Finch West Line 6 LRT

[Allandale25]

More maps here by Jeff Allen here posted on November 29th:

Maps of Line 6 Finch West - School of Cities

Maps and data of surrounding land-use and population change along Line 6 Finch West

schoolofcities.utoronto.ca

 

[kalis0490]

Initial travel time estimates of Finch West were at 33-34 minutes or 38 minutes in this oddly contradictory Metrolinx doc from 2 years ago. This would have meant a speed of 10.3/(34/60) = ~18 km/h or ~16kmh respectively. This is still slower than ion (16.26/(44/60) = ~22 km/h but a lot faster than the current proposed time. Not sure what would have changed for the 46 minute run time to be approved.

 

[Amare]

While I agree that the streetcar designation makes more sense than "Line 6" I also feel that the "Bus is faster" thing to be very overplayed.

The vast majority of Finch riders will experience much shorter travel times. Not to say they shouldn't have proper LRT priority and even level crossing gates (ala Calgary and Edmonton) and remove 3-4 stops. My point is not that there is nothing to critisize, it's that, even in this flawed state, we will see a substantial improvement over the bus service. My guess is that most of the people arguing otherwise haven't spent much time on the 36.


The silver lining on finch is that it will already be better than Spadina or St Clair, and will require less to upgrade. Both of those require much more in terms of stop removal and require switch upgrades. Line 6 has a larger stop spacing (although there are a few that should have been cut) and it doesn't have messy switch areas at every intersection where it has to grind to a halt.

In general, I think the residents and commuters along Finch will have a different reaction than the online community even if things should be better.

I think the problem most of us here have (the one's who are complaining about the speed) is that when you've spent billions to upgrade a line to have better and more reliable transit, only to operate in such a way that doenst fully maximize the potential.

It's akin to buying an electric screwdriver for $100, but choosing to try and use it as a manual screwdriver because you're too scared to press a button because it goes too fast. So instead of maximizing the value and productivity of that $100 electric screwdriver, you're using it as if it's a $10 tool because you're too scared of what it can really do.

Does it sound idiotic? Yes, because it is.

The TTC, Toronto Transportation Services (and city to an extent) doesnt see a problem with this kind of idiocy.

The service will be more reliable than the 36 Finch West yes, but when you spend billions and end up neutering a line's operation because of stupid reasons, it's right to question said stupidity.

 

[jmi22]

They're incompetent because they decided to use an affordable technology that was well established globally? The opportunity to build a network for the price of a subway line (at the time)? The technology is good and corporate culture and operations can change. But nah, instead let's discredit the entire thing because the service and culture are immutable.

What decade are you responding from? Nothing about Line 6's construction has been affordable, or in-line with international best practice regarding modern tramways/light rail, and the "promise" of a network for the same cost as one subway line fell to pieces about over a decade ago.

Yes, spending over half a decade building a streetcar that is *barely* faster than a bus *sometimes* for twice the amount of money per km than another Canadian city has spent on a automated metro network is incompetence. What an absolutely asinine refusal to engage with the reality of a situation as it stands today, instead clinging to political slogans from the turn of the century.

 

[urbanclient]

What decade are you responding from? Nothing about Line 6's construction has been affordable, or in-line with international best practice regarding modern tramways/light rail, and the "promise" of a network for the same cost as one subway line fell to pieces about over a decade ago.

Yes, spending over half a decade building a streetcar that is *barely* faster than a bus *sometimes* for twice the amount of money per km than another Canadian city has spent on a automated metro network is incompetence. What an absolutely asinine refusal to engage with the reality of a situation as it stands today, instead clinging to political slogans from the turn of the century.

Just to reiterate 10.3/(46/60)= 13.43 km/h, not 13.53 km/h as seen in the widely spread Twitter typo.

And according to the Star, the estimated cost of Line 6 is now $3.585 billion. So the line doesn't cost $240 million per km, it costs $350 million per km. That is nearing or even higher than full blown metro/subway costs in Spain according to this UofT study:

https://schoolofcities.utoronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Understanding-the-Drivers-of-Transit-Construction-Costs-in-Canada_Feb-2025_FINAL.pdf

Toronto Star Line 6 cost: https://archive.ph/lILv8

P.S. The REM cost $9.4 billion/67km = $140 million per/km according to Quebec auditor general.

 

[T3G]

Without comparing the price per kilometre costs for a new subway, that's a meaningless statistic in the context of transit construction in Toronto.

LRT may be expensive, but there's no chance the price of LRT has ballooned while subway has remained fixed. So it stands to reason that a Finch subway, apart from being massively overbuilt for the urban form, would also break the bank.

 

[jmi22]

And just to reiterate, according to the Star, the estimated cost of Line 6 is now $3.585 billion. So the line doesn't cost $240 million per km, it costs $350 million per km. That is nearing or even higher than full blown metro/subway costs in Spain according to this UofT study:

Thank you for highlighting this, such levels of needlessly inflated spending on public transit projects that deliver so little is a good way to kill public support for rapid transit expansion.

 

[hw621]

Thank you for highlighting this, such levels of needlessly inflated spending on public transit projects that deliver so little is a good way to kill public support for rapid transit expansion.

It is more like "kill public support for rapid transit expansion managed by corrupt and incompetent organizations such as Metrolinex".

 

[urbanclient]

Without comparing the price per kilometre costs for a new subway, that's a meaningless statistic in the context of transit construction in Toronto.

LRT may be expensive, but there's no chance the price of LRT has ballooned while subway has remained fixed. So it stands to reason that a Finch subway, apart from being massively overbuilt for the urban form, would also break the bank.

I want to be clear, I am by no means advocating for a subway in the past, now, or in the near future for Finch.

The underlying data from the paper the UofT study cited shows that Spain will finish two projects post-2025 for less than $250 million international dollars per km. Which is less than the per km price for Line 6 Finch West. The more expensive project is the super delayed Barcelona Line 9/10 central section and the cheaper one is the Madrid Eje Transversal. Both are fully tunnelled but the latter is more of an RER tunnel than a subway.

Source data: https://ultraviolet.library.nyu.edu/records/9wnjp-kez15

If we're paying world-class prices for a tram, we better get world-class service. Absolutely mind boggling we don't get strong transit signal priority and/or signal preemption despite the City council faffing about since April and acting like they care about transit priority: https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2025.IE20.3

A long read on signal priority/preemption (the comment linked):
https://www.reddit.com/r/transit/comments/1n2oa73/comment/nb8syvh/

We get weak signal priority at best in Toronto on the streetcars (and very rarely buses). The city likes to call it "unconditional", but "unconditional" and weak for the streetcars is clearly not enough, so I hate to see how bad "conditional" is for Line 5 and 6.

"All of the City's current TSP locations are 'unconditional' in their operation. [...] For these reasons, and in consultation with the City and TTC the Metrolinx consortia are implementing Conditional TSP on Line 5 Eglinton and Line 6 Finch West."
TSP Toronto source: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2025/cc/bgrd/backgroundfile-254795.pdf

 

[soundmuseum]

I saw this promo today while on the Line 1 train going southbound from Dundas/TMU...

 

[Steve X]

Just to reiterate 10.3/(46/60)= 13.43 km/h, not 13.53 km/h as seen in the widely spread Twitter typo.

And according to the Star, the estimated cost of Line 6 is now $3.585 billion. So the line doesn't cost $240 million per km, it costs $350 million per km. That is nearing or even higher than full blown metro/subway costs in Spain according to this UofT study:

https://schoolofcities.utoronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Understanding-the-Drivers-of-Transit-Construction-Costs-in-Canada_Feb-2025_FINAL.pdf

Toronto Star Line 6 cost: https://archive.ph/lILv8

P.S. The REM cost $9.4 billion/67km = $140 million per/km according to Quebec auditor general.

Are we comparing apples to apples? Or Apples+oranges to apples?

If we compare the Sheppard Line to Finch West, Sheppard does not include a train yard. The trains were also part of the T1 order oppose to an expensive sole sourced deal with Alstom plus ripping up the BBD contract.
ML also build a backup control center for Finch and Eglinton unlike Sheppard or the TYSSE.
Bike lanes were added to the project.
The utilities relocation cost for some projects may or may not be included in some figures around the world.

Finally all the ML P3 contracts include 30 years operating cost which is definitely not suppose to be included in any construction project. This inflates the project cost by at least 40%.

We need a detail analysis, not copy and quoting everyone's number cause the TYSSE and Sheppard line does not include the janitor cleaning the train in 2030. ML's final cost does!

 

[urbanclient]

Are we comparing apples to apples? Or Apples+oranges to apples?

If we compare the Sheppard Line to Finch West, Sheppard does not include a train yard. The trains were also part of the T1 order oppose to an expensive sole sourced deal with Alstom plus ripping up the BBD contract.
ML also build a backup control center for Finch and Eglinton unlike Sheppard or the TYSSE.
Bike lanes were added to the project.
The utilities relocation cost for some projects may or may not be included in some figures around the world.

Finally all the ML P3 contracts include 30 years operating cost which is definitely not suppose to be included in any construction project. This inflates the project cost by at least 40%.

We need a detail analysis, not copy and quoting everyone's number cause the TYSSE and Sheppard line does not include the janitor cleaning the train in 2030. ML's final cost does!

That is a very fair point. Yes those Spanish metro/RER projects are not apple to apples with Line 6.

However, the maintenance cost shouldn't be higher than $1-2 million per route km per year, which usually doesn't start until some time after the line is operational. A new line even if tested extensively is not supposed to need much maintenance. That's an additional $300 million to $600 million over 30 years. Worst case let's say $900 million to account for the Metrolinx incompetence 'tax'. That's an extra $90 million per km at most, and that's being generous.

So the fact that maintenance is included doesn't explain the full cost disparity between Finch West and a comparable European 'LRT'.

 

[Steve X]

That is a very fair point. Yes those Spanish metro/RER projects are not apple to apples with Line 6.

However, the maintenance cost shouldn't be higher than $1-2 million per route km per year, which usually doesn't start until some time after the line is operational. A new line even if tested extensively is not supposed to need much maintenance. That's an additional $300 million to $600 million over 30 years. Worst case let's say $900 million to account for the Metrolinx incompetence 'tax'. That's an extra $90 million per km at most, and that's being generous.

So the fact that maintenance is included doesn't explain the full cost disparity between Finch West and a comparable European 'LRT'.

We don’t know what is the average salary nor the minimum wage 20 years down the road. We also don’t know the cost of the parts and will the president of the USA levy a 500% tariff rate either. Yes some of these cost will definitely be variable based on that year’s cost.
To be safe, companies will all overbid a certain amount to ensure they don’t lose money in this deal. The cost would be very different between the private sector or kept public. Of course public employees would need to be very managed so we don’t have the whole SRT derailing disasters.

 

[a2z]

Not sure why the debate or comparison over the per-km outputs when that linked UofT transit construction costs study literally talks about all the underlying inputs (e.g. overdesigning, the cycle of lack of knowledge retention <> reliance on external consultants, inflated soft costs, strict safety standards - a theme that also hinders housing, etc.) that have led to such high costs per km here & across the Anglosphere - thus nothing discussed is really net new info lol.

(The article also reminded me how much of a bummer it was for DB to exit GO Expansion - even if they are far from perfect!)

 

[urbanclient]

Not sure why the debate or comparison over the per-km outputs when that linked UofT transit construction costs study literally talks about all the underlying inputs (e.g. overdesigning, the cycle of lack of knowledge retention <> reliance on external consultants, inflated soft costs, strict safety standards - a theme that also hinders housing, etc.) that have led to such high costs per km here & across the Anglosphere - thus nothing discussed is really net new info lol.

(The article also reminded me how much of a bummer it was for DB to exit GO Expansion - even if they are far from perfect!)

"overdesigning, the cycle of lack of knowledge retention <> reliance on external consultants, inflated soft costs"

Yeah, but lots of people including myself like to be technically correct. So there is a lot of "ummm ackshually, TTC/Metrolinx aren't that wasteful, we don't have slave labour and we are safe!/Barcelona Line 9/10 is a metro so we can't compare it to Line 6 Finch West".

Even if a lot of this technically correct info is good to get on the record, I think a significant part of it misses the bigger picture. Why are our soft costs more than the hard cost of construction itself (labour, equipment, materials).

Why are our transit authorities and politicians less transparent on transit than those in ostensibly more corrupt countries. Italy is not some shining beacon of morality with regards to the intersection of government and "private enterprise"...