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

91–100 of 159 posts

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#91

Post by com2kid »

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.

The majority of drivers don't know the signaling rules for roundabouts so the end result is no one uses signals on them for anything and this you never know what people are going to do next when they are in one.

All in all they end up being rather unpleasant to use through no fault of their own.

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#92

Post by cad1 »

KennedyHere wrote: post #64

Hey all, I'm the author of this game. I didn't expect to see it on HN! I wrote it to add some fun to all the conversations happening in the local forums about this roundabout. They've been heated at times. And, yes, this roundabout is right next to the Kirkland Costco. I definitely agree with all the critiques of the gameplay - and I have about 100 more. I cut it down to the bare essentials to get it done while it's…

Do this one! https://maps.app.goo.gl/wmwjQctXpRtXAdKS7

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#93

Post by Jblx2 »

dlcarrier wrote: post #4

I swear if the US could build regular roundabouts, converting an intersection would make the accident rate go down, instead of up.

I was surprised that the U.S. probably only has around 11,000 roundabouts. I thought it would be higher. If they were as popular as they are in my local area, there would be over 70,000 in the U.S.

https://roundabouts.kittelson.com/

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#94

Post by Jblx2 »

AngryData wrote: post #10
dlcarrier wrote: post #4

I swear if the US could build regular roundabouts, converting an intersection would make the accident rate go down, instead of up.

From what I understand roundabouts make accident rate go up, it is the severity of accidents that goes down which probably still a positive. That said I have yet to drive through a roundabout that I think improved an intersection in any meaningful way. Half of them work as intended but I find them less pleasant to drive through, the other half are just horribly designed and often have semitrucks go through them when…

>From what I understand roundabouts make accident rate go up,

"Studies of intersections in the United States converted from traffic signals or stop signs to roundabouts have found reductions in injury crashes of 72%-80% and reductions in all crashes of 35%-47%"

https://www.iihs.org/research-areas/roundabouts#safety-benef...

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#95

Post by jfyne »

FireBeyond wrote: post #82
KennedyHere wrote: post #64

Hey all, I'm the author of this game. I didn't expect to see it on HN! I wrote it to add some fun to all the conversations happening in the local forums about this roundabout. They've been heated at times. And, yes, this roundabout is right next to the Kirkland Costco. I definitely agree with all the critiques of the gameplay - and I have about 100 more. I cut it down to the bare essentials to get it done while it's…

For bonus points, tackle Tumwater next! https://www.google.com/maps/@46.9995932,-122.9095898,279m/da... This thing is a nightmare of newly constructed, but with poor signage, rapid lane changes required at times, and "wait, which roundabout?"

I raise you The Magic Roundabout https://maps.app.goo.gl/1Mj8tSvKNBnQMu8V7

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#96

Post by Jblx2 »

gs17 wrote: post #87
Jblx2 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Constant traffic flow in one direction can make an entrance entirely unusable. Seems like a poorly designed roundabout then. You should just pull into the roundabout, right after the car already in the roundabout passes by. Something is wrong if one direction of traffic can block the flow from other directions.

It's more a poor place for a roundabout. It was a very busy intersection in one direction, where the switch to roundabouts meant there was no longer a break in traffic. What it needed was a light with a sensor to let the very sporadic side traffic through (technically, a roundabout can have this, but the 3/4-way intersection that's always green except when someone needs it to not be is better), what we got was an end…

>If you pull in after the car already in the roundabout passes by, you get hit by the next one.

Yes, that seems like a roundabout design defect. Seems like the radius of the circle is too large, so cars aren't slowing down enough.

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#97

Post by daveguy »

drnick1 wrote: post #84
daveguy wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Roundabouts are almost always a good idea, assuming there is sufficient traffic. They keep traffic flowing faster, more predictably, and with fewer accidents.

No, they just interrupt the flow of traffic by slowing it down. The classic pattern of side roads with less traffic yielding to incoming traffic on the main road carrying more traffic is the correct road layout that minimizes frustration and confusion. Roundabouts are the favorite tool of left-leaning, anti-car, vanilla soy latte-sipping urban planners.

[flagged]

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#98

Post by munificent »

com2kid wrote: post #89
lokar wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

traffic circles (w/ stop signs) are an abomination and should be removed

They exist so people cannot run through the stop sign. Their only connection to a round about is the shape.

It's more complex than that. I live in Seattle near a street that has these traffic circles. The design is:

* There is a round obstruction in the middle of the intersection like a roundabout.

* The street going north-south through the intersection does not have a stop sign.

* The street going east-west has stop signs on both sides.

* But the north-south street which doesn't have to stop also has speed humps on it to slow drivers down.

On its face, this seems like a totally bananas design. The street that should be efficient by not having to stop has traffic calming speed humps on it anyway, negating the efficiency. The cross streets get none of the efficiency of a roundabout because they have to stop anyway. And the combination of roundabout and stop signs is very confusing to drivers.

It makes no sense... if you assume the intersection is designed entirely for cars.

But it isn't, it's a "neighborhood greenway"[1]. The north-south street is designed to improve bicycle traffic. The speed humps don't slow cyclists down. The roundabout middle and stop signs on the cross streets make it safer for cyclists to cruise through the intersection without stopping.

If you ever bike commute, you quickly learn how lethal a lot of stopping and going is for cycling. The effort and efficiency really only make sense if you can go a fairly steady speed for much of your commute. Accelerating a bike is a lot of work.

Once you factor in bikes, the design of these intersections makes more sense. At least in theory. In practice, though people are consistently confused by "roundabout + stop signs" and I see drivers blow through those stop signs more than I've ever seen any other traffic violation by a large margin. Because of that, cyclists and drivers going north-south still have to be paranoid going into the intersection. Even though they have the right of way, there's about a 25% chance the other driver won't stop anyway.

It was a good idea, and maybe the execution will work out once people get more educated. But right now it's a mess. I walk along that street often and I spend a lot of time gesticulating wildly at drivers when they blow through those stop signs.

[1]: https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs...

Re: Kirkland Roundabouts

#99

Post by Theodores »

jfyne wrote: post #95
FireBeyond wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For bonus points, tackle Tumwater next! https://www.google.com/maps/@46.9995932,-122.9095898,279m/da... This thing is a nightmare of newly constructed, but with poor signage, rapid lane changes required at times, and "wait, which roundabout?"

I raise you The Magic Roundabout https://maps.app.goo.gl/1Mj8tSvKNBnQMu8V7

Too easy. In the UK there are far more torturous roundabouts, for example, Five Ways in Birmingham, notable because you have to inch forward up a hill, always in traffic, typically with a manual gearbox, to finally get to the roundabout where the three lanes of traffic seems to already be doing 50 mph, meaning that you have to channel your drag racing skills to just get on there, without slipping backwards, damaging the clutch or coming a cropper.

London has some specials too, including the traffic around Hyde Park Corner, which is like a roundabout in vacuum form. Should so much as a square foot of tarmac become vacant then it will magically suck in four taxis, two double decker buses and a dozen UberEats delivery guys, making any progress tough.

Chiswick roundabout, where the M4 motorway, gateway to the West, begins is also not for those lacking testicular fortitude, my mum got stuck going round and round that one, we weren't quite dizzy by the time we got off, but it was getting that way.

All is nothing though. You have got to do France, Arc de Triomphe. Cobblestones, many, many lanes, every car with dents in it and priority given to those entering the roundabout rather than those on it already. No American in an American vehicle would be able to make it through that one!

Post reply on HN