We Can Deal with
Page 31
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
London's Superfluous Traffic
Several Points, Which
• in Reality are Salient, Seem to be Ignored by Those Who Wish to Solve the Problem of
London Traffic
' By
Capt. E. H. B. Palmer, O.B.E.
THE congestion of traffic in London
is a problem for which a solution becomes more unlikely as time passes on. First of all, there is the attitude of the London County Council towards the Bressey Report, and then there is the undeniable fact that every day, in every way, the streets become increasingly difficult to negotiate. Whilst we may, perhaps, be compelled to admit that nothing short of its aerial destruction will provide us with an excuse for the reconstruction of London on a plan more closely related to modern requirements, and whilst we continue to persuade ourselves that a ruthless sacrifice of ancient sites, mediceval customs and historic edifices can never be contemplated, there are one or two little points that merit more attention than most of us give to them.
The railway companies are so anxious to impress on us the need for an immediate economy in their budget, that my first two suggestions are broached, without further apology or comment, for their urgent attention and ultimate benefit.
Hint for the Railways.
Each of these companies supports a large fleet of road vehicles, engaged in the daily routine of collection and delivery, and here is an encumbrance of which, one feels sure, they would be most happily rid. Yet, at their elbow is a means to that end, because the combined resources of their good friends and associates, Carter Paterson and Co,, Ltd., Hay's Wharf Cartage Co., Ltd., and Pickfords, Ltd., represent, in variety and flexibility, that which could meet all their require meats.
If it be argued that these operators already enjoy a surfeit of traffic, why, then, do they persist in opposing appli-,:ations for licences and why does one 3bserve, on any day in the week, in many streets and at all hours, railway collecting vans only partially full?
Then there is the question of receivng offices. Why should not the prin:iple of inter-railway co-operation, so iffectively employed in other directions, Je applied here? A reduction of the lumber of these relics of less-hampered lays would be something to go on vith, in our quest for the relief of :ongested streets. Invariably, these )remises are 4ocated in the busiest horoughfares and more often than not, ittention is drawn to them by the iresence of a stagnant railway van. n each case, the flow of traffic is emiarrassed, as any experienced constable sill confirm.
Sometimes the vehicle is horse-drawn ir of the mechanical equivalent and, then it is released to a resumption if its tour, it rejoins the traffic queue
with a deliberation that seldom escapes remark from those more anxious to keep to a schedule. In Victoria Street, Westminster, for example, receiving offices of two railway companies are within a stone's throw of each other and of the Victoria* Southern Railway terminus. They are, also, sufficiently near to the bus halts to prove a hindrance to both vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
In other directions, there are absurdities equally avoidable by the exercise of a little common sense. On Mondays, Tuesdays, Fridays and Saturdays there is an invasion of laundry vans from the outer suburbs and farther afield. They cross and recross London, demanding a right-of-way through the most crowded thoroughfares, in order to keep faith and maintain contact with
isolated customers. Here, most certainly, the need for co-operation cries aloud.
What Could Be Achieved by Combined Distribution.
If the combined distribution of these laundries were carefully analysed, it would be found to involve thousands of dead miles and hundreds of superfluous working hours per week, all of which may be claimed to represent the unnecessary use of streets notorious for the fact that they carry more tonnage to the mile and the hour than those in any other part of the country.
A laundry has the bulk of its customers in its immediate neighbourhood, and a handful scattered beyond, by force of circumstances that have obtained through people moving out of the neighbourhood ; the natural inclination is to retain these accounts at all costs. It is, indeed, "at all costs," for much dead mileage is in volved. .
This story can be told about laundries north, south, east and west. Vans are working in opposite directions -and covering more or less the same ground. They eat up miles and consume time quite disproportionate to
the service effected. If, therefore, these laundries would pool their resources and classify their distribution, they would soon discover that the combined fleet was greatly in excess of actual requirements. A substantial economy would be possible by the reduction of the number of vehicles and this would, in turn, prove a valuable contribution towards the solution
of the problem we now face. .* Whilst it is admitted that there are certain advantages to the laundry, in operating its own vehicles, and whilst we agree that the services of a drivercum-salesman are not without their peculiar value, we would point oirt that many laundries employ hired vans and could not be persuaded to return to their old. habits.
It is unnecessary to flog a dead horse. This same principle of co-operative distribution could be adopted by other trades and particularly by those drawing from or serving the various London markets, Why Not Replan Covent Garden?
Incidentally, one can but marvel at the " untidy " spectacle presented by Covent Garden Market throughout the best part of the day. In its present arrangement, there is nothing but chaotic disorder, which is carried, gaily and irresponsibly, into the surrounding thoroughfares, to the confusion of many. Seriously, I suggest that this ancient site should be replanned.
While it is being demolished, trade could be transferred to Spitallields, Brentford and other well-known alternative centres. Possibly, as I have already indicated, we should then find aless disturbing and more reasonable use for the most valuable section of the West Central district.
I am a believer in viaducts as a cure for many ills. Surely the topographical contours of London offer a solution to more than one of its traffic problems.
Finally, why not continue the North Circular Road right the way around London and make it the recognized location and terminal for all trunk services. Vehicles on such services would be permitted to penetrate inwards only for the purpose of effecting a direct delivery or collection of not less than, say, 2 tons.
The extension of this principle to the railways and their goods yards is a tempting proposition that could be envisaged only after a close examination into ways and means. Would it be tank heresy to suggest, however, that Charing Cross be merged with Waterloo, Cannon Street with London Bridge, Holborn Viaduct with St. Paul's, and that railway goods yards should be moved just a little farther out?