TRANSPORT LOAN

Evening Star, Issue 26028, 17 February 1947, Page 8

TRANSPORT LOAN

OR MoCRAE ANSWERS MR SLIGO FURTHER CORRESPONDENTS’ VIEWS Cr J. McCrae writes '(Fob. 17): — If Mr Alex. Sligo liad attended the meeting in his own district, Roslyn, on Tuesday evening lie would not, on his hearsay report, have made the mistakes that he does in his letter to the ‘livening Star’ on Saturday; and, liy the way, all the people in that district do not hold the same views as Mr Sligo, as they carried a resolution unanimously supporting the trolly Ims proposals. I will take tho points raised by Mr Sligo seriatim: 1 said in Britain a Royal Commission of leading experts on various forms of transport—railways, canals, steamships, and tramways—was set up by the Government, about 1926, to make complete investigation of the problem. They issued three reports in all, and in the final one (January, 1931) they stated: “ Our considered opinion is that tramways, if not an obsolete form of trails port, are at all events in a state of obsolescence and cause unnecessary congestion and unnecessary danger to the public. We recommend, therefore (a) that no additional tramways be constructed, and (b) that though no definite time limit can be laid down, they should gradually disappear to give place to other forms of transport. We are unable to prescribe any definite period for the extinction of tramways, but we are of the opinion that it would bo to the advantage of the inhabitants of the towns where they exist to get rid of them by degrees as some authorities have already done.” ; At that date, over 50 electric tramway systems in Great ' Britain had been scrapped. During the next seven years, that is by 1938, over 70 more systems were abandoned, and up to August, . 1939, 15 more systems followed suit. _ J stated it was my considered opinion that had war not intervened not one tramway system, as we know it in Dunedin, would be in operation in Great Britain to-day. In Great Britain in 1925 there were 87 municipal trainway systems in operation, by 1939 this number had beeu reduced to 33, and of the 33 still operating in 1939, 11 showed a loss for the year. One of these was Glasgow, which for many years enjoyed the reputation of being the most" successful in the world. Glasgow’s loss for the year 1939 was £BI,OIB. As in Dunedin during the war years, when petrol was rationed, some recovery was made, but the latest balance sheet of the Glasgow Corporation Transport, which I have in front of me, shows a loss for the year of £376.984.

Note the difference in Adelaide; in 1944 (a war year) 304 trams showed a surplus of £10,250, while 60 trolly buses showed a surplus of £48,620. The only reason why Adelaide had not added to her fleet of trolly buses was because she could not get them during the war years.

Yes, i' said trolly buses do not interfere with the flow o!f traffic in streets. Anyone who has seen the Adelaide motion picture will agree with that statement. Mr Sligo says we will require movable sides on the trolly buses to load 60 in one'minute. In the army 100yds is the ordinary marching pace in one minute. The buses will have two doors, 34iu wide; and the fares will be collected by . the conductor when the passengers are inside. To say that it is impossible for 60 people to get into the bus in one minute, 30 in each door, is contrary to fact. Mr Sligo questions figures re operating costs, as between trams and tdblly buses. The figures I quoted were supplied to me by the .manager of the Hobart Transport Service. He is tunning both trams and trolly buses,. and should be able to make a comparison. With regard to street maintenance, the trolly bus will be treated just the same as every other heavy vehicle. The heavy traffic license fee will be £63 15s on each bus. which goes towards street maintenance; If Mr Sligo has other points to raise I invite him to come along to any of our meetings, as f have little time to carry on,a Press correspondence.

Thus W- 0. KempthonieContinuing my letter of ninth instant L would like to make the following additional points:—(l) One advocate for trolly buses said at a meeting recently that the opposition had no alternative proposal. There is no obligation at the present juncture to supply one in detail. The first decision to be made is, trolly buses or no trolly buses!? What proposals might be made to improve the present system await this decision. 12) Regarding the matter of the claim that there will be no increase in rates if the . loan is approved, that may be correct in the immediate future; but interest on £1,000,000 will have to be paid sometime and somehow by the citizens—you cannot get something for nothing.' (3) It has not escaped the notice of the man in the street that the advocates for the loan represent business interests, and that they, and the people they represent, without exception, have their own transport, and have no personal interest in community transport. Any statements made by them would carry much more weight if they were backed on the platform by men whose only method of transport is tram or bus. (4) One advocate, in comparing constructional costs, quotes figures that deal with new construction in each case. A lot of present equipment will come into use in either case; but practically all will bo useful in tliG case of rotention of trams, and only a fraction in the case of trolly buses. (5) Owing to the' bad constructional foundations in Dunedin a slab of concrete 9in thick will be necessary from kerb to kerb on all trolly -bus routes. In the case of trams only 6ft will be necessary, that is 18m under each rail. This is not there at present; but will be found. necessary to provide a better foundation for increased speed, etc. (6) If there is another war, or natural upheaval makinir evacuation necessary, petrol and Diesel buses would prove of great value trolly buses would he of no use whatever. (7) From informaton in the Press, the idea of a change-over.to trolly buses is not too popular with the present staff. While certain circles might consider this no argument at all, yet it may be as well to keep it in mind. (8) It will not have escaped the notice of observers, that a tram on a fixed track in the middle of the street can be run at a greater speed without inspiring fear than a bus that has the full width of the road. Also if it is a case of evasive action m the case of a pedestrian or other user of the street, this is accomplished with more ease in the case of the tram. This is due to the' knowledge that you know where you stand in the case of the tram, anil vou don’t in the other case (9) There will be far more accident's with buses loading and unloading at the kerb, than in the case of the present practice with trams. . With a “free for all” that is anticipated when trollv buses are introduced, the main street will be suicide area. The demand bv motorists to park on the streets will further complicate matters.

(10) When motor cars get cheaper, as they inevitably will in the near future, each family in the .suburbs will have one, and in the case of the more financial families there will be two or more. All these people will be independent of community transport, so it does not seem wise to go in for a new construction policy without giving the matter more thought than has been expended on it up to the present. (11) The'charge that opponents of the trolley bus loan are unprogressive cannot be sustained. Improvements that may be visualised in the tram service with better track and rolling stock will put any trolly bus scheme many jumps behind.

“Technical” enters the arena: Councillors have certainly excelled themselves in putting forth the merits of trolly buses, but their propaganda does not stand investigation—many misstatements being shown up by Mr Sligo in your Saturday’s ‘ Star.’ The most striking fact is that for threequarters of a million pounds we will be privileged to .strap-liang as we now do with Diesel buses. Here we were told that the superiority of Diesel over petrol buses was such that, used on the Roslyn service, they would show a profit of £2,000 a year. Instead there has been a loss of over £IO,OOO. Now trolly buses are to show a profit of close on £6,ooo'a year, based on suc-b absurd figures as 37,500 miles per tyre (and synthetic at that), costing approximately £SO per tyre.' No engineer of repute gives the mileage at over 15,000, and on pure rubber at that, and would not attempt to estimate on synthetic tyres. Miow about asking the makers for a guarantee, Mr McCrae?) This fact iilone converts the so-called profit into a loss. No city in Great Britain or America uses single-decker trolly buses as sole transport, as advocated here. Their magnetic brakes make them no safer than Diesel buses on ice or snow. Their ability to climb hills is true, but will the manufacturers guarantee that the electrical equipment will stand up to the strain of our hills? I know of no such severe service anywhere, Brighton (England) included. “ Information Seeker ” asks; Would it be possible for the Dunedin City Corporation to get a trolly bus from Christchurch and give us a demonstration of its working on the existing tram line power between the Gardens and Opoho or at the Anderson’s Bay terminus P

Finally, “Hill Dweller”: Sir, I understand that ratepayers only have a vote on the trolly bus-tram issue. Why not a vote for everyone over 21, for. after all, they are ‘'by far the great majority of those who use the city’s transport system, are also indirectly ratepayers, and undoubtedly should. be entitled to a vote. It is high time the young people of this city woke up.