The figure-8 central design makes this roundabout not a real roundabout. The challenge is that the entry and exit points are at the tightest part of the curve, making ingress and egress kind of weird. It looks like they did it because of space constraints on the bridge. What I find weird is the tightness of the on/off ramp, which share a very small part of the central lanes. In a traditional circle, they are spaced more apart, making exiting and entering smoother.
If it were a regular 2-lane traffic circle, it wouldn't be too difficult to navigate.
Personally, I find multiple-lane traffic circles (4+) to be more difficult to navigate, mostly when some people in the center lanes pull a fast right turn across all lanes of traffic. Otherwise, much better than traffic lights at keeping traffic moving or first-come, first-served stop intersections when people don't really stop or sit there waving you through.
- 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.
frustration with the last point was enough for me to give up trying to play it. I'm sure the LLM that vibe-coded this thinks the controls make perfect sense, though.
in general:
is this trying to make a point of some kind about the design of the interchange? the "Inspired by online discussions of the Kirkland roundabouts" text sort of hints at that but it's unclear how.
is the point that it's overly complicated? or is the point that it's actually not that complicated, in response to people criticizing it? I can imagine it going either way...but the poor controls mean that it's not really effective at making either point.
different roundabout / intersection types would make this much more interesting. I've driven through the "diverging diamond" interchange of I-5 in Lacey [0] before, and it was a bit confusing the first time but now doesn't seem any more complicated than any other busy highway intersection. or, add a before & after comparing the old Kirkland interchange design to the new roundabout.
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 confusing because at some point you are effectively driving on the wrong side of the road, but are extremely efficient. My daily commute includes one that cuts a few minutes off what it once took to negotiate the previous traditional interchange.
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've been driving roundabouts for decades, and think they're great - they really help with traffic flow. I've never found them confusing.
I had to drive this specific Kirkland roundabout the other day, and ended up missing my offramp and going in completely the wrong direction. It's the most confusing roundabout I've ever seen.
I used the roundabout the game is modeled after the other day. This is at the freeway exit used to get to the Costco AND downtown in Kirkland. I've seen pileups here for no reason. It's insane.
To be fair, I'm not sure there's a good solution. The real problem is the volume of traffic and that it dumps onto two lane roads at the edges of this roundabout. To really fix things you need to give people other exits to use.
I'm all for hating bad infrastructure, but this roundabout seems pretty straightforward? Maybe it's different when you're actually driving on it, but from a topdown view it's clear it's a central roundabout with some extra sidelanes to avoid the roundabout if you're immediately turning right.
Talking to my American colleagues, they're often perplexed by roundabouts and don't really understand how they fundamentally work. They're also incredibly stubborn when it comes to convincing them that it helps with traffic flow immensely versus a 4 way stop sign.
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 roundabout is part of an Interstate Highway interchange. The US Interstate system is at a scale that doesn't occur elsewhere. It is transcontinental.
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 they aren't really large enough for that.
I'm a huge roundabout fan, but this does indeed look nasty. Seattle area driving in general is pretty bad. There's an exit on the 5 in downtown Seattle that's on the far left lane (Seneca street I believe) that feels like putting your life on the line every time you need to take it.
The figure-8 central design makes this roundabout not a real roundabout. The challenge is that the entry and exit points are at the tightest part of the curve, making ingress and egress kind of weird. It looks like they did it because of space constraints on the bridge. What I find weird is the tightness of the on/off ramp, which share a very small part of the central lanes. In a traditional circle, they are spaced more apart, making exiting and entering smoother.
If it were a regular 2-lane traffic circle, it wouldn't be too difficult to navigate.
Personally, I find multiple-lane traffic circles (4+) to be more difficult to navigate, mostly when some people in the center lanes pull a fast right turn across all lanes of traffic. Otherwise, much better than traffic lights at keeping traffic moving or first-come, first-served stop intersections when people don't really stop or sit there waving you through.
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.
frustration with the last point was enough for me to give up trying to play it. I'm sure the LLM that vibe-coded this thinks the controls make perfect sense, though.
in general:
is this trying to make a point of some kind about the design of the interchange? the "Inspired by online discussions of the Kirkland roundabouts" text sort of hints at that but it's unclear how.
is the point that it's overly complicated? or is the point that it's actually not that complicated, in response to people criticizing it? I can imagine it going either way...but the poor controls mean that it's not really effective at making either point.
different roundabout / intersection types would make this much more interesting. I've driven through the "diverging diamond" interchange of I-5 in Lacey [0] before, and it was a bit confusing the first time but now doesn't seem any more complicated than any other busy highway intersection. or, add a before & after comparing the old Kirkland interchange design to the new roundabout.
0: https://wsdot.wa.gov/travel/traffic-safety-methods/diverging...
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 confusing because at some point you are effectively driving on the wrong side of the road, but are extremely efficient. My daily commute includes one that cuts a few minutes off what it once took to negotiate the previous traditional interchange.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diverging_diamond_interchange
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've been driving roundabouts for decades, and think they're great - they really help with traffic flow. I've never found them confusing.
I had to drive this specific Kirkland roundabout the other day, and ended up missing my offramp and going in completely the wrong direction. It's the most confusing roundabout I've ever seen.
I used the roundabout the game is modeled after the other day. This is at the freeway exit used to get to the Costco AND downtown in Kirkland. I've seen pileups here for no reason. It's insane.
To be fair, I'm not sure there's a good solution. The real problem is the volume of traffic and that it dumps onto two lane roads at the edges of this roundabout. To really fix things you need to give people other exits to use.
I'm all for hating bad infrastructure, but this roundabout seems pretty straightforward? Maybe it's different when you're actually driving on it, but from a topdown view it's clear it's a central roundabout with some extra sidelanes to avoid the roundabout if you're immediately turning right.
Talking to my American colleagues, they're often perplexed by roundabouts and don't really understand how they fundamentally work. They're also incredibly stubborn when it comes to convincing them that it helps with traffic flow immensely versus a 4 way stop sign.
Background music is awesome
I swear if the US could build regular roundabouts, converting an intersection would make the accident rate go down, instead of up.
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 roundabout is part of an Interstate Highway interchange. The US Interstate system is at a scale that doesn't occur elsewhere. It is transcontinental.
Perhaps they need to start building more roundabouts on smaller intersections, and improve education in driving schools. Then give it time (decades).
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 they aren't really large enough for that.
I'm a huge roundabout fan, but this does indeed look nasty. Seattle area driving in general is pretty bad. There's an exit on the 5 in downtown Seattle that's on the far left lane (Seneca street I believe) that feels like putting your life on the line every time you need to take it.
There are multiple left lane exits (and onramps!) on I5 in downtown Seattle. Fun times.
Not a joke, actual roundabout.
https://wsdot.wa.gov/construction-planning/search-projects/i...