London Banter - Old LT Garages

London Banter (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/forum.php)

- London Transport (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/)

- - Old LT Garages (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/613-old-lt-garages.html)

In message , Nick
Hewitt writes

I had a rough idea where Riverside was, but I needed
confirmation. I didn't know, until fairly recently, that there was a
trolleybus depot in Hammersmith. Bearing this in mind, can I
contribute something, simply from looking at the 2 photos on
http://www.trolleybus.net/resume.htm 'numbered' CR217 and GB1.

Aaargh! I hadn't spotted that first photo - CR217. I think that answers
the question of location. The road on the left, from which all the
traffic is turning is Butterwick, which I think was driven through the
area in 1959/1960. Since trolley-route 630 was replaced by buses in July
1960, this almost certainly dates the photo to early summer 1960.

The road with parked cars behind the trolleybus is Great Church Lane,
and the car coming in from the right is emerging from the newly-widened
Talgarth Road (the Hammersmith flyover had not then been built, so the
new one-way system was still carrying all of the A4 traffic in 1960).

So, the original suggestion of the garage being in Great Church Lane was
correct. Rob was right in saying that it was to the east of the
district/piccadilly station, but not in thinking that it backed onto the
railway site. It was further east - just east of Butterwick, hence the
reason why it survived demolition when Butterwick was knocked through,
and went on after trolleybuses ceased as a garage for the BEA coach
service for a few years in the early 60s. I think it must have
eventually gone in the 1970s, when the blocks to the east side of
Butterwick were redeveloped.

This location also explains how trolleybuses gained access before the
creation of Butterwick and the one-way system - down a short length of
Great Church Street going east from the top of Fulham Palace Road.

It seems extraordinary to think that the entire Hammersmith one-way
system must have been rewired for a very complex overhead trolley system
with numerous junctions, only to have the whole lot torn down a few
months later when trolleybus operations ceased.

Something else comes to mind. The trolleybus depot had the garage code
HB. What would the letter B have stood for? Broadway? Butterwick?

I agree with Rob - Broadway seems much more likely, even though the
garage wasn't on the Broadway itself. The site was probably part of the
grounds of the old Butterwick House, but that had been demolished in
1836 and I don't think the name was used again until resurrected for the
new road in around 1960.

I'm rather glad that I didn't ask for the exact locations of Fulham,
Albany Street, Rochester Mews and Kilburn depots!!! God knows what
sort of arguments THAT would have started.

Oh, no great arguments at all - just a fascinating debate. I totally
agree with Rob that this area, where I lived in the early 70s, has gone
through so much change that it is very hard to reconstruct a picture of
what it was like. Its been an interesting experience to try!
Incidentally, this very point is exemplified by the photos at:

http://www.la21.org.uk/traffic/photo.html

These show the re-development of the very area that we have been
discussing, albeit too small to see details of trolleybus routes and the
HB garage.

--
Paul Terry

Well, it has to be said that I got it wrong too! I thought Riverside
was on the corner of Talgarth Rd and Butterwick. I went to Hammersmith
today (saturday) to try and sort this out once and for all.
Ha-ha-bloody-ha! I followed up the lead in this thread about the
Smolensky's Restaurant, and found it. I did see Riverside when it was
open, but that was back in July 1970 and it flashed by while I was on
a 9 bus going to Mortlake. I also went and bought "LONDON TRANSPORT
BUS GARAGES" by John Aldridge. It describes HB as being in Great
Church Lane, but I had it as being near Linacre Court. A lot of the
book confirms my original thoughts, but confuses others - so, watch
this space!

Nick

In article ,
(Paul Terry) wrote:

It seems extraordinary to think that the entire Hammersmith one-way
system must have been rewired for a very complex overhead trolley
system with numerous junctions, only to have the whole lot torn down a
few months later when trolleybus operations ceased.

It was more than a few months. I think Butterwick was either already there
when I started school in Hammersmith Road in 1957 or was built shortly
afterwards. I don't think it was as late as 1959/60. They did make some
overhead alterations in Butterwick before abandonment but I can't now
remember the details.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message ,
Colin Rosenstiel writes

In article ,
(Paul Terry) wrote:

It seems extraordinary to think that the entire Hammersmith one-way
system must have been rewired for a very complex overhead trolley
system with numerous junctions, only to have the whole lot torn down a
few months later when trolleybus operations ceased.

It was more than a few months. I think Butterwick was either already there
when I started school in Hammersmith Road in 1957 or was built shortly
afterwards. I don't think it was as late as 1959/60. They did make some
overhead alterations in Butterwick before abandonment but I can't now
remember the details.

Yes, trolleybuses first started using Butterwick on 13 July 1958 (I have
at last managed to lay my hands on some decent reference material).

However, according to Taylor's London Trolleybus Routes, "Between 1958
and 1960 the routes underwent continual wiring alterations at
Hammersmith due to the construction of Hammersmith flyover". The latter
was still being built in 1960, of course, and photos from that year show
that much of the south side of the one-way system was far from complete,
even though open for traffic.

--
Paul Terry

IanB wrote:
"Nick Hewitt" wrote in message
Hi people. This is a bit long, so please bear with me. I am trying to
track down a number of past & present ex-LT bus garages. They are :-

1) The original Kingston garage in Richmond Road. Where on Richmond
Road was it?

I remember a bus garage by the railway station in what I think is called
Wood Street. It was there when we went in hunt of some of the last RFs in (LT)
service which would make it mid 70s. The entrance faced the railway line and
the exit faced west so buses leaving would go past the entrance! there was
some additional parking (bus) in a yard between Wood Str & the railway and the
garage entrance I am thinking of had some sort of restriction on it, ban on DMS
class or similar (either too wide or high) which would explain why it was
disposed of

There may possibly have been an earlier garage, but in the 60s and 70s
Kingston Garage had a wide exit on Clarence St and a narrow entrance on
what seems to be Cromwell Road. Unusually, passengers could board buses
within the bus garage. There was also a bus terminus in front (south) of
the station, mainly for green buses, and I think some sort of overflow
bus park by the railway east of the station - where the present bus
station is.

What you've forgotten is that in those days Clarence St was one way
southbound, and Wood Street one way eastbound. Buses reached the garage
from the west or north and departed south. Clarence St was very busy
even then, and I've got film somewhere of an RF taking a very long time
to push out into the traffic.

Colin McKenzie

Greetings from a newbie from West Sussex :)

Arrived at this thread through Google search and hope this post is in topic

We have just acquired a Smith's Sectric Art Deco design clock that is inscribed:-

PRESENTED TO L.W. BOYCE
DEPOT ENGINEER BY HACKNEY T. BUS, R.S. STAFF
AS A TOKEN OF APPRECIATION
MAY 1949

Wonder if anyone who has posted here already would be able to explain more about the role of Depot Engineer and the qualifications required.

What would his duties have been and what would be the staffing of the depot?

Was this a hands on job or a professional administrative post.

Would it have been a respected post and a career aspiration or target?

The clock is in very good condition other than it requires a replacement motor or rewinding (or insertion of new quartz unit). We are wondering if it might be better appreciated by a museum or collector rather than staying with us merely to keep time!