Mile Hill Road

No sidewalks signage at top and bottom of Mile Hill might help

MEE

Widen the road and put in speed bumps
Painting lines is a waste of money
Paris traffic is bad now this will only make it worse
This will also inconvenience many people

RC

I do not agree with this
Please stop appealing to the bikers. I use this road everyday going to and from work.
Rest Acres is already too busy and adding more traffic will slow the people of Paris even more going to work and everyday life

JM

Strongly opposed to this solution

You cannot add speed humps cause it will slow down emergency response time. what about the extra travel down Rest Acres?
5 min longer response in not OK.

CS

Not in favour of the one-way proposal
I don't believe it is safe for bikes or people walking
Reduce the speed limit
as much as I believe in space for people walking or on bikes, Mile Hill is not the place for them with traffic

GC

Do you have data that shows traffic will slow down on a one way road?
There won't be head on car collisions but what about the cyclist or pedestrians who will be in danger?

MH

I don't see many bikers as i go up the hill
In my 20 yrs here i haven't heard of any accidents

KM

Thanks for the information on complete streets.
Thanks for hiring an external company who is neutral to this project, this way we get a fair view on the solution

The numbers of increased traffic and speeds is a problem
please don't put speed bumps they wreck cars
Thank you for braving the crowd who seem to be not to happy about it
Its good they can ask the questions, you can respond. keep up the communication

The need for emergency vehicles - 2-way? is important how will this be managed?
Has there been issues with pedestrians/cyclist in the past? or injuries?
The cyclist are they going to drive the same as cars? I wouldn't feel safe if they get to use the walking path where a pedestrian is going uphill and they are going downhill.
I see how this impacts many of the residents down the hill - they won't be happy
Benefits - could be illuminated more so we can be positive about

Tough Job
Thank you for your service

AC

Next meeting in actual evenings please for day workers, commuters please

JM

1) What is the data on pedestrian/cyclist use at present?

2) Why isn't there a cycling path on Powerline and Rest Acres?
Why wasn't that addressed when all the improvements were made?
Why can't the cycling loop go that way?

3)Traffic calming measures please
try this for two years before the more drastic measure of converting to a one way.

NC

Nothing in this plan does anything to slow traffic down
Slow the traffic down with speed cushions, speed bollard, seasonal speed bumps.
Keep slow (40 km/h) 2-way traffic
Manage the speed and the hill will be safe

ST

Safety trumps everything
I am in favour of the proposal, I would not use the road to walk or cycle in its current state.
I back onto Powerline Rd, I would love to see speed bumps along Powerline, drivers speed down Powerline coming and going to Mile Hill
I would love to hear the outcome of a "Fence/Barrier" for the homes that back onto Powerline (those residents on Masters Ln). If no changes are made to Mile Hill, as mentioned, the traffic will increase along Powerline. Surely it must be a no brainer that a barrier must be erected along Powerline (for those residents along Masters Ln)
So frustrating that this still has not been decided upon
If we get approved for automated speed enforcement put it on Powerline

PW

I live at the bottom of Mile Hill & fully agree with how dangerous it is.
After all the building in this area surely there must have been plans in place
before for new roads to cope with excess traffic or has this been the plan all along?
The noise in the summer with all the motor bikes up + down is horrendous!
This plan will make this worse - Just divert the traffic elsewhere

SC

I keep hearing this is a done deal. Use Rest Acres Rd for walking/biking
Get speed under control
Speed humps
You need lanes for more cars not less
Do it right this time

DT

There must be a better way than what has been proposed so far....Thnik about it!

UT

County should have had a member bring microphone to all speakers, very poorly managed that way.

I am strongly opposed to the changes on mile hill road.

From attending the information session it is clear this is not an appropriate solution. As learned in the information session, there is a limited amount of data supporting if there is even a significant amount of pedestrian use on this road.

There has not been enough data collection validating cyclists and walkers on this road and its daily use. Especially in the cold winter months when cyclists and walkers are present in an even more limited amount. I live at the bottom of mile hill and very rarely see people using this road for cycling and walking. Before making drastic changes and inconveniencing everyone in the neighborhood do we not want to ensure our data is in alignment? Why are we inconveniencing an entire town for a select few individuals who would like to use a road unfit for walking and cycling even with the proposed changes?

I suggest looking at an alternative path designed for cyclists and walkers through the valley. This would be an all-around safer alternative to what is currently being proposed now.

At the meeting, it was described that emergency response times would not be drastically increased and only a "2-minute detour" would occur. I encourage the individuals who created this proposal to drive on these roads with the delays currently present and validate this timing as this is incorrect data. This will only increase if the closure of mile hill is approved.

Next, as we also heard at the meeting there are currently speed bumps present on emergency routes in Paris (Grand River St). Therefore, this incorrect notion should not have been provided to the public at the meeting as it is also false. I suggest decision-makers look further into the possibility of speed bumps or speed cameras to control speed. This would solve the issue at hand.

I lastly want to pose a question to the people who will make this decision on whether this change should be implemented. Well over 100 people came to this meeting yesterday to express their deep concerns with this proposal, and close to 600 signatures have been collected as part of a petition to stop this. Not to mention the negative comments under this post, emails that have been sent, and phone calls made also expressing concerns. I hope the decision-makers are not only listening but HEARING what the public is saying. There is a better way. Let's take some time and figure out the correct solution before making a bigger mess as a "quick fix". Is the County of Brant REALLY hearing the public? If so, the decision is clear.

Removed by moderator.

After attending the information session last night it is very obvious most people are not in favour of changes to Mile Hill road.
Our main concern is the impact of extra traffic cutting through other areas so people who live down the hill can head home.
Residents heading home will take the path of least resistance to get home which is north on Rest Acres to Daugaard then onto Court Drive down to Dundas.
We live on Court Drive and have seen a huge increase in the amount and speed of traffic since the road opened up and it will be worse with the proposed changes.
It is obvious these changes will negatively effect far more people than it will benefit.
So many are hoping that common sense prevails and these changes are not implemented.

Craig Mark

My Wife & I attended the Mile Hill meeting on Wed. evening Jan. 11 and we were also somewhat disappointed with the presentation. There appears to be a lack of data and based on assumptions with a focus on cheap and easy. In my experience, both professionally and personally, cheap and easy turns into costly and ineffective and in most cases makes the situation worst. The traffic issues and Mile Hill is only a fraction of the overall problems with traffic/pedestrian/bicycle issues throughout the town.
My Wife & I have lived on Charles St, for decades and have seen increased traffic, especially when canoers/kayakers/tubers our in town. I walk daily from the end on Hillside, up Main St Hill, Daugaart, Court, Laurel, Downtown, the Damn, SCJ trail to Firehall, across all bridges(pedestrian & Vehicle) Washington, Ball St. including all side streets and alleyways in between. But I've never walked or would even consider walking Mile Hill-in my view, it would be suicide. I walk with my 2 dogs and I always wear a high vis. vest and I've had several near misses with both vehicles and cyclists over the past couple years on roads, at intersections and on the trails by people, young and old, who were not paying attention, speeding and/or just being jerks. Having said all that, there are several streets that I walk regularly that have no sidewalks, some have been mentioned in previous comments, but the ones that are the most troubling are Catherine and Creedon streets at the Optimist park, which is used by many families with young children, baby carriages, teenagers, dog walkers etc. and can only be accessed by walking on the road, if money is going the be spent on improving safety and accessibility to public spaces that are used regularly, I suggest sidewalks on roads where people actually walk.
In addition, speeding is an issue everywhere I walk, but when it comes to Washington St, I suggest installing stop signs at all intersections from bottom of Mile Hill to the stop lights, this would also help with vehicles trying to pull out from Anne, Monk, Queen and Main streets and would be a speed deterrent. Furthermore, there were some assumptions made in the proposal, in that, down bound traffic would head down Rest Acres to King Edward, this is short sighted as both Duagaart and Court are now tied into Rest Acres and I have used both to access Dundas St. West to Chapel to Main to get to my home. This will become that next problem areas as eluded to at the meeting, once again, there are no sidewalks on Main, Chapel, or the east end of Dundas, all of which are used by pedestrians.
Furthermore, with regards to traffic down Mile Hill, there appears to be two types or groups of traffic; local(people who live in the south end) and transient(people driving either downtown or to head east across the river). Depending on the intended destination of these vehicles, there are potential issues that would be created by diverting down bound traffic either at the Dumfries St, or Washington St. stop lights which need to be considered as neither of those intersections are optimal for increased traffic, i.e., no dedicated Left/Right turn lanes at stop lights, poor traffic flow at Dumfries/Grand River St. South intersections.
In conclusion, I oppose the changes to Mill Hill and would strongly suggest that our tax dollars be spent on installing sidewalks on the many streets throughout this town that are used regularly by children, families, dog walkers, mobility scooters, etc. and would improve the safety and well being of many more residents than the proposed changes to Mile Hill could ever bring.
That My 2 Cents.
Take Care & Stay Safe