Sultanate of Oman.

Highway Design Standards 2010

17
Pedestrian Safety Measures
and Local/Development Access

17.1 Facilities for Pedestrians 17-1

17.1.1 Introduction 17-1
17.1.2 Sidewalks 17-1
17.1.3 Refuges 17-2
17.1.4 Speed Humps 17-2

17.2 Formal Pedestrian Crossings 17-4

17.2.1 General 17-4
17.2.2 Zebra Crossings 17-4
17.2.3 Pelican Crossings 17-4

17.3 Pedestrian facilities at junctions 17-5

17.3.1 Siting of Crossings 17-5
17.3.2 Grade Separation 17-5

17.4 Railing, Lighting

and Pedestrianization 17-6
17.4.1 Pedestrian Railing 17-6
17.4.2 Lighting 17-6
17.4.3 Pedestrianization 17-6

17.5 LOCAL AND DEVELOPMENT ACCESS 17-6

17.5.1 General 17-6
17.5.2 Private Accesses for Large vehicles 17-7
17.5.3 Low Volume Accesses 17-7
17.5.4 High Volume Accesses for General Traffic 17-7
17.5.5 “Culs De Sac” 17-7

17.6 References 17-10

List of Figures
Figure 17.1.1.1: Minimum Pedestrian Envelopes 17-1
Figure 17.1.2.1: Layout of Parking Adjacent to Junction 17-1
Figure 17.1.2.2: Typical Layout Offset Crossing Point
at a Junction 17-2
Figure 17.1.4.2: Detailed Layout of Rumble Strips 17-2
Figure 17.1.4.1: Detail of Road Humps with Standard
Dimensions 17-3
Figure 17.4.1.1: Pedestrian Guardrail Showing
Staggered Infil and Sight Gap at Top 17-6
Figure 17.5.3.1: Low Volume – Private Accesses
and Turn-Outs 17-8
Figure 17.5.4.1: Private/Commercial Accesses –
High Volume 17-9

List of Tables
Table 17.2.1.1: Suggested Warrants for the Provision
of Formal Pedestrian Crossing Facilities 17-4
Table 17.2.3.1: Pelican Crossing Sequence 17-5
Table 17.2.3.2: Pelican Crossing Timings 17-5
Table 17.3.1.1: Visibility of Pedestrian Crossings to Drivers 17-5
Table 17.3.2.1: Min. Dimensions for Pedestrian-
only Subways 17-6
Table 17.5.2.1: Approximate Turning Radii for
Listed Vehicles 17-7
 Sultanate of Oman. Highway Design Standards 2010

Pedestrian Safety Measures and Local/Development Access

17
17.1 FACILITIES FOR PEDESTRIANS 2m absolute minimum where the sidewalk is remote from the carriageway
n

3m absolute minimum at bus stops to accommodate queues and bus shelters.

n

17.1.1 Introduction
17.1.1.1 The section of the Oman Highways Design Standards covers the range of facilities available to cater for
pedestrians. Walking, it should be noted, is the most environmentally sustainable mode of transport and should
be encouraged wherever possible.
17.1.1.2 Pedestrians travel relatively short distances, yet their potential for being involved in an accident are
high. When involved in an accident, their chances of being killed or seriously injured are also high. The most
vulnerable members of society, the young, old and infirm are also the most likely to be pedestrians, as they do
not have free access to cars and often only need to travel short distances. It is essential to consider the needs of
pedestrians in the design of all schemes and to give them equal or greater consideration than other road users.
Typical minimum user envelopes are illustrated in Figure 17.1.1.1
These are minimum values and should be increased where large pedestrian flows are expected.
17.1.2.2 The width provided for sidewalks should be generally free from obstructions; and a minimum width
of pedestrian route between obstructions, such as lamp columns and sign post, should be a minimum of 2m,
reducing to 1.5m as an absolute minimum in limited situations only. Clear, unobstructed straight lengths of
sidewalks should be provided where possible to assist those who are visual impaired to navigate walking routes
without confronting unexpected obstacles.
17.1.2.3 In urban areas sidewalks must be provided on both sides of the street except in the following cases:
Where pedestrians are prohibited e.g. flyovers, underpasses. However an emergency walkway must
n
be provided in case of breakdown
Where there is no development on one side of the street, e.g. service road running parallel to a
n

primary street where no development will be permitted.

17.1.2.4 Where parking is permitted on the carriageway, it must be easy for the driver and passengers to reach
the sidewalk directly from the parked vehicle.

17.1.2.5 Typical sidewalk construction details are provided in Section 16 of these Standards.

17.1.2.6 The use of small radius curbing at corners can help pedestrians to cross side roads by forcing vehicles
to slow down when turning. It also reduces the width of road to be crossed. Such treatment, however, should be
limited to areas of high pedestrian activity or to areas where roads are lightly trafficked. Care should also be taken
to discourage obstructive parking. Figure 17.1.2.1 shows a typical layout which inhibits parking on the corners.
Figure 17.1.1.1 Minimum Pedestrian Envelopes The values X and Y on the diagram relate to the visibility requirements for the junction discussed in Section 6 and
sub-section 17.2 of these Standards, where no parking should be permitted. As a minimum, these values should
17.1.2 Sidewalks
be X=2.5m and Y=50m.
17.1.2.1 Sidewalks should be of adequate width to accommodate the expected usage.The major recommendations
17.1.2.7 Caution needs to be used when specifying the use of small radius curbing, to ensure that vehicle swept
on width are:
paths can be accommodated; insufficient radii can lead to overrunning of curbs, particularly by larger vehicles,
3.5m preferred in major central areas, 2m desirable minimum, with 1.5m as the absolute minimum,
n
to the detriment of pedestrian safety. Insufficient radii may also lead to turning vehicles impinging on opposing
where the sidewalk is alongside the carriageway
traffic lanes resulting in serious safety issues.

17.1.2.8 In areas where the use of small radius curbs

would not be appropriate (low pedestrian flows or large
vehicles turning), pedestrians should be encouraged
to cross at the narrowest part of the road (see Figure
17.1.2.2). As shown, the path should ideally be diverted
to a refuge set 10 to 15m away from the main road.
Dropped curbs and refuges will encourage people to
use the crossing point, and this can be reinforced by
the use of deterrent paving such as cobbles or by use of
low level planting to block off the straight line path. The
use of pedestrian railing should be considered only as a
last resort since it may obstruct sight lines and adds to
street clutter.

Figure 17.1.2.1 Layout of Parking Adjacent to Junction

17-1
 Ministry of Transport & Communications . DGRLT

Pedestrian Safety Measures and Local/Development Access

17.1.2.9 At all junctions, care should be taken to check that whenever possible pedestrians about to cross the 17.1.3.5 At all junctions where pedestrian refuges are provided, checks should be made to ensure that the largest
side road are visible to vehicles turning in. vehicle likely to use that junction can do so without overrunning the refuge in any way and that the body of the
vehicle remains clear of the refuge.
17.1.2.10 Dropped curbs should
be provided to assist pedestrians
17.1.4 Speed Humps
and those with disabilities, and to
encourage them to use the safest 17.1.4.1 Speed humps are useful in areas where large numbers of pedestrians are expected and in residential
place to cross. The gradient of the areas in order to calm traffic speeds. Because of the potential for damage to vehicles if the humps are hit at high
dropped curb should not exceed 1 speeds, they should only be used where:
in 12 (Figure SD 16.21 Section 16). The speed limit is 60km/h or less
n

17.2.2.11 Sidewalks with uneven The road is lit such that the humps are clearly visible
n

surfaces in need of repair can The road is not a National, Arterial or heavily trafficked Secondary Route.
n

present a danger and inconvenience Figure 17.1.2.2 Typical Layout Offset Crossing Point at Junction.
17.1.4.2 Humps may be round topped or flat topped as shown in Figure 17.1.4.1. Flat topped humps should be
to all pedestrians; they are of particular concern to pedestrians who are visually or physically impaired. Any excavation
used on roads that carry a public bus service, as this type of road hump has less detrimental effect on the quality
in the sidewalk should be adequately signed and lit, and a level walking surface should be maintained at all times.
of the ride for bus passengers. Flat topped humps can
Permanent reinstatements should be made as soon as practical.
also be used for carrying formal crossing facilities as
17.2.2.12 Poorly sited street furniture can prevent full use of the sidewalk and impede visibility. This creates described later in this Section of the Standards.
particular difficulties for pedestrians who are disabled, particularly those with a visual impairment. Where
17.1.4.3 Round top humps are suitable for use on
possible, equipment such as traffic signal controllers, lighting columns and poles supporting signs should be
routes where there is no public bus route, and their
positioned at the back edge of the sidewalk. Similarly, parking on the sidewalk is highly obstructive and can lead
use is primarily to calm traffic to speeds suitable for a
to further hazards by damaging the surface of the sidewalk. In persistent problem areas consideration should be
residential neighbourhood.
given to the provision of bollards to prevent this situation from occurring. At all times the width as discussed in
paragraphs 17.1.2.1 and 17.1.2.2 should be taken into account. 17.1.4.4 For road marking and signing details
associated with road humps, please refer to Section 19
17.2.2.13 Where building works take place adjacent to a sidewalk, appropriate arrangements should be made
of these Standards.
to ensure that a safe and level path of adequate width is maintained, even where this means closing part of the
carriageway to create an acceptable route for pedestrians. 17.1.4.5 Rumble strips formed by the use of non-
reflective road studs, should be provided at 50m and
17.1.3 Refuges 150m in advance of the center line of the road hump on
both approaches as shown on Figure 17.1.4.1. The layout Figure 17.1.4.2 Detailed Layout of Rumble Strips
17.1.3.1 Pedestrian refuges (or traffic islands) are a simple and very efficient method of assisting pedestrians
and spacing of studs are shown in Figure 17.1.4.2
to cross the road more safety, they allow pedestrian to concentrate on crossing one stream of traffic at a time,
and create a relatively safe waiting area near the centre of the carriageway and also between traffic lanes where 17.1.4.6 The noise of vehicles passing over road humps or rumble strips may cause an unacceptable disturbance
appropriate in urban areas. in areas where residences are close to the highway and this must be taken into consideration at the design stage.

17.1.3.2 Refuges should normally be at least 2m wide, preferably 2.5m wide for wheelchairs and pushers. The
absolute minimum width for a pedestrian refuge is 1.2m wide for a single standing person; below this width the
refuge offers no protection to the pedestrian.
17.1.3.3 To encourage pedestrians to cross at the refuge rather than nearby, low planting or pedestrian railings
may be used along the edge of the sidewalk to concentrate crossing movements at the refuge. Pedestrian railings
used on the approach to the crossing point must have staggered infill bars and a sight gap at the top to ensure
that pedestrians are not masked from drivers by the railings (See Section 16.6.3).
17.1.4.7 Rumble strips shall extend over the whole width of one way roads or half the width of two way roads,
including paved shoulders to ensure all approaching traffic receives adequate warning of the road hump.
17.1.4.8 Drainage is an important feature of road humps. Where the road is curbed, the hump should stop short
of the curb to allow drainage to operate as if the hump were not present as shown in Figure 17.1.4.1. If the hump
is being used as a crossing point, this is clearly unsafe. In this instance, the hump has to be taken to the curb face
and positive drainage should provided to ensure that ponding does not occur. If the road is un-curbed, then the
hump must be graded into the verge as shown.

17.1.3.4 A pedestrian refuge on the minor arm of a junction should preferably be set back at least 3m from the 17.1.4.9 Reduced height humps of 40mm height may be used on higher speed approaches such as the approach
Give Way line. As noted in paragraph 17.1.2.8 a set back of 10m at new sites is often a suitable compromise for to a village, however, it is still preferable to use other additional speed reducing features such as speed limits and
pedestrians and drivers (see Figure17.1.2.2). possibly yellow bar markings prior to the speed hump. Appropriate signing must be provided in advance of the
hump to warn drivers.

17-2
 Sultanate of Oman. Highway Design Standards 2010

Pedestrian Safety Measures and Local/Development Access

17

Figure 17.1.4.1 Detail of Road Humps with Standard Dimensions

17-3
 Ministry of Transport & Communications . DGRLT

Pedestrian Safety Measures and Local/Development Access

17.2 FORMAL PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS 17.2.2 Zebra Crossings

17.2.2.1 Zebra crossings consist of broad bands of white lines across the road, supplemented by pedestrian
17.2.1 General
signs in the verge (and central reserve or refuge if applicable). Drivers are obliged to stop in advance of the zebra
17.2.1.1 Formal pedestrian facilities provide pedestrian priority over vehicle for part of the time. Within the crossing when a pedestrian steps onto the broad band area. A typical layout is shown in Figure 19.2.1.5 in Section
Sultanate of Oman, the following are used: 19 of these Standards.

Zebra crossings
n
17.2.2.2 Zig-zag lines may be provided, if necessary, to make the crossings more conspicuous and provide a
Pelican crossings (traffic light controlled crossing not at a road junction)
n controlled zone around the crossing point giving the following benefits:
Pedestrian facilities at or closely associated to traffic signal controlled junctions.
n
No parking or waiting is permitted in the controlled zone. This makes the crossing more obvious to
n

17.2.1.2 In addition to the formal facilities listed above, the Police are able to give pedestrians priority over drivers and improves intervisibility between drivers and pedestrians
vehicles. The Traffic Police may provide a suitably experienced Officer to control traffic at certain times of the day Overtaking is prohibited within the controlled zone defined by the zig-zag markings
n

in certain locations (e.g. outside schools). This arrangement cannot be formalised as it depends on the Police They assist in guiding the pedestrians to cross on the crossing rather than in the zig-zag area.
n

having the manpower available. If a significant need arises, the guidelines, presented in this Section 17, should
17.2.2.3 It is vital that road markings for crossing are kept clear. If the quality of the markings reduces significantly,
be used to assess the form of facility to be provided.
the crossing may be ignored by drivers to the detriment of pedestrian safety. Regular maintenance of road
17.2.1.3 There are often calls to provide formal crossings at locations where such a crossing is not justified in markings is essential.
terms of traffic flows and pedestrian movements. These often arise following an accident where a pedestrian is
17.2.2.4 The minimum width of a crossing should be 2.4m. An additional 0.5m width may be provided for each
killed or seriously injured. Whilst such cases should be treated sympathetically, formal crossings should only be
125 pedestrians per hour above 600 (averaged over the 4 busiest hours) up to a maximum of 5.0m width.
considered at sites where adequate flows exist and positive benefits in the convenience and safety of pedestrians
will be obtained. For example, if a zebra crossing is installed at a site where very few pedestrian cross and where 17.2.2.5 Where the carriageway is more than 10m wide, a central pedestrian refuge should be provided on the
it will not be used for long periods, drivers are likely to become complacent and tend to ignore it to the detriment crossing.
of road safety.
17.2.2.6. Zebra crossings are generally more economic to install than Pelican crossings and have less on-going
17.2.1.4 Provision of a formal crossing where none existed before, and where accidents have not occurred running costs. In addition they provide a more responsive solution for the pedestrian who can ‘cross on arrival’.
previously, may generate new accidents in the form of shunts between vehicles stopping for the crossing. However, Pelican crossing would be preferable where:
Vehicle speeds are high, as pedestrians find it difficult to judge the speeds and stopping distances
n
17.2.1.5 It is not intended to have fixed quantitative criteria for the provision of formal crossing facilities in
of approaching vehicles. Zebra crossing should never be used where the speed limit is over 60km/h
Oman. Table 17.2.1.1 provides a useful guide to support the decision making process, but this must always be
or where the speed limit may be less than 60km/h but the road layout is such that speeds in excess
considered in conjunction with other criteria such as:
of 60km/h are likely to occur
Is there substantial community severance?
n
A significant number of pedestrians are elderly or infirm
n
Is the site adjacent to a mosque, school, home for the elderly, infirm or visually impaired, hospital or
n
In busy commercial areas or adjacent to a bus or train station where high and continuous pedestrian
n
clinic, or in a busy shopping area?
flows may cause excessive delays to traffic
Is there a previous pedestrian accident record?
n
Traffic is particularly heavy. Pedestrians may then be unwilling to step onto the Zebra crossing
n

because of the lack of positive control for vehicles

Pedestrian flow per hour Vehicle flow per hour
P x V2 Suggested provision
(two-way) - P (two-way) - V Existing crossing facilities on the particular route are already Pelican crossings; this is especially
n

<40 Any flow None or pedestrian refuge important where crossings need to be linked to ensure traffic progression.
40 to 1100 300 to 500 90 x 10 to 200 x 10
6 6
Zebra crossing
40 to 1100 400 to 750 > 200 x 10 6
Divided zebra crossing 17.2.3 Pelican Crossings
40 to 1100 >500 90 x 10 to 200 x 10
6 6
Pelican crossing
17.2.3.1 Pelican crossings are formal traffic light controlled crossings not at a road junction.
>1100 >300 90 x 10 to 200 x 10
6 6
Pelican crossing
40 to 1100 >750 > 200 x 106 Divided pelican crossing 17.2.3.2 Pelican crossings control vehicles and pedestrians by means of traffic lights. Conventional traffic signals
>1100 >400 > 200 x 10 6
Divided pelican crossing are presented to the driver (red, red+amber, green, amber) except that the red+amber indication is replaced by
Notes: 1) Pedestrian and vehicle flows are the average of the 4 hours with the highest values of PV2. a flashing amber indication making the sequence red, flashing amber, green, amber. During the flashing amber
2) A divided crossing is one where pedestrians cross each half of the carriageway separately
period, vehicles must give way to pedestrians already on the crossing
Table 17.2.1.1 Suggested Warrants for the Provision of Formal Pedestrian Crossing Facilities
17.2.3.3 Whilst vehicles are shown the flashing amber indication, pedestrians are given a flashing green man
indication to warn them to clear the crossing.

17-4
 Sultanate of Oman. Highway Design Standards 2010

Pedestrian Safety Measures and Local/Development Access

17
Period Light Shown to Drivers Light Shown to Pedestrians Action 17.3 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES AT JUNCTIONS
1 Green Red man standing Vehicles have priority
2 Amber Red man standing Vehicles prepare to stop 17.3.1 Siting of Crossings
3 Red Red man standing All stop
17.3.1.1 In siting Zebra and Pelican crossings, attention should be given to the following points:
4 Red Green man crossing Pedestrians have priority
Pedestrians on the crossing have priority n The crossing should not be located immediately adjacent to a priority junction (danger from turning
5 Red Green man flashing
Pedestrians not on crossing should wait traffic)
Pedestrians on the crossing have priority n Do not place a Pelican crossing close to a Give Way or Stop line as drivers may mistake the Pelican
6 Flashing Amber Green man flashing
Pedestrians not on crossing should wait
for junction signals
7 Flashing Amber Red man standing Vehicles may move when crossing is clear
n A formal crossing close to a roundabout may cause blocking of the roundabout if placed too close
Table 17.2.3.1 Pelican Crossing Sequence
to the junction on an exit arm. The roundabout capacity software ARCADY can be used to assess the
17.2.3.4 The full phasing sequences are shown in impact of such a crossing.
Period Length of Crossing (m) Time (seconds)
Table 17.2.3.1. 20 to 30 Max
1 17.3.1.2 Pedestrians should be encouraged to cross the street away from the immediate area of the junction. As
7 Min (on gap change)
17.2.3.5 The timings, associated with each of these shown in Figure 17.1.2.2, the path should ideally be diverted to a refuge set 10 to 15m away from the main road.
2 3 (fixed)
periods, are shown in Table 17.2.3.2. Dropped curbs and refuges will encourage people to use the crossing point. This can be reinforced by the use
3 2 (fixed)
of deterrent paving such as cobbles or by use of low level planting to block off the straight line path. Pedestrian
17.2.3.6 During the “green man” stage (Period 4), <6.5 5
railing should only be used as a last resort since it may obstruct sight lines and adds to street clutter.
a pulsed tone may be used to indicate priority to 6.5 to 8.5 6

pedestrians. This should not be used where crossings 4 8.5 to 10.5 7 17.3.1.3 The minimum visibility of the crossing for drivers should be as given in Table 17.3.1.1 The whole of the
are adjacent (e.g. staggered crossings) since the 10.5 to 12.5 8 crossing should be visible, including the areas where pedestrians are waiting to cross.
signal for one crossing could be mistaken for the 12.5 to 15.0 9
Speed limit or 85 percentile Approach Speed (km/h)
40 or less 50 60 70 80
other to the detriment of pedestrian safety. Overlap – 0 or 2( 2 used if (Use highest)
drivers are failing to stop
5 Desirable Minimum Visibility (m) 50 70 90 120 150
in time) (may be subtracted
17.2.3.7 A typical layout is shown in Figure 19.2.1.5 Absolute Minimum Visibility (m) 40 55 70 90 115
from period 6 if used)
Section 19 of this Standard. As can be seen, zig-zag Table 17.3.1.1 Visibility of Pedestrian Crossings to Drivers
<7.2 6
lines similar to those used with Zebra crossings may
7.2 to 8.4 7
also be provided for a Pelican crossing serving the 17.3.1.4 It is important that pedestrians must also be able to see approaching traffic. Their view must not be
8.4 to 9.6 8
same purpose as described in paragraph 17.2.2.2. restricted by parked or stationary vehicles.
9.6 to 10.8 9
6
17.2.3.8 The minimum width of a crossing should be 10.8 to 12.0 10 17.3.1.5 The design and use of pedestrian controlled facilities at, or closely associated to, roundabouts and
2.4m. An additional 0.5m may be provided for each 12.0 to 13.2 11 traffic signal controlled junctions, is covered in Sections 7 and 8 of these Standard respectively.
125 pedestrians per hour above 600 (averaged over 13.2 to 14.4 12

the 4 busiest hours) up to a maximum of 5m. 14.4 to 15.0 13 17.3.2 Grade Separation
<10.5 1
7 17.3.2.1 Grade separation of pedestrians from vehicles offers the safest form of crossing facility. Such routes
17.2.3.9 Where the road width exceeds 15m, a 10.5 to 15.0 2
staggered layout controlled by separate sets of Table 17.2.3.2 Pelican Crossing Timings must be easy and convenient for pedestrians to use. If the surface route is more convenient pedestrian may
signals which could be provided in a single cabinet. Pelican controllers are available to control dual crossings continue to use it to the detriment of road safety.
independently. The stagger in the median should preferably be to the right so that pedestrians are turned to face
17.3.2.2 Generally, subways offer less change in level than footbridges because of the minimum 6.5m clearance
the oncoming traffic.
required over carriageways. Pedestrians often dislike subways because of personal security issues; this should
17.2.3.10 Where the road is over 12m wide, it is desirable to widen the road in order to provide a staggered be counteracted by making subways light and spacious with good visibility and no hidden corners. Three types
crossing. Where there is a staggered pedestrian facility, the island should be a minimum of 3m wide. With a of pedestrian subway cross-section may be used:
staggered pedestrian facility, the minimum distance between crossings (i.e. the distance between the inside line 1. A wide section, suitable for those situations where a subway forms an extension to a footpath
of studs on each side of the island) should be 4m to reduce the problems of “see-through” system not less than 5.0m in width carrying large numbers of pedestrians or where for aesthetic
reasons the normal section is not considered to be suitable,
17.2.3.11 Where a pelican crossing is sited less than 100m from a signal controlled junction or another pelican
2. A normal section, suitable for the majority of situations,
crossing, it should be linked to that facility to provide efficient operation.
3. A narrow section, for situations with small numbers of pedestrians where the normal section could
not be justified on cost grounds.

17-5
 Ministry of Transport & Communications . DGRLT

Pedestrian Safety Measures and Local/Development Access

17.3.2.3 If circular or other shaped sections are proposed, they should circumscribe the rectangular sections 17.4.1.5 Railings, used in association with a footbridge or subway can be used to make alternative at-grade
with dimensions not less than the minimum laid down in this Standard. crossings less attractive (See also Section 16 of these Standards, paragraph 16.6.2.3).

17.3.2.4 The minimum height and width of subways for pedestrians only are given in Table 17.3.2.1.
17.4.2 Lighting
17.3.2.5 Sight distances of 4.0m or more should be provided at corners and changes of direction. For calculation
17.4.2.1 Lighting should be provided at all formal crossing locations in accordance with Section 18 of these
purposes, pedestrians can be assumed to be Type of Subway Length of Subway (m) Height (m) Width (m)
Standards.
0.4m away from an adjacent vertical wall. The Wide - 2.6 5
visibility envelope should extend from a height <23 2.3 3
Normal 17.4.3 Pedestrianization
of 1.5m representative of an adult to 0.6m for a ≥23 2.6 3.3
child. Inside corners rounded off to a radius of Narrow - 2.3 2.3 17.4.3.1 Some areas or lengths of road have a high level of pedestrian activity, e.g. souks. Such areas may be
4.6m will meet this criteria. Table 17.3.2.1 Min. Dimensions for Pedestrian-only Subways suitable for some form of pedestrianization scheme. This allows the pedestrian to have priority in the area rather
than the vehicle, with the ultimate aim being to ban all vehicles during certain times of the day.
17.3.2.6 Pedestrian footbridge design is covered in Section 11 of these Standards.
17.4.3.2 Depending on the needs to be met, pedestrianization can range from still allowing a limited flow of
17.3.2.7 Access to the subways or footbridges should meet the predominant movements of the potential users
vehicles (shared space) through to all vehicles prohibited for all or part of the day or on different days of the week.
of that facility. A study should be undertaken of the existing and future possible pedestrian movements before
deciding upon the layout of the subway / footbridge ramps and stairs. The access route should be as short and 17.4.3.3 In considering pedestrianization schemes, the following aspects need to be considered:
direct as possible. Generally both ramps and stairs should be provided. The dimensional requirements for ramps
Alternative routes for local and through traffic
n
and stairs are given in Section 11 of these Standards.
Residual traffic flow (for shared space schemes)
n

17.3.2.8 Where possible, pedestrians should be shaded from the sun on footbridges. Access for servicing of premises
n

Access for emergency vehicles (fire, police, ambulance), maintenance of suitable fire path
n

17.4 RAILING, LIGHTING AND PEDESTRIANIZATION Sufficient car parking provision within reasonable walking distance.
n

17.4.3.4 Where practicable, the preferred arrangement in terms of pedestrian safety is full pedestrianization (all
17.4.1 Pedestrian Railing vehicles excluded). This enables a consistent treatment suited to pedestrian usage to be applied over the full

17.4.1.1 Pedestrian railings should only be used in appropriate circumstances to channel pedestrians to a crossing area. It simplifies enforcement of the scheme by excluding all vehicles (except for maintenance and emergency

point and away from less safe areas. For example, short lengths of pedestrian railing may be erected adjacent to vehicles. Full pedestrianization can only occur if alternative servicing provision can be provided (e.g. rear access

exits from schools, parks and footpaths to prevent children from running straight out onto the carriageway. or delivery by trolley), and on adequate parking provision being available nearby.

17.4.1.2 An alternative to the provision of pedestrian railings could be by the use of deterrent paving such as 17.4.3.5 If the area is only to be controlled for part of the day, the scope of the environmental improvements
cobbles or by use of low level planting to block off the straight line path. Pedestrian railing should be used only that can be implemented is limited. A reasonably conventional vehicle route through the area needs to be

when absolutely necessary, since it may obstruct sight lines and add to street clutter, in general.
17.4.1.3 Pedestrian railings should be 1.05m to 1.15m high and set back at least 500mm from the curb. Where this
cannot be achieved without the sidewalk
being narrowed to less than 1.5m, measures
should be looked into to widen the sidewalk
either away from the carriageway or by
narrowing the carriageway. If this cannot
be achieved alternative routes should be
considered for pedestrians away from the
narrow section.
17.4.1.4 Pedestrian railings used on the
approach to the crossing point must have
staggered infill bars and a sight gap at
the top to ensure that pedestrians are not
masked from drivers by the railings.
Figure 17.4.1.1 Pedestrian Guardrail showing Staggered Infil
and Sight Gap at Top.
maintained for times when pedestrianization is not in operation. In addition, control of access may be difficult,
and enforcement wasteful of police time. If access is limited to certain times of day, moveable barriers or rising
bollards may be used to block the area off at appropriate times of day. If limited access is allowed for certain
classes of vehicle rather than at certain times, this option is not practicable.
17.5 LOCAL AND DEVELOPMENT ACCESS
17.5.1 General
17.5.1.1 The ability of a route to carry traffic at the required Level of Service is affected by the interference to
flow brought about by vehicles entering and leaving the traffic stream at junctions of various types. The design
of junctions, which connect roads is covered in Sections 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of these Standards. These junctions carry,
in the main, significant numbers of vehicles and must do so in such a way that turning, diverging and merging
traffic operates in a safe and disciplined manner.
17.5.1.2 As vehicles begin and end their journeys, they must generally join or leave the highway. A single vehicle
which carries out such a manoeuvre in an awkward or unsafe way, can affect a stream of traffic on the through

17-6
 Sultanate of Oman. Highway Design Standards 2010

route. For this reason vehicle access points which connect the highway with traffic generators, either large or
Pedestrian Safety Measures and Local/Development Access

travelling to and from school are transported by passenger car, then the area where buses enter and emerge from
17
small, must be designed in such a way that their use is safe and not disruptive to traffic flow. the school and parents drop off and collect their children, should be separated and the bus access designed to
maintain sight distances for other traffic.
17.5.1.3 Such traffic generators include:
Individual private residences.
n 17.5.3 Low Volume Accesses
Groups of residences around a private drive or courtyard.
n
17.5.3.1 Access to individual, or small groups of residences are perhaps the most common accesses of this type.
Apartment buildings
n
Individually, they carry very small traffic numbers but since they are frequently on the narrower routes, if through
Shopping complex car parks.
n
traffic numbers are high; their use can cause considerable traffic disruption.
Office and factory car parks.
n

Leisure facilities
n 17.5.3.2 Figure 17.5.3.1 shows standards required for accesses of this type.
Schools
n

Hospitals
n
17.5.4 High Volume Accesses for General Traffic
Transport and Logistics operations.
n 17.5.4.1 Accesses which carry relatively high peak flows require a higher standard than those which are subject
to low flows. These high flow accesses are again of a lower standard than highway to highway junctions. Junction
17.5.1.4 Some of these examples generate heavy traffic flows, other only light flows. Some of these accesses
details for accesses of this type are shown in Figure 17.5.4.1
have to cater for large heavy trucks while others carry only private passenger cars.
17.5.4.2 Facilities such as major retail centres, fuel filling stations are examples of accesses of this type. Alternative
17.5.2 Private Accesses for Large Vehicles acceptable layouts for access to a filling station on a high standard dual carriageway are also presented in Figure
17.5.4.1
17.5.2.1 The limitations in manoeuvrability of these vehicles and those of each individual site to which access
is required, create a situation in which the definition of detailed design guidelines is inappropriate. The use of 17.5.4.3 Accesses of this type require to be integrated into the road network to the extent that they operate at a
internationally recognised and branded swept path analysis software should be used to identify the capabilities similar level of service to the highway to which they are connected. A blockage on an access of this type can back
of the vehicle types involved and to ensure that a smooth safe entry and exit can be achieved. The use of “right up quite quickly and cause a problem on the through route.
in – right out” arrangements should also be considered for this type of access.
17.5.4.4 The lane width and turning radii should be in keeping with the road to which they are connected.
17.5.2.2 Table 17.5.2.1 sets out typical minimum turning radii for various vehicle types for a 180o turn. Note that
these figures are derived from AASHTO Geometric Design of Highways and Streets 2004 and the vehicle sizes 17.5.4.5 High volume accesses may need direction signing on the through route and beyond. In extreme cases
may not correspond exactly to the vehicle fleet in Oman. The turning radii can be taken as approximate and are road markings or even the provision of dedicated approach and exit lanes may be appropriate.
given for guidance only.
17.5.5 “Culs De Sac”
Design Vehicle Width (m.) Length (m.) Rmin (m.) Rmax (m.) Rmax-Rmin
Passenger Car 1.8 5.8 4.4 7.8 3.4
17.5.5.1 These roads, known also as “Dead Ends”, or “Courts” are access roads which are open to other roads at
one end only. Design controls to limit the length of such roads and to provide adequate turning provision at the
Bus (rigid) 2.6 12.2 7.5 13.9 6.4
end which is not open to the highway network are necessary.
Truck (rigid) 2.4 9.2 8.6 13.3 4.7
Intermediate Semitrailer 2.6 16.8 5.2 13.9 8.7 17.5.5.2 Such roads may provide access to either residential or commercial developments. The design standards
Large Semitrailer 2.6 20.9 2.4 14.2 11.8 for such roads and their junctions with the rest of the road network will depend upon the type of development
Table 17.5.2.1 Approximate Turning Radii for Listed Vehicles they are constructed to serve. In either case, the turning arrangements at the closed end must make provision for
Note : Rmin is the smallest achievable radius for the vehicle. (Normally at the rear wheels) the vehicles expected to access the properties adjacent to the road, and service and emergency vehicles which
Rmax is the greatest radius needed when making the smallest achievable radius turn. (Normally at the front of the vehicle.) may have cause to visit these properties.
The significance of the table column Rmax-Rmin is that it shows the approximate roadway width required to accommodate
the turning maneuver. 17.5.5.3 These turning arrangements can take the form of either turning circles (roundabouts), “hammerheads”
or “spikes”. Examples of these basic shapes are shown in Figure 17.5.3.1
17.5.2.3 The internal layouts of premises, where numbers of large trucks leave and enter, should be designed
such that there can be no tail back onto the roadway in the event of one truck having to stop and possibly hold 17.5.5.4 Long dead end roads should be avoided. This is because excess length can result in unduly high traffic
up following vehicles. levels at the open end and the junction with the outside road network. In many countries, both normal and
emergency services express their dislike of at long dead end roads on the grounds of inefficiency and difficulties
17.5.2.4 The same considerations are important also for access to lorry parks and to bus depots.
in reaching premises without undue delay.
17.5.2.5 Access to schools should be designed with particular care. If buses are to be used to transport children
17.5.5.5 For these reasons, such roads should be kept to a maximum length of 750 m.
to and from school, the buses should park off road and if possible within the school boundaries. If other children
17-7
 Ministry of Transport & Communications . DGRLT

Pedestrian Safety Measures and Local/Development Access

Figure 17.5.3.1 Low Volume - Private Accesses and Turn-Outs

17-8
 Sultanate of Oman. Highway Design Standards 2010

Pedestrian Safety Measures and Local/Development Access

17

Figure 17.5.4.1 Private/Commercial Accesses - High Volume

17-9
 Ministry of Transport & Communications . DGRLT

Pedestrian Safety Measures and Local/Development Access

17.6 REFERENCES
1. UK DfT, LTN 1-95, The assessment of pedestrian crossings
2. UK DfT, LTN 2-95, The design of pedestrian crossings
3. UK DfT, TAL02/03, Signal-control at Junctions on High-speed Roads
4. UK DfT, TAL05/05, Pedestrian facilities at Signal-Controlled Junctions
5. UK Government, Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997
(SI No. 2400)

17-10