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.
The former Royal Masonic Hospital site, recently marketed by Savills as “a landmark development opportunity”, is currently under offer. Sitting in a conservation area, surrounded by listed housing and overlooking Ravenscourt Park, the Grade II* hospital building and its later additions occupy a plum site in the heart of Hammersmith.
Opened by King George V and Queen Mary in 1933, its steel-framed modernist architecture by Tait & Lorne famously won an RIBA Gold Medal as the best building of 1933, while its interiors, fixtures and fittings were custom designed throughout in the same Art Deco style.
But times changed, and after a controversial sale in the 1990s, although its Art Deco interiors continued to make frequent appearances in films and in television series like Poirot, subsequent owners proved unable to find a viable healthcare use. And after standing empty for 15 years, the main building will need considerable investment in refurbishment and restoration.
A short promotional film made in 1970 gives us a fascinating glimpse into the hospital in its heyday. Fifty years ago, it was a self-contained organisation with its own kitchens, laundry, laboratories and a nursing school and staff accommodation, all set in 10 acres of immaculately kept grounds.
Following discussions with Council planners, the agents, Savills, are now saying that ‘medical use’ covenants need no longer apply and suggest a range of alternative possibilities for future development. Only the main building, with its twin entrance pillars representing Healing and Charity, is listed. The site also contains several smaller buildings which are described as targets for demolition and redevelopment – even “possible upward extensions”.
Any development on this scale and in this location will have a significant impact both on the park and the local community, so it is vital that we should all have a say in the future of this important part of our Hammersmith heritage.
Over the last year or so, we’ve been participating in the Council’s resident-led Cycling & Walking Commission, via our membership secretary, along with residents including representatives of one or two affected resident’s associations, such as affiliates SPRA & SBRA.
Due to the pandemic, meetings were held as online workshops, the process being chaired by Cllr. Iain Cassidy, and facilitated by the council’s preferred consultants, WSP, who provided expert guidance and showed design options used elsewhere in the UK and Europe. We heard from several special interest groups including disabled cycling group Wheels for Wellbeing.
In common with TfL’s leanings, most discussion was around cycling, with a healthy proportion of commissioners chosen for those credentials, despite the clue in the name (and Terms of Reference) Cycling and Walking Commission, we therefore felt the need to keep walking and other users on the agenda as (almost) everyone walks if they can, and the number of journeys by foot + bus represents at least 40% of all journeys. As shown, walking represents a 25% “modal” share, but is often the Cinderella of the show by needing no specific new infrastructure – or does it ?
Continued →
Proposed Hammersmith parliamentary constituency boundaries 2021. New proposed boundaries shown in red, 2017 in blue
We’ve been alerted to new proposed changes to the parliamentary constituency boundaries, and there’s a distinct feeling of deja-vu. Checking the annals, it was in 2017 when the last proposal surfaced.
At the time, Tom said that the “changes to parliamentary boundaries seem bizarre” – perhaps someone listened as they were quietly parked. Equally bizarre this time, in an effort to even up constituency sizes to around 75,000, Hammersmith is again split from Fulham, with a nod to the old borough boundary of 1968, but the significant change is the proposed East-West merger to create a “Hammersmith and Chiswick” constituency, split between two separate councils and administrations.
The north of the existing Hammersmith constituency would move to Ealing/Acton as proposed in 2017, though the line is further north matching the northwards march of the H/F boundary.
It would radically alter our sitting MP’s constituency, meaning Hammersmith being represented by two MP’s (North / Central), with a total of 3 MP’s across H&F (North / Central / South), all of whom would have split constituencies (the other halves being Ealing / Chiswick / Chelsea) to dilute their efforts, and potentially reduce the voice of Hammersmith. Or perhaps more is better? Make your views felt in the consultation.
The proposals shown above, despite their apparent non-political origins, could also appear to be politically motivated according to BBC analysis, as they may favour the ruling party. The proposed new boundaries are shown in red, the 2017 version in blue. More information can be found on the Boundary Commission website, where the consultation runs until 2nd August.
Open House has celebrated London’s amazing architecture for the last thirty years, starting just two years after our own Awards. There’s always been an eclectic selection of Hammersmith buildings in Open House, featuring some of our Award Winners over the years. Open House 2021 is scheduled for 4th and 5th of September.
Open House includes public buildings that everyone knows. It encourages private owners who are proud of the architecture or design features of their homes to open-up too. The festival is a unique opportunity to visit private residences and gardens in London, usually closed to the public – there are architectural gems hidden inside people’s own houses.
Open House would be delighted if Hammersmith Society members, supporters, their friends and contacts could suggest buildings they know that would be worth visiting. Open House can make the initial contact, even better if you already know and can pass on details.
Open House can arrange for people to gather outside as appropriate. We all hope that Covid-19 guidelines should have relaxed enough later this year to allow indoor gatherings without too many restrictions. Open House will produce guidelines covering the number of guests, mask-wearing, social distancing etc. that apply as appropriate at the time. They can discuss what works best and how to make safe arrangements.
If you would like to open your home during this year’s festival or make a suggestion for another building, Open House would be delighted to hear from you. West London Open House volunteers can provide detailed information about taking part, contacts are:
✉ Marianna Wolf, 📱 07400 568614
✉ Steve Bower, 📱 07770 558618
In April last year we reported on the hotel development proposed for the former West London Magistrate’s Court site at 181 Talgarth Road, a proposal which would include two hotels: a 442-bedroom, 23-storey luxury hotel, and a 440-bed, 10-storey tourist hotel. Permission for the development was agreed in July, and after referral to the Mayor’ office the consent was confirmed in December.
Since then, with the change in economic circumstances, the developer Dominvs Group has chosen to revise the scheme: retaining the tourist hotel, but providing Student Accommodation for up to 696 students, possibly linked to the Imperial College White City campus, in place of the 23-storey luxury hotel.
Initial proposals are for a student block with massing generally similar to the approved luxury hotel block, but adjusted to reduce the maximum height by two storeys, to 68 metres, and to enlarge the plan to add 2,400 sq. m floor area. We understand that TP Bennett, architects of King’s House at the other end of Shortlands, are to be appointed for this building, and that the accommodation would be run by Scape who are well-known in the sector.
No change is proposed to the tourist hotel design, but the landscaped public realm within the site would become a student amenity space, providing access to the student cycle store – a more mundane provision which lacks the tempietto, restaurant and bar which created a welcome spark in the earlier scheme. The prospect of a revised planning application has revived the considerable public opposition to the earlier development, and the Society is participating in consultations currently taking place.
This new scheme opens a further chapter in the uncomfortable history of this important site. The story began with the sale of the land by the Ministry of Justice, evidently failing to follow Cabinet Office guidelines which require that, prior to commercial sale, sites in public ownership should be assessed for residential, educational or similar public benefit. The sale of the Magistrates Court site was advertised with enticements including ‘precedent for tall buildings’ and reports of ‘positive pre-application feedback from LBHF’ without revealing the LBHF advice received. It is not clear if the £42m purchase price paid by Dominvs was based on a development valuation gleaned from the ‘evolving’ Town Centre Masterplan – a plan which has been evolving since 2015, but has still not been reviewed through public consultation. The provisional Masterplan currently circulating is based on a plan which incorporates the completed A4 fly-under tunnel, describing a misleading urban context for the hotel site.
Continued →
As membership secretary, I regularly hear the clarion call “I’m not on Social Media so I can’t see your posts…” It’s a popular myth that you must sign up, notwithstanding the fact that our latest Twitter and Facebook postings automatically appear on our home page (have you checked recently..?), all three “platforms” that we use are publicly accessible to anyone, as are most social media sites. They will encourage you to sign up, perhaps even boost the myth that you must for obvious reasons, but you can ignore that without missing that much. However paradoxically it will help our cause if you do sign up and follow us – read on…
I’ve read concerns about tracking, cookies, and a good range of urban myths too, but many are outdated. A number of issues are addressed in our website and accessibility guide and related privacy policy, but in short if you don’t have an account with the platform in question, there’s limited tracking they can do, while at the same time still giving you access to useful local material. Increasingly newer browser versions are closing these avenues of tracking joy, and the effects are often rather more prosaic than perhaps popular hyperbolae might suggest. You can, of course, always delete browsing data, including cookies, or use the Incognito/inPrivate modes available on all modern browsers to properly eliminate tracking if it still concerns you.
#BernieSanders patiently waits to cross the Bridge
It’s a lot simpler and quicker for us to post short updates, reactions to news, and links to events of interest on these platforms – particularly Twitter – than it is to create longform articles such as this, or physical/pdf newsletters. One or two of our survey responses have suggested more regular updates, and this is one way to respond. These postings form a useful complement to our other publishing, as text messages complement email and letters. We post something almost daily on one platform or another, so there’s always something new on the website as a result too.
Continued →
In March of this year the government promised legislation to improve the supply of new homes, including legislation on building safety, rental reform, social housing – and an update to the planning system.
Following this, a government White Paper Planning for the Future proposed very significant changes to the planning process for public consultation which closed last week.
At present, LBHF planning applications are assessed against the development policies in the LBHF Local Plan, in the London Plan, and in the government NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework). The White Paper proposes a new approach: a new form of Local Plan, replacing the current format of more abstract policy guidance, by a format with a prescriptive system of development rules and a design code. The Local Plan would also include borough zone plans, which would identify three categories of development:
In Growth and Renewal areas, proposals which are compliant with the Local Plan in height, use-type etc, and compliant with the government NPPF rules, would be effectively guaranteed an automatic outline planning consent, providing a level of certainty in site purchase values. At the next stage, a full planning application, with detailed proposals, would be granted consent if the proposals comply with the more detailed rules and design codes of the Local Plan.
Public consultation in the planning process would be limited to the stage when the new Local Plan is put together by the local authority: community involvement would be excluded from full planning application stage, because (it is argued) the application would be assessed against rules which have already been agreed through public consultation.
The intention is to establish a clear set of planning rules, which are in line with government policy, and have been agreed through community consultation; armed with these certainties applications would avoid the ambiguities of policy interpretation and community objection which (it is said) can delay the full planning application stage.
To illustrate examples of acceptable design and styling, and to provide a basis of resolution of design disagreements, Design Codes would form part of the Local Plan, and would be reviewed through public consultation when the new Local Plan is being put together. Design codes would be coordinated with the government’s National Design Guide, itself heavily influenced by the CreateStreets campaign and to the emerging National Model Design Code. To help the process, a chief officer for design and place-making would be appointed within each local authority.
Continued →
The national picture for COVID-19 is mixed with some areas much more affected than others. Despite well-publicised issues around test-track-and-trace, in a world of “big data”, the Government has made significant efforts to publish quite detailed data at various levels, if not always easy to tease out. At borough level, infection, test positivity, and death data is available, and we have also included relevant hospital data for our local NHS Trust, Imperial.
To help members better gauge the local situation, we’ve used this data to create an interactive chart, both here, and pinned to the head of the website for the time being, automatically updated every day in the early evening. Due to the well-known delays in test results, be aware that latest numbers are always revised upwards for severa days after initial publication, so we now filter the newest unrepresentative figures – check here regularly for updates.
The interactive map shown adjacent provides infection data in the last week by “MSOA” (Middle Super Output Area), representing c.7200 people, an area which approximates a council ward. H&F has the distinction of having the physically smallest MSOA in the country – E02000378 – Shepherds Bush South. Click on the map to see more information about each area.
H&F council COVID-19 advice is here.
We’ve been contacted by our member Jane Wilmot, also a member of the local H&F HealthWatch committee who want to find out how H&F residents have used GP practices during lockdown and in particular uncover any experiences of health inequality. HealthWatch is a statutory committee of the independent regulator, the Care Quality Commission (CQC).
If you would like to help, please:
If you would like any assistance in completing the survey or would like it in another format, please contact H&F HealthWatch at or call 0203 886 0386. Healthwatch Hammersmith & Fulham address: 141-143 King Street, W6 9JG.
Health scares, 18 metre masts, autonomous vehicles, economic recovery, critical national infrastructure, Huawei… It’s a long list.
In Hammersmith we’ve started to see planning notices for 5G base stations, ironically mostly from the company named Three, and yes, since you ask, they are using Huawei.
From the Society’s perspective, our concerns centre on the mast height, positioning, and the associated, rather retro, street clutter. There’s some further reading at the foot of the article, but first, to get some perspective, let’s get our terminology clear, review the most prevalent public concerns and take quite a hard look at the benefits – both real and more far-fetched.
The most widely used 5G band in the UK will be 3.6GHz…
…5G is just as safe as 4G, 3G and GSM.
– Institution of Engineering and Technology
1G to 5G phones
Here 1G means ‘First Generation’ AKA Analogue ‘brick’ phones of the 1980’s, 2G (AKA ‘GSM’ or ‘Global System for Mobile Communications’), a typical Nokia from the late 1990’s, 3G, the first phones with really usable Internet connections, and today’s 4G, typified by a smartphone – Apple or Android. There was even a 2.5G and we mention 4.5G later.
The gifts of Heinrich Hertz, or a billion of them, come in the form of a Gigahertz (GHz), the frequency a thousand times the Megahertz we’ve had since VHF FM radio days. 1G to 4G phones have used various radio frequencies over the years, depending on operator and country, from 800MHz up to 2.6GHz, but the operating frequency used doesn’t directly affect the data speed as far as the user is concerned. WiFi is sometimes confusingly termed 2.4G or ‘2.4 Gig’ or ‘5 Gig’, referring to bands – 2.4GHz (the same frequency as a microwave oven but a minuscule fraction of the power) and 5GHz: a less congested, shorter range band that has nothing to do with 5G: 5th generation mobile technology.
In the digital world we similarly have Megabits describing the speed of received data – whatever the technology that delivered it – and the Gigabit of your scribe’s home, and likely your office’s high speed Ethernet wired network. We won’t discuss the many flavours of WiFi on top of the frequency bands mentioned: A, B, G, N AC, AX… a story seemingly involving yet another G, until WiFi leapfrogs 5G by changing it’s letters to numbers, becoming WiFi 4, 5, and 6, and in future extending into a new 6GHz band. That’s the GG’s corralled 🐴
Members will doubtless have read the conspiracy theories about 5G and the pandemic, as well as other suggested health dangers. However, for 5G, the radio spectrum is in fact being used in very much the same way as earlier generations of mobile technology – even reusing some of the same bands – yet more efficiently, and we now have 30+ years of evidence on the effects of electromagnetic emissions from mobile handsets, 1G to 4G. Specific new concerns arise around the possible use of millimetre-band (26 GHz), but this is a long way off being implemented, and only then for some very specific & limited applications due to extremely short range.
The most popular 5G band, 3.6 GHz, is slightly higher than current ranges, the implication may be more base stations as range is slightly reduced, but other bands may be used to compensate. The 700MHz band for example, cleared in June this year (responsible for the loss of several HD TV channels from Crystal Palace), has yet to be auctioned off, but is earmarked by OFCOM for 5G.
Mobile emissions
If you are at all concerned about health effects, first check and understand the implications of the SAR value for your existing 2G/3G/4G phone, which have been published by manufacturers since the days of 2G when such concerns first arose – or better, stop using it now !
Unfortunately in addition to the above health concerns, the 5G cause has been muddied, and probably harmed by overzealous marketing, too many G’s and spurious claimed benefits – we prefer to keep to the tried-and-trusted recipe of ‘more & faster’, on which it certainly will deliver.
Continued →
The Hammersmith Society is supporting our affiliate, the Brackenbury Residents Association and the local action group in objecting to the development proposed for the former Aston Martin garage at 12-14 Wellesley Avenue.
The application scheme proposes a 3-storey building, significantly higher than the street building line, with 1,800 square metres of office space for an estimated 150 employees, in a street with a residential population of around 80. We reported that an earlier application for a larger scheme was refused planning consent and lost a subsequent appeal – refer to our related stories with more recent coverage in last winter’s newsletter. The current, slightly reduced scheme was again refused consent earlier this year.
The applicant is appealing against the refusal, and the local residents group is inviting support for their petition against the development.
Hammersmith Society’s letter of objection
One news item from each selected source – more on our Local and Affiliate news page. Subscribe to our weekly highlights
Hammersmith Weekly, Sunday, 16th Feb 2025 - http://eepurl.com/i97vNM
Tickets Alert: Tours of the Earl's Court building site
https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/tickets-alert-tours-of-the-earls-court-building-site-79098/
While they are waiting to get building the 4,000 homes planned to go there, there's a chance to step into the middle of the empty Earl's Court building site for a look around.
©2025, The Hammersmith Society | Privacy | Contact | Join | @ Subscribe | ⓘ
Campaigning for over sixty years