Hasn't Monroe Street been developed over the years with very minimal utilities underneath it, for the very purpose of a future transitway?

Whoa.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-b...?id=38143&ba=1

That's the story anyway but they never actually know what will turn up once they start moving dirt.

The 1990s iteration of the distributor plan (the "circulator") used street-running light rail -- I forget if the final routing was down Monroe or Madison, but I'm pretty sure it was Madison -- which could operate fairly quickly and efficiently if coupled with intelligent traffic signal systems. Much more affordable than subway construction, but still not cheap, as obviously there'd still be the issue of the river; I seem to remember a figure in the $700 million range, which would put the present day cost at around double.

In the meantime, we can think about what might have been, circa 1965....
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...tor_Subway.jpg

EDIT: the cross-loop routing was down Madison, with the north/south artery being State Street; north of the river, the line extended north along Wabash, and there was the Carroll Ave component that then continued along Grand/Illinois to Navy Pier. Lines extended along lower Randolph and Columbus to service Illinois Center, and to the south, the line turned from State to Roosevelt, then south along Indiana to serve McCormick Place. The yard was to be at the end of a southward extension of the Canal/Clinton route, located a bit south of Roosevelt. Along with the LRT routes, there were a few planned complimentary bus routes to fill in holes in the distribution capability of the LRT, such as a bus circulator to northern Streeterville. Total capital cost was $689 million in 1994. The plan completed alternatives analysis and final EIS, being at the preliminary engineering stage before being killed.

all of this has essentially remained intact in the long term city planning for 60 years, of course its just shifted from heavy rail (1960s) -> light rail (1990s)-> BRT (currently).

I am always happy to see new transit service and would like to see more. I'd love to see a circle line and Clinton subway.

That being said, transit isn't a contest where the city with the most lines wins. I feel that way sometimes, but it's an emotional response due to my chauvinistic feelings for my city. Transit is about quality of life for it's residents and making cities work. If we want to make our city work better via transit, building a bunch of new rail lines probably isn't the first thing on our list. It's making transit work better in the areas that already have good rail service. We should encourage denser development and discourage car use near rail stops on the Blue, Pink and Green lines and try to make transit more attractive to people who already have access to it. We should build dedicated bike lanes separated from traffic. We should build high-quality BRT/streetcars going North-South on the West side of the city and East-West on the North and South sides of the city.

Here are my personal development priorities: 1) Any transit solutions that makes getting around the central area easier, this makes taking transit to the central area more attractive and the whole system benefits. 2) Increased development density and improved transit quality along the existing system. 3) Low-cost, high impact improvements like BRT (*good* BRT) and attractive, safe bike lanes. 4) Circle Line and a South Lake Shore line.

What? Thats looking to the East from Chase Plaza. That is Inland Steel building with the green and silver.

Inland Steel is in the background. The building on the right side, in front of the Xerox Center, is a modern glassy tower on the site of Italian Village.

Yes, and then Xerox is to Inland's right (catercorner), and Italian Village, just west of Xerox, is gone (as is the whole corner lot, with the weather bell thing).
Its replacement reminds me of Harris Bank, but that's further west, so I still wish Pandemonius would let us in on his mystery.

Oh I see what you are talking about...

Didn't the city say it wanted to buy the Bell Federal Building? So it might not matter...

More El "Garden Car" information from the the guy pushing the project:

http://chicagoist.com/2010/05/12/chi...ldwin_an_1.php

This is just a plain bone-headed idea on several levels

^ It really, really is. I love installation art... when it's intelligent and well thought out. But this? Oy. The experience-- the artist writes that he wants it to "stop traffic"-- relies heavily on visual punch. But it appears the CTA is requiring that the car be covered, which sounds to me like it would make the whole thing DOA. Even if it weren't covered, plants take time to grow into their "container"/space. Maybe they would pack it full of mature specimens? Even then, I have a hard time imaging the garden would turn out as robust as it is in the renderings. The artist writes that he wants to use native plants and I can't help but think the end result may just appear to the average CTA user as a railroad car filled with dirts and weeds when it could otherwise be serving the real need for greater capacity.

Still, if it could be done on the cheap (and it does sound like an inexpensive project), sure-- give it a shot. But the artist is setting $400,000 as his fundraising goal. Wait-- what? Four hundred thousand? Really? How much did the Burnham pavilions cost? Shouldn't that amount lead to something, well... better?

And then there's the substantive question: What's the point? Is it supposed to be ironic because plants are sedentary? Is it some kind of environmentalist commentary? I don't see any hint of in-depth analysis in his interview; the guy actually sounds kind of vapid.

if he wants to raise the money on his own to pay for it, he can have whatever he wants piggybacked on the end of an El train for all I care.

IIRC, the Burnham pavilions were $5 million apiece. $400,000 isn't too much for an installation that has to withstand 55-mph travel.

Skokie Swift Oakton Station at last
 

It look long enough...

As usual, it's IDOT's fault.

Really? I thought they were 500k. Anyway, I don't think they're fabricating a car from the ground up but salvaging one. So, yes, 400k is too much, especially for the initial concept.

Ardecila, thanks for posting. When I was in town last week visiting my old stomping grounds, I was disappointed to see construction had yet to commence. I know a lot of anti-suburban forumers think this station is a waste of resources, but between downtown Skokie to the west and the relatively dense neighborhoods (where I grew up) around Oakton Park to the east, this station has a lot of potential to help revitalize the area. It will shave 20 minutes or so off the current bus commutes from downtown Skokie to the Howard station.

On a semi-related note, when I took the Skokie Swift last week, I clocked the trip from Dempster to Howard @ 7 minutes! There used to be some slow zones around downtown Skokie, but the train seemed to fly the entire way except on the Howard approach. At this speed, a commuter could potentially get from Oakton to Howard in 5-6 minutes!

Good news on the Oakton station! Hopefully it will attract news businesses, shops, & restaurants to downtown Skokie in the future.