News   Mar 28, 2024
 1.1K     2 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 577     2 
News   Mar 28, 2024
 880     0 

Transit Fantasy Maps

I like your Don Valley alignment. My only nitpick is, I think Eglinton should be orange ;)

That Leaside Laird area would sure get a huge amount of rapid transit with your alignment.

Is the dotted line through downtown underground? How about the dotted line on Eglinton - is it at-grade?
 
Thanks for the feedback!
@WisaHD, yes I agree completely that a DRL should be extended to King/Dufferin area in its initial construction. Reason it’s not included in this map is because I wanted to keep the proposal in-line with current proposals (i.e TTC DRTES Option 2b, and Metrolinx’s 2-3) for better cost/length comparison. Not to mention the fact that a St Andrew to Don Mills routing fits better on my map’s layout.

And the Thorncliffe station location isn’t that bad. It’s somewhat “far†from current residents, but it won’t be for the additional development closer to the station. It is what it is.

@Gweed. Yes, I think this proposal addresses everything that the usual DRL does...clearly some aspects less than others. However I firmly believe that its failings are made up for with the cost-saving opportunities and a shortened construction timeframe.

@ehlow. Correct, it does seem a tad rapid transit heavy in the Leaside area. My remedy for that would be to remove Leslie station from the Crosstown.

Here's my proposal for a Phase II of my previously-posted version of a 'light' DRL. I believe it's realistic, and that both branches can be completed for less than the price of a Sheppard Subway. Funding can be allocated from the SELRT, in-median portion of Eglinton East, and the shortening of the Scarborough Subway to only STC. Its impact on Scarborough, North York, and the commuting pattern of >100,000 would be significant.

From Don Mills/Eglinton the Scarborough branch would emerge from a tunnel alongside the CPR main freight corridor. This would continue to Warden, where the line would run elevated along Ellesmere to east of Kennedy. The elevated guideway of the SRT would be kept, rebuilt, and extended to Markham Rd/Sheppard as previously proposed.

A route along Don Mills from Eglinton to Sheppard is more of a fantasy addition, but entirely realistic. Preferably it would be elevated - but in-median or tunneled is possible as long as it remains grade-separated. The use of the CPR corridor is a tricky proposition, but the corridor is wide enough to accommodate more tracks through this area and it seems in realm of feasibility.

Others have mentioned Richmond Hill RER... I don't believe RER is very realistic south of Sheppard for the Richmond Hill corridor. The route through the valley is too circuitous, flood prone, and unreachable for a significant area of Toronto to be of much use.
DonLine-Branch_2.png

IMO I think it’s only logical to keep the SRT corridor alive. For a city (and especially Scarb) that’s supposedly in dire need of transit, it doesn’t make much sense to abandon a key piece of infrastructure. The SRT is decades-old decision, and in many ways it was the right one. Having it extended west along a post-war/industrial section of Ellesmere, then running it alongside a rail corridor to a tunnel at Don Mills shouldn’t be all that much more challenging than the current SRT’s construction.

Even if the Scarborough Branch were to be a standalone line, I think it’s a much better use of scarce capital than the SELRT and in-median portion of Eglinton East – both for actual commuters, and the socio-political/psychological issues concerning Scarborough being ‘underserved’ with ‘lesser transit’. The reason Light rail and ICTS have become so popular is because of its flexibility. And there's nothing flexible about running the mode in the middle of an arterial for +10km.
 

Attachments

  • DonLine-Branch_2.png
    DonLine-Branch_2.png
    722.8 KB · Views: 829
Last edited:
Is this more what you had in mind?

Yes exactly!

I was actually going to make my own fantasy map off of these new ideas but somehow ended up with just making a really high resolution template map instead. :eek:

I'm now too tired to make a fantasy map, but I might as well share it here for others to use: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0yxzx2yjbdf215l/DefaultMap.jpg?dl=0

It is a massive image, I don't think the dropbox preview is even properly working. You will have to download the raw file.
 
Yes exactly!

I was actually going to make my own fantasy map off of these new ideas but somehow ended up with just making a really high resolution template map instead. :eek:

I'm now too tired to make a fantasy map, but I might as well share it here for others to use: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0yxzx2yjbdf215l/DefaultMap.jpg?dl=0

It is a massive image, I don't think the dropbox preview is even properly working. You will have to download the raw file.

Thanks! For anyone who's interested, here's the two base images that I use for all of my to-scale maps.

The first one is a Toronto-centred map that shows a little bit of the surrounding 905 municipalities: https://www.dropbox.com/s/a7ucx7fm9d55cin/Greater Toronto.jpeg?dl=0

The second one is a map of the entire urban GTHA: https://www.dropbox.com/s/2tyifkynng3q7ce/GTA.jpg?dl=0

Both are pretty massive files. I created them by stitching together high quality Google Earth images back when I had access to a Google Earth Pro account. Feel free to use them however you see fit.
 
So here’s the 2.0 version of my previous map. Rather than branching – which as Gweed pointed out may require trains of different lengths – the Scarb section is simply an extension of the Crosstown. Malvern to Mount Dennis, completely grade-separated.

The current setup for the Crosstown’s east portal is for the line to enter Eglinton in the centre of the roadway, just east of Brentcliffe. I’d like this to be aligned to the south side, so that east of the CPR corridor it can arc south and become an elevated section above the valley. This viaduct would enter a portal into the valley’s west wall (alongside the Don Line). Doing so keeps the Crosstown grade-separated all the way to Don Mills (very important IMO), while omitting a Leslie surface stop (no biggie).

Below Don Mills/Eglinton, the Don and Crosstown can have paralleling platforms. As both travel north, the Don will rise in elevation while the Crosstown will lower - with the Crosstown passing under the Don and running alongside the CPR corridor where it surfaces via a portal. Or whatever seems logical. Perhaps a stacked configuration with the Crosstown overtop(?).

Everything north of Eglinton is mostly an amalgam of cheapest-where-possible alternatives and alignments – all grade-separated. Elevated, surface, trenched, cut/cover...possibly in-median for open stretches. Ellesmere has a solid a 6 lanes of through traffic + grassy boulevard, which is ample enough to handle a combination of elevated along the industrial section, and at/below-grade for the residential section. To join the current SRT just east of Kennedy, the line will be below-grade – as the SRT currently is while passing under the Stouffville line.

Don Mills I foresee as being mostly tunnelled (i.e - $$$). However, from just south of York Mills to the 401 there are opportunities for a lengthy elevated section.

Just as it was with the original SRT and pre-1996 open air subway extensions; greenspaces, vacant lots and industrial areas should be used to our advantage when connecting nodes/stations. Obviously using the right-of-way of an active rail corridor is a complex issue, but I don’t think it should be written-off completely when certain sections offer important connections. In my opinion this Crosstown/SRT would be a much better use of funds than either the SELRT or in-median portion of the Crosstown. Perhaps it could be built with the funds from both of them?

Don-Crosstown.png
 

Attachments

  • Don-Crosstown.png
    Don-Crosstown.png
    2.8 MB · Views: 1,020
Last edited:
So here’s the 2.0 version of my previous map. Rather than branching – which as Gweed pointed out may require trains of different lengths – the Scarb section is simply an extension of the Crosstown. Malvern to Mount Dennis, completely grade-separated.

Elevating ECLRT from DVP to Kennedy and connecting to the SRT/LRT also accomplishes this. The question is whether Ellesmere is busier than Eglinton. I'd say Eglinton wins, but it is close. Elevating Eglinton from DM to Kennedy is about $1B (6km x $150M) and its about $2B from Kennedy to Malvern by LRT. Your option is $3.5B for the B-D subway extension plus $1.0B (as guess) from DM to Ellesmere/Kennedy.

The current setup for the Crosstown’s east portal is for the line to enter Eglinton in the centre of the roadway, just east of Brentcliffe. I’d like this to be aligned to the south side

I think everyone would like this.

Don Mills I foresee as being mostly tunnelled (i.e - $$$). However, from just south of York Mills to the 401 there are opportunities for a lengthy elevated section.

Lets say Eglinton to Just north of Lawrence is maybe 2.5km. North of the railway, the west side is all industrial/business, so the elevated portion could be about 3km in length to the north side of 401. Then, again, an underground section of say 1km would be needed for the underground interchange with Sheppard. (If needed, the 2km extension to Seneca could be elevated through the peanut and beyond). If we multiply this out, 2.5km x $300M for the underground portion, 3.0 km x $150M for the elevated portion and 1km x $300 for the Sheppard interchange = $1.5B. This is a moderate amount, but it is about what can be saved by using the elevated Eglinton alignment.

So I guess the options are DRL to DM/Eg. and Scarborough Crosstown using this alignment, or a DRL to Sheppard and Scarborough Crosstown using elevated Eglinton/SRT corridor.

The two things that can be stated for certain. 1) that Eglinton should have the portal on the south side. 2) Toronto needs to embrace elevated transit otherwise nothing will be accomplished.
 
Last edited:
Elevating ECLRT from DVP to Kennedy and connecting to the SRT/LRT also accomplishes this. The question is whether Ellesmere is busier than Eglinton. I'd say Eglinton wins, but it is close. Elevating Eglinton from DM to Kennedy is about $1B (6km x $150M) and its about $2B from Kennedy to Malvern by LRT. Your option is $3.5B for the B-D subway extension plus $1.0B (as guess) from DM to Ellesmere/Kennedy.



I think everyone would like this.



Lets say Eglinton to Just north of Lawrence is maybe 2.5km. North of the railway, the west side is all industrial/business, so the elevated portion could be about 3km in length to the north side of 401. Then, again, an underground section of say 1km would be needed for the underground interchange with Sheppard. (If needed, the 2km extension to Seneca could be elevated through the peanut and beyond). If we multiply this out, 2.5km x $300M for the underground portion, 3.0 km x $150M for the elevated portion and 1km x $300 for the Sheppard interchange = $1.5B. This is a moderate amount, but it is about what can be saved by using the elevated Eglinton alignment.

So I guess the options are DRL to DM/Eg. and Scarborough Crosstown using this alignment, or a DRL to Sheppard and Scarborough Crosstown using elevated Eglinton/SRT corridor.

The two things that can be stated for certain. 1) that Eglinton should have the portal on the south side. 2) Toronto needs to embrace elevated transit otherwise nothing will be accomplished.

Hmm. Valid points. I guess in this fantasy of mine the B/D extension (Scarb Subway) is a go, SmartTrack may require use of the Stouffville Corridor, and the SRT would be abandoned outright regardless. Although I don't ever support the idea of abandoning the SRT, I think I'm at least grudgingly on board with the Scarb Subway. It's a done deal IMO. Tory's remarks in tonight's debate kinda sealed that for me.

My plan shortens the Scarb Subway by 1.7km, thereby saving ~$1B. And although I think an elevated Eglinton East is a great idea, it (combined with an SLRT) would create quite a circuitous Crosstown. From Don Mills to STC it would be 11.3km, whereas using the rail corridor and Ellesmere alignment I've proposed it would come in at 9km. On top of that, it would offer broader and more evenly-distributed rapid transit coverage to a large quadrant of Scarborough. The current SRT alignment combined with a grade-separated Eglinton East doesn't work alongside a Scarb Subway IMO...too much RT in such a small area.

Lastly, and what originally got me to consider this line, is that it's a great compromise for those wanting a Sheppard Subway, and opposed to an SELRT.

Your numbers seem correct, and I'll probably do a further rough analysis for comparison of the options.
 
So here’s the 2.0 version of my previous map.

I like it! I would almost be tempted though to have the DRL continue into Scarborough along the Eglinton alignment and have the Don Mills section be a continuation of the Eglinton line. That would set up a nice mirror in the west end, whereby the Jane LRT could be re-routed into the ECLRT. Since Eglinton is only going to be running 3 car trains, it would be sufficient to have surface operations on both the Don Mills and Jane branches (saving a boatload of cash over the tunnelled/elevated option). And realistically, the Scarborough branch is the one that's going to be carrying the bulk of the load anyway, not the Don Mills branch. Might as well give the higher usage line the direct access to downtown.

It's certainly a very interesting idea though, and it really doesn't even need the Scarborough Subway in the plan to make it work. In this case, it would almost be better to extend the subway along Eglinton to the Eglinton East GO station or Kingston Rd.
 
Hmm. Valid points. I guess in this fantasy of mine the B/D extension (Scarb Subway) is a go, SmartTrack may require use of the Stouffville Corridor, and the SRT would be abandoned outright regardless. Although I don't ever support the idea of abandoning the SRT, I think I'm at least grudgingly on board with the Scarb Subway. It's a done deal IMO. Tory's remarks in tonight's debate kinda sealed that for me.

Don't get me wrong, this is a well thought out idea. It does seem strange that you are assuming the B-D extension is a go, but the on-street ECLRT, which is already designed, and the Brentcliffe portal, which is under construction, are considered changeable.

I always thought about giving the Stouffville corridor to GO, but many people said the space was not required. I think it does have merrit though.

I like it! I would almost be tempted though to have the DRL continue into Scarborough along the Eglinton alignment and have the Don Mills section be a continuation of the Eglinton line.

Maybe it can be interlined so that alternate DRL trains go to Scarborough and Fairview Mall and alternate ECLRT trains go to Fairview Mall and Scarborough.

I thought about this using the Eglinton alignment and it was not possible, because of the proximity of DVP. With your alignment (and stacked tracks) there is more distance between the DM/Eg. station and the DVP so it could probably be done.
 
Last edited:
I like it! I would almost be tempted though to have the DRL continue into Scarborough along the Eglinton alignment and have the Don Mills section be a continuation of the Eglinton line. That would set up a nice mirror in the west end, whereby the Jane LRT could be re-routed into the ECLRT. Since Eglinton is only going to be running 3 car trains, it would be sufficient to have surface operations on both the Don Mills and Jane branches (saving a boatload of cash over the tunnelled/elevated option). And realistically, the Scarborough branch is the one that's going to be carrying the bulk of the load anyway, not the Don Mills branch. Might as well give the higher usage line the direct access to downtown.

It's certainly a very interesting idea though, and it really doesn't even need the Scarborough Subway in the plan to make it work. In this case, it would almost be better to extend the subway along Eglinton to the Eglinton East GO station or Kingston Rd.

Thx. And you’re right in that it would create quite the mirror image with both a Don Mills and Jane LRT. I’ve been trying to shy away from attempts to achieve a “balanced” system that ‘looks good on paper’. IMO it only protracts the narrow-minded approach to transportation planning that has befallen Toronto’s schemes over the decades. Namely, that transit and investment is to be blindly distributed across the city in some politically equitable fashion, in spite of the reality of commuting which always favours more direct routes. Transit City, Network 2011, the Ford napkin...all follow this same disjointed, “fair” approach of following the grid and concession system. Even the DRL is typically drawn as such with 90deg bends.

This is why I think it’s wise to use rail corridors and greenspace; because of the possibilities of steering demand away from conventional and disjointed E-W, N-S paths.

I guess I may've dissed my own idea and went on a bit of a tangent. Ironically, to explain the promise of tangential transit routing. I actually had originally thought the Don Mills section would see enormous demand, way above what this Crosstown-SRT would see. But I guess the opposite is true.

44 North, what's the purpose for the branch to Sheppard/Don Mills?

Oh, to create a thorough Yonge relief, and show the possibility of more affordable approaches to rapid transit. But it seems only one small stretch of Don Mills between Eg and Shepp could be affordably grade-separated, and that demand through that stretch isn’t as enormous as I thought. Perhaps a redux of this map will be released which will simply omit this Don Mills section. Or have the Don Line become the Richmond Hill GO RER north of Lawrence, and interchange with Sheppard at Leslie…which actually sounds pretty good.
 
Don't get me wrong, this is a well thought out idea. It does seem strange that you are assuming the B-D extension is a go, but the on-street ECLRT, which is already designed, and the Brentcliffe portal, which is under construction, are considered changeable.

This fantasy map considered the realistic prospect of across-the-board opposition to in-median LRT. As is evidence by recent news regarding Sheppard, even supposed progressive and pro-transit politicians are now against the SELRT. With it gone, I'd see the in-median portion of the ECLRT disappearing with it. And frankly, I had my doubts that either would ever be completed to begin with. Not that I think we'll see a major push for subways on Sheppard or Eglinton East, but rather simple opposition to the current proposal.

I'm not sure exactly where we're at with the Crosstown, but I think there's still a small window to align the eastern portal to the south side of Eglinton. As I understand it, the tunnel shaft is on the south side. A little cut/cover and alignment redesign seems possible.

Because this Crosstown-SLRT addresses E-W demand near or within Sheppard's catchment, while dipping near Eglinton East's catchment and offering a connection to the Crosstown, it's a good compromise. Obviously it would still have the politically toxic "LRT" monicker, but many progressive politicians are wiser than the Fords and aren't opposed to meaningless semantics. It's namely in-median that they don't want. This proposal works perfectly with a B/D extension because Scarb gets its subway, the SRT is not abandoned, E-W demand for a key quadrant of Scarb is addressed, and there will be no 'dem streetcars blockin up tha road'/'two-tiered transit' nonsense.
 
I'm not sure exactly where we're at with the Crosstown, but I think there's still a small window to align the eastern portal to the south side of Eglinton. As I understand it, the tunnel shaft is on the south side. A little cut/cover and alignment redesign seems possible.

I agree, I think technically there is still a window to correct the errors with the Brentcliffe portal. The issue is whether the political will exists to fix it.

Oh, to create a thorough Yonge relief, and show the possibility of more affordable approaches to rapid transit. But it seems only one small stretch of Don Mills between Eg and Shepp could be affordably grade-separated, and that demand through that stretch isn’t as enormous as I thought. Perhaps a redux of this map will be released which will simply omit this Don Mills section. Or have the Don Line become the Richmond Hill GO RER north of Lawrence, and interchange with Sheppard at Leslie…which actually sounds pretty good.

Are you sure Don Mills to Sheppard would not have the ridership. Especially if it goes to Seneca, it would intercept a lot of riders before they get to Yonge - even if the Lawrence and York Mills boardings are not that high.

Using Richmond Hill GO would work if it saves money, but I would rather have 2 lines (Richmond Hill for distance and Don Mills for local) than only one.
 

Back
Top