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 disappearing Crossrail opening date
Crossrail passes through the top of our borough at OPDC, where it joins HS2, the UK’s other high profile and eyewateringly expensive rail project. This, contrasted with failing local infrastructure such as the unfunded Hammersmith Bridge and now A40/A3220 viaduct, puts us in a rather unique position to examine the unfortunate nexus of government megaproject largesse, delays, structural failures, and an apparent absence of funds to maintain London’s essential local infrastructure.
Here we look at why UK railway construction costs spiral out of control, and how projects might be better planned and managed as has been achieved elsewhere, and ask if these projects are even the right transport solutions for the 21st century ?
Construction projects still typically employ analogue leaders in a digital age
Mega transport projects are almost always fraught with delays and cost overruns because of the often inappropriate governance and leadership. Inappropriate leadership – really ? Surely they’re run by Captains of Industry with huge experience and many letters after their names ? But the leadership is most often bound up with the management of high budget, and perceived high risk items, such as tunnelling with Tunnel Boring Machines (TBM) – the so called “bricks and sticks” – often 80%+ of the initial budget.
Appointments like these often address last century’s problems, a bit like taking over a British Leyland production line, only to discover that it’s now staffed by strike-free German-made robots, seemingly little delayed by the pandemic, at least here in Hammersmith. These elements are significantly lower risk than they once were, because of such mechanisation and associated technologies, engineered processes, resulting in tighter controls and more repeatability “at the coalface”, even though still beloved of TV documentaries with some false jeopardy added to spice them up. Still, documentaries do serve a valuable purpose in illustrating the point – the operator at the controls of the TBM deep underground is using a computer keyboard, mouse, several screens, a desk phone, with not a shovel in sight.
To re-purpose a phrase from the last decade, these projects still typically employ analogue leaders in a digital age. It’s commonly assumed that the “backroom boys” will sort of the hidden techie stuff – keep out of the detail. WRONG! This is where the risks are nowadays, in signalling and other heavily software-based systems, sometimes poorly designed code, frequent legacy issues, often clunky low-performance or de-facto interfaces (sometimes as simple as on/off dry contacts, AKA electromechanical relays, or their software equivalent “control points”), logical “gotchas” and subsequent system integration problems.
The issue is peculiarly amplified in railways, where proven operational safety is expected, yet a lot of what could provide that – 100% reuse of existing proven designs, robot style, ironically more akin to a modern tunnelling process – allowing the project to focus solely on what must be changed, is in this environment, swamped by commercial, time, perceived risk, or political pressures to use this supplier or that solution. This results in yet another bespoke railway with the inelegant compromises that Heath Robinson would recognise. Amplifying the misconception that the project is some sort of smooth production-line shown in the plans, the term “production design” is regularly misused, whereas the earlier compromises mean the endeavour has unwittingly become a “prototype design” – the approach to building a unique prototype like Crossrail or HS2 vs. a production design for 1000, or 100,000 units a year are rather different – your scribe has done all three.
Future leaders should present their software engineering credentials at the door
Continued →
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
Since the Town Hall extension was shrouded in scaffolding last year, internal strip-out has been progressing, and this year a gentler strip-out has been taking place inside the old Town Hall building, pictured.
We’re told that this continued where permitted during lock-down, but now we can see that the real demolition has started at last, and the destruction of the concrete steps and walkways is wonderful confirmation that the new Town Hall and the new Civic Campus are on their way.
The steps and walkways recently featured in the wedding episode of BBC2’s well-received series Trigonometry, together with the entrance hall of the old Town Hall itself as wedding venue, a space facing the new Town Square that will be hugely improved by the removal of the ugly 70’s construction. Nearby filming locations included the adjacent Riverside Gardens and Macbeth Streets.
Civic Voice launched its Manifesto 2020-2023, 50 years after the Skeffington Report on Public Participation in Planning, which arose from growing concern about the top-down nature of post-war planning and development and growing interest in the idea of ‘participatory democracy’ (that ordinary people need to be engaged in decision-making rather than simply voting for representatives to make decisions on their behalf).
A Civic Voice members survey last year found that 80% of people feel that developers do not effectively engage with the community and 72% said the same about local authorities. Recent research by Grosvenor Britain & Ireland also found a significant distrust of the planning process within communities. Just 2% of the public trust developers and only 7% trust local authorities when it comes to planning for large-scale development.
This week’s news concerning the housing minister, the role of large developers and oblique arguments about viability, plus the role of CIL, brings these issues into sharp focus
The Civic Voice ambition is to move away from ‘confrontation to collaboration’ and from ‘consultations to conversations’. Its manifesto consists of the following three key recommendations to the Government and to Local Authorities, which aim at placing Civic Societies like the Hammersmith Society at the heart of their communities:
Continued →
Save our Skyline – River and King St views
Local residents will remember John Jones, who was for many years Chairman of our affiliate, the Ravenscourt Society, and who died in April. For several decades he was a formidable defender of his patch of Hammersmith from ill-judged development and Council efforts to sell off land on the fringes of Ravenscourt Park.
He threw himself into the battle against the first Town Hall development plans in 2010-12, chairing a number of packed public meetings on behalf of the Save our Skyline coalition. The campaign notably led to a Council Planning Committee meeting so crowded with objectors it had to be moved to the Great Hall of Latymer School. At that time, the Hammersmith Society worked with him to successfully see off the 15-storey glass towers around the Town Hall and a footbridge over the A4 which would have very considerably reduced the Furnivall Gardens’ open space.
A barrister by profession, he used his professional and forensic skills in the service of local causes. His manner was a mixture of the magisterial and the mischievous, backed up by serious local knowledge and commitment. He also chaired public meetings for the Ravenscourt Action Group calling for Council action on anti-social behaviour.
An engaging obituary can be found in The Guardian following this link
The Ravenscourt Society was founded in 1971 and is no longer active, but perhaps there are residents in the area who would like to revive it; a local residents’ association is a good way to stay in touch with what is going on at the Town Hall, channel local concerns, and to build a neighbourhood network.
More: Video describing the SOS campaign
Continued →
The Society’s committee is of the view that as part of the renovation work, there is a great opportunity to improve the Bridge to make it better suited to future needs, requiring more space for pedestrians and cyclists, as mentioned in our last article. Our proposal is to widen the pathways to allow safe and satisfactory bidirectional walking on one side, and bidirectional cycling on the other, so that cyclists no longer need to compete with road traffic, significantly improving safety. Currently, because of the somewhat narrow walkways, it’s not possible to safely cycle or even pass easily when walking, certainly not in a wheelchair or buggy. We think this can be done both at modest cost (certainly compared with the Garden Bridge!) and largely independently of the planned repair works, so as not to lengthen the closure. We have a brief update on repair works at the foot of this article.
The bridge’s narrow pathways for most of the span measure approximately 1.6m, widening at the pillars to approximately 1.8m, but still too narrow for bikes to pass safely (one of the reasons cyclists have to dismount currently), let alone to support social distancing needed now, and possibly in the future. We’ve now looked at the structure in a little detail, and, as shown on the photos here, the pathways are supported by simple cantilevers, apparently bolted on.
Hammersmith Bridge – historical repairs (photo: Keepingthingslocal)
Steelwork underneath the bridge was repaired section by section in the 1970’s, and a new grid of substantial longitudinal girders replaced the originals (pierced where bridge hangers meet the deck). Historic photos (right) show the original, very much less substantial steelwork. Given the scope of the repair works, and amount of money and time to be spent on repairs, there seems little reason not to now consider the attached pathways in more detail, especially if the planned temporary bridge removes the need to keep it open during the works.
Continued →
The Council is struggling to finance the upkeep of its school estate, a portfolio which includes over forty primary schools. Limited funds have been available since the government Building Schools for the Future programme was terminated in 2010, and in March last year the Council introduced a “Community Schools Programme”, proposing to finance the improvement works by the building of affordable housing on school grounds. The programme starts with Flora Gardens and Avonmore Primary Schools.
Flora Gardens School Site
We are concerned at the direction of this policy: the unquestionable priority of good public education facilities does not justify the loss of public open space.
Public open space is sacred, it is a rare and precious commodity, and the acceptance of a practice which permanently removes the open space to alleviate a temporary financial shortfall is a mistake: it erodes the quality of our urban surroundings to the detriment of the public realm, and removes potential sites for future social facilities such as youth clubs and provision for the elderly, but also removes spare capacity essential to accommodate the likely increase in space requirements arising from the current review of school standards.
Continued →
©2023, The Hammersmith Society | Privacy | Contact | Join | @ Subscribe | ⓘ
Campaigning for over sixty years