Toronto and Chicago, A Tale of Two Cities - Part 1: Rapid Transit
In the first edition of a tale of two cities, we compare the TTC Subway with the Chicago L.
In today’s subscriber exclusive article, we’ll be kicking off the “A Tale of Two Cities” series by comparing the rapid transit system in Toronto — the TTC Subway, and in Chicago — the El. The comparison will dive into the systems as they are today, their expansion and rebuild plans, and how both cities can work to turn their “middle-tier” rapid transit systems into globe-leading ones.
You might notice that this comparison is really weighted towards the future. One one hand, that’s because it’s where the divergence between the subway and the El are the greatest, but it’s also because neither system has all that interesting of a recent past. The TTC Subway has only added Line 4 with its 5 stations, and the York subway extension with its 6 since 2000 — by comparison, the El has not built any truly new stations since 2000, only rebuilt/consolidated/relocated stations since (though Washington/Wabash is an excellent station).
Where the cities today are:
As of October 2023, the Chicago El has a total of 145 stations across 165 kilometres (103 miles) of track, meanwhile the TTC Subway has less than half the stations and mileage with just 70 stations along 70 kilometres (44 miles) of track. Despite this, the El is currently moving approximately 400,000 riders per weekday while the Subway moves nearly 1 million — both down from their pre-pandemic peaks, with Chicago down further than Toronto.
To some extent, Toronto makes up for its significantly lower trackage with larger trains — while Chicago runs a number of train lengths across its system, which can be up to around the approximately 140m (460ft) of a 6-car Toronto Subway train, many trains are not this long. At the same time, Toronto Subway cars at 3.1m (10ft) wide are a fair bit more spacious than the roughly 2.7m (8.8ft) wide stock on the El. Toronto also tends to run a more service historically — usually every 5 minutes or better even late into the night, partly aided by the fact that both major lines have their own route through downtown, whereas in Chicago a number of lines share space on the loop (though Chicago does have two downtown “subways” carrying the Red and Blue lines).
Another big distinguishing factor are the massive bus terminals that exist at many suburban Subway stations — while such terminals do exist at some El stations, the TTC terminals tend to be larger, and some are even underground or multilevel. More importantly, suburban bus service in Toronto is radically
better than in Chicago. That frequent grid of bus service means you can get to any corner of the city at any hour of day or night, and the incredible amount of people transferring from convenient buses onto and off of trains at major suburban terminals all day and night means that Subway trains are often busy even leaving the last station of the line. This, along with the larger trains and the high frequency, is how Toronto manages to move more than twice as many people on its system every day.
I also do think that Toronto has a few hidden “structural” advantages that aren’t necessarily discussed all that often. While both Toronto and Chicago effectively have downtown “loops” (with Toronto’s being formed by the downtown portion of Line 1 south of its intersection with Line 2), Toronto’s downtown is much larger than the loop in Chicago (which would stretch roughly from Union to Dundas in Toronto): the Subway loop encompasses about 7 square kilometres (4 square miles) compared to the loop in Chicago at about 3 square kilometres (2 square miles). That gives the subway a lot more relevance for intra-centre trips. It also means a huge number of students studying at major universities between Dundas and Bloor, as well as workers at the government precinct east of Queens Park, the several major hospitals along University avenue, and at the offices along Bloor street who arrive into the city at Union on a suburban train will use the subway in the counter-peak direction to get to work or school. Toronto has also done a pretty good job locating major event venues downtown and malls throughout the city (many not requiring an outdoor walk to connect to) close to subway stations. This keeps Toronto’s loop very busy at all times, and a significant part of the TTC’s expansion capital is going to upgrading stations along it to increase capacity.
There’s also the fact that while both networks appear to be highly radial, the decision to build the central section of Subway Line 2 along Bloor as opposed to Queen as was once proposed significantly reduces how downtown centric the Toronto Subway is. To put it in perspective, Line 2 is over 3.5km (>2 miles) from Toronto’s waterfront, while the western half of the loop is only about 1.5km (<1 mile) from the lakeshore. That has a huge impact on the usefulness of Line 2 for non-commute crosstown trips — especially when combined with Toronto’s buses, which is only going to be more of an asset in a less “peaky” future.
That being said, I do think the Chicago El has some serious network value. With so much above ground infrastructure (the Subway is 80% below ground) the El is very visible, including to drivers stuck in traffic on a number of expressways. The many branches also put more people and destinations within a short walk or cycle of train service, mitigating for the worse bus service in Chicago. I also think it shouldn’t be overlooked that Chicago has connected both of its major airports to its rapid transit system — while Toronto Pearson, Canada’s largest airport, still has no electric rail connection. The El also obviously is famous and despite actually moving less people than Toronto’s system, a key piece of how people think about Chicago.
Now, before I talk about the future, I want to rapid fire off a few smaller elements of both systems that are worth noting. Chicago has a few elements of its much larger American sibling the New York City Subway that certainly make this Torontonian jealous, including quad-track express services on the north side (with a new flyover for the Brown line being the cherry on top) and 24/7 service on the Blue and Red lines (Toronto only has 24/7 service a few times a year for things like New Years).
Toronto in my opinion has better trains — the Toronto Rockets in particular feel much more modern than anything in Chicago with their light, fully walkthrough design and streamlined cabs. And better yet, these new trains are fully CBTC-compatible, allowing them to operate reliably at extremely high frequency on Line 1, which has had its signalling totally overhauled over the last several years. Toronto also deserves points for keeping its trains and system as a whole significantly cleaner and in better shape. I’d also say that the stations seen in Toronto feel much more modern — many in Chicago feature wooden platforms (though the really unique blue platform edges are neat, they also go against the logic behind the yellow edge — high contrast), and very dark and column-filled designs (admittedly in part because of age), as well as old-timey features like turnstiles that Toronto has almost entirely ditched in favour of modern faregates.
On accessibility, both systems disappoint. Chicago has around 70% (100) of its stations full accessible, while Toronto has 78% (54) of its. Toronto wins here though, because all other stations should be finished being upgraded for full accessibility in the next three years — making it a fully step-free system (and the TTC has done a pretty solid job with installing thoughtful design elements like forward motion elevators that don’t require wheelchair users to back out of elevators).
Expansion Plans
Now, the section you’ve all been waiting for — let’s talk expansion plans! The plans I’ve included are for projects that are fully funded or under construction, because otherwise there’s just too much risk of shifting plans.
Unfortunately for Chicago, there’s basically just one — the Red Line extension that has received most of the funding it needs to go ahead. This project would be a 9-kilometre (5.6 miles) southern extension of the Red line to the south that would add four stations. While this project is good and has been long promised, it’s not all that significant, and there are no other expansion projects on the table — even though many would clearly be hugely beneficial.
To be fair, there is another major project currently happening on the El, and that’s the Red Purple modernization which is rebuilding sections track and stations on the elevated quad track route to the north of the city. This project will mean a number of vastly improved stations, new modern concrete viaducts and more reliable infrastructure - and it probably heralds things to come for other aging El lines. While this project will bring a lot of significant improvements to riders it essentially just modernizes existing infrastructure.
By comparison, Toronto has a lot of expansion projects underway, including several extensions and new lines.
For one, the much delayed Line 5 Eglinton is finally nearing the finish line. While the project has been delayed time and again, the infrastructure is clearly nearly entirely complete and testing is slowly ramping up. Line 5 is a light rail line with capacity for up to 90-metre (300ft) trains that will have 15 subway style stations and 10 surface stops over a 19-kilometre (11 mile) route. As you can see, despite the heavy light rail branding, most of Line 5 will look and feel like a subway. The line is going to be hugely valuable as an “crosstown” service that allows cross city travel without skimming across downtown, and it will connect to the existing subway at 3 underground interchanges as well as to 3 modernized suburban rail lines.
For me, probably the most exciting part of Line 5 besides its enormous transit value is that this is the first significant new subway line Toronto has had since the 1960s (sorry Line 4). That means Toronto is going to have a line that opens with line-wide digital wayfinding, cellular and wifi service, full accessibility, and large modern consistent station designs line-wide. While I’ve complained a lot about the fact that the line is light rail and not a full subway as was planned decades ago, it will still be hugely beneficial and capacity constraints might make for interesting modifications to the line and its vehicles. On the whole, it’s a very positive project.
And then there is Line 3, the Ontario Line. This project is already under serious construction in Toronto’s downtown core, and we’ve also already seen renders of the excellent looking new trains.
In a lot of ways, the Ontario line feels un-North American, because it basically adopts a rational globalized approach to subway building. The rolling stock will be a more or less standard subway train model from Hitachi that will be fully-automated (with platform screen doors at stations), powered by standard 1500 V DC overhead lines, and running on standard gauge tracks. The route will also spend 40% of its 16-kilometre (9.7 mile) length above ground — double that of the existing subway network, allowing tight interchanges with suburban trains with an “up-and-over” transfer, and cost savings on stations of which there will be 15. There is really no other subway line in North America like this, and the closest comparators internationally are probably the latest lines in Santiago and those on the Grand Paris Express.
The Ontario line’s role in the network is multifaceted. For one, it will give Toronto a second “downtown” subway route to relieve congestion on the Yonge portion of Line 1. Moreover, the line will enhance system redundancy, connect major destinations that aren’t currently on the network to the subway — such as the Exhibition Grounds, Queen West, and King East, and significantly enhance transit connectivity with interceptions of the GO Lakeshore Line on both sides of downtown Toronto, not to mention four subway interchange stations. If there was another line I’d compare the Ontario Line, to it would be London’s Victoria Line (which is also blue), another centre-city subway line built relatively recently (okay, 1960s… recent for London) that makes a ton of connections and is very heavily used. I really think the Ontario line will be the thing that pushes Toronto’s subway network size up large enough to the point where the city feels like it is really well connected — and I think the positive impacts of it will be huge.
There are also two major extensions to the subway network already well under construction.
The first of these is the extension of Line 2 east and then north over 8 kilometres (5 miles) with three stations. This extension will finally bring the proper subway to Scarborough Centre and replace much of the functionality of the now defunct Line 3 Scarborough RT that the Ontario Line stole its number from. It also sets us up nicely for an extension of Line 4 east to either Sheppard and McCowan, or my preferred option of Scarborough Centre (where all the action is). I actually think this plan is significantly better than the former one-stop subway plan with the new station at Lawrence connecting to a major hospital site, and the station at Sheppard significantly improves subway access to north Scarborough. From a transit nerd point of view the line is also very interesting, because it is the first case of a line in Toronto using a single tunnel bore for both tracks (even if it probably shouldn’t).
The second extension, and the one I’d argue is flying under the radar is that of Line 5 Eglinton (which, remember, hasn’t opened) west 7 stops along 9.2-kilometres (6 miles) of track. This extension will be partly elevated (adding another lovely river crossing to the TTC Subway) and below ground, effectively extending the “subway” portion of Line 5 from 15 to 22 stations. What’s more is that there is a pretty obvious extension just 4.7-kilometres (2.9 miles) longer right to Pearson airport being planned, which would add another couple stations (taking the total number of subway stations to around 25), and finally extend electric rail to the airport. The interim terminus of Renforth will also be very useful for passengers connecting to the Mississauga Transitway, a busway connecting to Downtown Mississauga.
I mentioned how Chicago has done some nice rebuilds of elevated stations recently earlier in the article, and so I thought it only made sense to mention that Toronto is also doing major expansions of a few subway stations, including King and College. But the most significant of these is the Bloor-Yonge station expansion, which will add a new second platform for Line 2, significantly increase circulation space, upgrade ventilation, visually remodel the station, and add platform screen doors on the Line 1 platforms in the first retrofit either city has done — essentially making Toronto’s busiest interchange stations a totally modern, high-capacity, world-standard subway station.
I would also be remiss if I didn’t at least make mention of the significant new light rail projects being built in Toronto and the GTHA region (more or less the equivalent of Chicagoland). While I think light rail projects often are treated as substitutes for badly-needed subway and rapid transit projects in Canada and the US, only some of the Toronto region’s projects fall into that trap. Even with that in mind, light rail lines will obviously expand capacity and make transit more attractive along their respective corridors. Two 18-stop lines are currently under construction, including one connecting directly to the TTC Subway Line 1 on Finch Avenue West, and another on Hurontario Street in Mississauga and Brampton, satellite cities to the west of Toronto. There’s also the existing 16-stop ION light rail line that runs in Waterloo Region — which isn’t really in the GTHA, but certainly is in Toronto’s orbit.
I should also say that these are only the projects current under serious construction in Toronto. There are a lot more in the planning phase that could quickly jump into major construction — including light rail in Hamilton, a new waterfront streetcar line, an extension of Line 1 north, and extensions of Line 4 east and possibly also west.
When you look at how much transit is being built in Toronto when compared to Chicago, at the end of the decade the TTC subway should have roughly 70% as many stations as the El, compared to less than 50% today, and many of those stations will be dramatically nicer and more modern. This is also before you consider the additional surface light rail stops across the city and the region, the streetcar network in the old city, and the frequent suburban train services. In short, Chicago needs to get back to building (which I will talk more about in the next section)!
While I know this section might have felt like I was rubbing the lack of expansion in Chicago’s face, I really want to make a point — Chicago is a city with a GDP more than double that of Toronto’s and a level of international cache that far exceeds its neighbour to the north. Chicago can and should be doing far more to grow its transit, and arguably its population given it is one of the last great transit cities in the US that remains relatively affordable. Plans for expansion need to be bold and extensive ,and they also should be advancing multiple things at once. For example, the Red line extension could absolutely have platform screen doors or gates!
The Gaps:
With the clear gap between Toronto and Chicago’s rapid transit expansion initiatives out of the way, it’s worth considering the gaps that still exist within each rapid transit system.
Obviously Toronto ought to expedite the extension of Line 5 all the way to Pearson airport, but I’d argue it probably should also extend the subway where sensible to major hubs in the 905. For example, an extension of Line 2 into Mississauga and the long planned extension of Line 1 to Richmond Hill, while expensive, would have hugely positive environmental impacts — even when just considering the large number of buses they’d replace.
Chicago arguably has even more work to do building new rapid transit, because while its network has many branches, travelling between them requires a trip into and back out of downtown. The introduction of new orbital lines — perhaps one a full El line further out and one light rail route closer to the centre — would not only be valuable as routes themselves, but they would enhance the entire network. Chicago should also invest a significant amount in its existing network — installing less expensive to maintain modern CBTC signalling, rebuilding more stations completely, and improving and expanding bus terminals and interchanges. This reinvigorated physical infrastructure should also be paired with dramatically more service, an every 5 minutes until late at night model just like Toronto should be adopted — with shorter trains deployed if necessary. I’d also suggest moving towards a TTC-style bus network over 5-10 years (training many additional operators and substantially increasing the bus fleet takes time) — that enhanced service would connect far more people to the El, shorten trip times (less waiting), and improve affordability.
Speaking of trains, both cities can and should dramatically improve the trains they run on their rapid transit. The latest designs of Chicago El and TTC Subway trains both feel quite dated, and inspiration should be taken from modern train models like the Hitachi Metro trains set to run on the Ontario Line. Trains should have better provision for accessibility, fully-walkthrough designs, lots of digital wayfinding to enhance the passenger experience, Wifi connectivity, onboard charging, and more. A lot of these quality-of-life features are pretty minor additional costs when building a train, but they seriously enhance the passenger experience, and they are what set the newest trains in cities like London apart from those operating today in Toronto or Chicago.
Regarding operations, I actually think both cities should have 24-hour service, but given how networks around the world operate, I think it would probably be wise to simply aim for 24-hour service on weekend nights only, with strong night bus replacements on other nights. Systems from Australia to Germany do this, and I think it works well. It’s worth remembering that a night bus is often a better experience than a train at night because you can have more frequent service, there tends to be little congestion, and you can often also minimize the need to transfer. This maintains lots of time for maintenance on weeknights, and captures a large chunk of the night travel market on weekends. In Toronto, this could be something done system-wide, while in Chicago it could apply to the routes that don’t currently have 24 hour service. In both cases I think a frequency of roughly every 20 minutes overnight is probably a good balancing point between cost and service frequency while also keeping traffic low enough that some maintenance activities might still be able to occur. New lines and infrastructure as well as upgrades should incorporate the flexibility (being able to turn track power off individually for example) and safety separation that makes 24-hour operation easier.
Passenger experience improvements can and should also extend to stations, and a good place to get ideas are the world’s great transit systems like those in Seoul, London, and Madrid. One thing I really appreciated in London from my trip last year was the much better ticket machines (for those still purchasing tickets) with options for modern payment methods and bit brighter touch screens, as well as large and bright LED screens along with announcements. A much appreciated feature of the Seoul subway besides the excellent internet connectivity are accessibility features like lots of tactile paving and free public washrooms. Of course, I also just think total remodels of stations with nicer materials and new benches, wayfinding screens, and waste receptacles is also a good idea — especially for old and heavily-used stations, providing basically the experience of a new station from an existing asset.
Given both Toronto and Chicago have relatively old “core” networks — both cities really should become masters of retrofitting new transit technology. I already mentioned screen doors and gates, and there is no reason both cities should not have 100% coverage with these as a stated goal, even if a rollout will take years. Of course, to some extent, platform screen door deployment depends on modern signalling, and so moving to CBTC progressively on more and more lines and possibly also unattended train operation (UTO) or driverless trains probably also makes sense. For Toronto, UTO could create significant operational savings given the intensity of service operated (which could be reinvested into any number of things) and in Chicago UTO would remove a major excuse for not running more service (and before you say retrofitting lines as old as those on the El to automated operation is inconceivable — Paris did it on the similarly-old Line 1 with great success!)
So with that we have part 1! Keep your eyes peeled for part 2 which will be on the cities’ local transit today, tomorrow, and how things could be even better!
Great read. While I appreciate the visibility of Chicago's numerous above-ground stations, it makes for a brutal experience in the winter months, and not much better in the peak of summer (not to mention the highway median stations). Toronto does a much better job of providing shelter at its outdoor stations, and its sub-surface connectivity to surrounding buildings, especially the PATH network, is enviable (much better than Chicago's Pedway).
Why do you think that the Scarborough extension should not have used a single-bore tunnel?