You are on page 1of 165

Highway Safety Design Standards

Part 1:






Road Safety Design
Manual
















May 2011



Republic of the Philippines
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS





May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual ii
FOREWORD
This Road Safety Design Manual is issued by the Department of Public Works and
Highways (DPWH) to establish and maintain standardized safe road design
principles and standards for roads in the Philippines.
The manual is part of the DPWH Highway Safety Design Standards Manual as
follows:
Part 1: Road Safety Design Manual
Part 2: Road Signs and Pavement Markings Manual
This Road Safety Design Manual has been developed as part of the Road
Infrastructure Safety Project with the assistance of DPWH staff from the Bureau of
Design and the Road Safety Section, Project Evaluation Division of the Planning
Service.
This manual is to be used in conjunction with the DPWH Highway Design Guidelines.
The manual includes standards and guidance for safety planning, safety design and
for road safety risk assessment. The manual is to be used as a primary reference for
the planning, design and management of National Highways and local roads. To
maximize safety, it is essential to maintain a consistent standard for road and
intersection design.
In the interests of uniformity, Local Government Units, project managers and
consultants are requested to apply the principles in this manual to provide
appropriate standards for intersections and lengths of roadway in the Philippines.
The principles contained in this manual should also be used in the training of DPWH
staff involved in road planning, design, road works project management and traffic
management.
The manual includes safety design principles based on best international practice
applicable to the Philippines settings. Specific areas of design where changes in
past practice are expected to lead to significant safety improvements include:
Choice of intersection type and layout. This is particularly related to the
design and use of roundabouts and the type of channelization to reduce
potential conflicts and the severity of traffic accidents (includes avoiding
use of Y junctions and T junctions with triangular islands);
Safety of the roadside. This includes the definition of a clear zone for a
forgiving roadside and the use of certified median and roadside barriers
as well as the use of frangible lighting poles; and
Safety of unprotected road users such as pedestrians and cyclists.
When the design principles in this manual are used in conjunction with the DPWH
Highway Design Guidelines, roads and intersections will be to a design that
maximizes road safety.

May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual iii
References:
AASHTO - A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 2001.
AASHTO - Roadside Design Guide, 2002.
U.S. Highway Capacity Manual.
VicRoads Road Design Guidelines.
AUSTROADS Rural Road Design: A Guide to the Geometric Design of Rural
Roads, 2003.
AUSTROADS Urban Road Design: A Guide to the Geometric Design of Major
Urban Roads, 2002.
AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice, Part 5: Intersections at Grade.
AUSTROADS Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice, Part 6: Roundabouts.



May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual iv

Table of Contents


FOREWORD ............................................................................................................................. II
SAFETY PLANNING ................................................................................................................. 1
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 2
1.1 Background .......................................................................................................... 2
2 LAND USE AND ZONING ................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Principles in Land Use Planning and Zoning ....................................................... 4
2.2 Traffic Planning for Different Land Uses .............................................................. 5
2.2.1 Residential Areas ......................................................................................................... 5
2.2.2 Industrial Areas ............................................................................................................ 6
2.2.3 Commercial / Retail Areas ............................................................................................ 6
2.2.4 Recreational/Tourism Areas ......................................................................................... 7
3 ROAD HIERARCHY ........................................................................................................... 9
3.1 Primary Arterials (Expressways, National Roads) ............................................. 10
3.2 Secondary Arterials (Provincial Roads) ............................................................. 11
3.3 Collector Roads (Municipal / City Roads) .......................................................... 12
3.4 Access Roads (Local Roads) ............................................................................ 13
3.5 Pedestrianized Areas/Routes ............................................................................ 15
4 ROUTE PLANNING THROUGH EXISTING COMMUNITIES ..................................................... 17
5 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL / ENCROACHMENT .................................................................. 19
6 ACCESS CONTROL ........................................................................................................ 20
7 TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT (TIA) ............................................................................. 21
8 ROAD DESIGN PARAMETERS ......................................................................................... 23
8.1 Speed Management........................................................................................... 23
8.1.1 Design Speed ............................................................................................................. 23
8.1.2 Speed Implications ..................................................................................................... 23
8.1.3 Current Speed Limits .................................................................................................. 23
8.1.4 Speed Restriction Signs ............................................................................................. 26
8.1.5 Poor Road Standards ................................................................................................. 26
8.2 Road Capacity ................................................................................................... 26
8.3 Traffic Forecasts ................................................................................................ 27
9 PUBLIC TRANSPORT ...................................................................................................... 28
9.1 Public Transport Operations .............................................................................. 28
9.2 Lay-bys, Bus Stops and Service Roads ............................................................ 28
10 VULNERABLE ROAD USERS ........................................................................................... 31
10.1 Pedestrians ........................................................................................................ 34
10.2 Cyclists ............................................................................................................... 36
11 PARKING ...................................................................................................................... 38
11.1 Parking Near Intersections ................................................................................ 38
11.2 Angle Parking ..................................................................................................... 38
11.3 Parking Adjacent To Barrier Lines ..................................................................... 39
12 LIGHTING ...................................................................................................................... 41
SAFETY DESIGN .................................................................................................................... 44
13 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 45
13.1 Background ........................................................................................................ 45
13.2 Safe Design Principles ....................................................................................... 45
14 ROAD SURFACE ............................................................................................................ 46
15 ROAD ALIGNMENT CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................. 48
15.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 48
15.2 Some Physical Problems ................................................................................... 48

May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual v

16 ROAD ALIGNMENT GEOMETRY ....................................................................................... 55
16.1 General .............................................................................................................. 55
16.2 Design Standards .............................................................................................. 56
16.3 Sight Distance .................................................................................................... 58
16.3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 58
16.3.2 Sight Distance Elements ........................................................................................ 58
16.3.3 Driver Eye Height / Object Height .......................................................................... 59
16.3.4 Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) .............................................................................. 59
16.4 Horizontal Geometry .......................................................................................... 62
16.4.1 Circular Curve Alignment ....................................................................................... 62
16.4.2 Spiral and Circular Curve Alignment ...................................................................... 63
16.4.3 Superelevation Development ................................................................................. 65
16.5 Vertical Geometry .............................................................................................. 66
16.5.1 Grades ................................................................................................................... 66
16.5.2 Vertical Curves ...................................................................................................... 69
17 CROSS SECTION ........................................................................................................... 74
17.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 74
17.2 Traffic Lanes ...................................................................................................... 74
17.3 Shoulders ........................................................................................................... 75
17.4 Curb and Gutter ................................................................................................. 75
17.5 Drainage ............................................................................................................ 76
17.6 Pedestrian Facilities on Rural Roads ................................................................. 77
17.7 Overtaking Provision (Auxiliary Lanes) .............................................................. 78
17.7.1 Overtaking Lanes: ................................................................................................. 79
17.7.2 Climbing Lanes ...................................................................................................... 81
17.7.3 Merging and Diverging for Auxiliary Lanes ............................................................ 82
17.7.3 Slow Vehicle Turn-outs: ......................................................................................... 83
17.7.4 Descending Lanes: ................................................................................................ 84
17.7.5 Emergency Escape Ramps: .................................................................................. 84
18 DELINEATION ................................................................................................................ 86
19 INTERSECTIONS ............................................................................................................ 89
19.1 Intersection Types .............................................................................................. 89
19.2 Traffic Control Devices....................................................................................... 89
19.2.1 Priority Intersections .............................................................................................. 90
19.2.2 Signal Controlled Intersections .............................................................................. 90
19.3 Control of Conflicts ............................................................................................. 90
19.4 Control of Speed ................................................................................................ 92
19.4.1 Relative Speed ...................................................................................................... 92
19.4.2 Attaining low relative speeds ................................................................................. 93
19.5 Channelization ................................................................................................... 94
19.6 Lane widths ........................................................................................................ 95
19.7 Auxiliary Lanes at Intersections ......................................................................... 95
19.8 Right and Left Turning Lanes ............................................................................ 96
19.9 Right Turn Slip Lanes ........................................................................................ 98
19.8.1 High Entry Angle Slip Lane .................................................................................... 99
19.8.2 Free Flow Slip Lane ............................................................................................. 100
19.10 Left Turn Treatments ................................................................................... 100
19.11 Intersection Capacity ................................................................................... 102
19.12 Sight Distance at Intersections .................................................................... 102
19.13 Horizontal and Vertical Intersection Geometry ............................................ 103
19.14 Roundabouts ............................................................................................... 104
19.14.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 104
19.14.2 Safety Benefits ........................................................................................................... 104
19.14.3 Appropriate Locations for Roundabouts .................................................................... 104
19.14.4 Balanced Flows ......................................................................................................... 105
19.14.5 Roundabout Design Practice ..................................................................................... 105
19.14.6 Things to Avoid .......................................................................................................... 109
19.14.7 Design Steps ............................................................................................................. 109
19.14.8 Traffic Control and Priority ......................................................................................... 113

May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual vi

19.15 Examples of Poor Intersection Layouts ....................................................... 114
19.15.1 Y-Intersection ............................................................................................................ 114
19.15.2 Y Intersection with Triangular Island ........................................................................ 116
20 SAFETY OF THE ROADSIDE .......................................................................................... 117
20.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 117
20.2 Clear Zone ....................................................................................................... 117
20.3 New Roads ...................................................................................................... 121
20.4 Existing Roads ................................................................................................. 121
20.5 Treatment of Hazards ...................................................................................... 122
20.6 Roadside and Median Safety Barriers ............................................................. 126
20.6.1 Road Safety Barrier Systems: ............................................................................. 127
20.6.2 Design Of Barrier System Installations ................................................................ 133
20.7 Further Examples of Barrier Installations......................................................... 140
20.7.1 Bridge Railing ...................................................................................................... 140
20.7.2 Connection to Bridge Railing ............................................................................... 141
20.7.3 Railing End Treatment ......................................................................................... 142
20.7.4 Unconnected Concrete Barriers .......................................................................... 143
20.7.5 Gore Area ............................................................................................................ 145
20.7.6 Trees ................................................................................................................... 147
20.7.7 Street Lighting Poles............................................................................................ 147
20.7.8 Other Examples of Roadside Hazards................................................................. 150
20.7.9 Curbs in Front of Barriers .................................................................................... 152
RISK ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................................ 153
21 RISK ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................................... 154
21.1 Risk .................................................................................................................. 154
21.2 Likelihood ......................................................................................................... 154
21.3 Consequence ................................................................................................... 154
21.4 Risk Category .................................................................................................. 155
21.5 Treatment Priority ............................................................................................ 155



APPENDIX 1 - ROADSIDE BARRIERS STANDARD DRAWINGS

APPENDIX 2 - CONCRETE BARRIERS

APPENDIX 3 - FRANGIBLE POLES - SPECIFICATION AND DRAWINGS

APPENDIX 4 - SPEED TEMPLATES FOR ROUNDABOUT DESIGN

APPENDIX 5 - TURNING TEMPLATES FOR LARGE VEHICLES

APPENDIX 6 - CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER DETAILS

May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual vii

Table of Figures

Figure 2.1 : Poor Zoning and Road Planning Interface ................................................ 4
Figure 2.2 : Good Zoning and Road Planning Interface ............................................... 5
Figure 2.3 : Ideal Road Network Planning for Tourism Areas ...................................... 8
Figure 3.2 : Externally and Internally-fed Networks .................................................... 10
Figure 3.3 : Road Network that Attracts Through Traffic Onto Local Roads .............. 14
Figure 3.4 : Road Network that Deters Through Traffic from Using Local Road........ 14
Figure 3.5 : Road Layouts that Deters Through Traffic from Using Local Roads ...... 15
Figure 4.1 : Road Layout that Results in Conflict Between Local and Through Traffic
................................................................................................................ 18
Figure 4.2 : By Pass Road Deters Through Traffic from the Community ................... 18
Figure 5.1 : Encroachment that Reduces Effective Sidewalk Width........................... 19
Figure 8.1 : Risk of Pedestrian Fatality ....................................................................... 24
Figure 8.2 : High Speed Road with Separate Lane for Non-Motorized Vehicles ....... 25
Figure 8.3 : High Speed Road with Wide Median ....................................................... 26
Figure 9.1 : Bus Stop Concept, EDSA ........................................................................ 29
Figure 9.2 : Lay-By Concept, EDSA ............................................................................ 29
Figure 10.1 : Poor facilities for pedestrians ................................................................. 34
Figure 10.2 : Good Pedestrian Facilities ..................................................................... 35
Figure 10.3 : Obstructions that Reduce Effective Travel Width for Pedestrians ........ 36
Figure 10.4 : Segregated Pedestrian and Bikeway from Main Thoroughfare ............ 36
Figure 10.5 : Road without bike lanes ......................................................................... 37
Figure 11.1 : Angle Parking with Maneuvering Area Clear of Through Traffic Lanes 39
Figure 12.1 : Types of Lighting and Illumination ......................................................... 42
Figure 12.2 : Lighting Installations at Intersections ..................................................... 43
Figure 14.1 : Poor road surface with depressed manhole lid ..................................... 46
Figure 14.2 : Poor Road Edge ..................................................................................... 47
Figure 15.1 : Poor Design and Delineation of Curve .................................................. 48
Figure 15.2 : Lost Control on Curve ............................................................................ 49
Figure 15.3 : Extreme topography results in small radius curves ............................... 49
Figure 15.4 : Trees Obstructing Sight Distance .......................................................... 50
Figure 15.5 : Poor Vertical Alignment Approaching a T-Intersection ......................... 50
Figure 15.6 : Poor Intersection due to Lack of Channelization ................................... 51
Figure 15.7 : Small (5m radius) Roundabout in Balayan Town .................................. 51
Figure 15.8 : Horizontal Curve at the End of a Steep Downgrade ............................. 52
Figure 15.9 : Poor Vertical Sag ................................................................................... 52
Figure 15.10 : Reverse Curves .................................................................................... 53
Figure 15.11 : Poor Combination of Horizontal and Vertical Alignment ..................... 53
Figure 15.12 : Delineation of Curve Poor night-time visibility .................................. 54
Figure 16.1 : Sight Distance Types ............................................................................. 61
Figure 16.2: Circular Curve Geometry ........................................................................ 63
Figure 16.4: Superelevation Development .................................................................. 65
Figure 16.5: Truck Speeds on Grades ........................................................................ 68
Figure 16.7 : Crest Vertical Curves ............................................................................. 71
Figure 17.1 : Good Cross-Section providing lane for vulnerable road users. ............ 74
Figure 18.1 : Good Road Delineation .......................................................................... 86
Figure 18.2 : Poor Curve Delineation .......................................................................... 87
Figure 18.3 : Poor Delineation of the Center and Edge of Roadway ......................... 87
Figure 18.4 : Examples of Chevron Signs providing Delineation of Curves ............... 87
Figure 18.5 : Road Delineation affected by shadows ................................................. 88
Figure 19.1 : Large Intersection Conflict Area............................................................. 91
Figure 19.2 : Three-Legged Intersection ..................................................................... 91

May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual viii
Figure 19.3 : Four-Legged Intersection ....................................................................... 91
Figure 19.4 : Roundabout at Four-Legged Intersection .............................................. 92
Figure 19.5 : Cross Road ............................................................................................. 92
Figure 19.6 : Y Intersection Layout ............................................................................. 93
Figure 19.7 : Roundabout ............................................................................................ 93
Figure 19.8 : Conflicts at Y and T Intersections .......................................................... 94
Figure 19.9 : Guideline for Left and Right Turn Lanes ................................................ 96
Figure 19.10 : High Entry Angle Slip Lane .................................................................. 99
Figure 19.11 : Free Flow Slip Lane ........................................................................... 100
Figure 19.12 : Type A Left Turn Treatment .............................................................. 101
Figure 19.13 : Type B Left Turn Treatment ............................................................... 101
Figure 19.14 : Type C Left Turn Treatment ............................................................... 101
Figure 19.15 : Geometric Elements of a Roundabout............................................... 105
Figure 19.16 : Inner Urban Roundabout.................................................................... 106
Figure 19.17 : Outer Urban Roundabout ................................................................... 107
Figure 19.18 : Rural Roundabout .............................................................................. 107
Figure 19.19 Urban Splitter Island Details : Low Speed Approach ....................... 108
Figure 19.20 : Urban Splitter Island ........................................................................... 108
Figure 19.21 : Splitter Island for High Speed Approach ........................................... 109
Figure 19.22 : Movement Volumes and Circulating Flows ....................................... 109
Figure 19.23 : Number of Lanes ................................................................................ 110
Figure 19.24 : Turning Radius for Determining Circulating Carriageway Width ....... 110
Figure 19.25 : Deflection Requirement Single lane ............................................... 112
Figure 19.26 : Deflection Criteria Multi Lane .......................................................... 112
Figure 19.27 : Typical Pavement Markings at a Multi Lane Roundabout ................. 113
Figure 19.28 : Give Way Sign (R1-2) ........................................................................ 114
Figure 19.29 : Poor Intersection Layout .................................................................... 114
Figure 19.30 : Poor delineation ................................................................................. 115
Figure 19.31 : Poor Intersection Layout .................................................................... 116
Figure 20.1 : Recovery Area (100 kph operating speed, flat cross slope) ............... 118
Figure 20.2 Road with Good Clear Zone. ................................................................ 119
Figure 20.3 : Clear Zone Calculation ......................................................................... 120
Figure 20.4 : Relocated Pole ..................................................................................... 122
Figure 20.5 : Drivable Culvert End ............................................................................ 122
Figure 20.6 : Steel Sign Posts ................................................................................... 123
Figure 20.7 : Frangible Wooden Posts ...................................................................... 123
Figure 20.8 : Pole Hazard .......................................................................................... 124
Figure 20.9 : Impact Absorbing Pole ......................................................................... 124
Figure 20.10 : Unprotected Roadside Hazard........................................................... 125
Figure 20.11 : Use of Barrier ..................................................................................... 125
Figure 20.12 : Median Barriers .................................................................................. 128
Figure 20.13 : Roadside Barriers............................................................................... 129
Figure 20.14 : Roadwork Barriers.............................................................................. 130
Figure 20.15 : Effective Clear Zone (ECZ) ................................................................ 134
Figure 20.16 : Fill Slope Safety Barrier Warrant ....................................................... 135
Figure 20.17 : Median Safety Barrier Warrant .......................................................... 136
Figure 20.18 : Approach Barrier Design Elements ................................................... 137
Figure 20.20 : Poor Bridge Railing ............................................................................ 140
Figure 20.21 : Very Good Bridge Railing................................................................... 140
Figure 20.22 : Poor Bridge Railing No Connection ................................................ 141
Figure 20.23 : Good Connection to Bridge Railing ................................................... 141
Figure 20.24 : Poor End Treatment ........................................................................... 142
Figure 20.25 : Car Speared by Guardrail .................................................................. 142
Figure 20.26 : Very Good End Treatment ................................................................. 143
Figure 20.27 : Unconnected Concrete Barriers......................................................... 143

May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual ix
Figure 20.28 : Good Connected Barriers .................................................................. 144
Figure 20.29 : Very Good Connected Barrier ............................................................ 144
Figure 20.30 : Poor Unconnected Barrier ................................................................. 145
Figure 20.31 : Poor Gore Treatment ......................................................................... 145
Figure 20.32 : Poor Gore Treatment ......................................................................... 146
Figure 20.33 : Very Good Gore End Treatment using Impact Attenuator ................ 146
Figure 20.34 : Tree Hazard ....................................................................................... 147
Figure 20.35 : Frangible Poles .................................................................................. 147
Figure 20.36 : Impact-Absorbing Pole ....................................................................... 148
Figure 20.37 : Impact Behavior - Slip Base and Impact Absorbing Poles ................ 149
Figure 20.38 : Hazardous Roadwork Site ................................................................. 150
Figure 20.39 : Hazardous Pipe Installation ............................................................... 150
Figure 20.40 : Hazardous Protruding Pole Outside Line of Barrier .......................... 151
Figure 20.41 : Hazardous Barrier System ................................................................. 151
Figure 20.43 : Curb in front of Barrier ........................................................................ 152


May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual x
List of Tables

Table 16.1 : Design Standards for Philippine National Highways .............................. 57
Table 16.2 : Driver Eye and Object Heights ................................................................ 59
Table 16.3 : Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) ............................................................... 60
Table 16.4 : K Values for Crest and Sag Vertical Curves ........................................... 73
Table 17.1 : Traffic Volume Guidelines for Provision of Overtaking Lanes ................ 80
Table 17.2 : Overtaking Lane Lengths ........................................................................ 81
Table 17.3 : Diverge and Merge Lengths .................................................................... 83
Table 19.1 : Intersection Sight Distance (ISD) .......................................................... 103
Table 19.2 : Circulating Carriageway Widths ............................................................ 111
Table 20.1 : Curve Correction Factor ........................................................................ 121
Table 20.2 : Test Levels for Roadside Barriers ......................................................... 126
Table 20.3 : Offset from edge of traffic lane to face of barrier .................................. 132
Table 20.4 : Clearance from face of barrier to face of hazard .................................. 132
Table 20.5 : Runout Lengths for Barrier Design ....................................................... 137
Table 20.6 : Maximum Flare Rates for Barrier Design.............................................. 139
Table 21.1 : Likelihood Definition .............................................................................. 154
Table 21.2 : Consequence Definition ........................................................................ 155
Table 21.3 : Risk Category ........................................................................................ 155
Table 21.4 : Treatment Priority .................................................................................. 155

May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual 1




SAFETY PLANNING
2 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
This section of the manual describes features relating to the safety of a length
of road or the road network through the awareness of safety principles during
the planning stages of a new area or of a road project.
Planning of new areas or road projects can be considered in four stages:
Laying out the land-use of the area. This is where for example,
industrial areas can be separated from residential areas or where
consideration should be given to the movement of people, particularly
pedestrians and cyclists. The location of shopping centers and schools
should be considered carefully to facilitate the safe movement of
pedestrians and motor vehicles and in order to avoid the potential
impact of adjacent heavy through-traffic;
Once the land-use is determined, an arterial road network should be
defined to cater for through traffic. This is then supported by a network
of local roads that provide access to the properties within the area.
The separation of through traffic from local traffic is an important
principle in road safety;
On the arterial roads, careful control and management of access can
facilitate safety and the smooth flow of traffic; and,
Careful planning and provision of public transport facilities can ensure
that the conflict areas between pedestrians and vehicles are
minimized.
3 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
2 LAND USE AND ZONING
Zoning in the Philippines has been under total control of the Housing and
Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB), until the early 1990s when this
function was gradually decentralized to the Local Government Units by virtue
of the Local Government Code. Since then, each unit of the Local
Government became responsible for zoning of their respective jurisdictions
and final land use and zoning plans were submitted to HLURB for approval.
Thus, the municipal, city, and provincial planning and development offices
(MPDO, CPDO, and PPDO) have developed comprehensive land use and
development plans to control within sustainable limits urbanism and rapid
growth.
It is the intent of this manual that road safety concerns should be given
emphasis in the conduct of traffic impact assessment for new developments
or any project that would significantly affect local zoning ordinances. As
experienced in Metro Manila, the emergence of large traffic generators such
as malls and similar commercial establishments has created fragmented land
use interactions that have deteriorated traffic operation of the road network.
While traffic impact assessments may have been prepared for these
developments, safety may not have been given adequate emphasis.
Therefore, in the course of planning for large traffic generators, it is imperative
to consider the following:
That big land developments must carefully follow project size threshold
as identified by the zoning administrator of the locality. The threshold
may be gauged based on the total land area of the project site, the
footprint area of the building, percentage land occupancy, floor area
ratio (FAR);
Large land developments usually are big traffic generators and should
not have direct access to a high speed road facility. This is to provide
a buffer between pedestrians and entering traffic from high volume and
high speed traffic;
The minimum local standards pertaining to access and parking
requirements should be carefully followed. It may be essential that
access, parking, and lay-by facilities must be treated separately
corresponding to private cars, public utility vehicles, and cargo
trucks/delivery vans;
Pedestrians should be given utmost consideration by providing
facilities that would segregate them from through and local traffic. A
network of at-grade and elevated walkways should be properly planned
considering travel patterns and volume of pedestrians;
Nighttime operation is deemed more critical than daytime as this would
require further analysis on lighting requirements and added security;
4 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
2.1 Principles in Land Use Planning and Zoning
The key principles to be adopted in land use planning and zoning are the
following:
Development and implementation of a zoning plan to separate
incompatible and conflicting land uses and the traffic they generate;
Strong planning regulations to influence the location of new
development and to control access arrangements and parking;
Land uses should be planned with the aim of minimizing travel and
maximizing accessibility to public transport;
Residential development should be separated from heavy industry and
major commercial uses;
Activities which generate substantial traffic should be located adjacent
to roads most suited to the type of traffic expected (e.g., if a primary
school generates many cycle or pedestrian trips, then it should be
capable of being reached directly via a network of bikeways or
footpaths); and,
Light industry and service establishments can be located adjacent to
residential areas but vehicular access should not be via the residential
streets.

Figure 2.1 : Poor Zoning and Road Planning Interface
Figure 2.1 illustrates a residential area separated from school zone and work
places by a primary road. Pedestrians crossing the road pose safety
concerns. A more adequate traffic and land-zoning interface is shown in
Figure 2.2 where all developments are located on the same side of the
primary road. This setup then would eliminate safety concerns as
pedestrians will not regularly cross the road.
5 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 2.2 : Good Zoning and Road Planning Interface

2.2 Traffic Planning for Different Land Uses
2.2.1 Residential Areas
Residential roads are the prime locations where vehicles and pedestrians
interact and where the movement function fulfills an increasingly minor role
amongst the most important service and domestic activities. In order to
provide a safe environment for vehicles and pedestrians:
Residential roads longer than 100 to 200 meters should be meandering
and should have tight horizontal curves or roundabouts at local road
intersections to encourage low speeds;
Non-access traffic needs to find it impossible, or highly inconvenient, to
use residential roads as a short cut;
Pedestrians must be given priority, especially close to buildings and in
play areas;
Direct access to dwellings should be provided from access ways rather
than distributor roads;
Where dwellings have vehicular access onto distributor roads,
alternative pedestrian access should be provided via segregated
footpaths onto access ways;
Pedestrians should be segregated wherever possible and crossings of
traffic routes should be convenient and safe;
Parking should be ample and convenient but located away from areas
where children play;
6 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Drivers need to be made aware of the priority for pedestrians on entry
and throughout the area by the overall geometry, surface texture and
threshold treatment as they enter the area;
Large developments should be sub-divided to minimize traffic on
internal roads;
Existing grid networks with cross roads should be modified by closures
or restrictions to create internally or externally-fed systems;
Inter-visibility between drivers and pedestrians should be sufficient to
minimize the risk of accidents; and,
Overnight parking of lorries, especially those with hazardous loads,
should be actively discouraged.
2.2.2 Industrial Areas
Industrial areas are very important to the economy of most countries and it is
necessary for them to be provided with safe, efficient links to national and
international markets for both raw materials and finished goods. The
important factors to consider for the layout and design of industrial estates
are:
Land zoned for industrial purposes should have direct access from the
district distributor network whenever possible;
Each site should have sufficient off-road parking and loading areas to
accommodate all its operational, staff and visitor requirements within
the site boundary;
Roads and footpaths should provide a safe and efficient means of
access for workers, visitors and the range of vehicles which can be
anticipated when a number of different industries are grouped together;
The internal circulatory system (to at least local distributor standard)
should ensure that no traffic queues on the network in normal
circumstances; and,
Networks of safe cycle/footpaths should be created between the
industrial area and the main areas where employees live.
2.2.3 Commercial / Retail Areas
Commercial and retail areas may vary from isolated stalls or street sellers to
major shopping centers and office developments covering large areas of land.
Consequently their transport needs may be very mixed. The main points to
consider in the planning of such areas are:
All commercial and trading areas should be away from the through
traffic network. If alongside, then service roads should be provided to
service the development;
Rear servicing, separate from pedestrian access should be provided
whenever possible;
Adequate parking and loading facilities for operational use should be
provided within the site of individual premises if possible;
7 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Visitor and customer parking should be provided off the road, possibly
on a communal basis;
On-street parking should be discouraged and only permitted where it
does not obstruct general traffic movements or conflict with
pedestrians;
Good public transport provision to and within such areas can effectively
reduce overall parking demand; and,
When rural main roads in developing countries pass through trading
centers it may be necessary to reduce speeds by physical measures
such as road humps and raised pedestrian crossings to protect
pedestrians and shoppers.
2.2.4 Recreational/Tourism Areas
As countries develop, people increasingly find time for leisure and
recreational activities. This leads to demands for sport and recreation centers
and leisure parks in addition to major facilities for spectators sports. Where
tourist or leisure related activities are encouraged and have become a
necessary part of the economy, safe access to them and appropriate parking
facilities for them may form an important part of their success. The main
considerations to bear in mind are:
All recreational generators should be given access from local or district
distributor roads, depending on their scale;
Recreational land uses should be separated from residential areas, but
they may be on the fringes provided recreational traffic is directed
away from dwellings;
Certain recreational uses may be acceptable within commercial or
industrial areas, although this should be done with care;
Adequate provision of public transport is essential;
All participant and spectator parking (refer to Figure 2.3) should be
provided separately within or near each facility and be sufficient to
accommodate peak demands;
Pedestrian routes between entrances/parking areas and venues
should be free of vehicular traffic and clearly signposted;
Where events necessitate the use of public highways, they should be
clearly segregated from general traffic (periodic closures may be
justified);
Service areas and facilities should be segregated from general traffic
and if possible should operate at different times to public use; and,
Certain facilities such as car parks could be shared with other uses.
8 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual



Figure 2.3 : Ideal Road Network Planning for Tourism Areas

9 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
3 ROAD HIERARCHY
Road network is defined as a hierarchy in terms of road types and according
to the major functions the roads will serve. The main classification is whether
the road is to be used primarily for movement or for access.
The key points to consider in network planning are the following:
Within the hierarchy, networks should be planned such that areas are
separated into self-contained zones (often referred to as
neighborhoods). The size and scale of these zones will depend upon
the importance of the road bounding them. Within these areas all non-
essential traffic should be excluded. It should be possible to carry out
most daily trips to shops and schools wholly within the area;
The natural barrier of main routes can be used to segregate and
contain incompatible uses and to reinforce local identities. The
network can be such that traffic can enter zones from an external or
internal system (refer to Figure 3.1). The external system reinforces
these natural barriers and offers the safest network when well planned.
Existing grid-iron networks should be closed off or restricted to create
internally or externally-fed system;



Figure 3.1 : Schematic Hierarchy of Roads
10 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Each class of road should clearly convey to the road user its role in the
hierarchy with respect to both traffic volume and design speed. This
can be achieved by appearance and related design standards; and,
Each road should intersect only with roads in the same class or one
immediately above or below it in the hierarchy. In that way, anyone
using the network has a clear impression of the graduated change in
conditions between the low speed access roads and the segregated,
higher speed through routes at the top of the hierarchy. (refer to
Figure 3.2)

Figure 3.2 : Externally and Internally-fed Networks

3.1 Expressways / National Roads
3.1.1 Expressways
An expressway is proposed for a road corridor under the following situations;
A road corridor connecting several highly urbanized centers with
ribbon-type of development of commercial, business and industrial
establishment.
A road corridor with high traffic demand.
These roads are the longer distance transport routes for motorized traffic.
They provide the transportation link between regions and provinces. Their
primary function is movement and not access.
The elements to consider when planning Expressways are:
No frontage access;
11 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Development set well back from the highway;
Grade separated intersections for extremely high flows and other
intersecting expressways;
Number of intersections to be minimized and
Where necessary or for emergency purposes, parking/stopping to be
provided clear of the main carriageway.
3.1.2 National Roads
National Roads are roads continuous in extent that form part of the main trunk
line system; all roads leading to national ports, national seaports, parks or
coast-to-coast roads. National arterial roads are classified into three groups
from the viewpoint of function, i.e. North-south backbone, East-West Laterals
and Other Strategic Roads.
The elements to consider when planning National Roads are:
Limited frontage access
Development set well back from the highway;
All access to premises provided via provincial roads;
Number of intersections to be minimized;
Suitable at-grade channelized intersections for minor flows and other
elements
No roadside vendors.

3.2 Provincial Roads
Provincial Roads are roads connecting one municipality with another; all
roads extending from a municipality or from a provincial or national roads to a
public wharf or railway station; and any other road to be designated as such
by the Sangguniang Panlalalwigan.
The main elements to consider when planning Provincial Roads include:
Limited frontage access. In exceptional circumstances, large individual
developments may have direct access when a high level intersection
is provided;
Development set back from the highway;
Most development to be given access via intersections with local
distributor roads;
All intersections will normally be at-grade;
Turning traffic should be separated out from the through traffic;
Separated pedestrians/bikeways remote from the carriageway;
Pedestrian crossing points should be clearly defined and controlled;
12 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Parking on the road should not be permitted;
Bus stops and other loading areas (only permitted in exceptional
circumstances) should be in separate well designed lay bys;
Regular stopping places for paratransit vehicles (i.e., private, non-
corporately run public transport operating vehicles smaller than buses
or AUVs) should be identified and safe stopping places established;
and,
No roadside vendors.
3.3 City / Municipal Roads
3.3.1 City Roads these roads / streets within the urban area of the city to be
designated as such by the Sangguniang Panglungsod.
3.3.2 Municipal Roads these roads / streets within the poblacion area of a
municipality to be designated as such by the Sangguniang Bayan.
City / Municipal Roads serve to feed traffic onto and off the main road network
at the beginning and end of trips. These roads serve local traffic only.
Main points to consider in planning City/Municipal roads are as follows:
The road is only for local traffic; through traffic is adequately
accommodated on an alternative more direct main road;
Where possible, an industrial traffic route should not pass through a
residential area;
Vehicle speeds should be kept low so long straight roads should be
avoided;
Parking is allowed, but alternative off-road provision should be made if
possible;
Non-motorized traffic is of equal importance to motor traffic and
separate route should be provided if possible;
Where non motorized traffic needs to use a local distributor it should
be separated from motorized traffic;
The road width can be varied to provide for parking or to give emphasis
to crossing points depending upon traffic flows;
Bus stops and other loading areas (only permitted in exceptional
circumstances) should be in separate well designed lay bys;
Through-movements should be made awkward and inconvenient to
discourage them; and,
No roadside vendors.
13 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
3.4 Barangay Roads
Barangay Roads are rural roads located either outside the urban area of city
or outside industrial, commercial or residential subdivisions which act as
feeder farm-to-market roads, and which are not otherwise classified as
national, provincial, city or municipal roads. Roads located outside the
Poblacion area of municipality and those roads located outside the urban
area of a city to be designated as such by the Barangay Council concerned.
As the name implies, these roads are for access only and are primarily for
residential uses (industrial access should normally occur from a road of at
least local distributor standard). These are ultimately the streets on which
people live. Design standards may vary but the important elements to
consider for barangay roads are:
Vehicle flows to be kept to a minimum;
All through traffic eliminated;
Vehicle speeds to be kept low by careful and deliberate inclusion of
obstructions to create meandering alignments;
Access roads kept short where possible;
Cul-de-sac and loop roads to be used wherever possible to deter
through traffic;
Intersections to be three rather than four leg and kept compact to aid
pedestrian movement;
Pedestrian and vehicles can share space;
Carriageway width can be reduced to emphasize pedestrian priority;
Entrance/exit points of access streets should be clearly identified by
threshold treatments, e.g. changes in geometric layout, landscaping,
building development or even gateways and signing;
Parking and stopping within the streets is permitted although adequate
provision should be provided within individual properties or separate
garage areas;
Use of fully mountable curbs for vehicles may enable reduced road
width and reduced standard alignments to be used by emergency and
service vehicles, or for occasional parking; and,
Firepaths (emergency accesses for the engines) can be kept clear by
using diagonal closures to eliminate parking spaces or by ensuring
other nearby owners gain access by the same route so that they keep
them clear.

14 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 3.3 : Road Network that Attracts Through Traffic Onto Local Roads


Figure 3.4 : Road Network that Deters Through Traffic from Using Local Road




15 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 3.5 : Road Layouts that Deters Through Traffic from Using Local Roads

3.5 Pedestrianized Areas/Routes
These are areas from which all motorized vehicles are excluded to improve
safety. In their broadest sense they would include all routes where non-
motorized traffic has sole priority. This would include purpose-built footpaths
and bikeways that often form a totally separate network to that for motorized
traffic in residential areas. In planning new pedestrian networks and areas
the key points to consider are:
Residential, industrial and commercial areas should be linked by
footpaths providing the most direct and pleasant route between
destinations.
Any deviation from a direct route should be more attractive than a less
safe option;
All crossings with main routes should be grade separated wherever
possible and if not possible additional at-grade facilities (e.g. refuges or
pedestrian crossings) should be provided to minimize crossing
problems;
Vertical rerouting (via over bridge or underpass) is much less attractive
to pedestrians than at grade facilities;
The vertical and horizontal alignments of pedestrian routes can include
much steeper gradients and sharper bends than for a roadway for
motor traffic;
Open aspects need to be maintained, particularly at intersections and
underpasses;
In shopping and commercial areas priority needs to be given to
pedestrians;
16 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Where motor vehicles are displaced, adequate capacity (for loading,
parking and movement) needs to be available elsewhere on the
surrounding roads but such facilities should always be within easy
walking distance;
If no alternative provision can be made for motor traffic, consideration
may be given to pedestrianization by time of day i.e., vehicle access
allowed only when pedestrian flows are light (e.g. very early in the
morning or late at night);
Connections to bus stops, parking areas and stations are vital and
should be convenient; and,
All pedestrianized areas must have provision for access of emergency
vehicles and refuse collecting vehicles.
17 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
4 ROUTE PLANNING THROUGH EXISTING COMMUNITIES
Bypasses around communities are countermeasures aimed at improving
safety and reducing the volume of through traffic inside the community. In the
Philippines, this is a common practice particularly around the countryside.
However, building bypasses is just an alternative countermeasure of
discouraging traffic to pass within the community. Other countermeasures
can be devised depending on economic and budgetary constraints.
Where a bypass can be justified, the most important considerations are:
The opportunity should be taken to reinforce the road hierarchy by
down-grading the old road to discourage through traffic;
Access to the bypass should be restricted to only a few points where
safe intersections and spur roads can be provided to link to the existing
network. Direct access from frontage land should not be permitted;
and,
Provisions should be left for future expansion or development of the
community but such developments should be served by service roads
and spur roads.
Where a bypass cannot be justified, countermeasures should be implemented
to slow down the speeds of through traffic as it passes through the community
or trading centers as follows:
Warning signs and rumble strips can be used to alert drivers about
speed-reducing devices ahead;
A series of road humps increasing in height from 40mm to around
80mm can be used gradually to slow down traffic in pedestrian
predominated areas;
Road narrowing (with due regard for capacity needs) can be used to
induce lower speeds as traffic passes through the community; and,
In order to alert drivers that they are entering a community, it is
generally regarded that some form of gateway treatment on the
approaches is beneficial (e.g., substandard curve, tree lining, or even
non-rigid gate structure).

18 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 4.1 : Road Layout that Results in Conflict Between Local
and Through Traffic

Figure 4.2 : By Pass Road Deters Through Traffic from the
Community
19 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
5 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL / ENCROACHMENT
Planning is a constantly changing process. The difficulty is to control the
degree of change so that the various inter-related elements can still operate
efficiently. In land use terms this is usually achieved (with varying degrees of
success) through the control of existing or new development and prevention
of uncontrolled parking, illegal accesses and spread of unauthorized
commercial activity. The main points to consider are that:
Strict control of roadside hoardings and advertisement boards is
required;
Landuse and highway requirements change over time so some spare
capacity should be designed into road networks to enable such
changes to be accommodated without detrimental effects upon road
safety;
Building regulations should include building line specifications to
control roadside development;
If development control standards permit the growth of activities to
encroach onto the transport corridor, additional countermeasures may
be required to maintain a safe level of service to the community as a
whole;
Strong development control can only prevent encroachment onto roads
if there are alternative locations for commercial activities to be
undertaken; and,
Unauthorized development such as roadside advertising boards, illegal
accesses and market stalls which create unsafe traffic conditions
should be removed as soon as possible and the sites monitored to
prevent their reappearance.

source: US Highway Capacity Manual
Figure 5.1 : Encroachment that Reduces Effective Sidewalk Width
20 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
6 ACCESS CONTROL
Access control applies to both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Local
practices have shown different practices in treating access to developments
such as:
Provision of elevated pedestrian walkways or underpasses to separate
people from road traffic. Oftentimes, these facilities have direct access
to respective developments such as shown in Figures 6.1 and 6.2.
This strategy does not only improve safety but also enhance
commercial attractiveness of an establishment to its target market.
Driveways should not lead directly to a high speed road facility as this
may create conflict and compromise safety. Good management of
access to roadside properties on arterial roads can reduce conflict
between through traffic and local traffic, for example by the provision of
service roads.
Large parking facilities should locate entrance/exits away from high-
speed roads, but with good access circulation leading to high speed
roads;
Expressway ramps should be carefully planned to reduce conflict with
local vehicle and pedestrian traffic;
On new roads of district distributor level or higher, direct frontage
access should only be permitted in exceptional circumstances;
The number of direct accesses onto main roads should be minimized
and service roads or collector roads used to bring traffic to a single T-
junction at the main road;
No access should be permitted at potentially dangerous locations (e.g.,
at road intersections, or on bends with poor visibility); and,
In all cases, each class of road should intersect only with roads in the
same class or one immediately above or below it in the hierarchy.









21 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual











source: DPWH / MMURTRIP
Figure 6.1 : Walkways and Overpass to Control Pedestrian Access












source: DPWH / MMURTRIP
Figure 6.2 : Service Road and Segregated Walkway to Control Local Traffic Access
22 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
7 TRAFFIC IMPACT ASSESSMENT (TIA)
Recent developments in transportation research in the Philippines have
resulted in the formulation of a TIA Handbook. This handbook was prepared
by the National Center for Transportation Studies (NCTS) in order to
standardize the conduct of TIA. In addition, it is worth giving more emphasis
on road safety as well as the traditional subjects such as volume control,
traffic forecasts, demand management, and congestion mitigation.
Some interesting subjects for consideration in the TIA is the interface
between land use development and traffic, and this should be reviewed
against the guidelines of the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board
(HLURB). Parking demand and restrictions should also be strictly followed as
mandated by the National Building Code. Preferably, parking demand should
be based on local parking indices and not on international practices since
local traffic conditions very much differ from other countries experiences.
Pedestrian considerations should also be given more weight in the planning
stage.
Road safety is given importance in the proposed TIA guidelines. The general
scope of works on the proposed guidelines cover the following:
Transportation Improvement
Road Geometry
Traffic Safety
Site Circulation and Parking
Transportation facilities related to public transport, bicycle, and
pedestrian travel
Transportation demand management
Neighborhood traffic and parking management
Funding for countermeasures
Likewise, the NCTS TIA guidelines have listed the standards of significance
for traffic impacts of a project:
If the projected traffic will cause the existing intersection or highway
roadway levels of service to drop below an acceptable level of service;
If the projected traffic will contribute to the increase in traffic along
arterials or at intersections currently operating at unacceptable levels.
If the project design does not have adequate parking or circulation
capacity to accommodate an increase in traffic.
If the traffic increase or roadway design will result in safety concerns;
or,
If the project does not include adequate provision for bicycle,
pedestrian, or public transport access.
23 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
8 ROAD DESIGN PARAMETERS
8.1 Speed Management
8.1.1 Design Speed
The choice of an appropriate design speed for a road project is important to
ensure a safe design.
When choosing a design speed, the following factors need to be considered:
Function of the road. An arterial road such as a national highway
would generally have a higher design speed than a local road.
Anticipated operating speed. For example, a national highway in an
area with steep terrain would generally have a lower design speed (i.e.
smaller radius curves) than a national highway in flat terrain where
higher speeds would generally be anticipated and hence large radius
curves adopted. In these examples the anticipated operating speed of
the new facility (that may include improved alignment and road
surface), should form the basis for determining an appropriate design
speed, rather than the operating speed of the existing road.
Anticipated speed limit. When considering the design speed along a
route, it may also be necessary to adopt a different design speed for
different sections of the road as circumstances change. For example
within a town or on the road section between towns.
Economics. The implications relating to cost of construction.
8.1.2 Speed Implications
Research shows that lower speeds lead to fewer and less serious crashes.
There are two reasons for this:
At higher speeds a rider or driver has less time to react to a situation
and therefore there is a greater likelihood that an error will result in a
crash; and,
The momentum and kinetic energy of a vehicle increases rapidly with
speed. The sudden dissipation of this energy in a crash means that
the injury to occupants is more severe.
Therefore, a carefully planned speed limit regime can make a significant
contribution to road safety.
8.1.3 Current Speed Limits
The current speed restrictions are set out in Chapter IV Traffic Rules, in
Republic Act No. 4136 Land Transportation and Traffic Code.
The rules indicate that a motorist shall drive at a safe speed determined by
the driver based on the road environment and conditions. There are however
maximum allowable speeds for different road environments.
24 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
On open country roads with no blind corners not closely bordered by
habitation, the maximum speed for passenger cars and motorcycles is 80kph
and for motor trucks and buses, 50kph.
On through streets or boulevards clear of traffic, with no blind corners,
when so designated, the maximum speed for passenger cars and
motorcycles is 40kph and for motor trucks and buses, 30kph.
On city and municipal streets, with light traffic, when not designated through
streets, the maximum speed for passenger cars, motorcycles, motor trucks
and buses is 30kph.
Through crowded streets, approaching intersections at blind corners,
passing school zones, passing other vehicles which are stationary, or for
similar dangerous circumstances, the maximum speed for passenger cars,
motorcycles, motor trucks and buses is 20kph.
Where it is determined that a road should have a different speed restriction to
that indicated above, then specific speed restriction signs should be installed
to inform motorists. The following sections describe where certain speed
restrictions could be appropriate.
High Risk Pedestrian Areas 40 kph
Vulnerable road users, especially pedestrians, are particularly vulnerable at
higher speeds. The graph below based on international research shows the
risk of a pedestrian fatality if hit by a vehicle at different speeds.












Figure 8.1 : Risk of Pedestrian Fatality

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Impact Speed (km/h)
R
i
s
k

o
f

F
a
t
a
l
i
t
y

(
%
)

25 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
For instance 25% of people struck by a vehicle traveling at 40 kph would
suffer fatal injuries. At 50 kph this risk increases to 85%. Therefore a speed
limit of 40 kph or lower would be appropriate in areas where there is high
pedestrian activity such as in city center areas.
A 40 kph speed limit would also be appropriate on roads where there are no
footpaths and pedestrians are required to walk on the road.
Low risk pedestrian areas 60 kph
On roads through built-up areas where there are not so many pedestrians, it
is appropriate to allow motorized traffic to travel more quickly.
The following picture shows the type of environment where 60 kph may be
appropriate. Although this road is carrying vulnerable road users, they have a
separate lane to travel in.

Figure 8.2 : High Speed Road with Separate Lane for Non-Motorized Vehicles
80 kph
An 80kph speed limit would be appropriate on a high standard duplicated
carriageway road where there is only occasional access from adjoining
properties.
100 kph
A 100 kph speed limit would only be appropriate on very high standard
expressways, which have a low crash rate. These expressways should have
a high standard geometry and should be free of roadside hazards. If hazards
exist and they cannot be removed or modified, they should be shielded with a
safety barrier.


26 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
8.1.4 Speed Restriction Signs
Good speed management practice depends on speed limit signs being placed
in visible locations and repeated frequently enough for motorists to be certain
of which speed zone they are in.
At the start of a new speed zone, a speed limit sign should be erected on the
left and right sides of the road. Then within the first kilometer, there should be
two (2) farther pairs of repeater speed limit signs. After that, repeater signs
should be placed at one kilometer spacing.
Repeater signs should also be placed before and after all major intersections
to confirm the speed limit to all traffic turning into the road being considered.
8.1.5 Poor Road Standards
If the standard of the road geometry or its surface is poor, then it may be
appropriate to adopt a lower speed limit than would normally apply until such
time that the road improvements can be made. The lower speeds
compensate for the hazardous conditions of the road.
An 80kph or 90kph speed limit may also be appropriate on lower standard
expressways. For instance, the concrete plant cylinders on the side of the
expressway as shown in Figure 8.3 are a serious road hazard within the clear
zone which could cause injury to the occupants of an out of control vehicle. If
this roadside hazard cannot be removed or protection for vehicles provided,
the speed limit should be restricted to reduce the risk to motorists and riders.

Figure 8.3 : High Speed Road with Wide Median
8.2 Road Capacity
Road Capacity, as defined in the U.S. Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), is
the maximum number of vehicles, which have a reasonable expectation of
passing over a given section of a lane or a roadway in one direction or in both
directions during one hour under prevailing road and traffic conditions.
27 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Generally, road capacity with respect to road sections is measured in terms of
level-of-service. This is designated with letters A to F with A the most ideal
condition and F the saturated condition where volume is equal to the road
capacity.
In regard to intersections, capacity is generally measured in terms of degree
of saturation.
The capacity of a route can be affected by the following factors:
Number of Lanes;
Lane and shoulder width;
Terrain and road gradient;
Traffic composition;
Side friction such as the presence of road furniture and pedestrians;
and
Intersection capacity (priority of movements, traffic signal phasing,
number of lanes etc.).
Ideal capacity of a road is 2,000 vehicles/hour (vph). However, based on
several surveys conducted in Metro Manila for various infrastructure projects,
it was found that the maximum volume is achieved only at a level of 1,400vph
on expressways and 1,100 for urban arterials.
In the design stage of a road project, appropriate capacity should be
established to ensure satisfactory operation. In establishing the capacity of
the road, actual traffic surveys as well as investigation of future use is
required to ensure that safety is not compromised once the facility is in
operation.
8.3 Traffic Forecasts
Experiences in the Philippines indicated that traffic forecasts for expressways
(tolled facilities) are usually optimistic. This may be seen as a factor to boost
revenue forecasts to make the road appear more interesting to investors.
The opposite can be true in planning urban arterials as forecasts are often
below actual traffic counts once the facility is in operation. The latter has
more impact on traffic safety since it could mean more traffic is using the road
than the volume for which it was originally designed. Further, road
maintenance is often compromised when traffic exceeds the forecasts (e.g.
thickness of pavement, lane width, maintenance budget, etc.).




28 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
9 PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Public transport refers to public utility jeepneys, buses and taxis.
9.1 Public Transport Operations
The rule of thumb to enhance safety in the operations of public transport as in
the case of Metro Manila is to segregate them from private cars. The
provision of yellow lanes on some major thoroughfares of Metro Manila is
seen as good practice. However, proper planning should be conducted on
locating loading and unloading areas for passengers. These
loading/unloading areas should be located in vicinities that offer protection to
commuters and pedestrians.
9.2 Lay-bys, Bus Stops and Service Roads
Lay-bys and bus stops allow public transport vehicles to stop safely and with
the minimum of adverse effects on other traffic. This is best done with a
segregated area joined to the main road pavement only at an entry point and
exit point. Vehicles can then stop off the main carriageway without interfering
with other traffic and with less risk to passengers getting on or off.
Where primary roads are bordered by commercial or residential development,
service roads are the safest way of allowing access to property with the
minimum effect on other traffic. Also, where a large commercial development
is fronted by an informal parking area with controlled access to the
carriageway, a significant risk of accidents will often exist.
The general guidelines in planning for public transport facilities are as follows:
Lay-bys should be positioned on straight, level sections of road and
should be visible from a good distance in both directions.
On rural roads, it is cheaper to provide lay-bys at transitions from cut to
fill.
Access to lay-bys should be convenient and safe for vehicles and also
for pedestrians in the case of bus stops.
Advance warning signs could be erected to alert drivers of the
approach to lay-bys, and to the possible presence of pedestrians
ahead.
Adequate queuing and waiting areas should be available so that
waiting passengers do not use the road or a dedicated bus lay-by.
Where space is limited, it may be possible to link premises using a
service road, which runs behind the premises and turns to rejoin the
main road only when a convenient and safe location is reached. At this
point, parking and other potential visual obstructions should be
carefully controlled.
29 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Where problems of merging from a lay-by occurs, it may be possible to
postpone the merge by providing a short additional lane, which is the
continuation of the lay-by.
Where spillage of diesel fuel is likely to occur, e.g. at bus stop,
concrete construction is more suitable than a bituminous surfacing.
(Buses will not use the stops if the road surface has deteriorated.)
Bus stops should be located beyond pedestrian crossings and after
intersections to avoid stopped vehicles masking pedestrian and other
crossing activities.










Source: DPWH / MMURTRIP
Figure 9.1 : Bus Stop Concept, EDSA









Source: DPWH / MMURTRIP
Figure 9.2 : Lay-By Concept, EDSA
30 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
On highly trafficked or arterial roads, it is desirable for public transport
vehicles to stop off the main carriageway. In urban areas, it can be
advantageous to locate indented bus or jeepney stops on the downstream
side of major signalized intersections. This can improve the ability and safety
of the vehicle to re-enter the traffic stream. The guidelines in the design and
location of turn-outs along national road shall conform to D.O. No. 58 series
of 2010.

























31 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual




























32 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual




























33 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual



























34 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
10 VULNERABLE ROAD USERS
Vulnerable road users include:
Pedestrians
People with disabilities
Non-motorized vehicles
Motorcycles
10.1 Pedestrians
Motorized vehicles are not the only means of transport using the road system.
Other road users such as pedestrians and cyclists need to be catered for
adequately so that they can use the road space safely.
The safest way to cater for these groups is to provide separate areas for them
to use.


Figure 10.1 : Poor facilities for pedestrians
Figure 10.1 shows a location where pedestrians need to share road space
with vehicles as there is no shoulder or sidewalk. In some situations,
consultation may be required with the Local Government Units (LGUs) to
control the use of roadside areas.
35 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Pedestrians are separated from fast-moving traffic

The open drain has been covered to provide a sidewalk.

Figure 10.2 : Good Pedestrian Facilities

36 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 10.3 : Obstructions that Reduce Effective Travel Width for Pedestrians
At intersections, it is important that pedestrians have somewhere safe to wait,
which is separate from the roadway.
At unsignalized intersections, pedestrians can be catered for by use of a
pedestrian crossing marked on the roadway. It is important that this is
situated as close to the intersection as possible so the pedestrian is visible to
the motorist.
10.2 Cyclists
It is desirable that separate lanes be provided for cyclists, especially on
heavily trafficked routes. Cyclists are unprotected and when mixed with faster
moving vehicles can produce a hazardous situation.


source: DPWH / MMURTRIP

Figure 10.4 : Segregated Pedestrian and Bikeway from Main Thoroughfare
37 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 10.5 : Road without bike lanes


















38 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
11 PARKING
The effective control of parking and appropriate provision of parking facilities
is required to maximize safety and to limit impacts on traffic flow.
Expressways. Generally, parking is not appropriate along expressways and
these roads need to have signs that inform drivers of the parking restriction.
National Roads. Parking should not be permitted along national roads.
Local Roads. Parking bans are generally not appropriate, however, the times
and duration of parking may need to be indicated on signs.
Subject to the consideration of safety and traffic flow needs, where parking is
to be permitted within certain areas along roadways, consultation and co-
operation between agencies is desirable to ensure that proposals are
appropriate.
11.1 Parking Near Intersections
Vehicles parked near intersections can obstruct the flow of turning traffic.
Thus, parking should be prohibited within the following minimum distances
from the boundaries of intersecting roads:
Parallel parking 6m on both approach and exit sides
Angle parking 12m on approach side, 9m on exit side
It is desirable that on the approach side of a signalized intersection, parking
be prohibited for a distance large enough to store as many vehicles as can
cross the stop line in one phase from the curb lane.
11.2 Angle Parking
All forms of angle parking present a greater hazard than parallel parking.
Therefore the function of the road needs to be considered relating to
proposals for angle parking on or adjacent to roads.
Generally, the use of angle parking shall be:
Expressways - No provision except for off-road roadside stopping
areas.
National Road- Parking and maneuvering associated with angle
parking to be executed completely clear of through traffic lanes. A
physical separation in the form of an outer separator should be made
between the parking-maneuvering area and the through traffic lanes.
Provincial Roads - Angle parking on these roads may be appropriate.
However, it is preferable that the marked parking bays and
maneuvering area are physically protected with a curb extension.
39 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual


Figure 11.1 : Angle Parking with Maneuvering Area Clear of Through Traffic
Lanes
Municipal/City Road - The maneuvering of vehicles for parking may
encroach into the through traffic lanes on that side of the center line. It
is also desirable that the marked bays should be physically protected
as discussed for secondary arterial roads.
Local Roads - The maneuvering of vehicles for parking may encroach
onto both traffic lanes where traffic volumes are low and the level of
delay or congestion can be accommodated.
The following guidelines should be observed for angle parking:
The words Angle Parking shall be indicated on the parking signs as
well as the angle of parking to the curb;
Pavement marking of parking bays is desirable, particularly where the
required angle is not 45 or 90 degrees; and
Angle parking shall not be installed where visibility restrictions would
create a hazardous operating environment, such as the inside of a
bend or on a crest.
11.3 Parking Adjacent To Barrier Lines
When considering parking adjacent to barrier lines the following factors
should be considered:
If parking maneuvers can be made clear of through lanes. Generally,
at least 3 meters needs to be available for moving traffic between the
parked vehicle and the barrier line for a single lane of traffic.
The loss of capacity during parking maneuvers if the maneuvers are
not completely clear of through lanes.
40 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
The safety and potential of vehicles crossing the barrier line to pass a
vehicle in a parking or unparking maneuver even though this is an
unlawful maneuver.




























41 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
12 LIGHTING
The introduction of adequate street lighting can help reduce nighttime
accidents and is an established accident prevention measure in urban areas.
It is particularly important where there are high proportions of pedestrians,
cyclists or other poorly lit road users, including animals. Lighting has benefits
other than accident prevention and can often be justified as a general amenity
with an associated reduction in nighttime crime and an improvement in
personal security.
Generally, there is a need to improve street lighting especially where there
are high pedestrian flows. The most important aspects to consider are:
Evenness and type of illumination is important (refer Figure 12.1). This
requires good design and regular maintenance. A routine maintenance
program should be initiated and all installations inspected on a regular
basis;
Light poles should be sited in positions where they will not be a danger
to a vehicle leaving the road or designed as frangible poles (slip-base
poles or impact absorbent poles) that slip away or collapse on impact.
In other situations, a safety barrier may need to be provided to protect
occupants of an errant vehicle.
Signs and road markings should be visible at night. Where lighting is
not feasible, use of reflective material is a useful, cheaper alternative;
Lighting is most important at key locations such as at sub-standard
design sections, at sites where the layout may be unclear, at
intersections, and where pedestrians cross; and,
Consideration should be given to the use of high pressure sodium or
metal halide lighting, particularly at key points, as it is much more
efficient than mercury or tungsten lighting.
It is important that intersections are adequately lit as it is in this area where
vehicles of different speeds can interact. Vehicles are slowing down in this
area to make a turn or enter an intersecting road. At intersections it is
important to ensure that elements such as raised islands are adequately lit as
these provide the motorist with early indication of the intersection. Figure
12.2 shows typical locations for street lighting at intersections.
For route lighting on duplicated roads, frangible lighting poles should
generally be located centrally in the median with lights on cantilevered
brackets over the roadways. On undivided roads lighting poles would be
located alternately each side of the roadway. The spacing of lighting poles
along the route is subject to the wattage and mounting height of the lights
chosen.
A uniformly lit surface should be provided and therefore maintenance is
important. Inconsistent lighting can itself be a hazard. Lighting is especially
important where large numbers of pedestrians or cyclists are expected.
Further information regarding frangible poles is in Section 20.6.7 and
Appendix 3.
42 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Different Types of Lighting

Before (streetlight using ordinary mercury and
halogen lamps)

After (streetlight using metal halide lamps)
Effect of Over Illumination on Streets

Before (Over illumination causes glare)

After (Adequate lighting improves visibility)
Proper luminance and lighting

Before (Dimly lit using mercury lamps)

After (Adequate lighting using metal halide)

Figure 12.1 : Types of Lighting and Illumination
43 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual


Figure 12.2 : Lighting Installations at Intersections
Cross Road Intersection
Roundabout Intersection
S is the design spacing of lamp posts for major roads
T--Intersection
w x E
x Cu x mf

where :

S = spacing of lamp post
w = width of the road
E = Illumination in Lux
= lamp lumen
Cu = coefficient of utilization
mf = maintenance factor
S =
44 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual










SAFETY DESIGN
45 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
13 INTRODUCTION
13.1 Background
This section of the manual describes how the road network can be made to
be safer through the awareness of safety principles during the design stages.
13.2 Safe Design Principles
The first aim of safe road design is to ensure that road users remain safely on
the road. This depends on the following factors:
a sound road surface;
an adequate width or cross-section;
horizontal and vertical alignment;
good visibility/sight distance;
delineation and signing;
provision for pedestrians, pedal cyclists and people with disabilities;
management of traffic conflicts at intersections; and,
speed management.
However, drivers and riders will sometimes make mistakes and lose control
and leave the road. At that stage it is important to provide a forgiving
roadside.











46 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
14 ROAD SURFACE
An even, well drained and good textured road surface can maximize safety on
the road and prevent traffic accidents occurring.
For example, pot holes can make drivers swerve or lose control. In addition,
poor skid resistance can cause drivers to lose control or increase the distance
that a vehicle will require to stop in an emergency. The level of manhole lids
for drainage pits or utilities can also be important for maintaining vehicle
control. These factors are particularly important in relation to motorcycle
safety.

Figure 14.1 : Poor road surface with depressed manhole lid

The areas where the state of the road surface condition and good texture of
the road surface is particularly important are where vehicles are required to
brake or maneuver suddenly such as:
On the approach to traffic signals
At roundabouts
Around tight curves
On downhill slopes.
The shape of the road surface and good skid resistance are also important in
ensuring that water drains from the road surface. Areas with depressions or
where the pavement is very flat can result in ponding or surface flow of water
that can cause a vehicle to skid or aquaplane. Surface shape and levels
need to be checked during design and construction.
In rural areas, loose gravel on a paved major road can result from traffic
movement at gravel intersecting roads. This can be minimized by paving the
adjacent area of the side road (6 to 10 meters from edge of through lane).
Vehicles then have a firm surface from which to accelerate when turning.
47 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
The road edge can also cause problems for vehicle safety.


Figure 14.2 : Poor Road Edge
Figure 14.2 shows the edge of a road with a level difference on the adjacent
shoulder. If a driver lost partial control of a vehicle on this curve and a wheel
went over the edge of the road, it could be difficult for the driver to regain
control due to the large drop off at the road edge. The driver could then lose
total control and run into a roadside hazard such as the pole in the
photograph.
The objective of providing an even, well drained and good textured road
surface is aimed at keeping traffic safely on the road. Maintenance of the
road surface is also essential to maximize safety and prevent traffic accidents
occurring.










48 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
15 ROAD ALIGNMENT CONSIDERATIONS
15.1 Introduction
In many design situations, designers will be faced with competing demands
from different sections of the community as they endeavor to design safe,
operationally efficient roads. The horizontal and vertical alignment and the
cross section of a road should be designed so that a driver or rider can travel
safely at an appropriate operating speed and have adequate sight distance of
the road ahead. If constraints require a tighter alignment, then it is imperative
that the driver or rider be provided with the necessary visual and physical
features to enable the driver to perceive the changed conditions accurately
and to select an appropriate lower speed.
For details relating to road alignment refer to Section 16 of this manual and
DPWH Highway Design Guidelines Chapter 3.
15.2 Some Physical Problems
Problems arise if the alignment
changes suddenly and unexpectedly.
A horizontal curve over a short
vertical crest is shown in Figure 15.1.
The three photographs show the
drivers view as the crest is
approached. The sequence of
pictures shows that the curve is not
visible until the driver can see over
the crest.
Although this road has a centerline it
does not give the motorist sufficient
advance warning that the road will
change direction. Some chevron
hazard signs may improve delineation
in this situation.
However, in new design situations the
curve should be commenced before
the crest to ensure the curve is visible
to drivers. This would improve safety
and may avoid the need to use
additional signs.

Figure 15.1 : Poor Design and
Delineation of Curve



49 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual












Figure 15.2 : Lost Control on Curve
A horizontal curve at the end of a steep downgrade can mislead a driver or
rider and they can find themselves approaching the horizontal curve too
quickly. This can lead to loss of control of the vehicle and the possibility that
the vehicle could run off the road and collide with a roadside hazard.


Figure 15.3 : Extreme topography results in small radius curves

The road alignment in Figure 15.3 changes quickly due to the extreme
topographical terrain resulting in a number of small radius curves. At night,
particularly with the headlight glare of an oncoming vehicle, it would be very
difficult to visualize the road alignment. A centerline and edge line pavement
markings would assist the motorists considerably. Strategically placed curve
markers and guideposts would also help.
50 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 15.4 : Trees Obstructing Sight Distance
Trees or vegetation as shown in Figure 15.4 can often hide the road
alignment. During daytime, dangerous corner cutting will be encouraged
because the pavement markings are not adequate. If the vegetation cannot
be trimmed, the alignment would be improved by providing strategically
placed chevron signs or guideposts. The centerline markings should be
barrier lines where visibility is poor.



Figure 15.5 : Poor Vertical Alignment Approaching a T-Intersection
Poor vertical alignment through an intersection can obscure the layout of an
intersection. For example in Figure 15.5, it is not possible to see the
intersecting cross road surface. This could cause vehicles to stop in the
wrong place, for instance in the path of cross traffic.
51 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual


Figure 15.6 : Poor Intersection due to Lack of Channelization
Lack of channelization in Figure 15.6, leads to poor driver behavior such as
corner cutting or lane blocking. If vehicle movement is unpredictable a
collision is more likely to occur. Installing a centerline, edge-line marking and
a stop or holding line would improve the intersection considerably. If an
intersection like this one had a poor accident record, then a splitter island
could be considered to give a clear indication of alignment and where the
driver should stop.
This would be an ideal location for a small radius roundabout. This would
improve safety as well as improving traffic flow to become orderly and
predictable. Figure 15.7 shows a small radius (5m radius) roundabout
operating very well in Balayan town, Batangas.


Figure 15.7 : Small (5m radius) Roundabout in Balayan Town
52 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 15.8 : Horizontal Curve at the End of a Steep Downgrade
It is difficult to determine the nature of the horizontal curvature at the end of
the steep grade due to poor sight distance. The motorist may approach too
quickly and lose control. Improved sight distance could be achieved by cutting
back vegetation by providing a sight bench. A centerline, guideposts and
chevron road signs would also improve awareness.

Figure 15.9 : Poor Vertical Sag
The short vertical sag curve in Figure 15.9 can hide a vehicle. Motorists may
try to overtake thinking the road ahead is clear without realizing that a vehicle
is hidden from view in the sag.
A good treatment would be to delineate the road with no overtaking lane
markings. Lane widening over the short crest would provide extra width for
maneuvering vehicles.
53 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 15.10 : Reverse Curves
Closely spaced reverse curves as in Figure 15.10 have a short straight
between the two curves. Closely spaced reverse curves without a length of
straight alignment between the two curves is undesirable as the standard rate
of change of cross-fall (super-elevation) is always exceeded. This can lead to
loss of vehicle control when the road is wet. It is also very hard for the
motorists to determine the road alignment in advance. It is desirable to have
the length of the tangent between reverse curves not less than 50m.In no
case shall the tangent length be less than 30m. Centerline and lane markings
should be provided as well as chevron signs.


Figure 15.11 : Poor Combination of Horizontal and Vertical Alignment
A poor combination of horizontal and vertical alignment is shown in Figure
15.11. The poor alignment is coupled with a structure at the lowest section of
the vertical alignment. Notice the small vertical curves provided at the
approaches to the structure to keep the structure on a level position.
54 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Traffic coming from both directions cannot pass this section of the road at the
same time due to the acceleration needed by the vehicle to negotiate the
steep gradient in both directions.
Provision of a Give Way sign on one approach and information signs on both
approaches of the bridge would help motorists to traverse this section of road.
This would provide the traffic management needed to control vehicles in the
course of traversing this section of road. It is a situation that should not be
provided in a new road design.

Figure 15.12 : Delineation of Curve Poor night-time visibility
The raised, colored, back to back curb, form of curve delineation in Figure
15.12, is intended to discourage vehicles moving into the opposing lane.
While this may be effective during daylight hours, this median treatment
would not be very visible at night. Also, if a driver inadvertently struck the
raised island this could cause the driver to lose control. The best way to treat
a substandard or unexpected curve is to provide barrier lines with
reflectorized pavement studs (RPS), edge lines and chevron hazard signs or
guide posts. If a curve is experiencing a number of loss of control crashes,
then it may be appropriate to provide these devices.
Other aspects that could contribute to loss of control on curves are:
Adverse superelevation;
Poor sight distance; and
Poor surface condition.
Other types of improvements that could be considered are:
Curve radius improvement; and
Pavement widening.
55 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
16 ROAD ALIGNMENT GEOMETRY
16.1 General
The geometric detail of alignment design is an essential ingredient to
achieving a safe road. The alignment parameters are generally based on the
chosen design speed for the length of road being designed. Each section of
the road making up the length of road is then analyzed against the road
safety design criteria appropriate for the section form and geometric detail.
Safe road design needs to consider the following design features:
Design speed (kph);
Sight distance (m), Stopping Sight Distance - SSD (m);
Straight section length - tangent T (m);
Radius of circle curvature - R (m);
Circular curve section length - Lc (m);
Spiral section length (Clothoid Ls (m);
Normal cross slope - Nc (%);
Design superelevation - e (%);
Superelevation runoff length - Sro (m), from zero cross slope to design
superelevation;
Portion of superelevation runoff - Psro (m) prior to the tangent to the
circular curve (PC);
Length of spiral equals the length of superelevation runoff
Ls = Sro;
Tangent runout length - Tro (m), zero cross slope to normal cross
slope;
Length of superelevation development (Le)
Le = Sro + Tro;
Grades of positive or negative longitudinal slope ( + %);
Vertical curves either crest or sag - L (m);
Algebraic grade change - A (%);
Rate of vertical curvature - K (m) = L (m)/A (%);
Cross section:
o Traveled way, traffic lane width and slope - w (m and %);
o Shoulder width and slope (m and %);
o Fore slope and back slope (m and %);
o Median width (m);
o Sidewalks;
o Curbs: barrier curb or mountable / drop curb;
Drainage channels;
Utility poles;
Frangible lighting poles - impact absorbing poles and slip-base poles;
L(m)
A(%)
56 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Road safety barriers: roadside, median and crash cushions;
Frontage roads;
Overtaking lanes, climbing lanes and turnouts - w (m).
16.2 Design Standards
The general design standards for the Philippine National Highways are shown
in Table 16.1.
The design speed for flat and rolling terrain should be high to meet the
expectations of drivers. There is a definite safety concern if lower design
speeds are used for low volume roads in flat or rolling terrain as drivers will
drive at higher speeds. There will then be inadequate sight distance and
design appropriate for the travel speeds. There is good logic in using design
speeds appropriate to the terrain being traversed rather than traffic volume.
This is recognized in the Table 16.1 for mountainous road design speeds.
The standards for curve radii and grades are shown as minimum radii and
maximum grades. The choice of smaller radii and steeper grades beyond the
standards need to be approved by the Bureau of Design Director to maintain
control on otherwise sound standards.
Geometric standards are important criteria for road safety and the maximum
values are shown in table 16.1.

57 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
(For BOD final review) Table 16.1 : Design Standards for Philippine National Highways
ADT (Average Daily Traffic) Under 200 200 - 400 400 - 1000 1000 - 2000 More than 2000
Minimum Minimum Minimum Desirable Minimum Desirable Minimum Desirable
DESIGN SPEED (kph)
Flat Topography 60 70 70 90 80 95 90 100
Rolling Topography 40 50 60 80 60 80 70 90
Mountainous Topography 30 40 40 50 50 60 60 70
RADIUS (meter)
Flat Topography 130 175 175 400 260 400 400 400
Rolling Topography 50 80 130 260 130 260 175 400
Mountainous Topography 30 50 50 80 80 130 130 175
GRADE (%)
Flat Topography 6.0 6.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 3.0
Rolling Topography 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0
Mountainous Topography 10.0 9.0 8.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 7.0 5.0
CROSS SECTION (meter)

Traffic Lane Width (m) 1 x 4.0 / 4.0
4.00
2 x 3.05/ 6.10 2 x 3.35 / 6.70
60
2 x 3.35 /6.70
6.70
2 x 3.35 /6.70
666666666.6
2 x 3.65 / 7.30
Shoulder Width (m) 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 2.5 (1.5 Paved) 2.5 (1.5 Paved) 3.0 (1.5 Paved)
Right Of Way Width (m) 20 30 30 30 60
60
STOPPING (NON PASSING) SIGHT DISTANCE (meter)
Flat Topography 85 105 105 160 130 175 160 185
Rolling Topography 50 65 85 130 85 130 105 160
Mountainous Topography 35 50 50 65 65 85 85 105
SAFE PASSING SIGHT DISTANCE (meter)
Flat Topography 410 485 485 615 540 645 615 670
Rolling Topography 270 345 410 540 410 540 485 615
Mountainous Topography 200 270 270 345 345 410 410 485
SURFACE TYPE

Gravel, Crushed Gravel or Stone,
Bituminous Preservative Treat.
Single or Double Bit. Treatment,
Bituminous Macadam Pavement
Bituminous Macadam Pavement,
Dense or Open Graded Plant Mix,
Bit. Concrete Surface Course,
Portland Cement Concrete
Bituminous Concrete Surface
Course
Portland Cement Concrete
Pavement
Bituminous Concrete Surface
Course
Portland Cement Concrete
Pavement
Source: AASHTO, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 2001
58 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
16.3 Sight Distance
16.3.1 Introduction
The drivers ability to see the road ahead is of utmost importance in the
safe and efficient operation of a vehicle on a highway. This sight
distance needs to allow the driver time to perceive and react to any
hazardous situation. It needs to enable the driver to avoid any object or
come to a safe stop before colliding with the object or vehicle.
Adequate sight distance should be provided in both the horizontal and
vertical directions. Clear signing and pavement marking systems
should be provided to indicate locations where the sight distance is
inadequate for safe overtaking.
The provision of safety sight distance depends on the characteristics of
the driver, the vehicle and the environment:
Driver
Alertness of driver
Recognition of the hazard
Actions available to the driver to stop or to change direction
Vehicle
Type of vehicle car or truck
Friction between the tire and the road
Eye height of the driver
Speed of vehicles
Road Environment
Road geometry grade and curvature sight limitations
Road surface sealed or unsealed, smooth or rough
Road illumination at night

16.3.2 Sight Distance Elements
Each type of sight distance consists of three elements:
Driver Eye Height is the observed eye height of a driver;
Object Height is a possible object in the path of a vehicle; and
Sight Distance is dependent on design speed and vehicle type.
It is a major road safety design control when determining the
horizontal and vertical geometric alignment for a new or
rehabilitation design.

59 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
16.3.3 Driver Eye Height / Object Height
Drivers eye height standards vary from 1.05m to 1.08m in different
countries. The value has certain practical limits due to passenger car
heights and the relatively small increases in the lengths of vertical
curves that would result. The values for use in the Philippines are in
Table 16.2.
Table 16.2 : Driver Eye and Object Heights
Sight Distance Type
Driver Eye Height
(m)
Object Height (m)
Car Stopping Sight
Distance
1.08 0.60
Truck Stopping Sight
Distance
2.33 0.60
Maneuver Sight Distance 1.08

0.60
Passing Sight Distance

1.08 1.08
Car Head-light to Road
Surface Sight Distance
0.60 ZERO
Truck to Car Tail-light Sight
Distance
2.33 0.60

16.3.4 Stopping Sight Distance (SSD)
There are two components in stopping sight distance:
Reaction Distance the distance traveled while the driver perceives a
hazard, decides to take action, then acts by starting to apply the brakes
to start slowing down; and
Braking Distance the distance required for the vehicle to slow down
and stop.
Basic stopping sight distance assumes a straight alignment, a flat
grade, a wet surface with a reasonable amount of surface polishing,
and an average amount of tire wear. Corrections need to be made for
grade and road curvature.
Reaction Distance
Reaction Distance depends on reaction time from the instant the
hazard comes into view, to the instant that the driver actually applies
the brakes. Reaction times vary, depending on driver ability and
alertness. International studies of reaction time have been conducted.
The studies show that for younger drivers, the reaction is less than for
older drivers. This is due to the ageing process that slows the reaction
time as people mature in age. It is for this reason that from a safety
point of view, the standard adopts the reaction time for older people.
The reaction time to be used for road safety design is 2.5 seconds.
This value is applied to the whole range of design speeds.
60 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Reaction Distance = 0.278tV
Where:
t = Reaction time in seconds (2.5 seconds)
V = Design Speed (kph)
Braking Distance
The braking distance of a vehicle on a level roadway traveling at the
design speed of the roadway = 0.039 V
2
/a, and on grade = V
2
/
254[(a/9.81)G].
Where:
f = Longitudinal friction factor between tire and roadway (see
Table 3.1 Highway Design Guidelines)
G = Percent of Grade divided by 100, (Uphill grades (+) and
Downhill grades (-).

Stopping Sight Distance
If reaction distance is d1 and breaking distance is d2 then,
SSD = d
1
+ d
2
,
Where SSD = Stopping sight distance in meters.
SSD = 0.278tV + 0.039 V
2
/a, On level roadway
SSD = 0.278tV + V
2
/ 254[(a/9.81)G], Roadway on grade.
Sight distance and several stopping sight distance types are depicted in
Figure 16.1. It can be observed that stopping sight distance for cars
and trucks are the same distance when applied to different situations.
Stopping Sight Distances for various speeds are in Table 16.3.
Table 16.3 : Stopping Sight Distance (SSD)
Design Speed (kph) Stopping Sight Distance (m)
20 20
30 35
40 50
50 65
60 85
70 105
80 130
90 160
100 185
110 220
120 250
Source : AASHTO A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 2001
61 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual



Figure 16.1 : Sight Distance Types

62 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
16.4 Horizontal Geometry
16.4.1 Circular Curve Alignment
The circular curve adjoins the tangent at the tangent point (PT) and
then adjoins the next tangent at the circle tangent point (CP). The
description of the circular curve geometry is shown in Figure 16.2.
The location of superelevation development onto circular curves has
been of continuous concern to designers throughout the world. This
concern is due to the fact that design superelevation is not available for
the curve radius at the PC. This results in the vehicle experiencing 2 to
3 seconds where lateral acceleration tends to force the driver to adopt
a natural spiral curve during entry and exit. This can be a safety issue
if the vehicle uses more than the lane width provided. Curve widening
is provided to give drivers this extra width as well as to give additional
width for the swept path of large vehicles.
Superelevation runoff (Sro) is the length of superelevation development
from zero cross slope to full design superelevation (e).
A proportion of superelevation runoff (PSro) is provided prior to the PT.
This proportion tends to minimize the adverse effects of lateral
acceleration and improves the safety of the transition from tangent to
circular curve. The PSro prior to the circular curve is shown in Figure
16.2. The proportion varies with operating speed from 0.70 to 0.90 of
Sro.
Tangent runout (Tro) is the length of superelevation development from
the normal cross slope to the zero cross slope point on the tangent.
63 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Error!

Figure 16.2: Circular Curve Geometry
16.4.2 Spiral and Circular Curve Alignment
The spiral and circular curve provides a natural spiral (Clothoid or Euler
spiral) that best suits the transition of a vehicle from a tangent to a
circular curve.
The spiral length (Ls) is the same length as the Sro. This allows for the
transition from zero cross slope to the design superelevation to be
totally included in the spiral length.
The length of Sro is applicable to all superelevated curves and it is
recommended that this value should be used for minimum lengths of
spiral. The length of spiral should be set equal to the length of Sro. The
result is that the whole of the circular curve has full design
superelevation over its total length.
The length of Tro is designed to provide a smooth edge of traffic lane
profile such that a common edge gradient is maintained throughout the
superelevation runout and runoff section lengths.
The details described in the text are shown with the necessary formula
to design the curve criteria on Figure 16.3.
PI POINT OF INTERSECTION

Figure 16.2: Circular Curve Geometry
PC

w(e)n1(bw)
PI
PI POINT OF INTERSECTION
Figure 16.2 : Circular Curve Geometry
64 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual





PC
Figure 16.3 : Spiral and Circular Curve
PI

PI POINT OF INTERSECTION
65 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
16.4.3 Superelevation Development
The length of superelevation development (Le) is detailed in Figure
16.4 for both tangent to circular curve and tangent to spiral to circular
curve.


Figure 16.4: Superelevation Development
ed

L

TS/ST SC/CS
Sro = Ls

e
ed = DESIGN SUPERELEVATION
66 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
16.5 Vertical Geometry
16.5.1 Grades
Vertical alignment is the longitudinal profile along the centerline of the
road. It is made up of a series of grades and vertical curves. The
profile is determined by a consideration of the planning, access,
topographic, geological, design controls, earthworks and other
economic aspects.
The maximum grades to be used on the national highways of the
Philippines are detailed in Table 16.1.
Flat Topography:
In flat topography, there are considerable lengths of national highway of
two lane two way roads. The volume of traffic using these roads varies
from location to location. However, there are sections of highway that
could benefit from improved overtaking opportunity. The use of
overtaking lane geometry would give DPWH Region and District
engineers and planners the facility to improve safety and the capacity
of lengths of highway along which traffic has had a lack of overtaking
opportunities. Details and traffic volume guidelines for providing
overtaking lanes are detailed in Section 17.7, including the details of
tapers at the diverge and merge locations.
A strategy for the implementation of a series of overtaking lanes along
lengths of national highway would provide cost efficient road works to
improve safety and overtaking opportunities that are currently lacking
on lengths of national highway.
Rolling Topography:
Rolling topography may present additional need for auxiliary lanes for
two reasons:
For the addition of overtaking lanes on flat to rolling grades; and
The provision for climbing lanes on steeper extended grades along
which trucks slow down to an extent where vehicles may be
impeded from passing due to lack of available overtaking sight
distance on the steeper grades. On steeper grades, AASHTO
proposes limiting the maximum length to that which will not exceed
the critical length of grade generally as follows: The critical length is
that which will cause a typical loaded truck (5.5 kW/tonne) to
operate without an unreasonable reduction in speed. A reduction of
15 kph is recommended, due to the significant increase in accident
involvement rate at high speed reductions.
The warrant for the design of climbing lanes is when truck speeds
fall to 40 kph or less and traffic volumes equal or exceed those in
Table 17.1.
67 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
In addition, climbing lanes should be considered where:
Extended grades over 8 % occur;
Accidents attributable to the effects of slow moving trucks
are significant;
Heavy trucks from an adjacent industry enter the traffic
stream on the upgrade; or
The level of service E or F exist on the grade E.
Upgrade traffic flow rate in excess of 200 vehicles per hour
Upgrade truck flow rate in excess of 20 vehicles per hour
A 15 km/hr or greater speed reduction is expected for a
typical heavy truck.
A reduction of two or more levels of service is experienced
when moving from the approach segment to the grade
The determination of the reduction of truck speeds on up grades
(deceleration) and of the increase in speed (acceleration) are
shown on Figure 16.5. These charts provide guidance relating to
the start and end locations of the climbing lane.
Mountainous Topography:
Although the speed of cars may be reduced slightly on steep upgrades,
large differences in speeds of light and heavy vehicles will occur and
speeds of trucks will be quite slow. It is important, therefore, to provide
adequate sight distance to enable faster vehicle drivers to recognize
when they are catching up to a slower vehicle and to adjust their speed
accordingly. On steep down grades, it is desirable to increase the
operating speed of the individual geometric elements progressively
towards the foot of the steep grade.
The topography in mountainous grades may not provide sufficient area
for climbing lanes to be provided. In these instances turnouts may be
used. A turnout is a short section of paved shoulder or added lane that
is provided to allow slow vehicles to pull aside and be overtaken. They
differ from climbing lanes in their short length and different signing.
Turnouts will be satisfactory to use on upgrades if traffic volumes are
low or construction costs very high.
In all the cases for the consideration of auxiliary lane provision, it is
necessary for the designer to consider a strategy for the placement of
these facilities rather than consider them in isolation. The strategy
should look at a staging of the construction over lengths of highway to
provide the most economical benefits and maximize the road safety
gains.
68 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 16.5: Truck Speeds on Grades
69 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
16.5.2 Vertical Curves
The vertical alignment of a road consists of a series of straight grades
joined by vertical curves. A vertical curve is expressed as a K value,
which is the length of vertical curve in meters for 1% change in grade.
In the final design, the vertical alignment should fit into the natural
terrain considering earthworks balances, appearance and the
maximum and minimum vertical curvature allowed.
Large K value curves should be used where they are reasonably
economical.
Minimum K value vertical curves should be selected on the basis of
three controlling factors:
Sight distance is a requirement in all situations for driver safety;
Appearance is generally required in low fill and flat topography
situations; and
Riding comfort is a general requirement with specific need on
approaches to a floodway where the length of depression needs
to be minimized.
Figure 16.6 provides details for the vertical curve theory and formulae.
The adopted driver eye height and object height for cars and trucks are
detailed in Table 16.2. In summary, most vertical curves can be
designed using the following equations:
Lv = KA
K =
S
2
when S < Lv, and
100 (h
1
+ h
2
)
2

K =

2S _ 200 (h
1
+ h
2
)
2

when S > Lv
A
where:
Lv = length of vertical curve (m)
K = length of vertical curve in meters for 1% change in grade
A = algebraic difference in grade (%)
S = sight distance (m)
h
1
= driver eye height (m), refer Table 16. 2 (for cars and trucks)
h
2
= object height (m), refer Table 16.2 (for cars and trucks)

For design purposes, the K value may be used to determine the
equivalent radius of a vertical curve using R (radius m) = 100K.
Values for stopping sight distance are shown in Table 16.3.

70 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual


Figure 16.6 : Symmetrical Vertical Curve
71 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
CREST CURVES:
Minimum crest vertical curve lengths for different values of A to provide
the minimum stopping sight distance are shown in Figure 16.7. In this
figure, the solid lines give minimum vertical curve lengths, on the basis
of rounded values of K (length of eye=1.08m; height of object =0.60m)
as determined from the following equations:
Lv =
A S
2
when S is less than Lv
658
Lv =
2S _ 685 when S is greater than Lv
A
On Figure 16.6, the short dashed curve crossing the solid lines
indicates where S = Lv.
The vertical solid lines are the minimum lengths calculated as 0.6V (m).




Figure 16.7 : Crest Vertical Curves
Length of crest vertical curve (m)
A
l
g
e
b
r
a
i
c

d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
c
e

i
n

g
r
a
d
e

(
%
)

72 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
SAG CURVES
At least four different criteria are used for the establishment of sag
vertical curves. These are: headlight sight distance, passenger comfort,
drainage control and general appearance.
DPWH sag vertical curves are designed using headlight sight distance
criteria. Headlight height is 0.6 m as shown in Table 16.2. A 1 degree
upward divergence of the light beam is used in computing the length of
sag vertical curves.
The lengths of sag vertical curves are shown in Figure 16.8. For
overall safety, a sag vertical curve should be long enough that the light
beam distance is nearly the same as the stopping sight distance.
The K values of crest and sag vertical curves for the corresponding
design speed and stopping sight distance are shown in Table 16.4.
The K values for passing sight distance are also shown. The headlight
sight distance for sags is equal to stopping sight distance.
The following directions shows the relationship between S,L at A using
S as the distance between the vehicle and point where the 1-degree
upward single of the light beam intersects the surface of the roadway;
When S is less than L When S is greater than L
As
2
120+3.5 S
120 + 3.5 S A
Where: L= length if sag vertical curve,
S= light beam distance,
A= algebraic difference in grades, percent










L = L = 25 -
73 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Table 16.4 : K Values for Crest and Sag Vertical Curves
Design
Speed
(kph)
Stopping
Sight
Distance
(m)
Crest
K for
stopping
sight
distance
Sag
K for
headlight
sight
distance
Passing
Sight
Distance
(m)
Crest
K for
passing
sight
distance
20 20 1 3
30 35 2 6 200 46
40 50 4 9 270 84
50 65 7 13 345 138
60 85 11 18 410 195
70 105 17 23 485 272
80 130 26 30 540 338
90 160 39 38 615 438
100 185 52 45 670 520
110 220 74 55 730 617
120 250 95 63 775 695
Source: AASHTO, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets,
2001
Figure 16.8 : Sag Vertical Curves
74 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
17 CROSS SECTION
17.1 Introduction
The provision of adequate space for all road users includes vehicles,
cyclists, pedicabs and pedestrians as well as other features such as
shoulders, drainage, sidewalks, cut or fill slopes and clearances to the
edge of the right of way.
The general cross section standards are detailed in Table 16.1, Design
Standards for Philippine National Highways.
17.2 Traffic Lanes
As indicated in Table 16.1, the basic lane width appropriate for national
roads is 3.35 m.
On lower trafficked roads, the lane width can be reduced. This is
justified on the basis of economics. For a single lane road traffic the
lane width is 4.0 m. For a two lane national road the minimum width is
2 x 3.35 m lanes (total 6.7 m). As the traffic volume increases, so the
need for extra width is justified. This width can increase up to a
maximum of 3.65 m.
Where warranted and where road space is available, an additional lane
can be provided to improve safety of slow or vulnerable road users
such as cyclists or pedicabs. An example of this is in Figure 17.1
where the pedestrians have a sidewalk and bicyclists and tricyclists
have a separate lane separated from motor traffic.

Figure 17.1 : Good Cross-Section providing lane for vulnerable road
users.
75 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
17.3 Shoulders
The shoulder width is generally selected according to the traffic volume
and standards are detailed in Table 16.1. Shoulder widths on low
volume roads may be increased if there are a significant number of
pedestrians or other needs requiring use of the shoulder to improve
safety.
On curved alignments, it is advisable to consider the paving of the
outside curve shoulder width. This will minimize the possibility of a
vehicle that strays off the traffic lane from loosing control due to poor
traction on a graveled shoulder. The widening of traffic lanes on curved
alignments is also advisable. This is dealt with in the DPWH Highway
Design Guidelines.
Shoulder paving is a valuable method of providing:
integrity of the pavement;
width to place edgeline pavement markings;
additional safety to prevent vehicles skidding or drivers
losing control in gravel; and
low maintenance costs compared with unpaved shoulders.
Shoulder paving provides width for traffic when passing or maneuvering
from oncoming vehicles and sheds water away from the regular
trafficked width.
For roads with less than 1,000 ADT, a shoulder is provided but
generally not paved. A general exception might be at locations of
sharper than normal curves when the outside shoulder of a curve may
be paved. Sharp vertical curvature may warrant pavement widening
and shoulder paving to provide sufficient width for maneuvering traffic.
The paving of the shoulder width needs to be considered during the
planning and design stages. Paving of the shoulder is desirable for
roads carrying over 1,000 ADT. The paving can then accommodate
the character of the traffic fleet, the maneuverability for passing needs,
emergency parking, and periodical maintenance of the road.
17.4 Curb and Gutter
The concrete curb and gutter types may be barrier or mountable and
either include a gutter for drainage, or curb only. The curb cross
sections are detailed in Appendix 6 and are listed below:
Barrier Curb & Gutter
Barrier Curb
Mountable / Drop Curb & Gutter
Mountable / Drop Curb
76 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
The use of the barrier or mountable curb types needs to be considered
in relation to the performance of vehicles that leave the traveled way for
some reason.
The barrier curb types are suited for the edge of the traveled way
where it is generally considered that drivers should not mount the curb
or sidewalk. The barrier curb types are used for areas where operating
speeds are generally less than 60 kph and where parking of vehicles is
allowed.
The mountable / drop curb types provide less vaulting of the errant
vehicle on impact with the curb, less likelihood of the driver losing
control and less damage to occupants of the vehicles compared to
barrier curbs. The drop curb / mountable type shall be used for all traffic
islands, medians and the right side of the roadway where operating
speeds are greater than 60 kph.
17.5 Drainage
Longitudinal drainage ditches are essential part of any road that is not
on fill and must be incorporated into the road cross section. These are
designed to accommodate the expected rainfall but can often be
hazardous to vehicles that run off the road. Adequate attention must
therefore be given to the safety considerations of drainage facilities
when designing and upgrading highways.
Drainage ditches collect and disperse the water from the road
pavement and the runoff from the uphill side of the carriageway.
However, a deep drain very close to the travel path of traffic can be
very hazardous if traffic strays from the traffic lane and this may cause
a driver to lose control. Careful design and location of such channels
can reduce the potential hazard.
It is desirable that open ditches being included in new works are
concreted and be provided with fitted pre-cast cover. This extends the
clear zone width and forms a sidewalk for pedestrians.
Consideration to the covering of existing open concrete drainage
ditches and channels needs to be carried out in a logistical manner to
cover the drainage structures where the need is greatest, such as in
urban areas and on the inner side of curves in mountainous terrain.
In rolling or mountainous terrain the cross section width may not always
allow the construction of safe vehicle friendly drainage structures.
Sharp V-type and acute U-type drains are essential in many of these
locations. The use of precast concrete cover (with slots to permit the
entry of water) on these drains should be considered, especially on the
inner side of curves.
In flat and rolling terrain, the preference is to avoid safety hazards
created by V-type and U-type drainage ditches. In this terrain
development of drainage ditches that can cope with the expected
rainfall levels and yet do not create unsafe conditions for motorists is a
challenge to engineers.
77 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
The most important criteria to consider are:
Actual reconnaissance survey during wet whether to identify
the natural run-out locations;
Slopes on the side nearest the road should not be steeper
than 3:1 and preferable flatter as this will minimize accident
severity. The slope farthest from the road may be as steep as
the ground will permit;
L-type channels (concrete barrier curb and gutter) should be
used where expected run-off will not breach the top of curb. A
larger than normal concrete gutter 600 mm wide may be an
option. Additional pits and careful selection of drainage run-
out location to match natural run-outs is essential. L-type
channels are also safer and provide a walking area for
pedestrians;
The U-type drainage channel offers no opportunity for a
vehicle to recover and no facility or space for pedestrians.
Rural roads become the main pedestrian routes between
Barangays and the absence of pedestrian footways forces
pedestrians to walk on the road; and
Safe drainage provisions need to be considered when the
basic cross section of the road is being determined.
17.6 Pedestrian Facilities on Rural Roads
Walking is a major mode of transport in the Philippines and pedestrians
form a high proportion of accident victims.
Special consideration need to be given to pedestrians along routes
during the design phase or re-planning stage of highway design.
Surveys of pedestrian movements need to be conducted to identify the
lengths over which priority needs to be given to provide pedestrian
facilities.
On higher trafficked roads, the non-motorized movements should be
segregated either by providing a sidewalk or cycle-way beyond the
drainage facility, or on a segregated part of the road shoulder. The
provision of wider shoulders with flatter cross slope also gives space for
pedestrians in identified locations.
Sidewalks need not be expensive. Grading a path along one side of
the road levels the ground and removes most of the vegetation to
create a cheap segregated pedestrian facility. A regular maintenance
program should be initiated to ensure that the surfaces of pedestrian
facilities are kept reasonably clean and level and that vegetation does
not cause an obstruction to either passage, visibility or to force
pedestrians onto the traveled way.
78 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Visibility at crossing points is particularly important and advance
warning signs should be used for traffic, particularly if good visibility is
not available. On very low volume roads, reduced geometric standards
will reduce vehicle speeds and may allow pedestrians to use the road
safely without segregation. This can lead to vehicles cutting corners
across road shoulders used by pedestrians and creating an unsafe
situation. These locations should be surveyed to locate off-road
footways at these points.
Where vehicle speeds are relatively high in Barangays and pedestrians
are at risk, pedestrian crossing facilities may be protected by speed
limiting devices, such as roundabouts at road junctions, slow down or
reduce speed signs, among others. Through Vehicle on through traffic
tends to travel at a relatively higher speed than does vehicle on local
traffic, and for this reason such speed limiting devices are a logical and
beneficial to the community. Parked vehicles should be banned within
20 meters of each pedestrian crossing facility. The associated
narrowing of traffic lanes on the approaches to along with adequate
road signs and pavement markings will provide safety for the
pedestrians.
At culvert and bridge crossings, it is preferable for the road shoulder to
continue across the structure to provide continuity of a pedestrian
facility. However, if the highway is narrowed, special segregation
should be made for cyclists and pedestrians. A segregated pedestrian
facility should continue across a bridge where surveys indicate the
need. A pedestrian barrier can further segregate pedestrians, however,
the barrier terminals should be designed not to pose potential hazards
for approaching vehicles and their occupants.
A pedestrian bridge adjacent to the bridge used by vehicles can be an
option where insufficient width is available for pedestrians. This can be
cantilevered off the structure of the road bridge. A minimum width of
1.5 meters should be provided, although it may need to be wider for
higher pedestrian and cycle volumes. The additional cost will be
relatively small if incorporated during the initial design and construction.
If a continuous pedestrian facility cannot be provided on longer bridges,
then refuges at regular intervals, would be of assistance to pedestrians
so they can move off the roadway when a vehicle is passing. Where a
pedestrian/cycle facility rejoins the road, it must be well signed and at a
good point of visibility to drivers using the through road.
The provision of adequate space for all road users enhances safety.
Alternatively, if vulnerable road users share space with vehicular traffic
or if inadequate lane widths are provided for trucks, this can create
safety hazards.
17.7 Overtaking Provision (Auxiliary Lanes)
The need to provide overtaking opportunities is a major safety issue on
two lane two way roads especially in rural areas where speeds are
high. The other need for overtaking is when speeds of vehicles are
reduced due to rolling or mountainous terrain.
79 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
In all cases of overtaking need, it is the vehicle that is overtaking that
gains the benefit of safety, improved travel time and removal of
frustration caused by slower moving traffic.
The availability of overtaking opportunity depends on sight distance and
gaps in the opposing traffic stream. As opposing traffic increases,
overtaking opportunities become restricted even if sight distance is
adequate. Sight distance that appears adequate may also be unusable
on occasions due to the size of the vehicle in front, particularly on right
hand curves. It is under this delayed travel condition that drivers are
tempted to take risks when considering overtaking. The provision of
overtaking lanes removes this frustration and provides a safer and
more efficient highway at relatively low cost. The pavement can be
locally widened to provide an overtaking zone for one direction of
travel, at low cost.
The selection of the location for overtaking lanes requires site visits to
observe traffic behavior and to select appropriate sites within the
existing road structure and at minimum cost and maximum driver
benefits.
17.7.1 Overtaking Lanes:
Overtaking lanes in flat to rolling terrain are used to break up platoons
of traffic and to improve traffic flow over a section of road. They
provide positive overtaking opportunities and are sometimes the only
real chance for overtaking to occur.
A series of such auxiliary lanes for both directions of traffic can greatly
improve traffic flow and driver satisfaction. The desirable layout is
based on the start or end of the lane merging location being separated
by a 3 second distance of travel time. This distance is to minimize the
possibility of conflict between opposing merging vehicles. An
acceptable layout when the geometric considerations do not provide for
an alternative is to allow the start of the merges to be opposite one
another.
The provision of overtaking lanes may delay the need for a major
upgrading to provide dual carriageways. Where a four lane road has
already been provided and the traffic volumes are consistently high, the
need for auxiliary lanes on grades may still arise when there is a high
proportion of heavy vehicles.
The traffic volume guidelines for the provision of overtaking lanes are
shown in Table 17.1.





80 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Table 17.1 : Traffic Volume Guidelines for Provision of Overtaking Lanes
Overtaking Opportunities
over the Preceding 5 km (1)
Design Volume (ADT)
Description of the
Ability to Overtake
Percentage
Length
Providing
Overtaking (2)
Percentage of Slow Vehicles (3)
5% 10% 20%
Excellent 70-100 6,000 5,000 4,000
Good 30-70 5,000 4,000 3,500
Moderate 10-30 3,000 3,000 2,500
Occasional 5-10 2,500 2,000 1,500
Restricted 0-5 1,500 1,500 1,000
Very Restricted (4) 0 1,000 1,000 500
Notes:
(1) Depending on road length being evaluated, this distance could
range from 3 to 10 km.
(2) See following text.
(3) Include light trucks and cars towing trailers and other units.
(4) No overtaking for 3 km in each direction.
The proportion of road length offering overtaking provision is the sum of
such section lengths, divided by the total road length being considered.
OP = OLs x 100
TSL
Where:
OP = Proportion of road offering overtaking provision (%)
OLs = Sum of overtaking lengths in road section (m)
TSL = Total road Length (m).

The recommended lengths of overtaking lanes relative to the operating
speed of the road section are shown in Table 17.2.
81 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Table 17.2 : Overtaking Lane Lengths
Operating
Speed
(kph)
Overtaking Lane Lengths - excluding Taper
lengths (m)
Minimum Desirable
Minimum
Normal
Minimum
50 75 225 325
60 100 250 400
70 125 325 475
80 200 400 650
90 275 475 775
100 350 550 950
110 420 620 1070
Note: The start and terminal areas of overtaking lanes should be
located where they are clearly visible to approaching drivers.
17.7.2 Climbing Lanes
Climbing lanes can be considered as a special form of overtaking lane
but they are only provided on inclines. Climbing lanes form part of the
network of overtaking opportunities and will therefore have an effect on
decisions associated with the location of other overtaking lanes.
The warrant for climbing lanes is where:
Truck speeds fall to 40 kph or less;
Truck speeds reduction by more than 15 kph;
Upgrade traffic flow rate in excess of 20 vehicles per hour;
Upgrade truck flow rate in excess of 20 vehicles per hour;
Extended grades over 8% occur;
Level of service E or F exist on the goods;
Accidents attributable to the effects of slow moving trucks are
significant;
A reduction of two or more levels of service is experience when
moving from the approach segment to the grade; and
Heavy trucks from an adjacent industry enter the traffic stream.
Table 17.2 indicates the lengths on constant individual grades needed
to produce a reduction in truck speed to 40 kph.
Truck speeds on grades can be assessed using the curves included in
Figure 16.5 and the longitudinal section of the road. The deceleration
chart in Figure 16.5 assumes a truck entrance speed of 100 kph.
82 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
17.7.3 Merging and Diverging for Auxiliary Lanes
The design of overtaking lanes and climbing lanes requires the
consideration of the:
Initial diverge taper;
Auxiliary lane length; and
End or merge taper.
Diverge Taper
A taper is required at the start of an auxiliary lane to provide for the
lateral movement of traffic.
A diverge is the dividing of a single stream of traffic into separate
streams as shown in Figure 17.2. The diverge taper length for a
through traffic lane is based on a lateral shift movement of traffic of 1
m/s. A lateral shift of 1 m/s means that for every second of travel in the
longitudinal direction, there is a transverse movement of 1 meter.
Diverge Taper 1.0 m/s lateral
shift for a through lane
Figure 17.2 : Diverge Taper
The taper lengths for various speeds and lane widths are in Table 17.3.
Merge Taper
A merge is a converging of separate streams into a single stream as
shown in Figure 17.3.
A merge taper length is based on a lateral shift movement of traffic of
0.6 m/s for a through lane merge and 1.0 m/s for an acceleration lane
taper. A lateral shift of 0.6 m/s means that for every second of travel in
the longitudinal direction, there is a transverse movement of 0.6 meter.
83 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Merge Taper:
- 0.6 m/s for through lane merge
- 1.0 m/s for acceleration lane merge

Figure 17.3 : Merge Taper
The lengths provided for the diverge and merge movements are
important to enable adequate notice and opportunity to complete the
movement safely.

Table 17.3 : Diverge and Merge Lengths
Design Speed 3.7 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.2 3.1 3.0
3.6
50 (13.88 m/s) 51 50 49 47 46 44 42 42
60 (16.67 m/s) 62 60 58 57 55 53 52 50
70 (19.44 m/s) 72 70 68 66 64 62 60 58
80 (22.22 m/s) 82 80 78 76 73 71 69 67
90 (25.00 m/s) 93 90 88 85 83 80 78 75
100 (27.78 m/s) 103 100 97 94 92 89 86 83
110 (30.56 m/s) 113 110 107 104 101 98 95 92
120 (33.33 m/s) 123 120 117 113 110 107 103 100
50 ( 13.88 m/s) 86 83 81 79 76 74 72 69
60 (16.67 m/s) 103 100 97 94 92 89 86 83
70 ( 19.44 m/s) 120 117 113 110 107 104 100 97
80 (22.22 m/s) 137 133 130 126 122 119 115 111
90 (25.00 m/s) 154 150 146 142 138 133 129 125
100 (27.78 m/s) 171 167 162 157 153 148 144 139
110 (30.56 m/s) 188 183 178 173 168 163 158 153
120 (33.33 m/s) 206 200 194 189 183 178 172 167
Lane Widths
Taper Lengt hs @ 1.0 m/s lateral shift [ (Design Speed/3.6 x Lane Width) Lat eral
Shift]
Taper length @ 0.6 m/s lateral shift
Design Speed
(kph)

17.7.3 Slow Vehicle Turn-outs:
A turn-out is a very short section of fully constructed shoulder or added
lane that is provided to allow slow vehicles to pull aside and be
overtaken. It differs from an overtaking lane due to its short length,
different signing and that the majority of vehicles are not encouraged to
travel in the right lane. A turnout may be appropriate if traffic volumes
are low or construction costs are very high for an overtaking lane or
climbing lane.
84 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Turn-out lengths of 60 to 170 m for average approach speeds of 30 to
90 kph respectively and a width of 3.7 m are to be used. Care must be
taken to provide adequate sight distance.
Signing at the start and merge points are required to better indicate
diverge and merge locations. The minimum sight distance should be
stopping sight distance for the section operating speed.
17.7.4 Descending Lanes:
On steep down grades the speed of trucks will be as low as that on
equivalent up grades. There will be a similar effect on traffic flow if
overtaking opportunities are not available. A descending lane may be
appropriate in these circumstances.
Sight distance provision at the terminals is also important. When
passing sight distance warrants, overtaking will be readily
accomplished. Similarly, if a climbing lane is provided in the opposite
direction and the passing sight distance is adequate, overtaking slower
downhill vehicles can be safely achieved and a descending lane will not
be needed.
Where the down grade is along sharp horizontal curves, a descending
lane will be appropriate to provide satisfactory traffic operation. Design
details are similar to those of climbing lanes.
17.7.5 Emergency Escape Ramps:
Where long steep grades occur, it is desirable to provide emergency
escape ramps. These are to be located to slow or stop an out of
control vehicle away from the main traffic stream. Out of control
vehicles result from drivers losing control of their vehicle.
There are four types of escape ramps:
Sand Pile;
Descending Grade;
Horizontal Grade; and
Ascending Grade.









85 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Each one of the ramp types is applicable to a particular situation where
an emergency escape ramp is desirable and must be compatible with
the location and topography. The most effective ramp is an ascending
ramp with a full depth arrester bed. The length of ramp can be
assessed from:
L = V
2
/ (26a + 2.55g
1
)
Where:
L = length of arrester bed excluding 50 m transition at the start
(m)
V = Entry speed (kph)
a = deceleration - (3.0 m/sec
2
for 350 mm deep gravel)
- (3.7 m/sec
2
for 450 mm deep gravel)
g
1 =
grade (%) (positive for upgrade; negative for downgrade).

The provision of escape ramps requires careful consideration of site
factors including the land use adjacent to the exit. Existing roads and
streets used for property access should only be used where the traffic
volume is very low and there is very low probability of an escaping
vehicle meeting another vehicle.
86 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
18 DELINEATION
The guidance of drivers as they travel along a length of road is
important to provide safe travel conditions.
Delineation of the road alignment needs to be considered as part of the
design process to ensure that adequate guidance is provided to road
users. Improving delineation may also be needed to improve safety on
a road section experiencing traffic accident problems.
Good delineation enables a driver to laterally position the vehicle on the
road and to be aware of the changes in direction or alignment that may
be ahead. Delineation is particularly important during periods of poor
visibility e.g. at night or during rain or fog.

Figure 18.1 : Good Road Delineation
Delineation is generally provided by the use of the following devices:
Pavement Markings
Center line
Lane lines
Edge lines or tactile edge lines
Other painted markings e.g. islands, hatching
Reflective Pavement Studs (RPS)
Signs
Warning signs indicating curves etc.
Hazard markers
Chevron signs for substandard curves
Guide posts
Reflective delineators
Lighting
Curb or other physical devices
87 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Examples of poor road delineation are shown in Figures 18.2 and 18.3.

Figure 18.2 : Poor Curve Delineation

Figure 18.3 : Poor Delineation of the Center and Edge of Roadway


Figure 18.4 : Examples of Chevron Signs providing Delineation of Curves
88 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual


Figure 18.5 : Road Delineation affected by shadows
In Figure 18.5, shadows across the roadway affect delineation of the
road alignment. Adding edge lines or chevron signs could improve the
delineation.
Details regarding the selection and use of signs and pavement
markings for delineation are provided in DPWH Highway Safety Design
Standards Manual Part 2: Road Signs and Pavement Markings
Manual.
89 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
19 INTERSECTIONS
This section of the manual describes the safety features of
intersections and the criteria for safe design.
An intersection is the junction where two roads either cross or meet.
19.1 Intersection Types
The types of intersections that generally exist on the road network are:
Unflared and unchannelized intersections (without widening or
traffic islands);
Flared and unchannelized intersections (with widening but
without traffic islands); and,
Channelized intersections (traffic islands to guide traffic).
The types of intersections are also described in Section 4.1.3 of the
DPWH Highway Design Guidelines.
Common types of intersection are cross intersections, T-intersections,
Y-intersections, other multi-legged junctions and roundabouts.
Principles of good design to reduce the likelihood of traffic accidents
include:
Minimize the speed of vehicles at potential collision points;
Separate movements and points of conflict by channelization, or
in some situations, prohibit certain movements (and provide for
them at other intersections along the route);
Control movements to reduce the possibility of conflict; and
Clearly define vehicle paths by use of pavement markings.
19.2 Traffic Control Devices
Traffic can be controlled at intersections by regulatory signs, traffic
signals, roundabouts. If no traffic control devices are provided, it
operates according to the road rules in Chapter IV Traffic Rules, in
Republic Act No. 4136 Land Transportation and Traffic Code.
Whatever type of traffic control is used, it must be clear and visible to
drivers from a distance that will allow the motorist to react and stop if
necessary.
All intersections should have appropriate pavement marking, not only to
ensure vehicles stop at the correct position, but to also help define the
intersection area.
Where intersections have no traffic control device other than pavement
marking, vehicles are required to give way to other vehicles that are
90 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
already in the intersection or have reached the intersection first and are
about to enter.
19.2.1 Priority Intersections
Stop or Give Way signs facing the minor road approaches at an
intersection are used to give priority to the major road. Safety at an
intersection is improved by assigning clear priority to inform drivers of
their responsibilities.
A Stop sign is installed on the minor road if the visibility to traffic on the
major intersecting road is below specified distances relative to the
major road operating speed. Otherwise a Give Way sign is used.
The Highway Safety Design Standards Part 2: Road Signs and
Pavement Markings Manual, Sections 2.6.1 and 2.6.2 provide details
on the visibility requirements for the use of Stop and Give Way signs.
19.2.2 Signal Controlled Intersections
Traffic signals improve safety and simplify decision making. They also:
Separate vehicle movements in time. This minimizes conflicts.
Minimize delays at an intersection;
Enable vehicles from a side road to cross or enter the major
road; and
Assist pedestrians in crossing the road.
19.3 Control of Conflicts
A conflict point occurs where two travel paths interact or cross. Safe
intersection design uses the following principles:
Minimizing the number of conflict points;
Minimizing the area of conflict;
Separating points of conflict;
Giving preference to major movements; and
Minimizing relative speed of conflicting movements.
A large area of conflict can occur when roads intersect at an acute
angle, where wide roads intersect or with offset cross intersections.
91 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Figure 19.1 shows an
intersection with a large
area of conflict. This
could be a safer
intersection with
channelization of the
movements or by
controlling movements
with a roundabout or
traffic signals.

Figure 19.1 : Large Intersection Conflict Area
The number of conflict points depends on the type of intersection.
Figures 19.2 to 19.4 demonstrate where the conflict points occur for
various types of intersection. Table 4-1.2 of the DPWH Highway
Design Guidelines also refers to intersection conflict points. The
figures below show the major points of conflict for crossing and merging
movements. The diverging conflicts are not shown as they are
generally of a minor nature and would usually occur prior to the
intersection, rather than within the intersection itself. Generally, from a
safety point of view, the fewer conflict points the safer the intersection.
6 points of major conflict
Figure 19.2 : Three-Legged Intersection

24 points of major conflict
Figure 19.3 : Four-Legged Intersection
92 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual


4 points of major conflict
Figure 19.4 : Roundabout at Four-Legged Intersection
19.4 Control of Speed
The speed of vehicles through an intersection depends on:
Alignment;
Road environment;
Traffic volume and composition; and
Traffic control devices.
19.4.1 Relative Speed
The safety of an intersection depends largely on achieving low relative
speeds. Relative speed is the vectorial speed of convergence of the
vehicles in a conflict maneuver. In each of the figures below, it can be
seen that the higher the collision angle the higher the relative speed.

Figure 19.5 : Cross Road
A = 60 kph
B = 60 kph
Relative Speed
C = 85 kph
93 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 19.6 : Y Intersection Layout

Figure 19.7 : Roundabout
19.4.2 Attaining low relative speeds
Low relative speed conditions at intersections can be obtained by:
Choosing a layout where conflicting movements cross at angles
less than or equal to 90 degrees;
Providing a layout or alignment that slows down approaching
vehicles; and
Providing deceleration lanes.
A common intersection type where the layout can be hazardous is the
Y-junction or T-junction with two way traffic each side of a single
triangular island (refer to Figure 19.8 below). These layouts have six
(6) points of conflict similar to other 3-legged intersections. However,
they can be less safe due to the angles of conflict involved (at points A,
B, and C), as there is a potential for high speed high severity head on
accidents. A drivers view of approaching traffic on the intersecting
roadway also creates a difficulty in seeing possible conflicts. Effective
traffic control using signs to define priority for the major movement is
also difficult to achieve.
A = 60 kph
B = 60 kph
Relative Speed
C = 112 kph
A = 20 kph
B = 20 kph
Relative Speed
C = 10 kph
94 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 19.8 : Conflicts at Y and T Intersections
19.5 Channelization
Channelization at an intersection involves the control of traffic by
provision of traffic islands or pavement markings to direct the traffic into
predetermined paths. The shape of an intersection layout and
channelization depends on the layout of the approaching roadways, the
traffic patterns and control strategy, traffic volumes including turning
movements, pedestrian needs, parking arrangements and access to
abutting properties. Channelization can be used to:
Merge traffic streams at small angles to ensure low relative
speed between conflicting stations
Reduce areas of conflict by causing opposing traffic streams to
intersect generally at right angles (desirable range is in the order
of 70 to 90 degrees);
Improve and define the alignment of major movements;
Control the speed of traffic entering an intersection by changing
alignment or bending their approach path;
Control the speed of traffic by restricting width or funneling;
Provide a refuge or median to shelter a turning or crossing
vehicle;
Provide protection for pedestrians;
Improve conspicuity of an intersection e.g. a splitter island on an
approach;
Prohibit certain turns/movement; and
Provide locations for traffic signal poles or traffic signs.
In the design and layout of channelization care should be taken to
provide clear guidance to drivers with simple decision making and to
avoid any possible cause of confusion.



95 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
19.6 Lane widths
The width of through traffic lanes at an intersection can affect how
motorists behave on the approach and within an intersection.
If lanes are too wide then it can encourage drivers to travel at high
speeds or form extra lanes of traffic. It can also result in poor lane
delineation.
Lane widths at intersections may be less than midblock lane widths to
enable additional through or turning lanes to be provided for reasons of
safety or capacity.
Narrow lanes need to be avoided where single lane roadways have
curbs on both sides e.g. on slip lanes, as there needs to be sufficient
width for vehicles to get past a stalled vehicle. It is desirable to provide
at least 5m between curbs to enable passing of a stalled vehicle.
Turning lanes within an intersection need to provide for the swept path
of turning vehicles. It is also desirable to provide at least 5m between
curbs on slip lanes to cater for the swept paths of larger vehicles during
the turn.
When designing an intersection, turning templates should be used to
indicate the swept path envelope for various angles of turn. An
example template is shown in Appendix 2. These are used to ensure
that there is enough pavement width on which the vehicle can turn and
to ensure that the vehicle will not encroach into an adjacent lane or
overhang areas with poles or signs. These are placed on the layout
design to map the areas of the wheel paths and the truck overhang.
A computer program called AUTOTURN can also be used to map the
swept path of large vehicles.
19.7 Auxiliary Lanes at Intersections
Auxiliary through traffic lanes may be provided at urban signalized
intersections to increase capacity. An auxiliary lane may also be
required through a roundabout to provide appropriate capacity.
Tapers are required at the start and end of auxiliary lanes to provide for
the lateral movement and merging of traffic. Details of diverge and
merge taper lengths for auxiliary through lanes are detailed in Section
17.7.3.
For right and left turn lanes the diverge tapers are shorter so that the
commencement of the lane is more obvious and so the driver is
required to make a conscious decision to change lanes. Typical
lengths are:
Urban area (up to 70 kph) - 30 m taper
Rural or high speed area up to 80 kph 40 m taper
Rural or high speed area up to 100 kph 50 m taper
96 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
19.8 Right and Left Turning Lanes
The safety of an intersection can be improved by provision of right and
left auxiliary turning lanes. Turning lanes also improve intersection
capacity and traffic flow. They are particularly important if the volume
of traffic making these moves is high or if the through or oncoming
traffic flows are high.
Provision for turning lanes can generally be provided in the following
ways:
Shared turning and through lane;
Flaring and taper; or
Separate lane for deceleration and storage.

Figure 19.9 can provide guidance on choosing an appropriate
treatment in rural or outer urban locations.


Notes:
QT Traffic flow in peak hour of through traffic (vehicles / hour)
QL Traffic flow in peak hour of left turn traffic (vehicles / hour)
QR Traffic flow in peak hour of right turn traffic (vehicles / hour)
If peak hour volumes are not available, assume the design peak hour volume equals
10% to 15% of the ADT.

Figure 19.9 : Guideline for Left and Right Turn Lanes

At some intersections there may need to be two or more turning lanes
to cater for high turning volumes. The provision of slip lanes for right
turning traffic is also desirable where space is available. The type of
treatment used depends on the volume and composition of the traffic
wanting to make the move.
97 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
The auxiliary lanes used for turning traffic are provided to allow vehicles
to decelerate in a separate lane, avoiding delays for through traffic
vehicles and to provide an area for vehicles while waiting to make the
turn.
It is important from a safety point of view that the length of the auxiliary
lane is adequate to store waiting vehicles and to ensure that vehicles
do not queue out into the adjacent lane and create a hazard for through
traffic.
98 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
19.9 Right Turn Slip Lanes
Right turn slip lanes are provided to minimize the delays for right
turning vehicles and to make the right turn movement easier and safer.
A traffic island is provided with this treatment to:
Guide traffic into defined paths;
Separate through, turning and opposing traffic movements;
Give advance warning of the intersection to approaching drivers;
Provide refuge for pedestrians; and,
Prohibit undesirable or unnecessary traffic movements.
The provision of an auxiliary right turning lane in advance of the slip
lane is desirable. The length is generally based on the distance
needed for deceleration with consideration also given to the storage
requirements for turning traffic. An auxiliary lane also enables turning
traffic to enter the lane around the queued through vehicles.
The two types of slip lane arrangements are:
High entry angle slip lane; and
Free Flow Slip Lane.
The shape and size of the traffic island is important to guide vehicles
along a path where a safe intersecting angle or merging can be
provided with traffic in the intersecting roadway. The choice of layout
arrangements depends on site conditions.
99 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
19.8.1 High Entry Angle Slip Lane
4.0
4.4 min
1

Figure 19.10 : High Entry Angle Slip Lane
The treatment in Figure 19.10 allows vehicles to wait at the hold line at
an angle of about 70 degrees, which ensures good visibility of
approaching traffic in the intersecting road. A lower angle promotes a
higher speed movement and can also create difficulties for the driver
seeing vehicles approaching from the left.




100 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

19.8.2 Free Flow Slip Lane
30m
Notes:

* - Offset of 0.2 m per 10 kph of approach speed

W Width based on swept path of turning vehicle
including space to overtake a broken down vehicle (if
curbs on both sides)

R1 Turn radius design speed based on 50% to 80%
of through speed
Offset 0.3m
0.3m
0.6R
1 in 10 Taper
Acceleration (speed change) Lane
Refer AASHTO Exhibit 10.73
Includes merge taper 1.0 m/s
lateral shift
R1

Figure 19.11 : Free Flow Slip Lane
The type of treatment in Figure 19.11 is appropriate when there is a
high volume of right turning traffic and a low pedestrian volume (the
free flow slip lane does not cater as well for pedestrians due to the
higher speeds). The free flow slip lane arrangement may be suitable in
a rural situation or an expressway interchange.
19.10 Left Turn Treatments
Provision of a special treatment for left turning vehicles at intersections
is dependant on the total number of vehicles needing to make the
movement and the opportunities available for the move to be
completed.
Three types of treatments that could be used, depending on the traffic
volumes and road environment are shown in Figures 19.12, 19.13 and
19.14.

101 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 19.12 : Type A Left Turn Treatment
The Type A treatment in Figure 19.12 has no separate turning lane and
is appropriate when the left turn volume is low. A feature of this
treatment is sufficient width to allow passing of left turning vehicles.
This area of shoulder could be paved in the vicinity of the intersection
as a measure to improve safety and reduce maintenance.

Figure 19.13 : Type B Left Turn Treatment
The Type B layout in Figure 19.13 has a semi-protected left turn lane.
It is safer than a Type A treatment, as it provides a full width marked
lane for through vehicles to pass waiting left turners. This treatment is
used for higher left turn volume situations.
The length D
1
in the treatment above is based on a diverge movement
with a lateral shift of 1.0 m/s. Appropriate lengths for various operating
speeds are shown in Table 19.1. The length D
2
needs to allow for
storage of waiting vehicles and would generally be in the range of 20 to
50 meters. The radius R is based on the design speed.

Figure 19.14 : Type C Left Turn Treatment
102 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
The Type C layout in Figure 19.14 shows a protected left turn
treatment. It features a formalized auxiliary turning lane with a painted
island to shelter a vehicle waiting to turn left. This treatment is
appropriate for high speed roads with significant left turn volumes.
The length D
1
in Figure 19.14 is based on a diverge movement with a
lateral shift of 1.0 m/s. Appropriate lengths for various operating
speeds are shown in Table 19.1. The length of the deceleration taper
entering the left turn lane would reduce to 30m in an urban or low
speed environment.
19.11 Intersection Capacity
The safety of at grade intersections is largely dependent on how well
the traffic demand is catered for.
The capacity of an intersection depends largely on the number of lanes
provided and whether auxiliary lanes are provided. For a signalized
intersection the phasing and cycle times also have an impact on the
capacity of the intersection.
Intersections without traffic signals are appropriate low traffic volumes.
For higher volumes auxiliary lanes and signals need to be considered.
When the flow on the major leg is high, it can become an issue for
vehicles from the minor road as they can have trouble entering or
crossing the major road. This is a safety concern as they can decide to
choose smaller gaps which increases the risk. Vehicles wanting to turn
off the major road can delay through vehicles on the major road, if
auxiliary lanes are not provided.
19.12 Sight Distance at Intersections
Safe intersection design requires that the appropriate sight distance be
provided. The Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) values used for road
sections are also applicable to the major road at intersections.
SSD values for various design speeds are based on the stopping
distance plus the travel distance during the reaction time. These are
outlined in Table 16.2.
Where possible, Intersection Sight Distance (ISD) should also be
provided. The ISD applicable to drivers in the minor road enables
vehicles from the minor road to enter or cross the major road without
impeding the traffic on the major road. ISD values for various design
speeds are outlined in Table 19.1.
103 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Table 19.1 : Intersection Sight Distance (ISD)
Design Speed (kph) Stopping Sight
Distance (m)
Intersection Sight
Distance (m)
20 20 45
30 35 65
40 50 85
50 65 105
60 85 130
70 105 150
80 130 170
90 160 190
100 185 210
110 220 230
120 250 255
19.13 Horizontal and Vertical Intersection Geometry
Sight distance standards should be provided for both horizontal and
vertical alignments.
The optimal location of intersections is on straight alignments with
uniform grade. This situation provides the best situation for sight
distance requirements and also the driving task is simplified as vehicles
can be maintained more easily on correct paths through the
intersection. For the same reason, severe changes of alignment within
an intersection should be avoided.
Where a straight alignment cannot be achieved, the position of
intersections should be contained within a horizontal curve, so that
drivers are already traveling on the curve before reaching the
intersection.
In rolling terrain, intersections should be positioned on sag curves
rather than near crest curves, as sight distances can be restricted.
Sight distance restrictions can also occur when the minor road
intersects on the outside of a horizontal curve. In this situation, the
superelevation on the major road is sloping away from the minor road
and the pavement may not be visible to the minor road driver,
particularly if the minor road is on an upgrade approaching the
intersection. To improve conspicuity of the intersection in this situation,
it may be possible to regrade the minor road approach to the
intersection or provide a splitter island.
104 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
19.14 Roundabouts
19.14.1 Introduction
A roundabout (or rotunda) is one of the safest type of intersection
treatments. It consists of a circular island in the middle of an
intersection and traffic moves around it in an anticlockwise direction.
When designed correctly, the roundabout is probably the safest type of
intersection as there are fewer conflict points. In addition, traffic is
slowed down by the layout before entering the roundabout, the relative
speed at possible collision points is low and the decision making for
drivers is simple. The provision of splitter islands on the approach to a
roundabout also provides advance notice to the driver and controls
vehicle movements.
19.14.2 Safety Benefits
Roundabouts are a safe and effective form of intersection control as the
central island physically deflects the traffic through the intersection and
controls the speed of traffic. Any collisions that may occur in a
roundabout are generally less severe because traffic is moving slowly
and in the same general direction. In addition, drivers only look for
traffic on the left, making it easier to judge an entry into the intersection.
19.14.3 Appropriate Locations for Roundabouts
Many factors need to be taken into consideration when choosing the
type of intersection to be provided at a given location. Roundabouts
may be appropriate in the following situations:
At intersections with high accident rates
When physical control of speed is desirable
When the flows on each approach are balanced and capacity
analysis indicates that volumes can be managed;
When the volume of left turners is significant
If traffic signals may be inefficient e.g. due to a large number of
phases; and
For multi-legged intersections.
Roundabouts may not be appropriate in the following situations:
Where satisfactory geometric design cannot be provided due to
insufficient space of unfavorable topography;
Where unbalanced flows with high volumes are on one or more
approaches;
Where a major road intersects a minor road and a roundabout
would result in unacceptable delay to the major road; or
Where there is considerable pedestrian activity and due to high
traffic volumes it would be difficult for pedestrians to cross at the
intersection.
105 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
19.14.4 Balanced Flows
Roundabouts operate best when the traffic flows are balanced. This
does not necessarily mean that all movements must be of the same
magnitude but that the predominant movements are broken up by
circulating traffic so that gaps are provided to allow vehicles waiting on
adjacent legs to enter the roundabout without major delays.
When traffic flows are not balanced then significant delays can be
experienced by traffic on the minor roads.
19.14.5 Roundabout Design Practice
The main components of a roundabout are shown in Figure 19.15

Figure 19.15 : Geometric Elements of a Roundabout
The following points outline good practice in the use and design of
roundabouts:
Roundabouts can be used to improve safety at any type of
intersection, including urban or low speed environments as well
as rural or high speed environments. The principles of good
design provide for control of vehicle speeds by using an
106 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
appropriately designed central island as well as approach and
departure geometry to control vehicle speeds.
The central island should preferably be circular to keep the
driving task simple. However, in some locations if there are
constraints or layout issues limiting an appropriate design speed
due to approach widths or angle of approach, other shapes e.g.
egg shape, can be considered. Guidelines on the size of the
central island are in Section 19.14.7 Step 4. The size of the
central island is generally related to:
Widths and location of approach roads;
Design speed and deflection necessary; and
Available space.
At urban low speed roundabouts, the deflection is provided by
the circular island in the intersection. Splitter islands on the
approach assist in providing deflection and restrict wrong way
movements.

Figure 19.16 : Inner Urban Roundabout.
The layout in Figure 19.16 could be improved with splitter
islands to guide drivers and control the entry of traffic into the
roundabout.
107 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 19.17 : Outer Urban Roundabout
At rural roundabouts where the approaches are high speed,
deflection has to be provided earlier by longer splitter islands on
the approach before vehicles reach the intersection.

Figure 19.18 : Rural Roundabout
It is important that the approaches are designed to gradually
slow traffic down before reaching the circulating roadway. The
maximum design speed through the roundabout should
generally be 40 kph in urban areas and no greater than 50 kph in
rural areas.
Once a vehicle has entered the circulating roadway, it should be
able to exit quickly. The departures should be designed with a
tangential straight or high radius curve departure.
108 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 19.19 Urban Splitter Island Details : Low Speed Approach



Figure 19.20 : Urban Splitter Island
On high speed roads, the splitter island should generally extend
across the full width of the approach lanes as seen by the
approaching driver. The length should provide for adequate
deflection and deceleration.

109 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Figure 19.21 : Splitter Island for High Speed Approach

Splitter islands discourage wrong way movements. The detailed
design features of splitter islands, entrance and exit conditions
are shown in Figure 19.19 and 19.21. It is important that they
guide traffic into the roundabout on a smooth curve and at an
angle that gives the drivers comfortable sighting of approaching
traffic.
19.14.6 Things to Avoid
Straight approaches on high speed roads;
Central island too small to provide deflection; and
Unbalanced traffic flows.
19.14.7 Design Steps
The following steps should be followed when designing a roundabout:
1. Obtain peak hourly flow traffic data and then calculate entering flows
and circulating flows.

Figure 19.22 : Movement Volumes and Circulating Flows

2. Select the General Design Criteria
- Appropriate design vehicle. Generally a semi-trailer for arterial roads
and single unit truck/bus or a service vehicle for non-arterials,
depending on the function of the intersecting roads.
- Adopt a minimum design vehicle turning radius. Generally, 15m
(outside radius of turn path) on arterial roads and 12.5m on non-
arterials, depending on the function of the intersecting roads and the
types of vehicles anticipated.
- Determine the number of lanes required (entry, exit and circulating
carriageway). Refer to Figure 19.23. Commercial computer design
packages can be used if a more detailed analysis of the roundabout
capacity is desired.
110 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 19.23 : Number of Lanes
3. Establish the space available for the roundabout taking into
consideration site controls such as property boundaries, utilities, trees,
parking etc.
4. Select a trial central island diameter and determine the width needed
for the circulating carriageway. Refer to Figure 19.24 and Table 19.2.
As a guide, the diameter of the central island should be 5 to 20 m
diameter in an urban environment and 20 to 50m in a rural
environment. Larger radius islands are used on divided carriageway
roads or high speed roads. If large vehicles are going to be using the
intersection then a desirable minimum central island radius of 8.0m is
preferred. This then enables the use of a 15m radius (outside radius of
turn path) turning template.

Figure 19.24 : Turning Radius for Determining Circulating Carriageway
Width
111 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual


Table 19.2 : Circulating Carriageway Widths

5. Position the central island on the plan and sketch splitter islands and
entry/exit lanes, ensuring that the offsets to the splitter islands are
maintained.

6. Check if adequate deflection has been achieved for the desired design
speed. If not, adjust the layout including the entry and exit geometry
and the position or size of the central island. Refer to Figure 19.25 or
19.26 (multilane roundabout).
Radii curves for various design speeds are attached as Appendix 4. These
can be copied as transparencies and used to check the deflection criteria.


112 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Figure 19.25 : Deflection Requirement Single lane


Figure 19.26 : Deflection Criteria Multi Lane
7. Check sight distances on each approach in relation to horizontal and
vertical visibility.
The alignment on the approach should be such that the driver has a
good view of the splitter island, the Give Way line, the central island
and desirably the circulating carriageway.
At roundabouts, the speed of vehicles is controlled within the circulating
carriageway, however, it is also desirable that drivers approaching the
roundabout are able to see other entering vehicles before they reach
the Give Way line, particularly in a rural or high speed area.
Therefore, a stopping sight distance requirement based on a 50 kph
approach speed is also desirable. In urban areas, this criteria can be
difficult to achieve.
A driver stationary at the Give Way line should have a clear line of
sight to the left to approaching traffic in the circulating carriageway and
visibility to traffic entering the roundabout from the approach
immediately to the left, for a distance representing the travel time equal
to the critical acceptance gap. A critical gap of 4 to 5 seconds is
appropriate.
8. Check turning path requirements using the appropriate turning path
templates or a software package such as Autoturn. There are various
software packages available and they are valuable computer design
tools.
9. Finalize the edge of pavement design at each entry and exit including
the splitter island details, providing the appropriate nose radii and
offsets.
113 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
10. Ensure that other road users such as pedestrians and cyclists are
catered for in a safe manner.
11. Design the lane and pavement markings. Refer to Road Signs and
Pavement Markings Manual for details of roundabout pavement
markings.


Figure 19.27 : Typical Pavement Markings at a Multi Lane Roundabout

12. Complete a signing design. Refer to Road Signs and Pavement
Markings Manual for details of roundabout signs
13. Complete a lighting design.
14. Complete a landscaping design ensuring that sight distance
requirements will be maintained when plants are fully grown.
19.14.8 Traffic Control and Priority
Priority at roundabouts is given to circulating traffic within the roundabout
by installing Give Way signs facing all approaches.
Roundabouts operate efficiently when the entering traffic gives way and
waits for a gap in the circulating flow before entering the roundabout. This
operation enables circulating traffic to leave the roundabout without delay.
It also reduces congestion and the likelihood of the roundabout locking up.
---

114 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
The Give Way signs should be placed on both sides of
an approach where it is two or more lanes wide.

Figure 19.28 : Give Way Sign (R1-2)
In congested situations where the traffic flow on one
approach is very heavy and it prevents traffic on another approach from
entering the roundabout, it is possible to install traffic signals on the
approach with the heavy traffic to stop it during busy times and allow
traffic on the minor approach to enter. Where this type of control is
used the signals are usually activated with loops to detect queue
lengths.
19.15 Examples of Poor Intersection Layouts
19.15.1 Y-Intersection

Example of poor
intersection
layout road
can give
impression that
it goes straight
ahead
(especially at
night), poor
curve
delineation.

Figure 19.29 : Poor Intersection Layout
GI V E
WA Y
115 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Poor layout and
no pavement
marking. Not
clear that
vehicles on this
leg need to give
way.
Figure 19.30 : Poor delineation
116 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

19.15.2 Y-Intersection with Triangular Island


Poor Intersection
Layout high
relative conflict
speeds, difficulty
defining priority,
awkward layout
to see vehicles
on intersecting
roadway, no
holding lines and
no marked left
turn lane.

Figure 19.31 : Poor Intersection Layout

117 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
20 SAFETY OF THE ROADSIDE
20.1 Introduction
The first objective in road safety is to keep road users safely on the
road pavement with a reasonable width, a sound road surface, a
predictable alignment and good delineation and signs.
However, it must be recognized that drivers and riders are only human
and will sometimes make mistakes and lose control of their vehicles.
The reasons that they might lose control are many, for example:
Excessive speed;
Fatigue or inattention;
Alcohol or drugs; or
Road condition.
Therefore the second objective is to provide a forgiving roadside free of
roadside hazards that may injure the occupants of vehicles that leave
the road and enter the roadside.
A forgiving roadside is more important on the higher speed roads
because the severity of a crash with a roadside hazard increases
rapidly with speed.
The importance of a forgiving roadside is emphasized by the studies in
many countries which show that around one in every three fatalities is
the result of a single vehicle running off the road accident.
20.2 Clear Zone
It may be difficult to provide width adjacent to the carriageway that will
allow all errant vehicles to recover. Therefore it is generally necessary
to decide on a level of risk management.
The most widely accepted form of risk management for the roadside is
the clear zone concept. The clear zone distance provides a balance
between recovery area for every errant vehicle, the cost of providing
that area and the probability of an errant vehicle encountering a hazard.
The clear zone should be kept free of non-frangible hazards. Where
this cannot be achieved, errant vehicles should be protected from
running into these hazards by the use of certified roadside safety
barriers. The median of a divided highway will need road safety
median barriers if hazards exist within the clear zone or if a traffic
volume warrant is demonstrated.
118 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Some typical road environment hazards are:
Poles;
Trees;
Steep side slopes;
Water courses, dams;
Culvert endwalls;
Fences and encroaching buildings; and
Bridge piers and abutments;
The following frangible based facilities can be located within the clear
zone:
Impact absorbent poles;
Slip base poles and other slip base structures; and
Frangible posts - steel, aluminum, wooden and concrete.
Other systems include:
Drivable endwalls; and
Extended culverts beyond the clear zone.
Research shows that about 85% of vehicles that leave the road at 100
kph are able to stop safely or regain control within an area of 9 meters
wide measured from the edge of the traffic lane.

Figure 20.1 : Recovery Area (100 kph operating speed, flat cross slope)

The clear zone width depends on the speed that the vehicle is moving.
At 60 kph, 85% of vehicles would recover within 3 meters from the
edge of the traffic lane.
This clear zone area adjacent to traffic lanes should be kept free of
features which could be potentially hazardous to the occupants of an
out of control vehicle, such as trees or poles.

119 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 20.2 Road with Good Clear Zone.

For economic reasons, the clear zone also varies with traffic volume.
For very low traffic volumes where few motorists are exposed to a
roadside hazard, it is not economically cost-effective to provide a full
clear zone and the width is reduced. Figure 20.3 shows how the clear
zone can be calculated for different speeds and volumes.
If the area to the side of the road is sloped, it will influence how far an
out of control vehicle travels. Figure 20.3 therefore has an adjustment
for roadside slope.
On curved roads the clear zone should be wider on the outside of a
curve because drivers and riders will require more distance to recover.
Table 20.1 provides a curve factor, which is used to increase the clear
zone width.
If a major hazard such as a cliff lies just outside the clear zone,
consideration should still be given to protecting the 15% of road users
who would travel beyond the clear zone.


120 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual



Source: Roadside Design Guide, American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO), 2002.

Figure 20.3 : Clear Zone Calculation
121 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Radius
(m)
Design Speed (kph)
60 70 80 90 100 110
900 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2
700 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3
600 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4
500 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.4
450 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.5
400 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.4 -
350 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 -
300 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.5 -
250 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.5 - -
200 1.3 1.4 1.5 - - -
150 1.4 1.5 - - - -
100 1.5 - - - - -
Table 20.1 : Curve Correction Factor
Note: The clear zone curve correction factor is applied to the outside of curves
only. The clear zone distance obtained from Figure 20.3 is multiplied by the
correction factor. Curves flatter than 900m radius do not require an
adjustment.

20.3 New Roads
Achievement of the clear zone is most often economically feasible
when a new road is being built or an existing road is undergoing major
reconstruction. For this reason, the provision of a clear zone should
always be considered when new works are planned.
20.4 Existing Roads
On the existing road network, particularly in urban areas, it can be very
difficult to achieve a clear zone. In urban areas there are many features
on the roadside like electricity and telephone poles, signs, trees and
many services under the surface like water pipes, drainage, and
cables. This usually means there are very few options for relocating
poles or other hazards.
Therefore, on existing roads it is best to focus on the high risk sites
such as on tight curves or at the end of long downward slopes and on
roads with high operating speeds.
122 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
20.5 Treatment of Hazards
The options for treating roadside hazards are:
Remove the hazard.
Move the hazard outside the clear zone.

Figure 20.4 : Relocated Pole
The above pole has been placed as far as possible from the traffic.

Modify the hazard so that it is not so dangerous. For example,
installing a cover on an open pit or making the end of a culvert
drivable.

Figure 20.5 : Drivable Culvert End
Drivable culvert ends are designed to enable vehicles to ride over
the hazard. Bars are placed tangential to the flow of traffic to be
spaced at not greater than 0.6m center lines. These can be utilized
for longitudinal drain culverts and cross drain culverts.
123 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Replace the hazard with something that it is not so dangerous, for
example replace steel sign posts with frangible (collapsible) wooden
posts
The steel I-beam sign posts in the following photo constitute a road
safety hazard:

Figure 20.6 : Steel Sign Posts
Frangible wooden posts breakaway if struck by a vehicle and will
not injure occupants:


Figure 20.7 : Frangible Wooden Posts
124 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Another example is roadside poles. They are generally immovable
objects that cause significant damage if struck. In the photo below,
the engine has been pushed into the passenger compartment.


Figure 20.8 : Pole Hazard

Specially designed poles are available which absorb the impact
and collapse when struck by a vehicle thus protecting the
occupants of a vehicle.


Figure 20.9 : Impact Absorbing Pole
125 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Shield the hazard with a barrier system. Figure 20.10 shows a
picture of a roadside hazard with no barriers.


Figure 20.10 : Unprotected Roadside Hazard


Figure 20.11 is an example of how such a hazard could be treated:


Figure 20.11 : Use of Barrier
126 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
20.6 Roadside and Median Safety Barriers
Roadside barriers are used to shield errant vehicles from running into
hazards that cannot be relocated or made more frangible. The barriers
are a hazard in themselves and accordingly should only be used when
they are less of a safety concern than the hazard they are protecting.
Roadside barrier systems maybe considered for use only after they
have been satisfactorily crash tested, computer simulated or designed
by other professionally acceptable methods that demonstrate
acceptability to meet the testing regime stated in the Road Design
Guidelines, AASHTO 2002.
The acceptance of roadside safety barrier systems is based on an
evaluation of its performance in an idealized crash test (vehicle in
tracking mode, approach surface 1:10 or flatter, paved and free from
obstructions such as curbs) for a specific weight and type of vehicle at
designated speeds and impact angles.
In accordance with the National Corporative Highway Research Project
350 (NCHRP350) procedures, there are six test levels to provide a
range of restraint requirements and impact severity conditions (refer to
Table 20.2). The criteria are based on:
Structural adequacy of the barrier system;
Occupancy risk and the impact velocity and ride down
acceleration limits; and
Vehicle trajectory after impact.
Table 20.2 : Test Levels for Roadside Barriers

127 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Test level 3 is considered to be the rating by which roadside barriers
are designed. They are applicable for cars and pick-up trucks at 100
kph with a nominal angle of impact of 20 degrees. The roadwork zone
systems can be designed for test levels 0, 1, 2 and 3 at nominal speeds
of 50, 70, and 100 kph respectively, and at 20 degrees nominal angle.
Roadside safety barriers and the equivalent test level category of each
are listed below. The test level rating of a barrier system can be
increased by raising the height of the top of the system and proven by
acceptable methods.
20.6.1 Road Safety Barrier Systems:
Flexible Wire Rope Safety Barrier Systems: Test Level
Brifen four (4) wire ropes TL 3
Flexible four (4) wire ropes TL 3
Armour Wire three (3) wire ropes TL 3
Semi Rigid Systems:
W-beam steel barrier TL 3
Thrie-beam steel barrier TL 3
Hollow box steel barrier TL 3
Rigid Systems:
Stone masonry parkway TL 3
F-shape concrete barrier TL 4
Concrete single slope barrier TL 4 to 5
Vertical face concrete barrier TL 4 to 5
High containment concrete barrier TL 5 to 6
Road Work Systems:
F-shape concrete barrier TL 3
Plastic water filled barrier TL 0, 1, 2 & 3
Truck mounted attenuators TL 3
These road safety barrier systems are detailed in Figures 20.12, 20.13
and 20.14.
The systems all have specialized terminals that provide control led
decelerations. Terminals provide deceleration below recommended
limits and ensure that the vehicle is not speared, vaulted, snagged or
rolled on impact. All these criteria combine to provide the necessary
road safety features of a total system.
Crash cushion systems are also used to shield hazards in confined
locations, such as the junction of concrete barriers, at ramp gore
locations and other rigid hazards.
128 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 20.12 : Median Barriers
129 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 20.13 : Roadside Barriers
130 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 20.14 : Roadwork Barriers
131 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Concrete barriers are best suited to situations where there is limited
space between the barrier and the hazard. Typically, this occurs in
narrow medians or in areas of restricted road cross section. The
greatest concern with concrete barriers is the method of termination.
Available options include:
Steel W-beam terminal assembly to shield the end of the
concrete barrier in association with a bridge approach
assembly;
Plastic water filled barrier systems used as terminals;
Burying the end of the barrier in an adjacent cut face; and
Shielding the barrier system with an impact attenuator/crash
cushion system.
Site characteristics will generally determine the most appropriate type
of termination/attenuation to use.
Concrete barrier systems may be considered on high volume roads as
they retain full functionality after impact, provide excellent whole of life
time costs and minimize the risk to workers on roadwork sites.
Maintenance of concrete barriers is minimal after impact. It is important
that on roadwork sites, individual F-shape concrete block barrier
systems are adequately and physically connected to each other to form
a continuous system of units rather than free standing units. Refer to
Appendix 2 Continuous Concrete Barriers.
Steel W-beam barriers are perhaps the most common barrier and are
used extensively in urban and rural areas. The effectiveness of W-
beam is dependant on its length and offset from the traveled way. W-
beam termination also needs to meet appropriate standards. The
Breakaway Cable Terminals (BCT) are detailed on standard drawings
in Appendix 1 - Roadside Barriers Standard Drawings. Standard
drawings are available for the approach end terminal SD 3541 (BCTA)
and the departure end SD 3542 (BCTB). The cable tensions the
system over the first and last 30m of installation. Parallel and flared
systems can be designed and these systems are included in the
standard drawings in Appendix 1.
Wire rope safety barrier systems work through high tension cables. An
errant vehicle deflects the wire ropes, the supporting posts bend and
the vehicle is redirected back towards the direction of travel. Wire rope
barriers are the most forgiving of the barrier systems. However, due to
the deflection of the wire ropes, consideration of the offset to features
behind the barrier is very important.
The minimum offset of the barrier systems from the edge of the traffic
lane are detailed in Table 20.3. The deflections of the various systems
are detailed in Table 20.4. In design, the consideration of the location
of the barrier systems and the offset to the face of the hazard, are the
first steps in designing a system.
132 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Table 20.3 : Offset from edge of traffic lane to face of barrier
Description Offset (m)
Minimum offset 1.50
Minimum offset without DPWH, Director,
Bureau of Design approval.
1.00
Absolute minimum offset with DPWH,
Director, Bureau of Design approval.
0.60

Table 20.4 : Clearance from face of barrier to face of hazard
Barrier Type Deflection (m)
Wire Rope Safety Barrier
2.40 to 3.20m post spacings 2.00
1.20m post spacings 1.50
1.00m post spacings 1.30
Blocked Out Steel W-Beam
2.50m post spacing 1.00
1.25m post spacing 0.75
Concrete Barriers
All types 0.10

Location of Curb Adjacent to Barriers
The location of safety barriers in the vicinity of curb and gutter is to be
considered carefully. If curb and gutter is essential in high speed
locations, the face of curb should be located:
At least 3m from the face of concrete safety barriers;
At least 3m from W-beam and wire rope safety barriers for
concrete barrier curb;
At least 3.0m from W-beam safety barrier or wire rope safety
barrier for concrete mountable / drop curb & gutter; and
In areas where the operating speed is less than 70 kph, an
offset of 0.2 to 0.3m can be tolerated to minimize damage to
vehicles.
133 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
The use of concrete mountable / drop curb & gutter in conjunction with
safety barrier systems is preferable to using concrete barrier curb and
gutters as the drop curb minimizes resultant dynamic jump of vehicles.
Roadwork Safety Barriers
Roadwork barrier systems come in various forms and can be precast
concrete with impact attenuators/crash cushion terminals or water filled
plastic systems. These systems must be considered during the design
phase of a project. Truck mounted attenuators can be used for short
term or mobile roadwork or pavement marking works.
20.6.2 Design Of Barrier System Installations
The design of road safety barrier systems should take into account the
following considerations:
Location topography;
Clear zone (Cz);
Warrant;
Runout length (LR);
Length of need (X);
Offset from edge of traffic lane to face of barrier;
Clearance from face of barrier to face of hazard;
Ground approach slope to the barrier;
Flare rate;
Transition lengths from barrier to barrier system type; and
End terminals.
The following steps provide guidance in the design process:
STEP 1. CLEAR ZONE
The design of clear zone width for the various criteria of design speed,
ADT exposed to the hazard (ADT/2), fore slope and back slope (fill and
cut) is determined using Figure 20.3.
The clear zone width should be increased on the outside of curves
using the curve factor shown on Table 20.1.
A further factor in the determination of clear zone is the consideration of
the steepness of the slope of fill. In this case an effective clear zone
width needs to be calculated. As the slope becomes steeper, the ability
of a vehicle to recover back to the traveled way reduces. This results
statistically in only a proportion of the slope width being available as
clear zone. The variations of effective clear zone can be calculated
using Figure 20.15.
134 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual


Figure 20.15 : Effective Clear Zone (ECZ)

135 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
STEP 2. WARRANT
The warrant for barrier systems can be determined by a risk
assessment taking into account the various issues (refer to Section 21
Risk Assessment).
The warrant for the use of safety barriers can be established
considering:
Fore slope or back slope steepness and height;
Unforgiving hazards within the clear zone; and
Water hazards within the clear zone.
The warrant for roadside safety barriers on fill slope can be determined
by reference to Figure 20.16. The warrant is based on fill height and
slope.
The warrant for median safety barriers is determined by using Figure
20.17. This warrant is based on the width of the median and the ADT.
In both the fill slope and median considerations, a warrant to install a
barrier system may also be determined by accident blackspot
investigations if traffic accidents indicate that a barrier would reduce the
severity of accidents.

Figure 20.16 : Fill Slope Safety Barrier Warrant

136 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual


Figure 20.17 : Median Safety Barrier Warrant

STEP 3. RUNOUT LENGTH & TRIANGLE
The statistical length over which a vehicle leaves the edge of traffic
lane to come to rest is the runout length for errant vehicles. The length
is determined by using Table 20.5 considering ADT and design speed.
The runout triangle can then be plotted by using the appropriate runout
length and the protected width SDs 3521 & 3531, the clear zone width
or effective clear zone width.
Refer to Figures 20.18 and 20.19 for detailed descriptions of the runout
triangle for the approach barrier and departure / opposing barrier
lengths.
For hazards located within the clear zone width, the roadside barrier
systems can be designed using SD 3521 and SD 3531. The protected
width can be applied to each layout type using the tabulations shown.
137 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
Table 20.5 : Runout Lengths for Barrier Design
ADT Over 6000 2000-6000 800-2000 Under 800
Design
Speed
(kph)
Runout
Length
(m)
Runout
Length
(m)
Runout
Length
(m)
Runout
Length
(m)
110 145 135 120 110
100 130 120 105 100
90 110 105 95 85
80 100 90 80 75
70 80 75 65 60
60 70 60 55 50
50 50 50 45 40


Figure 20.18 : Approach Barrier Design Elements

Figure 20.19 : Departure / Opposing Barrier Design Elements
138 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

STEP 4. OFFSET & CLEARANCE
The offset from the edge of the traffic lane to the face of barrier needs
to be established. The barrier should be located as far as possible
from the face of the barrier. The minimum offsets are shown in Table
20.3. Adjacent to fill slopes, the offset to the face of barriers can
extend to within 1.0m of the hinge point of the fill slope for W-beam
barrier and wire rope safety barrier systems respectively.
The location of the barrier in front of a hazard requires consideration of
the minimum clearance from the face of the barrier to the face of the
hazard being protected. The minimum clearances are shown in Table
20.4 for the various types of barrier systems.

STEP 5. LENGTH OF NEED
The length of need (X) is the length over which a barrier is needed to
statistically protect a vehicle from running into a hazard that would have
worse results than running into a barrier. The length of need is the
length of barrier that falls within the runout triangle.

STEP 6. BARRIER TERMINALS
Barrier terminals are needed to transition from no barrier to the full
barrier system. Position the end terminals outside the runout triangle.
The breakaway cable terminal to be used for W-beam is detailed in the
standard drawings. Concrete barrier system terminals can be designed
using W-beam or Thrie beam lengths suitably flared or tapered away
from approaching traffic. Wire rope safety barriers can also be used
and plastic water filled barriers may be used as terminals for worksite
terminal treatments. Refer to the standard drawings for more detail.
For other barrier systems, the manufacturers will provide detailed
drawings of their certified terminal details.

STEP 7. FLARE RATE
A further consideration is to flare the barrier systems away from the
traveled way. The flared barrier is used when terminating a system
beyond the clear zone width. Maximum flare rates for barrier systems
are shown in Table 20.6. A flared barrier system is detailed on SD
3511 in Appendix 1. When designing flared barriers the flare rates
must be kept within the maximum values to ensure any impact angle is
acceptable.
139 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Table 20.6 : Maximum Flare Rates for Barrier Design
Design Speed
(kph)
Flare Rate
Rigid Barrier Systems
Flare Rate
Semi- Rigid and
Flexible Barrier Systems
110 20:1 15:1
100 18:1 14:1
90 16:1 12;1
80 14:1 11:1
70 12:1 10:1
60 10:1 8:1
50 8:1 7:1

STEP 8. TRANSITIONS
A transition section should always be designed when changing from
one barrier system to another. This provision builds in a gradual
change between the two systems against which an errant vehicle would
transition itself gradually as it runs along the face of the transition. The
transition does not allow entrapment or pocketing of the errant vehicle.
A bridge transition section is detailed on SD 3081 Appendix 1.

STEP 9. GROUND APPROACH SLOPE
The slope of the ground on the approach to the barrier system should
be designed as 1:10 or flatter. When retrofitting an existing highway a
ground slope of 1:6 will be tolerated.
140 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
20.7 Further Examples of Barrier Installations
Further examples of good and poor practice with regard to roadside
hazards are shown below.
20.7.1 Bridge Railing
The picture shows that there is a steep drop off at a bridge with poor
railing and no approach barrier system.


Figure 20.20 : Poor Bridge Railing

A good treatment would be to install a strong bridge railing with a
barrier treatment on the approach similar to the following.

Figure 20.21 : Very Good Bridge Railing

141 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
20.7.2 Connection to Bridge Railing
There is a large gap between the steel railing and the concrete bridge
wall in the following photo. If a vehicle hit the steel railing it would
deflect and the vehicle would almost certainly strike the end of the
concrete wall with dire consequences.


Figure 20.22 : Poor Bridge Railing No Connection

The following picture shows how two different railings should be
overlapped to prevent the possibility of a vehicle striking the end of the
second railing.


Figure 20.23 : Good Connection to Bridge Railing
142 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
20.7.3 Railing End Treatment



Figure 20.24 : Poor End Treatment
The above end treatment can result in a vehicle being speared. A
photograph showing this in a real traffic accident is in Figure 20.25.


Figure 20.25 : Car Speared by Guardrail

143 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

The following photograph in Figure 20.26 is an example of a certified
treatment with a break away terminal (BCT) at the end of steel
guardrail.


Figure 20.26 : Very Good End Treatment
20.7.4 Unconnected Concrete Barriers
Unconnected concrete barriers of the kind shown in the following photo
are dangerous because a vehicle which is out of control is very likely to
end up in the space between two barriers and then the effect could be
similar to hitting the end of such barrier.


Figure 20.27 : Unconnected Concrete Barriers
144 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

To make such barriers effective, they should be properly connected
with the space between them less than 100mm. Refer to Appendix 2.


Figure 20.28 : Good Connected Barriers

The following is another example of a concrete barrier that is properly
connected.




Figure 20.29 : Very Good Connected Barrier
145 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Any barrier can be dangerous if it is unconnected and the ends are not
treated correctly.

In Figure 20.30, a vehicle could potentially become snagged if it hit just
prior to the discontinuity.


Figure 20.30 : Poor Unconnected Barrier
20.7.5 Gore Area
A barrier will often begin where there is a split in the road, like where an
off-ramp leaves the freeway thus forming a gore. The following gore
treatment is very hazardous.


Figure 20.31 : Poor Gore Treatment
146 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

Figure 20.32 : Poor Gore Treatment

Figure 20.33 shows a much safer treatment using a system that collapses in
stages if a vehicle hits it.


Figure 20.33 : Very Good Gore End Treatment using Impact Attenuator
147 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
20.7.6 Trees
Trees are often planted for street beautification reasons but can be
potentially dangerous roadside hazards.


Figure 20.34 : Tree Hazard

20.7.7 Street Lighting Poles
Roadside street lighting poles in a median or roadside areas can pose
a major hazard to motorists.
Solid or rigid street lighting poles can be specified or converted to
impact absorbing poles or to slip based poles that are frangible. These
are shown in Figure 20.35.

Slip Base Pole Impact Absorbing Pole
Figure 20.35 : Frangible Poles
148 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual

The slip-base pole is designed to break away at the base when a
vehicle collides with it. There are special electrical connections which
also breakaway. This type of pole can often be reused after a collision.
This type of pole is mostly suitable for locations where the speeds are
greater than 60 kph and is the preferred treatment.

Impact-absorbing poles do not break away but yield progressively,
generally embracing and entrapping the vehicle. They are suited to
locations where it is undesirable for the pole to fall to the ground such
as high pedestrian areas or where the median or island is narrow and
traffic is heavy.
The specification and standard drawings for these poles are in
Appendix 3.


Figure 20.36 : Impact-Absorbing Pole

Figure 20.36 illustrates how impact absorbing poles perform in a crash.
The diagrams in Figure 20.37 shows the different modes of behavior
when a vehicle hits a slip base or impact absorbent pole.
Other utility poles used for electricity supply may also be hazardous.
These cannot be converted to frangible poles. However, a safety
barrier may need to be considered for individual poles in hazardous
locations to protect occupants of an errant vehicle.

149 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual


Figure 20.37 : Impact Behavior - Slip Base and Impact Absorbing Poles
150 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
20.7.8 Other Examples of Roadside Hazards
It is important to consider roadside safety issues when managing a
roadworks site. The worksite in Figure 20.38 has a deep excavation
where a stronger more effective safety barrier should have been
installed.


Figure 20.38 : Hazardous Roadwork Site

The pipe installation in Figure 20.39 is hazardous. The pipe could have
been redirected behind the bridge barrier and supported on brackets
cantilevered off the outside of the bridge. Alternatively, the guardrail
could have been relocated to shield the pipe installation.


Figure 20.39 : Hazardous Pipe Installation

151 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
The design for the pole installation in Figure 20.40 is hazardous as it protrudes
outside the line of the safety barrier. A preferred arrangement is to design the
structure with a fixing arrangement for the pole on the outside of the barrier.



Figure 20.40 : Hazardous Protruding Pole Outside Line of Barrier

The parapet block type barriers similar to those in Figure 20.41 are not
continuous and therefore constitute a roadside hazard. These barriers would
become an acceptable roadside barrier with the fixing of a longitudinal railing
along the face of the parapet blocks. This could be a box beam or a W-beam
type railing.


Figure 20.41 : Hazardous Barrier System

152 May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual
20.7.9 Curbs in Front of Barriers
Careful consideration must be given when placing curbs in front of a
barrier as shown in Figure 20.43. A curb that is just in front of a barrier
can have the effect of lifting the impacting vehicle. If struck at high
speed in certain circumstances the curb may cause the vehicle to
bounce over the barrier. Section 20.6.1 provides guidance relating to
curbs adjacent to safety barriers.


Figure 20.43 : Curb in front of Barrier



May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual 153



RISK ASSESSMENT

May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual 154
21 RISK ASSESSMENT
A risk assessment strategy may assist in determining priorities for action
when considering design options or decisions that may have safety
implications. In addition, when a road safety audit report contains safety
concerns, the Project Engineer or designer may use a risk assessment
approach to help to determine a response to those concerns. The following
risk assessment process is the suggested method to be used. The following
tables provide an indication of the level of risk and how to respond.
Determine into which category in Table 21.1 and 21.2 the safety issue best
fits. From this select the risk category in Table 21.3 and its suggested
treatment priority in Table 21.4. This system does require the application of
professional judgment at each step.
21.1 Risk
Risk can be defined as the combination of the likelihood and the
consequence of a crash occurring.
21.2 Likelihood
The likelihood of a crash occurring depends on various factors like driver
behavior (inattention, fatigue, risk taking), the quality of the road (surface,
alignment etc) and the vehicle (poorly maintained brakes, tires etc.). The
likelihood that a given type of crash might occur can be defined in accordance
with the following table:

Frequency Description
Frequent One or more times per month
Occasional More than once per year (but less than
12)
Infrequent Less than once per year
Table 21.2 : Likelihood Definition
21.3 Consequence
If a crash does occur, the consequence of the crash depends on things like
the speed of the vehicle, the severity of roadside hazards and the ability of
the vehicle to protect the occupants (seatbelts, air bags, crumple zone,
collapsible steering column, etc). The consequences can be defined in
accordance with the following table:

May 2004 Road Safety Design Manual 155

Severity of an
accident
Description
Very Serious Multiple fatalities, severe injuries
Serious Single fatality, severe injuries
Minor Minor injuries, property damage
Table 21.3 : Consequence Definition
21.4 Risk Category
The risk is then estimated from the likelihood and consequence scores in
accordance with the following table:
Consequence
Very
Serious
Serious Minor
Likelihood
Frequent HIGH HIGH MEDIUM
Occasional HIGH MEDIUM LOW
Infrequent MEDIUM LOW LOW
Table 21.4 : Risk Category
21.5 Treatment Priority
The suggested treatment priority for each risk level is described in Table 21.5.








Table 21.5 : Treatment Priority

Risk Suggested Treatment Priority
HIGH
Must be corrected or the risk significantly
reduced at the earliest possible time.
MEDIUM
Should be corrected or the risk significantly
reduced as medium priority works.
LOW
Should be corrected or the risk significantly
reduced as low priority works.