So Is It "The Loop" Or Is It "The Circle"? (Chicago: power lines, university)

[Irishtom29]

When I'm travelling I'm thinking numbers, when I'm around town I'm thinking names or combinations of names and numbers, for instance one place I go I take the Stevenson to 294 then 294 to Ogden.

[Drover]

Originally Posted by Manigault

But you downplay the fact that there is a sense and a scheme to interstate numeration that is missing with names, such as 'the Ike'. Lower numbers are south and west, even numbers are east-west highways and three digit numbers are urban beltways.

Lower numbers are south and west doesn't even make any sense -- because they'd also be north and east. So what you're saying is that lower numbers go in all 4 directions. Additionally, 3-digit highways don't neatly correspond to urban beltways. One of the major urban beltways, the Tri-State, is on both 294, and 94, and for a small stretch, on I-80. Additionally, 190 is not a beltway.

Originally Posted by Manigault

So its easy to figure where I-55 is vis a vis I-57. Anyone can instantly know which goes to Iowa and which to Minnesota between I-80 and I-90. What's I-355? A north-south connector. Try to figure out the Reagan tollway off the top of your head!

Commuters aren't interested in which one goes to Minnesota or Iowa. Interstate travelers are. They can consult an atlas or a Garmin. Reagan Tollway, off the top of my head, is 88 from 290 out past DeKalb. How far past, I don't know, but far enough out to not need traffic reports any more.

[Manigault]

Originally Posted by Drover

Lower numbers are south and west doesn't even make any sense -- because they'd also be north and east.

No! I-95 is an east coast road and I-65 starst in Indiana. I-55 starts in IL. The north-south numbers decrease to the west! So you know I-57 is east of I-55!

Originally Posted by Drover

So what you're saying is that lower numbers go in all 4 directions.

Nope! I-90 is north of I-80! I-64 through St. Louis is south of I-70 through Indianapolis. Guess how I know that!

Originally Posted by Drover

Commuters aren't interested in which one goes to Minnesota or Iowa. Interstate travelers are.

If I-55 has a major accident where will I-57 put you on I-80? A commuter may wanna know.

Once you figure out the interstate numbering system, its like the Chicago street numbers -- instinctive.

[icebergsyndrome]

Originally Posted by Manigault

Once you figure out the interstate numbering system, its like the Chicago street numbers -- instinctive.

Yes but, as has already been said, this is much less useful for commuters than it is for interstate travellers.

[A2DAC1985]

I'm not a fan of traffic. I loathed it back where I used to live. Even though the traffic in Chicago is like 10 times worse, I can stand it because I know that the slow downs are due partly, if not totally, to the sheer volume of people using the interstates. And I don't drive that often now.

What I'm getting at is this: I hate the electronic signs that tell you how long it's going to take to get somewhere. On one particular visit to Chicago we were coming in on the Dan Ryan and passed on of the electronic signs that said "12 minutes to the Circle". I didn't know what the "Circle" was, but I figured 12 minutes to get there didn't seem too bad. After about 30 minutes of crawling along we pass another electronic sign that said "12 minutes to the Circle".

In summation: Don't lie to me electronic signs. If you aren't going to tell the truth, don't tell me anything.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by A2DAC1985

I'm not a fan of traffic. I loathed it back where I used to live. Even though the traffic in Chicago is like 10 times worse, I can stand it because I know that the slow downs are due partly, if not totally, to the sheer volume of people using the interstates. And I don't drive that often now.

What I'm getting at is this: I hate the electronic signs that tell you how long it's going to take to get somewhere. On one particular visit to Chicago we were coming in on the Dan Ryan and passed on of the electronic signs that said "12 minutes to the Circle". I didn't know what the "Circle" was, but I figured 12 minutes to get there didn't seem too bad. After about 30 minutes of crawling along we pass another electronic sign that said "12 minutes to the Circle".

In summation: Don't lie to me electronic signs. If you aren't going to tell the truth, don't tell me anything.

You know, they can't predict the future. All they can really do is tell you how long it took some other car ahead of you to do it sometime recently.

You also need to be careful to watch the right signs. The have "X minutes to the Circle" signs for both the local lanes and the express lanes and often the timing is different.

[A2DAC1985]

Originally Posted by emathias

You know, they can't predict the future. All they can really do is tell you how long it took some other car ahead of you to do it sometime recently.

You also need to be careful to watch the right signs. The have "X minutes to the Circle" signs for both the local lanes and the express lanes and often the timing is different.

I know that there are sensors in the road that can track speed and through some computer calculation they can come up with a travel time to where ever. So the travel time is not set in stone. Not a problem.

I just find it laughable that the sign will give a time (not designated as local or express) and then 3 miles and 30 minutes later the sign will give the same time once again (not designated as local or express). To me that is like saying "It's going to rain today!" everyday, and eventually you will be right. Just save your breath and save some electricity.

Sidenote: If you want to check traffic before you hit the road go to sigalert.com

[sunnyandcloudydays]

Originally Posted by Manigault

Well, radio announcers use several terms or art. Do you know the identity of 'the junction' or 'Hubbard's cave'? Those are terms for commuters -- not tourists.

Actually, if they used the name of one it would be more confusing, since the Elgin-O'Hare expressway goes to neither of those destinations. I think that naming highways after politicians and others is what makes directions confusing. The 'Bishop Ford'? What does that have to do with anything? It's I-94, y'all.

How about the Hillside Strangler
That is my favorite

[sunnyandcloudydays]

Originally Posted by Manigault

See what I mean? There's also the Jane Addams and the Ronald Reagan. Why can't we stick to numbers?

The system to me is pretty good
imo- the names are just segments helps to quickly id the area.


edens
ryan
bishop ford
same name but it helps commuters relate to the geographic area

[linicx]

As a freqient traveler I don't care about names or time. I care about really good route and directional signs and Chicago has it - or at least it did. OKC and Dallas both have terrible direction and route signs posted. On the other hand LA is very easy to drive through and I never had trouble driving in Chicago.