Toronto Crosstown LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

[MrsNesbitt]

I'm personally skeptical about closing Allen Rd. To me there is a much stronger case for closing the Gardiner, consider it's downtown and most people take transit to go downtown.

But completely regardless of whether it is or isn't a good idea, as you mentioned, there's absolutely no priority in spending money to do so at this time given the huge costs we'll have to spend to either maintain or remove the Gardiner, the DRL, and rest of the huge list of infrastructure we need to build.

All I was saying earlier was that a temporary & partial closure to make the LRT construction easier is fine, it had nothing to do with spending a huge amount of money removing a highway

To be fair I completely agree with you as well, in terms of priorities of infrastructure filling in the Allen is way down there.

What I do think though is this temporary closure thereof will provide some good data on what traffic may be like if the Allen was eventually closed, so that that data could be used in discussions on the issue if/when it ever arises.

 

[WislaHD]

Yah I am thinking the same. I am hoping that city planners will take this opportunity to see.

Though it wouldn't be exactly the same as I believe filling in the Allen implies maintaining a boulevard road along its route from Eglinton to the 401.

 

[BurlOak]

Northbound Allen Expressway could close for nearly two years

The thing I do not understand is this:

• The tunneling is already underway so the Contract has been prepared and the Contractor is on board.
• Presumably, the contract for this includes extraction and relaunch at Eglinton West - otherwise the separate contractor is needed to do the extraction and re-launch and the complications to co-ordinate the two contracts has the potential for major problems.
• Thus, how could the Contractor actually bid on the tunneling if the traffic impacts, his staging areas, etc. were not finalized.
• Is this an attempt to alter the original contract and hope the Contractor gives back some money if we simplify his operations - although when done after the signing, we would be lucky to get back 25% of the actual savings.

Is this closure of Allen to help with the station construction, but would not be used for TBM extraction and re-launch? This seems like a dumb idea because the extraction/launch sites are at the same location as the station construction.

Somehow it seems that the decision to close the Allen should have already been made.

 

[innsertnamehere]

The extraction locations are not in the same location as the station. they are off to the side of the street, while the station is in the middle of the street and will be dug out under the existing subway tunnel. The TBMs will be moved over slightly before extraction.

It has been stated that while it is possible to do the job without closing the Allen, however closing it would save significant money and time, and thus is being looked at. I presume if the choice is taken the contract will be modified with a lower overall price as there would be less work provided.

 

[BurlOak]

The extraction locations are not in the same location as the station. they are off to the side of the street, while the station is in the middle of the street and will be dug out under the existing subway tunnel. The TBMs will be moved over slightly before extraction.

It has been stated that while it is possible to do the job without closing the Allen, however closing it would save significant money and time, and thus is being looked at. I presume if the choice is taken the contract will be modified with a lower overall price as there would be less work provided.

As I said above, if Metrolinx thinks that there is money to be saved by closing the Allen, then it should have been explored before the Contracts were signed. If done before, the City (actually Metrolinx) would receive the full financial benefit for the traffic inconvenience. If the Contract is altered after signing, the Contractor will heavily skew the numbers to downplay the savings and Metrolinx will only receive back a small portion of the actual savings.

 

[innsertnamehere]

The idea was sent back by council to go through a full evaluation (is it worth the economic impacts, the increased congestion, etc.) and when given the option of delaying a $5 billion project to save maybe a month or two and a couple million dollars, they chose option B which was maybe a little less money saved.

in the end most of the "savings" will likely be time, all the closure will do will mean you will need less complicated material deliveries as you will have on site storage space. crews won't have to sit around waiting for materials to be delivered. Its a very similar scenario that played out when Metrolinx wanted to move the eastern launch shaft to the Science centre parking lot.

 

[CityPlaceN1]

The faster the better for everyone. Closing the Allen is a temporary hardship.

 

[sixrings]

I have always said that they should just put proper on and off ramps at Lawrence and end the Allen there.. Otherwise the other option is to keep the southbound Allen but close the North bound Allen. It is the North bound Allen whichnreally screws up eglinton especially on the west side where cars are willing to line up from dufferin to get on. This is coming from someone who lives 5 minutes away from the intersection and uses it personally or has his wife use it daily. It's not about bias its about the thing simply not working.

 

[T-Bor]

If people are talking about closing the allen in the future, what would be put in its' place?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

From the Allen Road EA:

http://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_toro...tudy/files/pdf/pic2_allen_d2_alternatives.pdf

http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=cf668dd3f2ce1410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD#a01

AoD

 

[WislaHD]

If people are talking about closing the allen in the future, what would be put in its' place?

In regards to permanently closing the Allen?

Well a boulevard road from Eglinton to the 401 would replace it, and the area would be prime development potential.

We could also expand the parks a little bit at certain points.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I have always said that they should just put proper on and off ramps at Lawrence and end the Allen there.. Otherwise the other option is to keep the southbound Allen but close the North bound Allen. It is the North bound Allen whichnreally screws up eglinton especially on the west side where cars are willing to line up from dufferin to get on. This is coming from someone who lives 5 minutes away from the intersection and uses it personally or has his wife use it daily. It's not about bias its about the thing simply not working.

When Premier William Davis stopped the Spadina Expressway (now named the Allen Road) in 1971, it was stopped at Lawrence Avenue West. Because the ditch was already in place, it was extended until Eglinton Avenue West. Just going back to the original.

Davis was a Progressive Conservative, and better than the current Progressive Conservative leader, in my books. Not perfect, because the Scarborough Rapid Transit vehicles decision he forced upon the TTC, but better.

 

[CityPlaceN1]

Stopping it at Lawrence just means pushing the traffic back there. Better for Eglinton but otherwise the same issues.

 

[sixrings]

Stopping it at Lawrence just means pushing the traffic back there. Better for Eglinton but otherwise the same issues.

I disagree since a lawrence ending could incorporate traditional doughnut style on and off ramps which would greatly improve function ability. Right now at both Eglinton and lawrence to get on or off the highway you need to cross a lane of traffic requiring lights. This is what causes both the backup in Eglinton as well as lawrence.

In fact making a boulevard to replace the Allen to me makes the least amount of sense because you lose potential development land and people will still line up in Eglinton and you don't gain the new ramps at lawrence.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I disagree since a lawrence ending could incorporate traditional doughnut style on and off ramps which would greatly improve function ability. Right now at both Eglinton and lawrence to get on or off the highway you need to cross a lane of traffic requiring lights. This is what causes both the backup in Eglinton as well as lawrence.

In fact making a boulevard to replace the Allen to me makes the least amount of sense because you lose potential development land and people will still line up in Eglinton and you don't gain the new ramps at lawrence.

What they should do (for the short term) is to reverse the traffic flow of the ramps on the south side of Lawrence. For example, eastbound Lawrence vehicles, instead of turning left to go northbound, turn right onto the former exit ramp. A single lane wide U-turn at the bottom of the ramp would then allow the vehicles to go northbound. Depends upon how much of a curve would be required to a tractor-trailer to do a U-turn. What type of vehicle could handle such a U-turn?