Isabella Caviedes, 18, left, and her friend, Claudia Ramsey, 55
October 18, 2025
Plans to remove the Hammersmith Flyover and potentially replace it with a tunnel are nothing new.
As detailed by the Hammersmith Society, the proposal was first mooted in the 1960s, the same decade the flyover itself was constructed, and has since been revived on a number of occasions. This includes last year when it featured in a key planning document, and most recently in Hammersmith and Fulham Council’s draft Local Plan.
Due to go out for consultation, the draft plan, which is intended to guide development across the borough from 2027 until 2042, details how removing the flyover and parts of the A4 would free up land and reconnect communities separated by the road.
Examples of potential development which could be constructed in its place include new homes and cultural and leisure facilities, plus upgrades to St Paul’s Green and Furnivall Gardens.
It is hoped the cost of the tunnel would ultimately be paid off by monetising the land to be freed up by removing the flyover.
Walking out of the south exit of Hammersmith Broadway Station the flyover looms large, acting as a kind of elevated marker of the edge of the town centre.
Kim Holt, 44, works in Hammersmith and said she has been looking at the flyover for the last 20 years. Asked if she thinks its removal would prove a good idea, she said: “Yeah I think so. It is a little bit of a blight on the space, particularly when you come to this side of the station.”
She said if it was to be demolished there would need to be some form of alternative, such as the proposed tunnel, due to the level of traffic in the area.
The freeing up of land however would be welcome, she said, in particular if it meant the delivery of new green spaces. “It would be nice to have a bit more green space up here. There are a lot of big offices in the area and having space, outside space, I know a lot of people do go to the churchyard.”
Hammersmith Flyover
Others the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) spoke to in and around the Broadway agreed that the removal of the flyover would likely prove beneficial, with little love shown for the structure.
Catherine Watkins, 55, said she is suspicious as to whether the proposed scheme will ever be funded, though that if it does she hopes it would lead to additional green space. Marion Clancy, 67, similarly said more space would be desirable, “because London is so over populated. It would be more space for people”.
Claudia Ramsey, 55, who was standing with her friend Isabella Caviedes, 18, outside the Broadway, lives close to the flyover. She said its removal could work, but that she would like to see the tunnel constructed first if possible.
“Not before,” she said. “I think it’s difficult with all this. I was concerned about the works that would be done and how it will affect us around here, but honestly I don’t know.
“It’s not beautiful, it’s horrible, it’s not nice but how will the traffic benefit? We’ll see how it goes.”
On how she would like to see the land used if the flyover is to be removed, she was firmly aligned with others the LDRS had spoken to. “Green space would be good. Because the reason I think I can live in London is because it’s very green.”
The flyover, and its potential removal, was raised at a Hammersmith and Fulham Council Cabinet meeting earlier this week. Cabinet members agreed to move the draft Local Plan to its Regulation 18 public consultation, which is due to begin later this month.
A visualisation of the area if the flyover was removed
Cllr Stephen Cowan, Leader of the council, said the local authority would have to work with the Mayor of London and Government to progress the project.
In terms of funding, he said the hope is that it would essentially pay for itself via the monetising of the land.
“It would be a land reclamation issue, recycling the profits made from the land into putting in a tunnel,” Cllr Cowan told members. “That would need a different approach to transport in this city and it’s something we’re planning for and hoping for, but clearly it would an issue we would have to work with the Mayor on and Central Government on. But it is something that would stack up because it would be self-financing ultimately.”
In the council’s draft Local Plan a feasibility study from 2013/14 is noted which found traffic on the A4 would be disrupted for around 18 months if the works are progressed, half of the overall construction time.
“Any project that comes forward will need to carefully consider this in detail against the construction methodology and design of any tunnel to ensure these impacts are minimised,” the draft plan states. “This will also have to be weighed up against a do-nothing scenario, which would involve substantial traffic disruptions associated with regular maintenance or upgrading of the flyover.”
The draft Local Plan, once adopted by Hammersmith and Fulham Council, will provide a strategic overview of the local authority’s priorities for the coming years. Covering topics from infrastructure to housing and transport, it will set policies and allocate sites to guide decisions about potential future developments.
Another key aspiration is to deliver 25,000 new homes between 2027 and 2042, which the council said would exceed housebuilding targets set out in the current London Plan.
The locality earmarked for the most new homes is Fulham, one of the four key regeneration areas, which is down for a potential 8,000 new ‘units’.
Following its Regulation 18 consultation, a second consultation is pencilled in for next summer before the draft plan is submitted to the Secretary of State for examination. It is hoped the plan will be ready for adoption in November 2027, to run for 15 years until 2042.
Ben Lynch - Local Democracy Reporter
Like Reading Articles Like This? Help Us Produce More This site remains committed to providing local community news and public interest journalism. Articles such as the one above are integral to what we do. We aim to feature as much as possible on local societies, charities based in the area, fundraising efforts by residents, community-based initiatives and even helping people find missing pets. We’ve always done that and won’t be changing, in fact we’d like to do more. However, the readership that these stories generates is often below that needed to cover the cost of producing them. Our financial resources are limited and the local media environment is intensely competitive so there is a constraint on what we can do. We are therefore asking our readers to consider offering financial support to these efforts. Any money given will help support community and public interest news and the expansion of our coverage in this area. A suggested monthly payment is £8 but we would be grateful for any amount for instance if you think this site offers the equivalent value of a subscription to a daily printed newspaper you may wish to consider £20 per month. If neither of these amounts is suitable for you then contact info@neighbournet.com and we can set up an alternative. All payments are made through a secure web site. One-off donations are also appreciated. Choose The Amount You Wish To Contribute. If you do support us in this way we’d be interested to hear what kind of articles you would like to see more of on the site – send your suggestions to the editor. For businesses we offer the chance to be a corporate sponsor of community content on the site. For £30 plus VAT per month you will be the designated sponsor of at least one article a month with your logo appearing if supplied. If there is a specific community group or initiative you’d like to support we can make sure your sponsorship is featured on related content for a one off payment of £50 plus VAT. All payments are made through a secure web site. |