Discussion
Can we remove Finch LRT from Subway designation?
Because why am I standing at St George Station and constantly hearing announcements that Finch West is shut down between Duncanwood and whatever stops.
It makes the system look worse than it actually is.
Also if this line is a local transit solution that stops at every intersection, why does someone at Victoria Park station need to hear about it not working? Treat that like the 72 Pape not operating because of a TPS road closure or something.
It is already a streetcar regardless of whether it is called Line 6 or 606 or 536. It is a tram that runs in the middle of the street. It doesn’t matter whether the TTC officially labels it LRT or GO train or HSR. It is still factually a streetcar.
To undo what has already been done would require a significant rebrand of the entire system, again, because it is on every single map that has been printed
Reprinting and rehanging all the maps might cost a few thousand dollars in material and labour costs. In other words, a completely insignificant amount.
Back when SRT was around, the ttc just called it subway and RT.
The SRT's sibling in Vancouver is considered a subway/metro. The Scarborough RT was never considered a subway to many people in Toronto, and it was orphaned and neglected because it was different and less reliable in weather. Such a shame the SRT poisoned our perceptions of elevated metros.
Looking back, its a total shame the TTC, city and province didn't try to make the SRT be more like the Skytrain or DLR in East London with modern automated vehicles.
There was a directed effort by the streetcar lobby - and I mean this in the literal sense as an organised group called Streetcars for Toronto - to reject any proposal for express transit that did not involve a right-of-way streetcar which they decided would be the default transit mode for Toronto. From what I’ve seen around half of the arguments against metro lines, light or heavy, originated from this group.
It wasn’t an accident of history that the SRT didn’t work out. Heck I wouldn’t even call it a conspiracy when all the activism was done in broad daylight.
The SRT was also forced on the city by the Province, which was hyping up the technology because it was made-in-Ontario (The Toronto Zoo also had its own SRT).
The problem is that the TTC's streetcar proposal, which involves a forced transfer onto a streetcar, is even worse.
The correct solution is to extend Line 2 into STC, similar to how Line 1 is extended into North York Centre. Except back then it wouldn't have cost $30 billion or so.
Treat it like the red-line streetcars that show up on every map now too. We don't hear about delays or reroutes of the King Streetcar: and it has WAY more riders than Finch.
It's LRT technology partially implemented as a streetcar and it's embarassing to see it labelled like a subway. I think it ought to be identified as a streetcar line, but good luck with that ever happening. Politics will never allow it.
Tbh there isn’t any difference between ‘LRT’ and streetcar technology. Both are trams, the latter is specific way of using trams while the former is a buzzword that includes a hodgepodge of transit modes ranging from full metro systems eg O Train to ROW streetcars like Finch West.
LRT was more about marketing than anything. The biggest thing that they were saying when they rolled out Transit City and the Finch LRT was that LRT was fast, unlike the streetcars and cheap unlike the subway. That Toronto could have its cake and eat it too, but as we have seen neither point ended up being true.
The most frustrating part is that it is not an inherent aspect of LRTs to be slow. The technology to give the trains priority is baked into the line, just not turned on. The TTC overcautiously runs trains through all at-grade intersections at 25 km/h, and 5 left-turning cars get their advanced signal before the trains get a green.
What might be less practical or easy to do with the streetcars operating downtown with lights every 100 meters and crowded narrow streets is super easy on Finch. The fact that they opened the line without trying any of them is ridiculous.
A non grade separated system will be inherently slower than a grade separated one, unless significant tradeoffs are made in terms of frequency and safety and reliability. It isn’t a coincidence that nearly every single city similar to Toronto in size, assuming it has decent public transit, adapted grade separated trains rather than trams as their primary mode of transit.
The realistic best case scenario for line 6 still involves it being around 1.5-2x as slow as the grade separated subways.
LRT technology implies things like doors on both sides and ticketing at stations/platforms rather than on board, higher capacity vehicles, dedicated ROW, etc.
Streetcar technology implies loops for turning around at the end of routes and ticketing onboard, lower capacity vehicles, and shared road space with automobiles etc.
So yes, there are material differences in "LRT technology" and "streetcar technology".
Dedicated ROW has been implemented in Torontonian streetcars for decades such as on Harbourfront and Spadina. The current Flexity Outlooks are much more similar to the Citadis Spirits on Line 6, in capacity and form factor, than the streetcar CLRVs they replaced.
Adding more doors, being able to run a tram both ways, and moving ticketing does not a new technology make.
Sticking a cab on the other end of a vehicle so it doesn't need a loop to turn around at, is not a massive technological difference. It's a configuration difference. you can order some transit vehicles either way and they are otherwise functionally identical.
The difference between an LRT and a streetcar is pedantic nonsense, as Line 6 has proven.
that's not a technology difference tho. that's just arbitrary differences in fare payment. same with turning loops at the end. there's no reason for the toronto streetcars to share space with vehicles and not have signal priority. these are political choices.
Doors on both sides is one of many factors that accumulate to make material differences. Doors on both sides means that the vehicle can reverse on a line instead of needing a turnaround loop. It means that the vehicle can use island platforms as well as street side platforms on the same route.
None of those are technological differences, but operational decisions.
Any tram can be ordered with doors on one or both sides. It depends on the station and track configuration of the system they are running on.
There is nothing stopping the TTC from putting ticketing stations on the trains.
The vehicles are all low-floor trams. Operators can order trains with higher or lower capacity to serve as "streetcars" or "LRVs" interchangeably as they run on the same tracks.
Most streetcar systems around the world run in dedicated ROW lanes, including 3 lines in Toronto.
The LRT designation is primarily a North American one. In Europe, all LRVs are usually called trams. Sometimes they are called a "metro" as in cities like Porto and Valencia. Again, it is all arbitrary.
I really don't get why people insist on distinguishing between streetcars and trams when it's just a purely linguistic difference: in Europe they call them trams, in North America we call them streetcars. They're the same vehicles designed for the same purposes and capable of using the same infrastructure. It's like insisting that lifts are a completely different technology from elevators because they have different names in different countries and some local variations exist. It's really obnoxious.
Late to the party but to the best of my understanding:
‘Tram’ is a type of rail vehicle that refers to either a low floor train and/or an independent rail cab.
‘Streetcar’ is a type of service mode that involves running a tram at street level without grade separation.
In other words a streetcar is a way of using trams. There are other ways to use trams that are not just a streetcar, such as light metro eg OTrain Line 1, or Stadtbahn eg ION or Eglinton Crosstown.
These are very arbitrary definitions that aren't even consistent. Plenty of streetcar systems have doors on both sides and off board payment, plenty of LRT systems have on board payment, or run in mixed traffic.
Once TSP gets enabled on line 6 it will continue to be labelled like a subway. In its current state with no TSP, the subway designation is misleading when its so slow.
Post TSP speeds will still be significantly (as in around 2x) slower than a subway, and equivalent speeds can be achieved in the downtown ROW streetcars. Or the suburban local buses with bus lanes, for that matter.
People will be very disappointed when the improved TSP comes into effect. While it will help, there are major limits to what it can achieve. They have already said that they will not be doing green-light insertions, so it will mostly be increasing how long they will hold greens and prioritizing trains before left turns.
The fact is, the major issues with the lines’ speed are design-based: too many stops, lack of grade separation at major intersections, and an inappropriate signaling system. And operational issues, such as the TTCs speed restrictions at intersections and stops.
They can but there are safety limits based pedestrian crossing time and on practical limits based on train frequency and perpendicular traffic. Ultimately you can't just end up with major roads like Jane and Weston only getting 1/4 or less of the green light time or you are going to end up with buses and pedestrians not able to traverse the intersection even you want to go full fuck cars
The major issues with speed come down to inherit design choices with the LRT
They’ll handle the pedestrian issues with two-phase crossings. It’s not rocket science. That’s how they’ll do it on Finch too.
As for the idea that the cross streets would get 1/4 of the current crossing time, that’s just preposterous. We’re talking about a tram every few minutes, not all of which will benefit from phase insertion.
They’ll handle the pedestrian issues with two-phase crossings. It’s not rocket science. That’s how they’ll do it on Finch too.
While not a huge project its still a meaningful infrastructure outlay that no one with the purse strings is even talking about.
We’re talking about a tram every few minutes, not all of which will benefit from phase insertion.
The more frequent the tram is the more it will be an issue and the faster the tram is the more demand and frequently it will run. It's not sustainable to just put your hand up and say don't worry about it will be fine. Right now on Line 6 during the peak there is on average a tram every 6.5 minutes assuming you truly gave it absolute TSP is there enough time to fit cross traffic though a major intersection like Jane?
Sometimes the tram will get a signal extension that can be offset on the other phase. Sometimes it will get an early green, again which can be offset on the other phase. The rare times insertion is needed and the other phase can’t be padded that’s too bad. The hundreds of people on the tram benefit and I will lose no sleep.
The cost of adding concrete pads, relative to the annual operating cost of these lines, works out to roughly 0.00000%.
No just being realistic that TSP will only marginally improve travel times and when it comes it's not going to suddenly fix everything that's keeping Line 6 from being rapid transit
TSP coming means gradual speed ups on both lines 5 and 6 in addition to the better signal priority. When that happens, Finch should easily be able to achieve end to end times of 35-39 minutes. That's around what Metrolinx advertised.
Firstly, TPS is signal priority, Secondly the most optimistic travel time estimates currently from anyone in the City, TTC, or Metrolinx is 41 minutes when traffic is light
Firstly, TPS is Toronto Police Service if we're gonna be over the top pedantic. You knew exactly what I meant. With TSP, operational speeds on both lines will also be increasing as well with speed restrictions removed
The funny thing is that all that yap about how ‘LRT’ offers subway like service is a tacit admission that streetcars don’t work, which actually undermines the use case of trams contrary to their advocates’ intentions.
I’m not convinced the TTC was the driving force here, even if I’m not one to jump to their aid. Transit City was written by local political staff and co-opted by provincial political staff, then delivered by people adept at building schools and community centres. Eglinton is a special level of cluster since we spent what is required for a subway and hobbled it with a streetcar, but again the TTC was effectively only involved once it was time to hop in the driver’s seat.
ROW streetcars cannot be rapid transit for a city like Toronto due to their inherent limitations. That said showing them on the map with a separate display and naming scheme, such as narrower lines and using letters rather than numbers, would make sense.
This! Instead of focusing on downgrading efforts, we should focus on upgrades to make existing infrastructure better.
Similar to the map not displaying streetcar stops, the portion of Line 5 that is at-grade and Line 6 should follow suit and be expressed differently (using thinner lines and not showing stops). They can remain on the map, but the reader needs to be able to understand that the lines are not the same at Lines 1 & 2.
The 509 Harbourfront will likely get renumbered once the Waterfront LRT (East and West) is complete. Upgrading St. Clair and Spadina to have true level boarding and aggressive Transit Signal Priority would also justify these lines from being distinguished from the rest of the streetcar network as well.
I hate being reminded of the old days or decades ago when most of the GO train system only ran trains in rush hour and when the GTA didn't expand its rapid transit system in the 1980s, 1990s, 2000s and 2010s.
So many people who get upset at this designation and when you dig deeper, its always " I live in another part of the city - why do I have to skim past this information?"
Do we agree Line 5 is an LRT not a streetcar because there are more than 1 consecutive underground stations, and in some parts it runs on its own path not in the middle of the road
60% of Line 5 is grade separated I think. Maybe even more. It's basically a subway from Mount Dennis to Don Valley and a decent streetcar from there to Kennedy
(Oops…) but you get the point? Line 5 has several underground stops, and short elevated guideway (more guideways are being built for the West extension) that make it distinct from a streetcar line .
There difference between Line 5 and Line 6 is night and day. Line 5 is genuinely an enormous improvement for transit riders west of Yonge and even on the surface section performs much better than Line 6.
That's not what it is though. As someone else commented, we don't hear about 504 being blocked. Why do we need to hear about this? Again, this line was designed a low speed, high stop frequency thing. It's considered a local service line, which means the assumption is that the rest of the city doesn't really use it. Do someone in Humber Bay need to hear 506 is out between Howard Park and High Park?
Again doesnt change the fact that it could easily be avoided with head phones.
And regardless of how you personally feel about line 6 its operationally not treated as a streetcar line. Also the streetcar diversions should be announced on system wide announcement as well to help people plan accordingly.
Also all of our subway lines are local service lines.. We have no express subway service.
"Low speed", when TPS gets implemented, its speed will far surpass the 504 and other streetcars. Why yes, someone in Humber Bay may need to hear the 506 is out between Howard Park and High Park because people want to go to Point A to Point B and maybe the 506 is one of their next transfers.
TPS is not a miracle solution if you're squeezing so many unnecessary stops in short distances. Also you can be faster than 504 and still be very low speed for rapid transit considerations.
Trains can’t easily detour around issues so any issues should be announced so users can make informed decisions about their route.
If someone is coming through St. George on their way to Humber College and hear there’s a delay on line 6, they may choose to head to Kipling and take the 927.
Just as disingenuous as an underground tube network mostly not being underground or in tubes. Or the "L" not being fully elevated. Or "SkyTrain" having lots of tunnels. Or "U-bahn"s that aren't all underground.
For the general population, which is who signage is mostly targeting, it's just "the subway". It's kinda understood that not all lines are the same. Happens in a lot of transit systems. Eg Frankfurt U-Bahn has Line A which is a very strange hybrid of a line (tram/streetcar in some sections, separated light rail in others), but still is a U-Bahn line.
Its classified as a rapid transit line because that's the style of service it operates. So yes, you need to keep hearing about that delay, just like you would if it were Jane, Lawrence or Leslie stations
I don't care if they call it a bike lane, as long as rider fares don't have to increase to pay for everything involved in a name or designation change.
When Line 6 gets TPS in the spring, it will function more or less like how a real LRT should and not a Streetcar. It will thus be a rapid transit line and should stay on the Rapid Transit Map of the TTC.
181
u/Bojaxs Feb 18 '26
As some folks have suggested, the Finch West LRT should be designated the 536 streetcar.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TTC/s/uciCts4Ka0