At the TTC Board meeting on December 10, 2025, there was an extensive discussion on the poor showing of Line 6 Finch since it opened a few days ago.
Predictably, this was a mix of “give us time to get things working”, disappointment over the bad impression left in riders’ minds, and attempts at hard questions about what went wrong. I say attempts because there were many evasive or just plain misleading replies, coupled with a stifling blanket of Metrolinx confidentiality thrown over the debate.
Yes, thanks to the multi-party agreement between TTC, Metrolinx and others for the Finch project, many aspects of it cannot be discussed in a public session because Metrolinx enforces silence as a condition of their contract. Commissioner Josh Matlow attempted a line of questions early in the meeting, but was shut down on this by Chair Jamaal Myers as the issue would be debated later in camera.
Global News recently reported that the TTC and Metrolinx did not agree on a planned opening date for Line 5 Eglinton. Metrolinx wanted December 28 and the TTC wanted February 8 as there were “still issues to be ironed out”. In the end the TTC prevailed, but the gravity of the meeting was clear from the presence of the Mayor, Premier and Minister of Transportation. This was no ordinary staff gathering. Attempts by Commissioner Matlow to elicit any information about discussions with Metrolinx were shut down by the Chair.
All the same, two motions regarding transit priority were proposed, amended and adopted, and discussion of them revealed details on the Finch and Eglinton projects. They also revealed many errors in understanding by some board members, TTC and City officials. This does not bode well for a frank, well-informed discussion of what might be done to improve Finch and other lines.
Commissioner Osborne asked if there is a way to track and report on actual line performance.
I cannot help observing that measurement and reporting on transit line behaviour has taken place for several years on this website. I hope to do this for 6 Finch once the tracking data are available, assuming that knowledge of where the Finch cars actually were is not a state secret. Vehicle locations for 6 Finch are not yet available on the older NextBus site, nor in the feed used by Darwin O’Connor’s Transsee site, nor on the TTC’s Bustime site.
CEO Mandeep Lali replied that the schedule determines the speed. This is utterly wrong as Finch demonstrates. The speed is determined by how quickly cars can move along the line, and based on experience to date, it is considerably slower than the generous scheduled time. Lali went on to say that TTC is working with York University on ways to improve transit operations. This is a red herring as the debate revealed.
Commissioner Saxe quoted Metrolinx’ claim that the trip time would be 33 minutes, but noted the actual time is 55. The following text was copied from the Metrolinx website at 6:30 on December 10. This is not some hoary old page rescued from the Internet archive, but their current website.
How often will light rail vehicles arrive?
Light rail vehicles will arrive every 5-7 minutes during peak hours, and every 7-10 minutes during off-peak hours.
How fast will trains on the Finch West LRT travel?
Light rail vehicles on the Finch West LRT will take approximately 33-34 minutes to travel from end to end, for an average speed of 20-21 km/h (including stops). LRVs will reach a top speed of 60 km/h.
Saxe claimed that improving service will add to costs, the implication being that better service requires more cars. However, the problem today is that the cars take much more time than Metrolinx claims to make a trip, and therefore the headway between cars is much wider than it would be on a shorter travel time. Service could be improved with the existing scheduled cars (15 out of a fleet of 18) simply by operating them faster.
There was some discussion about the evolution of proposed travel times as the outcome of discussions between TTC, Metrolinx and their partner Mosaic Transit. For unspecified reasons, Metrolinx realized that the claimed speed could not be achieved, but this information was not published right up to opening day and the original speed remains on their website (above).
Derek Toigo from the City’s Transit Expansion Office provided several garbled and misleading answers. He claimed that the operating agreement with Metrolinx and Mosaic provides that they must agree to any operational change, even though Metrolinx is already on record as saying that transit signal priority (TSP) is up to the City. Toigo claimed that changing the operating speed could affect vehicle maintenance, and the other partners would have to review the effect.
It is quite obvious that with travel times well above the projected level, the TTC is not yet even consuming the contracted level of service. While TSP will probably increase this utilization, it would likely not exceed the contracted level because of slow operations elsewhere. In effect, Toigo worries that the line could become so fast that Mosaic would demand more money for car maintenance. We should be lucky to have such a problem.
Saxe noted that improving the line at some later date will not reverse the reputational damage of a botched opening.
Toigo claimed that the change in scheduled trip time to 46 minutes arose from TTC and Metrolinx concerns about safe operation. He did not address Metrolinx’ claimed speed and frequency numbers.
Roger Browne, Toronto’s Director of Traffic Management, noted that his department is already examining left turn sequencing on Spadina at Council’s direction, and this could expand to other streetcar lines and to the new Lines 5 and 6. Data collection is in progress and the City could implement a more aggressive TSP trial early in 2026.
TTC’s Laurence Lui, Head of Service Planning & Scheduling, said that the TTC would move away from the “soft start” schedule in early Spring. How far they would move remains to be seen.
Commissioner Josh Matlow stated that the Minister of Transportation has suggested that Toronto could proceed whenever it wants on TSP, but Toigo replied that an agreement is needed with Metrolinx and Mosaic.
At this point, Toigo made the bone-headed statement that TSP changes causing a higher speed could make vehicles slower and add to maintenance costs. He really should take a Transit 101 course to learn the relationship between speed, travel time and headway, not to mention fleet size. Further, he stated that TSP could make the cars run faster than the contracted speed.
There are many aspects to “speed” here. One is the average speed taken over the course of a trip, and on Finch the scheduled value is about 13.5 km/hr not including terminal recovery time. The other is the maximum speed of operation between stations. Toigo himself noted that Council had approved a 60 km/hr cap. TSP will not affect the top speed, but would reduce the number of needless stops waiting for a clear traffic signal. Further aspects of speed are the presence of any restrictions such as safe approach to stations, and slow operation on curves due to technical problems with the cars. Cars that are routinely held by red signals will not cross to a farside platform as quickly as they would if approaching at track speed like, dare I say it, an ordinary streetcar.
Commissioner Bravo raised a point that often comes up from detractors of TSP asking how priority for Finch cars would affect transit service on major cross streets such as Jane. The typical argument is that taking green time for the primary transit line would slow service on the crossing street. The unanswered question is “by how much” and whether the service frequency on Finch would be often enough to significantly affect traffic on Jane. This requires site-specific study, not simply a rote answer.
Roger Browne explained green time extension as “priority” to transit. That is true, but there are varying degrees. For example, a common situation on streetcar lines is that an approaching streetcar can cause a green to be extended (particularly important at a street with no car stop), and a stationary car serving a stop can get extended green time on the assumption that it will leave before the signal times out.
A more aggressive strategy would lengthen the distance away from an intersection that a car can trigger an extension, as well as a change in the sequence of signals so that a left turn phase follows rather than precedes the streetcar green. This whole discussion is further complicated by the mix of nearside and farside stops which require different approaches to “priority”.
TTC’s Laurence Lui stated that the contracted travel times for Line 5 are 98 minutes peak, 90 off-peak, but the TTC is actually scheduling 112 for testing and initial service. This is similar to the situation on Finch, and that begs the question of just how slowly trains will move across Eglinton. Separate from this, but unconfirmed, are rumours of speed restrictions in the tunnelled section because of issues with signals and braking systems. If so, this fault lies squarely in Metrolinx’ hands.
Commissioner Osborne asked if the TTC was not yet hitting the target speeds. Josh Colle, TTC’s Chief Strategy & Customer Experience Officer, replied that this was so, but they will get better. What remains to be see is just what “better” means. The current schedule provides very slow service and can hardly be called a target worth achieving.
Commissioner Joe Mihevc asked whether aggressive TSP is new. Roger Browne replied that it is used now in Europe and Asia, but not in North America. Mihevc asked whether the TTC is talking to other systems. TTC’s Eric Chu replied that at a recent UITP light rail meeting they talked to peers in other cities like Vienna and Prague. Mihevc asked if they would be going to actually look at these systems, and this provoked a few chuckles considering the TTC’s current ban on travel. Browne later admitted that he had not seen the TSP installation on Waterloo’s ION LRT although it has been operating for several years and is quite nearby.
Commissioner Saxe stressed the importance of expectations. Safety is important, but there should not be surprises, and the public should have realistic information from the TTC.
Chair Myers shared the sense of celebration for a new line and frustration at its operation. He observed that the TTC went beyond the basic role of “operator” of the line to get it open, but this model for transit delivery is not working. The City and TTC need to have this discussion with Metrolinx, but of course existing projects are already locked into a defective delivery model.
Myers observed that the Board should not have found out on opening day that the service would be slow. That says something about the “transparency” of the testing phase. Slow operation was known to those involved, observed by passersby and raised as an issue in online fora. Why did the Board not know? Who else in the City and Provincial governments were in the dark?
This is a key question for Finch and all other transit projects. Clarity and honesty should be demanded from both TTC and Metrolinx.
Motions
An Urgent Need to Speed Up New LRT Routes – by Chair Jamaal Myers, seconded by Vice-Chair Joe Mihevc
The original motion read:
It is recommended that the TTC Board:
1. Direct the TTC CEO to work with the City Manager, the Ministry of Transportation, Metrolinx, Mosaic Transit Group and/or Crosslinx Transit Solutions to significantly improve performance, frequency and speed on Line 5 and Line 6 by exploring and implementing where possible, the following measures including, but not limited to, strengthening transit signal priority, feasibility of increasing service frequency (including any required operating funding subsidy increase from the Province of Ontario), and reviewing internal TTC and City of Toronto policies which govern speeds on surface routes, and provide a progress update to the TTC Board no later than Q1 2026.
This was amended on a motion by Commissioner Julie Osborne to read (changes in bold face):
It is recommended that the TTC Board:
1. Direct the TTC CEO to work with the City Manager, the Ministry of Transportation, Metrolinx, Mosaic Transit Group and/or Crosslinx Transit Solutions to significantly improve performance, frequency and speed on Line 5 and Line 6 by exploring and implementing where possible, the following measures including, but not limited to, strengthening transit signal priority, feasibility of increasing service frequency (including any required operating funding subsidy increase from the Province of Ontario), reviewing internal TTC and City of Toronto policies which govern speeds on surface routes including requirements to slow at intersections and have speed limits below those of parallel cars, and examination of line management data to uncover specific sources of unreliability and delay, and to provide a progress update to the TTC Board no later than Q1 2026.
2. Direct the TTC CEO to report back to the TTC Board in Q4 2026 on a plan to measure the performance of LRT lines, including end-to-end travel targets.
The motion as amended passed unanimously.
Further Recommendations to Speed Up Streetcars – by Chair Jamaal Myers, seconded by Commissioner Josh Matlow
It is recommended that the TTC Board:
1. Direct the TTC CEO to work with the City Manager and report back in Q1 2026 on options for removing on-street parking and restricting left turns during high-peak periods on key routes, reviewing the distance between streetcar stops and internal policies governing transit speeds on surface routes, as additional measures to speed up streetcar lines.
This was amended on a motion by Commissioner Osborne to read (changes in bold):
It is recommended that the TTC Board:
1. Direct the TTC CEO to work with the City Manager and report back in Q1 2026 on options exploring and implementing where possible, recommendations for removing on-street parking, prohibiting or restricting left turns during high-peak periods on key routes, reviewing the distance between streetcar stops and internal policies governing transit speeds on surface routes including requirements to slow at intersections and have speed limits below those of parallel cars, and examining line management data to uncover specific sources of unreliability and delay, as additional measures to speed up streetcar lines.2. Direct the TTC CEO to report back to the TTC Board in Q4 2026 on a plan to measure performance of streetcar lines, including end-to-end travel targets.
The motion passed on a 9-1 vote with Commissioner Kim opposed.
Steve Munro 
I was on the route tonite. My observations are as follows…
55 seconds of average dwell (stop to start) at the non terminal stations. The subway can do at least as low as 18 seconds, and there are lots of examples of LRTs doing the same, especially at stations with few customers (as was the case at 5pm westbound). If they can get it to 20 seconds, 35*16 stations is 9 minutes off the 54 minutes I experienced.
Another 8 minutes was associated with stop lights.
From stop to station was 30 seconds. It needs to be understood that accelerating and stopping in such a short space is a big waste of time as well…10 lights with 6 being before stations is another 3 minutes at least.
There is also the issue of approaching lights slowly…
My suggestions are:
1) all stops except terminals have 20 second dwell goals
2) fix left turns
3) for nearside stops ensure there is a visible countdown either in vehicle or wayside that shows when doors need to be closed to hit the cycle
4) add nearside signals that give the driver an indication of when the light is going to change so they can anticipate the light from earlier in the route
5) as part of left turn fixing – change the driving lights to arrows – which allow for quickly stopping left turns mid cycle if a train approaches
6) replace all transit signals with European style bar signals, which increase safety, eliminate risk for automated driving and low awareness drivers
7) allow for signals to understand approaching vehicle speed and intention at nearside stations and around corners
8) increase speed limits, acceleration curves and braking profile.
Steve: Thanks for the detailed breakdown. This is the sort of thing TTC and Metrolinx could and should have done.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh my. It looks like the TTC CEO has already been captured. Sure, schedule does determine speed. I’ll buy that. If you write a schedule for 24 hours round trip with a few hours of terminal time and slavishly force your drivers to adhere to it then you’ll get your pre-determined 1 km/h line speed.
Lali has been here for a month and I already want to chain him to the same rock as Leary. If this is the real Lali then hook him up and haul him out to the middle of the Pacific right now.
Oh? Were there specifics offered or just vague finger pointing? More safety theatre wouldn’t be surprising but these people need to spell it out.
Moreover while most online talk seems to be about TSP I feel like that’s a red herring if you’re not going to drive at top speed. The schedule seems like the typical TTC schedule of the last 10 years where they purposely draw it up to waste time and money.
LikeLike
Instead of receiving higher order transit, we received higher order incompetence…
As you implied, everyone but the ones “in charge” seemed to be privy to these issues long before it opened.
I watched the media briefing, and they all but admit that incompetence is why it’s slow…
LikeLike
A sidenote aren’t P3’s grand? Finger-pointing and confidentiality are used to dodge accountability pre and post construction.
Premier Ford was there so why couldn’t he use his provincial powers of micromanagement and force things to work over the objections of everyone else? He doesn’t seem to mind sticking his nose into low level city affairs when it suits him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Any reasoning given for why Commissioner Kim opposed the second motion?
Steve: No.
LikeLike
Not invented here!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for shining the light on this meeting. Seems everyone is avoiding responsibilities and incompetence is king. They have no clue why certain things are like they are, yet they are in charge.
They had years to prepare for this opening.
They knew from testing how long those tramways (let’s call a duck a duck) would take from end to end, and how it would be so far from expectations.
It’s officially a scandal, nothing less
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mihevc raised a point that I’m hoping to better understand. While there were some communication struggles with staff and he didn’t get an actual answer, it got me thinking.
When sequencing an intersections left turn, does it actually matter if the sequence goes Left First:
1) Red Light
2) Advance Left Turn
3) Green (for traffic and LRT)
vs. Left After Green:
1) Red Light
2) Green (for traffic and LRT)
3) Advance Left Turn
In both cases, the amount of time that the LRT can’t advance is the same. All things being equal, if you imagine the LRT arriving at random during each light cycle, it won’t actually make a difference to the expected wait time.
Am I missing something?
Steve: The sequence could also be:
1) Red Light
2) Transit only green (for LRT if a car is present in either direction)
3) Advance Left Turn
4) Green for through traffic, pedestrians and LRT including extended time if a car is approaching and the stop is farside.
There have been implementations on the streetcar system where transit actually gets less green time than without the “priority” signal because it can only move on the slots inserted in the cycle.
LikeLike
I don’t know what is more embarrassing:
• the fact that staff (TTC/Metrolinx) didn’t take measures in advance to ensure that the line is not slower than the bus service it is replacing, or
• the fact that staff seem to be surprised by the public’s negative reaction
It feels like somewhere along the way staff forgot what the entire point of the project was.
Here’s what the public consultation docs said the goal was, back when work began:
“Project Benefits
The benefits by implementing the Etobicoke-Finch West LRT project include:
• ensures that transit is a more attractive travel option by improving travel times, comfort, and reliability of service
• increases the people movement capacity in the corridor in an environmentally sound manner
• provides enhanced accessibility features for all customers
• provides alternative travel choices for non-drivers, including transit and enhanced environments for cycling and walking
• encourages and contributes to improved neighbourhood livability
• provides employment opportunities during construction and LRT operations
• provides opportunities to include urban design and streetscaping features
• contributes to the overall reduction in energy consumption and pollution levels”
As things stand, we seem to have accomplished pretty close to none of that.
One last note – I love how staff suggested that nothing whatsoever can be done to improve the speed of the line for months to come because of contractual issues. But at the same time, staff suggested that the original contract “contemplated a 30+ minute run time” … but “there was a discussion that it wouldn’t be possible to meet that shorter time frame and there was a revised service level”.
So apparently Mosaic was contractually obligated to deliver faster speeds, but we let them off the hook for that. At the same time, if we want to improve things beyond the current ~46 min scheduled runtime then we need compensate them for that? Huh??
LikeLike
Thanks ! What a dog’s breakfast Toronto has got on its hands.
LikeLike
Thanks for a very thorough article!
What I find galling is the lack of accountability; will any of these highly paid executives face any meaningful consequences for the disaster this and other projects have been, or do they just glide from one screw-up to another, laughing all the way to the bank?
I can already guess the answer.
LikeLike
The Finch West line had been at testing phase for quite a while before it was opened. It was well known that it will take that long to get from one end to another. And yet they did nothing to fix it prior to the opening. I wonder if a person who approved almost an hour long rides at TESTING phase will take responsibility for their decision? By the way, above ground part of Eglinton is even slower – I’ve seen it. I wonder if they make any adjustments prior to yet even bigger fiasco with public opinion.
Steve: FWIW there are problems in the underground part of Eglinton too, I understand. It’s not as it the cars wills drop into the tunnel at Brentcliffe and then fly to Mount Dennis.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anecdotally while riding this line I’m estimating at most twenty-percent of people are tapping their Presto before boarding. So not only is this line a logistical laughingstock but it’s literally being robbed blind. I think very soon a fare enforcement officer needs to be on every train, all day.
LikeLike
Although there is plenty of blame to pass around, it is long past the time for Mr. Toigo to move on, and for the supposed responsibilities of the Transit Expansion Office to be reassigned. It has been a complete failure through and through, not unlike John Tory’s other big transit idea: SmartTrack.
LikeLike
The LRT priority on ION in Waterloo was completely developed by the Transportation Operations personnel of The Region of Waterloo. It utilizes 16 phase, 4 rings, and logic steps within each controller to achieve a Station to Station approach for LRT progression. Peer to Peer communications, along with embedded loops in the track and GPS trigger points start the sequence that allows the Trams to progress smoothly thru intersections from one Station to the next. Special plans are used prior to and after the Tram passes thru each intersection to help mitigate effect on pedestrian and vehicular traffic. A window of opportunity is created that the Tram must pass thru in order for all this to occur seamlessly.
It is by no means perfect but does get around 90% of Trams from one stop to the next without stopping. The horizontal and vertical bars give pre warning signal is coming up as well as notice of termination of the phase. They are derived from a standard Grn/Yel/Red phase in the traffic controller. A fibre communication network allows each controller to use information from any controller in the network. The somewhat reliable GPS system provides some backup if coms are down. This info is used by logic processor in each controller to achieve what has been termed as “Active Transit Signal Priority”. TSP was tried in the beginning but did not help much at all, one badly timed ped call on the opposing street destroys headway. There is no other out of box solution in any North American Traffic Controllers for LRT control. The ION network could have been improved immensely with the knowledge gained by taking what was constructed and making the most of it, as was done in Waterloo. It is a shame no municipalities look to it for insight…..
As far as correcting Finch line 6, good luck with all the people involved there. ION Active priority was essentially programmed at street level by just a few employees of the Region who were trying to avoid the problems that other North American LRTs had at launch. And again yes it could be a lot better but working with what was constructed it works better than it would have and better than most. It’s predictable, reliable, on time most of the time.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The Line 6 LRT should really just be referred to as the 536 Finch West Streetcar (that’s how I refer to it as from now on) because without the signal priority and the normal operating speeds calling this a light rail transit is an insult to actual light rail transit.
LikeLike
To Steve: I live along the proposed Waterfront East LRT corridor. I have a driver’s licence but I don’t have a car as I prefer to walk and take transit. I just wanted to let you know that we don’t want LRT. What we want is high frequency articulated buses (preferably fully electric).
Steve: With the immense delays to the WWE project I have my dou
bts it will ever be built beyond a BRT corridor. That won’t solve the problem of congestion on any surface approach to Union Station, and the tunnels are too small for bus operation.
What you are likely to get is standard sized buses that will more likely be hybrids than pure electric, and don’t hope for extremely frequent service.
LikeLike
All of this is very funny to me. Steve, you and I had plenty of arguments here about the merits of LRT vs Subway and well we had our positions that’s for sure. Never thought I’d be so vindicated however.
Eglinton will be my favourite. It costs more than a subway, and moves at streetcar speeds for what is supposed to be a transit spine for Toronto. Rather amusing to me waiting so many years to spend countless billions on an underground streetcar.
Cheers.
Steve: The issue here is the utter incompetence of many who were involved in the design, construction and operation of Line 6, along with the outright deceit about limitations of the route as built. Even today, the Metrolinx website claims that a one-way trip will take only 33-34 minutes at an average speed of 20-21km/hr.
LikeLike
Why the “L(R)T”?
Surely there are rails on Finch West. 🙂
Steve: (Rapid)
LikeLike
To Phil: until we see how the Ontario line (a “subway”, well, mostly, I suppose) operates, things are pretty indeterminate.
LikeLike
How much would it cost to bury the Eglinton streetcar like from Victoria Park to Kennedy?
Steve: That depends on how many stations you want to retain. Ionview and Hakimi-Lebovic would disappear for sure, and O’Connor and Pharmacy would likely be consolidated into one. And why only east of Victoria Park? What about the section from Don Valley to VP? You would probably lose Aga Khan and Sloane stations in that section. Your Scarborough fixation is showing in the section you ask about.
Let’s assume a net addition of 4km of tunnels plus 4 underground stations. By analogy to the Eglinton West extension, you’re looking at least at $2-billion, more including inflation. This does not include vehicles or a maintenance facility as we have those already, nor does it include future operating and maintenance costs. Then there would be the upheaval of actually building it.
LikeLike
It seems to me that one critical thing that needs to be done is to “explain” to everyone from the TTC to Metrolinx to DoFo and his merry gang of car nuts, that so-called Transit Priority does not have to mean slowing down their precious cars. At its most basic, giving a green to an LRT train does not delay car traffic going straight through the intersection either way. Surely someone can come up pretty easily with some simulation runs (based on actual data – or is that all Top Secret?), showing that always giving LRT trains green lights unless they are stopping for another reason (generally boarding, but conceivably because the train in front is too close) does NOT have to slow car traffic.
Seems to me I saw such a simulation on Youtube not long ago, though of course I can’t find it now. But if half the local politicians and bureaucrats + all DoFo’s people are opposed to transit priority in principle, than nothing is ever going to happen. Maybe we need a different term for it – something that suggests that we need to move LRT trains out of the way quickly so the cars can go, but yet doesn’t sound like a euphemism. Regardless, this needs somebody on the inside to do the preaching.
LikeLike
Transit priority to ensure that the LRT has preference over road vehicles is good, but it’s not the only piece of the puzzle for faster transit. As a commenter notes above, the order of the phases don’t necessarily matter, except in Steve’s example. But truncating the lights for a pedestrian to give the train a green light is more difficult if there aren’t pedestrian refuge islands that allow staged crossings.
I haven’t been up to Line 6 yet, but that’s something that would add yet more construction if it isn’t already possible with the existing infrastructure.
And as Steve notes, the Metrolinx website still advertises 33-34 minutes of travel time end-to-end. If that was the contractual agreement with Mosaic, why does the TTC need to consult with Metrolinx and Mosaic about increased costs if they are contractually obliged to fulfil their role for the advertised runtime?
Metrolinx should not be exempt from being in the room, or Mosaic, if they are such big stakeholders.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I hope these line 6 issues do NOT delay the opening of line 5. Regardless of the political considerations, the reality is it’s cold outside and we have heated stations with functional underground trains that are available to us RIGHT NOW. I imagine the city has to pay millions to Crosslinx every month whether the trains are running or not, so just open it up. It doesn’t matter if it’s embarrassingly slow, some people don’t want to have to freeze outside while getting splashed with brown slush from passing cars when a viable alternative exists. After more than a decade of construction bs, some people would like to get at least some benefits as soon as possible.
In the end, the hardcore transit enthusiasts are never going to be happy because reality is never going to live up to their lofty dreams. And the pro-car/pro-subway contingent will always find something to complain about on the other side. The important thing is to manage expectations.
Just have some sort of “open testing” period with 4 trains an hour, and trust the local riders to make their own decisions about how they want to get around the city. The city can have a soft opening ceremony in March when they’ve figured out the speed issue and another grand opening in the summer when all the kinks are worked. Old Jewish grandmas going to get some Jamaican patties shouldn’t have to stand in the cold just because some politicians are afraid of getting egg on their face. Open line 5 up as soon as it’s reasonably viable to do so.
Steve: Actually it’s the Province who pays the cost of Line 5, not the City, although this is a short term agreement for the next few years. It was part of the whole swap with the Gardiner upload.
LikeLike
Line 5 is going to be an epic disaster for Scarborough.
That 20 minutes slower is for the above ground Scarborough portion only, not the high speed underground sections in richer areas to the west. This ultra-slow mode of transit is what Steve wanted built in Etobicoke as well but thankfully Doug Ford had the sense to say NO. After lines 5 and 6 disasters, the good news is that Toronto will not be building any more of these so called “LRT” lines.
Steve: Actually there are problems with the underground section too with speed restrictions due to signalling and braking issues. The “richer areas” are getting screwed too.
That whole trope about “poor Scarborough” is totally worn out. You’re getting a full-blown subway where even a revitalized SRT would have been quite adequate just to keep your tender egos happy.
LikeLike
Are all you people seriously slagging LRTs as “streetcars” and praising subways while forgetting the _years_ of slow operation on the subway we’ve been enduring? How is the Davisville slow order going?
And last I rode it (Thursday), the Line 1 “Rocket” trains are still substantially slower in practice than the trains they replaced. Do you like waiting for doors to open? Then you’ll love “safety first” subways.
And don’t forget Ontario Line is being built under the same delivery model of Metrolinx secrecy + operating consortium as the LRTs, so you’ll be asking some corporation to pretty please meet the advertised trip durations there too.
LikeLike
Edward Keenan of the Toronto Star made a similar observation as George Bell about excessive dwell times at each on-street stop. Shouldn’t this be an easy fix for the TTC?
LikeLike
Those two will never make Chief Safety Officer by saying things like that.
Can anyone tell me what the door timings are? Faster or slower than the Flexity doors? People need to track this in case they pull in more sneaky changes in the future.
LikeLike
So much BS & mutual finger-pointing to unpack. Switching to a less-prominent topic, what’s the dealio with a total lack of fare-taking hardware on the Finch L(R)T vehicles, coupled with a lack of electro-mechanical gates at the outdoor platforms (I refuse to call them “stations”)?
Seems an open invitation to fare cheating.
Steve: Metrolinx standard is to pay on the platform like the subway or GO. As for gates it would be easy to walk around them.
LikeLike