There always seems to be a few interchanges that were either designed badly or are now unable to cope with traffic levels. This idea is taken from CBRD's bad junctions on British roads.
I have a couple in Michigan:
US-31/I-96/BUS US-31 in Muskegon
Map: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=Interstate+96+%26+U.S.+31,+Norton+Shores,+Muskegon,+Michigan+49444&aq=&sll=41.623655,-92.285156&sspn=6.749025,28.740234&ie=UTF8&geocode=FUW4kgIdFJnc-g&split=0&hq=&hnear=Interstate+96+%26+U.S.+31+Business,+Norton+Shores,+Muskegon,+Michigan+49444&ll=43.171242,-86.206434&spn=0.006432,0.01987&z=16
Basically a 1950s-era cloverleaf with two surface roads getting involved. Traffic from SB US-31 to WB BUS US-31 has to use around a half mile of Airline Rd to get onto BUS US-31. Traffic from NB US-31 to EB I-96 has to use a portion of Hile Rd, while traffic from WB I-96 to SB US-31 has to stop, turn right onto Airline Rd, then make a sharp right turn onto the onramp for SB US-31, which curves sharply to the left as soon as it leaves Airline Rd. Also, trying to get from SB US-31 to EB I-96 is not easy either, as you have to cross the traffic coming onto US-31 from Airline Rd (that ramp merges in about 100 yards before the EB I-96 offramp). I have almost gotten into many accidents there. However, going from WB I-96 to NB US-31, you sometimes can stay at 70+ MPH as US-31 itself merges in from the left.
I-96/I-196/M-37/M-44 in Grand Rapids
Map: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=Michigan+37+%26+Michigan+44,+Grand+Rapids,+Kent,+Michigan+49525&aq=&sll=43.01618,-85.689969&sspn=0.006056,0.01987&ie=UTF8&geocode=FSW4jwIdPv3l-g&split=0&hq=&hnear=Michigan+37+%26+Michigan+44,+Grand+Rapids,+Kent,+Michigan+49525&ll=42.972753,-85.591435&spn=0.006453,0.01987&z=16
The main problem here is exiting onto M-37/M-44 from EB I-96. You have to cross two lanes of I-196 as they are merging onto I-96 just to get to the offramp. The other movements at this junction are better.
Quoteor are now unable to cope with traffic levels.
This doesn't necessarily make an interchange "bad". Plenty of examples of interchanges that are congested for a whole myriad of reasons...downstream bottleneck, mixing local with through traffic, limited right-of-way, etc etc. Nevermind that, especially in today's political climate, we lack the resources to guarnatee free-flow at every interchange. Not that we'd necessarily want that to begin with, especially in built-up areas. The cost, not just project cost, but also in lost tax-base, relocations, lost right-of-way, etc, is just too high.
Poor design, of course, is another story altogether. Such as your examples that show weaving issues.
The one that torments me on my way home from work in the evening is in downtown D.C., where I-395 southbound out of the Third Street Tunnel connects to the Southwest Freeway. The basic problem is that the two lanes of traffic coming out of the tunnel need to move two or three lanes to the left to stay on I-395 into Virginia, and do so in less than a mile before the freeway narrows to three lanes. Meanwhile, you have some Southwest Freeway traffic moving to the right in that same space, to make the 6th/7th Street and 12th Street exits.
Ramp braiding could be a fix, except that would require the demolition of at least two private office buildings right next to the westbound freeway. D.C. has such a small tax base to begin with (very high percentage of nontaxable property, including Federal buildings and embassies), and would be loath to tear any of it down, even if it were otherwise inclined to help suburban commuters it yearns to (but can't) tax.
The big design mistake was not streaming southbound I-395 traffic into the left, rather than the right, lanes of the Southwest Freeway so that through I-395 traffic would not have to change lanes. But high traffic volumes also add to the problem.
The East Los Angeles Interchange, the Riverside interchange 91/215/60 before they re-designed it.
Quote from: oscar on March 13, 2011, 10:41:51 PM
embassies
obsolete media. kick 'em out, tear 'em down. this isn't 1833 anymore - if you want to talk to a country's leader, call 'em up.
probably the worst interchange on the interstate system, until recently, was the Templin Highway on-ramp in the grapevine on I-5.
the original was washed out in a landslide in 2005, and for six years it was a hasty reparation featuring a stop sign with a 150 foot merge distance into blind traffic. Trucks are doing 80 down the hill in the rightmost lane and due to the geography, there was maybe 3/4 of a second of decision-making time to floor it and merge, or to hold still. And if you guessed wrong... after 150 feet, wham Jersey barrier - literally, it was merge or die.
luckily, after six years it appears to have been fixed. At least, it looks a lot better from the mainline. I haven't dared take the exit and then attempt to re-enter the freeway.
I cannot offhand think of a really hideous interchange on the interstate system, but I do know that the mainline 215 southbound at 210 features seven snap-merge lane changes (shift 12 feet within 100) in the span of a mile and a half. Most of them unsigned, and of course the original concrete goes straight so there are no terrain clues that you have to swerve like a maniac to avoid a bridge pier.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on March 13, 2011, 11:09:14 PM
Quote from: oscar on March 13, 2011, 10:41:51 PM
embassies
obsolete media. kick 'em out, tear 'em down. this isn't 1833 anymore - if you want to talk to a country's leader, call 'em up.
<ot>
From a foreign relations standpoint, yes. But they provide important consular services to their citizens traveling overseas.
</ot>
One of the worst designed I can think of is the interchange between I-4 and the 408 in downtown Orlando. It was set up as a double trumpet. There are tight turn radii, crazy weaving on the short connector road, and huge backups. And to make it worse, the WB 408 to SB I-4 ramp is a poorly marked exit only lane. It's a 3 lane highway before and after the exit, but only the left 2 lanes continue past this exit.
They're working on fixing it. They've adding flyovers. A few are done yet and it's helped, but they need to finish it.
Quote from: realjd on March 13, 2011, 11:28:33 PM
<ot>
From a foreign relations standpoint, yes. But they provide important consular services to their citizens traveling overseas.
</ot>
they also provide a great espionage risk (the most well-bugged buildings in Washington and Moscow, respectively, were each other's embassies - and probably still are) and hey, Tehran '79 anyone? They are a very rickety fiction that ignores the realities of modern war. Back in the day, yes, screwing with an ambassador was tantamount to regicide - but these days, let's face it, when you will most desperately need consular services is when your embassy is suddenly the new headquarters of Achmed von Kalashnikov.
My vote would be the US 101/I-880 interchange in San Jose, CA. This 1950's-era cloverleaf interchange with sharp curves services two major freeways in San Jose, CA and at least once a week is the site of an overturned big rig on one of the cloverleaf ramps. Unfortunately, there's no room for high-speed ramps (like at the 101/280/680 interchange) so Caltrans has resorted to putting up large warning signs with flashing yellow lights. It's about all they can do with the land available.
Google Maps View (http://www.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=san+jose,+ca&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=39.780156,62.578125&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=San+Jose,+Santa+Clara,+California&ll=37.365109,-121.902258&spn=0.009772,0.015278&t=h&z=16)
Quote from: myosh_tino on March 14, 2011, 12:11:07 AM
My vote would be the US 101/I-880 interchange in San Jose, CA.
agreed. the outline shield US-101 on 17 southbound has been gone for about 6 years, so now the interchange is without value.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on March 14, 2011, 12:11:46 AM
Quote from: myosh_tino on March 14, 2011, 12:11:07 AM
My vote would be the US 101/I-880 interchange in San Jose, CA.
agreed. the outline shield US-101 on 17 southbound has been gone for about 6 years, so now the interchange is without value.
You mean this one?
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images880/i-880_nb_exit_004a_03.jpg)
If so then that's northbound I-880, not southbound.
the one I am thinking of was on the same gantry as a sign with an 880 shield. I think the main AARoads page has a photo and it isn't that one ...
I had forgotten about that northbound one. when I moved to the area in May 2004 there were six or seven outline shields on and around the Bayshore Freeway, including one northbound near the southbound surviving one (US-85) and one somewhere a bit further south in the Santa Clara area that I passed every day on the way to work between Mountain View and Santa Clara ... and then at least two at the 880 and I know there were several others scattered about.
there was also one in Ventura and I think one around Atascadero, as of June 2004... and probably some others I am forgetting about. Also one on the Dumbarton Bridge westbound that wasn't actually all that old, as it was button copy, not porcelain.
(//www.aaroads.com/shields/img/CA/CA19581011i1.jpg)
by the time I returned for a morning shot, it was gone...
the southbound one was replaced by this one ...
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images880/i-880_sb_exit_004b_02.jpg)
btw, I did not check on the one surviving outline shield this morning, as I took 280-85-101 out of San Francisco heading home...
Quote from: myosh_tino on March 14, 2011, 12:11:07 AM
My vote would be the US 101/I-880 interchange in San Jose, CA.
Plus, you have to take a surface street (Old Bayshore Hwy) to get from I-880 SB to US-101 NB.
Not that Caltrans (or anyone else) has any money right now, but it looks like the land on three sides (SE, NE, NW) of the interchange are warehouse/industrial. If they were to acquire that, wouldn't there be enough room for some flyovers?
Quote from: agentsteel53 on March 14, 2011, 12:50:13 AM
the southbound one was replaced by this one ...
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images880/i-880_sb_exit_004b_02.jpg)
btw, I did not check on the one surviving outline shield this morning, as I took 280-85-101 out of San Francisco heading home...
If I remember correctly, that location's pull-thru sign for I-880 used to have both Los Gatos and Santa Cruz listed...do they still use Los Gatos on signs from US-101 to I-880?
Jake, that's one ugly US-101 shield on that new sign. CalTrans really needs lessons on sign making.
Two-lane roads meeting with an interchange show up in southwestern Oregon. One is at SR 42/Powers Highway and the other is US 101 just north of Gold Beach, where an interchange connects the Rogue Hills development to the highway. There is very little blend-in lane available. These were a 1960's ODOT design is my guess. Be careful when driving large RV's, commercial trucks and when pulling a trailer or if you see one of these trying to get onto the main highway.
Rick
Quote from: Brandon on March 14, 2011, 12:57:44 PMJake, that's one ugly US-101 shield on that new sign. CalTrans really needs lessons on sign making.
The US 101 shield is just fine--it meets Caltrans' rather offbeat but acceptably proportioned specification. The I-880 shield, on the other hand, is an ugly and off-spec "bubble."
Quote from: Brandon on March 14, 2011, 12:57:44 PM
Jake, that's one ugly US-101 shield on that new sign. CalTrans really needs lessons on sign making.
When I first saw the newer 3-digit US shields, I thought they looked off-spec. After finding the current Caltrans spec for a 3-digit US shield, I still think these are off-spec. When I get home from work, I'll post what a "proper" 3-digit US shield should look like.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on March 14, 2011, 12:50:13 AM
the southbound one was replaced by this one ...
Hmmmm.... I don't remember the old sign having an outlined 101 shield. I'm a lifelong Santa Clara County resident but I will defer to your knowledge on this one.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on March 14, 2011, 12:50:13 AM
btw, I did not check on the one surviving outline shield this morning, as I took 280-85-101 out of San Francisco heading home...
The last time I drove that stretch of 101 south a couple of weeks ago, that outlined US 101 shield was still there and will probably remain there until either the sign is damaged or the Rengstorff Avenue overpass is replaced. Caltrans went on a sign-replacement binge back in 2006-2007 within Santa Clara county but only targeted those signs mounted on butterfly sign trusses. This is why I think that lone outline shield will be around for a while because it's mounted on an overpass.
Also, the outline shields along CA-92 in San Mateo like the interchange sequence sign shown above are all gone. Caltrans did a massive sign replacement a few years ago replacing just about all signs on I-280, CA-92 and US 101 within San Mateo county with reflective, exit numbered signs.
Quote from: myosh_tino on March 14, 2011, 01:30:05 PM
When I first saw the newer 3-digit US shields, I thought they looked off-spec. After finding the current Caltrans spec for a 3-digit US shield, I still think these are off-spec. When I get home from work, I'll post what a "proper" 3-digit US shield should look like.
as far as I am concerned, the proper three-digit shield spec is the '61, as seen on button copy signs. I don't know why CA strayed away from it. that shield is, for the same dimensions, a bit "roomier", giving more separation between the sides and the number, and is therefore more legible, as well as being more aesthetically pleasing. Note in my avatar that that shield fits Series EM letters, not just D which is the modern standard.
For route 101, a two-digit (35x30) '61 spec shield with Series D numbers would be perfect. I just made up such a thing on the shield generator; too bad I can't upload it at work.
QuoteHmmmm.... I don't remember the old sign having an outlined 101 shield. I'm a lifelong Santa Clara County resident but I will defer to your knowledge on this one.
I distinctly remember one with the left sign being an 880 pull-through, and I am quite sure the other one was 101 Los Angeles. And this was very much southbound as I remember where I had been coming from (Fremont) and where I had attempted to go ("okay, this is 101 south already ... where the hell is the direct ramp to 101 north???") The reason I hadn't taken 237 is because I was going to work in Santa Clara and I
knew that 237 west to 101 south was a clusterfudge of an interchange... I specifically had anticipated 880-101 to be straightforward because it appeared to be reasonably perpendicular. Ah, the vagueries of south bay freeway interchanges!
so, back on topic... a terrible set of interchanges in the south bay is 101/85/237 - especially when one lives
inside the triangle.
QuoteThis is why I think that lone outline shield will be around for a while because it's mounted on an overpass.
that is good because it is the absolute last sign of its kind in the state. there are several state route outline shields left, but only one US as far as anyone's been able to discover.
QuoteAlso, the outline shields along CA-92 in San Mateo like the interchange sequence sign shown above are all gone. Caltrans did a massive sign replacement a few years ago replacing just about all signs on I-280, CA-92 and US 101 within San Mateo county with reflective, exit numbered signs.
that sign may have been on the 92 bridge, not the 84. the thing is, it wasn't as old as it appears at first glance (like that outline shield on the retroreflective sign near the San Jose airport) because it was button copy, used '61 spec US shield, had route 82, etc. It was probably a direct replacement of an actual old sign that had outline shields for By-Pass 101 and 101.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on March 14, 2011, 01:45:56 PM
so, back on topic... a terrible set of interchanges in the south bay is 101/85/237 - especially when one lives inside the triangle.
The old 101/85 interchange in Mountain View was absolutely dreadful but the new one is OK IMO as it eliminates the merging hell that was the 85 onramp to 101 and the Shoreline offramp from 101.
I would include the 85/82 interchange with the 85/237 interchange due to the proximity of the two interchanges and the resulting traffic backups as cars exiting 85 for 237 interact with cars entering 85 from 82.
The 101/237 interchange gets a vote from me simply because east 237 traffic wanting to go to 101 north has to exit the freeway at Mathilda, go under 237, reenter the freeway going westbound and then take the exit ramp to 101 north. That small stretch of Mathilda Avenue consists of 4 signalized intersections within a less than 1/4 mile stretch of road (Moffett Park Dr, 237 West, 237 East and Ross Dr) and is one of the most complained about stretches of city streets in the south bay.
See what I'm talking about (http://www.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=sunnyvale,+ca&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=31.784549,56.513672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Sunnyvale,+Santa+Clara,+California&ll=37.403344,-122.025865&spn=0.003886,0.006899&t=h&z=17)
I moved out in 2006 so I barely remember the redone 85/101. I just recall that at one point I got pulled over for suspicion of driving drunk.
"have you been drinking tonight?"
"no sir"
"you were doing 25, weaving, seemingly unable to follow the lane stripes"
"which set of lane stripes should I follow? there appear to be four."
and there were! the original concrete, the gouged out stripes on the concrete from before construction began, a set of permanent ones to be installed marked with flags, and a set of contradictory temporary ones that were also marked with flags of identical color.
The 401/427 interchange in Toronto is horrific. 18 lanes on Highway 401 converge to just 8, plus there's left-hand exiting, sharp turns, etc.
The behemoth of an interchange was overbuilt in preparation for another freeway to connect at this junction, but it never got built.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.static.flickr.com%2F2760%2F4504864905_af953e180c.jpg&hash=f953dde2535bfea410b20a45b50a991c6586874a)
* The west end of the PSB in St. Louis:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=38.620332,-90.187626&spn=0.006287,0.020599&t=k&z=17 (http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=38.620332,-90.187626&spn=0.006287,0.020599&t=k&z=17)
Incomplete plus the awful 20 mph ramps for I-55
* The I-44/I-55/Truman speedtrap interchange;
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=38.611505,-90.209363&spn=0.006288,0.020599&t=k&z=17 (http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=38.611505,-90.209363&spn=0.006288,0.020599&t=k&z=17)
Fix the awful 20 mph ramp from the left side of NB I-55 to the left side of I-44 and this one probably wouldn't be listed here. There are some days however I could make a case for WB I-44 needing to exit I-55 on the left, instead of having I-55 traffic exiting from the PSB having to make two lane changes - this can get rather fun when exiting the PSB behind a semi that takes forever to accelerate.
* The planned interchange at the western end of the Great Lemon Bridge between the bridge and existing I-70:
http://www.newriverbridge.org/documents/plans/2010-03-03_MRB_Projects_Exhibit-light.pdf (http://www.newriverbridge.org/documents/plans/2010-03-03_MRB_Projects_Exhibit-light.pdf)
Wouldn't be on this list if MoDOT would built it with ramps to/from the south. Sure, they might have to be torn down/modified when - more likely a question of if, given the difficulty of funding the first bridge - a companion bridge is ever built, but this isn't stopping IDOT from making the bridge much more accessible on their end at the Tri-Level
* I-29 at I-229/US 71 north of St. Joesph, MO:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=39.88729,-94.855678&spn=0.006207,0.020599&t=k&z=17 (http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=39.88729,-94.855678&spn=0.006207,0.020599&t=k&z=17)
The left side merge from NB I-229 to NB I-29 needs to be longer or changed to a right side merge
* I-80 at I-35/I-235 (The East Mixmaster) in Des Moines, IA:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=41.652249,-93.573647&spn=0.012089,0.041199&t=k&z=16 (http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=41.652249,-93.573647&spn=0.012089,0.041199&t=k&z=16)
The loop from SB I-35 to EB I-80 needs a lot more merging space
* US 77/West Bypass at I-80, Lincoln, NE:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=40.818981,-96.752547&spn=0.006122,0.020599&t=k&z=17 (http://maps.google.com/maps?ie=UTF8&ll=40.818981,-96.752547&spn=0.006122,0.020599&t=k&z=17)
Another one with a loop ramp that lacks adequate merging area; this one also has an abundance of trucks that take an hour to get up to highway speed using said loop
* Any interchange where a mainline interstate uses a loop ramp.
I just remembered a bad rural interchange: I-80 at I-81. Out in the complete middle of nowhere, on two of the biggest truck routes in the country, and it features some 15mph ramps.
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 14, 2011, 05:18:22 PM
* Any interchange where a mainline interstate uses a loop ramp.
How about two. The Big X near Moline, Illinois has both I-80
and I-74 go through loops. :banghead:
The I-90/I-95/MA-128/MA-30 interchange mess in Weston & Newton MA. Add the long C/D road on 95/128 NB and the access to/from Recreation Rd and it can be a massive bottleneck, especially where the ramp from 90 to 95/128 NB merges from 3 lanes to 1. (2 lanes from 90 and one on the C/D road which is still handling traffic from the Grove St. interchange to the south.
The I-91/I-95/CT-34 interchage in New Haven, which is luckily being fixed.
The US-6/RI-10/RI-14 interchange in Providence. This has been scheduled for replacement for yeard but who knows when/if it will ever happen.
And finally the classic disasters of the I-290/I-495 interchange and both I-93/I-95 interchanges.
Thank christ this got re-configured (Spring-Sandusky in Columbus, OH.)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fbishopdan.com%2Fimages%2Fspring-sand-71.jpg&hash=8f6bf4b003ad24fb7fa8bb9940e69f7a8a88f74b)
One from recent travels: I-355 at Boughton Road (pushing the envelope a bit here)
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.731547,-88.031956&spn=0.006005,0.020599&t=k&z=17 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.731547,-88.031956&spn=0.006005,0.020599&t=k&z=17)
It's not really the interchange that stinks; it's how cash customers are forced to weave across entering traffic for the cash lanes at the toll plaza. IMHO this is an offense worthy of striping I-355 of its interstate designation (get an IPASS? One ought to not have to buy some special transponder to use an interstate)
I-459 @ US 280 in Birmingham:
http://www.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=&ie=UTF8&ll=33.441657,-86.730291&spn=0.004217,0.006545&t=k&z=17 (http://www.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=&ie=UTF8&ll=33.441657,-86.730291&spn=0.004217,0.006545&t=k&z=17)
Traffic going from I-459 Southbound to US 280 Eastbound not only has a ramp with a sharp curve, but one has to cross other traffic coming from I-459 Northbound going to US 280 in both directions. US 280 Westbound only carries 2 through the interchange and a weaving problem existing on US 280 westbound just past this interchange with traffic trying to enter The Summitt shopping center.
Quote from: J N Winkler on March 14, 2011, 01:19:38 PM
The US 101 shield is just fine--it meets Caltrans' rather offbeat but acceptably proportioned specification. The I-880 shield, on the other hand, is an ugly and off-spec "bubble."
I disagree with that US 101 shield. Below are two versions of that sign I created using the current Caltrans 3-digit US shield spec and the 1961 US shield I received from Agentsteel53...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.markyville.com%2Faaroads%2F101_CurSpec.png&hash=df6acf2e46da9812329b7f701cc22381f3c5b6cd)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.markyville.com%2Faaroads%2F101_61Spec.png&hash=319bd22a5dba8b8e1968741357479f63a2d453dd)
Just for reference, the original sign...
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images880/i-880_sb_exit_004b_02.jpg)
the current standard isn't too too bad (looks like a 1957-spec shield widened by a whole lot), but I hardly see it anywhere. the 1961 looks great to me - but again I'd change it to the two-digit width.
my computer is being lame so I cannot upload the Shield Generator version of a 1961 green-sign spec US shield, two digit width, with Series D legend "101". use your imagination, folks!
most of Highway 40 in St. Louis interchanges before they were rebuilt
http://www.historicaerials.com/aerials.php?scale=3.2E-05&lat=38.6287399360093&lon=-90.2810827764684&year=1971
too many, just click and scroll the maps. for fun and games, aerials from 1958 and 2007 are available for comparison.
http://www.historicaerials.com/aerials.php?scale=8E-06&lat=38.7703145193589&lon=-90.2387547764688&year=1958
Dunn and Route 367 before 270 was built, just for good measure. Compare it to a later aerial after 270 was built.
One of the most notorious interchanges in the southeast US - I-85 @ I-285 northeast of Atlanta. Actually, the interchange is well designed, but for lower volumes that use it now. When I moved to Atlanta in 1982 that interchange was a cloverleaf, and had the nickname "Malfunction Junction". It would back up traffic on I-285 for miles every afternoon, overloaded with traffic wanting to use the loop to go north on I-85.
In the mid 1980's, over a four-year period, the interchange was converted into a fully directional interchange with no loops remaining at the cost of a billion dollars. However, years of traffic growth rendered it a bottleneck once again barely a decade after it was rebuilt. The traffic demands of the eastbound I-285 to northbound I-85 movement degrade the whole area, especially in the afternoon. IMHO, there are no easy solutions.
There are lane balance issues. I-85 traffic virtually doubles north of I-285, compared to south of I-285. Over the long haul, I-85 has the same number of basic through lanes both north and south of that interchange. The two-lane directional ramp itself is probably inadequate to carry the traffic that wants to use it. But the traffic that is already using it barely has any place to go on I-85, so just widening the ramp is no real solution.
The biggest issue for Atlanta traffic are inadequate freeway and arterial network for its size and population, and lack of alternate routes, either freeway or arterial, and this is a big problem at this interchange - it is very difficult to avoid it, if you are driving through this part of the metro area. Lots of local traffic is forced into that same interchange with the trucks and through traffic.
I work a few miles from this interchange, and I plan my work day to stay as far away from it as possible during certain hours of the day.
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 14, 2011, 08:57:10 PM
One from recent travels: I-355 at Boughton Road (pushing the envelope a bit here)
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.731547,-88.031956&spn=0.006005,0.020599&t=k&z=17 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.731547,-88.031956&spn=0.006005,0.020599&t=k&z=17)
It's not really the interchange that stinks; it's how cash customers are forced to weave across entering traffic for the cash lanes at the toll plaza. IMHO this is an offense worthy of striping I-355 of its interstate designation (get an IPASS? One ought to not have to buy some special transponder to use an interstate)
Lighten up, Francis. Over 80% of ISTHA users have an I-Pass and use it, so why should they cater to the less than 20% who use cash first?
It's bad for transponder people too: if you're getting off/on at that exit, you have to pay cash!
^^^
Can't you still use a transponder (IPASS/EZ-PASS) in the "cash" lanes?
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 14, 2011, 08:57:10 PM
get an IPASS? One ought to not have to buy some special transponder to use an interstate)
I don't like it either, but it's apparently the wave of the future. There are some transponder only toll roads in the US but I don't think there are any yet that have an interstate designation. (I could be wrong.)
Pennsylvania does have some EZ-Pass only exits on the turnpike system and is looking at a plan to transition to cashless operation.
Quote from: deanej on March 15, 2011, 12:39:51 PM
It's bad for transponder people too: if you're getting off/on at that exit, you have to pay cash!
WTF!?! I-Pass (and therefore EZ-Pass) is accepted in
all toll lanes at all ISTHA toll plazas. If you only use cash, you need to go through the manual lanes at the mainline plazas and cannot exit at Eola Rd on I-88.
Quote from: Brandon on March 14, 2011, 05:39:08 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 14, 2011, 05:18:22 PM
* Any interchange where a mainline interstate uses a loop ramp.
How about two. The Big X near Moline, Illinois has both I-80 and I-74 go through loops. :banghead:
Absolutely!
But i would also submit the stretch of I-294 between the I-88 ramp south of Cermak Rd to the I-290 ramp near North Ave especially for traffic flow for I-294 NB to I-290 WB, I-290 EB to I-294 SB, and I-294 SB to I-88 WB. A 294 SB collector would fix the later two and a simple flyover on 294 NB into a collector for St Charles Rd on 290 would fix the first.
Boughton Rd and 355 is in my village. The interchange itself is actually been improved ever since the I-Pass lanes were put in. Getting on 355 North used to be frequently backed up. Now, other than the actually turn lane back up, even in the morning rush, the ramp doesn't back up. As far as going South, again, there is no problem moving from the I-Pass lane in the actual plaza to exit at Boughton. There is almost 1/2 mile of room between the plaza and the ramp.
I'm surprised that no one has mentioned Breezewood (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=39.992443,-78.238535&spn=0.034588,0.084543&t=h&z=14).
Quote from: Michael on March 15, 2011, 10:53:06 PM
I'm surprised that no one has mentioned Breezewood (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=39.992443,-78.238535&spn=0.034588,0.084543&t=h&z=14).
Breezewood isn't a bad interchange, it's a bad non-interchange. ;)
I'm from out of town so I would have no need for an IPASS, so just handwaving the problem by saying "get an IPASS" is a non-starter.
If I lived in Chicago I probably wouldn't get an IPASS anyway after the glaring example of ISHTA customer service I experienced at the Chicago meet.
Quote from: Brandon on March 15, 2011, 02:22:50 PM
Quote from: deanej on March 15, 2011, 12:39:51 PM
It's bad for transponder people too: if you're getting off/on at that exit, you have to pay cash!
WTF!?! I-Pass (and therefore EZ-Pass) is accepted in all toll lanes at all ISTHA toll plazas. If you only use cash, you need to go through the manual lanes at the mainline plazas and cannot exit at Eola Rd on I-88.
Maybe ISTHA handles it better than NYSTA, but on the Thruway, if you use EZ-Pass in a cash lane it isn't automatically handled - the booth operator has to push a button saying you can go, and you have to come to a complete stop. There was even a post on MTR a while ago where a person did that entering at exit 23 and the toll booth was unattended - the person from the adjacent booth would walk over and hand out tickets to people in that lane. Needless to say, rather than pushing the button to handle EZ-Pass, the person simply handed the driver an exit 23 ticket. That driver had to use the cash lanes at Woodbury rather than the high speed lanes because of this.
^^ It's automatically handled. There are dozens of unattended booths on the ISTHA system (it's a barrier rather than ticket system) where it is automatically handled and the "Thank You" light comes on almost as soon as you stop in an I-Pass/coins lane.
I-295 and I-76 in NJ. Being fixed now.
I-75 at Florida's Turnpike and FL 44 are still bad interchanges that are too close together. FDOT and Florida's Turnpike Enterprise are still stalling on merging the two interchanges, but even when they get done with it, there will be no access to the turnpike from Northbound I-75, or from the turnpike to southbound I-75... unless you make a U-Turn at FL 44, of course.
:spin:
WB I-270 at I-255 South ramp (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=I-255+I-270&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=38.757229,-90.042529&spn=0.015896,0.058622&t=h&z=15&layer=c&cbll=38.757229,-90.042695&panoid=JnByUfMmIb45CJys_CLdiQ&cbp=12,259.41,,0,5)
IDiOT could had done this design much better than this. This ramp is too easy to miss unless you're on top of it. The interchange isn't that bad, its just this ramp that IDiOT f'ed up. Now you wonder why there are so many 10-50s on this section of westbound 270. . .
How about in Wayne, NJ where I-80 EB has no movements to NJ 23! You have to exit 5 miles sooner and use US 46 to make the connection!
How about the new I-4 and John Young Parkway in Orlando! Now to go from WB I-4 to SB John Young you have to weave as the John Young and LB McLeod intersection has a long stack up to help matters worse. Then there is a meaningless traffic signal at John Young and Clear Way that is only less than 400 feet north from LB McLeod Road that does not help either! It has hardly and traffic using Clear Way and could easily be a right in and right out on the NB Lanes of John Young. Just make some u turns and you are Okay from the SB side! How this signal got approved I do not know! Its in violation of the MUTCD.
Locally here in the Toledo area, the I-475/US 23 interchange in Sylvania if you're west/south on I-475 is pretty bad. It narrows to one lane, and then one has to cross traffic if they wish to exit at Central. This will likely get fixed when 475 is eventually widened.
I travel to MN to visit family a couple times a year, and the I-494/I-35W cloverleaf interchange is AWFUL. Tight ramps, short merges and packed with traffic. 494 backs up for miles in either direction largely because of this interchange. I sincerely hope for their sake they can at least advance construction of the two proposed flyovers (NB-WB and SB-EB) in the next 5-7 years, as funding will likely limit construction of the ultimate build-out for years to come.
Quote494 backs up for miles in either direction largely because of this interchange.
494's backups are largely due to other interchanges and factors. The 35W interchange is a contributing factor, but by far is *NOT* the primary factor.
Quote from: Michael on March 15, 2011, 10:53:06 PM
I'm surprised that no one has mentioned Breezewood (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=39.992443,-78.238535&spn=0.034588,0.084543&t=h&z=14).
Also, in PA, I'm surprised no one has yet mentioned the "South Junction" of I-70 & I-79, with all of it's issues. Though, apparently, work should begin on redoing it in a couple of months.
494's backups are largely due to other interchanges and factors. The 35W interchange is a contributing factor, but by far is *NOT* the primary factor.
[/quote]
You probably have a better feel for that than I do. I'm just going based on my (limited) experience driving through this corridor. It always seems to choke up a couple miles before the interchange and free up a few miles after. You're right though, that whole stretch is problematic. I saw a few aerials of the proposed improvements on MnDOT's website, looks pretty elaborate. Given the current economy and condition of state budgets, it will probably be a while before it's completed in it's entirety.
Quote from: froggie on March 22, 2011, 12:04:44 PM
Quote494 backs up for miles in either direction largely because of this interchange.
494's backups are largely due to other interchanges and factors. The 35W interchange is a contributing factor, but by far is *NOT* the primary factor.
I think you're right, but TRG does have a point. The primary culprit is 494 WB to I-35W SB, which for a while was part of an alternate route (and occasional detour) to avoid the MN-62/I-35W commons while it was being reconstructed. Even though there's not as much traffic making that exit it has since been completed, the window to merge in and out is very small and so there can be a lot of deceleration in the through lanes. It's still a scary exit to make.
Quote from: roadman65 on March 21, 2011, 10:48:52 PM
How about in Wayne, NJ where I-80 EB has no movements to NJ 23! You have to exit 5 miles sooner and use US 46 to make the connection!
That whole interchange is screwed up. And I can say that having just used it earlier this month.
Quote from: Mr_Northside on March 22, 2011, 02:55:19 PM
Also, in PA, I'm surprised no one has yet mentioned the "South Junction" of I-70 & I-79, with all of it's issues. Though, apparently, work should begin on redoing it in a couple of months.
"All of its issues?" It's just a standard trumpet with a tight curve.
speaking of bad interchanges due to the absence of connecting ramps... I-95 and the Penna Turnpike is the canonical example.
Quote from: haljackey on March 14, 2011, 03:55:47 PM
The 401/427 interchange in Toronto is horrific. 18 lanes on Highway 401 converge to just 8, plus there's left-hand exiting, sharp turns, etc.
The behemoth of an interchange was overbuilt in preparation for another freeway to connect at this junction, but it never got built.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.static.flickr.com%2F2760%2F4504864905_af953e180c.jpg&hash=f953dde2535bfea410b20a45b50a991c6586874a)
Hwy 403 was to meet at this interchange but was scrapped by the NIMBY effect, instead they built two freeways into one at the JCT of hwy 401, 410, and 403. Creating the E/C system west, to this interchange with only a half transfer from Collector to Express going west, and a 'basket weave' going east. 403 was originally planed to follow East Gate parkway then follow as transmission tower line to this interchange
How about the current I-80 and I-99 interchange near Milesburg, PA? It has no freeway to freeway connection and just south of I-80, I-99 drops to a surface arterial. If I-99 is to be duplexed with I-80 it cannot be on a non freeway type of road. I know we are talking about the same Commonwealth that allows a traffic light and surface arterial on I-70, so I guess why not in the eyes of PennDOT.
Quote from: Beeper1 on March 14, 2011, 06:22:40 PM
The I-90/I-95/MA-128/MA-30 interchange mess in Weston & Newton MA. Add the long C/D road on 95/128 NB and the access to/from Recreation Rd and it can be a massive bottleneck, especially where the ramp from 90 to 95/128 NB merges from 3 lanes to 1. (2 lanes from 90 and one on the C/D road which is still handling traffic from the Grove St. interchange to the south.
That's by far not the worst feature of that interchange. Coming off I-90 westbound at exit 15 and going onto I-95/MA-128, there is a scary dangerous merge, with traffic on the ramp from I-90 required to yield to traffic coming from behind on the left (from I-90 east) and moving to the ramp to 95/128 south, all within less than 100 feet. Traffic moving from I-90 west to 95/128 north must move immediately to the left after the merge in that same tiny space. There are tons of crashes at this point, mostly because the concept of "Yield" is so foreign to Massachusetts drivers.
Quote from: Beeper1 on March 14, 2011, 06:22:40 PM
both I-93/I-95 interchanges
There's nothing wrong design-wise with the one on the South Shore (where MA-128 ends/begins) and there are very few crashes there. The one on the North Shore, which is about a mile and a half from my house, is a cloverleaf (read: at least one crash a week) and a sterling example of the lack of foresight by Massachusetts highway designers which we see over and over again. They've been trying to fix it for years by a re-design with single off-ramps in each direction and flyovers, but even the least costly fix would involve removing about a dozen homes and a few businesses, and property costs being what they are these days the condemnation costs alone raise the possibility that this problem will never be solved.
Quote from: roadman65 on March 26, 2011, 08:31:39 PM
How about the current I-80 and I-99 interchange near Milesburg, PA? It has no freeway to freeway connection and just south of I-80, I-99 drops to a surface arterial. If I-99 is to be duplexed with I-80 it cannot be on a non freeway type of road. I know we are talking about the same Commonwealth that allows a traffic light and surface arterial on I-70, so I guess why not in the eyes of PennDOT.
Isn't some sort of preliminary work underway to make this a full freeway-to-freeway interchange?
How's this for a bad interchange: the Dallas Mixmaster, junction of I-30 and I-35E
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi631.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fuu40%2FChip1701%2FAARoads%2FDallasMixmaster.jpg&hash=3edd31ce720e1838a8df6901230c481ce90454b1)
Quote from: Brandon on March 14, 2011, 05:39:08 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 14, 2011, 05:18:22 PM
* Any interchange where a mainline interstate uses a loop ramp.
How about two. The Big X near Moline, Illinois has both I-80 and I-74 go through loops. :banghead:
For that exact reason, I choose my route around the Quad Cities based on whether I am going to/coming from I-74 or I-80. If I am going to/from I-80, I use I-280, if I am going to/from I-74, I use I-80.
Nothing beats Japan in terms of compressed interchanges. The speed limit is often only 25 or 40 mph on such interchanges.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F1nv3r.jpg&hash=dcc992304d70004d2659e451e656f2259099c1a9)
This is also in Michigan and also on I-96, but it's not as bad as the other two I posted on the first post. This is where I-96, US-131, and M-37 meet north of Grand Rapids.
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=43.018203,-85.673146&spn=0.01277,0.039783&t=k&z=15
How about the Conroy Road Interchange in Orlando, FL on I-4? It has a cloverleaf ramp from EB Conroy to EB I-4, but a left turn ramp from WB Conroy to WB I-4 using a left turn signal. There is less traffic going EB to EB then WB to WB and top it off there is a mall to the east on Conroy where (guess what) most people leaving it go to (uh I-4).
Also another thing to add, the moron who designed the Conroy overpass for the interchange with I-4 installed big ugly spires on all four corners of the bridge! They are just plain ugly and a waste of tax dollars! Just google the interchange and check out the street view to see it!
Then the WB ramp onto I-4 merges into a lane that ends at the Florida Turnpike. During rush hour there is a back up on the Conroy ramp because so many cars need to exit I-4 WB onto the Turnpike and you have the vehicles entering I-4 clashing with those exiting I-4. It was not well planned at all.
Quote from: deanej on March 16, 2011, 03:44:52 PM
Quote from: Brandon on March 15, 2011, 02:22:50 PM
Quote from: deanej on March 15, 2011, 12:39:51 PM
It's bad for transponder people too: if you're getting off/on at that exit, you have to pay cash!
WTF!?! I-Pass (and therefore EZ-Pass) is accepted in all toll lanes at all ISTHA toll plazas. If you only use cash, you need to go through the manual lanes at the mainline plazas and cannot exit at Eola Rd on I-88.
Maybe ISTHA handles it better than NYSTA, but on the Thruway, if you use EZ-Pass in a cash lane it isn't automatically handled - the booth operator has to push a button saying you can go, and you have to come to a complete stop. There was even a post on MTR a while ago where a person did that entering at exit 23 and the toll booth was unattended - the person from the adjacent booth would walk over and hand out tickets to people in that lane. Needless to say, rather than pushing the button to handle EZ-Pass, the person simply handed the driver an exit 23 ticket. That driver had to use the cash lanes at Woodbury rather than the high speed lanes because of this.
Since I live in the Chicago area and my brother lives in Brooklyn, i was pleasantly surprised 5 years ago when i drove out there that mym I-Pass worked on the ez-pass system. At the time, Ohio and Indiana hadn't incorparated the electronic tolls but both state now have them. If i really wanted to, i could drive from here to Augusta ME or Norfolk VA using one transponder. It would be nice if Kansas and Oklahoma would also have the "exchange" program for my storm chasing.
I-495/I-678 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=bruckner+blvd+ny&aq=&sll=40.742138,-73.993176&sspn=0.070362,0.150204&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Bruckner+Blvd,+Bronx,+New+York&ll=40.743404,-73.834434&spn=0.008795,0.018775&z=16) - so, about the east half of the interchange?
I-83 and US 322 with I-283 in Harrisburg, PA. Too many single lanes for movements and including straight through on I-83.
I mentioned this on this thread;
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3015.msg98884#msg98884
But Northbound I-95 between the South Carolina Welcome Center and Exit 5 needs to be rebuilt.
Charlotte has a very bad interchange, I-77's Exit 11 (I-277/NC 16). Too many left-hand entrances and exits there.
The intersection of SB US71 and I-49 north of Texarkana has quite an anomaly. I travel this stretch almost daily. Traffic traveling southbound on US-71. First you have a left turn lane for Miller County 55. Then you have a left turn lane that leads you directly into the exit FROM I-49 . The exit is one way coming toward you. Further up, you have the left turn lane for the actual I-49 SP ramp. I put the streetview link there/I would have linked if I could.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Li7QRfMsgaxzLxdQ8
TxDOT says it is a " crossover" or "turn around" and the paint in the intersection signifies this. I have seen multiple vehicles either turn in then notice or figure out at the last second and jerk back into the traffic. While there are no I-49 signs at this crossover, there is a ONE WAY sign pointing to the left. There eventually are Wrong Way signs.
THere is no need for a crossover there. MC-55 is a quarter mile back and the actual I-49 ramp is less than a half a mile forward.
What should be there is a no left turns sign and at least paint over the left turn lane or remove it altogether.
This was a 13 year old post back from the dead. Suspect some have been modified. The I-475/US 23 has been.
Quote from: tigerwings on August 11, 2024, 09:04:28 AMThis was a 13 year old post back from the dead. Suspect some have been modified. The I-475/US 23 has been.
As has the I-70/I-79 south junction in Washington, PA.
I-55/Riverside Dr/Crump in Memphis, TN before the rebuild.
Mike
As for I-83/US-322/I-283 in Harrisburg (Eisenhower Interchange), a rebuild is on the drawing board. But it will be about 13 years before it's completed.
https://www.i-83beltway.com/projects/east-shore-section-2.php (https://www.i-83beltway.com/projects/east-shore-section-2.php)
My picks for least favorite interchanges:
- I-70 and K-18 between Junction City and Manhattan, KS. There's too much eastbound traffic on I-70 turning off to head to Manhattan. The intersection is not meant for as much traffic as it gets. It's in the KDOT "Ike" pipeline, so relief should come soon.
- I-35 and I-40 in Oklahoma City. It's a mess, especially southbound. Too much weaving involved. Most of the time I drive through OKC, I just use I-235 and the Kilpatrick Turnpike.
The US 65/US 69/IA 5 interchange (https://maps.app.goo.gl/cpKcCGKFKVvLt3C36) south of Des Moines has both this tiny merge area (https://maps.app.goo.gl/N56DnmtJCNzUsLHv8) and a hard right turn (https://maps.app.goo.gl/B9dnK9BBf7qMovN89) on an outer cloverleaf ramp, both of which look like they could be easily fixed but weren't.
Quote from: Brandon on March 14, 2011, 05:39:08 PMQuote from: Revive 755 on March 14, 2011, 05:18:22 PM* Any interchange where a mainline interstate uses a loop ramp.
How about two. The Big X near Moline, Illinois has both I-80 and I-74 go through loops. :banghead:
And that's the thing I hate most about IL, a state that builds cloverleafs where others would've built some sort of directional interchange at least (if not a stack).
I still dread the Rapid-Fire ramps in Chicago; in fact, entrances onto and exits off of the left lane scare the fuck out of me.
Before they were rebuilt, I'd have nominated both the 170 and 270 interchange as well as the 64/40 and 170 interchange in the St. Louis area. Even in North County along 270 was bad, particularly on the wb lanes as those ramps shot you past oncoming traffic along Dunn Road. Good to see that that area has been improved.
I-405 from SW 6th Ave to 12th Ave, northbound. US 26 merges then immediately splits away from I-405. Traffic trying to get onto I-405 north has to weave through traffic getting exit US 26 west, which can back up onto the bottom deck of the Marquam Bridge, I-5.
The US 60/VA 150 interchange (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.5011857,-77.5248039,875m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu) is a very compact cloverleaf that is extremely inadequate given traffic volumes on both routes. The merge area between the loop ramps is extremely short (about 400 feet) and traffic routinely backs up onto VA 150 during rush hour.
It's about to get a whole lot worse because of massive redevelopment of the former Spring Rock Green shopping center in the northwestern corner of this interchange - Springline at District 60 (https://chesterfieldbusinessnews.com/2023/springline-at-district-60-groundbreaking-initiates-first-phase-of-mixed-use-development/) will feature high-density housing, shopping, a business center (including some relocated Chesterfield County offices), and a multipurpose sports and concert arena. Reconfiguration of the interchange or even adding pedestrian accommodations was never considered as part of this project, it still isn't, and this area will probably become a traffic nightmare once everything is finished.
I-290/395 where it meets I-90. Absolutely confusing for anyone not familiar with the area. It backs up 290 for miles and people jumping in and out last second. On summer weekends and holidays forget it. Not to mention it's under construction.
I'll also mention I-84 where it meets I-90 in Sturbridge mainly heading eastbound. That eastbound transition onto I-90 should be at least 2 lanes as I once got backed up all the way back to Exit 5.
The I-88/290/294 interchange mentioned before is completely being rebuilt as part of ISTHA's Central Tri-State project, and most of the mentioned issues here are being addressed
I nominate the I-95/MD-32 interchange. Specifically because two of the movements are left-entrances onto busy I-95. Not only is 95 4 lanes in each direction at that point, but the curve geometry of the ramps is tight enough that you really do not have a lot of time to accelerate to fast-lane speed. (While the corresponding off-ramps are left exits, Route 32 is narrower and has a lower speed limit, so that's not really as problematic. Plus, they are exit-only lanes in both directions.)
I nominate the A-73/A-540/QC 175 interchange in Québec City. Hopefully the current reconstruction fixes it, but it's very substandard, a problem that's made worse by the incredibly high traffic volume, as there is no other way by road between Québec and Lévis.
In Myrtle Beach, the interchange with US 501 and SC 31 needs some improvements
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7402375,-78.9523951,956m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MDgyMC4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D
This interchange is a unique double-trumpet interchange with left exits off of SC 31, a limited-access freeway. From both directions of SC 31, the left lane becomes an exit to US 501. (SC 31 South to US 501 South, and SC 31 North to US 501 North), the interchange also has left lane entrances onto SC 31. It's also a fairly compact interchange, likely due to the wetlands.
The areas of concern I see are:
On SC 31, thru traffic has to be aware of traffic merging in from both the left and right, more so for US 501 traffic (both directions) to SC 31 North. You'd see it better on Streetview, but the sightlines aren't great for traffic merging from/exiting and feel like blind merges/exits.
You can see from Streetview, the guardrail on the ramp from SC 31 South to US 501 South indicates drivers don't anticipate the curve, maybe due to the long ramp leading to it?
On SC 31, the speed limit drops to 50 MPH through the interchange.
How I would fix it:
I would extend the right lane accel/decel lanes at least 1/4 mile beyond the start of the left lane drop & end of the left lane add. Due to the curves through the interchange, I would extend the accel/decel lanes to either (a) a straight section of roadway for better visibility or (b) to stagger the merging / lane changes due to a dual left-right exit at all points of SC 31.
I would add rumble strips in the lane for the left exits from SC 31 to US 501.
Assuming SC 31 is going to be a part of a future I-73, this interchange might need to be reconstructed to remove the left movements. That would be something for the 'redesigning interchanges' thread. In the short-term increasing the visibility and merge area on SC 31 should be a priority.