Cool Interchange

[asovse1 3]

I believe there are only 2 roundabouts here in Edmonton. I personally don't like them because nobody knows how to use them, thus there are a lot of traffic accidents on them.

Oh my goodness! Another Edmontonian!!!

Well, we have quite a few in the city, and more are popping up in residential areas, although they're really small and narrow.

Looking at the first two in Athens and a city in the Netherlands, I've seen a few in Vietnam that use that similar model. It seems to be very efficient as an interchange. I'll see if I can dig up some photos...

...close enough!

  Edited December 11, 2011 by asovse1  

[glazert 89]

Looking at the first two in Athens and a city in the Netherlands, I've seen a few in Vietnam that use that similar model. It seems to be very efficient as an interchange. I'll see if I can dig up some photos...

The roundabout shown in the picture you posted is interesting because journeys turning right straight ahead on the main highway or all right turning traffic do not need to use the roundabout; only left-turning traffic or traffic straight ahead on the crossing road have to do so. The practice of some or all roads at roundabouts having special right-turning (or left-turning in Britain) slip roads is a common traffic-easing feature, whether the roundabout junction is all on one level or has overpasses. Limited space in already built-up urban areas can hinder their introduction, though.

  Edited December 11, 2011 by glazert  

[jacksunny 741]

I believe there are only 2 roundabouts here in Edmonton. I personally don't like them because nobody knows how to use them, thus there are a lot of traffic accidents on them.

Oh my goodness! Another Edmontonian!!!

I actually don't live in Edmonton, I live about 45 min. away.

[Dewm 177]

This is a roundabout close to where I live in Essex, England.

As you can see it is one large roundabout surrounded by 5 smaller roundabouts.

You say people in Canada don't know how to use roundabouts, imagine how they'd get on with this baby

Actually at peak times in the morning and afternoon things can get a bit hairy, when it just seems to become a bit of a free-for-all.

This thing is just scary... who thought it would be a good idea?

I mean, I'm looking at it from the air and I can't figure out who is supposed to go where... imagine if you were actually on the road.

:S

[dazza262 133]

This is a roundabout close to where I live in Essex, England.

As you can see it is one large roundabout surrounded by 5 smaller roundabouts.

You say people in Canada don't know how to use roundabouts, imagine how they'd get on with this baby

Actually at peak times in the morning and afternoon things can get a bit hairy, when it just seems to become a bit of a free-for-all.

This thing is just scary... who thought it would be a good idea?

I mean, I'm looking at it from the air and I can't figure out who is supposed to go where... imagine if you were actually on the road.

:S

Well the trick is to treat each small roundabout as a single entity and ignore the rest of it. Some people do get intimidated by it and have no clue what they should be doing though.

Fortunately this whole junction is being completely rebuilt at the moment, due to the fact that we have the Olympic mountain bike event taking place about 2 miles from here, and it really wouldn't do to have foreign dignitaries getting confused by this monstrosity.

[Moskva 75]

The roundabout scares americans? Funny . Here in Italy we have even too many. Roundabouts get placed everywhere for any reason, to slow down traffic, for the aestethics, when a major road has a T interchange with a minor one (there should be just a stop, in my opinion) etc... The win-win of the roundabout is epic, however they cannot sustain too much traffic flow and take up some space compared normal cross.

[Duke87 1,070]

The issue with "roundabouts scare Americans" is that in most parts of the country, they have only recently come into vogue. As little as 10 years ago there were probably less than half of the current total out there. So, most of the drivers on the roads in the US did not grow up used to navigated them and as such can't really get comfortable handling them. This will change with time, of course, but it will take decades. In Europe, meanwhile, roundabouts have been common since there have been cars, so people are simply accustomed to them.

[Moskva 75]

For what i've seen, all of the roundabouts built in my town came in the last decade, however people had no trouble understanding how it works... I mean, just take care of signals, that's all you really have to do (nearly one year with driving license, yay!).

[dazza262 133]

Also, different parts of Europe have different rules at roundabouts.

In the UK we give way to traffic on the roundabout, but I have been to places where when you're on the roundabout you give way to the traffic approaching it.

I remember being in Malta a few years back and it seemed to be a complete free-for-all, it was just a case of whoever blinks first !

I've also heard that when you are driving on the roundabout at the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, your car insurance is void because it's so dangerous, but I don't know how true that is.

[Moskva 75]

The problem is that the roundabout really should not have more than one lane. Making roundabouts with multiple lanes is just stupid and increases chance of accidents.

[TekindusT 3,809]

I've also heard that when you are driving on the roundabout at the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, your car insurance is void because it's so dangerous, but I don't know how true that is.

According to Wikipedia, this statement is not absolutely true:

There is an urban myth that motor insurance companies will not cover driving around the Étoile, which is not strictly true. Insurance companies generally cover motor accidents only on the Étoile under a knock-for-knock agreement,^[1] whereby each insurance company will pay for losses by its own policyholder, provided that the other party's insurance company agrees to do the same for the other policyholder.

Sadly, the reference of this article is a broken link, then we can't ensure the veracity of the statement; but seems logical to me. If I ran an insurance company, I wouldn't cover any car damages made in Place de l'Étoile or Periphérique. These are some crazy places!

[dazza262 133]

I've also heard that when you are driving on the roundabout at the Arc de Triomphe in Paris, your car insurance is void because it's so dangerous, but I don't know how true that is.

According to Wikipedia, this statement is not absolutely true:

There is an urban myth that motor insurance companies will not cover driving around the Étoile, which is not strictly true. Insurance companies generally cover motor accidents only on the Étoile under a knock-for-knock agreement,^[1] whereby each insurance company will pay for losses by its own policyholder, provided that the other party's insurance company agrees to do the same for the other policyholder.

Sadly, the reference of this article is a broken link, then we can't ensure the veracity of the statement; but seems logical to me. If I ran an insurance company, I wouldn't cover any car damages made in Place de l'Étoile or Periphérique. These are some crazy places!

Thanks for the info there TekindusT.

Whilst I can fully understand the reasons why they would do that, it wouldn't be much consolation if some maniac broadsided your car because they left it too late to move out to their exit

And Moskva, single lane roundabouts wouldn't be very useful with a dual carriageway running into it. That way madness lies

[Duke87 1,070]

There is nothing wrong with multilane roundabouts. Stay to the right to make a right turn, stay to the left to make a left turn, use either lane to go straight. You'd think it'd be dangerous and confusing but when you drive through one it's actually a very intuitive setup (at least, I find it such).

The problem comes when traffic counts go too high. Then the roundabout gets jammed and you start to be better off with a signalized intersection. But, in lighter traffic applications, roundabouts (including multilane roundabouts) are good for traffic flow. And while they require everyone to slow down a little, since they never (almost never, anyway) require anyone to stop, they don't cause frustration, don't induce drivers to become aggressive (the time cost of slowing down to yieldi to one vehicle is much less than the cost of stopping just as the light is turning red instead of flooring it through), and are thus better for safety..

  Edited May 3, 2012 by Duke87  

[Moskva 75]

I don't think you've to do with multiple lanes roundabout everyday, do you? A 2 lanes roundabout is way more dangerous compared the single lane. Only crazy folks would change lane meanwhile they're turning. You're all focus on turning and staying on your lane, looking for cars and for exit, and now you also have to change lane? That's stupid. It's already enough energy taking. Often people never enter the inner lane and happen to cross it meanwhile turning, making it dangerous if someone actually was using that inner lane. Even my mother (who is not that clever sometimes...) has came to agree with me...

A 2 lanes ways could get into one lane roundabout without problems, unless traffic is high. However now i'll show you this:

45.42, 11.08 (in google maps)

See, it's a two lanes freeway, the roundabout has one lane coming from the freeway inner lane, meanwhile the outer lane of the freeway goes around the roundabout making it a "quick bypass".

  Edited May 3, 2012 by Moskva  

[dazza262 133]

Duke, while most of the things you say are correct in theory, unfortunately real life isn't like that.

Here in the UK we have roundabouts everywhere, and like you said on roads with a light traffic flow they do work very well. On roads with a heavier traffic flow, they do become very congested. For instance, if you are approaching a roundabout with heavy traffic approaching from the right (in the UK and other Left hand drive countries), you will almost certainly come to a complete halt, as the whole thing becomes a log-jam. This is why we know have many busy roundabouts controlled by traffic lights, which sort of defeats the object really.

Moskva, you said earlier that you have been driving for less than a year. I think, my friend, that is why you are still a little intimidated by them. Seriously, single lane roundabouts with two or three lanes flowing into them would just not work. They would become a bottleneck, with the traffic eventually coming to a complete standstill.

It's quite straight forward really, as long as you approach the roundabout in the correct lane.

To turn left (1st exit) approach in the left hand lane

To go straight ahead (2nd exit) approach in either lane. If you are in the right hand lane, once you have passed the first exit indicate left and move into left hand lane.

To turn right (3rd Exit) approach in right hand lane, once you have passed the 2nd exit, indicate and move out to left hand lane.

I appreciate that not everyone sticks to these simple rules, but unfortunately you will always have inconsiderate drivers no matter what sort of junction you are driving on.

[Duke87 1,070]

However now i'll show you this:

45.42, 11.08 (in google maps)

That is a poorly designed multilane roundabout, and the inner lane really is pointless there. Here's a better example. What lane you get into directly correlates to where you're going and pavement markings make it quite clear where you're supposed to go.

  Edited May 7, 2012 by Duke87  

[dazza262 133]

Actually, the roundabout that Moskva gave as an example is designed very well because if you are taking the first exit, from any direction, you are simply bypassing the roundabout entirely, thus no stopping at all.

In fact, the multi-roundabout that I showed earlier is currently being upgraded to a similar system to ease the traffic congestion. This is being done at a cost of millions of pounds, largely due to the fact that we have an Olympic event being held nearby this summer.

Like I said before, we have roundabouts everywhere in the UK, and the cost of upgrading them all is just not feasible. Which is why they will just put traffic lights on them.

[Piteri 17]

This is a highway interchange in Athens, Greece that I think is really cool.

Too many times have I driven by that OTE net building. The OTE building was the 2nd tallest building I'd see on the way down into Ampelokipi. The tallest being the American building.. gah, so many years!

Suburban roundabouts here

  Edited May 7, 2012 by Piteri  

[Moskva 75]

Meanwhile for sure roundabouts cannot sustain major traffic flows, they still can work when a 2 lanes road (4 in total) get in. It can work however if the traffic is too much it just won't, at this point you better have the roundabout i have shown here previously... I agree it feels stupid to have a lanes road getting into an one lane roundabout, but the two lanes roundabout is absurd, come on! I am not scared of roundabouts, here in Italy we have to use them very frequently, i just think no one would feel comfortable switching lane meanwhile turning in a small circle, the two lane roundabout surely increases risk of accident greatly and like i said before, a lot of people will no respect the drawn lines (here at least) and will "cut" from outer lane to inner lane to without taking care of the roundabout... Sometimes the old good cross is the best, i think.

[Wiimeiser 436]

Canberra, eh? I think they should convert the inner circle to a Pinavia interchange and grade separate the road on the lower right from the outer circle. They can keep the loop ramps as well.

[Duke87 1,070]

Actually, the roundabout that Moskva gave as an example is designed very well because if you are taking the first exit, from any direction, you are simply bypassing the roundabout entirely, thus no stopping at all.

I was speaking more to the fact that the roundabout is two lanes but all the approaches and exits are only one lane, so there is no point to the second lane. And was also pointing out that an inner lane will see a lot more use when its usage is clearly defined in the design, as in the example I linked to.

[Moskva 75]

Actually, the roundabout that Moskva gave as an example is designed very well because if you are taking the first exit, from any direction, you are simply bypassing the roundabout entirely, thus no stopping at all.

I was speaking more to the fact that the roundabout is two lanes but all the approaches and exits are only one lane, so there is no point to the second lane. And was also pointing out that an inner lane will see a lot more use when its usage is clearly defined in the design, as in the example I linked to.

No, the inner lane will not be used more (assumed all 3 ways have the same traffic share) because this roundabout has only 2 outputs for those who enter it, unless you just have to do an inversion... So the inner lane won't be used more compared the outer lane, however the inner lane will see cars waiting to join the roundabout, meanwhile those who can use the outer lane will have no problem. If it was a 4 ways roundabout yes you would be right. However, this system is still more efficient compared a single lane or two lanes roundabout...

  Edited May 9, 2012 by Moskva  

[Texan 8]

Gotta Represent my home city DALLAS! This is the "Texas High Five", the most famous interchange in Texas and puts most other interchanges to shame. At least all the East Coast ones...5 roads stacked on each other, no big deal...

http://upload.wikime...9/High_Five.jpg

[sadiemydog 47]

Here is mines:

http://maps.google.nl/maps?hl=nl&ll=51.87363,4.576707&spn=0.014175,0.042272&t=m&z=15

Here is mines:

http://maps.google.nl/maps?hl=nl&ll=51.87363,4.576707&spn=0.014175,0.042272&t=m&z=15