Improvements proposed for Hammersmith gyratory

gyratoryTransport for London is proposing a new road layout around Hammersmith Broadway to improve cyclist safety.

The transformation of Hammersmith gyratory would include:

  • A segregated two-way cycle track on the north side of Hammersmith gyratory
  • Cyclist-specific signals at junctions to separate cyclists and motorised vehicles
  • An increase of cycle parking
  • Pedestrian countdown signals at the crossings of King Street, Beadon Road, Shepherd’s Bush Road, Queen Caroline Street, Hammersmith Road and Butterwick
  • Widened sections of footway on King Street to provide more space for pedestrians
  • A new bus lane on Beadon Road between Glenthorne Road and Hammersmith Broadway to improve bus reliability

The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, said:

“We want to completely overhaul this stretch of road and make some serious improvements for pedestrians, bus users and cyclists. Our proposals would greatly improve the area for everyone using it and I hope we’ll see a positive response to our consultation.”

The improvement work is part of TfL’s £4bn Road Modernisation Plan to radically transform the way the Capital’s roads and public spaces are used. Work on the improvements at Hammersmith, subject to consultation, could begin in 2017. It is separate to a long term aim of burying the Hammersmith flyover. Members of the public can respond to the Hammersmith gyratory consultation, which closes on Tuesday 15 March, here.

TfL keeps London’s traffic moving through a variety of methods. Technology, such as Split Cycle Offset Optimisation Technique (SCOOT) – proven to reduce delays by up to 12 per cent and being expanded across London, is used. Up-to-the-minute traffic information is provided via digital road signs, TfL’s traffic status page and TfL’s Twitter feeds to better manage the network. TfL also has the ability to control temporary traffic lights from its central traffic control centre, to help further ease traffic and minimise disruption.

Pedestrian Countdown shows exactly how much time is left to cross the road, meaning pedestrians are less likely to hesitate or stop in the middle of the road. An off-street trial of the technology demonstrated that more than 85 per cent of pedestrians felt safer and more confident when crossing the road with countdown

Cyclist journeys through the area will be improved by up to a minute.

The sessions will take place at St Paul’s Church, Hammersmith, Queen Caroline Street, London, W6 9PJ on:
•Thursday 18 February 15:00-19:00
•Wednesday 24 February 9.00-12.00
•Saturday 5 March 09:00-12:00

5 thoughts on “Improvements proposed for Hammersmith gyratory

  1. Perks for bus users, cyclists and pedestrians, but what does it do for car users on what is already a difficult and congested junction? Knowing Transport for London’s contempt for car users, any “improvement” will probably be at their expense.

    The idea of widening King Street pavements has been tried before by our previous Labour Council, that is before voters kicked them out. I remember the £3 million Street Smart extravaganza which used pavement widening as an excuse to remove road space. Removing a vital road lane on a gyratory exit only added to the stress on the Broadway. There were even dangerous tailbacks on the A4 before the slip road.

    The main benefit seemed to be more pavement space on King Street for youths to smoke and loiter. The snazzy new pavement is unusually slippery when it rains.

    We may have changed the Mayor, but not the power behind the throne. Transport for London is still referred to as Transport for Livingstone for good reason.

  2. https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/hammersmith-gyratory?cid=hammersmith-gyratory
    “we would need to remove the existing pedestrian crossing that connects this island to the south side of Hammersmith Broadway”
    – so better for pedestrians? Would lead to them just dashing across?

    “we would provide a new bus lane on Beadon Road between Glenthorne Road and Hammersmith Broadway, replacing one of the two general traffic lanes.”
    – translated into English, stuff car users!

    “Raise the carriageway to footway level on King Street opposite Lyric Square to make crossing more convenient for pedestrians and encourage slower motor vehicle speed”
    – the mind boggles, traffic usually crawls. Unnecessary ‘traffic calming’.

    “Our proposals would affect some journey times through the area. In the main these changes would not be significant, with some bus and general traffic journeys getting shorter and some getting longer. The most notable increases in journey times will be for traffic approaching Hammersmith gyratory from Fulham Palace Road in the morning and evening peaks.”
    – in other words, aggravating congestion for the majority!

    A very expensive way of achieving the social engineering goal of increasing cyclist numbers. H&F residents will be paying for this through their council tax bills while their journeys take longer and public transport fares go up and up.

    • I agree that the pavements on King Street do not need widening. They are perfectly adequate. This part should be cut out of the plans to save some of our money.

  3. With reservations about widening pavements in King Street, this is a good proposal. Using the gyratory as a cyclist is tough – it is on a par with the old Elephant and Castle roundabout for danger.

    Please can we think carefully about how adding more cycle parking, and how much is really needed. Most cyclists in London are commuters travelling between home and work. Large clusters of racks filled with bikes, some abandoned or rarely used, just create eyesores. Look outside Shepherds Bush underground station for example.

  4. This is an expensive proposal to benefit the tiny minority of cyclists at the expense of the vast majority of motorists. As cyclists in Hammersmith are already able to ride on the roads or pavements as they wish, go down one-way streets in either direction according to choice, and to ignore any traffic signals and pedestrian crossings that motorists have to observe I’m not quite sure why we need to give them a cycle lane too.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s