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.
On a brisk March morning, we looked at the new West Hall music venue, the most advanced of the structures being built at Olympia, and viewed some of the rest of the site. As you can see, it’s still a major construction site and will be for the next couple of years. From the roof, we could see the theatre building now coming out of the ground, other parts of the site pictured below, and a wide swathe of North West London. Below we take a detailed look at the tall buildings on the horizon.
The music venue is substantial, holding c. 4000, with easy loading access immediately to the side of what will become the stage (left of photo). Of particular interest is the design and construction of the façade, to keep any noise emanating to a minimum, bearing in mind the existing residential buildings in Blythe road opposite. The capacity makes it twice the size of the O2 Empire, and comparable to the Apollo – though that’s usually seated these days – in the guise of the Hammersmith Odeon it took around 5000 standing.
Keeping to the theme of the entertainment and hospitality, the Emberton House theatre school foundations can be seen being built at the Western end of the former Maclise road car park, of which only the (listed) outside shell remains, plus the hotel foundations on the side nearest the railway. Operators for all venues are now established, so they will be able to open for business once construction is complete – phased from next year to early/mid 2025. Click on any of the images below for larger versions.
Continued →
Property company Yoo Capital, who are currently undertaking the ambitious expansion of Olympia, bought Shepherds Bush Market in 2020. Over recent months we’ve advertised and attended a number of public consultations, revealing plans for the area. These include (i) the redevelopment of the Old Laundry site, the triangular area behind the east side of the market, and (ii) the upgrade and renewal of the market facilities.
Two buildings are proposed for the Old Laundry site: (i) a mixed-use commercial building, of 6 upper floors, ground floor and mezzanine, and a full basement floor below, together providing for office space and Imperial College research facilities, and (ii) located on the north end of the site, a smaller building providing 40 affordable flats in 5 upper floors and ground floor.
This is a dense, complex scheme, inserting a substantial building bulk in a site landlocked behind the 2-storey shop terraces of Goldhawk Road, and 2 & 3-storey residential terraces of Pennard Road. For reference, the main commercial building is the same height as the Dorsett Hotel.
Looking North, this building would be visible from Goldhawk Road, rising above the shop terraces, and the substantial stepped, craggy elevation would not be out of place in the busy mix of style and scale, and could enrich the visual jazz of the area. From the west the building would be seen chiefly from the passing trains, and would form a new, east side to the market thoroughfare, with stalls partly tucked into the ground floor area, this would create an enclosure which could bring a sense of urban intimacy to the market thoroughfare, akin to the feel of Borough market.
On the east side, the building would be a dominant presence for the adjacent terrace of houses on Pennard Road, close to the rear gardens and crowding the outlook from rear windows. The design of the new building acknowledges this problem, and brings some mitigation with progressive stepping back at upper levels, and a landscaped area alongside the Pennard Road boundary: rules for this arrangement are set out in the Local Plan SPD (Section HS6), and the developer advises that the proposals comply with the dimensional restraints required. Resolution of this possible discord is fundamental to the development concept.
Continued →
In the last week there have been well-publicised consultation meetings either side of the river, covering the repair and refurbishment of the bridge together with proposed Foster/COWI temporary bridge. Below are photos of the models of the proposals, but there’s one further public exhibition in Barnes this Saturday – details in the diary
We’re delighted to see that the designers have adopted our 2020 proposal to widen the pathways alongside the bridge to at least 2.3m, to better facilitate walking and cycling which are currently rather less than ideal. One of the photos below shows before & after views, and you can see that the visual impact is minimal [click on the images for larger versions]. We understand that Historic England are satisfied that this won’t harm the setting of the Grade 2* bridge.
There’s a further piece of thinking to complete the necessary crossing of both 2-way cycling and pedestrians. Crossings naturally exist under the bridge at each side as we recall from the heights of COVID, but there remains a risk of paths crossing awkwardly. Subject to agreements, there may be an opportunity for the temporary walkway pictured to be part-repurposed into better crossover(s) after completion, with perhaps a smaller scale nod to the recent Dukes Meadows Footbridge.
Continued →
We attended the first Placelab session held next to the North Acton gyratory at Gypsy Corner, to help shape plans for Old Oak West. Representing our affiliate Old Oak Neighbourhood Forum, Henry Peterson was there, as were a good cross-section of neighbours and resident groups. For those of you unfamiliar with Old Oak, please read Henry’s piece Taking a View from last year, where he sets out the issues around this Mayoral Opportunity Area, and its planned expansion westwards in the wake of the CarGiant debacle.
Currently the area comprises around 90 acres of post-industrial no man’s land, and is proposed to provide 9000 homes and 2.5m sq. ft. of commercial space to the northwest of Victoria Road, between North Acton and Harlesden/Willesden Junction.
With notable resonances of Earls Court, including comparable planned housing density of 250/ha, though twice the land area and in a rather less salubrious spot, the main development area is triangular in shape and similarly surrounded by railways, which provide mixed blessings for access, but it has the benefit of the Grand Union Canal rather than the West London Line through the middle. It doesn’t include the large Elizabeth Line depot alongside, because as reported, someone unfortunately forgot to specify foundations strong enough to support over-development! HS2 enabling works currently occupy a significant portion.
Though strictly in Ealing, it’s right on our borders, closely associated with Wormwood Scrubs and HS2/Oak Oak Common, and your skyline is likely to be affected as it has been already, by the 55 storey tower pictured below and adjacent, during the boat race. We think Historic England could ‘champion England’s Heritage’ better by proactively managing this ‘listed building setting’ rather more effectively.
If the developers have their way unfettered, as Henry describes, and as is the M.O. in Opportunity Areas where the normal planning shackles are largely off, they’ll add several more, and significantly overbuild. The leader of our council was the sole dissenter at the Local Plan adoption last year as Henry describes – the plan really must be deficient.
The workshop format was a sort of mini-charrette organised on behalf of the Mayoral development organisation, OPDC, by consultants Soundings, where about 30 people spread among 3 tables, were asked a series of questions about desirable locations for particular types of infrastructure, beit shops, parks, workspace, housing etc. There were, unsurprisingly, no picture cards of anything like Pilbrow’s planned 50+ storey towers for Imperial at 1 Portal Way.
The fashionable subject of 15 minute cities was aired as we show above, which these days is a byword for walking and cycling. We were asked to prioritise what type of infra should be located in annular zones 5 minutes’ walk apart from the centre. The range of views you can see shows how difficult placemaking can be, not least with a lack of an identifiable ‘centre’ or even definition of what a centre looks like, causing significant consternation on our table. In another similarity with Earls Court, we didn’t get a strong steer from OPDC as to any particular identity, making the area again fall into the awkward category of all things to all (wo)men.
Continued →
Earls Court site panorama, on “The Table”, looking approximately North. Temporary BBC Experience under construction in foreground.
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.
Earls Court model looking approximately SW. The white translucent model (foreground) is the consented Tesco redevelopment (100 West Cromwell Road)
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.
Nancye Goulden Award 2013 – Nicholas Mee Aston Martin showroom
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 →
We expect the council’s Clean Air Neighbourhoods policy to be a well-intentioned and researched policy, with its implications and unintended consequences carefully considered. There are good things in here, such as planting more street trees, improvements to street safety, and some incentives intended to discourage car use. However, on examination, few measures actually relate directly to ‘the name on the tin’ – air quality – and the one that does, only relates to around 12% of the air quality problem in Hammersmith according to Public Heath England’s figures below. This week’s smell of wood-burning stoves reminds us that the main problem here is PM2.5 particulates. Rather than deal with that, this policy would concentrate nitrogen oxide pollution where it’s highest – on main roads.
Welcome to the infamous Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) debate that dare not speak its name – our council knows how toxic that is. Instead it has decided to use a heavy-handed mix of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt, deployed with highly inflammatory headline-grabbing phrases such as TOXIC, SILENT KILLER, DEATH, in a decades-old ‘big stick’ approach. The claim of 40,000 UK annual deaths is a misappropriation of the data, which actually relates to life expectancy. Privately the council still uses the term ‘LTN’, and funds them instead of schools, with Section 106 contributions.
Along with a proposed bridge toll, this binary “clean” vs. “dirty” social-media style campaign is beginning to make us look like Fortress Hammersmith, rather than the well-connected borough we appreciate, predicated on the idea that other boroughs wouldn’t think of putting up their barriers similarly… would they? Hounslow’s so-called South Chiswick Liveable Neighbourhood is one such controversial and euphemistically named control scheme already on our doorstep, which points to Hammersmith bridge closure as part of the problem.
Evidence from the controversial South Fulham Traffic, Congestion & Pollution Reduction (TCPR) scheme shows that the policy of diverting traffic can make it worse overall, particularly on main and boundary roads such as the A4, or to places not measured, out of sight and out of mind. This was confirmed recently by widely-reported DfT figures showing that total vehicle miles driven in the ten inner London boroughs that introduced LTNs or equivalent schemes in 2020 rose by an average 11.4% in 2021 vs. 8.9% where they hadn’t. This is one of the reasons the TCPR has had to be extended to the western side of Wandsworth Bridge Road, but the recent extension is already reported to be causing gridlock in Wandsworth itself and on Wandsworth Bridge and New Kings Roads.
Kings College and the council’s own data shows that our backstreets are already as much as 50% less polluted than main roads. Clean Air Neighbourhoods might therefore be seen as a divisive and discriminatory policy addressing the wrong target, by aiming to improve air quality in areas where it’s not a significant problem, and diverting traffic to main roads, where it would worsen the sometimes already sub-standard air quality, slowing the movement of public transport and other traffic, reinforcing last year’s similarly ill-conceived bus lane removals, and concentrating any pollution on those trying to “do the right thing” by using active travel modes – the bus, walking or cycling – or perhaps living alongside. The deeper dive at the foot of the article provides more detail.
It’s not very useful claiming that H&F residents will be unaffected, as some councillors have, with oddly mixed messaging, potentially encouraging residents’ car use. Let’s look past our own noses, and imagine other councils following suit and imposing their own set of rules, having had H&F traffic displaced to them.
Lock-down London would be divided up into a competing patchwork of complicated and differently administered fiefdoms, that no business or occasional visitor would want to, or in many cases be able to, cross – at least at any reasonable level of administration or cost – and Fortress London would become ever more a playground for the super-rich.
This represents a spectacular own goal from a council claiming to be “Doing things with residents, not to them”, and for whom it takes over 3700 words to explain just their South Fulham TCPR scheme (that’s 50% longer than this article, which is hardly short!). Unsurprisingly, the TCPR now has its own 7000-signature petition.
In an era rapidly going electric (50% of new vehicles are projected to be electric in 3 years time), rather than the council’s retro big-stick approach, a far more effective policy would involve the carrot of improving public transport from it’s pitiful speeds by ungumming the main roads, and making it cheaper and more accessible, as they do in Germany. TfL has just done the exact opposite.
Instead, this policy would make it worse in the hotspots: the five most polluted spots measured in the 2022 air quality report are Hammersmith Road East/West (HF11/46), The Town Centre, Wood Lane (HF16), and of course the Broadway, all locations where traffic is already largely at a standstill. Amazingly, for a supposed ‘clean air’ policy there appear no exceptions for EV’s; this is actually an anti four-wheel policy – ‘clean air’ is a marketing ploy.
In the month of COP27, the council conflated air quality with climate change in order to ‘make it relevant’, and then casually targeted predetermined usual suspects, fitting a tired and over-politicised narrative. The two don’t always overlap, especially geographically as we wrote before, and sometimes even work in opposition, as described below. But where the effects of climate change and air pollution do collide is in the ‘global south’ as the map above clearly illustrates, and, by encouraging pollution exports, this policy helps reinforce the situation. Do we want those countries, recently awarded ‘loss and damage’ payments from the developed world for climate change, to need to add loss and damage from our exported air pollution too?
Continued →
RMH isometric from https://www.ravenscourtparkhospital.info
Earlier this month we met with the new owners of RMH, Telereal Trillium, their planning consultants, Turley, and Trevor Morriss of SSPARC architects appointed for the redevelopment, who you may remember giving a presentation on the Olympia redevelopment at our AGM in 2019.
They gave us a rundown of Telereal Trillium’s background (mainly a large portfolio of former public sector property, a large proportion of which were in the BT and DWP estates, formerly owned by Land Securities). This is not their first listed building redevelopment – the example they gave us was the one on the website, the Grade II listed Tooting Police Station. As it’s early days, there were no more details available other than that on the website boards, shown above and on their website.
Telereal Trillium describe themselves as an £8 billion family owned property development company owned by the William Pears Group. They say that they are not “operators”, they have moved from being owners to owner/developers recently, and are not currently planning on going further into running buildings.
The 80’s block at the back of the site shown in pink adjacent, “Block E”, was suggested as the location for the main redevelopment activities, the rest of the estate is more a case of preserve, enhance and convert into luxury accommodation, with restoration of the surrounding gardens, which is good news.
Discussions with the council started in June, but there have been no formal planning pre-application meetings yet. We mentioned that we’re extremely keen to engage early, offering our experience and local knowledge on behalf of the wider community. Meanwhile we’re looking at how National (NPPF), London-wide (London Plan), and borough (Local plan) guidance applies to this project.
The large public spaces in the listed parts of the estate (“Block A”) are where the community use and engagement is critically important. We discussed possible educational and other uses, but only in outline at this initial stage.
We’re pleased that this important building has an engaged new owner, and look forward to its unique interiors being open for public enjoyment again in an appropriate form. Your suggestions for suitable uses are most welcome.
New Civil Engineer recently reported that the bridge stabilisation has progressed and that specialist concrete has been poured into the cast iron pedestals to prevent them collapsing. This means that the bridge is safer for the next stage of repair, which we mentioned in the last email. The stabilisation works are scheduled to complete by the end of February 2023.
It’s worth mentioning again that while the funding arrangement for the rebuilding has been determined, actual funds remain scarce, and the long term funding and maintenance model is undecided. The council prefers to package it up so it can be put into a trust and managed at arms length.
The next step is diversion of a gas main at a cost of £5m, and the letting of contracts so that works on the actual major repairs can begin. We have requested copy of the £200k feasibility report into the Foster/COWI temporary bridge to better understand details of the proposals.
There’s been some press and politics around a proposed bridge toll as a way to close the gap in funding for the rebuild, and whether or not residents would be expected to pay. A historic problem with tolls has been that it cost a significant percentage of the actual toll to collect, and with so much cash sloshing around, there was often significant fraud. Newer technology, such as Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) would presumably lessen these overheads, if not the displeasure.
We are grateful to the Barnes Bugle for alerting us to a detailed video from Mott’s explaining the whole process for those interested in the technicalities:
Continued →
Many of you will have been to the exhibition at the Lyric recently to view the proposals and displays. We exhorted the development team to show full elevations, but the best we achieved at the time were partial CGI images. They have now come forward with North and East elevations, which are on the consultation website, along with the exhibition boards, and above / below, and appear to be part of a pending planning application. The large towers in the background are the proposed Landmark House, as yet unbuilt, and we believe subject to change of ownership, and therefore possibly design change too.
As you can see, our very approximate CGI in the earlier article was reasonably accurate dimensionally, if not aesthetically, and at 47m, this undistinguished proposal is of alien scale, substantially higher than the Lyric, and a large intrusion on the King St. horizon. The 15m setback from the street helps reduce this intrusion only marginally, which you can see below.
More importantly, acceptance at this dimension would set a bulk and height precedent along King St., much as we’ve recently seen used in the 66 Hammersmith Road proposal, especially in the continuing absence of an issued Town Centre Masterplan, or planning brief, a subject on which we repeatedly remind the council is nearly 5 years overdue. We haven’t even mentioned a likely West-East prevailing wind tunnel, increased if others were to follow suit.
Continued →
©2025, The Hammersmith Society | Privacy | Contact | Join | @ Subscribe | ⓘ
Campaigning for over sixty years