Dear Ministry of Transportation of Ontario,

We are writing collectively as more than 6,000 signatories to the public petition calling for immediate safety improvements at the intersection of Highway 6 and Wellington Road 22 / Nichol Road 8.

This letter reflects the shared concerns of residents, commuters, first responders, business owners, parents, and community members who rely on this corridor daily — and who are asking for clarity, accountability, and interim safety action while longer-term changes remain pending.

What has been acknowledged
We recognize and appreciate that the Ministry has:

• Identified the need for improvements at this intersection;
• Conducted site visits and reviewed collision data;
• Indicated that interim measures are under review, including lane configuration changes, turning movements, and a speed study to inform enforcement; and
• Communicated that lane clarity measures may be implemented when weather conditions permit.

These acknowledgements matter, and they signal that the safety concerns raised by the community are valid.

What remains unaddressed
Despite these acknowledgements, critical gaps remain, even after repeated written requests.

1. No timelines
To date, the Ministry has not provided:

• Target dates for decisions on interim measures;
• Expected timelines for implementation once decisions are made; or
• A schedule for completion and public release of the proposed speed study.

Terms such as “under review,” “monitoring,” and “weather-dependent” describe process, not commitment. Interim measures without timelines do not meaningfully reduce risk at a location with a documented history of severe collisions.

2. Unaddressed interim safety measures
The petition calls for several interim actions that have not been substantively addressed in Ministry correspondence, including:

• Temporary speed reduction through the intersection zone;
• Speed feedback signage to address chronic speeding and speed differentials;
• Enhanced lighting to mitigate known visibility limitations;
• Milled rumble strips on east–west approaches to provide earlier sensory warning;
• Navigation-routing mitigation to discourage unfamiliar through-traffic; and
• Confirmation that existing flashing warning systems are functioning reliably.

If any of these measures are being ruled out or deferred, the community is asking for the safety rationale and policy constraints informing those decisions.

3. Monitoring without accountability
The most recent response from the Ministry (January 21, 2026) indicated that comments had been reviewed and that traffic safety operations would continue to be monitored. Monitoring alone does not constitute an interim safety plan, nor does it replace the need for defined actions, assigned responsibility, and clear timelines.

Why this matters beyond statistics
For many in this community, collisions at this intersection have resulted in years-long physical recovery, lasting disability, emotional trauma, and profound impacts on quality of life. Some individuals who have contacted us report never fully returning to work or normal daily functioning after crashes at this location.

These are not abstract risks. They are lived consequences that persist long after headlines fade, and they underscore why interim safety measures exist: to reduce harm now, not only after permanent construction is complete.

What the community is asking for
We are not asking for new studies, new consultations, or abstract assurances. We are asking for:

• Clear, written timelines for interim safety measures currently under review;
• Transparency about which measures will be implemented, which will not, and why;
• Engineering and operational actions that reduce risk now, not solely enforcement-based responses; and
• Ongoing public communication that reflects measurable progress, not process language.

Families, workers, and emergency services travel this route every day. Interim safety measures are intended precisely for this period — when permanent changes are pending, but risk remains present.

Closing
This issue is not about a single collision or a single correspondent. It is about a corridor with a long history of severe outcomes, and a community asking — collectively and reasonably — for action that reflects the urgency of that reality.

We respectfully request a written response that addresses the points above with specificity and dates, so the public can understand what will change, and when.

Sincerely,

The 6,000+ signatories of the public petition calling for immediate safety improvements at Highway 6 & Wellington Road 22
https://c.org/Tfqfr6Ptrq

This open letter was sent by email to the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario on January 28, 2026. For transparency, elected officials whose mandates intersect with this corridor were copied on the correspondence.