A4 Great West Road junctions with Lampton Road, Heston Road and Jersey Road Consultation report March 2016

A4 Great West Road junctions with

Lampton Road, Heston Road and

Jersey Road

Consultation report

3

Contents

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 4

2. The consultation ......................................................................................................... 4

3. Overview of responses from members of the public .................................................... 6

4. Responses from stakeholders ..................................................................................... 7

5. Summary and conclusions .......................................................................................... 8

Appendix A – List of stakeholders consulted ......................................................................... 9

Appendix B - Consultation material ..................................................................................... 11

Appendix C – Response to issues commonly raised ........................................................... 17

4

1. Introduction

Between 25 November 2015 and 22 January 2016, we consulted on proposals to improve pedestrian, cycle and bus facilities on the A4 Great West Road at the junctions of Lampton Road, Heston Road and Jersey Road. The proposals consider a signal controlled ‘staggered’ toucan crossing west of Jersey Road, a new bus stop and shelter west of Lampton Road and carriageway widening to remove pinch points on the southbound carriageway at Heston Road, improving priority for buses and reducing passenger journey times.

2. The consultation We asked three questions relating to different geographical areas of the proposals:

A4 Great West Road / Jersey Road

A4 Great West Road / Lampton School

Heston Road / Lampton Road The consultation material was available at https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/a4-great-west-road, where it can still be viewed. The consultation was designed to enable TfL to understand opinion about the proposed changes. The potential outcomes of the consultation are:

We decide the consultation raises no issues that should prevent us from proceeding with the scheme as originally planned.

We modify the scheme in response to issues raised in consultation.

We abandon the scheme as a result of issues raised in the consultation.

The objectives of the consultation were:

To give stakeholders and the public easily-understandable information about the proposal and allow them to respond.

To understand the level of support or opposition for the change.

To understand any issues that might affect the proposal of which we were not previously aware.

To understand concerns and objections.

To allow respondents to make suggestions. 2.1 Who we consulted

We wanted to understand the views of those living and working near to where our proposals would be implemented. We wrote to approximately 7,030 residents and businesses in the area. The extent is shown in Appendix B. We also issued an email to stakeholders to inform them of our consultation. Those contacted included the London Borough of Hounslow, local politicians and

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/a4-great-west-roadhttps://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/a4-great-west-road

5

emergency services. A list of external stakeholders contacted is shown in Appendix A.

2.2 Consultation material, distribution and publicity

The consultation was published online on our consultation website between 25 November 2015 and 22 January 2016.

Copies of the letter, map and email are shown in Appendix B.

2.3 How did you hear about this consultation?

Number of

respondents

Saw it on the TfL website 15

Social media 14

Not Answered 11

Received a letter from TfL 9

Other (please specify) 9

Received an email from TfL

8

Read about in the press 2

2.4 About the respondents

The majority of respondents identified themselves as local residents or employed locally.

Number of

respondents

Local Resident 38

Commuter to the area 15

Visitor to the area 10

Employed locally 8

Business owner 5

Other (please specify) 5

Not Answered 2

Stakeholder 0

6

3. Overview of responses from members of the public

We received 68 responses. We asked three questions relating to the three different sections of the proposals.The following tables detail the responses to each question.

StronglyAgree

Agree Neutral DisagreeStronly

disagreeNot

answered

Number of responses 17 11 7 12 13 8

0

5

10

15

20

Q.1 what do you think of our proposal for the junction of A4 Great West Road at Jersey Road

StronglyAgree

Agree Neutral DisagreeStronglydisagree

Notanswered

Number of responses 15 15 12 12 11 3

0

5

10

15

20

Q.2 What do you think of our proposal for the A4 Great West Road at Lampton School

7

4. Responses from stakeholders

London Cycling Campaign There appear to be several nearside lane widths on the approaches and exits at the junction that are within the Cycling Level of Service (CLoS) “Critical fail” 3.2-4.0m range. These lanes will therefore represent a very hostile and potentially dangerous environment for cyclists to navigate.

Stronglyagree

Agree Neutral DisagreeStronglydisagree

NotAnswered

Number of responses 15 15 12 12 11 3

0

5

10

15

20

Q.3 What do you think of our proposal for Heston Road and Lampton Road

Main issues raised by respondents Number of comments

Generally support the proposal Heston Road and Lampton Road 31

Generally oppose the proposal Heston Road and Lampton Road 24

Separated paths between users are preferred. 24

Consider a bus stop bypass at Lampton Road. 14

A toucan crossing where Jersey Road meets the southern side of the A4 8

Lack of signage on the Great West Road 8

Widen the road 4

Oppose bus stops and bus priority measure with the extension of the bus lane on Heston Road (southbound) 3

8

Hounslow Cycling

We strongly object to these proposals as they make conditions worse for cyclists in the area. Widening Heston Road and Lampton Road will increase traffic capacity and speeds at the junction - both are detrimental to the enjoyment and safety of cycling. The proposed lane widths appear to be within the critical 3.2-4m range which is most uncomfortable for cyclists as drivers often attempt to overtake at an unsafe distance. Traffic turning speeds into Jersey Parade may be increased, with increased safety risk to cyclists.

Brian MacIntyre, Co-ordinator, Old Park Mews & Nuffield Court Neighbourhood Watch

Made seven comments relating to the consultation, saying the biggest problem at this junction is drivers making illegal turns, particularly turning left into Lampton Road while travelling westbound on the A4. He asked us to consider the pinch-points around this junction, and whether any consideration has been given to widening the southbound 2 lanes on Lampton Road, immediately south of the A4.

5. Summary and conclusions

We received 68 responses to the consultation. A slight majority of respondents said they agreed with each of the three proposals. Having considered the responses to consultation, we have decided to go ahead with the proposals. However, we are considering some changes following consultation, including:Consider increasing the length of the traffic island south of Heston Road, junction with A4 Great West Road, in order to improve accessibility of the junction for all users as part of detailed design

Consider a bus stop bypass at the proposed new bus stop west of Lampton Road as part of detailed design

Investigate providing further signage as part of detailed design

Monitor the scheme after implementation and if necessary consider yellow boxes at the junction of A4 Great West Road with Heston Road and Lampton Road

We will monitor the junction and if necessary liaise with the Metropolitan Police regarding enforcement of the illegal right turn into Lampton Road if required

We will now progress with the detailed design of these schemes, including consideration of the above points. We intend to introduce the changes in early 2017, subject to land acquisition and further discussions with key stakeholders such as the London Borough of Hounslow. We will write to local residents and affected properties later in the year to advice of any planned works.

9

Appendix A – List of stakeholders consulted Caroline Pidgeon AM Chair of the GLA Transport Committee

Valerie Shawcross AM Deputy Chair of the GLA Transport Committee

Richard Tracey AM Member of the GLA Transport Committee

Navin Shah AM Member of the GLA Transport Committee

Dr Onkar Sahota AM Member of the GLA Transport Committee

Tom Copley AM Member of the GLA Transport Committee

Victoria Borwick AM Member of the GLA Transport Committee

Steve O'Connell AM Member of the GLA Transport Committee

Darren Johnson AM Member of the GLA Transport Committee

Jennette Arnold AM Member of the GLA Transport Committee

Tony Arbour AM London Assembly Member

Ruth Cadbury MP Brentford and Isleworth

Councillor Sheila O'Reilly Osterley and Spring Grove Ward

Councillor Tony Louki Osterley and Spring Grove Ward

Councillor Peter De Vic Carey Osterley and Spring Grove Ward

Seema Malhotra MP Feltham and Heston MP

Councillor Amritpal Mann Heston East Ward

Councillor Gurmail Lal Heston East Ward

Councillor Kamaljit Kaur Heston East Ward

Local Authorities

London Borough of Hounslow

Police & Health Authorities

Metropolitan Police

Hounslow Safer Transport Team

London Ambulance Service

London Fire Brigade Service

Transport Groups

AA

Association of British Drivers

Association of Car Fleet Operators

British Motorcyclists Federation

Freight Transport Association

Green Flag Group

Motorcycle Action Group

Motorcycle Industry Association

Road Haulage Association

London Cab Ranks Committee (Secretary)

London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority

Other Stakeholders

Action on Hearing Loss (formerly RNID)

Age Concern London

Age UK

Asian Peoples Disabilities Alliance

BT

Campaign for Better Transport

Confederation of British Industry (CBI)

mailto:Caroline.Pidgeon@london.gov.uk

10

CTC, The national cycling charity

Disability Alliance

Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee

EDF Energy

Greater London Forum for the Elderly

Guide Dogs for the Blind Association

Joint Committee on Mobility of Blind and Partially Sighted People (JCMBPS)

Joint Mobility Unit

Living Streets

London Cycling Campaign

London Older People's Strategy Group

MIND

National Children's Bureau

National Grid

RADAR London Access Forum

RNIB

Royal Mail

London TravelWatch

Sense

Sixty Plus

Stroke Association

Thames Water

The British Dyslexia Association

11

Appendix B - Consultation material

12

13

Plan 1

14

Plan 2

15

Letter distribution area

16

Dear Stakeholder

A4 Great West Road/ Jersey Road, Heston Road, Lampton Road Junction Improvements

I’m writing to let you know about our proposal to introduce pedestrian and cycle

facilities at these two busy junctions to achieve clarity and consistency. As well as Bus

Priority measures to reduce journey time and improve traffic flow along Heston Road.

What are we proposing?

Create a staggered toucan crossing; a type of crossing that can be used by both

pedestrians and cyclists on the west and south arms of the Jersey Road junction and

consolidating two pedestrian and cycle crossings into one toucan crossing at the

Lampton Road junction.

For further information and to have your say, please visit our website

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/a4-great-west-road by Friday 22 January 2016

Kind Regards

Mario Constantinou

Consultation Officer.

Transport for London

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/a4-great-west-road

17

Appendix C – Response to issues commonly raised

Why extend the bus lane closer to the junction. It will not improve journey times. In addition to extending the bus lane, we propose widening the southbound carriageway to remove existing pinch points and allow consistent two lane traffic flow through the junction, improving capacity southbound. Extending the bus lane will give buses additional priority and journey time saving through the junction. Should bus stop be a floating bus stop with a bus stop bypass? A bus stop by-pass could prove a more efficient way to manage the interaction between cyclists and pedestrians crossing to or from the main pedestrian footway and the bus stop. This will be considered at detailed design. Shared space is a very poor proposal, segregated or stepped cycle tracks would be much better There are segregated tracks along most of the A4 Great West Road; however, pedestrians and cyclists are required to share around the junctions and crossing points. The shared use facility that we propose is only in the areas where it is not possible to provide a continuous segregated track. Why remove the pedestrian island south of Sutton Lane on Heston Road? We are sorry this was an error in the letter we sent out. Retaining the informal traffic island east of Sutton Road junction with Heston Road will be considered as part of detailed design. I would like a toucan crossing where Jersey Road meets the southern side of the A4 Great West Road. A controlled crossing over Jersey Road south would require additional time within the existing signal arrangement, which would cause unacceptable traffic build up on the network. The south side of the junction is not difficult to cross because there is time within the existing signal arrangement when pedestrians and cyclists can cross free from conflict with vehicles. When balanced against the existing safety record, cycle and pedestrian numbers, and the impact a crossing would have on capacity, we decided to retain the existing facility. Improve the signage along the A4 Great West Road. The signs approaching the junction will be assessed and rationalised accordingly. Can the bus stop be located in a lay by so as to not obstruct traffic? There are only four buses an hour in each direction. Based on bus numbers, bus dwell

times and the location of the proposed stop after the junction it is unlikely to negatively

impact traffic. Along the A4 Great West Road we have a number of bus stops in the

carriageway, which have not been causing capacity issues.

The existing provision for cyclists is poorly maintained We have shared these concerns with the London Borough of Hounslow, who are responsible for cleaning here. We are currently proposing to resurface the worst sections of cycle tracks along the A4 Great West Road. The remaining tracks will be assessed and maintained in priority order.

18

Something has to be done to stop eastbound traffic illegally turning right from A4 Great West Road eastbound on to Lampton Road (at lights before the legal right turn) onto Jersey Road We will monitor for illegal turning movements into Lampton Road. Following the outcome, we will address this matter though the Metropolitan Police for enforcement. Footways must remain for pedestrians, why are you removing? We are not removing any pedestrian footway. We are removing small sections of cycle track and converting to share use to the southeast of the junctions where pedestrians are forced to cross existing cycle tracks. Traffic signals at this location have been troublesome in the past. The whole junction would benefit from signals upgrade The traffic signal equipment was upgraded in November 2010. More recently, in 2013, the junction was upgraded to SCOOT - a leading adaptive traffic control system that manages signal timings on the network in accordance with real-time traffic situations. Will a yellow box junction be installed with enforcement camera? The junction will be assessed. If required, yellow boxes will be considered during detailed design. Is the road being widened at Heston Road and Lampton Road? Our current proposal includes aligning both sides of the road at Heston Road and Lampton Road. This would include widening the carriageway to allow sufficient widths for a consistent two lane approach through the junction. Mixing different travel types in "shared space" is not safe Shared use crossings and paths are most appropriate where flows are relatively low and cycle and pedestrian movements need to cross each other, such as each side of road crossings. Evidence shows that the number of unexpected interactions and potential conflicts is lower in shared environments than on paths separated between users. Cyclists are likely to travel more slowly on shared paths compared to dedicated cycle facilities. A qualified team of road safety auditors have assessed the scheme and no issues were raised concerning the shared use proposals.