AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

BUS EXTENSION BAN.

26th October 1926
Page 61
Page 61, 26th October 1926 — BUS EXTENSION BAN.
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?

The London County Council reports that the Leyton Corporation recently informed the council that the London General Omnibus Co., Ltd., had given notice of their intention to operate a service of omnibuses over a route which includes Crownfield Road and High Road, Leyton. The council is concerned in the matter, as it has throughrunning arrangements with the corporation, and two tramway services are

operated over the streets named in the scheme.

The existing travelling facilities are considered ample, as there are 22 cars running over the streets during each hour of the day and a frequent independent omnibus service duplicates the tramcar services. This fact was brought out at the recent inquiry held by the Ministry of Transport into the travelling facilities in East London. The L.C.C. accordingly made representations-to the Minister that the proposed extension was unnecessary, and urged him not to sanction it. The Minister replied that•he had been in communication with the Commissioner of Police, who had refused to " define " the route under Section 6 of the London Traffic Act. So long as this refusal is maintained it will not be possible for bus proprietors to operate a service there9,

Tags

Locations: London

comments powered by Disqus