Finch West Line 6 LRT

[6ixGod]

 

[lastcommodore]

Reece Martin via The Star: To fix transit in Toronto, we need to embrace a simple idea: subways subways subways.

The piece is primarily about speeds. Though he also goes further and comments that even with all the speed ups of TSP and wider stop spacing, we still need faster transit than that, and LRTs should serve as the local roads and subways the highways of transit.


Opinion: methinks if the 6FW speed fiasco is not solved soon public opinion on LRT over subway will sour, and sour fast- irregardless of whos to blame.

 

[Dan416]

The thing is, the problem is solvable. It's just a matter of political will. So if the politicians don't have the will to do it, they should be voted out in favour of politicians who will increase the speed of the Finch Line and the rest of the streetcar system.

 

[Bojaxs]

The thing is, the problem is solvable. It's just a matter of political will.

Is it though? It could be a design flaw with Line 6 and not so much lack of political will. As others have pointed out, the lack of pedestrian/ refuge islands at intersections along Line 6, and the surface portion of Line 5 may make it difficult to implement aggressive TSP on the lines.

Marco Chitti (@chittimarco.bsky.social)

The problem is that it's going to be hard to have very strong TSP, because the very reason you can't have it (one-stage pedestrian crossings that take too long, preventing truncated red as a tsp strategy) has been literally cast in concrete by not having refuge islands in many places.

bsky.app

If the lack of refuge islands at intersections proves to be an issue, then we'll probably get some weak TSP. Like just giving trams priority over left turning cars. But they would still have to wait at red lights. That would, at best, probably shave 2-3 minutes off a trip. Maybe "extended green lights" if the signals at the intersection detects a tram coming?

I think a lot of people consider the cars when discussing TSP, but don't consider the pedestrians who might be crossing the street when a tram is approaching.

This crossing in Prague has a separate pedestrian crossing light for the tram. You can see it's telling the pedestrians to "Stop" as a tram is approaching. I don't think Line 6 has anything like this.

Street View · Google Maps

Explore a place in a more immersive way in Google Maps.

maps.app.goo.gl

 

[urbanclient]

Reece Martin via The Star: To fix transit in Toronto, we need to embrace a simple idea: subways subways subways.

The piece is primarily about speeds. Though he also goes further and comments that even with all the speed ups of TSP and wider stop spacing, we still need faster transit than that, and LRTs should serve as the local roads and subways the highways of transit.


Opinion: methinks if the 6FW speed fiasco is not solved soon public opinion on LRT over subway will sour, and sour fast- irregardless of whos to blame.

I'm going to pile on here:

Opinion: A transit blunder in the name of equity

A look at the origins of Toronto’s latest transit goof

www.theglobeandmail.com

https://archive.ph/wwD7B

They say democracies move slow, but when they do, they tend to stay on the right track. I hope lessons are learned here. As I've mentioned in another thread, it's not exactly a novel concept to reject trams in favour of metro. (Although in this case, I don't think Finch West deserved a metro.) China now has more metro than the rest of the world combined at 11,987 km vs. 11,957 km, and yet they only have 600 km of tram. Their metro system total is projected to hit 15,000 km in 5 years while their tram total will stagnate, if not decline.

Good public transit benefits the least privileged, most vulnerable members of society. Good public transit does not preclude private car usage from growing or even doubling as you can see below:

I second this and would like to expand on this idea further.

This is from both personal and secondhand experience: in Tier 1 and Tier 1+ Chinese cities, i.e. Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen and a dozen others, the rapid metro/subway expansion over the last 10 years has not actually reduced car congestion by much. In fact congestion is still just as bad as Toronto, if not worse. And the stats back me up, car usage rates and metro expansion appear to be positively correlated in China. The most rabid Amsterdam-bike-urbanists would think the opposite would be true, wouldn't a fast and efficient transit system reduce demand for personal cars?

I’m intentionally simplifying this for the sake of discussion; basically, a gargantuan amount of fast public transit did not reduce demand for cars in China, what it did instead was allow more people, especially the less privileged to travel more. A lot more. Private jets and helicopters are a much smaller thing in China, if you are ultra-wealthy, you'll still travel by common carrier like commercial airline and high speed rail.

“A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It's where the rich use public transportation.” —former Bogotá Mayor Enrique Peñalosa Londoño

And here I ask, why not both? In an ideal world, the rich and poor can use cars and public transit as they please.

To each their own, but to me cars are for convenience, for trips too far for metro, but too short for intercity or high speed rail, best time of use would be non-peak. The metro is for rush hour and medium distance trips that stay within the city. Shorter trips you walk, ride a bike, or catch an Uber or bus.

Finch West is also not an affluent corridor. It is people working one or two jobs just trying to get by, and they are the ones being slowed down by a line that cannot consistently deliver the basics: reliable service, predictable travel times, signal priority. Meanwhile, a lot of the loudest defenders are commenting from a place of comfort, treating it like just another line on a map they can draw.

People should go ride Line 6 and talk to actual riders. The frustration does not need a consultant’s report.

Line 6 underserves an already disadvantaged community, delivering slow, unreliable service along a corridor where residents rely on public transport most. Line 5 (which still isn’t open) is a hybrid half-underground, half-surface LRT that maximises cost and complexity while failing to provide speed or reliability (and likely capacity if my prediction is right). Meanwhile, Sheppard will have a fully functioning subway from Sheppard West to McCowan, while Toronto’s main midtown east-west corridor is left with a grey streetcar.

 

[ThenWhat]

This whole discussion, here and in other places, is about speed. I like faster trains as much as everybody, but I am much more concerned about reliability. If the schedule says the next train/bus/subway is coming in 2 minutes, but I have to wait 20 minutes instead, then no speed will make up for it. The same if my train breaks down or turns back half way to my destination; I'd much rather go slowly but actually get to where I am going at the expected time.
I get it why it is easier to talk and write articles about speed. It is easy to measure and understand. It is easy to write about and appreciate the image of a runner going faster than a streetcar. Reliability is more subtle, not so easy to define and measure, and also may be more difficult to achieve in operations.
A big problem with putting so much focus on speed is that reliability is ignored. At some point the trains will run faster, those in charge will declare victory, and this and other lines will be just as unreliable as the rest of the TTC system.

 

[6ixGod]

I'd much rather go slowly but actually get to where I am going at the expected time.

It's not too much to ask to have better speeds and better reliability. This is the bare minimum when it comes to public transport....you can have both, we don't have to chose one or another.

 

[6ixGod]

Reddit Link
Here's the reality outside of the forum. This is what the masses are talking about.

**** Line 6 and Toronto’s abysmal transit planning. Residents waited over 20 minutes today in -10 windchill.​

Discussion

I feel incredibly cheated as a taxpayer and as a local resident. This line was a complete waste of time and money. It enriched people associated with the project, whereas residents have not gotten much of a benefit at least yet. I used to be open to the idea of an LRT now I think I’m changing my mind. Canada doesn’t know how to build transit and our system is a failure.
The Line was built by people completely disconnected from our community. The stations don’t even have proper enclosures to guard you from the cold. The “roof” doesn’t even protect you from the rain or snow, getting on the seats. Don’t even get me started on the speed.
Also shut the **** up if all you have to say is “write to your councilor” or “do something other than complain on Reddit”. Guess what, I am someone who is engaged politically. I write to my councilor. I depute. I volunteer. But even I feel defeated. THERE IS A STRUCTURAL PROBLEM IN THIS COUNTRY. I AM FURIOUS.
EDIT: AS SOME HAVE POINTED OUT IT IS A GOVERNANCE PROBLEM. OUR LEADERS HAVE FAILED US.

Some other comments beyond the echo chamber

I wish I documented how line 6 was constructed, especially around Tobermory Rd.

These idiots had HUGE machinery, diggers, etc leaning on uneven ground, right by the sidewalk. NO fencing or rope around it, no safety person guiding pedestrians.

Too busy trying to get my elderly father by, forgot to take pictures. Even if I did take a picture -- who would care?

Meanwhile Forrest Hill has a tiny road repair and the whole street has cones.

**** you TTC & Toronto for treating lower income neighborhoods like ass. I love this city, but I hope people continue to laugh at our subway & shitty upgrades.

To be honest, as someone who is an admittedly left leaning voter, I’m sick and tired of partisan politics.

Just because something is “left” doesn’t automatically mean it’s better. We need to demand excellence in public services.

I wish Metrolinx was actually what it was intended to be: an arms length agency which wasn’t so controlled by the whims of our provincial (and municipal) governments.

Likewise I’m so saddened by the history of transit in Toronto and the political deadlock which prevented us from building literally anything for so long.

I’m disappointed in Line 6 as well, but personally I have hope that the speed can be improved greatly if we, the public, demand that it be operated competently, and that the necessary prioritization be given.

And in the future, LRT, Subway, elevated rail, I hope we can prioritize the right technology which will move people in the most efficient ways.

Isn't it funny that the VIVA BRT system in York Region, with abysmal headways (like 30+ minutes off-peak), has heated waiting areas? While this doesn't.

NW Toronto local here. I do agree. The neighbourhood that most of line 6 is in is a working poor community in Toronto. I have seen local residents who were trying to survive in -16 degree celcius weather with only a HOODED SWEATER that I even gave one woman a spare pair of handwarmers this past week.

I do recall that shelters outside of the GO Train station (Downsview Park) and bus shelters at Jane st and Eglinton Ave W have heated features. I would definitely agree that Metrolinx should have installed heated shelters.
It’s horrible. It has ruined my commute. The 36B was faster. The floor ramp to the lrt shelters are crumbling off and breaking apart already. The lrt has skipped so many bus stops that people still use. Also when I was on the lrt it was saying the stops wrong. I was tobermory dr and the lrt said it was at driftwood. A lot of elderly people still wait for the bus even tho it will never show up unless after 11 pm.
Those shelter stops across Line 6 are absolutely evil. Definitely done on purpose so that underhoused individuals aren't sleeping in there, but why should everyone else get screwed?!

 

[Bojaxs]

This whole discussion, here and in other places, is about speed. I like faster trains as much as everybody, but I am much more concerned about reliability. If the schedule says the next train/bus/subway is coming in 2 minutes, but I have to wait 20 minutes instead, then no speed will make up for it. The same if my train breaks down or turns back half way to my destination; I'd much rather go slowly but actually get to where I am going at the expected time.
I get it why it is easier to talk and write articles about speed. It is easy to measure and understand. It is easy to write about and appreciate the image of a runner going faster than a streetcar. Reliability is more subtle, not so easy to define and measure, and also may be more difficult to achieve in operations.
A big problem with putting so much focus on speed is that reliability is ignored. At some point the trains will run faster, those in charge will declare victory, and this and other lines will be just as unreliable as the rest of the TTC system.

Other cities around the world have figured out fast & reliable transit. It's only Toronto that struggles with this concept.

 

[lrt's friend]

In this case, reliability and speed are part of the same problem. If you want more reliability, pad the schedule and make the line even slower. LRT must run faster than buses that were replaced or the concept of surface LRT can never be built again in Toronto. Toronto and TTC officials must be shaking in their boots if this is repeated on Line 5 and Line 10 in Mississauga. And there is also the concern that trains will run less frequently than the replaced buses, a double whammy.

 

[Voltz]

Is it though? It could be a design flaw with Line 6 and not so much lack of political will. As others have pointed out, the lack of pedestrian/ refuge islands at intersections along Line 6, and the surface portion of Line 5 may make it difficult to implement aggressive TSP on the lines.

Marco Chitti (@chittimarco.bsky.social)

The problem is that it's going to be hard to have very strong TSP, because the very reason you can't have it (one-stage pedestrian crossings that take too long, preventing truncated red as a tsp strategy) has been literally cast in concrete by not having refuge islands in many places.

bsky.app

If the lack of refuge islands at intersections proves to be an issue, then we'll probably get some weak TSP. Like just giving trams priority over left turning cars. But they would still have to wait at red lights. That would, at best, probably shave 2-3 minutes off a trip. Maybe "extended green lights" if the signals at the intersection detects a tram coming?

I think a lot of people consider the cars when discussing TSP, but don't consider the pedestrians who might be crossing the street when a tram is approaching.

This crossing in Prague has a separate pedestrian crossing light for the tram. You can see it's telling the pedestrians to "Stop" as a tram is approaching. I don't think Line 6 has anything like this.

Street View · Google Maps

Explore a place in a more immersive way in Google Maps.

maps.app.goo.gl

If the TSP system can detect the LRV’s far enough away from an intersection, such as more than 4 minutes, adjust the signal timing and then precisely track it as it approaches then they should be able to implement decent signal priority.

 

[ThenWhat]

It's not too much to ask to have better speeds and better reliability. This is the bare minimum when it comes to public transport....you can have both, we don't have to chose one or another.

Agree completely. My concern is that with the discussion here and elsewhere concentrated solely on speed, reliability will be ignored.

 

[afransen]

This whole discussion, here and in other places, is about speed. I like faster trains as much as everybody, but I am much more concerned about reliability. If the schedule says the next train/bus/subway is coming in 2 minutes, but I have to wait 20 minutes instead, then no speed will make up for it. The same if my train breaks down or turns back half way to my destination; I'd much rather go slowly but actually get to where I am going at the expected time.
I get it why it is easier to talk and write articles about speed. It is easy to measure and understand. It is easy to write about and appreciate the image of a runner going faster than a streetcar. Reliability is more subtle, not so easy to define and measure, and also may be more difficult to achieve in operations.
A big problem with putting so much focus on speed is that reliability is ignored. At some point the trains will run faster, those in charge will declare victory, and this and other lines will be just as unreliable as the rest of the TTC system.

A big part of speed is frequency. Long waits for the next train make transfers unappealing and increase trip duration (the thing people experience as speed). This is why grade separation and automation are important, it makes it feasible to run more frequent service. Part of the issue with Finch is that the increase in vehicle capacity is seen as an excuse to reduce frequency, further reducing the speed. Compound that with inadequate shelters and unreliable schedules means lots of shivering in the middle of a windswept suburban stroad as car traffic roars around you.

 

[Bojaxs]

If the TSP system can detect the LRV’s far enough away from an intersection, such as more than 4 minutes, adjust the signal timing and then precisely track it as it approaches then they should be able to implement decent signal priority.

4 minutes away? That doesn't sound practical. Is that how TSP typically works?

In some cases "4 minutes away" could put the LRV two intersections or two stops away from the signal.

 

[urbanclient]

Other cities around the world have figured out fast & reliable transit. It's only Toronto that struggles with this concept.

This whole discussion, here and in other places, is about speed. I like faster trains as much as everybody, but I am much more concerned about reliability. If the schedule says the next train/bus/subway is coming in 2 minutes, but I have to wait 20 minutes instead, then no speed will make up for it. The same if my train breaks down or turns back half way to my destination; I'd much rather go slowly but actually get to where I am going at the expected time.
I get it why it is easier to talk and write articles about speed. It is easy to measure and understand. It is easy to write about and appreciate the image of a runner going faster than a streetcar. Reliability is more subtle, not so easy to define and measure, and also may be more difficult to achieve in operations.
A big problem with putting so much focus on speed is that reliability is ignored. At some point the trains will run faster, those in charge will declare victory, and this and other lines will be just as unreliable as the rest of the TTC system.

@ThenWhat not necessarily directed to you in particular:

Besides frequency and grade separation, you know what would also increase reliability? Platform screen doors. And 9 times out of 10, you know what that also means? Metro, and for new systems more often that not, automated metro. So is it all that surprising that the Ontario Line will be driverless with platform screen doors?

Even in near ideal situations, it's just not realistic to expect other modes to be as reliable as modern metro when considering mechanical breakdowns. The TTC themselves know this:

Posting this here in support of platform screen doors / platform edge doors:

https://thevarsity.ca/2025/11/30/we-need-trust-not-tracks/

U of T study finds subway air quality falls short of global standards

Despite decades of improvements, air quality in Toronto’s subway system still falls short of international standards, according to research from a team of chemical engineering students at the University of Toronto.

toronto.citynews.ca