TRANSPORT FOR LONDON CONSULTATION

A4 cycle lane.

We want a continuous high quality cycle lane along the A4. This consultation is now closed.

Transport for London have released a report on the consultation for the crossing across Windmill Road:

Plans where A4 cycleway crosses Clayponds Avenue
Please ask for a single toucan crossing across Clayponds Avenue on north side of A4.
Please ask for a bus stop bypass behind the bus stop outside Q West on south side of A4.
Please ask for a continuous marked cyclelane along the A4 and reject the shared pavement proposals.

Plans where A4 cycleway crosses Windmill Road
Its great that Transport for London have plans for a toucan crossing across Windmill Road on south side but we need a toucan crossing across Windmill Road on the north side of the A4 too.
Please support the new toucan crossing across the southern arm of Windmill Road.
Please ask for a toucan crossing across the northern arm of Windmill Road.
Please ask for a continuous marked cyclelane along the A4 and reject the shared pavement proposals.
Please ask for better visibility for pedestrians and cyclists crossing Windmill Road on the north side.

Click here to find out more about what Hounslow Council wants to happen along the Great West Corridor

4 Comments. Leave new

  • Niall MacAonghusa
    February 3, 2016 6:27 am

    It’s imperative that clearly defined, separate cycle lanes run along the entire stretch of the A4. Toucan crossings on both sides of the junction with Windmill road will reduce risk at the junction. Also; eradicate right turn into windmill road in both North and South directions

  • Niall MacAonghusa
    February 3, 2016 6:27 am

    It’s imperative that clearly defined, separate cycle lanes run along the entire stretch of the A4. Toucan crossings on both sides of the junction with Windmill road will reduce risk at the junction. Also; eradicate right turn into windmill road in both North and South directions

  • Mike Houghton
    March 16, 2016 12:49 pm

    I agree that the cycle lanes should be clearly defined, even separated by height ( raised cycle track ) at some vehicle intersections ( office and hotel entrances ) to encourage vehicles to slow ( over the bump ), whilst accessing and leaving the A4.
    Toucan crossings may be helpful, but it has not been demonstrated to me how these would work.
    I DO NOT, HOWEVER BELIEVE THAT THE SOUTH SIDE OF WINDMILL ROAD SHOULD NOT HAVE ACCESS TO TURNING RIGHT INTO THE A4, OR LIKEWISE, TURNING RIGHT INTO SOUTHSIDE WINDMILL ROAD FROM THE A4. Both of these actions I use personally, as a resident of Windmill Road. There are already many restrictions for us ( residents )and I cannot envisage an easy alternative, that is not very time consuming and causes far more traffic congestion. If you are proposing to restict residents access to Windmill Road, then perhaps we should restrict access to all traffic using our road, and simply pedestrianise it?
    I believe the major flaw in the design of cycle tracks, of late, is the introduction of signage to encourage two way traffic on the cycle lanes, when most road users don’t seem to expect cyclists both ways. When I used to cycle along A4( many years ago )I would always cycle on the left of the A4. Of recent years (3-4) I have taken advantage of the 2 way signage on the cycle tracks. This was my downfall, as when cycling past Q-West (against automotive direction) I was struck by a Freelander driver (locked away in his insulated world) whilst he exited the car park,looking only to the right, for a clear space in road traffic. I ‘landed’ in the 3 lane road, lucky to get away with a broken arm, bike, and a hell of a recovery programme. I hate to think what it could have been.
    My point is you can’t educate everybody (drivers and pedestrians) that 2 way tracks exist each side of a dual carriageway. If you go ahead, you have to make the signage, very, very, abundantly clear.

  • Mike Houghton
    March 16, 2016 12:49 pm

    I agree that the cycle lanes should be clearly defined, even separated by height ( raised cycle track ) at some vehicle intersections ( office and hotel entrances ) to encourage vehicles to slow ( over the bump ), whilst accessing and leaving the A4.
    Toucan crossings may be helpful, but it has not been demonstrated to me how these would work.
    I DO NOT, HOWEVER BELIEVE THAT THE SOUTH SIDE OF WINDMILL ROAD SHOULD NOT HAVE ACCESS TO TURNING RIGHT INTO THE A4, OR LIKEWISE, TURNING RIGHT INTO SOUTHSIDE WINDMILL ROAD FROM THE A4. Both of these actions I use personally, as a resident of Windmill Road. There are already many restrictions for us ( residents )and I cannot envisage an easy alternative, that is not very time consuming and causes far more traffic congestion. If you are proposing to restict residents access to Windmill Road, then perhaps we should restrict access to all traffic using our road, and simply pedestrianise it?
    I believe the major flaw in the design of cycle tracks, of late, is the introduction of signage to encourage two way traffic on the cycle lanes, when most road users don’t seem to expect cyclists both ways. When I used to cycle along A4( many years ago )I would always cycle on the left of the A4. Of recent years (3-4) I have taken advantage of the 2 way signage on the cycle tracks. This was my downfall, as when cycling past Q-West (against automotive direction) I was struck by a Freelander driver (locked away in his insulated world) whilst he exited the car park,looking only to the right, for a clear space in road traffic. I ‘landed’ in the 3 lane road, lucky to get away with a broken arm, bike, and a hell of a recovery programme. I hate to think what it could have been.
    My point is you can’t educate everybody (drivers and pedestrians) that 2 way tracks exist each side of a dual carriageway. If you go ahead, you have to make the signage, very, very, abundantly clear.

Menu