Travelers follow traffic signals, signs, and lines through the interchange. Carefully designed roadway striping, arrows, and signs direct travelers. See more about this work in Lacey, Washington at I5exit111.com
It works ok now. Once all the lanes open it should fly. Not sure how long thats going to be though. Seems like the project has been dragging a bit since reopening.
Is WSDOT expected to deploy these super efficient interchanges elsewhere in problem areas in Pierce County and beyond? Gravelly Lake, Bridgeport, 512, 38th and 56th would greatly benefit from a Diverging Diamond. 320th in Federal Way comes to mind as well.
Be careful what you wish for... This has taken over a year so far and has been a mess while they built it. They usually have about 5 guys working on it (with 3 of them supervising) at any given time so I'm assuming they can drag it out another year at least they way they are going.
This used to be one of my favorite exits. Not sure if it still is, as things change like Hawks Prairie Old Fashion Inn with their Roast Beef Hash and Pancakes as big as your HEAD or gas station that changed owners but always had spotless restroom or, across I-5, Fusion Beads, bad for my budget but fantastic for creating beautiful beaded creations.
@@BillGreenAZ yes I know but if you just look what causes that dangerous or not you would have known. The DDI is safe because it reduces the amount of crash points.
why did you ruin it with those two red lights that everyone has to stop and wait at? Just make those both overpasses. Boom. Now you got something that flows. You are welcome.
Wait until there is an accident on the freeway that backs up traffic. This layout will make it that much harder to navigate the other road when traffic backs up there as well now. The old way only 1 lane of non freeway traffic was congested. With this method all lanes will become blocked during accidents. Great job designing and planning this one!
The tutorial: - Stop when the light is red - Go when the light is green - The design of the intersection is literally that you don't have any opportunities beyond that to screw it up
This looks very expensive and will take up even more land for roadways. How about an overpass with a trafic circle underneath. Im sure just as expensive.
Roundabout would cost more because it would take more right-of-way outside of the prior interchange design. That would require more stormwater management facilities, as well as shoring / retaining walls due to encroaching into the slopes of the overpass highway. And the roundabout would not be efficient for places with high traffic volumes. They max out at 1500 vehicles per hour for single lane roundabout (2500 for dual lanes). Roundabout interchanges are better for rural surburban locations where traffic is not projected to increase.
@@Michael-lt3zb Stating that we're "way more protected" isn't really helpful. How does the protection work? What tools are in place? Why would making more uncontrolled sliplane crossings and *left* turns on red be safer? That's what I want to know.
@@KattbirbInstead of crossing 3, 5, or 7 lanes at a time, they cross one lane, then refuge, then 2-3 lanes with stopped traffic at a signal (no turns). Other than the slip lane (which can be modified with the DDI intact) they do not have to worry about turn traffic across their crosswalk. The center island also has barriers for positive protection.
and we think roundabouts are hard …. at least there’s no traffic lights in them 😭 edit: “hard” isnt the right word for this, maybe more “stupid magnet” 💀 i can smell the fender benders, side swipes, and teen confusion from here in arkansas LMAO
This is horrible. I'm here now bc I'm trying to understand why NC ever thought this was a good idea. Slower and more dangerous. Idiotic. All I can assume is that it cost more money to build and a DEI hire was dumb enough to sign off on it.
looks more like, how can we spend the most money possible while making a traffic nightmare works to me. WSDOT fix the freeway...too many short offramps, too many left exits, too many exit only lanes and get rid of the HOV.
@@brendonhalverson5178 hahah seriously?!? my suggestions involve ELIMINATING HOV lanes and some exits, new construction on exits to the right is unnecessary. If you work for WSDOT i would be more than happy to draw up the plans as WSDOT has proven themselves incapable at doing the same. HAHA Redoing the entire freeway - what a card.
Diverging diamond interchanges actually have significantly higher volumes (as the only left you can make is a dedicated lane during the cross), only two phases for traffic signals (no left turns through traffic), and they're cheaper since they save space. They also have 46% less crashes after a year compared to a regular diamond interchange, per a study done on the Springfield, MO DDI.
They are not content using just roundabouts anymore to confuse everyone while driving, they needed to come up with another confusing way to make you think twice where in the hell are you going !!
@@trwent I lived in Reno when a DDI was installed at the Moana Lane interchange of I-580/US-395. It's super easy to adapt to. Some folks just want to complain.
Roundabout interchange would fail here. It would cost more because it would take more right-of-way outside of the prior interchange design. That would require more stormwater management facilities, as well as shoring / retaining walls due to encroaching into the slopes of the overpass highway. And the roundabout would not be efficient for places with high traffic volumes. They max out at 1500 vehicles per hour for single lane roundabout (2500 for dual lanes). Roundabout interchanges are better for rural surburban locations where traffic is not projected to increase.
Good Job WSDOT! Excellent Interchange design! its going to get me quicker to where I have to go! Thank you!
It works ok now. Once all the lanes open it should fly. Not sure how long thats going to be though. Seems like the project has been dragging a bit since reopening.
How do traffic lights maske this faster?
Traffic moves faster because the left turn light and the through moment light are the same, so left turns and through traffic happen at the same time.
May try this out at midnight so I have less probability of getting lost and causing an accident.
Is WSDOT expected to deploy these super efficient interchanges elsewhere in problem areas in Pierce County and beyond? Gravelly Lake, Bridgeport, 512, 38th and 56th would greatly benefit from a Diverging Diamond. 320th in Federal Way comes to mind as well.
Be careful what you wish for... This has taken over a year so far and has been a mess while they built it. They usually have about 5 guys working on it (with 3 of them supervising) at any given time so I'm assuming they can drag it out another year at least they way they are going.
This used to be one of my favorite exits. Not sure if it still is, as things change like Hawks Prairie Old Fashion Inn with their Roast Beef Hash and Pancakes as big as your HEAD or gas station that changed owners but always had spotless restroom or, across I-5, Fusion Beads, bad for my budget but fantastic for creating beautiful beaded creations.
Makes me think of a diverging diamond, but idk if this functions the same
So you have to cross traffic twice just to go through the intersection? How is that safer and more efficient?
It's safer then regular interchanges like the Diamond.
Go research dude
@@rafiqstarline Do you believe everything you read in "research"? It's not always correct.
@@BillGreenAZ yes I know but if you just look what causes
that dangerous or not you would have known. The DDI is
safe because it reduces the amount of crash points.
@@rafiqstarline how does it reduce the amount of crash points when traffic is being crossed twice?
@@BillGreenAZ haiya just watch some videos
for example from Road Guy Rob. Im to lazy to
explain because in the end you won't understand
why did you ruin it with those two red lights that everyone has to stop and wait at? Just make those both overpasses. Boom. Now you got something that flows. You are welcome.
Cost
Space
Pedestrian crosswalks
I think there is that consideration but hasn't been proposed anywhere yet. Good idea though.
Lol why don't we just make 7 lane roads between all points in the entire world? Boom traffic = 0. You're welcome "engineers."
Wait until there is an accident on the freeway that backs up traffic. This layout will make it that much harder to navigate the other road when traffic backs up there as well now. The old way only 1 lane of non freeway traffic was congested. With this method all lanes will become blocked during accidents. Great job designing and planning this one!
as if a normal diamond interchange is any better when there is a traffic accident
You can turn LEFT on red too! Who made this? 46.61.055
You can turn left on red on to a one-way that has the traffic going the same direction. Right in the section you listed.
The fact that you have to make a tutorial video to explain how it works says a lot.
That could make a video at how to stop at a stop sign but people don't understand that logic either.
@@blakew595THAT could make a video?
All it says is that it is something new. People need some time to learn how to use new things.
The tutorial:
- Stop when the light is red
- Go when the light is green
- The design of the intersection is literally that you don't have any opportunities beyond that to screw it up
This looks very expensive and will take up even more land for roadways.
How about an overpass with a trafic circle underneath.
Im sure just as expensive.
Roundabout would cost more because it would take more right-of-way outside of the prior interchange design. That would require more stormwater management facilities, as well as shoring / retaining walls due to encroaching into the slopes of the overpass highway.
And the roundabout would not be efficient for places with high traffic volumes. They max out at 1500 vehicles per hour for single lane roundabout (2500 for dual lanes). Roundabout interchanges are better for rural surburban locations where traffic is not projected to increase.
And what protection do cyclists and pedestrians have? Are they merely "accommodated"?
They are way more protected in this scenario than they would be with 2 4 way stop light intersections.
@@Michael-lt3zb Stating that we're "way more protected" isn't really helpful. How does the protection work? What tools are in place? Why would making more uncontrolled sliplane crossings and *left* turns on red be safer? That's what I want to know.
@@Kattbirb th-cam.com/video/pHXhOILb3Gc/w-d-xo.htmlsi=QOq917RU3ro8jlOX
@@KattbirbInstead of crossing 3, 5, or 7 lanes at a time, they cross one lane, then refuge, then 2-3 lanes with stopped traffic at a signal (no turns). Other than the slip lane (which can be modified with the DDI intact) they do not have to worry about turn traffic across their crosswalk. The center island also has barriers for positive protection.
@@Kattbirband pedestrians will not walk in front of the left turns on red. They will be directed to the barriered median.
Just make roundabouts!
who makes roundabouts on an overpass?
Probably insufficient for the amount of traffic.
@@busa89 You can make 2 roundabouts at each end. Also in my country we have roundabouts under the highways.
@@theoneandonlylonely1 2 roundabouts at each end. That would be a total of 4 roundabouts; is that what you mean?
2, one on the left and one on the right side
and we think roundabouts are hard …. at least there’s no traffic lights in them 😭
edit: “hard” isnt the right word for this, maybe more “stupid magnet” 💀 i can smell the fender benders, side swipes, and teen confusion from here in arkansas LMAO
This is horrible. I'm here now bc I'm trying to understand why NC ever thought this was a good idea. Slower and more dangerous. Idiotic. All I can assume is that it cost more money to build and a DEI hire was dumb enough to sign off on it.
looks more like, how can we spend the most money possible while making a traffic nightmare works to me. WSDOT fix the freeway...too many short offramps, too many left exits, too many exit only lanes and get rid of the HOV.
Sounds like you just like to complain. This has worked everywhere they have been built.
How would redoing the entire freeway be cheaper?
@@brendonhalverson5178 hahah seriously?!? my suggestions involve ELIMINATING HOV lanes and some exits, new construction on exits to the right is unnecessary. If you work for WSDOT i would be more than happy to draw up the plans as WSDOT has proven themselves incapable at doing the same. HAHA Redoing the entire freeway - what a card.
Diverging diamond interchanges actually have significantly higher volumes (as the only left you can make is a dedicated lane during the cross), only two phases for traffic signals (no left turns through traffic), and they're cheaper since they save space. They also have 46% less crashes after a year compared to a regular diamond interchange, per a study done on the Springfield, MO DDI.
@SergeantTeabag Thank you for educating that doubting Thomas.
They are not content using just roundabouts anymore to confuse everyone while driving, they needed to come up with another confusing way to make you think twice where in the hell are you going !!
Drivers tend to adapt very quickly to DDIs. The evidence bears this out.
@@trwent I lived in Reno when a DDI was installed at the Moana Lane interchange of I-580/US-395. It's super easy to adapt to.
Some folks just want to complain.
Roundabout interchange would fail here.
It would cost more because it would take more right-of-way outside of the prior interchange design. That would require more stormwater management facilities, as well as shoring / retaining walls due to encroaching into the slopes of the overpass highway.
And the roundabout would not be efficient for places with high traffic volumes. They max out at 1500 vehicles per hour for single lane roundabout (2500 for dual lanes). Roundabout interchanges are better for rural surburban locations where traffic is not projected to increase.