The DRL: Why...and when?
The Downtown Relief Line (DRL) continually falls somewhere between long-term planning and long-term lore when it comes to heavy rail infrastructure ideas for Toronto. While the idea lay dormant for a generation, we now seem to be back in an era when it has come out of its fabled state and into some vision of long-term reality. While it might not be something on the average Torontonian’s radar yet, it is once again being seriously discussed, not only on transit blogs and forums, but also in some halls of power.
The DRL was first studied in the mid-1980s as part of the Network 2011 transit plan for what was then Metro Toronto. The line was envisioned to connect Union Station with Pape and Dundas West Stations by running large portions of the line at grade via mostly existing railway right-of-ways which would also help to significantly reduce the cost of such a major investment. The DRL would, in effect, have created a second, wider subway ‘U’ for Toronto, and thereby taken enormous pressure off the existing system. For instance, if one were coming from the east, one would have the option of switching lines at Pape instead of Yonge-Bloor Station for a quick ride downtown. The DRL could also be thought of as a heavy rail version of the King streetcar, but following a wider route and playing a more regional role.
In 1985 the first phase of the DRL — from Pape (on the Danforth line) to Spadina (near the coming domed stadium) — was budgeted at $565 million and was seen as requisite to relieving large portions of the Yonge and Bloor-Danforth lines, especially Yonge & Bloor Station which was becoming severely overcrowded in the run-up to the TTC’s all-time ridership record of 463 million riders in 1988. Despite all this though, the DRL never came to fruition. There are several reasons and speculations as to why, but basically the line had no champion and some of the more personality-driven politicians in Metro’s boroughs were against “another downtown subway” and favoured system expansions in their own fiefdoms instead. Another blow to the DRL was the fact that “intensification” was not the buzz word it is today and that “stable neighbourhoods” would have been the equivalent of the time. Basically, many residents — and their politicians — looked at the DRL sceptically as a developer-driven scheme to change their neighbourhoods. Also, post-1988, the TTC’s ridership began to drop for more than a decade and a modest extension to the Bloor platform at Yonge-Bloor Station relieved some of the crowding problems and cemented the DRL as something off the agenda.
Today we find ourselves in a strikingly similar position to the mid-1980s. Transit expansion is back on the agenda and a variety of proposals are being vetted, including the DRL. The Yonge line is once again nearing a breaking point — as is Yonge-Bloor Station — and the TTC is flirting with besting its all-time ridership numbers. Also, as downtown Toronto has grown as a multi-purpose destination, people have become increasingly frustrated with the unreliability of transit routes into and through the downtown as admitted by the TTC and as documented in various articles.
Twenty years later there are also some significant differences, but they only seem to add to the call for a DRL. Firstly, intensification is the order of the day and many of the previously industrial neighbourhoods that the DRL would run through are now some of the most significant and dynamic growth areas of Toronto. In fact, the original proposed alignment of the DRL appears more attractive than ever as it passes through emerging neighbourhoods such as Leslieville, The West Donlands, CityPlace, Liberty Village, Parkdale, Roncesvalles, etc. Toronto’s central business district is also once again attracting significant office development and there is increasingly not a quick and effective way of going cross-town through the city unless one is relatively close to the Bloor-Danforth line. As Toronto has matured and densified, transit has not kept pace with where this urbanization has been occurring. Therefore, the DRL could now provide double the bang for the same buck as it would both relieve existing subway services (and thereby help those coming in from the suburbs), but would also give those living closer to the core a better, more reliable and faster route cross-town while connecting some of the primary neighbourhoods where Torontonians increasingly live, work and play.
Despite all this, the DRL has a curious spot in the minds of our current civic administration. While there is recognition that some form of a DRL needs to be part of the long-term planning for downtown Toronto, it does not appear to be a high priority for the current administration. Mayor David Miller and TTC Chair Adam Giambrone seem preoccupied with selling their Transit City light rail plan that envisions modern streetcars in their own rights-of-way pushing out into Toronto’s suburbs. While the merits of Transit City are generally good, it does not offer much to the downtowner wondering why it is taking 45 minutes to get from Parkdale to Parliament. Also, while Transit City’s noble goal of getting higher priority transit into more parts of Toronto is sound, it could run the risk of overwhelming part of the existing subway system as these new, faster and more attractive tram lines will be feeding into the same subway system that is also being expanded northerly in Vaughan. In a way it seems a case of putting the cart before the horse which is perhaps why Metrolinx is viewing a version of the Downtown Relief Line as imperative to reliable transit across the region.
Metrolinx will be presenting its Draft Regional Transportation Plan and Investment Strategy at their next board meeting, now scheduled for September 26. However, elements of the plan have already been leaked to the media and it is widely expected that they will be calling for a Downtown Core Line that mostly mimics the DRL, but could have a much more expensive southerly alignment on King or Queen Streets instead. The province had always intended for Metrolinx to examine their MoveOntario 2020 plan and to allocate provincial funding based on their sober second look. However, while even Metrolinx’s more pro-subway stance on GTA transit issues recognizes the need for a DRL/DCL, they too are arguing that it is not likely to start anytime before 2020.
Backers of the Downtown Relief Line — myself included — have waited a long time for the DRL to find a place on the agenda again. While there is certainly some satisfaction with seeing it return to the books in some form, it also comes with the frustration that it will have to wait on a shelf as our next generation of subway expansion will not be following typical urban growth patterns, but will instead plough expensively north to what is now a power centre in Vaughan. Interestingly, the DRL never seems to be considered in current infrastructure projects either, such as eliminating the Dufferin jog or in the designs for the CityPlace complex on the former railway lands. In a city that prides itself for having had the foresight to build the Bloor Viaduct with a second tier for a future subway, it is curious at best, prohibitively expensive at worst to be ignoring the fact that a subway line is needed here at some point in the not-too-distant future. While construction may not be imminent, planning for the DRL should be. The DRL would also be easily expandable north of Bloor-Danforth (particularly on the western leg), yet it strangely holds no place in current discussions for finally connecting Pearson Airport and Union Station via a heavy rail link.
All said, the relatively cheaper cost of the DRL (using the originally proposed alignment) compared to other subway plans and the larger place it would hold in turning our subway system into a proper network should not be ignored. Couple this with how the DRL would strengthen and connect growing neighbourhoods while providing relief to existing overburdened lines can really make one wonder if this is one of those cases where those ideas that are so damn obvious are also the ones that get ignored.
What will the excuse be in 2020? Can we even wait until 2020?
