The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1913-10-04
HIGGINS WOULD
MAKE CONN. co.
TOE THE MARK
Public Utilities Commissioners
Are Not in Accord on Nor
walk Petition.
FORD AND HALE SAY
1854 IS ENOUGH
Higgins Believes Trolley Com
pany Should Pay More
City Asked For 100000.
Ospeeial to the Farner.)

Especial to the F'armer)
Hartford, oct 4-Commissioner Rich
ard T. Higgins of the State Public
Utilities Commission is at variance
with the other two members, Theo-
dore B. Ford and J. H. Hale, in it's
interpretation of the law relating to
the portion of expenses that should be
borne by street railway companies in
connection with the construction of
new bridges or strengthening of ex-
isting structures
In the decision of the commission on
the petition Of the city of Norwalk as
TO tracks in washington street bridge,
the question is brought to issue
The city wanted the Connecticut Co.
TO stand 500. 600 of the expense of the
bridge work Commissioners Ford
and Hale have ruled that $16,614 is
fair amount, while Commissioner Hig-
gins who agrees with the finding in
ether details. files dissenting opin-
ion as to the expense The hearing
was held in this city on July "a.
The finding of the commission may
be summarized as follows:
The proposed new bridge will be 907
feet in length with a total length, in
Guiding approaches. OF 9e5 feet and
width Of sixty feet, with a forty-foot
driveway between sidewalks. The
particular type, style and dimensions
OF the proposed new bridge were deter
mined by said bridge construction
committee. prior to the bringing of
this petition
street across said Norwalk river forms
part OF the public highway connect
ing Norwalk and East Norwalk, and
over which there is a large amount
testimony that over 700 vehicles pass
over said bridge in three hours.
Owing to--the large amount of
money which ths city viii be Obliged
TO necessar1fy expend In the conStruc-
ticn OF this bridge and the volume
commission feels that the wishes of
the city. in requesting a grooved rail,
should be acceded to, and a grooved
ran across said bridge and its ap-
ticular type and weight to be definite
" determined IN a subsequent order
approving of the method and manner
Of construction
The city of NorwaTk claims that two
tracks should be laid across said.
claims that a single track is and will
be ample track facilities to accomno-
date the trolley service The posi-
tons taken by the city and the COM
pany were apparently maintained be-
cause OF the supposed controlling in
nuence that the number of tracks
would have In apportioning the equita-
hle amount which the Connecticut Co
should pay for the construction of
said bridge The evidence before the
commission indicated that a single
track would afford sufficient track ia
cilities for the present street railway
traffic across said bridge, but, reaHz-
ing the necessity OF providing for the
future. and as tending to obviate
congestfon on this bridge, having a
draw span, the commission is Of opin-
ion that the number of tracks to be
laid BY said street railway company
across said bridge and its approaches
should be two. commonly designated
as double tracks.
After an extended consideration 70
the facts and elements involved in
this case a majority or the commits
sion Is OF the opinion that the equita-
ble portion OF cost to be assessed
against the street railway company
should be the cost of paving that part
Of the highway which the law requires
the company to maintain, to wit: S.
622, and the additional expense of
making the bridge sufficiently strong
for street railway service which in
this case. is estimated at 1892, and
we and that $16,614 is a fair and
equitable part for the Connecticut Co.
- pay.
It IS therefore. determined, ordered
and decreed that the Connecticut Co.
lay two tracks across said new con-
crete bridge and its approaches with
an approved type of grooved rail, and
equitabie part OF the expense OF the
construction of said new concrete
bridge and its approaches, the sum of
S1s,S14. which shall include the ex-
pense of paving its legal part ana
ehali also pay the cost Of all rails.
ties. ballast wires, cables and other
precial work connected with and neces-
Nary for the operation of street rail-
way cars over said bridge and its ap-
Proaches-
Commissioner Higgins dissents, say
Ing IN part:
/ fully concur with the majority |
Mndfnr. opinion and order of the com |
1miEsion in this case, excepting as to |
the rule adopted in determining the |
eqsrBfa BILE apportionment, and the |
amount so determined which shall be |
Borne by the respondent railway com |
psny-
am OF opinion that the statute re-
curing the street railway company |
10 pay so much of the expense of the |
reconstruction' of said bridge as may /
he. equitable. and authorizing this |
comnfssion to determine the amount, |
implies and intends that such equit- !
able part to be borne by the street |
railway company shall include a part |
cf the cost OF the bridge and a sub
structure built up to a standard nee |
essarv for vehicular and general high
way travel
The question is not, in its fnaIity,
n determination of the additional ex-
pense of the bridge due to the pres
ence OF the street railway company's
tracks across same. but what, under
al the circumstances is the equitable
amount OF part of the expense of the
entire structure which should be borne
49, - -