News   Jan 30, 2026
College Park Proposal Revision Swaps Tower Heights, Bumps Supertall Slightly
 3.2K     6 
News   Jan 30, 2026
New Lower Don Bridge Prepares for Move Across the DVP This Weekend
 4.7K     1 
News   Jan 30, 2026
News Roundup for January 30, 2026
 536     0 

Finch West Line 6 LRT

Westey said:
If you count the big-O roof then count the LRT connection to YYZ.
Click to expand...
There was never a plan or promise to connect the LRT to even Woodbine, let alone the airport.

While the Big O roof itself may not have been installed for the games, the Olympic Tower was fully planned to be finished in 1972. You can still see the construction cranes during the games!

Still not as late as Montreal Metro line 3 though ...

1769290775944.png
 
nfitz said:
There was never a plan or promise to connect the LRT to even Woodbine, let alone the airport.
Click to expand...
Not that Line 6 is fully comparable to the '76 Olympics. But there have been planning studies and ostensible plans to extend Line 6 to Woodbine and the airport. Just no promises. It depends on what your definition of a plan is. Does it have to be a promise in motion to be a plan?

Including but not limited to:
https://web.archive.org/web/2019112...mber_16_2009/Reports/Request_for_approval.pdf
 
nfitz said:
But only the 38th anniversary of the completion of construction of the Olympic Stadium.

An odd claim. Perhaps you are thinking of a different LRT line? The contract for Finch West was awarded in 2018, and it opened in 2025 - about 3 years (and Covid) late. The Montreal stadium was scheduled to be completed in 1972 (how I don't know, given the games were only awarded in 1970), but construction lasted until 1987, with the retractable roof not being commissioned until 1988.

Hopefully the Finch West LRT lasts longer than the retractable roof for the Olympic stadium - which was decommissioned in 1992, and removed in 1998.
Click to expand...
The plans to build the FWLRT go way back prior to 2016. That's what I was referring to. I was referring to the time elapsed from the conception of the project (the plan or the approval to go ahead) all the way to the day it is in service. If you look at it that way, the FWLRT took much longer. The facilities for the 1976 Olympics were delivered on time except the stadium tower and retractable roof but there are many stories stating that they were building right up until the opening ceremonies and even on the opening ceremonies a few smaller things weren't completed.

Regarding the bolded part, Its kind of telling that in this and age we automatically assume that this time frame (from 1976) is unreasonable and we have been conditioned to think so. But this tells you that there was a time when nobody questioned that timeline. So how is possible that with experience, progress and technological advancements of 50 years, the delivery times of infrastructure projects have regressed to this point where it is today? But this is a whole other story


PS.: I typed just second before you posted the picture
 
Last edited:
Burnt creek said:
The plans to build the FWLRT go way back prior to 2016. That's what I was referring to. I was referring to the time elapsed from the conception of the project (the plan or the approval to go ahead) all the way to the day it is in service. If you look at it that way, the FWLRT took much longer.
Click to expand...
How long something was planned? I don't know ... I guess that makes the Elizabeth Line in London either 60-years to completion or 180 years ago.

You cut off both a decade of construction (ignoring the plans to use the not-built tower for media facilities) at the end, and ignore that serious planning started in late 1967 after many years of talk about building a stadium.

Honestly, of all the projects to go after on timeframe - you pick this one? How about that's supposed to open in the 2030's that was approved in the mid-1940s, with initial construction in the late 1940s.
 
Voltz said:
That was more of a proposal at one point, not a fully funded and approved plan with a timeline
Click to expand...
From Yonge to Don Mills was more of a proposal. Finch West to Finch (Yonge) was fully funded with an approved plan and timeline by the province.
 
If Line 5 does open on Feb 8, it would be interesting to see if it could run in snow storms unlike Finch, or if they would turn back trains at Laird at the very least as the underground section obviously wouldn’t have snow to deal with.
 
nfitz said:
From Yonge to Don Mills was more of a proposal. Finch West to Finch (Yonge) was fully funded with an approved plan and timeline by the province.
Click to expand...
According to Wikipedia's page on Line 6:
"In March 2010, the Ontario government eliminated the proposed section of the line between Finch West and Finch because of budget constraints."
Since then, there have been proposals brought up by Toronto city council, but none have been endorsed by the province.
You could fill a book with Toronto area transit plans proposed in the past, including projects approved but then unapproved.
 
anb said:
If Line 5 does open on Feb 8, it would be interesting to see if it could run in snow storms unlike Finch, or if they would turn back trains at Laird at the very least as the underground section obviously wouldn’t have snow to deal with.
Click to expand...
They were running normally today in this freezing weather. So there’s more hope unlike Finch which is having issues everyday.
 
A 6264 said:
According to Wikipedia's page on Line 6:
"In March 2010, the Ontario government eliminated the proposed section of the line between Finch West and Finch because of budget constraints."
Click to expand...

It's not so simple as 'budget constraints' suggests. There would likely need to be costly, contested expropriation, for temporary or permanent interests. The ROW east of Keele is too narrow in certain sections to fit 4 car lanes, a median tram ROW, stop platforms, and sidewalks, much less the addition of turning lanes at intersections. Otherwise, tunnelling would be needed.

Either way, 'budget constraints' clearly come into play, just not in the way many would think.

urbanclient said:
[...] Right next door you can see the ROW narrows to 33 metres and even less closer to Yonge. And it's effectively narrower for reasons stated above.
View attachment 709890
Here is the legacy residential area in the other Google maps screenshot:
View attachment 709891

In cases like these, the narrowest sections determine tram upgrade viability. There is no way the city fits a tram and four car lanes on Finch [closer to Yonge]. In a theoretical best case scenario you need only 20.6 metres curb-to-curb, and maybe 25-26 metres property line to property line, but in reality you more than likely need at least 22-24 metres curb-to-curb and 30-32 metres property line to property line [to account for 4.2 metres for sidewalks, 3 metres for tram stop platforms and 1-2 metres conservative construction buffer for street widening and sidewalk reconstruction, assuming no grass boulevards, no bike lanes, no turning lanes at intersections like Line 6]

8 metres for tram ROW, 2x8 metres for car lanes in both directions with some buffer for ease of construction etc. and roughly 5 to 7 metres for sidewalks/boulevards. [...] They are not going to build 2.1 metre wide sidewalks sandwiched exactly between the property line and the road surface to cram in a tram + four lanes of traffic in a cross section of 25 metres.
View attachment 709902
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
So I don't understand why we keep repeating the same thing and expect a different result.

The first time the switches froze due to snow that should have been the first time and last time. Measures should be put into place to prevent it from happening again.

Again it snowed and the line is down. Subway from Victoria park is also down. At least line 1 is running.

On days like this we especially need public transit to work, and when it doesn't it's such a counter productive situation.
 
Bordercollie said:
So I don't understand why we keep repeating the same thing and expect a different result.

The first time the switches froze due to snow that should have been the first time and last time. Measures should be put into place to prevent it from happening again.

Again it snowed and the line is down. Subway from Victoria park is also down. At least line 1 is running.

On days like this we especially need public transit to work, and when it doesn't it's such a counter productive situation.
Click to expand...
If the TTC is only reliable in good weather, I might as well drive. It’s when the weather means I don’t want to drive that I want to take the subway, streetcars and LRTs.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top