DOCSLIB.ORG

A4 Great West Road

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A4 Great West Road A4 Great West Road Proposed toucan crossing with the junction of Ridgeway Road December 2015 A4 Great West Road Proposed toucan crossing with the junction of Ridgeway Road Contents 1 Background ................................................................................................................ 3 2 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 3 3 The consultation ......................................................................................................... 4 4 Overview of consultation responses ............................................................................ 6 5 Responses from members of the public ...................................................................... 8 6 Responses from statutory bodies and other stakeholders ......................................... 12 7 Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 14 Appendix A – Copy of letter to occupiers of 719 and 721 Great West Road ........................ 15 Appendix B – Copy of letter and drawing to other residents ................................................ 18 Appendix C – Copy of the bus stop notice ........................................................................... 21 Appendix D – List of stakeholders consulted ....................................................................... 22 Appendix E – Response to issues raised ............................................................................ 23 1 Background This scheme was identified in response to requests from Isleworth and Syon School and Hounslow residents for a safe place to cross the A4 near the junction of Ridgeway Road. The nearest available at grade crossings are 350 and 400 meters away at the adjacent junctions. At the moment, pedestrians crossing the A4 are doing so via the narrow central reservation, particularly in the vicinity of the bus stops serving the H91. The scheme will aim to improve safety and confidence for both pedestrians and cyclists, and formalise the crossing points for cyclists and pedestrians in the area. 2 Introduction We proposed to provide a new ‘staggered’ toucan crossing on the A4 Great West Road, west of its junction with Ridgeway Road. It has been observed that a high number of pedestrians (including pupils from Isleworth and Syon Boys School) cross the A4 at this point. The particularly busy nature of the A4 and the speed of vehicles using it makes pedestrian safety the main reason for providing a formal place for pedestrians and cyclists to cross. This has been highlighted by the School and its Parent Teacher Association, who have asked TfL to provide such a crossing (similar to that created near Lampton School). Preliminary designs were developed which included siting the proposed crossing to either the east or the west of Ridgeway Road. Following careful consideration, the option to site the toucan crossing to the east of Ridgeway Road was rejected because it was not on the required desire line (that is, existing path taken by pedestrians) to the nearest bus stop. 2.1 Purpose of the Scheme The overall aim of the scheme is to provide a formal crossing point from a nearby school to bus stops, recreational and other amenities. We proposed to install a signal controlled staggered toucan (cycle and pedestrian) crossing 20 metres to the west of Ridgeway Road. 2.2 Descriptions of the proposals To do this we would need to: Widen the carriageway on the north side to maintain the 3-lane configuration (in order to create a safe waiting area in the middle of the carriageway) Widen the central reservation by 2 metres to create a safe waiting area Move the eastbound bus stop (located on the northern side of the A4) by 5.5 metres 3 Create a shared surface for pedestrians and cyclists around nearby bus stops and the crossing point. Tactile paving and signage would be used to indicate that the area is shared by pedestrians and cyclists Move and replant existing trees and/or plant new ones (resulting in no overall loss to the number of trees in place) Remove one parking bay located outside 719 and 721 Great West Road. 2.3 Location maps A map showing the location of the scheme can be found in Appendix A. 3 The consultation Consultation between 4 June and 3 July 2015 was designed to enable TfL to: Raise awareness of the scheme amongst local residents, stakeholders and the public Explain the proposals Provide an opportunity for people to tell us what they think about the proposals Potential outcomes of all TfL’s consultations are that we: Decide the consultation raises no material issues that prevent us from proceeding with the scheme as originally planned Modify the scheme in response to issues raised by consultation Abandon the scheme as a result of issues by the consultation The objectives of the consultation were to: Give stakeholders and the public clear and accessible information about the proposals to enable them to respond Understand the level of support for, or opposition to, the proposal Understand any issues that might affect the proposed crossing which we were not previously aware of Understand concerns and objections Allow respondents to make suggestions 3.1 Who we consulted Public consultation sought the views of people living close to the location of the proposed toucan crossing, users of the bus routes affected by bus stop 4 changes, and users of other local facilities (such as local churches, sports facilities and the local Magistrates Court). To achieve this, letters setting out the proposal were hand delivered to 563 households, businesses and other organisations in the area on 5 June 2015. We also consulted stakeholders including Hounslow Council, London TravelWatch, the Metropolitan Police, the London Fire Brigade, Members of Parliament, London Assembly Members, local councillors, local schools, churches, and other businesses. A list of the stakeholders we consulted is shown in Appendix D. A summary of their responses is given in Section 6. 3.2 Consultation material, distribution and publicity Letters and accompanying drawings explaining the proposed scheme were distributed to 563 local households and businesses. Copies of the letters and drawings are shown in Appendices A and B. A notice was also posted on the eastbound bus stop on the north carriageway to alert customers to the proposed relocation of this stop by 5.5 metres to the west. See Appendix C for a copy of this notice. We invited people to respond by: emailing us at [email protected]; using the TfL website (consultations.tfl.gov.uk); or writing to us at FREEPOST TFL CONSULTATIONS. 3.3 Meetings and site visits (if appropriate) No public meetings or exhibitions were held. 5 4 Overview of consultation responses We received 91 responses all of which were submitted online. The tables below show who responded (by type), the level of support for the proposal and main issues raised. Table 1: Consultation responses by respondent Question 2 Local Resident 73 Business Owner 1 Employed locally 9 Commuter 5 Visitor 4 Other 12 Not answered 1 Sub total 105 The majority of respondents (90%) support the proposed crossing; only 5% are opposed: Table 2: Answers received to Question 1 – Do you support the proposed scheme? Question 6 Strongly support 72 79.12% Support 10 10.99% Neither 2 2.198% Do not support 2 2.198% Strongly do not support 3 3.297% Not answered 2 2.198% Sub total 91 100.0% 6 Table 3: Common themes arising from consultation Theme (frequency high to low) Total Per cent Will create a safe crossing point 31 22.79 Good idea 28 20.58 Will improve road safety 14 10.29 Concern about impact in traffic 7 5.14 Alternative crossing too far away 5 3.67 Alternative style crossing suggested 5 3.67 Concern about shared space 5 3.67 Will help slow traffic 3 2.20 Place crossing on the east side of Ridgeway Road 3 2.20 7 5 Responses from members of the public We asked six questions relating to the proposal and received 91 responses in total. The results are summarised below. 1.1. Question 1: “What is your name?” Question 1 Name provided 90 99% Not answered 1 1% Sub total 91 100% 1.2. Question 2: Are you? (please select all boxes that apply):” People had the choice to let us know if they were visiting the area, if they had a business, were commuting through the area or were a resident. The vast majority (80%) of respondents were local residents: Question 2 Local Resident 73 Business Owner 1 Employed locally 9 Commuter 5 Visitor 4 Other 12 Not answered 1 Sub total 105 1.3. Question 3: “What is your email address?” In response to this question the majority (85%) provided an email address which will enable us to update respondents on the outcome: Question 3 Email 77 84.96% Not answered 14 16% Sub total 91 100.0% 1.4. Question 4: “If responding on behalf of an organisation, business or campaign group, please provide us with the name:” Seven respondents provided the name of the organisation they were responding on behalf of. Their responses are included in section six. 8 1.5. Question 5: “What is your postcode?” Of those that answered this question, the majority (76%) were from the location of the proposed crossing (TW7): Question 5 KT12 1 1.19 N16 1 1.19 N7 1 1.19 RG4 1 1.19 SE16 1 1.19 SW1 1 1.19 SW12 1 1.19 TW1 1 1.19 TW2 1 1.19 TW3 3 3.57 TW4 1 1.19 TW5 1 1.19 TW7 64 76.19 TW8 1 1.19 UB2 1 1.19 V6 1 1.19 W4 3 3.57 Sub total 84 100% 1.6. Question 6: “To what extent do you support the proposed new toucan crossing west of Ridgeway Road on the A4 Great West Road?” The majority of respondents (90%) supported the proposed crossing; only 5% were opposed: Question 6 Strongly support 72 79.12% Support 10 10.99% Neither 2 2.198% Do not support 2 2.198% Strongly do not support 3 3.297% Not answered 2 2.198% Sub total 91 100.0% 9 1.7. Question 7: “Question 7: Do you have any further comments?” This question allowed respondents to provide additional comments (inc.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In This Issue
    eNewsletter – 23rd February 2020 Welcome to the third OWGRA eNewsletter of 2020. In terms of impact on our area, far and away the most important item is the proposed development on the Tesco and Homebase Osterley sites by St. Edward, part of the Berkeley Group. So please can we ask all residents (and friends and neighbours) to read the article on the next stage of this (the first article in the Planning section on page 2) and go to the exhibition of the revised plans and make your views known.…... In this issue In Planning (page 2-7), we have news on the 2nd Public Exhibition of the Tesco/Homebase Osterley redevelopment (please read this article), an update on the Bolder Academy con- struction, Brentford FC news, Osterley Station (flats and lifts), Syon Lane lifts, plans for an- other hotel and Conservation Area updates Under London Borough of Hounslow (LBH) News (pages 8 -11) there’s news of the coun- cil’s unsuccessful bid to be London Borough of Culture 2021, problems at council leisure centres, updates on parking restrictions and consultations underway. In Local News (pages 12 - 14) there’s news of Brentford Sports Fest, events at Osterley Park, The Watermans Centre in Brentford (including Bollywood dance classes…), Brentford Musical Museum and Gunnersbury Park, an art exhibition, two local history stories and events at Grasshoppers and Thistleworth clubs Under Crime and Local Policing (pages 15 - 18) there’s news of burglaries, doorstep cons, bicycle and car theft, good news (at last !) on catalytic convertor thefts, more police coming, latest crime stats and how to meet your local police.
    [Show full text]
  • Consultation Boards
    WELCOME TO OUR CONSULTATION Hello and welcome to our public exhibition. We have organised the event today to start a discussion with local residents and community groups about the future of these two important strategic sites. We want to hear your thoughts about how the TESCO OSTERLEY redevelopment of these sites can make a positive contribution to the local area. The aim of today’s exhibition is to present our aspirations for each site at this early stage and to listen to what you have to say. Your views will help inform our scheme going forward. Please take your time to read through all of the information on display and feel free to put any questions you might have to a member of the project team. HOMEBASE BRENTFORD ABOUT ST EDWARD St Edward is a joint venture between Berkeley Group and the Prudential Assurance Company. We build homes and neighbourhoods with a focus on creating beautiful, successful places across London and the South of England. Our team has a wealth of experience in delivering complex developments that provide much needed homes, community facilities and improvements to local infrastructure. SOME KEY FACTS ABOUT US • Berkeley has built a total • We take the issue of climate of 19,660 homes over change seriously, and in 2018 the last five years and we committed to become supported 29,250 jobs the UK’s first Carbon Positive annually. housebuilder. • On all our sites we now • Since 2011, over £18m has deliver a Net Bio-diversity been committed by the Gain, and we work closely Berkeley Foundation to with the London Wildlife over 100 charities, and our Trust to ensure this.
    [Show full text]
  • Buses from Brentford Station (Griffin Park)
    Buses from Buses Brentford from Brentford Station Station (Griffin (Grif fiPark)n Park) 195 Charville Lane Estate D A O Business R W NE Park I R Bury Avenue N OU D TB M AS School IL E L AY GREAT WEST Charville W R QUARTE R Library O T D O D R M - K 4 RD YOR TON ROA RD M O R LAY RF Lansbury Drive BU for Grange Park and The Pine Medical Centre O D A OA E R A D D EW L R N I N Uxbridge County Court Brentford FC G B EY WEST R TL T R Griffin Park NE B Brentford TON RD D O OS IL O R OAD T AM O R A R GREA O H K N D MA D Church Road 4 M A R A A RO O RAE for Botanic Gardens, Grassy Meadow and Barra Hall Park NO EN A B R LIFD D R C SOU OA TH D Library Hayes Botwell Green Sports & Leisure Centre School © Crown copyright and database rights 2018 Ordnance Survey 100035971/015 Station Road Clayton Road for Hayes Town Medical Centre Destination finder Hayes & Harlington Destination Bus routes Bus stops Destination Bus routes Bus stops B K North Hyde Road Boston Manor 195 E8 ,sj ,sk ,sy Kew Bridge R 65 N65 ,ba ,bc Boston Manor Road 195 E8 ,sj ,sk ,sy Kew Road for Kew Gardens 65 N65 ,ba ,bc for Boston Manor Park Kingston R 65 N65 ,ba ,bc Boston Road for Elthorne Park 195 E8 ,sj ,sk ,sy Kingston Brook Street 65 N65 ,ba ,bc Bulls Bridge Brentford Commerce Road E2 ,sc ,sd Kingston Cromwell Road Bus Station 65 N65 ,ba ,bc Tesco Brentford County Court 195 ,sm ,sn ,sz Kingston Eden Street 65 N65 ,ba ,bc ,bc ,by 235 L Brentford Half Acre 195 E8 ,sm ,sn ,sz Western Road Lansbury Drive for Grange Park and 195 ,sj ,sk ,sy E2 ,sc ,sd The Pine
    [Show full text]
  • Former Syon Gate Service Station, Land South of Gillette Corner, Great
    PLANNING COMMITTEE 2 May 2019 Melek Ergen [email protected] References: P/2018/4691 00505/AF/P28 Address: Former Syon Gate Service Station, Land at South of Gillette Corner, Great West Road, Isleworth TW7 5NP Proposal: Erection of up to six storey building to provide Class B1 (office) and Class B8 (self-storage) uses, with associated car parking and landscaping This application is being taken to Planning Committee as a Major Scheme with a Legal Agreement 1.0 SUMMARY 1.1 The applicant seeks planning approval for a part three-, part four-, part five- storey building with lower ground floor to provide self-storage (Use Class B8) and offices (Use Class B1). 1.2 The application site was formerly the Syon Gate Service Station and the principle of office development as well as storage use on this site was previously accepted/established (see ‘History’ and the site has been allocated for mixed use development in the Local Plan. Therefore the Council would like to see the delivery of this site in line with its allocation. 1.3 The proposed building would not compete with nearby heritage buildings and would still carry Art Deco features interpreted in a modern way. The building, particularly for a storage building would have some visual and historic merit and would create sense of place as well as some interest to the site. 1.4 The building would be a suitable addition to this vacant, prominent corner site. It would be set back from the pavement to allow landscaping along the boundaries, which would be an improvement to the townscape.
    [Show full text]
  • GOLDEN MILE Vision and Concept Masterplan Report Presented by Urban Initiatives Studio Ltd
    LONDON BOROUGH OF HOUNSLOW GOLDEN MILE VISion And ConCEPT MASTERPLAN REPORT PRESENTED BY URBAN INITIATIVES STUDIO LTD IN ASSOCIATION WITH (SUB CONSULTANT) STATUS FINAL ISSUE NO. 01 DATE ISSUED 16 APRIL 2014 FILE NAME 4050_20140416_GoldenMileReport_DS_Final.indd AUTHOR David Syme REVIEWED BY Hugo Nowell PROJECT DIRECTOR APPROVED BY DESIGN DIRECTOR This document has been prepared for the exclusive use of the commissioning party and unless otherwise agreed in writing by Urban Initiatives Studio Limited, no other party may copy, reproduce, distribute, make use of, or rely on its contents. No liability is accepted by Urban Initiatives Studio Limited for any use of this document, other than for the purposes for which it was originally prepared and provided. Opinions and information provided in this document are on the basis of Urban Initiatives Studio Limited using due skill, 36-40 York Way care and diligence in the preparation of the same and no explicit warranty is provided as to their accuracy. It should London N1 9AB be noted and is expressly stated that no independent verification of any of the documents or information supplied to Urban Initiatives Studio Limited has been made. +44 (0)20 7843 3165 Urban Initiatives Studio Limited. Registered in England No. 8236922 www.uistuido.co.uk CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................5 HOW TO USE THE DOCUMENT .................................................................. 5 01 OVERVIEW ..................................................................................................27
    [Show full text]
  • Access Self Storage Gillette South
    Access Self Storage Gillette South Construction Logistics Plan April 2020 Contents 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 Overview ............................................................................................................. 1 Site Context ........................................................................................................ 2 Development Proposals ...................................................................................... 3 Objectives ........................................................................................................... 3 CLP Structure ...................................................................................................... 4 2 CONTEXT, CONSIDERATIONS AND CHALLENGES ............................................... 5 Policy Context ..................................................................................................... 5 Location Context ................................................................................................. 6 Considerations and Challenges ........................................................................... 9 3 CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMME AND METHODOLOGY ....................................... 10 Overview ........................................................................................................... 10 Site Arrangement .............................................................................................. 10 4 VEHICLE ROUTING
    [Show full text]
  • PDU Case Report XXXX/YY Date
    planning report D&P/4192/01 26 June 2017 Bolder Academy, MacFarlane Lane, Isleworth in the London Borough of Hounslow planning application no.01106/W/P9 Strategic planning application stage 1 referral Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008. The proposal The proposal comprises demolition of existing clubhouse and construction of a secondary school. The applicant The applicant is Education Funding Agency, the agent is Cushman & Wakefield and the architect is Callison RTKL. Strategic issues summary Principle of land use: provision of school on MOL and playing fields: Pressing educational need and lack of available alternative sites are accepted as ‘very special circumstances’ which outweigh the potential harm to the MOL by reason of inappropriateness. The applicant must address the potential impact on playing fields (paragraphs 13 to 28). Community use: A community use plan agreement, which secures the use of the school’s facilities outside core hours, should be submitted and secured (paragraphs 29). Urban and inclusive design: The Council should secure key details of the cladding system to ensure the best possible build quality is delivered. The approach to inclusive design is supported and the measures proposed should be appropriately secured (paragraphs 30 to 33). Sustainable development: The carbon dioxide savings meet the target set within the London Plan. Clarification is required regarding solar gains, overheating and cooling demand, communal heating system. BRUKL worksheet and roof layout plan should be provided (paragraph 36). Transport: Revised modelling is required to assess the impact on local junctions.
    [Show full text]
  • Brentford Area Action Plan Development Plan Document
    BRENTFORD AREA ACTION PLAN DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT Submission Version June 2007 LONDON BOROUGH OF HOUNSLOW CONTENTS PAGE Acronyms .......................................................................................................................3 Introduction ....................................................................................................................4 Structure And Development Of The Document.............................................................6 Spatial Portrait and Key Issues .....................................................................................8 Policy Context ..............................................................................................................13 A Vision for Brentford...................................................................................................24 Plan Objectives ............................................................................................................24 BAAP Policies ..............................................................................................................28 POLICY BAAP1 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ..................................................... 28 POLICY BAAP2 URBAN DESIGN ............................................................................... 34 POLICY BAAP3 REGENERATION OF BRENTFORD TOWN CENTRE.................... 38 POLICY BAAP4 THE GREAT WEST ROAD ............................................................... 43 POLICY BAAP5 REGENERATION AND PROTECTION OF BRENTFORD’S RIVER AND CANAL
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Consultative Committee
    Planning Consultative Committee \z\Great West Corridor Local Plan Review BCC820 Preferred Option Consultation Document Consultation Response Adopted by the Brentford Community Council. November 2017. We would like to thank you for inviting us to respond to your proposal set out in the “Preferred Option, Consultation October 2017 document. (POC) 1. PREVIOUS CONSULTATIONS. The BCC responded to the consultations on the 2015 Local Plan (LP) and gave evidence at the public inquiry. The Plan was adopted in 2015. The Cabinet instructed two Local Plan Reviews and the Council produced a Consultation Issues paper in December 2015 for the Great West Corridor Plan (CIP). Planning Officers made a presentation on their Issues paper and questionnaire to the BCC in February 2016. This was supported by the paper: The Golden Mile: The Strategic Case for Transport Investment January 2015 (SCI) by Steer, Davis Greave. And a further supporting paper called: The Golden Mile Site Capacity Study plus an Executive Summary 2014 ((SCS) by Urban Initiatives. The BCC responded to the Issues paper and questionnaire and the presentation in January/February 2016. BCC 757 and 758 (attached). This paper is our response to The Great West Corridor Local Plan Review Preferred Options Consultation 2017. (POC) which has been written in the light of former correspondence and in response to the changes made in the Review documents since February 2016. (See POC page 6) 2. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN SHAPING THE GWC LOCAL PLAN. POC Page 6 states “community involvement has been integral…….” In fact after the initial issues consultation the BCC wrote two responses (BCC757 and BCC 758, attached) and we were never advised whether they had been received or what effect their detailed comments had had on the development of the plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Brentford Area Action Plan
    LDD3 BRENTFORD AREA ACTION PLAN Adopted 27 January 2009 Contents Plans ..............................................................................................................................2 Acronyms .......................................................................................................................3 Introduction ....................................................................................................................4 Relationship to other Local Development Documents..................................................5 Structure and development of the document ................................................................6 Spatial Portrait and Key Issues .....................................................................................8 Policy context...............................................................................................................13 A Vision for Brentford...................................................................................................24 Plan Objectives ............................................................................................................28 BAAP Policies ..............................................................................................................32 Policy BAAP1 Sustainable Development ..................................................................... 34 Policy BAAP2 Urban Design ........................................................................................ 41 Policy BAAP3 Regeneration of Brentford
    [Show full text]
  • Comment Keep Osterley Green Metropolitan Open Land Planning
    Appendix 1 Consultation responses: Comment Keep Osterley Green Metropolitan Open Land Planning restrictions on MOL have not been properly considered. The constant erosion of open space is unsustainable, irreversible and contrary to the NPPF, London Plan and Hounslow Local Plan. The application site has not been designated for development in the Hounslow Local Plan. The site is not currently used for education and as such the expansion or provision of new education facilities into open space would be contrary to Policy GB3. The justification for development in MOL, based on ‘very special circumstances’ rests entirely on the claim that there are no alternative sites within Hounslow. The proposal would result in a precedent of permitting inappropriate development in MOL. Sequential site assessment This analysis is deeply flawed and alternative sites are available which do not impact on MOL. The application site was not shortlisted as an educational site following the Borough’s site sequential assessment carried out by Cundall in 2014 and was highlighted as a non-preferred site in the Local Plan Sustainability Appraisal. The Nishkam School Trust had already chosen the site before the sequential assessment was undertaken. The initial parameters (e.g. site size, building height, requirement for a nursery) were inflexible and ruled out a wide range of other possibilities. The assessment does not follow an objective, non-arbitrary approach against defined criteria and scoring measures. A number of sites were included, such as Osterley Park, Syon Park, West Middlesex University Hospital, Mogden Sewage Treatment Works, the Treaty Centre, etc. that were entirely inappropriate and should not have even been considered.
    [Show full text]
  • Mayor's Report March 2017
    10th Mayor’s Report to the Assembly MQT – 22 March 2017 This is my tenth Mayor’s Report to the Assembly, fulfilling my duty under Section 45 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999. It covers the period from 7 February – 8 March 2017. Executive Summary Cressida Dick announced as the new Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service On 22 February, following a rigorous and competitive recruitment process, I was delighted to be able to join the Home Secretary in announcing Cressida Dick as the next Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service, the first female Commissioner in the history of the Service. Healthy Streets for London In 16 February, I published ‘Healthy Streets for London’ my long-term vision to encourage more Londoners to walk and cycle by making London’s streets healthier, safer and more welcoming. London Brexit blueprint On 9 February, I set out plans for a London Brexit blueprint at the first meeting of my Brexit Expert Advisory Panel. The Panel, which includes business leaders from the financial services, technology, science and the media, will provide their unrivalled knowledge and experience to the formation of London’s Brexit paper which will be published towards the end of this month. £4.2m boost for vulnerable rough sleepers Vulnerable rough sleepers, many of whom have mental health, drug and alcohol issues, are among those who will benefit from a £4.2 million funding boost. Rough sleepers are at serious risk every night they spend on the streets and this funding will help reduce the dangers they face and improve their quality of life.
    [Show full text]