Dozens of residents who live near Bradford’s new south west arterial road (SWAR) have concerns about safety.
In December, local community member, Delia Emeid, started a petition asking the town to make changes to the design of the SWAR and nearby roads, and within just a few days it had gathered 83 signatures.
Among the list of potential improvements, the community group is asking for:
- Larger road-name signs to guide motorists
- A three-way stop at the old intersection of Line 5 east and Sideroad 10 south
- Right-turn lanes at intersections along Sideroad 10 with Brookview Drive and Miller Park Avenue
- Right-turn lane on the new SWAR curve at the intersection with Line 5 east
- Right-turn lane on Line 5 east at intersection with Sideroad 10 south
- Street lights at both intersections of Line 5 east with SWAR curve and Sideroad 10 south
- Guard rails in appropriate spots
In the long term, the group also wants the town to consider adding roundabouts or traffic signals at both intersections of Line 5 east with the SWAR curve and Sideroad 10 south.
The SWAR is part of a long-term transportation project by the town started in 2009 to accommodate growth and integrate the Highway 400 interchange on Line 5 by rebuilding and realigning Sideroad 10 from County Road 88 south to Line 5, and Line 5 from Sideroad 10 west to Coffey Road.
This involved creating a large curved section of road to prioritize traffic travelling along Line 5 and Sideroad 10, as well as the realignment and addition of a roundabout at Line 6.
Construction began in 2022 and is expected to be complete by the end of this year. Work on the curved portion of the SWAR is essentially finished, and town staff explained the only remaining efforts — including minor ditch grading and possibly some shoulder sealing — are expected to be completed once the weather is suitable.
After having a chance to drive on the new road, residents were worried, and Paul Franks met with neighbours to write a letter of their concerns and suggestions to the mayor and council on Aug. 12.
“It appeared initially that it was a fairly dramatic change in design,” he said, admitting that up until then he wasn’t entirely sure what to expect. “I’m not a traffic designer, but it doesn’t appear to be fully safe.”
Franks is particularly concerned with the size and placement of the signs telling people how to access Line 5 east, and said that his mother had become lost when trying to visit in the fall, because one of the signs happens to be located close to a construction entrance, leading her to accidentally drive off road.
Another member of the group, Delia Emeid said her biggest concern is the lack of street lights at the intersections.
“That turn, at night, you do not see it,” she said. “We need some lighting for crying out loud.”
Both residents are also concerned about the speed of traffic the lack of a right-turn lane for vehicles trying to exit onto Line 5 east, as well as traffic trying to turn left off Sideroad 10 onto Line 5 east.
They said it’s difficult to judge when it’s safe to turn left.
While waiting for a response, another member of the group organized an on-site meeting in October with Ward 3 Coun. Ben Verkaik.
In correspondence shared by a member of the group, Verkaik later explained that he had discussed those concerns with staff and was waiting for a response.
Growing frustrated with waiting, Emeid put together the petition and began circulating it on Dec. 2, before sending it to the town, hoping for a response from the elected officials.
“I got responses from (staff), but I don’t want to talk to (staff). I don’t know why I’m being directed to staff when I didn’t vote for staff. I voted for Ben, he’s my councillor, he represents my area, so why isn’t he stepping up?” she said.
“Addressing the concerns of residents is a primary role for everyone on town council,” Verkaik said via email, but he also explained that he isn’t a civil engineer, which is why questions concerning road design were deferred to the expertise of town staff.
Councillor working to resolve issues
Additionally, Verkaik took action in response to the concerns during the regular meeting of council on Dec. 19, when he requested staff investigate the cost and timing of adding the street lighting. Staff hope to have that report before council sometime in March.
Meanwhile, he’s working on the issue of making navigation less confusing by updating the street names and eventually having new signage installed.
As chair of the heritage committee, Verkaik brought up the issue of renaming the streets during a Jan. 25 meeting and said the committee is “getting close” to recommending a renaming process to council.
This proposed process “will include public input,” he said.
Upon learning that, Franks questioned why the town waited until now to rename the streets if the basic design had been selected in 2010.
“It should have happened sooner,” he said.
In response, Verkaik explained that while the town has a street naming policy, council have “seldom had to deal with street renaming.”
“The south west arterial road will be a major road in BWG coming off Highway 400 and we want to get this one right,” he said, adding that the committee is hoping to use the process as a guideline to help ensure street renaming begins sooner for future projects, when required.
Verkaik is also hoping to have greater consideration given to street lighting.
The environmental study report explains that the portion of the SWAR south of the roundabout did not require street lighting because it was built to a rural standard.
However, Verkaik also acknowledged the importance of lighting at certain intersections, even on rural roads.
“Future projects of this magnitude will need to go through an (environmental assessment) process with public input and I would certainly be asking for street lighting to be considered where warranted,” he said.
Staff respond to requests
Traffic safety concerns are normally be handled by the town’s community and traffic safety advisory committee, but because this issue is with new construction, Katy Modaressi, the town’s manager of capital projects, addressed the residents’ remaining concerns.
Modaressi said guard rails and a roundabout for Line 5 and Sideroad 10 were considered as part of the process, but it was determined they weren’t warranted for the new curve connecting the two roads based on several factors, including posted speed limit and the grade of the ditch slope. Meanwhile, a traffic analysis determined a roundabout was not needed.
“Similarly, signalization requires minimum traffic volume to justify having signals. Such volume is not projected for the two intersections (identified by residents), therefore the intersections are not signalized,” Modaressi said via email, adding that low traffic counts also led to right-turn lanes being ruled out during design.
However, she added the town will continue monitoring traffic volumes to determine if upgrades become needed.
As for the old intersection of Line 5 east and Sideroad 10 south, traffic on Line 5 east currently has the right of way and traffic on Sideroad 10 south has a stop sign, so both sections of road are now classified as collectors, meaning traffic priority is again determined by traffic counts.
That didn’t satisfy Franks and Emeid, who both said they would have preferred to see those features included from the outset.
“God forbid terrible things happen in that intersection before they get this done. That’s my concern,” Emeid said.
Safety a significant component
Both Verkaik and Modaressi emphasized that the design of the SWAR followed standard engineering practices.
To help illustrate that point, Modaressi explained project teams typically complete 20-30 different assessments including: surveys, warrants, locates, utilities plans, tree assessments, and heritage, migratory bird, geotechnical and geohydrology reports.
Many of those reports were included as part of the project’s environmental assessment, for which the public consultation began about 15 years ago.
That included public notices and information centres in 2009 and 2010, and a report from staff endorsed to council on June 8, 2010.
Emeid and Franks each moved to the area in 2011 and 2012 respectively, and as a result, were not able to participate in the process.
BradfordToday reviewed written and typed feedback from those centres in archived documents provided by the town, and while support for the use of Line 5, Sideroad 10 and Line 6 was common, only one of the current group’s recommendations was included back then — a roundabout for Line 5 and Sideroad 10 was suggested after the third centre, but never adopted.
The Ward 3 community access networking meeting is scheduled for Feb. 10, from 10 a.m. to noon, at the Bradford West Gwillimbury Fire and Emergency Services Station No. 1 (77 Melbourne Dr.).
Verkaik asked to have the meeting early in the year so residents will have a chance to discuss the SWAR or other issues important to them sooner rather than later.
.png;w=120;h=80;mode=crop)
