AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Ebdon loses its bid for new terminals

5th July 1986, Page 21
5th July 1986
Page 21
Page 21, 5th July 1986 — Ebdon loses its bid for new terminals
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?

• A bid by Ebdons Coaches to run London sightseeing tours from Whitehall and Coventry Street has been turned down by Metropolitan Traffic Commissioner Ronald Ashford.

The company's application for licence authority, together with a third application withdrawn by the company for a terminal at Tyburn Way, was opposed by the City of Westminster and the Metropolitan Police.

Robert Nelson, senior assistant traffic engineer of the City Council, said there is a high accident rate in Whitehall, there having been 28 accidents in the past three years in the section between Great 'Scotland Yard and Trafalgar Square.

A coach standing at the point proposed would create a major obstruction on an already congested street, he said.

The council has always felt that Coventry Street is unsuitable for coach tour terminals, but it was prepared to accept Ebdon's shared use of the terminal outside No 4 already used by two other operators, instead of outside Nos 5/6. Inspector Peter Bick of the Metropolitan Police said Whitehall is already restricted by the bank of bus stops on the opposite side to Ebdon's terminal.

Standard conditions preventing sightseeing tours from starting at peak hours are of no value in Whitehall as the worst traffic conditions tend to be around mid-day.

The proposed Coventry Street terminal was 31m from traffic signals and a second bus standing at the point would obscure the left turn signal and traffic lane.

Colin Ebdon, a director, said 28 accidents in three years did not seem to be a great problem and was no worse than other parts of London. He did not accept that the use of the proposed Whitehall point would cause more accidents.

The company would be happy with a condition that coaches only wait for the time required to take up passengers, which he estimated at about five minutes.

He had driven coaches in the area without experiencing any particular traffic problems or hold-ups. The company would be happy to share the point outside 4 Coventry Street. It has .other terminals in the area but • demonstrations and roadworks mean that some points cannot always be used so others are needed. Not every point was used every day of the week.

Refusing the applications, Ashford said he was concerned solely with whether the proposed terminals would prejudice the safety and convenience of the public.

The Whitehall terminal point would exacerbate traffic congestion and impede the traffic flow around Trafalgar Square. The convenience of the public would be impeded and there would be a detrimental effect on public safety.

There is insufficient room to accommodate any more stopping places in Coventry Street and he considered that both the convenience and safety of the public would be prejudiced.

In view of the number of sightseeing departures already authorised there he did not feel that refusing the applications would in any way impede the convenience of the public.


comments powered by Disqus