streets over which the busses will operate are heavily traveled and badly worn; that additional traffic thereon would increase what is now a dangerous traffic hazard; and that due to the manpower shortage difficulty is experienced in properly policing such streets.

As pointed out above, the general trend of traffic moving between Teaneck and New York City is over the lines of carriers operating over the bridge. The New York City termini of most of the busses operating over the bridge are in uptown New York between One Hundred and Seventy-second Street and One Hundred and Eightieth Street. Stops are made at the various subway stations and service to midtown and downtown New York over the subways is frequent and rapid. Generally, the combined service of the bridge busses and the subways is more rapid than the present or proposed tunnel routes. The majority of the passengers which Westwood would obtain on its proposed route would be those who now use its lines and the lines of protestant motor carriers. It anticipates that it will be able to stimulate the use of its proposed route and obtain passengers who now use private transportation, but the evidence fails to justify a finding that any substantial amount of such traffic would be obtained. The four public witnesses who supported the proposed route use the bridge busses most frequently. One of the principal reasons they use Westwood's present route through Bogota, and would use the proposed route, is the fact that Westwood's present fare from Bogota, and its proposed fare from Teaneck, is 5 cents less than Public Service's fare from Teaneck, over its route through the tunnel. No resident in Teaneck is located more than 2,000 feet from a bus line, and in the territory through which the proposed route passes the distance is considerably less.

Westwood maintains that the schedules on Public Service's tunnel route are so infrequent that the public prefers not to use its service. The record does not support any such conclusion. It is true that Public Service operates only 24 schedules a day from Teaneck to New York City through the tunnel, but it is not shown that more frequent service is required by the public. For instance, traffic checks taken by Westwood in Teaneck disclose that on the 7 busses which Public Service operated over Queen Anne Road in Teaneck on August 13, 1941, between 7:15 a. m. and 8:16 a. m., there were 33 passengers on board when the busses reached the intersection of Cedar Lane, and 108 at the intersection of Fort Lee Road. Some of the 33 passengers conceivably were picked at points north of Teaneck. Thus on Queen Anne Road, between Cedar Lane and Fort Lee Road, Public Service picked up with 7 busses only 75 passengers or an average of a little less than 11 passengers per bus. On the 23 south-bound Public Service tunnel schedules checked at Queen Anne Road and Fort Lee

Road, between 6 a. m. and 12 midnight, there were a total of 162 passengers on board or an average of 7 plus passengers per bus. Similarly on the 21 north-bound busses checked, there were a total of 184 passengers, or an average of a little less than 9 passengers per bus. Public Service's schedule between Teaneck and New York City is 46 minutes; and although Westwood's proposed schedule is 40 minutes, it is apparent that it can make no better time than Public Service. In fact, its present schedule from Bogota which is south of Teaneck is 40 minutes to the Consolidated Terminal in New York City and 45 minutes to the Penn-Greyhound Terminal. Clearly, if there was an overwhelming desire of the Teaneck public to travel to New York City through the tunnel, they would utilize more fully the line of Public Service, particularly during the morning rush hours when 7 busses are available between 7:15 and 8:16. Some mention is made of the fact that Westwood uses, and will use over the proposed route, larger and more comfortable busses than Public Service now uses. It appears that Public Service for sometime prior to the hearing herein. was using larger busses than formerly. In any event, it has not been established that the failure of the public to utilize its tunnel route more frequently is the result of the equipment used.

Considering all of the facts, we conclude that a public need for additional bus service between Teaneck and New York City has not been shown; that a grant of the authority sought would adversely affect protestant motor carriers without a commensurate benefit to the public; and that this application to the extent authority is sought to operate over the route above described between these points should be denied.

BERGEN BOULEVARD (NEW JERSEY HIGHWAY 8-1) EXTENSIONS

Nos. MC-3701 (Sub-No. 3) and MC-3705 (Sub-No. 3).-Westwood's Rochell Park-New York City bus route via the tunnel, now passes, in part, over Broad Avenue in Palisades Park, Ridgefield, and Fairview, over Fairview and Woodcliff Avenues in Fairview, and thence along Boulevard East to the tunnel approaches. Its proposed alternate route which is 2.7 miles in length extends from the intersection of Broad and Columbia Avenues in Palisades Park on its present route along Columbia Avenue in an easterly direction to Grantwood Boulevard, thence along Grantwood Boulevard to Bergen Boulevard, thence along Bergen Boulevard in a southerly direction through Ridgefield Park and Fairview to the intersection of Harding Place in Fairview, and thence in an easterly direction along Harding Place to a junction with its present route on Boulevard East. Westwood proposes to render a 30-minute non-rush-hour and 15-minute rushhour service over such route. In addition, when two of its south

bound busses reach Broad and Columbia Avenues at the same time, it desires to route one over the proposed route so that it will reach Fairview ahead of the other and thus reestablish the headway between the two.

In support of its claim that there is a need for the proposed service over this route, Westwood submitted the testimony of public witnesses and that of the traffic expert. The latter made a study of the territory through which the proposed route extends, the facilities of competitive carriers, and the traffic trends. Such studies resulted in the compilation of exhibits containing statistics derived from traffic checks of the facilities of Westwood and its competitors at certain intersections along the proposed route, and certain statistics taken from questionnaires which were presented personally by the expert's employees to residents of Ridgefield and which, when answered, were answered in the presence of such employees. Through the expert, applicant offered such exhibits in evidence. Protestants renewed their objections to the exhibits based upon the returns to the questionnaires, and the joint board admitted such exhibits only for the purpose of showing one of the bases upon which the expert founded his opinion that the proposed service is required by the public convenience and necessity. For reasons previously referred to in connection with the Tonnelle Avenue route discussion, we conclude that the exhibits were inadmissible, but that the expert's opinion, since it was based in part upon data other than the questionnaires, is entitled to some weight.

Four public witnesses appeared in support of the proposed operation. Two were members of the governing body of Ridgefield and constitute the transportation committee for that borough; the third was a photographer doing business in Ridgefield; and the fourth was a councilman in Fairview. The civil association representing persons residing along and near Bergen Boulevard in Ridgefield have repeatedly requested the transportation committee to obtain a through interstate route to New York City through the tunnel. The photographer employs approximately 40 persons of whom about 30 live in New York City. Eighteen live in the Bronx, 6 in Harlem, and the remainder in various other sections of New York. At present, most of those who use the public transportation facilities travel via the bridge and subway. Usually arrangements are made by the photographer to take his employees by private automobile to the nearest interstate bus line. Similar arrangements are made with respect to the travel to and from New York of salesmen and business associates. The councilman from Fairview expressed the opinion that there was a need for service over the proposed route.

No. MC-13492 (Sub-No. 4).-North Boulevard has authority to operate a bus service in interstate or foreign commerce, between North

43 M. C. C.

Bergen, N. J., and New York City through the tunnel. Its North Bergen terminal is located at a point known as Nungesser's in the northeastern portion of North Bergen near the intersection of Hudson County Boulevard and Bergenline Avenue. It also conducts an intrastate bus operation between Nungesser's and Englewood Cliffs, N. J., over Hudson County Boulevard to the intersection of Bergen Boulevard in North Bergen, thence in a northerly direction along Bergen Boulevard through Fairview and Ridgefield, thence over New Jersey Highway S-1 through Palisades Park to the junction of New Jersey Highway 6 in Palisades Park, thence over New Jersey Highway 6 to the junction of New Jersey Highway 4 in Fort Lee, thence over New Jersey Highway 4 to the Bridge Plaza in Fort Lee, and thence over Hudson Terrace, Bayview Avenue, and Sylvan Avenue to its terminal at Bayview Avenue and Sylvan Avenue in Englewood Cliffs. The entire proposed route duplicates in part the intrastate route, and connects with the present interstate route at the intersection of Hudson County Boulevard and Bergen Boulevard in North Bergen at a point approximately 1,300 feet northwest of Nungesser's. No interstate service will be rendered at points on the intrastate route north of the Bridge Plaza. North Boulevard now renders intrastate bus service at 10-minute intervals during rush hours and at 15-minute intervals during nonrush hours. It proposes to operate separate through busses between the Bridge Plaza and New York City through the tunnel and render a 30-minute rush-hour and 60-minute non-rush-hour schedule. Intrastate service will be somewhat curtailed, although North Boulevard's expert witness stated such curtailment would be necessary even though the instant application be denied. If the authority sought is granted. North Boulevard will operate as described above, and will seek authority from the New Jersey Public Service Commission (if such authority is required) to carry intrastate and interstate passengers in the same vehicle. Upon the grant of such authority, the same frequency of through service will be provided over the combined proposed and present interstate routes as is now provided over the intrastate route.

North Boulevard's traffic expert and seven public witnesses appeared in support of the application. In addition, five more public witnesses were present at the hearing and it was stipulated that their testimony, if given, would have been substantially the same as that of the seven who testified. Two of the persons who testified are members of the civic association composed of residents living on and near Bergen Boulevard. This association (previously referred to above in connection with the Westwood applications) adopted a resolution favoring the grant of authority to North Boulevard. Such action was based upon their appreciation of the satisfactory intra

state service rendered by North Boulevard in the past. Two of the seven persons travel to and from New York City once or twice weekly, usually by private automobile, and the remainder travel daily using North Boulevard's intrastate service to Nungesser's and thence North Boulevard's interstate service through the tunnel. They express no dissatisfaction with the service as such rendered by North Boulevard on its intrastate and interstate routes, but they would prefer to board a through bus, thus eliminating a change of bus and waiting periods between busses at Nungesser's.

Discussion.-The territory in which the greatest need has been shown for the proposed services of Westwood and North Boulevard is that on and adjacent to Bergen Boulevard in Ridgefield and Cliffside Park, particularly in the former. Persons residing in such territory desiring to travel to and from New York City, have transportation available over the following routes: (1) The combined intrastate and interstate routes of North Boulevard through the tunnel, (2) North Boulevard's intrastate route to Fairview and thence the interstate routes of Public Service, Manhattan, and Westwood, (3) the route of Jersey City and Lyndhurst Bus Company, which passes along Anderson Avenue in Cliffside and in Fairview, and thence along Bergenline Avenue to the tunnel approaches, and thence through the tunnel, (4) the Public Service intrastate route which operates along Bergen Boulevard from the Ridgefield-Fort Lee Borough Line to the West Shore Ferry, in Weehawken, with transfers possible en route to the tunnel lines of Public Service, Manhattan, or Westwood, (5) the intrastate route of North Boulevard to the Bridge Plaza and thence over the interstate lines of numerous carriers, or (6) the intrastate line of Public Service to the Ridgefield-Fort Lee Borough Line, and thence over a Public Service interstate route across the Bridge or a Public Service intrastate route to the One Hundred and Twenty-fifth Street Ferry in Fort Lee. Public Service, however, operates only during rush hours over Bergen Boulevard.

Generally, most traffic moving by public transportation toward New York from the Bergen Boulevard section in Ridgefield and Cliffside Park moves through the tunnel. The only through interstate service available is that of Jersey City and Lyndhurst Bus Company along Anderson Avenue in Cliffside Park. Anderson Avenue is located east of Bergen Boulevard at a distance ranging from 500 feet at Fairview Avenue in Fairview to 2,300 feet in Ridgefield and Cliffside Park. The connecting streets in Ridgefield and Cliffside Park, between Bergen Boulevard and Anderson Avenue are steep with the downward slope toward the latter. The frequency of service over Anderson Avenue by Jersey City and Lyndhurst Bus Company is not shown.