I think what you're describing is GGP's second example: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2981376,-73.935245,212m/data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2

I think what you're describing is GGP's second example: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2981376,-73.935245,212m/data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2981376,-73.935245,212m/data... In which case I agree completely. And, from what I can tell, they're about the same size, so IMO this was a design miss, not a space constraint. For me, it's all about the surprise factor. In my example, the outer lane almost goes all the way around. So you end up surprised after passing two exits and then being forced to merge to pass the next one. GGP's example is completely symmetrical, so nothing is surprising.