New Britain herald., 1925-07-17
Connecticut Co. Must Pay Cost of Change In Tracks, Having Expected Revenue Therefrom.
Common Council Wins Fight to Force Corpora ton to Foot the Bill in State Board Finding.

The city's order to the Connecti- cut C for removal of the Myrtle street sV tch must be obeyed and the r1sts borne by the Connecticut Cc. he | ubIic utilities commission has annoQnced in 8 finding handed down today.
 On My 23, the common council al the request of the board of pub lie works. ordered removal of the .-sHltch to improve road conditions and eliminate d traffic hazard. The CnncCtlcut Co. on June 16 appealed to the utilities commission and the matter was heard June 30, Judge John H. Kirkham presented the city's case.
 When the commission received the trolley companys appeal. it an- nounced that no hearing would be held until the fall Mayor Paonessa wrote at once asking for hearing without delay. explaining that the commissions plan would hold up NpIStl uClloll W pl pIl wy tlt StltVNt His request was granted
 4 part of the P. U. C. finding fol- lows.
 The evidence showed that the Myrtle street line, so-called, in New Britain. was constructed about 10 years ago at the urgent request of the then mayor and court of com mon council in the expectation that an unseryed territory would be opened up and relieve crowded liv- ing conditions Tn the city. In order to serve adequately the expected traffic a turnout was constructed on Myrtle street between the junction Of Myrtle and Washington street, q distance of about 300 feet.
 Traffic demands on this route, in recent years at least, have been in sufficient to warrant 8 headway that would make necessary the use of this turnout and its use has, there fore, been confined to providing 3 place for occasional work and other cars to await the arrival of passen- ger cars
 Myrtle street has e width be- tween curb lines of 29 feet and the city of New Britain is now repay ing and widening the street. This highway which Is located near the center of New Britain, contains in dustrial plants and commercial houses, creating frequent automobile traffic and Is also used to avoid traffic congestion in the center of the city.
 The total cost to the company in compliance with the city's order was estimated at $3,150. The Connecti- cut Co. was willing to comply with the order of the city If the latter would agree to bear the out-of- pocket expense of doing the work, which was estimated at S2500. The ground for this condition was that equitably the municipality should bear some part of the cost of re moving 6 part of the companys plant installed at the request of the city. The commission believes, how ever, that the extension of the util- ity's plant under the circumstances Of the case was with the acquiescence Of the company under an expecta- ton similar to that of the city, and with the purpose of meeting an ap- parently reasonable demand for this addition to it's plant.
 From the evidence presented at the hearing, the commission Is oi the opinion and finds that public conN enience and necessity no longer require the continuance of the aforesaid turnout; that the cost of the removal and turnout and re. location of the existing curve and track should he paid as provided hS Section 3S17 of the General Statutes and, further, that tho order of the city of New Britain set forth above Is reasonable. The appeal and peti. tion of the Connecticut Co. is, there fore. dismissed"