Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kirkland Roundabouts

kirklandroundabouts.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 159 posts

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#21

Post by brudgers »

markdown wrote: post #9
brudgers wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can and do build them. The problem is that at intersections the normative behavior of American drivers is to queue and wait for your turn. Roundabouts assume a different behavior based on jumping the line. Thus there is a lot of unpredictability regarding other drivers due to generations of driving patterns developed in diverse regional driving cultures...many of which are distinctly not-urban. In addition, this…

Perhaps they need to start building more roundabouts on smaller intersections, and improve education in driving schools. Then give it time (decades).

The US has been building roundabouts for about 30 years.

It has a lot of intersections.

Reconfiguring intersections is expensive and disruptive. Stop signs and traffic lights take less space and are often the simplest thing that might work.

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#22

Post by WalterBright »

There's one installed a few years ago north of it where 132nd goes under the freeway. It used to have 2 lights to get through under the freeway. Now there are 2 roundabouts. I never have to wait anymore. It's a big win.

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#23

Post by tom_ »

evil-olive wrote: post #15

about the gameplay specifically: - have a mute button for the background music. - there should be a gas pedal and a brake, rather than the car going forward at a constant speed unless I hit the brakes. - the car should go straight, unless I turn. if I don't do anything near the exit of a roundabout, sometimes the "default" behavior is to exit the roundabout, sometimes it's to turn and continue within the roundabout.…

I rather agree. The layout actually looks pretty straightforward, but the controls make it annoyingly hard.

Though, in real life, people often don't look at the road markings - possibly even more true in America, where people are perhaps less familiar with the roundabout concept - and general directions of traffic flow is an issue. Perhaps driving this particular roundabout in real life might indeed turn out to be as annoying as this game is to play.

(There are a couple of straightforward-looking ones near me that, in practice, are almost impossible during busy times in specific directions. Even if your car is powerful enough to zip onto the roundabout in a tiny gap without there being a crash, now you have to not crash while making it turn...)

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#24

Post by dwd »

bobthepanda wrote: post #20
dwd wrote: post #12

That is a very basic roundabout. I was expecting by "magic" that you would have to go round some part in reverse (clockwise for US left-hand driving). This is nothing compared to the original "magic" roundabout of Swindon, Wiltshire. This interchange might have been better off using a diverging diamond interchange layout [1]. While not a roundabout they are "magic" and we should use them more often. They just look co…

it does note that it's satire. a lot of drivers in America have reflexive dislike of roundabouts. this one probably is not good for a DDI because it is also supposed to be a bus interchange for a BRT project, and the buses will stop at the roundabout level.

Probably an instance where busses need their own level/ramps.

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#25

Post by mikestew »

shawn_w wrote: post #16
dwd wrote: post #12

That is a very basic roundabout. I was expecting by "magic" that you would have to go round some part in reverse (clockwise for US left-hand driving). This is nothing compared to the original "magic" roundabout of Swindon, Wiltshire. This interchange might have been better off using a diverging diamond interchange layout [1]. While not a roundabout they are "magic" and we should use them more often. They just look co…

We have one of those diverging diamond ones in the general area too (at the I90/SR18 junction). It's interesting to drive through until you get used to it.

I hit that one a few weeks ago, having apparently not been that way in quite a while. I’m down with some roundabouts, but that intersection definitely kept me in my toes.

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#26

Post by dafelst »

I drove on this for the first time yesterday, once from 405 S to 85th W, then back on 85th E and 405 N. Super easy, the lanes are fairly nicely signed and there is ample signage. No issues at all.

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#27

Post by [deleted] »

markdown wrote: post #9
brudgers wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can and do build them. The problem is that at intersections the normative behavior of American drivers is to queue and wait for your turn. Roundabouts assume a different behavior based on jumping the line. Thus there is a lot of unpredictability regarding other drivers due to generations of driving patterns developed in diverse regional driving cultures...many of which are distinctly not-urban. In addition, this…

Perhaps they need to start building more roundabouts on smaller intersections, and improve education in driving schools. Then give it time (decades).

[deleted]

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#28

Post by loeg »

dafelst wrote: post #26

I drove on this for the first time yesterday, once from 405 S to 85th W, then back on 85th E and 405 N. Super easy, the lanes are fairly nicely signed and there is ample signage. No issues at all.

Have you done the I-90 SR 18 interchange out by Preston yet?

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#30

Post by themafia »

The basic failure mode I would expect:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeFY9u69tkE

The adjoining roads have a large speed differential. The runoff areas around this project do not appear as if designed with this in mind. I predict a few horrible accidents and some hamfisted redesigns.

The local news has a ground level view of this project:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/jlPMB7c0RyQ

Post reply on HN