If the two sides of our politically divided borough are in agreement on anything related to housing, it is that there is a desperate need for more homes.
The disagreement is about how many of those homes should be designed to house people on low incomes or benefits, and how many should be built to appeal to wealthier private buyers.
For developers, the opportunity is clear – and the message when the Conservatives took over the town hall four years ago, borne out by the high volume of schemes in the pipeline, is that Hammersmith and Fulham is now open for business.
King Street Developments, a joint venture between Grainger and Helical Bar, is the latest to step forward with a planning application for a comprehensive redevelopment of the area around Hammersmith Town Hall.
In place of the town hall extension would be a new public square, lined with cafés and restaurants and flanked by buildings up to 14 storeys high, containing new council offices and 320 luxury flats.
For the firm's directors, David Walters and Matthew Bonning-Snook, the project is the key to unlocking Hammersmith's future.
Mr Bonning-Snook said: "Hammersmith hasn't seen a lot of housing development over the last 20 years, because the previous administration insisted on it all being affordable housing. The end result is not very much of it.
"Now the council says it is 'open for business', and I think they are – that's why the development community has embraced the new administration, because they feel, at long last, that something can actually be done."
Adding a new supermarket and public square will draw people further down King Street and boost footfall, said Mr Bonning-Snook, who rejects the idea that another food store will kill off local shops.
"When you get towards the end of King Street, you end up with a lot of kebab houses and fried chicken shops," he said. "It's underperforming."
He cites the example of the regeneration of Exeter city centre, where a large-scale regeneration project attracted widespread opposition in the planning stages, but was warmly received on completion.
"Everyone was terrified, and then pretty much the whole town said it should have come sooner," said Mr Bonning-Snook. "They suddenly see Strada and these other great restaurants that they've never come across before. People are slightly concerned about change, but we feel this is a definite change for the better."
Key to the success of the project will be the footbridge sweeping from Nigel Playfair Avenue, over the A4 and into Furnivall Gardens. It was one of the features which led to the scheme beating two other competitors in a design contest, but has since been an object of derision for Save Our Skyline, an umbrella organisation of local resident and amenity groups who are all against the scheme.
Some claim the bridge will be a 'mugger's paradise', and will have to be caged to address fears about the safety of pedestrians passing over the busy A-road, but the developers say discussions with Transport for London have indicated that no such measures will be necessary.
Mr Bonning-Snook said: "I can imagine there's a certain amount of concern from some residents, but it will be well populated and a much safer route than what currently exists by way of the underpass. That's not a nice environment to walk under at any part of the day, to my mind."
Mr Walters, himself a Fulham resident, said: "Hammersmith and King Street have all the ingredients for fantastic development. What struck me the most when I first walked from King Street under the subway and popped out at Furnivall Gardens, is that there's no suggestion when you're in King Street that you're so close to the river.
"The bridge will really put Hammersmith on the map in terms of driving into London from the west. It's a very well-designed, architectural footbridge that will be a landmark."
Exactly how much it will cost to buy one of the new flats will depend on the market, but it is thought they will be significantly cheaper than those in other recent riverside developments – around £700 per square foot in King Street, compared to between £900 and £1,000 at Imperial Wharf in Fulham.
"The housing has to pay for the rest of the scheme. Inevitably it comes at a price, but the kind of price that the market can afford," said Mr Bonning-Snook. "We don't necessarily see it being full of overseas buyers or young professionals. The interest that has come while we've been doing the consultation has been from people who live, work and have businesses in the area.
"I can see it being quite appealing to people who have houses nearby and whose children have left home."
Both men say they expect a certain level of opposition to any major regeneration project, particularly one in which the local council is a partner.
But they are irritated by the images created and circulated by SOS, which superimpose planning drawings on to photographs of the river to give what the developers believe is a misleading impression of the scheme's impact.
Mr Bonning-Snook says the firm has spent a 'considerable amount of money' producing a series of views that have been verified by an independent planning professional, but which SOS have declined to use in their own literature.
"They seem to refuse to use any of our images, and we find it rather strange," he said. "There is plenty of material out there in the public domain. We want people to have all the information to allow them to make their own decisions."
Another controversial aspect is the need to pull down several buildings, including the Cineworld cinema and a row of homes belonging to the Thomas Pocklington Trust, which cares for people with sight loss and which counts the flats as an important capital asset.
The developers admit that if private agreements cannot be made, compulsory purchase of the sites may be the only option, but insist they are doing everything possible to make acceptable arrangements. Tenants of the Thomas Pocklington Trust buildings will be offered new homes in the immediate area if they wish, under the same arrangement as before.
"We will ensure that that they move to a location that's acceptable, and hopefully chosen by them," said Mr Walters. "They need to be properly and fairly treated because it's a sensitive issue, and we're aware of that. There's a lot of scaremongering about people being thrown out of their property, and that's just not the case."
If planning permission is granted and there is no further legal challenge, construction could start within two years and be complete within four. Disruption would be inevitable, although it is hoped that access off the A4 would limit the impact of this vast project.
"It's a significant amount of investment that will make other people invest in the area," said Mr Walters. "That may come through people wanting to move here, with the potential impact on property prices, and the commercial market, in terms of other organisations wishing to base themselves here because of the quality of the location. You may see more commercial development, a better quality of shops, and then of course the savings to us taxpayers in delivering this scheme.
"It's the council undoing the damage that previous generations have done, like building the town hall extension, which was a council-led initiative with council architects.
"We truly believe this will be an absolutely fantastic scheme, which of its time is probably the best in London."