New Britain herald., 1924-05-24
GETTING DOWN CENTRAL PARK

C-liNG DOWN tENIhAI PAhh
 Opponents of one-way traffic about the center have hit upon a scheme which they think is going to allow & return from the present plan 10 their favorite method of handling the many machines which are now going about the center of the city in a circular fashion rather than by haphazard number of routes that cause many crossing points of traffic. They say that 1t would be possible 10 have two- way traffic should part of the north ern end of Central Park be taken off, and are prepared to introduce a reso- luton in the Common Council for the removal of part. at least, of the greenery that affords a welcome sight in an otherwise, more or less drab block.
 The park, however. is the property of citizens of New Britain and, in our opinion, storm of protest will arise from peopel who are accustomed 10 consider the city from anything but a srdid business standpoint. The green cry is a distinctive feature of New England towns generally. II furnishes 8 beauty spot for those about the cen ter Its growing vegetation aids in clearing tho air. tCarbon- -monoxide gas which is generated by automobiles is poison to humanity and is absorbed by trees and plantsD. 1t has a scnti- mental value to many, many, people, old and young. We arc putting hun. dreds Of thousands of dollars into the development Of parks on the out skirts, why should we relieve the city of one beauty spot for the sake of an experiment7 Once the park is cut down il can never be replaced much as we might wish to do SO.
 As for the argument that cne.was traffic might then be abolished. That bears no weight whatever. One Of the big features of one-way traffic is that it abofishes points where vehicles have to cross each others routes.
 In an orderly arrangement, such as NC now have, there are less danger points. supposing the park were cut
 
 off for the purpose of returning to the old traffic scheme? Would that abol- bh the crossing Of traffic at the north- west corner of the park? Would it do 20 at the northeast corner? Would there not be a criss-cross arrangement al the southern end d2 Conditions would be just as bad as ever as far as traffic is concerned. although cars going east ] ana west across-toWn would have a little more room to one side or the ! other room which they could not take advantage Of because the street . would bc two-way not one-way.
 1t has. we believe. been conclu- ! sisely demonstrated that our streets are wide enough to take care Of traffic providing there is an orderly arrange . ment, providing many danger points are eliminated. There are bound 10 he some. but bur present system has eliminated th, ma5ority. Why give up on advantage Vbich the city possesses q little bit or beauty st inc center. for an evanesccut scheme which would never matcrislizcs 1' would not Hork. ve must eliminate crossings and, 1T we do so, we have room suUuhEh.
 IT there is anyone so seriously hurt in s business fashion hy inc one-way traffic Hby not Iet them use the monu- ment for billboard purposes sivcriis- Ing their goods theron? No. ssy you. Why noi9 We could. at'trsst. remove thc signs and clean up the monumeft some day--we couid not repIace the park. rn matter how mgch seutim.n there might ha for dofue. so uhen No had learned that our act eas mis- taken. ti
 MoaEN POLICE As it ess 10 l,e expected the number [