18-97_Basic_Guidelines_On_Pedestrian_Facilities.pdf

Nota Teknik (Jalan) 18/97

Basic Guidelines on Pedestrian Facilities

m .0 7

m .0 5

FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY

Basic Guideline on Pedestrian Facilities

Introduction Pedestrians are highly vulnerable road users and they form the second largest group of road users killed on Malaysian roads. In 1995, there were 5286 pedestrian casualties in traffic accidents, of which 711 were deaths. The majority of these (67%) involved people crossing roads, whereas about 33% involved people walking along (or working on) the road.

Cawangan Jalan, Ibu Pejabat JKR, K.L

Page 1



PROVIDING FOR PEDESTRIANS

Existing Facilities For Pedestrians Crossing Roads The current facilities provided in Malaysia to assist pedestrians in crossing busy roads include:     

Pedestrian Bridges and Subways, Signalised Pedestrian Crossings, Pedestrian (`Zebra') Crossings, School Children's Crossings, Combined `Zebra' and Signalised Pedestrian Crossings.

court action which may arise out of an accident at such sites. At many signalised intersections, a combination of `white and black' Zebra crossing markings have been installed in direct contradiction of the current Road Traffic Rules. These pose considerable risk to pedestrians because of the confusion between pedestrians and vehicle drivers as to who has `right of way'. Quite recently, `Yellow and Black' Zebra crossing markings have been introduced in conjunction with traffic signals. These are equally confusing to pedestrians and motorists.

In respect to pedestrian bridges and subways, there is strong evidence that the majority of those which have been built across non-express- The provisions for pedestrians to walk along way routes have poor utilisation. For example a roads varies greatly even in urban and `built-up' study of 10 pedestrian bridges in and around areas. In town and city centres, footpaths are Kuantan Pahang, showed utilisation at some generally provided as part of building (shop) sites was less than 10 %. although at few sites development, but in many cases these are utilisation was higher than 80%. A similar study severely obstructed by business activity, street of a Pedestrian Subway under Jalan SS l 64 (in furniture, motorcycle parking and even vehicle the Bandar Utama area) had less than 20% utili- parking. In addition to this, most footpaths are ùnfriendly' to pedestrians particularly the eldersation. ly and those who are `disabled'. The cutting of In respect to 'Zebra' type pedestrian crossings, the footpath at driveways, the excessive height there is considerable confusion about the obliga- of the kerbs, the lack of `ramps' at intersections tions of vehicle drivers and pedestrians at this and driveways, the common use of steps instead type of crossing. There is generally poor obser- of ramps to cater for changes in level and the vance of the `give -way' obligation by vehicle common presence of deep uncovered (and often drivers when pedestrians enter the crossing and smelly) drains, is a significant discouragement there appears,to be little or no enforcement of to pedestrians using the footpath and as a result even where footpaths are provided pedestrians this obligation by the police. find it more convenient to walk along the roadIn respect to signalised pedestrian crossings, way. while these offer a higher degree of safety for pedestrians, they are often not adopted on Federal Routes because (it is argued) it would interrupt the "free flow" of traffic on these routes. School Children's Crossings have been marked in various ways in different areas of Malaysia and none of them have any legal or regulatory backing. This poses a serious legal problem for road authorities such as JKR in the event of any Cawangan Jalan, Ibu Pejabat JKR, K.L

Guidelines On Facilities For Pedestrians To Cross Roads It is universally accepted that pedestrians need to be provided with safe and convenient facilities, to cross busy roads. The choice of type of treatment is not always clear cut and may be influenced by economics and other factors.

Page 2


General Factors To Be Considered: The provision of pedestrian facilities at a particular site needs to take into account factors such as: 





the number and characteristics of pedestrians wishing to cross the road at a given location. Questions which need to be considered are : are the pedestrians predominantly school children? age? are there disabled pedestrians who need to use the crossing? etc.. the functional classification of the road, eg Expressway, Major Arterial, collector Road , Local street, the speed, volume and composition of vehicular traffic, the width of the road. the number of traffic lanes and is it operating two-way or oneway? the character of the locality, eg urban, rural, residential , commercial, industrial etc.

Basic Guideline on Pedestrian Facilities lar traffic capacity requirements). This shortens the distance pedestrians have to cross when exposed to traffic, and also helps to reduce traffic speed.  by providing pedestrian refuge islands so that pedestrians can cross the road in stages, eg placing a central refuge in a `two way' traffic stream allows pedestrians to cross one direction of flow at a time.  by reducing vehicle speeds and reducing the variability of vehicle speeds. This makes gap selection by pedestrians less subject to errors of judgement.

The Importance Of Speed Control

In respect to traffic speed, this is closely related to the class of road, the road alignment and the nature of the locality. With the exception of expressways, where at-grade crossings are not  acceptable, reducing traffic speed in the vicinity of a pedestrian crossing, on all other classes of Consideration of these factors in most devel- road will greatly enhance pedestrian safety, both oped countries has resulted in a range of differ- for crossing roads and for walking along roads. ent types of treatments to meet the needs of However speed control, particularly on high pedestrians at a variety of sites and local condi- standard arterial roads is not easy to achieve. tions in the most cost effective way. The selec- The imposition of unreasonably low speed limtion of the most appropriate treatment is often a its, which require continual `heavy' enforcement matter of judgement, but this is assisted by the by police, is rarely if ever effective. However, development of, and use of, warrants and guides the setting of realistic speed limits (even if they which are aimed at achieving uniformity in deal- are higher than may be desired for pedestrian ing with similar conditions and ensuring cost safety), is desirable as this tends to reduce the variability of vehicle speeds. effective treatments. 

The ability of pedestrians to cross roads 'atgrade' anywhere is very dependent on traffic volume (or `flow rate') and traffic speed. As traffic flow rate increases, the availability of `gaps', sufficient for pedestrians to cross the road safely between vehicle arrivals at the site, decreases and pedestrians are delayed. At high traffic flow rates pedestrian delays can become very large and in some cases impatient pedestrians may make risky crossings in short gaps in the traffic flow. This situation invariably results in the occurrence of traffic accidents involving pedestrians. In this situation the ability of pedestrians to cross can be enhanced by measures such as: 

narrowing the vehicular roadway (maintaining only just sufficient width to meet vehicu-


The use of `Speed Humps' and other `vertical displacement' devices are not favoured on àrterial' roads because of the severe effect these have on heavy trucks and busses, but they are applicable and quite effective on `collector' and `local streets' in urban areas. Thus `Speed Humps' and `raised platform' areas, which may be used in conjunction with other `Local Area Traffic Management (LATM) Devices and `Traffic Calming' techniques can also be used in combination with pedestrian crossing facilities at appropriate locations.

Types Of Pedestrian Crossing Facilities Pedestrian crossing facilities can be categorised into three distinct types as follows: Page 3


  

Uncontrolled Crossings Controlled Crossings Grade Separated Crossings

Guidelines for the selection and use of these types of pedestrian crossings follow: A. Uncontrolled Crossings:

Uncontrolled crossing tend to occur by default at any location where pedestrians find it convenient to cross a road. They become more formal where pedestrian movements are concentrated such as at intersections, near bus stops etc. In general these uncontrolled crossings are simply provided with nothing more than ramps at kerblines to bring the footpath down to explicit warrants are not necessary.

Basic Guideline on Pedestrian Facilities way to pedestrians crossing the road between the flags (or flashing lights) during the periods when these devices are displayed.  Signalised Pedestrian Crossings, at which `right of way, is alternately allocated between pedestrians and vehicular traffic in accor dance with pre-set cyclic phasing, or on pedestrian demand by means of a "call" button. This includes `Pelican Crossing' signals and "Puffin" (Pedestrian User Friendly Intelligent") signals, and the provision of pedestrian phases and signal heads at conventional signalised intersections.  Manually controlled traffic operation. eg by police or by other people so authorised such as 'School Children' Crossing Supervisors C. Grade Separated Pedestrian Crossings:

Where the number of pedestrians wishing to Grade separated pedestrian crossings by means cross a road is significant and where the traffic of pedestrian over-bridges or subways potentialflows are high, to the extent that pedestrians ly offer pedestrians with the safest means of have difficulty finding a `safe gap' in traffic (eg crossing busy roads, however the required on a two-way road), the provision of a pedestri- bridge or subway construction is very expensive an refuge island may be justified. No numeric and these facilities are often poorly utilised warrants have been adopted for the provision of unless extensive fencing is used to deter pedesrefuge islands and each case should be treated trians from walking directly across the roadway. on its merits taking into account the volume of traffic, the number of pedestrians, the type of Where pedestrians need to cross expressway pedestrians (eg children, elderly) , the speed of (freeway, motorway) type roads, other than at traffic, the sight distance available etc. interchanges provided for vehicular traffic, grade-separated crossings are essential. They B. Controlled Crossings: should only be used on other types of roads At some sites with high traffic flow rates, the where conditions particularly favour this soluabove ùn-controlled crossing' treatments may tion and a high degree of utilisation can be not provide adequate safety, or capacity (for assured. heavy pedestrian demands), and some form of "Spacial (Grade) Separation" or some form of The following are some of the factors which "Time Separation" of the pedestrian - vehicle have been found to be associated with low utilisation of pedestrian bridges or underpasses: conflict is necessary. `Time Separation' treatments, which are the most common form of pedestrian crossing facility, include the following: Zebra Crossings, at which by statutory regulation, vehicular traffic must `give- way' to pedestrians who are on the crossing.  School Children's Crossings, either supervised or not supervised, (preferably supervised), at which vehicular traffic must give 






Low traffic flows, to the degree that pedestrians have little difficulty in finding a safe gap in the traffic flow to cross the road; The proximity to traffic signals. The interruption of traffic flow by traffic signals at a nearby intersection, usually provides pedestrians with an acceptable opportunity to cross a road. Any traffic signal within approximately 300 m of a pedestrian crossing site is likely to have a significant influence on the utiliPage 4


sation of any grade separated pedestrian crossing facility.  The provision of steps (stairs) rather than ramps at pedestrian grade separations has been found to be a discouragement to pedestrians.  Where subways are depressed below ground level, are long and not well lighted, personal security can be a perceived problem, particularly for women, children and elderly people. Such facilities often experience poor utilisation even in daytime.

Basic Guideline on Pedestrian Facilities (faces) and signal phases to assist pedestrians to cross safely can be incorporated at little additional cost. In general, at important intersections within cities and towns. there will usually be sufficient pedestrian movements to justify the provision of pedestrian facilities, not withstanding this, some guidelines / warrants for such provisions are included in Appendix A.

The type of pavement marking to be used to indicate the pedestrian crossing at signalised intersections is similar to that used at signalised pedestrian crossings away from intersections ie, conventional signalised pedestrian crossings as Warrants And Layout Guidelines Consideration of the various factors relevant to illustrated in Figure 5. These consist of white the choice of the appropriate type of pedestrian transverse lines marked across the carriageway crossing leads to the presentation of a range of the width between which may vary from a mindifferent types of facilities to suit various classes imum of 2.5m (for low pedestrian flows) to 4 m of road and different road environment situa- (for high pedestrian flows). Note that Zebra type tions. Most of the `well proven' techniques and markings must not be placed across the main devices are currently being used in Malaysia, but carriageways at signalised intersections. the main problem is that particular treatments are often used at inappropriate locations and the The pedestrian phases at signalised intersections geometric design, traffic signing and roadmark- are usually incorporated into the signal cycle in parallel with non-conflicting, or the least coning vary greatly from site to site. flicting traffic movements. It is generally acceptGuidelines for the selection of the most appro- ed that conflicts between left turning traffic is priate type of treatment are provided in Figure 1. acceptable except where high speed `slip' road The desirable general layout etc for various with 2 or more traffic lanes are provided. At sigtypes of pedestrian crossing facilities are illus- nalised intersections with significant pedestrian movements, `Zebra' type pedestrian crossings trated in Figures 2 to 7. may be installed across any separate left turn `slip' road, but never in conjunction with a sigIn the absence of quantitative and other guidenalised left turn `slip' road. It is also generally lines specifically developed for Malaysian conacceptable to allow the conflict between right ditions, it is suggested that those presented in the turn vehicular traffic and pedestrians crossing AUSTROADS (Australia) Guide To Traffic the roadway into which the right turners are Engineering Practice, Part 13 - Pedestrians, entering, except where this traffic movement is (derived from Australian Standard AS 1742. 10), proceeding on a green arrow signal. be adopted as Ìnterim Guidelines' until such time as experience in practice indicates any necessary changes to better suit Malaysian condi- Guidelines For Providing Facilities tions. These are attached as Appendix A of this For Pedestrians To walk Along Roads: report. There are few places on the road system where Provisions For Pedestrians At no provision needs to be made for pedestrians to Signalised Intersections walk along a road, and in view of the vulnerabilAt intersections where traffic signals are ity of pedestrians in any conflict with vehicles installed to control conflicting traffic move- (including motorcycles) some form of segregaments, the provision of special signal heads tion is desirable. However where the intensity of


Page 5


land use and thus pedestrian movements are low , such as in most rural areas, the road shoulder can adequately provide space for people to walk clear of vehicular traffic. While no numeric warrants are given for the provision of footpaths along roads, they are generally considered necessary in all "built-up" areas and may also be necessary at some rural locations such as in the vicinity of schools, mosques or other community facilities where pedestrians are likely to be concentrated. In some city and town situations, on 'local street' class of roads, where there may be very high pedestrian activity, the roadway itself. These situations in which vehicles and pedestrians share the road carriageway require specific traffic rules which give pedestrians equal priority to vehicles together with special traffic management arrangements, including a maximum speed limit of 25 km/h or less, to reduce the degree of threat to pedestrians posed by vehicular traffic. In some countries these are referred to as "Shared Zones".

Basic Guideline on Pedestrian Facilities 

Manhole covers and gratings, if they cannot be avoided, should be kept flush with the footpath surface and any drains close to the footpath, which could pose a danger to pedestrians, should be covered.



Clearance of at least 1.0 m should be provided between the traffic lanes and the footpath. This clearance, which should be greater where traffic volume and, or speed are high, increases the safety of pedestrians, and reduces the inconvenience / annoyance caused by the splash from vehicle tires in wet weather.



Where differences in level are catered for by a ramp instead of or in addition to steps, the gradient should not be steeper than 1 in 10. Where long ramps are involved, such as at pedestrian bridges, gradients of 1 in 20 to 1 in 33 should be provided.

Where footpaths are provided. consideration should always be given to the needs of elderly people and people with disabilities. The design should incorporate the following characteristics aimed at making them 'user friendly' for all classes of pedestrians: 

Where kerbs are provided at the edge of the carriageway, they should not be higher than 150mm. Where the footpath crosses or intersects the kerb as at intersections and driveways, the kerb should be `dropped' and a ramp at an acceptable slope should be provided.

Adequate width should be provided. This may vary from an absolute minimum of 0.9 m to 2.4 m or wider in shopping and other high pedestrian activity areas.



A height clearance of at least 2.0 m should be provided.



The pathway should not be obstructed by posts, poles, traffic signs, trees and other street furniture. Neither should they be allowed to be obstructed by adjacent business activity or parked vehicles, or unreasonably obstructed by motorcycles and bicycles. Any obstacle close to the pathway which could endanger pedestrians, particularly people with impaired vision, should be well delineated.


Changes in level along and beside the foot path should be minimised. Where it is not possible to avoid steps, particular care needs to be taken to properly identify them so that they can be seen, especially by people with impaired vision.

In general driveways should not `cut' the foot path but should be ramped up or down from roadway level to meet the footpath level. The need for pedestrians to step down to the driveway level and back up to footpath level at each driveway is a major discouragement to pedestrians using the footpath. In addition. pedestrians should be given `right of way' (priority) over vehicular traffic where drive ways cross the footpath. This pedestrian priority is greatly enhanced if vehicular traffic is ramped up to footpath level. 

Footpath surfaces should be firm. even. smooth and skid resistant, especially in wet

Page 6


conditions.

Conclusion Pedestrian movement forms part of almost every trip made on the road system and thus Pedestrians form an important component of the traffic sN-stem. The vulnerability of pedestrians. when they must operate amongst vehicular traffic, is amply emphasised by the high number of traffic accident casualties involving pedestrians. The lack of proper provisions for pedestrians to cross roads or to walk along roads safely is a major contributing factor to the high number of pedestrian casualties on Malaysian roads. Consideration of the specific needs of pedestri-


Basic Guideline on Pedestrian Facilities ans must be made an essential part of the planning. design. construction. maintenance and operation of every road or road project. These guidelines should be used as a means of achieving better and more consistent standards and practices in relation to creating a more ùser friendly' and safer road environment for pedestrians.

Page 7




Page 8




Page 9




Page 10




Page 11



Appendix A

WARRANTS / GUIDELINES FOR THE INSTALLATION OF PEDESTRIAN CROSSING FACILITIES. Based On AUSTROADS Guide To Traffic Engineering Practice Part 13 - Pedestrians, (1995). (In the following warranting criteria, P is the number of Pedestrians per hour and, ' V is the volume of vehicular traffic in the same hour.)

Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossings:

regard, the operating speed of traffic needs to be carefully assessed.

No specific warrants have been adopted for uncontrolled crossings, but they can be used at quite high traffic flows on arterial roads (but Not School Children's Crossings. on Expressways), particularly where traffic flow School children's crossings may be installed is `bunched' due to nearby traffic signals. Each at any location as indicated in Figure 1, case should be treated on its merits, considering where children need to cross a road on a regfactors such as: the width of road to be crossed, ular basis. Subject to firm arrangements whether it is operating one-way or two-way, the being made for the Children's Crossing Flags number of pedestrians, the traffic flow rate, the to be placed ( or the flashing lights to be speed of traffic, sight distance available etc. switched on) during the appropriate periods Uncontrolled pedestrian crossings are often of the day when children are expected to be combined with Local Area Traffic Management crossing the road, and for the flags to be Devices and `Traffic Calming' Techniques. removed (or the flashing lights switched off) outside the crossing periods. This arrangePedestrian, (`Zebra') Crossings: ment often includes the provision of a properly authorised, ìnstructed' and uniformed 'Zebra' type pedestrian crossings are appro`Crossing Supervisor', whose role is to oper priate, in the situations indicated in Figure 1, ate the crossing equipment and conduct the where the general traffic speed as indicated children safely across the road. by the 85th percentile traffic speed, is less than 70 km/h, subject to the following criteria being met:

Signalised Pedestrian Crossing:

The number of pedestrian (wishing to cross the road), P is at least 60 persons per hour,, the total volume of vehicular traffic on the road at the site, V is greater than 600 vph. for at least 2 separate one-hour periods of a typical week day, and the Product PxV > 90,000.  The width to be crossed by pedestrians in one `stage' is not more than Four (4) traffic lanes, ie. a carriageway of not more than 15 m wide.  The visibility is adequate, both in respect to vehicle drivers being able to see the crossing and pedestrians about to step onto the crossing, and the pedestrians being able to see the vehicles approaching the crossing. In this

A signalised pedestrian crossing may be installed where any one of the following criteria are met: Where, P > 350 pph for each of three (3)  one-hour periods of an average day, or, where, P > 175pph for each of any eight (8) one-hour periods and : where there is no central median or  pedestrian refuge island provided, the vehicular traffic flow, V > 600 vph (sum of both directions) in the same hours. where there is a central median or  pedestrian refuge island, the vehicu




Page 12


lar traffic flow, V > 1000 vph (sum of both directions) in the same hours. Subject to there being no other pedestrian crossing (including a grade separated crossing within a reasonable distance (say 200m) of the site. A signalised pedestrian crossing may be placed instead of a school Children's Crossing where: where P> 50pph for each of two (2)  one-hour periods and V > 600 vph. and, the product of PxV > 40,000.  A signalised pedestrian crossing may be  justified at any location on an Arterial road where the above warrants for a Pedestrian (Zebra) Crossing are met, but at which it would not be appropriate to install a Zebra type crossing due to the high speed of traffic or where the carriageway is wider than 15m, or where there is a continuous high flow of pedestrians which would cause excessive delay to vehicular traffic at a Zebra type crossing. A signalised pedestrian crossing may be  justified to replace an existing pedestrian (Zebra) crossing where the has been two or more pedestrian involved accidents, of a type which may be corrected by the installation of traffic signals, in the last three (3) years. A signalised pedestrian crossing may be  installed instead of a Pedestrian (Zebra) Crossing where the site is within a `coordinated (linked)' traffic signal system , or close to signalised intersection or a railway level crossing, where there is a dan ger of vehicles 

Grade Separated Pedestrian Crossings:

Grade separated crossings are very costly and experience shows that they are generally poorly utilised. They are however essential wherever pedestrians need to cross and Èxpressway' (or Freeway) route.

Basic Guideline on Pedestrian Facilities and each case should be treated on its merits, the following general guides should be considered. Low utilisation can be expected at sites where: Traffic flow on the carriageway to be  crossed is less than about 700 vph during the period when most pedestrians need to cross the road. The site is within 250 m of a signalised  intersection. The site is not conveniently located for  the pedestrian movements in the vicinity. Good utilisation is usually achieved 



In the vicinity of schools (particularly primary schools) where children can be `channeled' to the facility by fencing. At high pedestrian demand locations where ramps are provided directly on the most convenient route for pedestrians

Providing Pedestrian Signals At Signalised Intersections:

Pedestrian signal heads and 'push button' equipment should be incorporated as a general practice into all intersection and interchange signals in urban areas. Where there is doubt about the justification of the increased cost of providing the pedestrian equipment on some or all approaches to a signalised intersection. this provision is usually considered to be justified where the following criteria is met: 

At intersections where for any two (2) one-hour periods of an average day the Pedestrian volume. P >60 pph across the intresection approach under construction. The presence of children, elderly or disabled pedestrians at the site may justify the specialpedestrian equipment at lower pedestrian flows than this.

While no specific warrants have been adopted for grade separated pedestrian crossings, Cawangan Jalan, Ibu Pejabat JKR, K.L

Page 13

18-97_Basic_Guidelines_On_Pedestrian_Facilities.pdf

Recommend Documents