SPECIAL REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE SELECT COMMITTEE.
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The County Surveyor's Statements.
The Select Committee of the House of Lords sat on Wednesday, 8th July, for the second time to consider the Middlesex County Commit (Western Road and Improvements and Fioance) Bill, which seeks, amongst other provisions, to impese a tax of iths of penny per crir mile on motor omnibus companies using the new road, which is estimated to cost £502,800, made up by 2322,800 as cost of works and £180,000 eest of land arid properties. The Duke of Bedford is chair/non of the Committee. The promoters of the Bill, the Middlesex County Council, were represented by Mr. Honoratus Lloyd, K.C., Mr. G. .J. Talbot, K.C., and Mr. 1Vrottesley, and there were numerous petitions against the Bill, including he London Omnibus Owners' Federation, whose counsel were r. Balfour Browne, K.C., and Mr. 0. M. Freeman, K.C., while the London United Tramways Co. had as theft. counsel Mr. Szlnmper. At the first hearing on the 7th inst., Mr. bmoratus Lloyd, K.C., opened the case for the promoters and objected to tho locus standi of the Roads improvement Association. The Committee decided not to hear this Association's petition.
On the following day Mr. Henry Titus Wakeham, M.I.C.E.. Comity Surveyor and Engineer, was called, and stated that Lie knew the western and south-western portions of the oounty, having devoted some 16 years to the upkeep of the roads of Middlesex. He was acquainted with the through traffic difficulties along High Street, Breutford, and especially SO since the tracks of the London United Tramways had been laid. Several schemes had been proposed for the widening of High Street, Brentford, and for new roads to the north of the said street, but none of those had fructified, owing chiefly to their prohibitive cost. The County Ceuneil had, however, been fully alive to the need for a new arterial road to the West for several years past, arid sieee 1905 various schemes had beers suggested, and after full consideration of all witness had arrived at the conclusion that the needs of the traffic through the west and south-west portions of Middlesex would best be met by a new arterial road along the road now suggested. This new arterial road would not only lessen the inconvenience of blockages to traffic experienced in High Street, Brentford, but it would also relieve the High Street, Hounslow, the width of which was fast becoming insufficient entiefactorily to carry the constantly increasing traffic to the eouth-west and western districts. The line of road proposed had been well considered, and would have a length of five miles one furlong, with an additional length of " spur" road of about one furlong 420 yards. This new road would open up the land through which it passed, and would prove of immense value to the district. The proposed road would also
afford a means of getting rid of present blockages to traffic in the High Street, Brentford, and would be the mealis of obviating many serious collisions and accidents which now
took place. The system of construction suggested for the road was unique in character, and would produce it carriage way which after construction would be entirely free from interference for the laying of sewers, drains, water and gas mains, which under existing conditions was constantly going on in other roads to the general annoyance and ioconvenienee of road users. Thisinconvenience would be obviated by laying sewers and mains, cables, et'., in duplicate under the footways only, and this system would obviate all cross cuttings of the carriageway for obtaining access to either a subway or to sewers or mains. The underbed of the road would be constructed in reinforced concrete, and as mechanical traction would undoubtedly increase along the roads in Middlesex, it. was highly desirable that this new artery, and also all other new arterial roads, should be constructed on is principle which would enable them to withstand as much as Possible the sudden impacts and stresses caused by such traffic.. Witness knew of no law which prevented a road authoeity from constructing a carriageway under any method it chose to adopt, and in constructing this new road in the way suggested in order to hear the motor traffic the large extra expense incurred would be thrown upon the county. Witness had carefully watched the effect of motor omnibus traffic on all classes of roads during the last few years, and the damage done to the eurfacies of roads had been of a very serious nature. Road surfaces in Middlesex which used to he strong enough to carry all ordinary traffic for years were itow in a very short time so cut to pieces and injured by motor traffic that it had been found necessary to discard the ordinary system of water-bound reparation in savour of permanent surfacing materiels, which was a great charge open the county exchequer. In this connection the Batts Road from the Heston and Isleworth district boundary of Hounslow to the county boundary of Coinbrook after a few months of motorbus traffic had already had to be wholly re-surfaced for a length of about five miles at a cost of a-bout £33,000. Until a short time am the Green Lanes main road through Wood Green was maintained pertly in wood paving and partly in water-hound macadam, and this surface was quite sufficient for the ordinary traffic until motor omnibus traffic was started over it. But within those or four months from the commencement of the motorbus traffic kelt the wood-paved and macada.mized lengths began to deteriorate very rapidly, and it eprielcly became necessary to take up the wee-id block's and the concrete. bed and to lay thicker concrete foundations and to renew the blocks. This extra work cost
.04305. Then, again, the Richmond and Isleworth Road and the Twickenham Road and South Street, Tsleworth, had been so damaged by motor traffic that reconstrnetinn had become necessary at acost of 28600. The reconstrection of Golder's Green T-load, and the main road right through Hendon which was used by the motorbuses, had also become necessary, and was now in progress at all estimated cost of £50,000. In consequence of the motor traffic the reconstruction of the St. Alban,. Road had also been commenced at a cost of 214,000. The reconstruction of the Staines Road was also now about to be undertaken at a cost of £32,000, and the reconstruction of the Edgware and Watford Road would shortly be commenced at a cost of 232,000. In addition to all these witness had submitted a scheme to the County Highways Committee for the re-surfacing, reconstruction, and re-widening of other roads in the county at an estimated cost of about £256,000. The damage to road surfaces in Middlesex during the last 18 months or two years in particular had been most marked in ratio to the extended use of the motor omnibuses. The amount of taxes or petrol duty received by the Road Board email not be legally disbursed in contributions towards road maintenance, and therefore the road authorities received no benefit at all in the way of rates towards the upkeep of the roads for bus traffic unless they happened to be the licensing and police authority for the area in which damaged roads were situated. Petrol taxes went to the Road Board and Revenue duties to the Exchequer. Motorbuses only paid 10, per gallon petrol tax, whilst an ordinary consumer paid 3d. per gallon. It was therefore most unfair that motor omnibus traffic should he allowed to traverse any roads and do extraordinary damage under the conditions which now existed. A CelISIIS taken on 14 county roads on two days last August showed that motor omnibuses numbered 19,500, representing a tonnage of 117,000. Other vehicles, excluding trams, numbered 89,307, giving a tonnage of 84,887.
In reply to Mr. Freeman., one of the counsel for the Omnibus Owners' Federation, Mr. 'Wakehant said under the Bill the Council would have power to make structural alterations, but the height of bridges would in all cases be sufficient to allow buses to pass under them.
Answering Mr. Wroetesley, witness said the cost of this new road would fall upon the ratepayers of the county. The Road Board were taking no share in the promotion of this Bill, and were therefore not concerned in any way in aeking that the motor omnibus companies should pay a tax of 3ths of a penny per mile towards the cost of the maintenance of this proposed new mad. He considered that wood [ducks were the best surface material for these main roads which were used for omnibus traffic, which was considered extracrdinary traffic. When once laid down he was not prepared to have the reinfort ed concrete foundation of this new mad broken up by either the tramways company or anyone else.
Other Middlesex Opinions.
Mr. Charles Pinkham, J.P., chairman of the Highways Committee of the Middlesex County Council, and an Alderman of that body, stated, in reply to Mr. Wrottesley, that he carried out negotiations wills the Road Board reSpeeting this matter, and had gone fully into all the particulars with the County Engineer. A foundation of reinforced concrete was, he thought, a very desirable way of dealing with the new road in view of the motor omnibus and other heavy traffic that would use it. It WaS obvious, .however, that such a method of construction would be useless if the foundation when once laid was allowed to be broken up. And as to the proposal to charge the motor omnibus companies a tax of ith of a penny per mile for maintenance he thought it was a very fair charge, and most desirable in the interests of the ratepayers. The county had suffered far too much from these motor omnibuses in the past. He was at the Conference held last year, when it was resolved that local authorities should have the power to fix the routes of omnibuses, and decide what the companies should contribute towards the maintenance of roads.
In reply to Mr. Balfour Browne, K.e., Mr. Piultham said this proposed new road was to a great. extent intended to relieve the present congested traffic at Brentford. He did not consider athis of a potmy an unfair tax, and he agreed that if they put. on a heavy tax on motor traffic using the new read the omnibuses would not use it. The County Council were owners of a ItuTe system of tramways in the North of London but not in this western district, and these trams were worked by a private company under lease. He was aware that motes. omnibus competition had been dieestrous to tramway traffic carried on by the London County 1110 Council, but he believed with regard to their own tramways that they had been ding better for the last 12 months than fru. several previous years. He, however, had no figures with him to substantiate what he seas stating. He did not object to the motor onmihnses competing with their tramways, and he had no special object in trying to get rid of the motor omnibuses.
This is to be a kind of armour-plated road?—It is to he a well constructed road. You tried in the other House to prevent motor traffic on this road1—Yes. And if the Bill had then passed you could have prevented motorbuses using it!—No doubt. And now you want tie: right to insert a condition that motorbus companies shall pay a tax of j of a Id. per mile if they use it. Do you know of any other county where such a tax is being imposed in regard to any new road I—No, I know of no °thee rued being made under such conditions. _Have you the least idea what a tax of 3 of a Id. per mile or. these omnibus companies mean to those who Use the buses?-1 cannot say.
Mr. Freeman: It is suggested that the bus is the poor man's vehicle and that a tax of 3 of a Id, will cause the feres to be raised. The bus companies do not like the tramways running cheap workmen's cars do they I—No, and they won't run them themselves. To say the motorbus is the pew man's vehicle is all a bogey.
Mr. Leslie Vigers, of the firm of Messrs. Leslie Vigers and Co., land agents and surveyors, stated that he had had considerable experience in the valuing of land in the district in question, and had surveyed the property in the neighbourhood where it was proposed to make this new road. He considered that 2180,000 was a fair valuation for the properties concerned.
Experience at Richmond.
Mr. John Henry Brierly, civil engineer and surveyor to the Richmond Town Council, stated thathe had been responsible for the highways of the borough for many years. Owing to the altered conditions of traffic during the last few years, owing chiefly to the motor omnibuses, the Richmond Corporation had 'had to expend about 229,000 on the wood Paving of the two main arteries. Before the introduction of motor omnibuses these roads had been macadamized roads, hut after about the year 1909 they had to alter their road materials owing to the excessive n-ear and tear of the motorbuses, They began paving a portion of the main roads with wood in 1910, and afterwards continued on with the same system in other roads. Mr. Wrottesley: What is the form of road construction you are most in favour of for these roads?—Wood paving on a concrete foundation is the best I have found. The wear and tear to the roads of thie omnibus traffic varied. lei amain road which had been laid for four years the blocks hae worn down some quarter of an inch Ill some places. whilst where the buses had stopped there was a perceptible wear of half an inch, and in other places 3 of an inch. May I take it that in your opinion the motor omnibus traffic— shortens -the life of wood pavine—Yes, certainly. Hoe. nmeh?—That really depends upon the extent of the traffic. The life of roads upon which there is no motorbus traffic lasts very much longer.
Have ye411 considered the question of this proposed charge ot 3 of a id. per mile?-Yes, I have considered it, and I comider it a very fair and proper charge to make.
In reply to Mr. Balfour Browne, witness admitted that where there were a large number of cabs and private vehicles roads soon became worn at places, and, of course, roads were provided and made to he worn. A wood-paved road under ordinary circumstances was expected to last 16 years, and the best material for road construction he considered was wood paving with a solid concrete foundation. Whathe meant by saying that a certain main road had worn down 3 of au inch within four years was that the wood blocks had worn down. Is this road one where there is the heaviest traffic?—Yes. When did you first lay any wood paving?—About 24 years ago. But there were no motorbuses running then. Why did you lay wood paving at that time I—Because at that part the traffic was already heavy. Altogether apart from any motorbus traffic?—Yes. Mutt and dust were a great annoyance at that time and it wea done to minimize this. Speed and weight are elements in the wear and tear of a road ?—Yes, but the traffic in Richmond with the exception of motorbuses was light motorcars.
But they go faster than motorbuees?—Yes. And you have just said that speed is one of the prilicipal elemetits in the wear of roads?—Yes.
Hampstead's Experiences.
Mr, Oliver Ernest Winter, civil engineer and borough engineer for Hampstead, in reply to Mr. Wrottesley stated that he had had considerable experience in the wear and tear of main roads caused by motorbuses diming the last few years. For instance, the road leading from Marble Arch to Crieklewood was in 1992-3 in excellent order, but after the motorbuses began to run upon it the read rapidly deteriorated. It, became rough and uneven, and his council received a great many complaints from the residents along the road of the annoyance and injury caused by the motorbuses. Property owners complained of the viGetion caused by the buses, and the council were compelled to .repave the vvhole of the portien of this road which wits in their boundary. Then, with regard to West End Lane, soon after the horse buses were taken off in 1911 and moterienses put cu the road there was a great outcry, and the owned found it neeessary to put down wood-paved road with a concrete foundation at. very great cost. Finchley Road was another instance where great expenditure had been incurred by the council in consequence of the heavy motor oncicjbccs traffic, That read would have lasted 14 or 15 years had not motorbuses come along.
Mr. Wrotteslev: When you out a regular motorbus service mi roads which are wood-paved with a concrete foundaden you find that the life of those roads is very nnich shortened ?--Ye.s. He admitted that where mails were con
structed on embankments there was greater possibility of set tlement through heavy traffic notLv i t hs: ending the solideess of the foundations. Weight and speed of heavy motorbuses had a good deal to do with the sot lenient of yoada. mid speed and weight on an embankment 7.cued such as this proposed new road would have a greater effect than on WI ordinarily constructed road. Mr. Balfonr Browne: Have not the buses been a ereat b000 to HanuesteaP--They have no doubt served a very useful p LINN Ise. elt-nd carried_ an enormous number of people: Yes. Be Mr. Wrottesley : He had taken into enusideration the peen sect conditions of this new road. Motorhicae travelling at eight or nine miles per hour did not du occult harm. It was when they travelled from 12 to 16 miles per hour that LIIV.V did the mischief.
May we take it that there are good wood bbek, and bad wend blocks and that there is a good way of laying them end a had way cf laying them1—Certainly.
And is it still your opinion after this experierce you have had that motorbus traffic wears up-to-date made reads more than any other kind of traffic I—Yes.
And vou say that the life of a road is shortened by this motor traffic hyat least three or four yearse7--th rtainly,
Hackney's Troubles.
Mr. Norman Seorgie, civil engineer and surveyor for the Alotropolitart Horaugh of Hackney, stated, in reply to Mr. Wentesley, that he had charge of over 109 miles ef roads. Dud all the motor omoibus routes in his hoeough were now acrid -paved with concrete foundations. The tested length of time for the life of such roads should be about 16 years, but during the past 4If years since the heavy motor omnibus traffic had come upnn them this period had been considerably reduced. When he made his report to his council in February. 1910, he thought that if his council set apart a renewal fund of £5000, apart from the maintenance fund, it xt.aild be sufficient to provide for all renewals. This was before the motorbuses came upon them, but hi 1912 he had to advise his council that the life of the reads had been reduced to something like 25 per cent. through the motorbuses, mid now he was of opinion that 25 per uent. WitS not a sufficient calculation, considering the character of the motorbuses he had to deal with, and his roads neve not what were termed embankment roads. Instead of .i.:5000 they had this ,)ear spent .B10,000 on these roads, and lie anticipated having to spend £43,000 during the next three years through the presence, of these motorbuses.
Mr. Balfour Browne: What are these roads ho': -Surely you don't want me to answer that question.
Well, I suggest that they are thete to he used le— Yes, but these buses bring few people to Hackney in comparison to the numbers they carry to outlying districts. At this stage the inquiry was adjourned, the Duke of Bedford and his colleagues being required in the House of Lords. It was evident to those in the room that the Committee was in a hurry, and desirous to get to the end of the proceedings in the least possible time.
Promoters Case Closed,
On the adjournment of the Committee on Wednesday after noon the case fur the promoters of the Bill had been closed, but when the sitting was resumed on Thursday Mr. Honoratue Lloyd, K.C., the leading Counsel for the Middlesex County Council, referred to a controversy which took place between Ids junior Counsel, Mr. Wrottaley, and Mr, G. M. Freeman, K.C., one of the Counsel for the L011(1011 Omnibus Owners' Federation, as to the production of a letter alleged by Mr. Freeman to have been received by the County Councilfrom the Road Board expressing disagreement with the taxing by the! Council of motorbuses. The eorrespondeoce, Mr. Lloyd explained, could not at the. time be produced, but the two letters of the Road Hoard to the County Council on the question at issue had since been obtained, and he now read them us follows :— " The Road Board, Westminster, 23rd December, 1913.— 1/ear Sir,—Refeering to the draft Bill which your repre. sentative handed to the writer, 1 am directed by the Road Board to say that they are not in a position to give final approval to all the contents of theBill until the provisions of the proposed agreement between the Board and the County Council have been finally agreed, hut they think it right, et the present stage, to let you know that if your clients decicla to insert clauses 16, 18 and 23 as they are printed in the Bill, they would have to do so entirely at their own risk and expense, and provisions will have to be inserted in the agreement for the apportionment of the, cost of Parliamentary proceedings in the event elf the above-mentioned clauses 'leaching to opposition, and consequent increase of the Parliamentary costs in connection with the Bill.—Yours faithfully, H. R. Watliek, assistant secretary. To R. S. Freeland, Esq., solicitor, Middlesex County Comicil." " The Road Board, Westminster, 25th June, 1914. Sir,— I am directed by the Road Beard to inform you that they are now prepared to complete the agreement with the Middlesex County Council and I shall he obliged if you will let me have an appointment for the exchange of the sealed documents. I am also to refer you to the letter which was written to you by direction of the Board on the 23rd December, 1913, and to say that the approved Bill referred to in Clause 2 of the agreement may now be taken to be the Bill as amended hi Committee ci de: House of Commons, with the exception of clause 25, which takes the place of clause 2.5 in the Bill as deposited. The Board intimated that they did not. approve of clause 23 in the deposited Bill, and that any ((sets incurred by the County Council in consequence of the insertion of that clause iii the Bill would have to be borne entirely by them. if yoer clients decide to submit the Bill centaining clause 25 to the House of Lords Committee it must he distinctly understood that the, Road Board have not approved of that clause in the Bill. I am also to add that the Board assume that you will endeavour to get the words ` to the extent of four-fifths thereof' omitted from line 35 in clause 42 of the Bill.—I tun, your obedient servant, H. II. Wading, assistant secretary.
R. S. Freeland, Esq., solicitor, Middlesex C.C."
The., learned Counsel, after reading these letters, remarked that their Lordships were, of course, aware that with referelite to the maintenance of this new road the Road Board wculd have no responsibility whatever. This fell upon the County Council, the Road Board baying only undertaken to pay 75 per cent, of the cost of construction. The whole of the meinteuance of the road would fall upon Middlesex.
-Mr. Lyuden Macessey, K.C., next addressed the Committee in support of tile petition entered against the scheme by the Metropolitan Water Board, after which evidence was given by the Chairman of the Board, Mr. Barnard, and the engineer, and then tame the ease of the Brentford Gas Co., who had entered a petition against the Bill, several witnesses baing examined by the Hon. Evan Charteris and Mr. Arthur Moon, Alr. Balfour Browne, K.C., afterwards addressing the committee on behalf of the company. It was subsequently announced that the committee would not he troubled further wUi the opposition entered against the Bill by the London United Tramways Co. as satisfactory arrang.ements had been imme to, and the case of the petition of the London Omnibus Owners' -Federation was thereupon commenced, Mr. Balfour Browne intimating that he proposed to first call witnesses and then address the committee, but the day was now far advanced and the examination of the first witness called by the learned Nomad had not concluded when their lordship!. adjourned.