Or you know, maybe just build the DRL under Pape or Donlands and connect with RH and Lakeshore GO further south.
The most in-depth DRL alignment was from the 80s (where the term “DRL” came from). But interestingly, very few recognize that DRL (or whatever Ataratiri was). Nor do they acknowledge that it had elevated sections through Leslieville, Thorncliffe, and Flemingdon (“rollercoaster”?). There are only a few low-res maps (or graphical representations) from several periods in the last fifty years that show a tunnel through Riverdale or East York. The Pape DRL... it’s basically just an idea at this point. As it’s been for awhile now. And with SmartTrack being prioritized, seemingly less of an idea than it was this time last year.
That 1994 map I shared the other day shows an RH diversion. I get that you think it’s a bad idea to divert RH onto this abandoned line (“rollercoasters” and all). But GO, Metro, many transit enthusiasts, and the gov’t organization that paid for the corridor (Metrolinx) seemingly didn’t and don’t. It’s been acknowledged in the relief studies. And in ‘94 that supposed “nothing there” area of EY had been acknowledged as an “Intermediate Centre” worthy of both RT and commuter service, and a reopening of Leaside Station. Granted that plan was from twenty years ago, but that’s not all that long ago.
1994 Proposal
Notice that this plan was concocted after the Network 2011 DRL failed to launch? And after Let’sMove (which also had no DRL)? There’s no tunnel ID’d on Pape. The only transit south of Danforth seems to be a waterfront streetcar line terminating at what later became a subdivision. Twenty years on: no Lake Shore East streetcar line, and our biggest priority in that area seems to be SmartTrack stations cantilevered above Queen and Gerrard (“rollercoaster”?). Even 2007’s MoveOntario2020 had a noticeably absent DRL. But because MO2020 included a Yonge North extension, and that extension can’t be built without a relief line in place - the DRL has become an issue again. Yet “relief line” is still a broad notion at this point and it considers many things. Notice that the study process has been delayed by almost a year? Notice the relief line study area spans from the Don Branch in the west all the way to Coxwell?
I’m a diehard traditional DRL supporter, always have been. But I will question whether it will happen. Aside from our original subway from Union to Eglinton, every past subway project in TO came at the expense of a Queen subway. And while we have two lines u/c, one shovel-ready, one shortlisting alignments; and one being studied (SmartTrack) - the DRL has barely gotten through the long-list stage.
The image below is a Metrolinx proposal which got carried forward to a final assessment in its study of Union’s capacity issues (Union 2031). In the end it was rejected, in part due to the problems with tunnelling Lakeshore/Stouffville from its corridor around Pape, as well as tunnel size for a 6-track configuration through downtown. Sidenote: Metrolinx never mentioned the difficulties of getting RH underground at that point around Dundas. From what I know about that area, such a proposal raises a lot of red flags. But still, the plan obviously had a lot of advantages and it did make it far in their study process.
What ended up being shortlisted in Union 2031:
A couple points: I don’t think both is an option. As well, GO Richmond Hill isn’t acknowledged (which wasn’t so much an issue relating to Union’s capacity, but is for the subsequent issue of Yonge relief). Not to mention that RER/SmartTrack has made a lot of headway in recent months.
The DRTES DRL...see the Bayview Station? If what many posters have written over the months concerning the complexity of carving a 150m station box, then this spot is out of the question. Active rail corridor, volatile river, Bayview Ave...How the heck can a station be built there to intercept RH? I’m sure it’s possible, but posters were quite adamant that a sizable area needs to be open to the surface during construction. And according to Metrolinx: “
The Richmond Hill GO line does not have sufficient corridor right-of-way to provide new station platforms in the location where the Richmond Hill GO Station interfaces with the proposed DRT. A feasibility review of the proposed Richmond Hill GO Station interfacing with the DRT suggests significant corridor right-of-way constraints as a typical GO station.”
As for the DRTES DRL, Metrolinx has stated that it has disadvantages in regards to its “
high risk complexity” and “
questionable viability/feasibility given its significant costs, property impacts, construction issues; and issues related to land availability, operations, zoning; and physical and environmental impediments”. And from Neptis:
-“
The full line would carry 14,900 in the peak hour, with an 11% increase in overall rapid transit ridership”
-“
Like the Spadina subway, which was also built as a “relief” line, the DRL would do relatively little to increase all-day transit use or encourage higher-density, transit-oriented development. While some passengers would have faster or less crowded journeys, crowding is only a serious problem in the peaks. So ridership growth seems likely to be small unless the line stimulates more intensive development along its length and not just in the downtown area. This seems unlikely.”
Notwithstanding some fairly optimistic assumptions, our analysis indicates that benefits are only about two-thirds of the costs, even for the shortest scheme. Put simply, the scheme in its current form is not worthwhile, costing more than it delivers. However, incremental revenues appear to cover incremental operating costs. This fact could explain why TTC supports the scheme; if the capital cost can be covered, TTC will make a profit on the operations.
The case for the scheme would be further eroded if GO is upgraded. As we have shown, GO relief and express rail services, with interchanges at Danforth/Main, Kennedy, Kipling, and Bloor/Dundas West, can provide similar relief to the subway at a fraction of the cost.
… The DRL seems to us to be a scheme whose time has not yet come, if indeed it ever will.
I support the Pape DRL. But I’m trying to look at this realistically.
1. SmartTrack is a bit of a priority and has taken some of the DRL’s thunder
2. Union’s capacity issues need to be addressed
3. Funds are finite, and as it stands the completed DRL costing many $Billions has less peak projections than another priority project: Yonge North (14,900 vs 18,800). Somehow.
4. Many are itching to get Yonge started, and a near-to-mid term solution for relieving Yonge has been stated as a goal by Metrolinx (this is where the Don Branch may prove important).
5. As much I support a subway on Pape or Donlands, a tunnel there isn’t necessary to meet Metrolinx and TTC’s evaluation criteria for a “Relief” line.
