Tony I believe it was East Brunswick Blythe Street 86.

The terminus was supposed to be a loop, with three left turns and one right. This would have required the compulsory acquisition of
several houses.

I only mention the possibility of a T or Y as I had seen this used very successfully in San Francisco. Not considered, to the best
of my recollection, in the Report. Ass the purpose of the T or Y was to permit the use of single ended trams, it would have
fulfilled its purpose.

Regards

Dudley Horscroft
----- Original Message -----
From: "prescottt@ymail.com [TramsDownUnder]" TramsDownUnder@...>
To: TramsDownUnder@...>
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: [TramsDownUnder] Single ended trams for Melbourne

> Perhaps after the passing of 40 years now Dudley you can feel free to tell us which route/s it was?

>

> A wye would completely defeat the purpose of it. The whole idea is to enable trams, if necessary to go straight out again without

> stopping at all and to despatch them in the order in which they came in. A wye would be the same as having a stub.

>

> Tony P

>

> ---InTramsDownUnder@..., <transitconsult@...> wrote :

>

> I read the MMTB Report on single ended trams in the copy provided to the Bureau of Transport Economics Library. An interesting

> document, unfortunately it came to the conclusion that it would be necessary to purchase property at the outer end of the line(s)

> in

> order to provide a loop. No consideration was give, AFAIR, to use of a T or Y terminus, using a convenient cross road or side

> street.

>

> Because an actual route was mentioned, it was considered that release of the booklet would be harmful to the Board because of

> possible disquiet (!!) from affected householders, and it was marked "Confidential". Rather stupidly I pointed this out to the

> Librarian, and the booklet disappeared from view, to the extent that the BTE thereafter never admitted that it existed or that it

> had had it.

>

> One of the series of Research Reports done by the MMTB at the time, another being the possibility of synchronization of traffic

> lights in Melbourne CBD to improve the average speed of trams. Unfortunately it worked on the basis that the dwell time would be

> seven (Yes, SEVEN) seconds, which immediately became the killer when the Z cars started operating. You will notice that the same

> badly placed conductor's position is shown in this plan, should be immediately in front of or close to, the exit door.

>

> Regards

>

> Dudley Horscroft

>

>

>