BUS SERVICES.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19164, 22 November 1927, Page 7

BUS SERVICES.

IMPROVEMENTS AND EXTENSIONS. LICENSING AUTHORITY SITS. Sitting as the Licensing Authority tor the No. JO Motor Omnibus District, the Christchurch City Councillast I night dealt with applications .from the Inter-City Motor Service and the Christchurch Tramway Board to be allowed to put more buses on the road. | The first application (which had been held over from the previous meeting) was from the luter-City Motor Service, and was for permission to run two extra omnibuses between the City and North Beach during peak hour "loads and ou holidays. In respect of this application the following letter was received from the company:— At a meeting of your Council held on 7st inst, it was stated by your Engineer that in his opinion roads other than tar-sealed roads were unsuitable for bus traffic, and your Chief Motor Inspector stated that the distance over City roads on this company's route was 3} miles, and for your information we submit the following:—The measured distance to Kerr's road is 21 miles, all tar-scaled excepting nine-tenths of a mile from Worcester street Extension to Eolloston street. We have been informed by the Heathcote County Council that an arrangement has already been made between the Christchurch City Council and the Heathcote County Council to tar-seal Kerr's road. Further, the condition of Kerr's road and Worcester street Extension is chiefly due to the laying of the sewer. It will be seen from the foregoing that when the tar-sealing of Kerr's road is completed there will be only nine-tenths of a mile of City road on the company's route which is not tar-sealed. An application was received from the Christchurch Tramway Board for permission to establish an omnibus service between the City and North Beach via Wainoni road, and to extend to the sea its existing omnibus service between Burwood and North Beach. The Board's general manager (Mr Prank Thompson) wrote as follows: — When the application of the InterCity Bus Company to run two more buses to North Beach,, and the objections of the. Tramway Board to that proposal were before the Licensing Authority last Monday, several Councillors said that while they favoured transport by a local body rather than by private owners, the requirements of the public should have consideration; and it was also said that the adjournment granted for the purpose of inspection would also give the Board opportunity to consider further improvement to its services.

A Faster Bus Service.—l am directed, therefore, to forward formal application for a license to permit the Board to run a direct bus service from North Beach to the City, but without stopping in the Wainoni area. This latter proviso is for two reasons: Firstly, the Wainoni area has been declared by the Transport Appeal Board to belong to Mr Bussell exclusively (see Section 15 in Memorandum, November 11th, 1927, attached). .Secondly, the absence of stops in Wainoni will give the North' Beach residents a quicker run. When the Board, first made application to use Wainoni road (December 14th, 1926), the Heathcote. County Council objected to another bus being run on Wainoni road. That objection has now lseen withdrawn.' With respect to the City .streets,, the route .proposed is as. far from that used by Mr Bussell as possible. "Reference to the accompanymg map shows that the Board desires to come in from North Beach via Racecourse road, Wainoni road, a portion of Iverrs road Woodham road, Bnttan street, Armagh street, to Cathedral square, returning by way of High street, Cashel street, and, say, Baibadoes street ine Board would be glad to confer with the City Engineer respecting any other direct rout© which he might prefer, and with the Tramo Inspector respecting the running of the bus in the centre of the City. The Board must continue to object to Mr Bussell being given a license to. run any more buses, particularly in view of the Transport Appeal Board's verdict previously mentioned, in which the Appeal Board said that Mr Bussell wns not entitled to additional licenses for the purpose of a competition with the Board's North Beach tram service. The time-table will he constructed so that it will not clasli with Mr Bussell's. and the fares will not exceed those being charged by him. The proposed service would pass Wilding Park, not now. catered for. Improvement of Burwood feeder service: The Board's programme was disturbed bv the Appeal Board's reversal of the Licensing Authority's P/evious permit, under which idle time of boutn Brighton was advantageously used tor Burwood-Ascot service. There is » half-hourly No. 10 tram service to Burwood, and not Jess than 20-minqte Noo tram service via Central Brighton. It is impossible to make satisfactory connexions between the two because pi these times. The Board therefore asks that it be permitted to extend this Burwood feeder service from Park road to the'sea beach. This should meet the complaint voiced by Crs. McCombs, Sharpe and others. It would be advantageous if the two applications were treated as one, because the two can be co-ordinated more efficiently and economically with respect to men and vehicles than if they were run separately.

Localßodies' Attitude. Concerning the North Bench bus services, the Town Olerk of New Brighton (Mr C. T. Middleton) wrote in the following terms: — In reference to your letter of the loth inst. covering copy of application of the Christchurch Tramway Board to establish an omnibus service between NorfTi Beach and the City, via Warner" road, and for permission to extend tne existing omnibus service between Burwood and Park road to the Esplanade at North Beach, I am directed to inform von that the Council offers no objection to the Tramway Board s application for a service via Wainoni road, providing the time-table is not identical with the present service, and witii regard to the extension of the Burwood bus service from Park roaa to the beach the Council would like the Board to confer with it with regard to the route to be taken.

The clerk of the Heathcote County Council wrote statin* that he had been instructed to advise that his Council opposed the granting of a license to the Tramwav Board for an omnibus service from North Beach to the City, via Wainoni road, but raised no objection to the granting of n license tor two extra buses to be used by the lnterCitv Motor Service on peak hours and on holidavs. such buses to be approve! of bv the Heathcote County Council as to size, etc.. before being put on the road. Mr C. S. Thomas, on behalf of the Inter-City Company, said, in answer to a question asked by Cr. D. G. Su!l:j van at a previous meeting, he would state that over the North Beach route the number of passengers carried for three months ended on October 31st. 1926 was 22,728. and for a similar period in 1927. 22,996. air increase of 118 per cent. Over the Wainoni road route 12,569 passengers were carried for the three months ended October 31st 1926 and for the corresponding period of this year 23,923, an increase of 90.8 per cent.

1 Women's Deputation. A deputation from the W.C.T.TJ. waited on the Council with reference to the matter, particularly on behalf of North Brighton and Ascot women. Miss Beatrice Harbend said that the deputation was concerned more with the aspect of the service as it affected the women. The women of the district found *t much more convenient to travel by the Inter-City bus service than the tram service. It meant that ten minutes was saved each way, and mothers felt their children much safer when they were inside a bus and had no need to change. The so-called "improved No. 5 service'' of the trams was not convenient for working girls, nnd the earliest tram did not roach the City early enough. If Councillors listened sympathetically to a deputation of mothers, they would be willing, perhaps, to travel on the tram route I with the impedimenta of mothers, push chairs, and babies. Mrs Parker mentioned another matter, that there was no place in the Square for the bus service to place a time-table. She was sure that the Council would provide a foot or so o! space in the Square so that they could ascertain tho time buses left. Replying to a question by Cr. McComhs. a member of the deputation said the Tramway Board had been approached several times regarding the bus services, but were always "considering" matters. Mr J. D. Hutchison, representing the Christchurch Tramway Board, said that reference to files in the Board's possession showed there had been complaints made concerning the trams on tho North Beach line, but none regarding the buses, except one or two isolated instances which arose out of an unofficial meeting held in 1925. Mrs Parker said no representations hfld been made to the Board except by way of private correspondence. The Mayor said he thought it would be advisable to hear all the evidence i at the present meeting, and give consideration to it later.

Two Applications. Mr Hutchison brought forward two applications from the Tramway Board. The first was that the buses at present taking the route from the No. 10 terminus at Burwood, by Travers street, Biver road, and Baeecourse road to Park road, should be allowed to run right to the sea, finishing at the Ozone Cafe. This would eliminate the present changing from tram to bus. The other application was that a bus might be run down Wainoni road to the sea, and following with a few small diversions, the route of the Inter-City service. This route would not follow that of Mr Bussell's service in the Wainoni district, but would follow Kookwood avenue.

The Board had consistently opposed applications by Mr Bussell to increase his North Beach service. The Transport Appeal Board had laid down that his Inter-City service was entitled to the "Wainoni district, but the Tramway Board buses, although following the same route down Wainoni road, would not interfere with his service. ,

Mr Thomaß contended that the application was nothing but another attempt by the Tramway Board to oust the Inter-City service. The Board's applications had been turned down by the previous Council, and by the Appeal Court, yet brought forward the same application, with a few small amendments to make it appear a new one. Mr Thomas said he had been fighting the Board on behalf of the company for years, and at a very great expense to the company. (Laughter.) Previously the Board had maintained that one service was required to North Beach, and no fault could possibly be found with that provided by the Inter-City service. What did the Board want now—four services?

Mr W. Scarff, of the Heathcote County Council, said he was present to object to any increased traffic on Wainoni road except to relieve peak loads or holiday traffic. Mr Bussell was only on the Wainoni road on sufferance,' being allowed there for the convenience of the county 'a ratepayers. To Cr. Eoberts, Mr Scarff said the road was not fit for heavy traffic, and it took the Council* all its time to keep it in order for Mr Bussell's service. No more buses would be allowed on the road. lii answer to a question, Mr Hutchison said the bus fares from the City to tho beach would be 7d single and Is return. "You couldn't do it," said Mr Thomas, "we are the existing service.''

A Complicated Matter. The Mayor, speaking to Councillors, said that as the licensing authority the matter had become a very complicated one, and he was of the opinion that thev should take time to consider it in all its aspects before coming to a decision. Boplying to Mr Thomas, Mr Hutchison said this was an entirely different application from that made previously by the Board. The buses would run straight through the Wainoni district to North Beach without stopping at all along the Wainoni road. The City Council Engineer had given it as his opinion that a tar-sealed road stood up to heavy traffic on pneumtaic tyres, and all of the route through the Heathcote county's area was tar-sealed, with the exception of 30 chains. The Mayor suggested that the Licensing Authority should endeavour to arrange a conference between the parties concerned, in the meantime reserving its decision concerning the questions at issue. . ~ Cr. Sharpe moved a motion on tneae lines. , , , "If the New Brighton people had supported the Board as it should, this trouble would not have occurred," said Cr. J W. Beanland, who added that since 'the special rating area had been abolished the New Brighton people did not care how they acted as-the City had to make up any deficit in the tram services. Mr E. H. Andrews opposed the motion. The Council as licensing authority, should act as a judicial tribunal, apart from any Labour or other leanings. He saw no reason why the Tramway Board should not continue its bus service right to the beach. He did not know whether the new Tramway Board might not consider the reopening of the North Beach tram line. But of course he did not know as yet who the members of the new Board would be. Cr. M. E. Lyons: You've got a good idea.—Oh, I'm not divulging any secrets. '"lt's not for us to endeavour to arrange these conferences," said Mr Andrews, "that is a matter for the Board and Inter-City Company. We should reach a decision to-night." The Mayor: What is your policy then? Mr Andrews brought forward as an amendment that the Council should grant the Tramway Board the continuation of its Park road service to the beach, and that in view of the Heathcote county's statement, the application of the Board to run a service along Wainoni road be refused. No seconder was found for the amendment, and Cr. Sharpe's motion was carried.