not something we need to think about now that we have advances in double-glazing. Should speed limits be determined from the point of view of pedestrians or drivers, or is there a ‘sweet spot’ in between? That kind of thing. I know this could spiral on and on. I’m just interested in what people see when I ask the question. I thought it might be interesting to have all these thoughts in one place and discuss them in case we find any similarities, rather than always picking out our differences.

Dominik Klimowski ● 114d

Vision has to be tempered by pragmatism Dominik. As an all too frequent user of NHS services due to orthopaedic issues I have a clear vision of what could change to better meet my needs. However I have to accept that there is a finite amount of money and the magic money tree simply does not exist, nor is it ever likely to do so.

N V Brooks ● 114d

I doubt your vision of ‘ideal roads’ is shared by any but a few extreme cycling lobbyists.Perhaps you ought to consider how our cities should look. Maybe less shoehorning increasing numbers of people into places where there isn’t the infrastructure to support them. That includes roads, which will have to be accessible to all. Of course, that’s a different discussion but no doubt you will eventually get round to it.Perhaps a start would be to have Dominik, Paul and Ben volunteer as lollipop people to help those vulnerable schoolchildren and old ladies across the road. King Street in Hammersmith might be a place to start, where crossing the road is a lottery when the cars stop but the cyclist don’t.

Simon Hayes ● 114d

I do inhabit the earth Nigel. My question was one of goals and how we see things working in an ‘ideal’ world. That’s why I asked what each of us want our roads to look like (using our imagination). Once you have a vision of how you’d ideally want things to be, then there is the discussion of how to get there (or how to try).If you don’t want to share your vision here, you don’t have to.

Dominik Klimowski ● 114d

Never ever heard anybody complain about an empty road

Peter Yale ● 114d

The reason I’m asking this question now is because there are a lot of comments online about empty roads and congested roads.This is what prompted me to think about how we see an ‘ideal’ road. I hadn’t thought of it in this specific way before but I’m thinking about it now.There are complaints when roads are empty, and complaints when roads are full. So, I’m curious to know whether one of these is what we should aim for, or whether we want to aim for something else?I don’t even know if there’s an answer to the question, Peter. It’s purely a conversation starter. I’m interested to know what others think once they’ve pondered it for a bit.

Dominik Klimowski ● 114d

Please Dominik, try to inhabit planet earth with the rest of us. In your fluffy la la land of unicorns and clouds where you can refer people to non-existent GPs to reduce the load on hospitals, where more administrators then clinical staff have been recruited every year for the last seven years and where no political party can address the bottomless money bit but our expectations set for NHS delivery. Until you face that reality I have grave reservations about your vision for roads and transportation.

N V Brooks ● 114d

Less anti car measures so travel is helped rather than hindered.Parking in hospitals is not another cash cow.The sick need to get there, not by public transport

Peter Yale ● 114d

That’s right Eric. If we apply it to hospitals, for example, how would we ideally like them to look? The answer is probably less waiting time, pleasant surroundings to encourage rest and recuperation, staff with time to spend on patients. Healthy food. Outdoor space. Fresh air. Libraries?How is this possible? Maybe with more referrals to GPs. More advice and help on how to avoid having to visit in the first place. Change the way admin is done. I’m not an expert, but those are my starting points. Of curse a utopian hospital is one that’s never used as everyone is healthy, but of course that’s impossible. I’m asking for something in between that and what it is now.So now the same with roads: how do you ideally want them to look?

Dominik Klimowski ● 114d

Perfect Rhodes being used to move traffic from one point to another exactly what they were designed to do. Your posts thus far today or proving how staunch an advocate you are for the use of roads for motor vehicles.

N V Brooks ● 114d

Good grief how many years ago did you and your son not cycle to the leisure centre. If that is the only example that you can cite ballers evidence then no one should be at all concerned with what you have to say.

N V Brooks ● 114d

So 🤷‍♀️ not sure your views count. Hypocrisy at its worse.

Peter Yale ● 114d

No cycle lanes here.

Paul James ● 114d

>Cyclists can use them also.Hmm. Whilst I will cycle along Uxbridge road, I'm not sure my young son would, in fact, I did an exploratory trip from Hanwell to Dormers Wells leisure centre and decided it just wasn't worth the risk with him tagging along, too much danger.So, I'm not sure this statement "Cyclists can use them also" is the whole picture.

Paul James ● 114d

Again Dominik you are asking the same question in a different guise.I could offer some ways to alleviate traffic congestion, so it frees a lot better.Pedestrian areas are fine, so long as there’s a route for vehicles, deliveries etc.It’s all this anti car rhetoric.We need & want cars, for loads of various reasons.

Peter Yale ● 114d

Philosophical? Roads in 2025 are primarily for motorised vehicles. Cyclists can use them also. Often there are edge bits we called 'pavements'. These are for pedestrians.What are going to ask us next? Maybe what is the end goal for hospitals, pubs, cemeteries, nuclear power plants and maybe crazy US Presidents.....

Eric Alan Leach ● 114d