News   Dec 05, 2025
Renowned Toronto-Born Architect Frank Gehry, Dead at 96
 343     0 
News   Dec 05, 2025
Finch West Line 6 Opens Sunday: It Could Use Some Improvements
 1.4K     3 
News   Dec 05, 2025
First Phase Advances at Multi-Tower Proposal on Steeles in Brampton
 356     0 

Finch West Line 6 LRT

smallspy said:
And what are the ridership numbers per kilometer of route for each of those cities?

And what is the budget to maintain them?

It's easy to yell "SUBWAYS SUBWAYS SUBWAYS" without having the foggiest notion of what it costs to run them. Building them is one thing. Keeping them running after is another.

About 20 years ago, the TTC estimated that it cost $7mil per kilometer just to maintain the subway each year. That was to maintain the rails, power supply, lighting, signals, equipment, structure, life safety, etc. If we assume that it's increased with inflation, that means that the TTC is spending over $700mil per year on maintaining it today - a quarter of their operating budget.

Yes, the subway is the backbone of the TTC's network. Yes, it costs a lot, but it also handles the largest part of the ridership. But that's also because it has been built in places that (for the most part) can justify putting it there. Building subways willy-nilly is going to cause an operational spiral where costs increase, and ridership and revenue won't keep up. Nevermind the fact that, as T3G correctly pointed out further up, that the capital budget isn't an open purse, either.

Dan
Click to expand...
I did not scream subways subways subways. I said that "I firmly believe the issue is we have NOT invested enough in subways historically." which was in response to this: "Maybe if we spent less money building the most overpriced option to anywhere that cries out loud enough for it, there might be money for improving service in other communities." I also said I don't think Finch deserves a subway, shovels in ground now or in 10 years. However, I believe we should've built more subways in the past; if I am not mistaken, you guys think we should build less subways in the future (than the subways subways crowd). To be clear, I'm not a big fan of subways into the suburbs, especially before transit needs are addressed closer to downtown.

Regarding what you said about costs. I think what you'll notice is that those 6 cities (Vienna, Busan, Madrid, Chicago, Randstad, Athens) are a mixed bag in terms of economic metrics compared to Toronto. And they don't correlate well with network size and ridership. Madrid has lower GDP per capita, and yet the largest system. Chicago has higher GDP per capita and yet the lowest ridership. Athens is the poorest, and yet managed to build a system with higher ridership per km than Toronto. Vienna is the smallest city in general, but still has higher ridership per km than Toronto. Point is, there are smaller, less economically prosperous cities that can manage to provide better transit for their citizens. Not only were their systems built cheaper, they are run cheaper on a per kilometre basis.

The most obvious difference with Toronto's network compared to those 6 is it has historically catered to suburbs, and left a large part of the downtown underserved.

Long radial lines and historical urban sprawl made it inherently less efficient and costlier to run than peers. This is despite the fact that Toronto has an efficient street grid which barely gets leveraged by rapid transit. One consequence of the design decisions made 70 years ago is its super wide rolling stock that is only useful during rush hour peak directions. At 3.137 metres wide, that's wider than virtually every subway on Earth. But ironically, by the time a train returns deep into the suburbs, that train size is no longer needed. The overbuilt nature of the trains make rail maintenance etc. a much bigger headache for Toronto than cities that use lighter, narrower rolling stock.

Dan, you're clearly a respected contributor this forum, but I am not sure what you are implying so perhaps you could clarify. That we cannot afford to maintain our existing subways? I'm well aware of the budget pressure the TTC is under now, but I'm not sure how that precludes anyone from building more subway back when construction costs weren't so astronomical.

'Building subways willy-nilly is going to cause an operational spiral where costs increase, and ridership and revenue won't keep up.'
Given Toronto's farebox recovery ratio compared to peers, it would appear the problem is lack of financial support from higher levels of government rather than potential subway expansion bankrupting the TTC. You made a good point about ridership per km though. Yes, past a certain point, building more subways will drive down ridership per km. However, IMO we are far from that inflection point. Even then, is operating profitability or ridership per km of utmost importance for a transit system? The Chinese incur massive amounts of debt to build and run HSR and subways willy nilly, but they get positive economic returns. At the end of the day, positive economic returns for society as a whole are the fundamental reason why we build transit.

P.S., $700 million per year or $10 million CAD per route km for maintenance even as a subset of the SOGR capital budget (rather than operational budget) seems astronomically high. I see about $1.5 million USD per route km for Chicago for SOGR, a bit more if you account for unfunded needs. Even if Toronto runs more service, spending 3-5 times more on maintenance seems ridiculous for a network that is half the size and runs mostly underground. If the $700 million per year number is true, something is rotten in the state of Denmark.
stevemunro.ca

TTC Capital Budget Update: September 2025

At its meeting of September 4, 2025, the TTC’s Strategic Planning Committee considered a report on the unfunded “state of good repair” (SOGR) projects in their capital budget and …
stevemunro.ca stevemunro.ca

China HSR 8% annual economic returns: https://documents1.worldbank.org/cu...16/pdf/Chinas-High-Speed-Rail-Development.pdf
 
Last edited:
This thread is definitely getting de-railed.

It is not about subways, or HSR, it is not about cities around the world.

Tangential comparisons are fair when they help inform a useful, on-point discussion.

We all sidetrack from time to time.....but lets get this discussion re-focused on the topic at hand, please.

*****

On the subject at hand. A reminder note for members who may be unaware.

Service levels here are determined by Mx, clearly, in conjunction with the TTC; but Mx decides what it wants to pay for..... The TTC cannot unilaterally double service.

*****

The above said, I have some concern that the off-peak service seems too low; and the peak service, oddly , fails to meet the Mayors/TTCs current desired standard of every 6M or better for streetcar routes 7am-7pm, 7 days per week.

I'm not sure where the exact demand level will fall; but I'd like to have seen every 6M as a given during daytimes, and every 8M or better in the evenings.

It would seem wise to err with slightly more service than needed rather than the other way around.
 
Amare said:
Because apparently as of now, the plan is for the replacement bus service to service the LRT stops only.
Click to expand...
This is the worse idea ever. Not only you don’t get to get on the train, you’ll have to walk further and not reach Humberwood loop either.
 
Northern Light said:
The above said, I have some concern that the off-peak service seems too low; and the peak service, oddly , fails to meet the Mayors/TTCs current desired standard of every 6M or better for streetcar routes 7am-7pm, 7 days per week.
Click to expand...
As the peak service uses 15 of their 18 cars (over 83%), it seems unrealistic to be able to provide even a 16th car. So 6.5 minutes is the best they can do. A couple of fender benders, they'll likely have to cut service.

I can only assume they were planning on faster trains, or less terminal time.
 
Unless Alstom is planning on retraining the Brampton site for future orders, the jigs will have to be ship to Thunder Bay or Quebce as they are planning on closing the Millhaven plant with CN removing the spure to it. Cos to ship the two sections will be more costly to ship from TB or Quebec.

You are looking about 2-3 years lead time for extra cars after 2030.

Don't know if there is a plan to expand the platforms for a section car but if so it will mave a major impact on service.

To reduce the plan headway, when do people see this happening based on current projections ridership?

As noted, two spare cars for peak time is asking for trouble as an accident or two let alone a mechanical issues can eat those 2two spare cars up in no time, If both soares are out of service there are no spares for peak to the point headway will have to be either increase to akkow a spare or extra buses will have to be added to pickup the slack of the missing LRV ot two.

Who will be paying TTC for those extra buses and drivers since it not TTC responsibly to fix and maintain the fleet??
 
canucks2030 said:
The REM is acting like a subway and not regional rail with trains every few mins all day long. The closest to the REM in Toronto will be the future Ontario Line but REM a much bigger project. Furthermore a lot of the stations are not regional rail with most stations on Montreal island and a few around downtown like Gare Centrale and Mcgill. We cannot compare the REM with GO. With the REM you do not need to look at the schedule, with GO you still need to plan your trip. Toronto win over Montreal with regional rail, but Montreal win to provide fast subway service. It’s mind boggling Toronto have not open a new subway like in decades. If they did I would be much less critical of Finch West. Toronto deserved more frequent and grade separated transit.
Click to expand...
Fully agree. The REM's closest equivalent in Canada is probably the Canada Line in Vancouver which is 100 percent rapid transit.
 
Stop spacing on the REM is pretty long vs the Metro. It's a rapid regional light metro interurban. Trying to shove it into any pre-existing box is unproductive. The Canada line is maybe the closest comparison but even that has much closer stop spacing, which implies a different desired service (regardless of frequency).
 
I think the Finch LRT team should just be retained and keep them working considering they probably had the best go at a rail transit project in 21st century Ontario history.

A competent government would be extending the LRT Finch Station 6.5km east AND Pearson Airport 8.2km west.
 
Railrunner said:
I think the Finch LRT team should just be retained and keep them working considering they probably had the best go at a rail transit project in 21st century Ontario history.

A competent government would be extending the LRT Finch Station 6.5km east AND Pearson Airport 8.2km west.
Click to expand...
I would imagine extending Finch LRT eastwards would be a bit complicated if done in the near future because of all the construction at yonge related to the subway extension 💀
 
Railrunner said:
I think the Finch LRT team should just be retained and keep them working considering they probably had the best go at a rail transit project in 21st century Ontario history.
Click to expand...
I'd think almost all would have finished a year ago. Many even longer!

Heck, for Eglinton, I'd think quite a few that worked on the tunnelling how since retired from old age! :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top