News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

Neil said:
Look at the last 50 years. Building roads does not get rid of traffic, it creates it. Conversely, getting rid of roads...
Click to expand...

Your logic is faulty. Removing roads also creates traffic as a percentage of traffic moves to other routes. See how the Gardiner/Lakshore combo works when one is closed to traffic, the other becomes jammed with traffic. Why? Well some people will leave the car at home and take transit but some will still take the car.

The answer is to make transit a viable alternative and move people out of their cars, not make it so difficult to drive that people are forced onto public transit.
 
sixrings said:
right now the allen is 2 lanes south then the area for the subway and then 2 lanes going north. If the 4 lane road was built over the subway portion there would be quite a bit of land to develop on. This land is a gold mine. Some here suggest that it would cost the city money.... Hypothetically would your opinion change if it could be done without ANY TAX dollars being used.
Click to expand...

Ironically it would probably take tax dollars to get private developers to develop on the site.
 
Asterix said:
Yonge side is maxed out. There is still some spare capacity on the Spadina side (witness the short turning of every second train in the morning at St Clair W).
Click to expand...

South of Bloor, Spadina / University subway is close to being maxed out as well.

That line has quite a bit of spare capacity north of Bloor, but attempts to utilize it will exacebrate problems south of Bloor.
 
Rainforest said:
South of Bloor, Spadina / University subway is close to being maxed out as well.

That line has quite a bit of spare capacity north of Bloor, but attempts to utilize it will exacebrate problems south of Bloor.
Click to expand...

Sounds like more reasons for a DRL from the east (relieving Yonge) and to the west as far as Bloor to relieve University. Latter branch obviously isn't in as immediate need of going further north the way the eastern branch needs to go north of Danforth.
 
It's possible this news story today has sparked a separate thread in the nontransporty parts of UT, but I'll copy-paste it here for completeness' sake. Sounds like the decking-over would be on a considerably more limited scale than some others have dreamed about, and not be intended to support heavy structures above.

'Massive' plan to revamp troubled Lawrence Heights
Plan to be unveiled Thursday envisions a do-over for 138 hectares around Lawrence Ave. and Allen Expressway
Published On Thu Feb 25 2010

Donovan Vincent Staff Reporter

The troubled Lawrence Heights public housing project is about to get a makeover bigger in scope than the massive Regent Park redevelopment underway downtown.

A "preferred option'' for redeveloping Lawrence Heights – sometimes dubbed The Jungle – calls for creating a pedestrian-friendly community with nearly 10,000 units of mixed-income housing, new parks, retail and schools.

To be unveiled Thursday, the plan is part of a larger project to remake the neighbourhood around Lawrence Ave. W. and Allen Rd. – including revamping two subway stations, tearing down and rebuilding the Lawrence Square shopping plaza to make way for an extended road and new housing, and possibly covering a section of the expressway.

In total, the swath targeted for the Lawrence-Allen Revitalization covers 138 hectares, stretching from Bathurst to Dufferin Sts. and Lawrence Ave. W. to Highway 401.

The housing part of the plan mirrors the Regent Park revitalization, but fewer tenants would be affected. About 7,500 tenants lived in Regent Park before that revamp began, compared with 3,500 now at Lawrence Heights.

At 26 hectares, Lawrence Heights itself is similar to the 28 hectares of Toronto Community Housing property at Regent Park. Add to that the four hectares occupied by the plaza.

The plan comes after 18 months of consultation with the community, which has seen its share of gun crimes and drug problems. Rather than continued concentration of social housing, and the social ills that accompany it, the city hopes to go to a mixed-housing model in the revitalization.

No dollar figures for the proposal were available Wednesday, but given the scope of the project it will be in the range of hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars.

"It is massive,'' Howard Moscoe, the local city councillor, said in an interview Wednesday, calling the proposal a "unique opportunity to rebuild a section of the city that's in bad need of rebuilding.''

Three city planners are working full-time on the proposal, and the city has also hired a consulting firm.

The first shovels could be in the ground by late 2011, but completing the project could take up to 25 years.

Newly appointed Toronto Community Housing CEO Keiko Nakamura will join Mayor David Miller, Moscoe, and other officials to make the announcement Thursday at Lawrence Heights.

Among the specifics to be unveiled:

Extending Marlee Ave., which runs parallel to Allen, north beyond Lawrence Ave., where it currently ends at Lawrence Square. This would be made possible by tearing down and redoing the plaza.

Possibly "capping'' or covering part of the Allen at Lawrence. This idea is being explored to increase pedestrian accessibility and "tie both sides of the Lawrence Heights community back together,'' according to Moscoe. Results of preliminary studies will be revealed.

A redesign of the Yorkdale and Lawrence West subway stations is also getting serious thought.

"We want the new development to be subway-oriented,'' Moscoe said.

Rebuilding old public schools, in addition to creating new Catholic schools, of which there are currently none in Lawrence Heights. A large percentage of students at Our Lady of the Assumption school near Bathurst and Lawrence come from Lawrence Heights and must be bused in.

Moscoe said the plan is to get input on the proposal from residents and others in workshops slated over the next week or so.

The proposals will be further refined, culminating in a secondary plan that would go to North York community council sometime in June.

A developer would be chosen at some point.

Like the Regent Park makeover, buildings will be torn down and residents will have to be relocated until the new subsidized units are rebuilt on site.

Currently, there are 1,200 such units in Lawrence Heights, and all must be replaced.

Also like Regent Park, money from sales of condominium units and other forms of market housing will be used to finance the huge redevelopment.

Originally, Toronto Community Housing wanted 9,500 units of mixed housing on the Lawrence Heights "footprint," but the city shaved that to 7,500, saying the larger number would make it too dense.

Toronto Community Housing has also redeveloped its Don Mount Court housing project in the city's east end into mixed housing.

"With the Lawrence Heights revitalization, Toronto Community Housing is doing more than simply replacing housing," the housing agency said in an email Wednesday.

"Our vision is to reshape the Lawrence Heights community to improve the lives and living conditions of all residents."
Click to expand...
 
Woodbridge_Heights said:
The answer is to make transit a viable alternative and move people out of their cars, not make it so difficult to drive that people are forced onto public transit.
Click to expand...

I think the reality is that it's a mixture, but making driving more difficult is absolutely part of the equation. Though it shouldn't be phrased as 'making driving more difficult' as much as making alternative modes of transportation, including walking, cycling or transit, easier.
 
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sou...-79.444703&spn=0.004909,0.013733&z=17&iwloc=A

I don't see that the cost is worth the benifit. With the Subway and existing properties edging the site, there is not much developable land there.
I think the money would be better spent giving the area population top quality rec facilities, improvements to area schools and parks. Create a few connections across the gap, for pedestrians and autos and be done with it.

There are much better ways and much better land in the city that could be reclaimed than burrying this road.
 
Last edited:
jaycola said:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sou...-79.444703&spn=0.004909,0.013733&z=17&iwloc=A

I don't see that the cost is worth the benifit. With the Subway and existing properties edging the site, there is not much developable land there.
I think the money would be better spent giving the area population top quality rec facilities, improvements to area schools and parks. Create a few connections across the gap, for pedestrians and autos and be done with it.

There are much better ways and much better land in the city that could be reclaimed that burrying this road.
Click to expand...

That thought came to mind as well. Even if you removed the Allen and added a 4 lane avenue above the subway, I think you still end up with a pretty small strip of developable land.
 
That could make some sense and would be a good interim stem to closing the entire road. It doesn't make much sense to have all of that traffic poured onto a TC corridor. The subway corridor could not be decked over without being visually obtrusive until it reaches Lawrence Square anyways. once decked over, the entire ~150m wide corridor could support development. In particular, the area around Lawrence square could explode.

I really think an all or nothing approach to getting rid of the Allen should be in order. While Sheppard would probably be better at dispersing traffic, it would be unreasonable to dump that traffic in that neighborhood.

When it comes time to replace the Allen/401 ramps, the city just ought to get rid of the ramps and decommission the Allen then. The amount of redevelopable land around Yorkdale caused by ramp closure and realignment south of the 401 would easily pay for the boxing in of the subway. Hopefully, at this point, we'll have automatic train control.
 
Yeah, I guess I was overly generous in that estimation (although the ROW south of Lawrence is easily 80m if you include embankment). But I still stick to not removing any of the Allen unless we're going to do it all and are prepared to dismantle some ramps at the 401. I couldn't see this as a seriously considered project until at least 2020.
 
Last edited:
sixrings said:
alright how bout just ending allen at lawrence where theres proper on off ramps...
Click to expand...

How is the ramp arrangement at Lawrence any more conducive to traffic flow than the ones at Eglinton?

I'm not one to generally advocate spending money on improving expressways, but the Eglinton/Allen traffic arrangement really serves to detract from the pedestrian environment/streetscape along that stretch of Eglinton West for the various hours of the day where the traffic is perma-snarled queueing to get on or off the Allen. That the Spadina expressway was stopped there was a good thing, but the intersection layout was never designed to efficiently distribute the entirety of the Allen's traffic at that point.

If they're planning on doing a big cut-and-cover station box for the Allen station on the Eglinton LRT, I really think they should contemplate using the works as an opportunity to add a pair of tunnelled ramps allowing for free flow for those routings that currently have to make signalized left turns across traffic lanes (Allen traffic off and over to Eg eastbound, and from Eglinton eastbound onto Allen northbound). It wouldn't massively increase overall throughput of the junction or freewayize Eglinton, but it would ensure that south-to-east cars wind up moving smoothly and calmly into a traffic light facing the right way, and that east-to-north cars can get onto the Allen without making everyone else queue up while waiting for them.
 
please detail where on eglinton the tunnels would start and stop... On the south side of eglinton is a park. But I dont believe the residents are going to let that get dug up to allow a tunnel to be made for a connection to the allen... I understand what you are preposing I just need a visual of how this would work...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top