VCC for all its follies would probably shave a half-hour my commute (Brampton to subway via 77) so no complaints here. My beef with DRL is that with ever increasing cost projections it's realistic to presume only a handful of future subways will get built. A line stretching from Don Mills/Steeles through the central waterfront than up back to Woodbine/Pearson sounds ridiculously long (50+ kilometres) and expensive (subway closures, GO rail closures, expropiations, new tunnels, a complex reno at Union Stn/Pearson, etc.) Also how is forcing Regent Park residents, for instance, to take a bus up from the Queens Quay/Front any better than approaching south from the BD line?
It isn't, but how does an Eglinton line help people at York University? Not every line can serve every place. Moreover, they wouldn't be forced to do anything. All the existing transit routes would remain in place and would likely offer better service as some of their riders sift to the DRL.
I probably wouldn't ever build a DRL north of Bloor (an S-Bahn-style service would likely do the job just as well) and I would only build the downtown 'U' in the first phase. The section north of Danforth, however, is too good to pass up. It would intercept all the major bus routes from the east, providing them with a much faster route to the core and massively relieving the Yonge line which could then accommodate far more riders from northern extensions. It also passes through one of the city's most intensely developed corridors, with apartment clusters and office parks at almost every stop, and with a lot of room for growth. The DRL would be a catalyst for massive redevelopment in the downtown and waterfront areas, as well as in the Don Mills corridor. It would be a major contributor to restoring Downtown to being Toronto's pre-eminent employment neighbourhood.
The point is that these cost projections are crazy. Madrid, with comparable labour costs and levels of regulation, builds for less than half what it costs in Toronto. Montreal built its new subway for 50% less per kilometre, even with a river crossing. Vancouver is building the Canada Line for less than $2 billion cost to governments for over 18 kilometres of rapid transit, the majority underground. The TTC way overbuilds its routes, and it's obsessed with putting everything underground even when it's tunneling under vacant, government-owned land. The downtown 'U' of the DRL is over 50% on the surface in established corridors, many already government-owned (Toronto Terminals Railway, Front Street Extension ROW, GO's portion of the Galt Sub). It is one of the cheapest potential subways out there. There is absolutely no reason why it couldn't be built for well under $100 million per kilometre.
Why shouldn't shorter lines and extensions be priortized higher and leave exuberantly long routes to LRT/BRT/S-Bahn/commuter rail? That's all I'm saying. The Lakeshore West LRT, new Queens Quay East streetcar and Kingston extension to Kennedy/Eglinton in effect create a continuous rapid network along the waterfront/southern edge of the city. I'm sure this will all cost less than the Vaughan extension will at 8 kms, comparative to around 43 kms of LRTs. More importantly those nodes you mentioned would see rapid transit alot sooner than holding out for another subway. The new waterfront communities are only for those who can afford living there and renegs the existing viability of King/Queen/Dundas/Gerrard to downtown's growth and sustenance.
Like I said, I agree with you. You'd never build a DRL from Steeles/Woodbine to Union to Steeles in one go, and the western portion north of Bloor would be so far down on any priority list that it would likely never get built. An S Bahn-style service could do the job just as well. I'm afraid I don't understand your last sentence.
If it we're made obvious to me how DRL (beyond a pick-up/drop-off transfer scenario at Dufferin-Union-Degrassi-Gerrard Sq) assists 'old' downtown residents/commercial districts/tourist attractions/instituitions I wouldn't feel the need to continually oppose it.
I don't see why "old" residents, etc. are somehow more deserving of "assistance" than new development. Leaving that aside, the main benefit for people living in low-density residential neighbourhood right around the core would be relief for the surface routes that they use to get around. By definition, a stable low-density residential neighbourhood isn't the kind of place you'd pick for a subway. You want to put it through areas undergoing significant, high-density redevelopment. People in Parkdale/West Queen West and Riverdale/Leslieville could get downtown much quicker and would also benefit from surface route relief. The benefits for downtown businesses and institutions are far more obvious: capacity to bring tens of thousands more people an hour into the downtown core for employment and for leisure.
