New Weapon for Garage Battle
Crescent People Have Signed “Anti” Petition
A new weapon is now being used in Rushden’s grim “Battle of the Garages.” It is in the form of a petition and is being fired against the building of garages in the back gardens of Council houses.

Visiting the battle area on Wednesday afternoon, a reporter found the same confusion of opinion as exists when the Housing Committee meets or when the full Council sends back the committee’s reports.

Different people (he writes) have different views, but on one thing they are agreed – the Council created the whole difficulty by bad planning in its estates. I think so, too.

The trouble clearly arises because the back way of some houses in Irchester-road is the front way of houses in The Crescent. A narrow road, with narrow footpaths has back gardens on one side and house fronts on the other side.

Worst of it......
Artistically, of course, The Crescent gets the worst of it. The people in Irchester-road look out from their front windows on a very pleasant prospect. Those in The Crescent survey – cabbages, ashbins, huts and hen-places – and not their own.

If the test case of No. 113, Irchester-road, now agitating the Council, results in a climb-down by the Housing Committee, garages will be added to the list of objects in the foreground.

One which the Council sanctioned before the war is still in use at No. 111. The Housing Committee has resisted the building of one next door, but the Council has ordered that unhappy committee to think again.

Arguments
Danger to pedestrians – because the road is narrow – and injury to the appearance of the estate are arguments on one side. Council tenants, no less than other people, are entitled to cars and garages, says the other party.

To what extent the present view from the Crescent would be spoilt may be gathered from the following summary of objects in the Irchester-road back gardens.

Garden A : Creosoted hut, large enough for a garage. Stacks of firewood.

Garden B : Washtub, boxes, ashbin, and remains of bonfire.

Garden C : Three wooden buildings clumped together, the foremost being a henplace with corrugated iron roof held down by bricks. A ladder is stored on one roof.

Garden D : Green hut and rusty tar barrel.

Garden E : Green hut, small henplace, remains of bicycle, bucket and washing.

Garden F : Green hut and incinerator (ex-ashbin).

Garden G : Garage (wooden), with chimney and felt roof. Rubbish bin and washing.

Garden H : Collection of henplaces, etc., and green hut which might hold an Austin Seven.

Garden I : Rustic work and wooden hut.

Garden J : Wooden hut large enough for garage.

On a grass verge at the “A” end of the row is a wooden hut smudged with several colours of paint and decorated with barbed wire.

It was obvious that the motorist privileged to have, hold and use a back garden garage must occupy and dominate the little road when entering or leaving in his car. He must bump over the kerb, reverse, and make his turn in two or three stages.

“Let us hear what The Crescent say,” I said to myself.

At the third attempt I found a house where people were at home. They were pleased to see the Press.

“We have five children,” said the husband, “and our youngest has never played in the street. It isn’t safe for kids to play there.”

Said the wife: “It nearly drove us mad when the man opposite had his garage first. He used to back into our front way three or four times. Even now he backs towards my window two or three times.

“If the next man has a garage, they will want them all along the row, and won’t it be lovely. We are fighting for peace and fairness, but the tenants of the Crescent don’t get it. When they built this street they ought to have put two white posts at each end.”

The Husband : “I should just like you to come and live here when they are getting the car out of the garage.”

The Wife: “It’s a terrible front; it’s no good saying it isn’t.

The Husband : “Some people near us moved to Tennyson-road because they couldn’t stand the noise and it was so dangerous for their children.”

Two or three doors off this hot spot, a young man told me: “I’ve got no views about it. I’m easy.”

Two ladies rather more remote from the centre of action discussed the question pleasantly.

“We don’t begrudge anybody a car,” said the elder “and I wish we could afford one ourselves. We have no children, but I suppose it may be dangerous when children are playing.”

“Two women came round with a petition on Monday,” said the younger. “They were very strong about the danger to children. I put my name to it, but when my husband came home I said: I don’t know whether I’ve done the right thing.”

Then the lady of The Crescent laid her finger upon the original cause of the difficulty.

“The trouble is,” she said, “that when we first came here there were no houses in front, and the Council told us that the land between us and Irchester-road was going to be a playground for the children. Soon afterwards, however, they built on it, and we have the backways to look at.”

“Dangerous”
“There is nowhere for the children to play except in the street, and it would be dangerous for the children if there were many garages. People should have their cars, but I think the best place for the garages would be on a bit of waste land.”

“We look out on the other people’s washing,” mused the senior, “but washing can be taken in. Garages are there all the time.”

A few comments from Irchester-road might have been helpful, but No. 111 (garage in use) and No. 113 (garage applied for) were not at home.

I took another look at the back gardens – divided only by posts and wires – and the bending ribbon of road with nothing better than low palings to separate it from the gardens.

Then I pictured a garage in every garden – the logical outcome of the Council’s present frame of mind.

I shall not apply for a tenancy in The Crescent.