[Dan416]

I rue the day that Mike Harris cancelled the Eglinton subway, which is how we got into this mess to begin with. Building subways was much cheaper back then. And we definitely overpaid for an inferior product. I still support the line we got, but a subway would have been much better I think. Subway vehicles just have so much more space versus a low floor LRT vehicle. Sometimes I think we got the worst of both worlds by spending so much on a line with so much grade separation with LRT vehicles, and it makes me worried that it'll be overcrowded, but if the usage doesn't overcrowd the LRVs then I am ok with it. TBD.

 

[GenerationLee]

I share the same concern Dan. I'm unimpressed by what product we're getting, and I genuinely don't see how an LRT will work out in the long term on Eglinton. Subways just work better in being totally seperate from street level traffic and the ability to accomodate more people, including those who are disabled, with ease. (well, I guesss accessibility is a little tougher with underground stations).
It doesn't need to be said again, but building transit like this, partly grade seperated, and partly underground, is difficult to put into service as an effective, rapid form of transit, not to mention construction complexities in weaving between different grades and establishing different engineering and design guidelines on how to construct access points, tunnels and related infrastructure.

That being said, I'm glad this is being built. I just wish there weren't so many compromises made for this line. I don't think it's inaccurate to say it's going to potentially create more problems down the line with the expansion going on westbound.

 

[urbanclient]

https://www.reddit.com/r/TTC/comments/1orce0b/this_is_fucking_ridiculous_lmao

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2025/cc/bgrd/backgroundfile-254795.pdf

According to the city, Line 5 and Line 6 will have "conditional TSP", which only works if the LRT is already late. The streetcars have a very weak form of active signal priority, called "unconditional TSP" by the city, something the LRTs somehow don't even have. Neither Line 5, Line 6, nor the streetcars have strong active signal priority/full active signal priority, which tends to include some level of signal preemption. We all know streetcars in the city, even on St. Clair are often stuck waiting for cars to turn left. And yet the city has the audacity to claim this is "unconditional" TSP, which is easily misinterpreted as real active signal priority by some people.

So to clarify, when most transit enthusiasts say X doesn't have signal priority, we mean the system(s) that always lets transit vehicles go first instead of waiting for cars to left turn etc... The system(s) where a transit vehicle approaching a red light will shorten the cycle and change it to green. None of which is implemented in Toronto, and none of which is planned to be implemented as best as I can tell. If European cities can give real priority to street-running trams, why can't Toronto at least give priority to "LRTs" running on median ROWs?

 

[T3G]

If European cities can give real priority to street-running trams, why can't Toronto at least give priority to "LRTs" running on median ROWs?

Because, with very few exceptions, we as a society don't care about transit. It is a liability, a charity service we run to tick some boxes in a bureaucrat's form. The system is working as intended.

 

[urbanclient]

I share the same concern Dan. I'm unimpressed by what product we're getting, and I genuinely don't see how an LRT will work out in the long term on Eglinton.
[...]
That being said, I'm glad this is being built. I just wish there weren't so many compromises made for this line. I don't think it's inaccurate to say it's going to potentially create more problems down the line with the expansion going on westbound.

I do think Line 5 Eglinton is definitely underbuilt for future ridership 10+ years away. Might even be overcrowded sooner.

However, I am also a big proponent of "if you build it, they will come". Since we evidently did not build it, densification like what we have seen along Bloor and south of Bloor will likely never materialize to the same level (barring a rebuild of Line 5). Ironically, this will dampen Eglinton's future transit demand and capacity issues if any. The skyscrapers along Line 4, many of which were built nearly two decades after Line 4 opened, are evidence that rapid transit access can serve as the cause rather than just the effect of densification and growth.

The long-term ramifications of having a not-so futureproof transit line on Eglinton is that it will be relegated to having a lower limit on future densification, job growth etc... Midtown NIMBYs rejoice. Once the transportation infrastructure along Eglinton becomes saturated, further urban development will move to other corridors and nodes that may have higher capacity eventually (i.e. Sheppard with extensions, Lawrence Ave if it gets a subway in the far-far-future).

Just based on current density, distance from Line 2 and Ontario line, and the fact UofT campus has 100,000 people every day, College-Carlton should have a short subway, Dundas West to Gerrard station ~9km. But because the Carlton streetcar exists, among other reasons, the corridor will not see nearly the same densification as Bloor or North York Centre. The density is lower than subway corridors, so the city is content with anemic streetcars. The streetcar is anemic, so density won't increase much. Obviously zoning comes into play as well. Low density housing near College and Carlton is rarely seen in any other city's downtown with the same density as Toronto, and likely will stay that way for the foreseeable future.

 

[Voltz]

Perhaps the TTC would handle it better, but riding starting ten years ago? not very likely. Only if the funding came ten years earlier.

The funding was in place and the construction schedule was to start opening the line in phases from 2015 to 2021, including the western extension. The Liberals intentionally stretched out the construction phases to delay spending.

 

[zang]

Subways just work better in being totally seperate from street level traffic and the ability to accomodate more people, including those who are disabled, with ease. (well, I guesss accessibility is a little tougher with underground stations).

I’ll note here that the TTC’s subway accessibility plan is about a decade past due, and by the end of this year, more than 10% of the stations still won’t have elevators. The subway line won’t be fully accessible until 2028, when Old Mill’s elevator construction is set to wrap up. That said, I expect it’ll probably be 2030, as deadlines keep getting missed.

I’ll also add that the TTC is also reliant on 3rd party landlords for the maintenance and repair of elevators to just even get down to concourse level at stations like Bloor/Yonge, Queen, Dundas and Osgoode. And so, it’s gonna generally be on those landlords’ time and dime if something fails.

Street Level, Level Entry will always be the most accessible form of transit.

 

[Vortex112]

I rue the day that Mike Harris cancelled the Eglinton subway, which is how we got into this mess to begin with. Building subways was much cheaper back then. And we definitely overpaid for an inferior product. I still support the line we got, but a subway would have been much better I think. Subway vehicles just have so much more space versus a low floor LRT vehicle. Sometimes I think we got the worst of both worlds by spending so much on a line with so much grade separation with LRT vehicles, and it makes me worried that it'll be overcrowded, but if the usage doesn't overcrowd the LRVs then I am ok with it. TBD.

It was 4 stations and also entirely missing the GO connections. I’m also disappointed we aren’t running metro-type vehicles on the Line5 that we built, but let’s not pretend that the old Eglinton West line was a great plan; or would’ve been any more successful than the Sheppard line.