Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

Dream scenario could be a Line 4 loop like this, maybe 2050 timeline, hence the other extensions often mentioned included. Built off the exiting Subway/streetcar map.View attachment 532090
Well done! You should post it on the Relief Line Facebook group (link below).

My only issues/wants...
  • There would almost certainly be at least one stop between Line 2's Kiping and Sherway
  • Line 6 should be extended east, all the way to Seneca Newnham
  • Line 4 should be extended southwest to Keele/401 - hospital/government campus.
 
There is no need for the Ontario Line to loop.

Loop lines exist in cities because they are supposed to bypass the central core and connect secondary hubs to each other directly. And provide an alternate way for people to switch between radial lines.

The cities which have loop lines tend to have a roughly circular city around their downtown core. Toronto has Lake Ontario. The equivalent for a loop Line in Toronto would be a ‘n’ shaped line that allows you to transfer between Line 2 and 1 without passing through St George or BloorYonge.

The top of the loop has no reason to be interlined with the rest of the Ontario Line.

In fact it would be vastly preferable for a line that far out from the core to run alongside the 407/427/ 409 and be a suburban connector for Misisauga, Pearson, Vaughan, RHill, Markham and Pickering.
After thinking about this for a few days I'm not sure I fully agree. Tokyo's famous loop line (the Yamanote), doesn't connect just secondary hubs, it connects some of the cities largest main hubs (Shinjuku, Shibuya, Ueno, etc), and most of what's in the centre of the circle is actually less accessed. It also has an ocean coast on one side similar to how we have the lake. I think there's a case for making the Ontario Line a loop eventually though I can certainly agree we need lots of discussion on what exact route makes the most sense.
 
After thinking about this for a few days I'm not sure I fully agree. Tokyo's famous loop line (the Yamanote), doesn't connect just secondary hubs, it connects some of the cities largest main hubs (Shinjuku, Shibuya, Ueno, etc), and most of what's in the centre of the circle is actually less accessed. It also has an ocean coast on one side similar to how we have the lake. I think there's a case for making the Ontario Line a loop eventually though I can certainly agree we need lots of discussion on what exact route makes the most sense.
If all the LRT lines were built and Sheppard line was extended both east and west, wouldn't that negate the need for a loop?
 
I dunno I instinctively don't like the loop idea for Toronto . As much as I love Tokyo and Japan, it is a bit hard to compare one of the biggest cities in the world to Toronto. Maybe if we had something close to Tokyo's density it might make sense, or if our biggest destinations were in a loop. But realistically, downtown Toronto is the largest trip generator and all the secondary places like NYCC, MCC, SCC and VCC are all pretty small, and some of them still don't even have a connection to downtown. Those connections should be focussed on first. We still don't know how successful Eglinton will be yet and I think that will be a major test regarding the kind of capacity we need outside of downtown.
 
After thinking about this for a few days I'm not sure I fully agree. Tokyo's famous loop line (the Yamanote), doesn't connect just secondary hubs, it connects some of the cities largest main hubs (Shinjuku, Shibuya, Ueno, etc), and most of what's in the centre of the circle is actually less accessed. It also has an ocean coast on one side similar to how we have the lake. I think there's a case for making the Ontario Line a loop eventually though I can certainly agree we need lots of discussion on what exact route makes the most sense.
Tokyo and Toronto differ in this respect because Tokyo is a megapolis of near national size, so there are multiple CBDs and the need to connect all of them.

Toshima, Shinjuku, Shibuya etc would all be their own CBD of a major city if we picked them up and plopped them down in North America.

What are Toronto's major hubs? Union and then what else? Bloor and the Yonge spine south of Bloor maybe? Liberty Village???? They're building new secondary hubs in Sq One, VMC, RHill, Markham but those don't exist right now and are orders of magnitude further than Tokyos hubs.

Downtown Torontos development pattern is very different from Tokyos. Our development pattern resembles an upside down T clustering around the lakeshore and the Yonge University spine. To that extent why are we trying to draw a loop line here?

Lets examine Tokyos two loop lines, the aforementioned Yamanote line and the Toei Magenta Line. As we can see the Yamanote Line is actually connecting multiple CBDs but more importantly than that, is that it intercepts multiple radial lines that DONT meet at a common point.
1705306628794.png


1705307065490.png


Meanwhile in Toronto we have an T shaped downtown cluster with secondary hubs that are located linearly to each other at St Clair, Eglinton and North York Center. So why would we have a loop line here? Everything is connected to each other in one seat or two seat trip anyways and there isn't nearly the demand to have a direct journey from Bloor to Liberty Village or East Harbor.

1705307237322.png
1705308639717.png
 
Last edited:
Tokyo and Toronto differ in this respect because Tokyo is a megapolis of near national size, so there are multiple CBDs and the need to connect all of them.

Toshima, Shinjuku, Shibuya etc would all be their own CBD of a major city if we picked them up and plopped them down in North America.

What are Toronto's major hubs? Union and then what else? Bloor and the Yonge spine south of Bloor maybe? Liberty Village???? They're building new secondary hubs in Sq One, VMC, RHill, Markham but those don't exist right now and are orders of magnitude further than Tokyos hubs.

Downtown Torontos development pattern is very different from Tokyos. Our development pattern resembles an upside down T clustering around the lakeshore and the Yonge University spine. To that extent why are we trying to draw a loop line here?

Lets examine Tokyos two loop lines, the aforementioned Yamanote line and the Toei Magenta Line. As we can see the Yamanote Line is actually connecting multiple CBDs but more importantly than that, is that it intercepts multiple radial lines that DONT meet at a common point.
View attachment 533319

View attachment 533324

Meanwhile in Toronto we have an T shaped downtown cluster with secondary hubs that are located linearly to each other at St Clair, Eglinton and North York Center. So why would we have a loop line here? Everything is connected to each other in one seat or two seat trip anyways and there isn't nearly the demand to have a direct journey from Bloor to Liberty Village or East Harbor.

View attachment 533325View attachment 533327


Following on, (Please forgive my terrible late night handdrawn spaghetti maps)

When people draw loop lines in the Toronto context what do they look like relative to the CBD, radial lines and secondary hubs?

Dark Red being the CBD, light red being secondary hubs + Pearson
1705308293057.png

1705308913346.png


Plus some contours in yellow that are roughly 2-5, 10-15 and 20-30km from Bay and King, and the light blue lines of Go and the orange ttc lines

If we examine this map then we see that all the GO lines are radial, and that the Yonge Line is very clearly a radial line. This explains why the Yonge Line is so dang busy, its the only reliable way from the outskirts of the Northern GTA into Downtown. (At least prior to GO expansion)

The Bloor Danforth line also reveals itself to a mostly radial line, but crucially one that does not reach the center of the GTA.

If we want to create a circumferential line here, then (as it was designed and planned to be) the most obvious candidate is going to be one at the 20km contour, running along the 407, and hitting the Mississauga secondary hub, Pearson, and the 3 planned hubs in VMC, RHMC and Unionville.


Based on the shape of Torontos semicircular development, creating a loop line makes a weird radial/ circumferential line that won't properly serve either use case.

If you give it the service patterns needed to properly serve radial trips into the central business district, then the circumferential portions are going to be overserved or you'll have to constantly turn trains back around.

But if you give it the service patterns appropriate for connecting our anemic secondary hubs and doing suburb to suburb trips, then you are underserving the radial CBD journeys.

My point here being that Torontos geography and orientation lend itself poorly to a loop line because development is not circular around a central point. The lake means that development is semicircular around the CBD. Trying to jam a circular line onto this geography makes for poor design and would duplicate the path of existing radial lines into downtown.

Instead circumferential lines that want to connect secondary hubs, radial lines and suburbs should be an arc

Look at Melbourne, where they are building a suburban connector line and because of their coast hugging geography, they are building it as an arc too

1705310526755.png
 
Last edited:
Anyone else notice how they kept writing "three new [GO] tracks" for the new bridge, but the render showed 4 tracks, and Metrolinx plan for the joint corridor is 4 tracks for GO and 2 for OL?
 
Anyone else notice how they kept writing "three new [GO] tracks" for the new bridge, but the render showed 4 tracks, and Metrolinx plan for the joint corridor is 4 tracks for GO and 2 for OL?
technically the OL project in relation to the joint corridor is specifically for the rebuilding of the existing 3 non-electrified tracks. Its On-corr's responsibility to add that 4th track and electrify them all
 

Agreement Signed for Ontario Line Pape Tunnel and Underground Stations​


Important to note this is not the contract execution, but rather the Development Phase Agreement. The contract execution won't happen until 2026, a long ways out. Which means heavy construction for this contract won't start for at least another 2.5-3 years. 2027 was when this line was supposed to be operational and now they are saying construction won't even start till close to that on this underground portion is really sad. Disappointing to say the least.

On the bright side, at least this line is moving forward and not backwards.
 
Important to note this is not the contract execution, but rather the Development Phase Agreement. The contract execution won't happen until 2026, a long ways out. Which means heavy construction for this contract won't start for at least another 2.5-3 years. 2027 was when this line was supposed to be operational and now they are saying construction won't even start till close to that on this underground portion is really sad. Disappointing to say the least.

On the bright side, at least this line is moving forward and not backwards.
the release says construction will start before that in the form of early works - but yea, likely not looking at TBM launch until 2026 or so.

The completion date for the OL has been 2030-2031 or so for a while now, and that still roughly lines up with that timeline. 5-6 years is possible to finish a subway line once you get major construction underway provided the cash is flowing.

This contract includes underpinning of Line 2, which is where the major issue on the Crosstown came up, but hopefully Metrolinx has learned from that project and won't run into the same issue again.
 

Back
Top