We attended the Policy and Accountability Committee (PAC) meeting on 9th September which quickly deteriorated into a pro/anti cycling stooshie.  The two extremes expressed were roughly “build it now and just get on with it”, reflecting a populist mantra du-jour, and on the other side “they don’t ride safely or follow the Highway Code…”  Significant climate change, anti-car and pro-air quality assertions were also made.  Despite all of us being pedestrians at some point, and there being around 1000 cyclists per day compared with up to 1000 bus users per hour along King St, there were few speaking for the overwhelming majority.

These arguments serve to polarise the debate, create heat, yet shed little light.  Our view is one of the practicality and evidence regarding safety and air quality that doesn’t support the existing plan.  The evidence shows that the Broadway and Fulham Palace Road (the nearest analogy/datapoint to King St.), have higher NO₂ levels than Talgarth Road, and far more than any side road. Adding a cycle lane wouldn’t reduce pollution according to TfL’s own AQ report but would slow buses to walking pace through removal of bus lanes, particularly on Hammersmith Road. 

CS6 with accident hotspots 2018

TfL’s 2018 data from their exemplar CS6 built outside their HQ, Palestra, shows that most serious accidents still happen at junctions, for which despite all the cost, environmentally damaging concrete, and negative effects on other road users shown, this type of segregated path is ineffective in protecting the cyclist.  ROSPA analysis shows that 75% accidents occur at or near junctions, and a peculiarity of London are the 20% of fatal accidents with HGV’s, often turning left into cyclists, for which the mayor is making new provisions.

As shown, minor accidents are also recorded at bus bypasses, which is unsurprising.  Those complaining that cars are ‘the problem’ may note that at the time this photo was taken (lunchtime, June 12th 2019) after a meeting at TfL’s HQ, only buses and commercial vehicles were causing pollution and being delayed.  We all still need bin collection lorries, the post, deliveries of items that won’t fit on cargo bikes and so on.  The overwhelming majority, especially elderly, very young, disadvantaged and vulnerable people need buses and bus lanes (removed for CS6 above, and planned for removal as part of TfL’s CS9).  We don’t relish King Street or Hammersmith Road looking anything like this.

Many journals have pronounced that London’s ‘filthy air’ is killing thousands, and we note that all candidates standing for Mayor of London this year quote Air Quality as a pillar of their campaign. Here, taking the long view, we look more closely at the claims and wider issues, and how they apply to Hammersmith, public transport and cycleways. 

According to King’s College, the reference for air quality measurements, London is the 2,516th most polluted city in the world

We think that climate change is the key issue here, and which if properly addressed, would deal with many of today’s air quality issues. The reference work ‘Mortality Effects of Long-Term Exposure to Particulate Air Pollution in the United Kingdom’ (A report by the Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants [COMEAP], updated 2018), says clearly in its executive summary ‘As everyone dies eventually no lives are ever saved by reducing environmental exposures – deaths are delayed resulting in increased life expectancy.’

Air quality in London started deteriorating about 400 years ago, and for the entire time the Georgians and Victorians were painting the globe pink, sulphur dioxide was around 40 times the current WHO guideline level of 20 µg/m³. It was in fact raining sulphuric acid AKA ‘acid rain’, the effects of which can be seen on the Palace of Westminster or in Turner’s paintings.  The Great Smog of 1952 that killed perhaps 12,000 appears as a peak on the graph, and created a level over 10 times the level it is now, but our nonagenarian, and in one case centenarian parents survived and are still here with us, begging the question what effect it had on long term life expectancy.

The answer from COMEAP is around six months if you could (unrealistically) remove 100% of all air pollution from all sources, or more realistically 20 days per µg/m³ removed, plus you have to live to those grand old ages otherwise healthy.  Not as much as the headlines or Twitterati would have it.

Of course this isn’t a complete list of pollutants, there’s PM2.5, PM10, NO₂, and Ozone which have differing WHO thresholds as shown here, and those with respiratory conditions are much more affected than others, explaining most of the 1952 deaths.

Cycling in Copenhagen, 2015

The CS9 saga has been running for a couple of years now, and we’re finally beginning to achieve some clarity in the plans for Hammersmith.

CS9 has been renamed CW9 “CycleWay 9” to distance it from existing Central London Superhighways, and provide a facility serving a wider demographic than those installed to date.  The image being promoted is shown in TfL’s Walking and Cycling Commissioner’s Tweet, left, although we feel obliged to point out that despite the wording, the photo is not London at all – this was Copenhagen in 2015.  Nevertheless we believe this more inclusive vision is an appropriate aspiration for our borough’s roads.

Together with other members of the community, we have been successful in persuading H&F Council that TfL’s CS9 plans were flawed, now two different cycle routes are planned:  a fast commuter route using the somewhat underused paths alongside the A4, and something closer to a “Quietway“ plus urban realm improvements (greening) in King Street and Hammersmith Road. More on the council website, where an online debate has started.

We expect to be part of the planned residents consultation as we are concerned about potential negative impacts on pedestrians and retailers, significantly slower buses/traffic/increasing pollution, for which there is evidence from schemes such as Winchmore Hill and Waltham Forest.  TfL’s own CS9 Air Quality Report predicts only walking-speed traffic along Hammersmith Road at Olympia, and no overall improvement in air quality.  A council meeting is planned for 9th Sept, which you should attend if you are interested in this scheme (see our diary)…

Water Fountain outside Pallingswick House / WLFS

The Mayor of London has recently announced a scheme for Thames Water to install fountains to help reduce single-use plastic consumption, a sentiment we obviously endorse.  You may have noticed refill stations appearing in TfL locations recently, such as Hammersmith Bus Station.

We, along with the media, are rather less enamoured of the Thames Water-designed fountain, and hope not to see that particular design appearing on our streets.

We think it far more appropriate and greener to repair and revitalise the long-disused and pet-friendly Victorian fountains already on our streets, such as this fine but sadly non-working monument, dating from 1887, the same year Hammersmith Bridge was opened, conveniently and appropriately located adjacent to 3 local schools.  It was erected in memory of S.L. Swaab Esq., and bears the inscription: 

His knowledge like a spring of refreshing water flowing ever during life for the relief of suffering

Happily the Council has agreed with our view, and plans to include refurbishment of this one as part of the King Street Cycle path scheme, CW9.  Not far away, the fountain on Turnham Green Terrace is being refurbished, and should be operational next month, alongside some significant urban realm improvements in the form of seating and planting, which we would similarly welcome in Hammersmith.

Click on the newsletter image to open the pdf 

The Special 20-page Anniversary Newsletter has been published, celebrating 30 years of Hammersmith Society Awards. Printed copies are being distributed to subscribing members.

TfL has issued its response to previous consultations on the cycle route from Kensington Olympia through Hammersmith and Chiswick, and says construction of the route on the north side of the Hammersmith Broadway gyratory will begin this year.

There are no substantial alterations to the section from Hammersmith Broadway to the end of King Street. Local criticism had centred on the congestion of traffic and pedestrians, and the  likely delays for buses if the roadway is narrowed at the east end of King Street to make space for a segregated two-way cycle lane: TfL says delivery vehicles will use parking bays or park in Blacks Road or Angel Walk. We are sceptical as to whether that message will get through to security service vans delivering to banks, for example.

There were also worries about  increased risk to pedestrians from cyclists. TfL has decided to drop the term “Super-Highway”, saying it sends the wrong message. A local family cycling group has welcomed the scheme, so let’s not forget it is not just fast commuter cyclists who want cycle lanes.  But the TfL report specifically excludes the option of a commuter route parallel to the length of the A4, and is vague about the prospect of a fast route in Hammersmith,  which the Council announced last month. 

We understand LBHF is having further discussions with TfL.

 Click on the report image to download it from TfL.

Further to my News Update last week, we have received notice that there will be an ‘interim’ report to the Council’s ‘Community Safety, Environment and Residents Service Policy and Accountability Committee’ on Monday 29th January at 7pm.
You can see the Report  here

This Committee is open to all and I strongly recommend you attend if you can. (Unfortunately I shall be away).

The report is completely noncommittal and there appears to be no recognition of the considerable local opposition both in Hammersmith and Chiswick where there are various active anti-CS9 groups and petitions.