Who has right-of-way on a one-lane bridge?

[wanderer2575]

I saw this link posted on humorist Dave Barry's blog yesterday -- the story from Picton, Australia is that two elderly drivers in opposing directions refused to yield to each other in the middle of a one-lane bridge, each feeling he/she had been first on the bridge, and they remained in their standoff for 30 minutes while traffic backed up on both sides of the bridge.  (Police eventually arrived and fined both drivers for obstructing traffic; no mention in the story of which driver was the moral victor.)

http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2016/09/12/Elderly-drivers-cited-for-30-minute-standoff-on-single-lane-bridge/8501473690487/?spt=sec&or=on

Chuckles and eye rolls aside, what is the protocol in this situation?  Are there laws governing who has right-of-way on a one-lane (or narrow two-lane) bridge, or is it a matter of courtesy?  (Other than a lineup of cars on both sides, in which case one hopes and assumes they alternate one car in each direction.)  And are there any one-lane bridges so long and with a curve or other obstruction that one can't see the other end and might very well come face-to-face with an opposing vehicle?  What then?

[kphoger]

I'm glad there are instances where right of way is not clearly spelled out. There need to be places where common sense and courtesy must be used.

I've been on plenty of roads that are only wide enough for one vehicle to pass, and I've occasionally had to reverse to let an incoming driver by. Go to a country with one-lane streets signed for two-way traffic, go to 4WD roads in the Rockies, go to alleys just about anywhere, and you'll encounter these situations.

[Max Rockatansky]

Usually I wait a little bit when I'm approaching one lane bridges.  That way I can see anyone is coming the other direction, if there is I tend to let them pass so I don't have to deal with them further up the road after the bridge.  One-lane one one-lane and a half generally requires a lot of patience in general whereas people who aren't used to it tend to still drive like they do in suburbia.  I would imagine ROW laws if they exist would largely favor the vehicle that accesses the bridge first....but like kphoger said common sense is the best alley. 

[nexus73]

When US 101 ran from Coos Bay to Coquille and thence to Bandon, a very narrow 2-lane bridge crossing the Coquille River was build heading out of Coquille towards Bandon.  On it was a sign that stated it was a one way bridge for log trucks.  Everyone gave the right of way to the log trucks.  How the truckers settled their "who goes first" deal when two trucks met is unknown to me.  There was not widespread use of CB radios back then as there later was in the woods. 

Thankfully this obsolete bridge was replaced in the late Eighties as I recall.

Rick

[Max Rockatansky]

Not a one-way bridge scenario but I had a funny incident with my Cousin up on CA 236 heading up to Big Basin a couple months back.  Her and the family were in San Jose for the Olympic trials for something and weren't even planning on doing anything at all.  They didn't want to go far so I took them to the nearest Redwood grove that I knew about.  At about 2,000 feet above sea level on CA 9 I got the question "are we going to have a hard time breathing" out of my Cousin.    Anyways when I hit 236 the road quickly went to down a lane to lane and one-half wide heading up to Big Basin.  She was kind of spooked about how narrow the road was but I assured her was a normal thing for rural highways in California.  Then the log truck came around a blind curve.  I causally pulled to the shoulder slightly since it's something I'm used to and the truck passed.  My Cousin flipped out saying something to the affect of "why is a log truck here?" "where are you taking us?"    Needless to say she wanted off the mountain fast when we got back to the car after seeing the Redwoods.  I guess it a bit of culture shock for someone who lives around D.C.  It just makes me wonder what kind of reactions I would get on places like Mineral King Road, the Apache Trail, Kaiser Pass Road, or anything that I know that's narrow in general that's infinitely more badass than CA 236 was. 

Bottom line...pull over for the log trucks, they will win and they can't stop fast. 

[Rothman]

Heh.

[Michael]

Just outside of Auburn, NY, there's a one-lane bridge on Mutton Hill Road over a railroad.  The angle of the road and the fact the bridge is on a slight hill make it so you can see if anyone's on the other side.  Here's the view you have heading northbound, and southbound is similar.  Usually, the first car there is the first to cross, but sometimes someone will let the other car cross first.

Another local one is Bonta Bridge on Bonta Bridge Road between Weedsport and Jordan.  You can't see the other end, and I've always wondered what would happen if you met someone in the middle.  I've only been on this bridge a few times, and it isn't busy enough to make it likely to run into oncoming traffic.

[Roadrunner75]

I met someone head-on in the middle of this bridge - and it's actually signal controlled.  I think I went through the tail-end of the yellow, but there should have been enough buffer.  I won the confrontation and he ended up backing up, but we had a little bit of an argument on the other end...
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.5196297,-74.3192002,3a,95.6y,35.31h,83.07t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sUHfFCe3jMPRCtOR2pJnDcw!2e0?

[Brandon]

The one lane bridges (and viaducts) I've seen are controlled by one of two methods:

1. If sight distance is a problem, then a signal (usually for underpasses):

We've got a traffic-light-controlled one-lane underpass in Rockford, Illinois. While it's wider than one lane, the angle of the road and the Union Pacific railroad tracks was too acute (obtuse, if you're looking at it the other way LOL) for two cars to pass through at one time.  20th Street makes an 'S-curve under the UP tracks before crossing the Canadian National railroad tracks.

Here's approaching the underpass: http://goo.gl/maps/B0rPW

Here's underneath the bridge: http://goo.gl/maps/wCDK9

I got a couple of photos of it back in February.

The approach, crossing some railroad tracks:


The tunnel itself as I was waiting for the signal to change:

2. If sight distance is not a problem, then first come, first serve:

The One-Lane Renwick Road Bridge over the DuPage River and its replacement construction in Plainfield.

No, that last one never even had so much as a yield sign.

[SteveG1988]

in my vehicle, even the truck, i approach, blow the horn, and flash the high beams at night. In the truck i throw on my 4 ways so people can see me from farther away. In my car i toot the horn if i cannot fully see the approach roads.

[hm insulators]

The great big pick-up truck with the gun rack full of rifles.

[kkt]

I saw this link posted on humorist Dave Barry's blog yesterday -- the story from Picton, Australia is that two elderly drivers in opposing directions refused to yield to each other in the middle of a one-lane bridge, each feeling he/she had been first on the bridge, and they remained in their standoff for 30 minutes while traffic backed up on both sides of the bridge.  (Police eventually arrived and fined both drivers for obstructing traffic; no mention in the story of which driver was the moral victor.)

http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2016/09/12/Elderly-drivers-cited-for-30-minute-standoff-on-single-lane-bridge/8501473690487/?spt=sec&or=on

Chuckles and eye rolls aside, what is the protocol in this situation?  Are there laws governing who has right-of-way on a one-lane (or narrow two-lane) bridge, or is it a matter of courtesy?  (Other than a lineup of cars on both sides, in which case one hopes and assumes they alternate one car in each direction.)  And are there any one-lane bridges so long and with a curve or other obstruction that one can't see the other end and might very well come face-to-face with an opposing vehicle?  What then?

If they meet where there's an uphill direction and a downhill direction, the car going downhill must yield to the car going uphill.

The drivers in Picton should be sentenced to writing by hand the story of the North-going Zax and the South-going Zax fifty times.

[Duke87]

If they meet where there's an uphill direction and a downhill direction, the car going downhill must yield to the car going uphill.

That seems odd to me considering that the car going uphill will have an easier time stopping.

[Max Rockatansky]

If they meet where there's an uphill direction and a downhill direction, the car going downhill must yield to the car going uphill.

That seems odd to me considering that the car going uphill will have an easier time stopping.

It's a lot easier backing up downhill than it is uphill.  You're going to fight a nasty battle depending on your gearing trying to back up a large grade.

[renegade]

I drove across a narrow bridge in Dandridge on TN-92 last week.  Fortunately, I was the only vehicle on the bridge.

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0120901,-83.4142003,639m/data=!3m1!1e3

It appears they are building a replacement span immediately to the west, however I was not able to stop for photos.

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0131612,-83.4137601,3a,60y,163.66h,71.93t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOyRyF_xLLiYQ-REXi4sqRA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

As you can see, it is two lanes, but they are very narrow.  A vehicle much wider than your average passenger vehicle would cause problems.

[kphoger]

If they meet where there's an uphill direction and a downhill direction, the car going downhill must yield to the car going uphill.

That seems odd to me considering that the car going uphill will have an easier time stopping.

This was my thinking as well.  However, in wet conditions, getting going again on an uphill slope can be a dicey situation.

[Brandon]

If they meet where there's an uphill direction and a downhill direction, the car going downhill must yield to the car going uphill.

That seems odd to me considering that the car going uphill will have an easier time stopping.

However, the right-of-way is done due to other factors that may prevent the uphill vehicle from being able to continue forward if it stops.  As an example, the streets in Houghton, Michigan tend to have 3-way stops with no stop for up hill traffic.  This is due to the steepness of the hill and that if one stops heading uphill during the winter, one may wind up sliding all the way back down to Portage Lake on the ice and snow.

[1995hoo]

In Mexico, I'm told the etiquette is that the first driver to flash his lights has the right-of-way, which of course is alien to most people from the US since flashing your lights to us usually means "go ahead."

To me the worst is when people want to take turns one and one. On the north shore of Kauai, going one and one is specifically taboo–you let five or six people go one way, then the other way goes. It seems to work a lot better.

We used to have a one-lane bridge on Woodburn Road here in Fairfax County and the right-of-way normally went to the most aggressive driver. I still remember the day in 1979 when our school bus rear-ended a VW Beetle whose driver was being a pussy about seizing the right-of-way.

[Duke87]

To me the worst is when people want to take turns one and one. On the north shore of Kauai, going one and one is specifically taboo–you let five or six people go one way, then the other way goes. It seems to work a lot better.

This is because every time the traffic flow on the bridge switches directions, it takes time for one direction to clear before the other can proceed. The fewer times the direction is switched, the greater the throughput that can be achieved.

That said, it seems unusual to me that a permanent one lane bridge would exist on a road with sufficient traffic counts for this to make a difference.

[empirestate]

If they meet where there's an uphill direction and a downhill direction, the car going downhill must yield to the car going uphill.

That seems odd to me considering that the car going uphill will have an easier time stopping.

This was my thinking as well.  However, in wet conditions, getting going again on an uphill slope can be a dicey situation.

It definitely has less to do with who can stop more easily, but rather who can start up again. In notoriously-hilly Pittsburgh, it's very common for 4-way crossroads to be signed with 3-way STOP signs, the uphill approach being the one not required to stop.


iPhone

[roadman]

If they meet where there's an uphill direction and a downhill direction, the car going downhill must yield to the car going uphill.

That seems odd to me considering that the car going uphill will have an easier time stopping.

This was my thinking as well.  However, in wet conditions, getting going again on an uphill slope can be a dicey situation.

It definitely has less to do with who can stop more easily, but rather who can start up again. In notoriously-hilly Pittsburgh, it's very common for 4-way crossroads to be signed with 3-way STOP signs, the uphill approach being the one not required to stop.


iPhone

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOmayx2JBs8

[epzik8]

I always give the other driver the right-of-way unless they give it to me. The reason I choose to yield to them is because I assume they won't yield to me. But I have been yielded to on one-way bridges before.

[noelbotevera]

Basically what we do is that whoever comes first, goes first.

[empirestate]

Basically what we do is that whoever comes first, goes first.

Sure, but I think the whole point here is, when it's not known who was first, or for some reason both vehicles have an equal claim to being first, then what?

[noelbotevera]

Basically what we do is that whoever comes first, goes first.

Sure, but I think the whole point here is, when it's not known who was first, or for some reason both vehicles have an equal claim to being first, then what?

Ah. Generally what I do is to move on to traffic. If there's more people going across, they go first.

If it's unsure I'd yield and let them have right-of-way.