Another extract from the Royal Commission report reads :- while lifts are no doubt the best way of meeting the difficulty of "tube" railways being made at depths of 80 to 90 feet below the street they are not only expensive in working costs but tend to cripple a tube railway in competition with other means of transport for short distance.
However well the lifts may be worked they cause delay and are not popular in themselves; they do not always reach the level of the platforms or streets. It is of course obvious that the lifts are extensively used but they are a necessity of the situation and the necessity is from all points of view objectionable.
The writer here points out that :- in the Kearney system with the stations immediately below the street no lifts will be required.
From all the above consideration the Royal Commissioners stated " it appears to us that so far as convenience to the public using the railway is concerned the facilities which "shallow" railways afford for all descriptions of traffic are much greater than those which can be given by "tube" railways and that whatever the shallow form of construction can be satisfactorily employed in London preference should be given to it ... in all future projects for urban railways the fullest consideration should be given to the many points in which the shallow form of construction offers the greatest advantages ... it is most desirable that urban railways traversing London from side to side should have four lines of way in order to provide express and stopping trains and thus admit by means of comparatively few interchange stations of rapid transit to the suburbs from all stations on the local service lines.
Comments
Post a Comment