Agenda item

Hammersmith Gyratory Consultation

Minutes:

Richard Duffill introduced the report explaining that the scheme was part of Transport for London’s ‘Better Junctions’ programme. Hammersmith Gyratory was a very challenging junction, and any changes made would have an impact on some other part of the gyratory. The scheme offered significant benefits to cyclists, especially when seen as part of a wider scheme for improving cycle routes in the area. Officers had already made preliminary comments objecting to the loss of the crossing from Shepherds Bush Road to the Broadway.

 

John Griffiths, Acting Chair of H+F Cyclists, explained that he was concerned that road space was being taken from pedestrians to accommodate the changes, in order to preserve road space. He was concerned about the increase in width of the crossing between King Street and the Broadway, and whether the crossing would have sufficient capacity for those using it. He was also concerned about the lack of a two way cycle lane on King Street, the use of a stepped, rather than segregated cycle track which could be unsafe. Mr Griffiths expressed his disappointed with the lack of detail in some of the plans. He said that pressure on the scheme from King Street could be reduced by the creation of a cycle route along Studland Street and onto Glenthorne Road

 

Councillor Dewhirst explained that he was concerned with the impact on Fulham Palace Road, where the Council had previously done much to ease congestion.

 

Nigel Hensman, a local resident, explained that he was concerned about pedestrian safety, especially about the new wider crossing, and about the impact on journey times through the junction. Other residents concurred with this view, and added that it was difficult to see how pedestrians waiting to use the crossing could be kept from doing so on the cycle lane. Mr Hensman noted that journey times for pedestrians could be significantly slower than at present, as could those for motor vehicles, although cyclists would benefit from a reduced journey time. John Griffiths pointed out that this might encourage car users to use more sustainable forms of transport.

 

Councillor Hamilton was concerned about the reduction in the number of lanes from the Broadway onto Butterwick and the potential impact on traffic. He was also concerned about the introduction of a bus lane on Beadon Road which could impact on Hammersmith Grove. He felt that the new taxi rank and loading bay arrangement in Blacks Way was poorly designed, as it would move the loading bays away from the rear of the shops which they serviced.

 

A resident said that they were concerned that cycle lanes would be at different heights, which would make it difficult to cross roads, especially for those with difficulties seeing.

 

Rosemary Petit, a local resident, said that she supported the idea of a bus lane in Beadon Road as it presently caused significant delays to journeys. She said that if a bus lane were not introduced, a bus stop should be, in order that people could access the western part of the town centre without waiting in traffic to get to the next stop on the route.

 

The committee thanked officers for their presentation, and asked that their disappointment that Transport for London had not attended the meeting be passed on.

Supporting documents: