AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

New Town Design Criticized

13th June 1952, Page 39
13th June 1952
Page 39
Page 39, 13th June 1952 — New Town Design Criticized
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Three Papers Read Yesterday Deal With Progress in Refuse-vehicle Design, Methods of Collection and the Use of Mechanical Aids in Cleansing

IN his presidential address to the Institute of Public Cleansing's conference at Harrogate, this week, Mr. H. Turner said that the design of new housing estates did not always afford good access for vehicles. Dustbins often had to be carried a long way along footpaths to waiting vehicles and this created additional expense.

Delays could be avoided if carriageways were provided at the front or back of premises, rather than having houses on three sides'of a rectangle with a grass plot in the middle, the only approach to individual houses being by a path around the grass. This type of layout caused the average time for the emptying of a dustbin to be as much as seven minutes.

Mr. Turner foresaw that mechanization in public cleansing might extend to the use of equipment for sweeping footpaths, although it was doubtful whether manual methods could be entirely dispensed with. In the work of gully-emptying, even minor authorities could employ the smaller type of appliance, as it was possible to fit an alternative body for other purposes.

A symposium of papers on refuse collection _was read yesterday. This comprised " Progress in Refuse

collection Vehicle Design," by Mr. W. Carmichael, assistant cleansing manager of Edinburgh Corporation; "Methods of Collection and Bin Provision." by Mr. A. E. Barton, director of public cleansing of Manchester Corporation, , and " Mechanical Aids," by Mr. Norman Holt. To-day, papers on street-cleansing equipment and problems of distant disposal are to be heard by delegates. Summaries will be published in next week's. issue _ of ." The. Commercial Motor."

of vehicle was sometimes considered specious. This was unfair, as in almost every town there were certain conditions which narrowed choice. Some were the existence of narrow roads which demanded vehicles with small turning circles, steep hills which prevented the use of articulated or batteryelectric machines, and the nature of the residential areas.

The method of disposal was also a critical factor. If it were by controlled tipping, moving-floor machines might be unsuitable and well-compressed refuse might be preferred, whereas if the refuse were passed through a disposal plant, compression might destroy some of its salvage value.

Savings with Oilers In Edinburgh, most of the 20-30cubic-yd. vehicles for carrying refuse from plant to tip had been convened to oilers, and -fuel consumption was less than half that of petrol-engined machines. A similar result was experienced in the use of oil-engined 4-5tonners on house-to-house work. A saving in maintenance costs was also 7.e1fettecL la a reeent:tria.4 a.s4-45-tonner had a fuel-con§uniptioit 'rate of 10.38 gallons per 100 miles, and a petrolengined machine 16.1 gallons per 100 miles.

Referring to battery-electric vehicles, he said that their suitability, long life, reliability and low operating costs were generally admitted, and their limited adoption could be attributed only to ,high initial cost. This was because total demand fell short of the number which wouldmerit large-scale production. No post-war refuse collector embodied any special provision for the potential needs of civil defence, but it was pertinent to point out the obvious adaptability of the side-loading and rear-loading moving-floor vehicle for this purpose.

American Method The speaker described a system worked in the U.S.A. in which dustbins sterilized by steam were leftat premises and filled ones were taken away. Thecollecting vehicle was merely a platform lorry which could take 100 bins in a load, and carried a steam cleaner mounted on the chassis. After the bins had been emptied they were inverted over a series of jets and subjected to a scalding spray. Each householder paid 75 cents a month for this service.

The Americans used many compacting devices. One city claimed that its compressor-type bodies loaded refuse to a density of 460-620 lb., compared with 280-400 lb. in open lorries. It was, however, pointed out that maintenance costs were greater because of the upkeep of the hydraulic lines and other equipment.

There was no doubt that American' design had caught up with British, but the use of modern hygienic vehicles wat not as prevalent as in this country.


comments powered by Disqus