News   May 03, 2024
Assembly's Blueprint for Sustainable Urban Living in the GTHA
 1.1K     1 
News   May 03, 2024
RAD's State of the Market 2024 to Feature Talks on AI and Real Estate
 696     0 
News   May 03, 2024
Congratulations to our Avontuura Guides Winners!
 315     0 

Plans to fill in Allen Road

golodhendil said:
I.e., only one tower (or more correctly, decks over one or two of the parcels) was built at the same time. Other parcels have since been decked over and more will be in the next few years/decades, so plenty of communities are/will hover over existing roadways/railways.

Edit: For those interested, here is a report from 2000 on the history, economics and vision of developing the air rights over the Pike.
Click to expand...

The report itself states that developing air rights over the turnpike is dependant on strong demand for real estate development. I doubt there is that kind of pressure to build over the Allen. For one the turnpike goes right through downtown boston.
 
Woodbridge_Heights said:
The report itself states that developing air rights over the turnpike is dependant on strong demand for real estate development. I doubt there is that kind of pressure to build over the Allen. For one the turnpike goes right through downtown boston.
Click to expand...
golodhendil said:
Again, I am simply pointing out that it is possible to develp over highways, I am not necessarily endorsing doing it for the Allen. If anything, I would much prefer to see the rail lands decked over and developed.
Click to expand...
.
 
My two main problems with the Allen have been the abrupt ending at Eglinton and the feeling, when in traffic, that you're stuck in a trench with no escape.
There must be a way to cover the whole thing, leaving the road underneath. Then you could have a real road network connecting the east/west sides, at least some parkland and development and, hopefully a north-south road as well. Then you could maybe reconfigure the Allen in such a way that you split off the traffic, kind of like how the Lakeshore and Gardiner share traffic (but hopefully better than that).

There's probably a lot of potential if people put their heads together, for making use of the "air rights" while leaving the road down there.
 
Personally I don't see much of a point in filling the ditch - it is probably cheaper and more constructive to selectively deck beside existing/proposed E-W crossings to support low-mid rises and contributes to the contiunity of the streetscape. That, and zone the land right beside the ditch for taller/high density developments.

AoD
 
The Allen is still a relatively vital transportation link in this city; filling it in would not cause traffic chaos, but it seems extremely regressive to spend hundreds of millions of dollars deploying about 10,000 dump trucks to fill in a perfectly usable roadway with a Grand Coullee dam's-worth of fill just to prove an ideological point about car travel.
 
They wouldnt need to fill it in with dirt... they would probably actually dig a little more and make parking garages for the mid rise buildings that would go there.
 
Everyone: Interesting topic about the WR Allen Expressway here - I never realized that it was designed to go Downtown as the Spadina Expressway and that Jane Jacobs was influential in stopping its construction...
I always liked the way the TTC constructed the Spadina Line in the 70s in its median section...I recall S of Yorkdale over the SB lanes the TTC placed multiple signs promoting the line being "The Better Way" visible from trains also...are they still there and does anyone remember them if they are not?

Leaving it be - but building on the air rights above is a good idea making the WR Allen Expressway a tunnel to the MCF/401 from its southern end.

LI MIKE
 
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
My two main problems with the Allen have been the abrupt ending at Eglinton and the feeling, when in traffic, that you're stuck in a trench with no escape.
Click to expand...

But by covering it, you're substituting the feeling that you're stuck in a *tunnel* with no escape. So from a motorist's POV, it's a draw...
 
I dont see how the ALLEN moves enough cars to justify ruining Eglinton, and making a Lawrence height renovation difficult. This is still a central part of the city and one that could really shine with some new development. Sure the allen works sometimes.. But 85% of the time its worse then the don valley parking LoT. I dont see whats so exciting to keep.

I find it really discouraging that the sheppard line has seen more development then EGLINTON WEST GLEnCARIN, LAWRENCE, YORKDALE and DOWNSVIEW... NO WONDER our PUBLIC TRANSIT system isnt profitable, we prefer to have parking lots surround stations or very low rise buildings, or even worse a highway... Basically Downsview has some new devlopment at the old IDOMO site, Wilson has a new development called something PARK... and thats it... Comparably Sheppard Yonge has too many new buildings to count... Bayview has seen a tremendous boom, Barizon and Leslie where the old Canadian tire site was has about 4 or 5 cranes in the ground and DON MILLS area is being redeveloped as well.. THE reason the Spadina line isnt profitable and there are always empty seats on the subway is that there isnt much development arround it. NOw its getting expanded into vaughn. Thats not going to help anything. We need to intensify the areas arround stations and unfortunately for car drivers whom use the allen THIS IS PRIME LAND.
 
Last edited:
Ha - true. I'm just saying, I think:
a) Yeah, there should be some kind of redevelopment, tying the two sides of the Allen together (though I'm not sure how thrilled Cedarvale will be about that).
b) You're wasting space if all you do is fill in the ditch. Find a way to create a viable underground road with something more vibrant above.
 
That's a planning issue. Fact is the Spadina subway exists because it was a comprimise between the desire to build the Spadina expressway and having a decent mass transit system. Sheppard was intended from the start to be intensified, I doubt there was similar plans for the Spadina portion.

Now that doesn't mean that we can't plan to intensify the area now but it is still not economical to try to build buildings over the road.
 
junctionist said:
Why not? It's not an innovative practice anymore, and there's a lot of space to work with.
Click to expand...

Explanation previously provided in this thread by Platform27:

http://urbantoronto.ca/showthread.php?11433-Plans-to-fill-in-Allen-Road&p=374577#post374577

"If you're simply "decking over" a freeway with an overpass-grade "roof", there's no way anything built on top can be particularly heavy. From a simply structural perspective, if you want to plop anything mid- or high-rise on top of the Allen, you're going to want pretty substantial pilings punching down "through" the road/subway right-of-way and into the bedrock underneath. I wouldn't say that would be impossible to do in the case of the Allen trench, but I would caution that it's not exactly a cheap reservoir of underutilized land waiting for an entrepreneurial sort to bring to life."

The issue isn't space, but how much money you are willing to spend to make use of that space.
 
well in my mind the city would make money on this since the land would be sold to developers who would have to pay for the construction. PLus the city would save money in how many highways it needs to plow in the winter time.. PLus the TTC would make money since it probably would help make the line profittable... ALL things considered its good for pedestrians, for cyclists (assuming they build some lanes to accomodate them) good for a revitalized lawrence heights, good for the ttc, good for more sustainable neighbourhoods, good for jobs, OH and BAD for a very FEW who happen to drive this way...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top