AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Service Extensi on Bid Refused

22nd March 1963, Page 35
22nd March 1963
Page 35
Page 35, 22nd March 1963 — Service Extensi on Bid Refused
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?

AT a resumed hearing at Leeds on Monday in which Leeds Corporation proposed to extend a service from the cemetery at Lawnswood to Kingsley Drive, Adel, the advocate for the objec:ors, said that company bus services )1:aerating between Leeds, OtIcy and ilkley had been losing 75,000 passengers t year since 1956.

Mr. D. Herrod, for the West Yorkshire [toad Car Co. Ltd., and the executors of amuel Ledgard, said that in view of this lot only was there no need for an addiional service but the existing private )perators were well able to cope with he traffic on present frequency.

Earlier, Mr. J. W. Lawrence, traffic nanager of the West Yorkshire Car Co., aid that in conjunction with Ledgards he company had been providing services rver the route for more than 30 years. -here was no real hardship for residents n the area where Leeds Corporation was pplying to extend its service and if the pplication was granted it would result in n abstraction of traffic.

Miss E. M. Boynes, for Leeds Corporaion, said that the application was being lade solely as a result of public pressure although the Corporation agreed that the existing operators of the route were entitled to consideration.

The Traffic Commissioners refused the Corporation's application and the chairman, Major F. S. Eastwood, said that if any improvement were needed on the service after perusal of the very large schedule put in the present operators should do it.


comments powered by Disqus