[Johnny Au]

February 8, 2026:

Train Interior at Mount Dennis Station:

LRT Entrance to EMSF:

Black Creek Drive:

Black Creek:

 

[picard102]

The yonge line is currently at capacity; I guess we should’ve built catapults?

That happened after 50 years. Not at opening.

 

[zang]

Proper signal priority doesn't make a tram run at metro level speeds, nowhere in the world I can think of where that's the case unless it's in the stroadiest of stroads where it's basically a heavy rail line anyways. Most on street tram routes cap out at 25km/h average even with strong signal priority.

Or we could put up signal gates, and much stronger enforcement of blocking the box.

If heavy rail can do level crossings at that speed, what’s truly stopping an LRT beyond “cars”?

Who? Most of the vocal advocates here use the terms metro and subway interchangeably. Subway to most people is just the North American word for metro, and doesn't actually have to be underground. The New York City "Subway" has far more above ground sections than underground.

You can click buttons, can’t you? I’m not going to systematically name users here for reasons of not being that kind of a-hole. But they’re here.

And the people complaining “Ford was right” seem to forget Ford’s “subway” was a chained LRT vehicle entirely underground. Not heavy rail.

 

[nfitz]

The cost of Line 5 has been over $13 Billion. Finch West over $3.5 Billion. I don't know where you are getting your numbers from.

I'm getting my numbers from Metrolinx's quarterly report released this week for spending through the end of 2025.

I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers - but looking at Metrolinx's numbers, it appear you have used the cost to build what they've built to date PLUS all the O&M spending for decades into the future!

Why not use the current costs for construction, rather than all the future costs?

 

[zang]

Build more subways.

Sure, and in 15+ years (gonna guess 20+ with MX) it takes to build them, we’ll have enough capacity.

Otherwise, stop with the trolling.

 

[picard102]

Sure, and in 15+ years (gonna guess 20+ with MX) it takes to build them, we’ll have enough capacity.

Are we pretending it didn't take nearly 15 years for line 5 to be built?

 

[Thaboss]

I'm getting my numbers from Metrolinx's quarterly report released this week for spending through the end of 2025.

I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers - but looking at Metrolinx's numbers, it appear you have used the cost to build what they've built to date PLUS all the O&M spending for decades into the future!

Why not use the current costs for construction, rather than all the future costs?

View attachment 714320

I'm still in awe at how expensive SSE is...unlike crosstown that figure i assume doesn't include new trains and operation is handled and funded by the ttc i presume so wouldn't be included here either? Its only meant to have three stations that appear to be nothing special architecturally....why the hell is it so expensive, seriously

 

[zang]

Are we pretending it didn't take nearly 15 years for line 5 to be built?

No, but the same level of PPP/Metrolinx incompetence can only hinder. Which is why I added 20+ for MX. For sure, we *could* do it faster, but the same people claiming the upper governments would pay for it are the same people who forget that they do things poorly.

If we want subways built quickly, it would mean the feds and the province would have to fork over money with little input and keep at arms length. And with so many photo ops and campaign stump points, that’s not going to happen in our lifetimes.

 

[DMICS]

lol: Forest Hill residents may be wondering why the entrance on the south side of Eglinton isn’t open. That’s because it’s not even connected to the station underground yet.

Station manager says the condo developer is still negotiating about the fare gates(?) so they haven’t even broken through the wall to connect to the station. Here is the section of where the entrance is supposed to connect.

View attachment 714054
View attachment 714055

Wow. You literally can’t make this sh*t up.

 

[PL1]

No, but the same level of PPP/Metrolinx incompetence can only hinder. Which is why I added 20+ for MX. For sure, we *could* do it faster, but the same people claiming the upper governments would pay for it are the same people who forget that they do things poorly.

If we want subways built quickly, it would mean the feds and the province would have to fork over money with little input and keep at arms length. And with so many photo ops and campaign stump points, that’s not going to happen in our lifetimes.

I truly do hope that Metrolinx learns from and gains some expertise in subway/transit lines building and the process of building more/extending existing improves into the future

 

[Sauga89]

On the latter, he links to a piece by Scarborough activist, past and possible future candidate for Council, Kevin Rupasinghe, here:

Improving the Eglinton LRT - Fewer Intersections

An ongoing question we'll need to answer: How do we modify the at-grade portion of the Eglinton LRT so that the experience and operations are more like the underground portion?

kevinrupasinghe.substack.com

One note on Rupasinghe's suggestion for the southbound DVP off-ramp. If you banned/blocked left turns, I feel like it would be faster for cars to get off at the Wynford exit, rather than performing a U-turn at Gervais.

You'd save 1.1 km in distance travelled, and avoid both the Gervais light and the Wynford station crosswalk light (and the northbound off-ramp light he wants to eliminate). You'd hit the Wynford exit light, the Wynford/Concorde light and the two Wynford/Eglinton lights, but perhaps those could be synchronized so you only hit one or two.

This route is also shorter than the existing left onto Eglinton from the DVP off-ramp, though I haven't timed what the comparison is.

My apologies if this has been noted before. I couldn't find anything recent in a UT search.

 

[Northern Light]

I'm still in awe at how expensive SSE is...unlike crosstown that figure i assume doesn't include new trains and operation is handled and funded by the ttc i presume so wouldn't be included here either? Its only meant to have three stations that appear to be nothing special architecturally....why the hell is it so expensive, seriously

Metrolinx is responsible for the cost of net new trains for SSE, 7 of them. These are currently structured as an optional add-on to the TTC Line 2 train contracts along with 7 trains for the YNSE. I assume they are in the Mx budget, but I don't know that.

 

[Northern Light]

One note on Rupasinghe's suggestion for the southbound DVP off-ramp. If you banned/blocked left turns, I feel like it would be faster for cars to get off at the Wynford exit, rather than performing a U-turn at Gervais.

View attachment 714327

View attachment 714328
You'd save 1.1 km in distance travelled, and avoid both the Gervais light and the Wynford station crosswalk light (and the northbound off-ramp light he wants to eliminate). You'd hit the Wynford exit light, the Wynford/Concorde light and the two Wynford/Eglinton lights, but perhaps those could be synchronized so you only hit one or two.

This route is also shorter than the existing left onto Eglinton from the DVP off-ramp, though I haven't timed what the comparison is.



My apologies if this has been noted before. I couldn't find anything recent in a UT search.

There's a discussion a few pages back ( Ha!, over 1,200 posts ago, and it was only early January) noting that the interchange at DVP actually had additional clover leaves in the remaining corners that could, in theory, be revived. Those make for lousy pedestrian and cycling conditions for people crossing fast moving traffic.

***

That discussion starts about here.

Eglinton Line 5 | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx | Arcadis

**disclaimer -- I am an amateur with a crayon that doesn't really know what he's talking about* No harm in throwing ideas out. An easier (but unrealistic since it inconveniences drivers) solution to the first section could be to simply ban left turns to/from Leslie, forcing some drivers to...

urbantoronto.ca

 

[Sauga89]

One note on Rupasinghe's suggestion for the southbound DVP off-ramp. If you banned/blocked left turns, I feel like it would be faster for cars to get off at the Wynford exit, rather than performing a U-turn at Gervais.

View attachment 714327

View attachment 714328
You'd save 1.1 km in distance travelled, and avoid both the Gervais light and the Wynford station crosswalk light (and the northbound off-ramp light he wants to eliminate). You'd hit the Wynford exit light, the Wynford/Concorde light and the two Wynford/Eglinton lights, but perhaps those could be synchronized so you only hit one or two.

This route is also shorter than the existing left onto Eglinton from the DVP off-ramp, though I haven't timed what the comparison is.

View attachment 714329

My apologies if this has been noted before. I couldn't find anything recent in a UT search.

I timed it using Google maps directions, which actually suggest the Wynford exit is faster, at least during the morning rush.

 

[Voltz]

I've seen some decent train operations from Line 5 on the surface so far, but this video here was just bad,

• Signals that changed to red just as the train was arriving or ready to go, even while the vehicle signals remained green,
• Burned a green signal at Golden Mile, there appeared to be a malfunction that caused them to wait,
• Foot prints from people walking on the tracks, and a pedestrian trying to get off the wrong end of the platform,
• Passengers waiting at the wrong end of the platform that probably weren't able to get on in time, they need to fence off the unused ends or install railings especially if passengers enter from that end.
• Several buses passing.

A lot of bad luck here

These issues can be fixed, it's really an issue of proper signal priority that can give each train a green light 9 times out of ten, not just "more aggressive priority".