AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Urban transport in the melting pot

23rd February 1968
Page 32
Page 33
Page 32, 23rd February 1968 — Urban transport in the melting pot
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?

by Derek Moses • The publication of Brigadier T. I. Lloyd's study of the Manchester Rapid Transit proposals (pages 40-44) in which he criticizes the decision to build electric railways and puts forward arguments in favour of building special busways instead, underlines the fact that the future of public transport is very much in the melting pot. Is the backbone of future passenger traffic in the conurbations to be carried by rail or by road?

If Mrs. Castle gets her way, it seems very likely that rail will become the senior partner in suburban public transport. This is despite some convincing conclusions in favour of road, and the plans already being considered—or implemented—by some authorities to operate express bus services on separate busways.

Comments recently made by Mrs. Castle to rail union executives are heavy with significance. She spoke of the "regrouping of bus services to serve railheads" and "the extension of local rail routes" as trends for the future in conurbations. It was in the conurbations that the lack of passenger service integration was most obvious, she alleged, and it was here where suburban railways had an essential role to play in moving millions of commuters.

Later Mrs. Castle was more specific. She said that road/rail interchange facilities which were a -positive encouragement to use suburban rail services" must be created. She added that it would be part of the job of PTAs to provide new rail services in their conurbations where these were needed. She believed that the conurbations needed new rapid-transit systems and all the signs were that in most cases these would be electric railways.

Meanwhile there has been a welter of studies, reports and recommendations for the future of transport in towns and cities. Most recent is the rumour reported in COMMERCIAL MOTOR last week that the consultants working on the London Traffic Survey are likely to recommend that the car should be the basis of future transport in London, thus saving heavy investment in new tubes and other public 'transport systems.

This clashes with proposals for controlling the use of cars in cities, either by special road taxes or the restriction of parking or other similar measures. It is also contradicted by a statement on February 13 by the chairman of the GLC's highways and traffic committee, Mr. Robert Vigars. Talking about the proposed new motorways, he said: "They are not intended for the rush-hour journey to work. The rush-hour problem must be solved by improved public transport which we are determined to obtain".

However, the Young Liberals are the latest body to call for a move to "impose severe restrictions on the use of private cars in town centres".

Total bans on the use of cars in city centres have been called for by several associations, but Mrs. Castle herself has gone on record many times as saying that she will not impose such a ban. Her solution to the problem is the optimistic one of trying to encourage people away from the private car by providing more attractive public transport, possibly linked with parking restraints in city centres.

Clearly, the ultimate solution to the problem is going to be that of striking the correct balance between private and public transport. If private transport is not first restricted, then public transport by road, however comfortable it might be, will simply be held up by traffic congestion, and therefore become even less popular.

A positive step towards finding the solution was taken last week with the publication of Mrs. Castle's Road Circular, Traffic and Transport plans (CM, last week), in which the Minister asks all urban authorities of over 50,000 population to send her, within the next 18 months, their traffic and transport plans for the period up to the mid-1970s. Smaller traffic authorities have also been invited to prepare such plans, particularly hose with difficult problems, such as historic owns.

As a guide to local authorities, there is >ound-in with the circular a traffic and ransport plan prepared by consultants which in imaginary county borough with a popuation of about 125,000 might have prepared. t is illustrated with maps and diagrams, and nakes an interesting study. The following nain objectives were considered in preparing he plan:

ID measures to relieve congestion, I=1 help for public transport,

CI Road safety measures built into highway and traffic plans, and CI measures to protect the environ ment by traffic management.

The plan is divided into three phases, and phase I—for the period 1968-69--includes :he application of waiting and peak-hour oading and unloading restrictions at main .ciad junctions and selected bus stops in the own centre and along the more important radial routes, and the reviewing of bus routes Ind the siting of bus stops.

In phase II (1969-71) the only real neasure to help make public transport more ittractive is "starting to provide additional ;helters at bus stops". In phase III (1971-74) s the exclusion of day-time traffic from the nain shopping street and other minor ;treets to complete a network of pedestrian ;treets, and possibly the provision of special xis services to them.

Under phase III, further bus shelters will )e provided and waiting restrictions will be Ipplied at further bus' stops throughout the own.

What seems incredible to me is the delay in providing bus shelters—surely an essential and not very expensive way of contributing to the comfort of public transport. One of the real fundamentals which has been widely neglected already.

The imaginary town is also served by local railways, but there is what amounts to a frank admission that there is not much scope for the development of these little-used services—which is to be expected in a town of that size. Their future is to be investigated, however.

Already the British Road Federation has issued a statement about the traffic and transport plans Mrs. Castle calls for, asking that they be made public. The statement says: "Not only will the plans involve policies that affect everyone who lives in towns, but they will have a considerable bearing on the size of grants made by the Minister for road schemes and public transport.

"There is provision for some consultation with local interests, but we consider it is most important that plans of this nature should be made available for inspection before they are submitted to the Minister so that local people have an opportunity to comment."

Where do we go from here?

Tags

Organisations: GLC, British Road Federation
Locations: London

comments powered by Disqus