WELLINGTON COUNTY – The recommended plan for dealing with a dangerous intersection on Highway 6 south of Fergus is a roundabout.
This is according to the recently completed Transportation Environmental Study Report (TESR), which is available for public comment until Feb. 21 at highway6andwellingtonroadsecondline.com.
“The recommended plan evolved through a process that included the development and evaluation of alternatives, with additional details being developed as the study progressed,” the report states.
The plan involves constructing a “modern roundabout” designed to accommodate both farm equipment and tractor trailer vehicles, and changes to the “horizontal alignment” of both Highway 6 and Wellington Road 22 and 8th Line, it says.
Currently, all roads leading to the intersection approach on a downhill slope.
Wellington Road 22 to the northeast and 8th Line to the southwest is a two-lane paved road that marks the border between Guelph/Eramosa and Centre Wellington townships.
Drivers on those roads encounter a stop sign when they reach Highway 6.
The provincial highway passes straight through the intersection without a stop.
From the south, there is a right-hand turn lane. Traffic coming from the north travels on two lanes, with the passing lane doubling as a left-turn lane.
Accidents at the intersection are not uncommon.
“This has been a dangerous intersection for a long time,” said county Warden and Guelph/Eramosa Mayor Chris White.
He could not say when construction will begin on the project, but said if the project is moving forward “this is a good news story.”
The TESR, prepared by Egis on behalf of the Ministry of Transportation, is part of the preliminary design and Class Environmental Assessment study process required for provincial transportation facilities.
It looks not only at design alternatives for improving the intersection, but also at environmental impacts, property requirements, strategies for construction and traffic impacts.
The intersection “requires improvements to address the safety concerns and geometric deficiencies,” the study’s “problem statement” reads.
“Specific issues identified include safety-related concerns such as visibility, speeding, and turning movements.”
The roundabout option the study identifies as the recommended plan was one of seven alternatives that were included on a “long list” of potential options for the intersection. All six of the other options involved traffic lights instead.
![](https://www.wellingtonadvertiser.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/roundabout.jpg)
This image from the Transportation Environmental Study Report shows the recommended plan for improving the intersection at Highway 6 and Wellington Road 22/8th Line.
A weighted evaluation process favoured the roundabout because “it resulted in lower permanent natural environment impacts, lower property requirements, highest safety improvement, least complex construction staging, lowest construction costs, and highest cost benefit ratio,” the report states.
White said the roundabout option would be fine.
“Whatever they do is 1,000 times better than what it is,” he said.
In feedback gathered through public consultations, multiple people expressed their preference for traffic lights, but more people spoke up in favour of a roundabout.
Most people also expressed some sort of concern about the safety of the intersection, and many wondered about the timeline for the project.
Minutes of a Feb. 8, 2023 meeting between the townships, county, MTO and Egis, and attached to the TESR, provide scheduling for the project.
According to the document, the TESR public review was supposed to have taken place in June and July of last year, detailed design was supposed to follow from August to January, and construction was supposed to have started in spring of 2025.
In an email response to an Advertiser inquiry, Tanya Blazina of the ministry’s senior media relations department reiterated that the comment period for the TESR ends Feb. 21.
“The Ministry of Environment Conservation and Parks then has a 30-day review period concluding on March 21,” Blazina stated.
But she provided no further detail about when construction might be expected to begin on the project, and no details about the anticipated cost.
“To ensure that value for money is achieved during the bidding process, we do not release a cost estimate,” stated Blazina.
Asked whether there might be a cost to the county for any part of the project, county roads department manager Joe de Koning said there would only be a cost to the county if additional work is requested to be added to the project outside the MTO scope.
“I do not see this happening at this time,” he said.
Neither he nor the warden could provide any further insights about the construction timeline.
“Timelines are with the province,” said White. “We’d like to see it as soon as possible.”