We welcome as members individuals and organisations who care for Hammersmith
As a Member, you will receive regular updates outlining our activities, giving you the opportunity to participate in consultations and campaigns. We'll invite you to our Awards Evening and AGM, and other events. Members are always encouraged to take an active part in the work done by the committee – come along and see if you can help.
The membership year runs from 1st Jan, and only costs £6 for individuals, £8 for couples or families, and £15 for organisations. Additional voluntary donations always welcome.
Under the banner ‘Taking a View’, from time to time, we’re pleased to publish articles by members on a subject of their choice, which they believe will be interesting to the wider membership.
Earlier in the year, we wrote about the parlous state of some shopfronts in the borough, giving some examples of better practice. The story was part-inspired by affiliate BRA’s activities and those of our members, in appealing to the council for enforcement of existing planning regulations. We note that this issue is not specific to LBHF – there’s been a rising tide of graffiti across London, even recently reported in Barnes.
In this follow-up, two members detail particular issues and the enforcement actions they’ve been working on with the council and with our encouragement and support.
If you have an article you would like to be considered, please send it to .
Articles are unedited personal viewpoints, and may not always represent the views of the Society
There should of course be an obvious answer to the question of what constitutes a park Summer’s faded into a distant memory, so it’s a good time to take stock, with a season of site visits, reviews of virtual CGI, and actual wooden models of new developments in full swing, showing the newly alluring sunlit ‘park’ images, here in our mid-winter. So far, these suggest that many a developer has rather different idea to us, but perhaps it’s just a naming thing.
Without even considering Wormwood Scrubs, we have several wonderful parks in H&F, the largest of which – Ravenscourt and Bishop’s Parks – provide for almost every conceivable outdoor leisure need, even including exhibitions and Laser shows. From basketball nets in the north to a paddling pool in south, taking in sufficient space to play several team games – of football or cricket – in the middle, tennis courts, toddlers playgrounds, dog exercise areas north and south, popular all-weather football pitches adjacent, and greenhouses and community gardening alongside. Even a renovated and listed Tea House. And that’s just Ravenscourt Park.
Bishop’s Park has a Grade I listed palace adjacent, the river and riverwalk too. This gives us a pretty comprehensive idea of the purposes of a park. We even have possibly the world’s smallest park, Beckett Wharf Park, between the bridge and Riverside Studios. One of our members, has recently worked with Kier Construction to renovate it as part of a community contribution.
The Open Spaces Society, to which we’re affiliated, noted recently that parks are under unprecedented pressure from commercial activities, and we a little of that here with fairs, concerts and so on, but those are modest by comparison with say, Hyde Park, where a good part is cordoned off for most of the summer for the huge ‘BST’ outdoor concerts. Even so, some damage occurs as the photo adjacent shows.
Perhaps we’ll get a better feel for the modern take on a ‘park’ or open space by looking at recent developments? Kings Cross seems a reasonable place to start, with the possibility to do what it likes with public spaces and presumably with few budgetary constraints. The ‘park’ shown adjacent is about the size of a communal garden of the type you might find in Notting Hill, the difference being that this is expected to be shared by a thousand or more people, the original by perhaps a hundred or two. There is perhaps no coincidence that the name of this example is connected to one of the great 18th century builders, Cubitt, rather than a name we might choose, say, Capability Brown.
A review of some proposed new developments we’ve looked at might help. We don’t have to go far for CGI proposals, and to compare then with some recently built. Mayoral Opportunity Areas, notably Old Oak and it’s environs provide good hunting grounds, in addition to those actually in the borough. The evidence suggests that developers, rather than producing fanciful CGI’s, might perhaps go and visit some of the many Victorian and Edwardian parks around us to see what they do, and what their public values might reasonably look like.
Which one of these new developments has the space to play a team game of some sort or an individual game of tennis? Or any of the other activities listed above? Perhaps one.
Increasing physical activity must be a central part of everything we do
Continued →
Members have been writing to us about council plans for wheelie bins in some areas, though parts of the borough already have them from a pilot scheme. Our interest is to ensure that they don’t damage the streetscape and the wider environment through excessive or unnecessary deployment of plastic, especially of the large and/or dayglo variety.
The council circulated leaflets to 16,000 households in the borough announcing more wheelie bins and food waste containers. To date, there has been no suggestion of a public consultation process with residents before deployment, which hardly matches the philosophy of ‘Doing things with residents, not to them‘ listed against every council policy. There is a possible opportunity to reject them, but only after the fact, through an unpublished ‘reassessment’ process. Out would go your dustbins (if you have them) and in would come tall and bulky plastic bins – one for waste and one for recycling. You would also be given a smaller food waste container.
To take the food waste first – for the majority who do not have a compost bin, this container may be helpful. It would remove food from black bags and so reduce ripping and spillage. It can be locked to prevent animal access and the waste will be processed to make fertiliser. So far, so good.
The large bins are another matter. Not only are they much taller than a regular dustbin at about 1.1m, and therefore much more obtrusive above a wall or fence, they are also bulky and take room in a front garden. For residents who pride themselves on an attractive and green garden this will come as a blow. Where are the bins to go? Who is to pay for the necessary re-paving?
As the bins have to be wheeled out to be emptied their access has to be clear – no shielding them behind shrubbery. If you normally do not have a bin you would be required to have two. Bins would be the first thing that greets you and your visitors, and the ‘kerb appeal’ of your home and the whole street could be significantly harmed as the photos below show, reducing amenity, social and financial values, to the detriment of all – aside from an unspecified figure on the council’s bottom line.
The standard 240L dayglo green recycling bin is the largest size commonly available, and three – yes three – times the size of the a conventional 80L bin, which is about half the height, and one-sixth of the weight – empty. It can hold five bin bags, or the weight of a large grown man, as many a comedy sketch – or recent world speed record – confirms. The black ‘waste’ bin at 140L is nearly twice the size of a conventional bin. This represents an aggregate of just about five times the bin storage space you probably have now, and in a world increasingly short of space, and trying to reduce waste of all sorts, appears to send a very odd message.
Continued →
(AGM Photos: Franco Chen. Click for full-size versions)
We were delighted to announce our 2023 Awards at the AGM at 245 Hammersmith Road on Thursday 29th June, with the Awards introduced by vice-chairman Richard Winterton and kindly presented by our guest speaker Andy Slaughter MP. Members and supporters were provided excellent hospitality for which we would like to thank the 245 staff, and of course our very own Robert Iggulden and his many assistants.
Award details and the associated narrative are posted on our 2023 Awards page together with a link to the updated spreadsheet of all Awards since 1990, and matching interactive Awards map. More AGM photos and the administrative documents are posted on the dedicated 2023 AGM page.
After a rapid run though the mandatory AGM procedures, approving the 2022 minutes, 2023 accounts, and committee re-elections, our guest speaker needed no introduction. As our local MP, with Twitter handle @Hammersmithandy, he has over 40 years experience as local councillor, deputy then leader in 1996, and an MP since 2005. He talked about the various battles over the West Ken. estates that were originally given over to CAPCO for redevelopment as part of Earls Court, then reclaimed, the continuing issues with Charing Cross Hospital, the Bridge, flooding, and then onto large developments and the general pace of redevelopment, with a particular discussion on Shepherds Bush Market. He also mentioned that with the recently confirmed electoral boundary changes, his constituency is, not for the first time, being radically reshaped to lose the northern half to Ealing, while he could gain Chiswick in the new ‘Hammersmith & Chiswick’ constituency should he be elected next time. He subsequently answered a number of questions from the audience including a topical one about Thames Water.
This year the main Environment Award was given to The Hoxton on Shepherds Bush Green. An addition to its own merits discussed in detail in the narrative, the building achieves the unusual feat of making a slightly awkward red brick building adjacent – Lawn House – fit better into the streetscape, so that the whole of ‘The Lawn‘ can be seen as a piece, perhaps the most characterful stretch of buildings in the borough, having won 2 further awards from us: the Dorsett (2015), and the Palladium (2022).
We again presented the Jane Mercer Award for “proactive co-operation, collaboration and communication” to a community gardening project – this time Askew in Bloom . The group shares some of the same enthusiastic members as last year’s winner, the Green Project, but this project has been running independently since 2019. It brings daily joy to what used to be a fairly ordinary W12 thoroughfare, and they are now spreading the word to other parts of the borough, starting with Dalling Road. More power to their collective elbows – and fewer asphalt tree pits!
Continued →
The council’s short-notice decision to make C9 permanent was reported in HammersmithToday in March. That would be less significant if the January to June Key Decisions List had mentioned it, or if the cycle and walking commission had been in the loop.
This key decision was made on 6th March – on the cusp of a legal minimum five working days notice, but despite being ‘key’ was not sufficiently important to be discussed at the 17 minute Cabinet meeting that day.
We are in the business of being a ‘critical friend’, as a former chair once put it, and here we need to be critical. An apparent reluctance to encourage public – or even cabinet – scrutiny in such a significant decision making process is concerning. Let’s be clear: we expect a well-designed, safe and efficient public transport system for everyone, and the C9 bidirectional design unnecessarily precludes that simple and democratic vision, marginalising those unable to cycle – and that’s quite a few. We might also reflect on the fact that bicycles are ‘vehicles’ in law, and while cycling is classed as ‘active’, it remains a form of private transport being favoured over actual public transport, while at the same time being encouraged to use a less safe infrastructure.
Without independent design and vetting, the council created and reported on it’s own survey in October/November 2022, on which the decision appears to rest. The detailed report has been redacted which raises its own questions, but the summary is problematic too. Firstly it’s a small self-selecting sample of around 700 people, of whom only around half live in the borough. Secondly, 45% of the able-bodied, and 22% of the disabled respondents said their preferred mode of transport was cycling. But only 3-4% of the public actually cycle according to TfL’s cycling counts, casting respondents as ‘keyboard warriors’, unrepresentative, or both.
The survey data, redacted as it is, shows a design successful enough to split the public 92% against (drivers), 89% for (cyclists), with 68% of disabled respondents not regarding C9 as beneficial. Overall, only 52% of the respondents thought C9 to have a positive impact, and last time that percentage voted for something of significance, there was some notable buyer’s remorse.
It’s been widely reported by others that this two-way design is, rather then the moniker ‘safer’, actually the more dangerous cycle path, as the accident rate (above) confirms. We’ve disregarded the council’s collision data supporting its decision, as it erroneously compares three years of pre-C9 accidents with less than one year with, while failing to normalise the data as an accident rate, per the chart above. Nevertheless, it still shows a higher percentage of cycle-related accidents since C9.
The risks were evident before implementation as a result of advice from transport experts, including those that have studied Dutch and Danish implementations (the latter removing bidirectional paths in urban areas over a quarter of a century ago on safety grounds), through the council’s own unflattering public engagement exercise (painfully extracted by FOI), it’s own Walking/Cycling Commission – which was not consulted in detail – it’s own Disabled Residents Commission, and, last but not least, us! 80% of accidents continue to happen at junctions, and much vaunted segregation does little other than provide a false sense of security for unwary users, to which we might partly attribute the increased accident rate.
The Disabled Residents Commission didn’t support the existing ‘temporary’ scheme, or the bus bypass concept, their abandoned bus shelters, or staggered pedestrian controlled crossings, and were as surprised as we were to see the 22% claim above. For reference, TfL’s latest data says 83% of disabled and 82% of able-bodied Londoners have never used a bike.
We put these and further specific points to Cllr. Holder, responsible for this policy, who passed them on to officers for detailed response, yet to be received. At the moment, we have no idea what a proposed ‘permanent’ C9 looks like, such is the lack of communication and consultation on this important transport artery.
Continued →
Under the banner ‘Taking a View’, from time to time, we’re pleased to publish articles by members on a subject of their choice, which they believe will be interesting to the wider membership.
In this article, our member Dr. Alex Reid revisits the work done on the original Flyunder proposal, and in recognition of the times we live in, looks at how the essence of it could be reworked into a vision for the 2020’s, recognising a much-prolonged lifespan for the flyover, and the longterm declining pollution levels on the A4.
As cheerleaders for the original Flyunder proposal, we support the essence of these proposals, especially in respect of possible improvements to the environment, and the prospect of measurably safer cycling facilities along the A4, as long as A4 capacity can be substantially maintained, which earlier research suggests is possible. The creation of the Society was of course as a result the A4 ‘cutting a great divide through the townscape’ in the early 1960’s.
If you have an article you would like to be considered, please send it to .
Articles are unedited personal viewpoints, and may not always represent the views of the Society
Earls Court is one of those projects that keeps on giving. We wrote about the shenanigans surrounding former owners CAPCO at the hand of a well-known former prime minister, while reviewing 25 years of property development in one of our 2021 lockdown projects.
Earls Court and Earls Court 2 were totally demolished over the period 2015-18, leaving the huge empty, but complicated, 40 acre site pictured, straddling our borough and adjacent RBKC. At a stated demolition cost of £97M, needing the world’s largest crane to lift 61 of the up to 1500 tonne beams, this and other factors inevitably broke the former owners, never mind the carbon budget, with over 15,000 tonnes of concrete beams removed.
On the LBHF side, there was a long-running battle over ownership of the social housing – Gibbs Green and West Ken. estates – which were once sold to CAPCO and eventually returned in a deal with Delancey and the council in 2019. The net effect is that by not involving the adjacent estates, this master-plan covers the smaller area of 40 acres compared to the original CAPCO proposal that foundered, covering around 80 acres. According to some resident representatives we met, the condition of parts of these estates remains poor.
Enter the Earls Court Development company (“ECDC”) with Delancey and others joining forces with TfL again. The recent site walk showed us just how much railway there is around and under Earls Court, and why little can be done without TfL involvement. Blessed with a station at each corner (Earls Court, West Brompton and West Ken.), the site unsurprisingly benefits from the maximum 6b PTAL rating.
Over the last couple of years, ECDC have run a number of workshops and local community engagement exercises to steer the master-plan, several of which we advertised to members and/or attended. Now it’s ready for all to see, and exhibition details appear in our diary (starting 23rd Feb), together with a webinar and public meeting date.
The scale of the proposed development is as immense as earlier the demolition task, with buildings up to 39 storeys around the existing landmark Empress State Building (ESB) shown, itself 31 storeys high. In West London, this makes the proposed tall buildings second-only to the North Acton towers – no boasting matter.
The model shows that the masterplan uses much of the railway and existing infrastructure to guide new structure placement – the routes through the site are predominately directly above the tunnels which are only just below the surface and insufficiently strong to be built on. A pleasing advantage of this more carbon-friendly approach, is that the routes have to be curved, indeed some of the smaller scale housing in the foreground (above) is in crescent format, the like of which we’ve rarely seen since the brutalist Hulme or Golden Lane crescents of the 60’s, or subsequently more successfully at the Barbican.
“The Table” is a concrete cover over part of the West London Line that bifurcates the site, forms the borough boundaries and was the camera location for the above panoramas. Built as part of the base for former Earls Court 2, it’s of unknown strength and therefore assumed too weak to be built on, but forms an above/below grade datum for much of the site. Servicing of all varieties is most definitely below stairs.
Continued →
In recent months we, our members, affiliates and others have noticed an increase in unsympathetic shop fronts or public realm land-grabs adjacent to shops, particularly in King Street, but elsewhere in the borough too. We are of course aware of the plight of the high street, an issue we wrote about in 2019, but the pandemic seems to have accelerated a slip in standards. The pictures also demonstrate an unfortunate correlation between these slippages, metal roller shutters (with or without graffiti), and some of the better historic buildings, sharpening the discordancy. Shopfronts require the same constraints as rear extensions – ‘subservient to the existing building’. A strong building presence at ground level – with visible walls between the shop openings – can accommodate a variety of shopfront designs without losing the integrity of the building design.
Some larger chains are showing is that it’s quite possible to build new frontages sympathetically, while maintaining enough corporate branding to meet the business needs, though it’s unclear how much cajoling the various local authorities undertook to achieve these results. Unfortunately we’re not seeing quite enough of this in parts of Hammersmith – yet.
Longstanding members will recall the Nancye Goulden award we gave to the Nicholas Mee showroom in 2013, a “stylish minimalist modern frontage”, which appeared to be a high point, with the nearby Ginger Pig also awarded in the same year. In 2019, helping to highlight what can be done in our high streets, we awarded the two adjacent shops shown at the western end of King Street, but the eastern end remains a rather different matter.
A few years after the award, Nicholas Mee sold up, possibly feeling – correctly as it turned out – the zeitgeist turning significantly against car ownership in general, big-engined luxury car ownership in particular, notwithstanding the skilled jobs involved. The workshop in Wellesley Avenue was also sold, leaving a site that’s been fought over tooth-and-nail since. These days, the mere suggestion of a car-related enterprise locally may have segments of the population foaming at the mouth, though the residents of Wellesley Avenue probably still reflect fondly on the glamorous metal formerly adorning their neighbourhood. We digress.
Continued →
One news item from each selected source – more on our Local and Affiliate news page. Subscribe to our weekly highlights
©2024, The Hammersmith Society | Privacy | Contact | Join | @ Subscribe | ⓘ
Campaigning for over sixty years