News   Dec 11, 2025
Bella Aqualuna
 79     0 
News   Dec 10, 2025
63-Storey Pencil Tower Proposed on Adelaide East Near Church Street
 2K     1 
News   Dec 10, 2025
11-Storey Rental Infill Proposed Beside Grange Park
 1K     5 

Finch West Line 6 LRT

6ixGod said:
I don’t ever want another “LRT” built in Toronto ever again. This city requires subways and the downtown neoliberal elites can suck a pear for all I care….stop treating the outer boroughs like they don’t exist. This is 2025, not 1955.
Click to expand...
If this is the case, can Toronto do us a favour and secede from the province so that the rest of us don't have to pay for this nonsense with our tax dollars? I have zero interest in seeing subways built in environments that don't have the density to justify them, while transit outside the city continues to get shittier and shittier with every year.

Imagine paying billions of dollars on overbuilt infrastructure because Rob Ford invented a culture war that never existed before. What a ridiculous notion.
 
Towered said:
You actually think a full scale subway is justified on Finch? Have you seen the place?? 😆
Click to expand...
No subway, but I think a BRT would have left everyone here a lot happier given per-dollar-spend than this current iteration of streetcar-performing LRT.

At least the bus drivers would be able to floor it between intersections without traffic in the way.

If we assume that LRTs are operated by the TTC under their wisdom, then the equation in Toronto is probably Subway > Light Metro > BRT > LRT.

(I am embarrassed now that I ever advocated for the Scarborough LRT lol.)
 
urbanclient said:
Yeah someone help me out here, does "no later than Q1 2026" mean by March 31, 2026 like I think it does?




Also, why are there so many people saying stuff, like "signal priority could help, but more importantly they need to drive the tram faster, slow as a snail/25/30 kph is too slow."

Let me ask y'all this. How do you think the tram is supposed to drive faster when it is met with a red light 200 metres down the tracks from a stop? Is it supposed to go pedal to the metal to 60 km/h in 100 metres at 1.3 m/s^2, then go hard on the brakes down to 0 km/h right in time to stop at a light? Y'all are being lazy and regurgitating the same talking points without actually thinking about basic physical realities or doing some basic math.





Yes, the overly risk-averse, streetcar style operations do waste time. But as I demonstrated, by analyzing a 52 minute Line 6 run (which is the average time confirmed to me by a TTC instructor), the main issue is getting stuck at red lights and ~50 second average dwell times.
Click to expand...
but how much does the slow operating speeds add? Why do cars, which are held to those same restrictions regarding red lights, take 20 minutes to get across the corridor but the LRT takes 52? Are the physics of a car really all that different from a tram?

The fact that if you eliminate all stoplights and make dwell times ridiculously minimal (ignoring how trams have smaller doors than Line 1 and simply take longer to unload/load passengers) and still get a 34 minute travel time is indicative of a problem. With the tram barely stopping at stops and never stopping at red lights your hypothetical scenario still delivers a travel time over 50% longer than driving with stoplights and an average speed below 25km/h.

And as an FYI, those types of travel time savings are simply not realistic. Dwell times and red light time can definitely be reduced, but you aren't going to save 18 minutes off those. Even a very strong transit priority signaling system is still going to have some level of dwell time for vehicles as lights have minimum cycle lengths that have to be met. Similarly, not every stop is going to be able to get it's doors closed in 20 seconds. Maybe the quieter ones with minimal passengers, but stations like Kipling and Jane are just going to take longer.

All three (dwell time, red light time, travel speeds) need to be addressed. And honestly, if the TTC did nothing but operate the LRT to 70km/h on open stretches and took corners a little faster it would probably cut more time than either of the other two issues could by being addressed.
 
In the early days of Transit City, modeling was done for a surface LRT line with 400 m average stop spacing. The predicted average speed was 23 kph (and that includes the dwell time at stops).

Finch LRT, on the other hand, has average stop spacing of 630 m (10.7 km length / 17 stop distances). That should give a slightly faster average speed, let's say 25 kph.

At 25 kph, the one-way trip would take 10.7 * 60 / 25 = 26 minutes. That should be the goal. I get it, after the initial "soft opening" period, but eventually, that.

If the above goal cannot be achieved, then: either the original model was way off, or something is seriously wrong with the TTC operating practices.

The ability or inability to reach that 25 kph speed (or close to that) will definitely affect the public perception of LRTs. Many transit activists happen to be railfans, and will claim that LRT is always better, no matter how slow it runs. But the broader public will not buy that. People only have so many hours in the day, and want to get to their job / school etc faster, then get back home sooner. A bus ride may be rough and bumpy, yet not many riders will support spending quite a bit of money to replace their bus route with something that is even slower.

Finch LRT is a very important showcase. It will either confirm the viability of LRTs in this city, or bury the whole idea for a long time.
 
Towered said:
You actually think a full scale subway is justified on Finch? Have you seen the place?? 😆
Click to expand...
With the benefit of hindsight, the ~10 km stretch of Line 6, in my opinion doesn't even justify a tram/LRT currently.......much less faster, high-floor rail transit. I'll spend some time writing a novel on this later...

Here is a quick preview:

Pre-covid, a stronger, but imperfect argument could have been made for LRT for Finch West; but as it stands post-covid, the Finch West corridor is no longer even in the top 7 bus corridors for ridership, much less the top 7 bus corridors for population density. All 7 are corridors which may or may not deserve better transit than Finch West, even in the context of an austere budget.

Furthermore, the actual implementation of a cost-effective and time-saving tram/LRT is harder in practice than in theory. Yes theoretically trams can be run more speedily than Line 6, but there are inherent tradeoffs with this mode that one must take into account. Hypothetically, even if BRT is not the optimal solution for Finch West, that does not mean BRT is some crappy mode that is only marginally better than a normal bus. If done well, BRT can be proportionally cheaper to build and demonstrably more effective than the current state of Line 6. Let's not allow our experience with VIVA bus "rapid" transit to cloud our views.

Case in point: Guangzhou BRT, which once had ~1,000,000 daily riders over 22 km. This was a decade ago before ridership declined due to massive metro(subway) expansion and covid. It currently has ~340,000 daily ridership and a theoretical peak capacity of 26,900 pphpd, still hitting Toronto subway numbers. Nevertheless, higher Canadian labour costs must be factored in when considering BRT or LRT for Finch West.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guangzhou_Bus_Rapid_Transit

The form(s) of transit that sit between bus/BRT and metro can serve as an effective stopgap for cities that don't foresee rapid population growth and rapid growth in transit demand. Either the city has peaked in population or that growth has slowed to a crawl, such that it will never have the population mass or density to justify a metro. In areas where trams, tram-trains, stadtbahns, and premetros are well received and cost-effective, there tends to be a unique set of conditions, including but not limited to walkable urbanism. It is not entirely clear whether Line 5 and 6's at-grade corridors adequately meet these conditions.

At-grade trams have been a huge failure in China, and yet metros/subways have succeeded. The reasons for this should be studied and lessons should be learned to avoid the same mistakes in Canada, if not at least to mitigate any current mistakes.

*added "at least"
 
Last edited:
Live updates:
- The earliest Line 6 improvements can be implemented is at the end of the "soft opening" in "early spring"

- TTC staff would need to consult with Mosaic and Metrolinx if it were to speed up the LRT because it would impact maintenance costs

- In response to question from Councillor Matlow, TTC insists that Line 6 did have TSP from day one that would extend the green light and truncate the reds. No specificity on whether this is conditional or unconditional. Says what they're looking into now is a "more aggressive" form of TSP

- Councillor Bravo asks whether giving priority to Line 6 would mean that other lines like the Jane bus would be delayed. TTC staff say yes, but that nature of transit signal prioritization is that some prioritization must happen

- TTC staff says original stated runtime for Line 6 and Line 5 are "lower than what would be possible to do." "That was developed by Metrolinx in consultation with TTC and the city... as part of the original contract." Became evident last year "or possibly earlier than that" that those run times would not be possible.

- Myers asks if there was ever a discussion about updating the public about the new run times. TTC staff says no because "this was a contractual issue and they wanted to have that discussion internally"
 
Last edited:
Myers: did we know or anticipate at the TTC that the vehicles would not meet their expected travel times due to factor such as the lack of TSP?

TTC staff: the original contract contemplated a 30 plus minute run time. What happened was during the development and into discussions amongst city, TTC and metrolinx, there was a discussion that it wouldn't be possible to meet that shorter time frame and there was a revised service level

Myers: what were the reasons given?

TTC: because the original estimate for the run time for Line 5 and 6 was lower than what was actually possible to do

Myers: so where did the 36 minutes for Finch West number come from?

TTC: that was developed by Metrolinx in consultation with city and TTC... was part of the original contract

Myers: and when did it become apparent that that time frame was no longer possible?

TTC: became evident during discussions between TTC metrolinx and mosaic

Myers: what's the date approximately?

TTC: it would've been last year or possibly earlier.

Myers: was there ever a discussion about updating the public?

TTC: no

...

Myers: what is the estimated run time for Line 5. TTC staff: contractual number for round trip time is 98 minutes during rush hour and 90 minutes outside rush hour

TTC staff: The current schedule we have for RSD is currently scheduling 112 minutes round trip

Myers: are there any measures being considered to speed up the runtime? TTC staff: Any moves would have to be done in consideration with Mosaic and Metrolinx. At this point in time cannot say there are alternatives being discussed.
 
Last edited:
Rainforest said:
In the early days of Transit City, modeling was done for a surface LRT line with 400 m average stop spacing. The predicted average speed was 23 kph (and that includes the dwell time at stops).

Finch LRT, on the other hand, has average stop spacing of 630 m (10.7 km length / 17 stop distances). That should give a slightly faster average speed, let's say 25 kph.

At 25 kph, the one-way trip would take 10.7 * 60 / 25 = 26 minutes. That should be the goal. I get it, after the initial "soft opening" period, but eventually, that.

If the above goal cannot be achieved, then: either the original model was way off, or something is seriously wrong with the TTC operating practices.

The ability or inability to reach that 25 kph speed (or close to that) will definitely affect the public perception of LRTs. Many transit activists happen to be railfans, and will claim that LRT is always better, no matter how slow it runs. But the broader public will not buy that. People only have so many hours in the day, and want to get to their job / school etc faster, then get back home sooner. A bus ride may be rough and bumpy, yet not many riders will support spending quite a bit of money to replace their bus route with something that is even slower.

Finch LRT is a very important showcase. It will either confirm the viability of LRTs in this city, or bury the whole idea for a long time.
Click to expand...
The model is probably way off as it was modelling traffic in 2000s which is significantly less.

The model was definitely for shorter trains too. They assume it’ll start with one car with the length of the current streetcars and eventually ramp up to two cars. The current streetcars also don’t exist at that time as they started arriving after 2012. So they won’t be able to model on that acceleration and operation profile either.

The model probably made an assumption that the cars will reach top speed whenever possible, receive green lighting over a certain percentage of the thing (maybe 90%) and only deaccelerate for the platforms from full speed. For trains to stop at red light, slowly glide across the intersection and into the platform can add over a minute per station.
 
Matlow: why wouldn't we proactively ensure that Finch and Eglinton are ready with TSP as we understand it [with priority over left turning cars]?

TTC staff: during the contact and Metrolinx managing the contract there wasn't really the opportunity for us to intervene.

Matlow: was there a request thru the mayor, city manager, TTC CEO to say: this is really important to the success of the line, we want to work with you proactively?

TTC staff: that's not the way the contract works. Metrolinx has a contract with Mosaic. They were abiding by the terms that were set. There was no opportunity to alter the contact, and if they did it could have caused further delay

Matlow: but in the midst of it all... there are discussions that happen... with all these people here at TTC and the city, didn't somebody just think of picking up the phone and call the CEO of Metrolinx and say can we get our act together?

TTC staff: The TSP that was mentioned preivously was always contemplated in the base contract. This more aggressive form that is proposed now... this is a new change. We wouldn't have contemplated it then. I'm not sure that Transportation Services contemplated it then.

Matlow: so for those of us asking for TSP, meaning priority for transit, that is not the form of TSP that was envisaged in the contact? What... what does it mean in the contract? To the average viewer it doesn't seem like transit actually has any more priority than the cars turning. So what does that mean?

TTC staff: The TSP in the contract is the basic TSP that goes back decades, which is either extending the green or shortening the red.

Matlow: and is that on right now?

TTC staff: That is on right now
 
Osborne: What is the [contractual] round trip time for Finch?

TTC: 92 minutes for driving time and 6 minutes for recovery

Osborne: So exactly the same as Line 5?

TTC: Yes

Osborne: Ok I'm a bit stunned by that

TTC: There are things we can do to increase the speed of the vehicles. I'll give you examples. If council chose to they could increase the speed of the vehicle in the guideway. The second would be how the vehicle enters and exits the intersection. At this point in time there's a speed slowdown as it's going into the intersection. These were put in place from a safety perspective.

TTC: With time we will also increase the speed of the trains. We expect that just with having this in our hands
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top