, ,

Revised traffic plan for Richmond Rd removes speed bumps

Open house April 12, 6-7pm, City Hall, Rm 247

City staff have revised the original traffic calming plan for Richmond Road in light of resident feedback and scheduled road work. Details of the revised plan are below, as well as in a letter sent to residents this week.

Residents are invited to attend a drop in Public Information Centre to learn more and ask questions:

Date: April 12, 2017

Location: City Hall, Room 247, 426 Brant Street

Time: 6:00pm to 7:00pm

There is no formal presentation at this meeting. Residents will have an opportunity to discuss the revised traffic calming plan with staff to answer any questions and provide comments.


The original traffic calming plan recommended the installation of three speed humps to address the identified speeding concern. Based on feedback received, residents requested that other options first be considered before any split speed humps may be installed. Residents also believed that three speed humps were too many. Taking this information and that Richmond Road is proposed to be resurfaced in 2018, staff have created a revised traffic calming plan.

The revised plan will be installed in late spring and will consist of installing an off-set solid yellow centreline along the entire length of Richmond Road with a solid white edge line on the north side. No parking anytime restrictions will be installed on the north side within the existing road narrowing areas. Furthermore, semi permanent driver feedback signs will be installed midway between Maple Avenue and Lambshead Drive.

The revised traffic calming plan will be evaluated in the fall. If the results indicate the plan has reduced vehicle speeds and traffic calming measures are no longer warranted, then the pavement markings and driver feedback signs will be permanently installed as part of the 2018 road resurfacing project. However, if the results indicate that traffic calming measures are still warranted then two split speed humps will be installed.

If you have any questions, comments or require more information regarding the traffic calming plan, please do not hesitate to contact staff:

Brent Jefferson, Traffic Technologist, Transportation Services Department


(905) 335-7671 Ext. 7760


Written by Marianne Meed Ward

I was inspired to seek public office because I believe, like so many of you, “I can do something about that” on the issues we face. As councilor, my role is to take a stand on what’s best for residents and go to bat for it. Pushback is inevitable from those who don’t have the community’s interests at heart. I will stand with you and for you, to achieve the best interests of our city, without caving to unacceptable compromise in the name of consensus.


Leave a Reply
  1. I hope the City is considering the impacts of these traffic calming measures on adjacent areas. For example, there are number of speed bumps on Woodview so people now use our quiet little street aka the one without speed bumps, to speed around the calming measures. Great for the people on the other street but now we’ve got speeding around our children. Maybe it should be all residential streets have the measures or none?

  2. That’s pretty weak traffic calming measures.
    What’s the results of such in other similar road neighbourhood environments?

    Best one the city to do is put the grids together in more than one place, Richmond. Best traffic planning is to provide residents of both sides if the old railway line at least 3 points of connection: Caroline, Grahams Lane and Richmond

    Back in 1992 the city dropped a bunch of progressive measures such as bump outs on both sides of the road and those connections

    As the density raises in the core our urban modal split we molded into will pack the cars in creating increased frustrations and bring multiply immediate and long term dangers to our environment and health.

    City has to come up with better short and long term solutions. This jumping around the various neighbourhoods with piecemeal measures won’t add up to much.

What's your take?