Single-lane roads

[jakeroot]

In Surrey, BC, there is a new road called Burns Drive parallel with Highway 99 between Ladner Trunk Road and Highway 17A. This road is particularly unique, given that it was built, in 2012-2013, with only one lane *total*. I can't recall seeing any new roads (farm or otherwise) built with only one lane in a very long time. And at most, they're usually dirt, not paved with pullouts every couple dozen meters like below.

Usually, single lane roads are tied to urban redevelopment projects, to slow traffic and heighten driver awareness. However, I don't think that concept applies here given the complete lack of pedestrians. I can see why BC chose this alternative -- having two lanes in each direction was probably a waste of money given the low traffic counts -- but it's far-fetched to say building single-lane roads is a common practice. If I was running the show, so to speak, I probably would have opted for the two-lane alternative, but all things considered, I don't think the road built as-is is suffering in any way.

Burns Drive on left:

[Quillz]

Kind of reminds me of those one-way frontage roads that are pretty common in Texas.

[Brian556]

It is probably there for property and power line access only.

[SignGeek101]

Also this one way bridge:

https://goo.gl/maps/9EK2A

I like the idea. Why waste the excess asphalt? I doubt it would ever be common though. AADT's usually go up in an area which doesn't make this idea work; roads like this (frontage roads) are an exception.

Also, nice to see some FHWA use in BC 

[roadman65]

The tunnel in Philly under the Museum of Art is single lane.  In fact looking at it on GSV makes me claustrophobic as it is so narrow and confined.

[Bruce]

One-lane bridges are thankfully being phased out.

WSDOT recently replaced a one-lane bridge on SR 9 (which was one of the oldest in the state at the time).

[1995hoo]

The Road to Applecross in Scotland is a single-lane road (I believe they say "single track") with occasional "passing places." You're only supposed to stop when the passing place is on your side of the road (the left)–you're not supposed to cross over to stop on the right.

There's another single-track road on the Mull of Kintyre near Paul McCartney's farm. I'm sure there are others.

I can think of a few US roads that are so narrow that two vehicles must slow to a crawl and practically drop the wheels off the pavement to get past, but that are probably a little too wide to be considered "single-lane." The road up to the McCormick Observatory in Charlottesville is one. It's no fun at night if you're heading up there and you have to pull to the right to let someone through going the other way, since there's a drop-off on your side of the road. 

[oscar]

One-lane bridges are thankfully being phased out.

Not in Hawaii. Two highways received Federal and state historic designations, specifically to protect their one-lane bridges (about five dozen on one highway with both state and county segments, about a dozen on the other which is all state highway). When one of those bridges was fatally damaged in an earthquake, its replacement was identical in style and dimensions, including having just one lane for both directions of travel. Hawaii has other roads that are largely or entirely one-lane (including county 340 in northwest Maui, the access road to the NOAA weather observatory on Mauna Loa in the Big island). though not on the state system.

Alaska has a long one-lane tunnel on the road to the port of Whittier, shared (carefully!) by not only both directions of traffic, but also Alaska Railroad trains. This was built as a rail-only tunnel (with autos carried on train shuttles), but was later converted to auto use.

[KEK Inc.]

One-lane bridges are thankfully being phased out.

WSDOT recently replaced a one-lane bridge on SR 9 (which was one of the oldest in the state at the time).

I don't think WSDOT intends to replace or widen this one north of Battle Ground on 503.

[SignGeek101]

One-lane bridges are thankfully being phased out.

WSDOT recently replaced a one-lane bridge on SR 9 (which was one of the oldest in the state at the time).

I don't think WSDOT intends to replace or widen this one north of Battle Ground on 503.

I don't see why single lane bridges should be phased out. Why build a two lane bridge if there is very little traffic that uses it? It's a waste IMO.

[Bruce]

Most one lane bridges have little traffic and can stay, but SR 9 was a special case. One of only a few north-south highways and swamped with traffic when the I-5 bridge in Mount Vernon collapsed in May 2013.

[jakeroot]

It is probably there for property and power line access only.

Probably the former. I ran up and down the road in Street View, and spotted the signs below. Sort of what I guessed the purpose of the roads was for (satellite shots also show lots of dirt on the road, which suggests the road is primarily used by tractors).

Also, nice to see some FHWA use in BC 

Probably left-over signs.



I think these single lane roads were built because of how drastically the Delta, BC area changed when the South Fraser Perimeter Road was built (100 km/h freeway between the Port Mann Bridge and Tsawwassen) (before on left, after on right):

I'm sure there are others.

There are. Last trip I took to England was filled with "single track" roads. I think their "passing place" signs are the only diamond signs in the UK (though sometimes they're squares)

I can think of a few US roads that are so narrow that two vehicles must slow to a crawl and practically drop the wheels off the pavement to get past, but that are probably a little too wide to be considered "single-lane." The road up to the McCormick Observatory in Charlottesville is one. It's no fun at night if you're heading up there and you have to pull to the right to let someone through going the other way, since there's a drop-off on your side of the road. 

Another one I remember was the Mount Washington Hill Climb. Very narrow road, though not strictly one lane (more like 1.75 lanes). Wide enough for two cars to pass but not for a truck and car (not that any truck could make it up there without blowing off).

There's another very narrow lane near me in Tacoma (62 Ave E between 52 St and 48 St). The road is a popular commuting route, and at its terminus with 52 St, is a large hedge on the left. On more than one occasion, there have been many near-hits with people pulling out blindly. Too bad the local council doesn't have any way to trim the shrubs (most of the US, to my knowledge, does not have laws permitting the local government to cut back trees on private property to increase visibility). I usually sound my horn multiple times pulling out, though much to the rancor of local residents (not that I give a shit).

[Quillz]

As long as we're talking about single-lane roads, I just recently visited Mt. Rushmore. US-16A en route to the mountain is two lanes wide total, a single lane in each direction with a wide median in between. And it makes use of the pigtail bridges. That entire stretch of highway isn't maintained in winter.

[realjd]

One-lane bridges are thankfully being phased out.

WSDOT recently replaced a one-lane bridge on SR 9 (which was one of the oldest in the state at the time).

I don't think WSDOT intends to replace or widen this one north of Battle Ground on 503.

I don't see why single lane bridges should be phased out. Why build a two lane bridge if there is very little traffic that uses it? It's a waste IMO.

I'm surprised a bridge like that isn't signal controlled.

[iBallasticwolf2]

One-lane bridges are thankfully being phased out.

WSDOT recently replaced a one-lane bridge on SR 9 (which was one of the oldest in the state at the time).

I don't think WSDOT intends to replace or widen this one north of Battle Ground on 503.

I don't see why single lane bridges should be phased out. Why build a two lane bridge if there is very little traffic that uses it? It's a waste IMO.

I'm surprised a bridge like that isn't signal controlled.

Especially considering it isn't super-long. Although from this GSV (https://www.google.ca/maps/@48.265122,-122.165457,3a,75y,345.03h,80.11t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sK_9C1UQzKo2-Yx5Zujw-Nw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DK_9C1UQzKo2-Yx5Zujw-Nw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D100%26h%3D80%26yaw%3D41.970829%26pitch%3D0!7i3328!8i1664) the bridge doesn't look to be in the best of conditions and I could understand catering to future traffic counts. One lane roads should only be used in remote areas or if traffic is supposed to be very slow and when space requires a small road. It does save on asphalt although with passing bays on both sides it seems like it would take more ROW then a basic 2 lane road.

[Brandon]

There's a lot of single lane country roads out there.  In Illinois, they're typically maintained by a township and are either chip and seal or gravel.  Makes meeting farm implements fun.

[SignGeek101]

One-lane bridges are thankfully being phased out.

WSDOT recently replaced a one-lane bridge on SR 9 (which was one of the oldest in the state at the time).

I don't think WSDOT intends to replace or widen this one north of Battle Ground on 503.

I don't see why single lane bridges should be phased out. Why build a two lane bridge if there is very little traffic that uses it? It's a waste IMO.

I'm surprised a bridge like that isn't signal controlled.

It should only be signal controlled if the traffic demands it, but doesn't demand a two way bridge IMO (or construction as seen below). Otherwise, I think it does more harm than good to attach a signal somewhere (cost versus use).

Example:



During the summer, this road is busy. It being a single lane is only due to construction though.

[jakeroot]

There's a lot of single lane country roads out there.  In Illinois, they're typically maintained by a township and are either chip and seal or gravel.  Makes meeting farm implements fun.

I sort of got off-topic, but were any of them built in the last decade? I originally meant for this thread to detail new-ish single lane roads (but I did not specify that originally).

[TEG24601]

SR 225 near Battleground, IN and Delphi, IN has a single-lane bridge over the Wabash River, controlled by traffic signals.

[iBallasticwolf2]

SR 225 near Battleground, IN and Delphi, IN has a single-lane bridge over the Wabash River, controlled by traffic signals.

*Just casually ignores the floods in the picture

I would say that is a longer bridge than the SR 9 one in Washington. The SR 9 bridge probably didn't need signals because the length was short enough so that you could see the other end of the bridge from each end unlike the SR 225 bridge which is longer. It does make sense to control a longer length bridge with a signal.

[TEG24601]

SR 225 near Battleground, IN and Delphi, IN has a single-lane bridge over the Wabash River, controlled by traffic signals.

*Just casually ignores the floods in the picture

I would say that is a longer bridge than the SR 9 one in Washington. The SR 9 bridge probably didn't need signals because the length was short enough so that you could see the other end of the bridge from each end unlike the SR 225 bridge which is longer. It does make sense to control a longer length bridge with a signal.

That section of the Wabash seems to flood every spring.  And just a few days ago, I saw a picture that actually had the water over the 225 sign.


You are correct about the signals not being needed for the SR 9 bridge, but in my travels, I've found a lot of places doing culvert work, and more substantial bridge work controlling access with traffic signals, likely so there isn't an argument.


I was also going to mention the previous configuration of Dock Grade Rd. between SR 141 and SR 14 in the Bingen-White Salmon, WA area.  It is a single lane roadway (since at least 1996) but until a few years ago had two-way traffic, with just enough room for vehicles to squeeze by.





We are actually having a debate in my home town as to how to address a narrow roadway to our marina.  It is impossible for two trucks carrying boats to get past each other, and have pedestrians on the sidewalk, and there are many ideas for solutions.  Including signals, mirrors, flaggers, or expanding the road.  Expanding it quite difficult because the adjacent properties have clauses in their deeds that they cannot sell any portion of the land for public use (which is likely illegal), so they would have to taken through Eminent Domain, which would be quite expensive.

[Brandon]

There's a lot of single lane country roads out there.  In Illinois, they're typically maintained by a township and are either chip and seal or gravel.  Makes meeting farm implements fun.

I sort of got off-topic, but were any of them built in the last decade? I originally meant for this thread to detail new-ish single lane roads (but I did not specify that originally).

Nope, they're all relatively old.  Until late 2012, we still had a one-lane bridge in Will County, one of the six counties typically considered "Chicagoland".



Renwick Road over the DuPage River.  The bridge is still there, bypassed by a more modern one, but it is now used for bicycle and pedestrian traffic.

[iBallasticwolf2]

From the closest GSV to the bridge on Renwick road it seems like the bridge doesn't have very good access for "Bicycle and pedestrain traffic."
GSV here- https://www.google.ca/maps/@41.592881,-88.225992,3a,75y,128.14h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sP8XtW7HMu4RL5qNSPmYGuQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DP8XtW7HMu4RL5qNSPmYGuQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D100%26h%3D80%26yaw%3D136.39172%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656

[Brandon]

From the closest GSV to the bridge on Renwick road it seems like the bridge doesn't have very good access for "Bicycle and pedestrain traffic."
GSV here- https://www.google.ca/maps/@41.592881,-88.225992,3a,75y,128.14h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sP8XtW7HMu4RL5qNSPmYGuQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DP8XtW7HMu4RL5qNSPmYGuQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D100%26h%3D80%26yaw%3D136.39172%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656

That's from almost 3 years ago.  Much has changed since then.

[Rushmeister]

SR 225 near Battleground, IN and Delphi, IN has a single-lane bridge over the Wabash River, controlled by traffic signals.

I suppose this belongs in the "Bridges" category, not the "Single-lane roads" thread, but...

When I was a kid I lived near this bridge.  Back in those days there were no signals, which resulted in confusion at times.  Most drivers exercised patience and courtesy and problems were few.  In the pre-signal days an unwritten rule-of-crossing existed:  If you approached the bridge and saw that there was already a car on the bridge going the same direction as you, then you could proceed to cross -- even if there was an approaching car queued up and waiting to cross.   More efficient than simply taking turns. 

Occasionally two opposing cars would reach the approaches at the same time.  A quick flash of the headlamps would signal your intent to yield to the other vehicle and you waited your turn.

However, I have witnessed instances of impatient drivers turning this into a two-lane bridge.  It can be done if the vehicles are small enough.

Not so many years ago Wabash River in this part of Indiana had many one-lane bridges.  Above Lafayette one-lane crossings existed at Battleground (pictured here), Americus, and just west of Delphi (oddly named Bicycle Bridge).  Below Lafayette were the one-lane Granville Bridge and the crossing between Independence and Riverside.  All of these bridges were beautiful iron truss monstrosities.  In the 1970s and 80s all of them were decommissioned and replaced, except for the IND 225 bridge near Battleground.  I wonder how many years she has left in her.