IRC:103-2022

GUIDELINES
FOR
PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES

(Second Revision)

Published by:
INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS
Kama Koti Marg,
Sector-6, R.K. Puram,
New Delhi-110 022

JUNE, 2022

Price: ` 700/-
(Plus Packing & Postage)
IRC:103-2022

IRC:103-2022
Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities

Author’s Name
Indian Roads Congress

Published by
Indian Roads Congress

Publisher’s Address
Kama Koti Marg, Sector-6, R.K. Puram, New Delhi-110022

Printer’s Details
A.P. India, Okhla

Edition Details
Second Revision, June, 2022

ISBN:

(All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication shall be reproduced,

translated or transmitted in any form or by any means without the
permission of the Indian Roads Congress)

600 Copies
 IRC:103-2022
CONTENTS
S.No. Description Page No.

Personnel of the Highways Specifications and Standards Committee i-ii

1. Introduction 1

2. Policies and Acts 2

3. Scope 3

4. Pedestrian Facilities Principles 3

5. Walking-Friendly City 4

5.1 Healthy Streets 4

5.2 Pedestrian-Oriented Urban Planning 5

6. Pedestrian Facilities Design Standards 6

6.1 Pedestrian Level of Service 6

6.2 Footpath 6

6.3 Shading on Pedestrian Facilities 13

6.4 Kerb Stone 14

6.5 Tactile Pavers 15

6.6 Street Furniture 16

6.7 Pedestrian Crossings 22

6.8 Bus-Stops 27

6.9 Landscaping 28

6.10 Street Vending 29

6.11 On-Street Parking 29

6.12 Shared Streets 32

6.13 Consistent Carriageway Width 33

7. Pedestrian Facilities at Intersections 33

8. Non-Motorized Transport only Streets and Greenways 35

9. Placemaking 36

10. Skywalks 36
IRC:103-2022
S.No. Description Page No.

11. Pedestrian Facilities around School Zone 37

12. Pedestrian Facilities around Transit Station 38

13. Implementation and Maintenance 39

14. Management and Enforcement 40

15. Audits 41

Annexure 1 Pedestrian Walking Speed 44

Annexure 2 Nomographs for Planning Pedestrian Crossing 45

Annexure 3 Guidelines for Safe and Accessible Grade-Separated 49

Crossings

Annexure 4 Material Details 50

Annexure 5 To Evaluate Qualitative Level of Service for Pedestrian 57

Infrastructure (Walk Score)

Annexure 6 Signages and Markings 61

References 63
 IRC:103-2022
LIST OF FIGURES
S.No. Description Page No.
Fig. 1 Mode Priority Diagram for Urban Street 4
Fig. 2 Healthy Street Design Concept 5
Fig. 3 Dense Urban Road Network Planning 5
Fig. 4 A Footpath in Chennai showing various Zones 7
Fig. 5 Recommended Space Requirement in Walking Zone 7
Fig. 6 Seating and Landscape located in MUZ 8
Fig. 7 Thyagaraja Salai, Chennai 9
Fig. 8 Footpath in Neighbourhood-Level Commercial Area 9
Fig. 9 Footpath in Residential Area 9
Fig. 10 Footpath in High-Footfall Intensity Area 10
Fig. 11 One-Side Footpath on Narrow Streets 10
Fig. 12 Footpath continuing at Same Level along Side Street in Chennai 11
Fig. 13 Detail of Footpath continuing along Side Street 11
Fig. 14 Footpath at Same Level along Property Entrance in Pune 11
Fig. 15 Detail of Footpath continuing at Property Entrance 11
Fig. 16 Footpaths with Side Ramps at Property Entrance in Mumbai 12
Fig. 17 Detail of Property Access on Small Footpath Widths 12
Fig. 18 Bulb-out to negotiate decrease in Right of Way Width 12
Fig. 19 Bulb-out around existing Trees 12
Fig. 20 Adequate Footpath Space provided along Cycle Track in Pune 13
Fig. 21 Planning detail between Footpath and Cycle Track 13
Fig. 22 Buffer between On-Street Parking and Cycle Track 13
Fig. 23 Shade on Footpath 13
Fig. 24 Shaded Walkway in Singapore 14
Fig. 25 Colonnade in Mumbai 14
Fig. 26 Typical 150 mm Thick Kerb Stone Block 14
Fig. 27 Kerb Stone Block with Saucer Drain 15
Fig. 28 Precast Rounded Kerb Stone Block 15
Fig. 29 Guiding Tile 15
Fig. 30 Warning Tile 15
Fig. 31 Incorrect Laying of Tactile Pavers 16
Fig. 32 Layout of Tactile Pavers to indicate Turns 16
Fig. 33 Plan showing Location of Seating Footpath 17
Fig. 34 Bollard Spacing on Footpath 17
Fig. 35 Broken Bollards due to Poor Implementation 18
Fig. 36 Bollards Designed as Seating 18
Fig. 37 Signage Placement on Footpath 19
Fig. 38 Braille Signboard at a Bus-Stop in Delhi 19
Fig. 39 Trees Obstructing the Street Light 20
Fig. 40 Spacing between Street Lights 20
Fig. 41 Street Lighting on Narrow Streets 20
Fig. 42 Street Lighting on Wide Streets 21
Fig. 43 Placement of Utilities on Footpath 21
Fig. 44 Service Covers should be located in MUZ 21
Fig. 45 Detail of Warning Tiles around Service Cover when provided on 21
Walking Zone
S.No. Description Page No.
Fig. 46 Tabletop crossing in Connaught Place, Delhi 23
Fig. 47 Tabletop Pedestrian Crossing Detail 23
Fig. 48 Kerb Ramp Detail 24
Fig. 49 Bulb-out at Pedestrian Crossing 25
Fig. 50 Transverse Road Markings before Pedestrian Crossing 25
Fig. 51 Placement of Bus-Stop on Footpath 27
Fig. 52 Bus-Stop Area Planning 28
Fig. 53 Tree Pit Detail 28
Fig. 54 Tree Grating Detail 29
Fig. 55 Planning of On-Street Vending on Footpath 29
Fig. 56 Parallel Parking is preferred for all 3 & 4 Wheeler Vehicles 30
Fig. 57 Angular 2-Wheeler Parking on Narrow Street 31
Fig. 58 On-Street Parking Planning Detail 31
Fig. 59 On-Street Accessible Parking 31
Fig. 60 Shared Street in Bengaluru 32
Fig. 61 Chicane tested in Jabalpur 32
Fig. 62 Consistent Carriageway 33
Fig. 63 Safe Intersection Design 33
Fig. 64 Large Vehicle making a Turn on Small Kerb Radius 34
Fig. 65 Intersection with Roundabout 35
Fig. 66 Pedestrian Only Street in Amritsar 35
Fig. 67 Seating Space on JM Road Footpath in Pune 36
Fig. 68 Skywalk 37
Fig. 69 Intersection Trial in Coimbatore 40
Fig. 70 PCC Stamped Concrete at D.P Road, Pune 50
Fig. 71 PCC Broomed Finish at J.M Road, Pune 50
Fig. 72 Rubberised Flooring at J.M Road, Pune 51
Fig. 73 Stone Block Paving in Calicut 51
Fig. 74 Stone Slab Tiles on Harrington Road Footpath, Chennai 52
Fig. 75 Concrete Blocks used in J.M Road Footpath, Pune 52
Fig. 76 Cement Tiles on a Footpath in Chennai 53
Fig. 77 Interlocking Tiles used in Footpath in Chennai 53
Fig. 78 R.C.C Bollards with Reflector Strips 54
Fig. 79 GI Bollards used at J.M Road, Pune 54
Fig. 80 Stainless Steel Bollards 54
Fig. 81 Stone Seating at D.P Road, Pune 55
Fig. 82 Precast Concrete Seating at J.M Road, Pune 55
Fig. 83 Metal Bench 55
Fig. 84 Fibre Reinforced Plastic Bench 56
Fig. 85 School Ahead Signage 61
Fig. 86 No Free Left Signage 61
Fig. 87 Pedestrian Crossing Ahead 61
Fig. 88 Pick-up and Drop Point Signage in School Zone 61
Fig. 89 Tow Away Zone Signage 61
Fig. 90 Informal Public Transport Stop Signage 61
 IRC:103-2022
PERSONNEL OF THE HIGHWAYS SPECIFICATIONS
AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE

(As on 12.09.2020 and continued on 19.09.2020 & 03.10.2020)

1 Pandey, I.K. Director General (Road Development) & Special Secretary to Govt. of India,
(Convenor) Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi

2 Balakrishna, Y. Additional Director General, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways,

(Co-Convenor) New Delhi

3 Kumar, Sanjeev Chief Engineer (R) S, R & T, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways,
(Member Secretary) New Delhi

Members

4 Behera, Bijan Kumar Engineer-in-Chief (Civil) (Retd.), Odisha

5 Bose, Dr. Sunil Head (Retd.), FP Division, Central Road Research Institute, New Delhi
6 Chandra, Dr. Satish Director, Central Road Research Institute, New Delhi
7 Gupta, D.P. DG(RD) & AS (Retd.), Ministry of Surface Transport, New Delhi
8 Jain, R.K. Chief Engineer (Retd.), PWD Haryana
9 Kapila, K.K. Chairman & Managing Director, ICT Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi
10 Kukrety, B.P. Associate Director, CEG Ltd., New Delhi
11 Kumar, Dr. Mahesh Engineer-in-Chief (Retd.), PWD (B&R) Haryana
12 Lal, Chaman Engineer-in-Chief (Retd.), PWD Haryana
13 Mina, H.L. Secretary (Retd.), PWD Rajasthan
14 Nashikkar, J.T. Secretary (Retd.), PWD Maharashtra
15 Nirmal, S.K. Additional Director General, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways &
Secretary General, Indian Roads Congress, New Delhi
16 Parida, Prof. (Dr.) M. Deputy Director, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee
17 Patel, S.I. Secretary (Retd.), PWD (Roads and Buildings) Gujarat
18 Prasad, R. Jai Engineer-in-Chief (Retd.), PWD & Bangalore Mahanagar Palike, Karnataka
19 Rawat, M.S. Executive Director, AECOM India Pvt. Ltd.
20 Reddy, Dr. K.S. Krishna Chief Project Officer, Karnataka State Highways Improvement Project,
Karnataka
21 Reddy, I.G. Engineer-in-Chief (NH, CRF & Buildings), PWD Hyderabad
22 Reddy, Prof. (Dr.) K.S. Professor, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
23 Sharma, S.C. DG(RD) & AS (Retd.), Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi
(Expired in Feb, 2020)
24 Shrivastava, A.K. Additional Director General (Retd.), Ministry of Road Transport and
Highways, New Delhi
25 Singh, Nirmaljit DG(RD) & SS (Retd.), Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi
26 Sinha, A.V. DG(RD) & SS (Retd.), Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi

i
IRC:103-2022

27 The Chief Engineer PWD Arunachal Pradesh

(Basar, Toli)
28 The Addl. DGBR Border Roads Organisation, New Delhi
(North-West)
(Kumar, Anil)
29 The Director (Tech.) National Rural Infrastructure Development Agency, New Delhi
(Pradhan, B.C.)
30 The General Manager National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd.,
(Projects) (Retd.) New Delhi
(Kaul, Satish)
31 The JICA Expert Japan International Cooperation Agency, New Delhi
(Kitayama, Michiya)
32 The Member (Projects) National Highways Authority of India, New Delhi
(Pandey, R.K.)
33 The Professor Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur
(Chakroborty, Dr. Partha)
34 The Secretary Roads and Buildings Department, Gujarat
(Vasava, S.B.)
35 The Secretary (Roads) PWD Maharashtra
(Joshi, C.P.)
36 The Secretary (Tech.) Roads and Buildings Department, Jammu & Kashmir
(Tickoo, Bimal) (Retd.)
37 The Special Director CPWD, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi
General (Retd.)
(Bansal, M.C.)
38 Venkatesha, M.C. Consultant
39 Wasson, Ashok Member (Tech.) (Retd.), National Highways Authority of India, New Delhi

Corresponding Members

1 Jaigopal, R.K. MD, Struct Geotech Research Laboratories (P) Ltd., Bengaluru

2 Justo, Prof. (Dr.) C.E.G. Professor (Retd.), Emeritus (Expired in June, 2019)

3 Veeraragavan, Prof. (Dr.) A. Professor, Indian Institute of Technology, Madras

Ex-Officio Members

1 President, (Joshi, C.P.), Secretary (Roads), PWD Maharashtra

Indian Roads Congress

2 Director General (Road (Pandey, I.K.), Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, New Delhi
Development) & Special
Secretary to Govt. of India

3 Secretary General, (Nirmal, Sanjay Kumar), Additional Director General, Ministry of Road
Indian Roads Congress Transport and Highways, New Delhi

ii
 IRC:103-2022
GUIDELINES FOR PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES

1. INTRODUCTION
Walking is the primary mode of travel in Indian cities. It forms about 25-35 percent of the total
trips as per the mode share data in Indian cities. Census 2011 data showed that nine out of every
ten trips by women were on foot and public transport.
Short trips in urban areas can be easily covered on foot or cycle. Even a public transport and a
private motorized transport user is often dependent on walking for the last mile journey. A good
walking and cycling infrastructure increase dependence on public transportation. Walking and
cycling provide affordable travel to all sections of the society to reach work, education, recreation
and other day-to-day activities. It provides resilience during difficult times such as oil crisis,
pandemic outbreak and natural calamities.
Pedestrians and cyclists are the most vulnerable towards injuries and fatalities due to crash.
As per the Ministry of Roads Transport and Highways (MoRTH) data on road accidents in India
for 2019, about 70 pedestrians and 12 cyclists died daily. Absence of safe and comfortable
pedestrian infrastructure is discouraging walking, and resulting in increased dependence on
personal motorized vehicles especially for short trips. Increased use of personal motorized
vehicle is resulting in congestion and air pollution in cities. This is having a negative impact on
health, environment and economy.
Pedestrian facilities that are safe, comfortable, continuous and enjoyable attract more walking.
Pedestrian facilities should provide seamless movement to all road users including vulnerable
road users such as persons with disabilities, caregivers with prams, children and the elderly.

Therefore, need was felt to revise IRC:103 “Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities” which was first
published in the year 1989 and was revised in the year 2012. The task of revising this Guidelines
further was taken up by the Urban Roads and Streets Committee (H-8) of IRC. Accordingly, a
subgroup under the convenorship of Ms. Shreya Gadepalli (represented by Shri Parin Visariya)
consisting of Prof. (Dr.) Rajat Rastogi, Prof. (Dr.) K. Ramachandra Rao, Dr. Anjlee Agarwal, Shri
S.K. Marwah and Shri Rajiv Sharma was constituted to prepare the revised draft. The revised
draft prepared by the subgroup was deliberated in a series of meetings of H-8 Committee and
was finalized in its meeting held on 27.06.2020.

The composition of the H-8 Committee is given below:

Parida, Prof. (Dr.) M. …….. Convenor
Marwah, S.K. …….. Co-Convenor
Ravi Sekhar, Dr. Ch. …….. Member-Secretary

Members
Agarwal, Dr. Anjlee Singh, Nirmaljit
Bhatt, Amit Thakar, Vikas
Gadepalli, Shreya Tiwari, Dr. Devesh
Gupta, D.P. BRO (Agarwal, A.K.)
Jaigopal, R.K. CPWD (Kumar, Anant)

1
IRC:103-2022
Kumar, Dinesh IIT Bombay (Rao, Prof. (Dr.) K.V.K.)
Kumar, Dr. Mahesh IIT Delhi (Rao, Prof. (Dr.) K.R.)
Kumar, Dr. Pawan IIT Roorkee (Rastogi, Prof. (Dr.) Rajat)
Kumar, Sanjeev MoRTH (Chamargore, U.J.)
Prasad, R. Jai MoRTH (Sharma, Narendra)
Sharan, G.

Corresponding Members

Gupta, Dr. Sanjay Rawat, M.S.

Mishra, Manikant Sharma, Rajiv
Raju, Dr. Phani

Ex-Officio Members

President, (Joshi, C.P.), Secretary (Roads),

Indian Roads Congress PWD Maharashtra
Director General (Pandey, I.K.), Ministry of Road
(Road Development) & Special Transport & Highways
Secretary to Govt. of India
Secretary General, (Nirmal, Sanjay Kumar), Additional
Indian Roads Congress Director General, Ministry of Road
Transport & Highways

The revised draft document was placed before the Highways Specifications and Standards
Committee (HSS) in its meeting held on 12.09.2020 and continued on 19.09.2020 & 03.10.2020.
The HSS Committee decided that the Convenor, H-8 Committee will modify the document based
on written and verbal comments offered during the meeting and submit the final document to IRC
for placing before the meetings of Executive Committee (EC) and Council. The EC in its meeting
held on 18.02.2021 approved the draft document for placing before the Council. The 221st Mid-
Term Council in its meeting held on 20th – 21st February, 2021 considered and approved the Draft
Revision of IRC:103 “Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities” for printing.

2. POLICIES AND ACTS

There are existing policies and acts that are adopted nationally and at city-level to ensure the
rights of pedestrians and promote non-motorized transport.
● National Urban Transport Policy, 2006 stresses the need to promote walking and cycling. It
stresses that the urban streets should move people instead of vehicles. Cities like Chennai
(2014) and Coimbatore (2017) have adopted Non-Motorized Transport policy to ensure
city provides high quality walking and cycling infrastructure. Similarly, Pune has adopted
pedestrian policy (2016).
● The Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA) under the Smart Cities Mission has
adopted the Complete Streets Framework Toolkit in 2019. It is a comprehensive toolkit that
2
 IRC:103-2022
guides the Indian cities on the process of planning, designing and implementing Healthy
Streets to achieve safe and enjoyable walking and cycling infrastructure.
● The Government of India enacted the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and
signed and ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act in
2008. To realize all the rights under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act and the
UNCRPD, stakeholders need to understand and implement universal accessibility in its
holistic sense.
● Goal 11.2 of Sustainable Development Goals also known as Global Goals that were
adopted by all United Nations Member States in 2015 mandates to provide access to
safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for all, improving road
safety, notably by expanding public transport, with special attention to the needs of those
in vulnerable situations, women, children, persons with disabilities and older persons by
2030.

3. SCOPE
IRC:103 provides various planning-level guidelines and design standards for safe and enjoyable
pedestrian infrastructure in urban areas. The guidelines and standards take into consideration
the way urban streets are used in Indian cities. The guidelines are well explained with illustrations
and images. IRC:103 will be useful to city engineers, transport planners, urban planners, urban
designers, decision makers, civil society organizations and students involved in the design and
implementation of pedestrian facilities.

4. PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES PRINCIPLES

Safety, security, continuity, comfort and liveability are the key five principles to consider in the
planning and design of pedestrian infrastructure for a safe and enjoyable walking experience.
These principles make walking more attractive over personal motor vehicle use especially for
short trips.

Safety – Pedestrians should be protected from motorized vehicles to prevent injuries and
fatalities due to crashes. They should be able to walk and cross safely irrespective of age,
gender and disabilities.
Security – Pedestrians should be secured from crimes while walking. All pedestrians including
women, children and elderly should feel secure while using the facilities.
Continuity – Pedestrians should be provided with continuous walking environment without
any obstructions. All pedestrians including persons on wheelchair, visually impaired persons,
caregivers with prams and elderly should be able to move seamlessly.
Comfort – Pedestrians should be provided with well-shaded, well-drained, spacious and clean
walking environment. They should feel comfortable while walking, waiting at the bus-stop and
seating.
Liveability - Pedestrians should be provided with liveable walking environment where they
can pause and enjoy the surroundings at their own pace. They should have opportunities to sit,
play and socialize.

3
IRC:103-2022
5. WALKING-FRIENDLY CITY
Right street design and urban planning helps to make city walkable. This can be largely achieved
through – a. Healthy Streets and b. Pedestrian-Oriented Urban Planning.

5.1 Healthy Streets

Urban streets should be designed as ‘Healthy Streets’. Healthy Streets prioritize the movement
of greener (emit less per capita) and space efficient (consumes less road space) modes of
transport such as walking, cycling, and public transport shown in Fig. 1. Healthy Streets move
people efficiently and safely, and help to reduce congestion by promoting walking, cycling and
public transport. This improves air quality. Healthy Streets also provide spaces for citizens to
sit and socialize. Studies have shown this has a positive impact on local retail businesses and
well-being of citizens. Healthy Streets makes urban environment socially equitable, healthy and
liveable.

Fig. 1 Mode Priority Diagram for Urban Street

Healthy Streets provide fair share of road space to all users as shown in Fig. 2. They are
designed with wide and continuous footpaths, safe at-grade pedestrian crossings, segregated
cycle tracks (on streets with high vehicle speeds), bus stops designed to enhance convenience
and ease of alighting, designated stands for auto-rickshaw, cycle rickshaw and taxis, organised
street vending, places for people to sit and socialize, consistent carriageway and organized
parking. Where pedestrians have to share road space along with motorized traffic, streets are
traffic calmed to ensure safe mingling. It is recommended that the carriageway, service road and
parking together should not occupy more than 50% of the total right of way width to ensure space
4
 IRC:103-2022
for walking, cycling and other street elements. MoHUA’s Complete Streets Design Workbook
(2019) can be referred further.

Fig. 2 Healthy Street Design Concept

5.2 Pedestrian-Oriented Urban Planning

Pedestrians and cyclists prefer short routes to reach their destinations. Long walking distance
discourages walking. Dense non-motorized transport street network along with mixed-use
landuse encourages walking, and reduces dependency on personal motorized vehicles especially
for short trips. Dense network provides multiple and direct routes (Fig. 3). It also induces safe
motorized transport speeds that ensures the safety of all road users.

The pedestrian detour route ratio should be within 1.5. Pedestrian detour route ratio is defined as
ratio of actual walking distance to direct route distance. Urban blocks should be designed such
that at every 150-200 m a non-motorized transport access is available. In case of large urban
blocks such as large educational campus, public institutes, commercial complex and others,
pedestrian only thoroughfares can be planned to improve walking and cycling. IRC:SP:118
should be referred for planning of urban street network.

Fig. 3 Dense Urban Road Network Planning

5
IRC:103-2022
6. PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES DESIGN STANDARDS
6.1 Pedestrian Level of Service
Pedestrian facilities with insufficient space leads to unpleasant and unsafe walking experience.
Pedestrian facility should provide enough space for safe and comfortable walking. The width
should be provided based on the current and expected pedestrian numbers, street type (arterial,
collector or local), and adjoining land-use. Pedestrian facility width should be designed for Level
of Service1 (LOS) B. LOS C is acceptable only in case of space constraints.
Table 1 gives pedestrian LOS for walking infrastructure in relation to predominant adjoining
landuse. Pedestrian flow is given in pedestrian/hour/meter (ped/h/m) width of walking zone.

Table 1 Service Volume of Pedestrian Facility of Unit Width

LOS Service Volume of Pedestrian Facility of Unit Width, Pedestrians/Hour/
Considered Meter (ped/h/m) in Both Direction
Commercial Institutional Terminal Recreational Residential
LOS – B 1285 1145 1360 1360 1430
LOS – C 1800 1600 1900 1900 2000

Incase of streets with mixed landuse, consider the LOS standard for predominant landuse
adjoining the facility.
Service volume on facility with pedestrian flow in one direction can be taken as 1.5 times more
of the flow given for LOS-B and LOS-C in above table.

6.2 Footpath
Footpaths segregate and protect pedestrians from motorized vehicles on urban streets to
provide safe walking, and help to improve vehicle flow. Footpaths must be provided on all street
types where vehicular speeds exceed 15 kmph2. Walkable footpaths are safe, continuous,
secure, comfortable and livable for all including children, elderly, and the persons with physical
disabilities. Good footpaths provide places for people to sit, socialize and play.
If footpaths are not provided, then street should be traffic calmed3 to ensure vehicle speeds
are below 15 kmph for safe co-existence of pedestrians and motorized vehicles. This can be
considered especially for local streets and narrow crowded commercial streets.

6.2.1 Footpath Design

Footpath width should be planned in 3 different zones – pedestrian/walking zone, frontage/dead
zone and multi-utility zone as shown in Fig. 4.

1
Level of service is defined as a qualitative measure used to determine how well a facility is operating from a
traveler’s perspective.
2
As per the Global Street Design Guide, it is safe for pedestrians to share the space with motorists at speeds below
15 kmph.
3
Traffic Calming measures ensure pedestrian and vehicle safety by reducing vehicular speed. Traffic calming
measures include vertical displacements (for e.g. speed humps, tabletop, surface treatment) and horizontal
displacement (for e.g. chicane, narrowing of carriageway).

6
 IRC:103-2022

Fig. 4 A Footpath in Chennai showing various Zones

Pedestrian/walking zone – It is the clear walking space for pedestrians, clear of any obstructions.
It is recommended to provide minimum 2 m wide walking zone to ensure two wheelchairs can
pass each other. A clear height of 2.4 m from the finished footpath floor level should be maintained
in walking zone as shown in Fig. 5. IRC:SP:117 should be further referred for details on the
minimum clearances required by different pedestrian groups.

Fig. 5 Recommended Space Requirement in Walking Zone

Frontage/dead zone – It provides a buffer between the walking zone and the property edge.
Minimum 0.5 m buffer space should be left from the building compound wall, as pedestrians do
not walk touching the wall. In case of shop front, 1m frontage space is recommended to avoid
hindrance from standing customers. Street lights can be placed in dead zone, however, no
element of it should protrude inside the walking zone.

Multi-utility zone (MUZ) – It is the space to provide seating, bus stops, IPT (Intermediate Public
Transit)4 stands, landscape, trees, children play elements, street signage, telecom and electric
boxes, on-street vending, and on-street parking. Minimum 1.5 m wide MUZ should be provided
to accommodate tree pits, auto-rickshaw stand, seating and on-street vending. 2 m wide MUZ
should be provided for on-street parallel parking for 4-wheeler parking and cycle/2-wheeler
4
Intermediate Public Transit (IPT) includes auto rickshaws and taxis that can be personally hired or share autos,
vans, private minibuses that operate on a shared or per seat basis on specific routes. The service may or may not
have a predefined fare structure.

7
IRC:103-2022
perpendicular parking. MUZ is usually provided at the footpath kerb edge. More than one MUZs
can be provided for wider footpaths to accommodate street furniture, trees and other elements.
However, walking zone should not be compromised. Fig. 6 shows the provision of seating and
landscape in the MUZ of JM road footpath in Pune.

MUZ width can be further reduced below 1.5 m on narrow streets with RoW below 15 m. However,
minimum 0.5 m wide MUZ should be provided to accommodate street lights, road signages and
bollards.

Fig. 6 Seating and Landscape located in MUZ

Table 2 recommends minimum clear widths of different zones on footpaths along different
landuses. It is also illustrated in Figs. 8, 9 and 10.

Table 2 Minimum Clear Widths of different Zones on Footpaths as per adjoining Landuse

Adjoining landuse a. Minimum walking/ b. Minimum c. Minimum Minimum total

pedestrian zone dead/frontage multi-utility footpath width
width (meters) zone width zone width (meters) (a+b+c)
(meters) (meters)

Residential (Fig. 8) 2.0 0.5 1.5 4.0 (for a 15m

wide street with
6 m undivided
carriageway)
Neighbourhood-level 2.5 1.0 1.5 5.0 (for a 18m
commercial street, wide street with
(Fig. 9) 7 m undivided
carriageway)
City-level commercial 4.0 1.0 1.5 6.5 (for a 21 m
street, high-street wide street with
shopping street 7 m undivided
(Fig. 10) carriageway)

8
 IRC:103-2022
● Incase of limited Right of Way5 (RoW) width, optimize the space by first adjusting/removing
the parking, then adjusting the carriageway6 width, and then the MUZ width to ensure
walking zone is not compromised. One-side footpath can be considered on narrow local
streets with RoW less than 10 m as shown in Fig. 11.
● Walking zone of minimum 2.5 m should be considered for streets with schools, hospitals,
markets, bus-stops, public parks and gardens (recreation) at the neighbourhood level.
● Streets in areas with high pedestrian footfall such as markets, shopping streets, transit
nodes, religious nodes, railway/metro stations, bus terminals, urban historic core can be
considered as only pedestrian streets or pedestrian mall that only allows walking, cycling
and public transport. Thyagaraja Salai retail street in Chennai is redesigned as pedestrian-
oriented street with wide walking space to cater to the high pedestrian footfall. Of the total
30 m RoW width, footpaths occupy 2/3rd of the total right of way space and balance is for
vehicular access as shown in Fig. 7. The street provides spaces to sit, play and socialize.
On-street parking is defined and priced.

Fig. 7 Thyagaraja Salai, Chennai

Fig. 8 Footpath in Neighbourhood-Level Fig. 9 Footpath in Residential Area

Commercial Area
5
Right of way is the total width of the road taken from compound wall/edge on one side of the street to that on the other side.
6
Carriageway is the space on road meant for vehicles to move.

9
IRC:103-2022

Fig. 10 Footpath in High-Footfall Intensity Area

Fig. 11 One-Side Footpath on Narrow Streets

Height – The height of the footpath should be 150 mm from the adjoining finished carriageway
level to ensure comfortable access to all pedestrians especially the elderly and children, and
prevent illegal parking by not allowing vehicles to mount over the footpath.
Surface – Footpath surface should be even, firm, free from cracks and well-drained. Surface
should be of anti-skid material to ensure usability and safety in all-weather conditions. Vitrified
tiles should be used for tactile pavers as they have high load bearing capacity and are durable.
Footpath surface should have gradient (slope) to prevent accumulation of water. Transverse
slope (along the footpath width) can range between 1:50 to 1:100. It should not be steeper than
the mentioned slope to prevent fall and rolling back of wheelchair users, however, ensure that
the footpath height of 150 mm is maintained at the kerb edge. Any break in the surface, such as
drainage channels or expansion joints (to prevent cracks in concrete) in the surface should not
be greater than 10 mm and should cross perpendicular to the direction of movement. This will
prevent walking sticks and wheels getting caught in the gaps.
Continuity of the footpath – Footpath should continue at same level across side streets and
property entrances for seamless movement.
Vehicle access ramps of 1:8 slope should be provided to access side streets as shown in Fig. 12.
Ramps also slow down vehicles at the intersection, thereby improving safety of pedestrians and
other road users. This is recommended where local streets join collector or arterial streets and

10
 IRC:103-2022
the intersection is without signal. Bollards should be provided to prevent vehicles encroaching
the footpath space as shown in Fig. 13. Ensure that one bollard spacing provides wheelchair
access. Provide tactile pavers before and after the bollards to warn the visually impaired on
obstacles.

Fig. 12 Footpath continuing at Same Level Fig. 13 Detail of Footpath continuing

along Side Street in Chennai along Side Street (Top View)

While providing vehicle access ramps to private properties, provide one access ramp in single
house dwelling units or small apartment buildings as shown in Fig. 14. In large commercial,
residential and institutional complexes two access ramps may be provided. The access ramp
length should not exceed 3.5 m as shown in Fig. 15 to prevent vehicles from mounting over
footpath.

Fig. 14 Footpath at Same Level along Fig. 15 Detail of Footpath continuing

Property Entrance in Pune at Property Entrance (Top View)

Where footpath width is insufficient especially on local streets, footpath should slope down
gradually at property entrances as shown in Fig. 16. Side ramps should slope down at 1:15
slope on both sides from +0.15 m to +0.05 m as shown in Fig. 17. The landing space is raised at

11
IRC:103-2022
+0.05 m from the finished carriageway level to prevent water logging. A ramp of 1:8 slope should
be provided to access landing space and then access property as shown in Fig. 17.

Fig. 16 Footpaths with Side Ramps at Fig. 17 Detail of Property Access on

Property Entrance in Mumbai Small Footpath Widths (Top View)

Continuous walking zone should be maintained around the existing trees as shown in Fig. 18.
Where RoW width decreases, provide bulb-out7 in the MUZ as shown in Fig. 19 to continue the
walking zone.

Fig. 18 Bulb-out to negotiate decrease in Fig. 19 Bulb-out around existing Trees

Right of Way Width

Integration of Footpath and Kerb-Side Cycle Track

Pedestrians can hinder cyclists’ movement on kerb-side cycle tracks, if adequate walking space
is not available. This will result in cyclists using the carriageway instead of cycle tracks. It is
recommended to provide enough walking space and clearly demarcate space for pedestrians
and cyclists as shown in Fig. 20. Walking space can be separated from cycle tracks through
a slight level difference. Cycle track finished level should be 50 mm lower as shown in
Fig. 21 to prevent water logging on footpath. Cycle track surface can be painted in different
colour along with cycle symbol marking. On wider footpaths, various street elements such as
seating, landscape, trees and pedestrian lights can be located between walking zone and cycle
track as buffer.
7
Bulb-out is a footpath kerb extension into the MUZ.

12
 IRC:103-2022

Fig. 20 Adequate Footpath Space Fig. 21 Planning detail between

provided along Cycle Track in Pune Footpath and Cycle Track (Top View)

Minimum 0.5 m buffer is recommended on both sides of cycle track to ensure vehicle overhangs
and street elements on footpath such as bus stops, seating and others do not affect the cyclists’
movement as shown in Fig. 22. Flexible spring posts or tubular markers shall be considered for
segregating cycle tracks from the carriageway.

Fig. 22 Buffer between On-Street Parking and Cycle Track

6.3 Shading on Pedestrian Facilities

All the pedestrian infrastructure including bus-stops, IPT

stands, seating spaces, foot-over bridges and skywalks
should be well-shaded to ensure pedestrian safety.
Footpaths are usually shaded by trees. On narrow streets,
abutting buildings provide shade. Ensure minimum
clearance of 2.4 m between shade and finished footpath
floor level to maintain clear walking height and ensure
visibility to road signages as shown in Fig. 23. Other on-
Fig. 23 Shade on Footpath
street shading elements include colonnades and shaded
walkways. Colonnades can be considered along retail commercial streets as shown in Fig. 24.
Shaded walkways can be considered to connect railway/metro station or major building to the
nearest bus-stop and/or IPT stand for comfortable transfer as shown in Fig. 25.

13
IRC:103-2022

Fig. 24 Shaded Walkway in Fig. 25 Colonnade in Mumbai

Singapore

It is recommended that bus-stops, IPT stands, foot-over bridges (including staircase) and
skywalks be shaded by permanent roofing to protect from heat and rain. All the support systems
(post, poles, columns and others) for shading should be located in MUZ or dead zone, and not
obstruct pedestrian movement.

6.4 Kerb Stone

Kerb stone is placed along the footpath edge. Pre-frabricated concrete kerb stones are preferred
as they are stronger, easy to install and have uniform finish. However, in some cases in-situ
construction of kerb stones can be done if the site needs a lot of variation in the edge. The
top level of kerb stone should align with the final finished footpath level. It should not exceed
150 mm. A typical bull nose kerb stone is commonly used as shown in Fig. 26. Kerb stones are
placed over PCC mortar base. Curved and angular kerb stone blocks can be used to create
bulb-outs.

Fig. 26 Typical 150 mm Thick Kerb Stone Block

14
 IRC:103-2022
Saucer drains and openings to catchment pits should be laid along the footpath kerb to channelise
and collect stormwater runoff. Saucer drains can also be provided along with the kerb stone as
a single unit as shown in Fig. 27.

Fig. 27 Kerb Stone Block with Saucer Drain

Precast rounded kerb stones of desired radii can be used for intersections
and parking bays as shown in Fig. 28.

Fig. 28 Precast Rounded Kerb Stone Block

6.5 Tactile Pavers

Visually impaired pedestrians need guidance while walking to find their way, overcome obstacles,
and cross safely. Two types of tactile tiles are used – guiding and warning tiles as shown in Figs.
29 and 30. Detail specification of tile design can be referred in IRC:SP:117.

Guiding tiles have straight continuous lines that indicate the route. They are
helpful in large areas such as transport terminals, public spaces and wide
footpaths (more than 4 m) for easy navigation, as the usual guidance given
by the edge of the footpath or compound wall is not within the reach of stick
used by visually impaired to navigate. Only warning tiles are recommended
on footpaths with width less than 4 m.

Fig. 29 Guiding Tile

Warning tiles helps to warn against level difference and obstacles, and further
informs on how to navigate. It should be placed at the beginning and end of
the ramps and stairs. Warning tiles should be provided at property entrances,
intersections and pedestrian crossings. Two sets of pedestrian warning tiles
should be provided, so that the pedestrian does not miss it.

Fig. 30 Warning Tile

15
IRC:103-2022
Tactile pavers should be used in a correct and consistent manner. Fig. 31 shows the incorrect
laying of tactile pavers that can result in collision. It can result in serious injuries.

Fig. 31 Incorrect Laying of Tactile Pavers (Source- walkabilityasia.org)

Tactile pavers should be laid 600 mm away from the edge of footpath kerb edge, compound wall
and any other obstructions to avoid collision. Pavers should be provided in line of travel avoiding
obstructions such as service cover, tree pits/guards, lamp posts, bollards and others. Layout
of tactile pavers to indicate turn is shown in Fig. 32. Unglazed vitrified pavers are preferred
over ceramic/cement ones, as they have good load-bearing strength and are durable. Stainless
tactile studs can also be used. Tactile paver colour should be contrasting to the surrounding
surface. IRC:SP:117 should be referred for more details on tactile pavers.

Fig. 32 Layout of Tactile Pavers to indicate Turns

6.6 Street Furniture

Street furniture includes seating, street light, signage, bollard, wastebin, children play element
etc. Street furniture should be located in MUZ, and not obstruct pedestrian movement. All street
furniture should be convenient to use, universally accessible, vandal proof, durable and easy
to maintain. Installation of street furniture must be accompanied by a maintenance plan. Street

16
 IRC:103-2022
furniture should be painted in contrasting colour for persons with low vision. Furniture should be
fixed at the same level as surface level. Pedestal-mounted furniture should be avoided. Furniture
protruding (for eg. wastebins) inside the walking zone should be avoided. It is recommended that
street fixtures like bus shelters, utility boxes, seating, bollards, wastebins, etc. are installed prior
to the paving of the footpath.

Seating – Seating enable pedestrian to rest and

socialize. It should be well-shaded and comfortable to sit.
It should be provided as per the context. Seating in MUZ
should be perpendicular to the pedestrian movement as
shown in Fig. 33. Seating may be provided parallel to
the pedestrian movement on wider footpaths as shown.
Seats may have back rest and armrest. Seat should be
at 0.45 m in height and depth (not including the back
rest).

Wastebins – Wastebins should be provided at regular

intervals. It is recommended that wastebins be available
at every 50-75 m distance. The opening of the bins should
not be above 800 mm. Dustbins should be placed near
all transit stops and vending areas. Dustbins attached
to street lights should not protrude into the walking
zone. Regular cleaning of dustbins is required to ensure
pleasant walking experience. Garbage dump on streets Fig. 33 Plan showing Location of
should be prevented, and city-level waste management Seating Footpath (Top View)
plan should be implemented.

Bollards

Bollards should be provided at locations on

footpath where illegal vehicle encroachment
is possible such as around property entrance
access ramps, raised pedestrian crossings
or kerb edge of footpath. Bollard (outer edge
of bollard) should be placed 0.25 m away
from the footpath kerb edge to ensure proper
fixing of bollard after kerb stone, and prevent
mounting of vehicles. Bollards should be
0.5-0.7 m high with a clear spacing of 0.6 m
Fig. 34 Bollard Spacing on Footpath between them and one with 1 m clear width
to ensure movement of wheelchair users,
caregivers with pram and persons with luggage. Bollards can be placed on footpath kerb edge
at 3 m center to center distance to prevent mounting of vehicles. Bollards can also be designed
as seating at a height of 0.45 m as shown in Fig. 36. Bollard material should be of good quality
material and fixed well to avoid breaking as shown in Fig. 35. Refer Annexure 4 for more details
on bollard material.

17
IRC:103-2022

Fig. 35 Broken Bollards due to poor Fig. 36 Bollards Designed as Seating

implementation

Pedestrian Guardrails

Continuous guardrails on footpath without frequent opportunities to enter and exit makes
pedestrians feel trapped inside, and they begin to walk on carriageway. In the absence of
frequent crossing opportunities or crossings at preferred locations, pedestrians tend to jump
over median guardrails. Pedestrian guardrails if not provided thoughtfully, adds to the discomfort
of pedestrians. Hence, pedestrian guardrails should be only used where there is evidence that
pedestrian safety can only be achieved by providing guardrails. Pedestrian guardrails may not be
required in most cases if sufficient walking space, and frequent and safe crossings are available.
It is recommended to avoid kerb-side guardrails on streets with undivided carriageway, where
crossing is frequent and vehicle speeds are under 40 kmph. Guardrails may be considered at -
● Around intersections on arterial roads to direct pedestrians towards safe crossings.
However, ensure crossings are planned along pedestrian desired lines to avoid
increase in walking length.
● Around school and aanganwadi entry/exit to protect children.
● Streets or locations that have high pedestrian volumes and fast-moving vehicles, and
there are chances that pedestrians may spill over carriageway.

Following design considerations to be incorporated in pedestrian guardrails:

● The guardrails to be around 0.7-0.9 m high to deter pedestrians from climbing over it
and ensure visibility.
● The balusters should be placed such that the pedestrians cannot pass through the
gap.
● Guardrail (outer edge) should be located 0.25 m away from the footpath kerb edge.
● They should be aesthetically designed to enhance the street character.
● Provide appropriate entry and exit points along the pedestrian desired line to prevent
pedestrians from climbing over the guardrails.

18
 IRC:103-2022
● If a continuous guardrail is provided along the stretch, it is recommended that a gap
be provided at every 20 m to allow exit during emergency – for instance, pedestrian
can escape any unfortunate event that may be threat to their personal security.

Signage

Signages inform pedestrians and other road

users to navigate on urban streets. There
should be no clutter of signages, unnecessary
signages should be avoided. Signages on
directions, parking, and others that helps to
navigate and induce safe driving should be
provided. A clear height of 2.1 m should be
maintained between the signage bottom and
the finished footpath floor level as shown in
Fig. 37 Signage Placement on Footpath
Fig. 37. Signage should be placed
perpendicular to the line of traffic, on the left side of the road with clear visibility except for
‘Parking’ and ‘No Parking’ signs which shall be placed parallel to the carriageway as per IRC:67.
Signages should be placed in the MUZ. Multiple informatory signs and advertisements can be
combined on a single pole to reduce clutter. IRC:67 on road signages should be referred. Braille
signboards should be located between 1.4-1.6 meters from floor level for persons with visual
impairments as shown in Fig. 38.

Fig. 38 Braille Signboard at a Bus-Stop in Delhi

Colour combinations shall be followed as per IRC:67 standards, cautionary, regulatory and facility
and direction information signs. For way-finding and direction signboards, IRC:67 standards
shall be followed. Periodical testing of retro reflective sign boards to be done as mentioned in
IRC:67 to assure the performance of the sign boards. Non-performing sign boards (not meeting
the minimum Ra values) which are under the warranty period should be replaced, and damaged
sign boards to be replaced on immediate basis.
19
IRC:103-2022
Street Lights

The entire RoW width should be well-lit. Warm white LED light is
preferred. 25-30 lux level of lighting should be available on footpath.
Spacing between two light poles should be approximately three
times the height of the fixture to ensure complete lighting as shown
in Fig. 40. Light poles should be no higher than 12 m to reduce
undesired illumination of private properties. It is recommended to
have flexible and reboundable type retro-reflective sheets of Type
IV on street light poles. Pedestrian lights on footpath and cycle
track should not exceed beyond 6 m. Table 3 recommends the
height and spacing of street lights.

Table 3 Street Light Height and Spacing as per Street Type

Street Type Pole Height (m) Spacing (m)
Footpath or cycle track 3-6 9-16
Local street (less than 12 m width) 8-10 25-27
Arterial or Collector 12 30-33
(more than 12 m width)

Placement of street lights should

be coordinated with trees to avoid
dark spots as shown in Fig. 39. An
integrated plan of trees and street
lights location should be prepared.

Fig. 40 Spacing between Fig. 39 Trees Obstructing

Street Lights the Street Light

A single row of light is sufficient for streets upto 12 m wide. Dual lights can be mounted on a
single central post as shown in Fig. 41, if lighting is insufficient.

Fig. 41 Street Lighting on Narrow Streets

For wider streets, multiple rows of posts can support lights at different levels as shown in Fig. 42.

20
 IRC:103-2022

Fig. 42 Street Lighting on Wide Streets

Utilities

Improper placement of overground utilities such as

utility boxes and uneven service covers impedes
pedestrian movement. Utility boxes should be placed
in MUZ or dead zone without disrupting the pedestrian
movement as shown in Fig. 43.

Any service covers on the footpath should be placed

in MUZ as shown in Fig. 44. They should be avoided
on cycle tracks. However, if they come on walking
zone or cycle track, the covers should be in level with
footpath surface. Warning tiles should be provided
to indicate the visually impaired persons to change
the direction as shown in Fig. 45. The gratings of
the service covers should be perpendicular to the
movement of wheels of a wheelchair. Openings of
Fig. 43 Placement of Utilities on grating should not be more than 10 mm wide.
Footpath (Top View)

Fig. 44 Service Covers should be located in MUZ Fig. 45 Detail of Warning Tiles around
Service Cover when provided on
Walking Zone (Top View)

21
IRC:103-2022
Mapping Utilities
● While retrofitting existing footpaths, mapping of all utility lines running underground is
necessary for precise excavation so as to prevent damage to these lines.
● While excavation, atleast 2 m around tree trunk should be left unexcavated to prevent
damage to the roots. Precautions should be taken to avoid damaging of existing utility
lines.
● Ducts are recommended for all underground utilities than trenches. Ducts may be conduits,
tubes or pipes such as RCC, PVC hume pipes. Ducts are cost effective and provide flexibility.
Where trees obstruct the continuous passage of utility lines, the lines should be continued
around the trees via flexible ducts. Manholes should be provided at regular intervals for
maintenance. IRC:98 should be further referred for guidelines on accommodation of utility
services on urban streets.

Public Toilets and Drinking Water Facilities

It is recommended that public toilets be located off-street. Walking along public toilets should
be pleasant. They should be universally accessible. IRC:SP:117 should be referred for details
on universally accessible toilet design. They should be safe for women and children to use.
Hygienic public toilets and drinking water facilities should be available within 5-minute walking
distance of major destinations such as transit stations, markets, public parks etc.

6.7 Pedestrian Crossings

Pedestrians of all age groups, gender and abilities should be able to cross streets safely and
conveniently. Pedestrians cross at mid-block and at intersections. Frequent opportunities for
at-grade crossings should be available on urban streets. Crossings that are located far apart
increases the walking distance which leads pedestrians to cross randomly. Similarly, if the
waiting time to cross increases, the pedestrians tend to become impatient, and cross in an
unsafe condition subjecting themselves to the risk of road crash. Table 4 recommends LOS for
pedestrian crossing as per the Indian Highways Capacity Manual. Pedestrian delay is defined
as the waiting time a pedestrian has to invest before crossing.

Table 4 Pedestrian Crossing Level of Service

LOS Pedestrian Delay (in seconds)
A ≤5
B 5 – 10
C 11 – 25
D 26 – 45

Pedestrian crossings are of two kinds – at-grade and grade-separated. At-grade pedestrian
crossings provide crossing at the street level, whereas grade-separated infrastructure provide
crossing above or below the street level. Foot-over bridges and subways are grade-separated
pedestrian crossings. At-grade pedestrian crossings are recommended over grade-separated
ones, as they provide quick, short and comfortable crossing. Pedestrian crossings should be
provided at every 80-150 m in urban areas. On undivided streets where pedestrians tend to
cross at any points, such streets should be traffic calmed to ensure vehicles speeds are below 20

22
 IRC:103-2022
kmph. Pedestrian crossings should be minimum 2 m wide. 4 m wide crossings are recommended
on streets with high pedestrian volumes such as schools, transit stations, shopping complex etc.
Pedestrian crossings should be clearly visible to all road users by appropriate markings as per
IRC:35.

6.7.1 At-Grade Pedestrian Crossings

At-grade pedestrian crossings are mainly of two kinds – tabletop/raised crossing, and painted
zebra crossing.

Tabletop Crossing

Tabletop or raised crossings are recommended

at all unsignalized crossings, as it provides
comfortable and safe crossing to all road users
including persons on wheelchair, elderly and
caregivers with pram. It allows pedestrians
to cross at the same level as the footpath
as shown in Fig. 46. It also acts as a traffic
calming measure that ensures road safety to
both pedestrians and motorists.

Fig. 46 Tabletop crossing in Connaught

Place, Delhi

As shown in Fig. 47, crossing is raised at the

same level as the adjacent footpath finished
level. Ramps of 1:8 slope is provided for
vehicle access. Crossing should be minimum
2 m wide. Bollards should be provided at both
ends of the crossing and at median, to prevent
vehicles from (especially two-wheelers) taking
U-turns and entering the footpath. Atleast
one bollard spacing should ensure access
to wheelchair users. It is recommended to
provide traffic calming measure (speed hump)
10-20 m before the crossing as per IRC:99.
This will help to slow down the vehicle in
advance and ensure pedestrian safety. Tactile
pavers should be provided to guide visually
Fig. 47 Tabletop Pedestrian Crossing Detail impaired persons. Provision for storm water
(Top View) drainage before the ramp should be provided.
Asphalt concrete may be used for the table-
top surface.

23
IRC:103-2022
Painted Zebra Crossing

Zebra Crossings are painted at the level of carriageway. Kerb ramps on footpath should be
provided at both the ends of the zebra crossing for access to wheelchair users, caregivers with
prams and elderly. Following design guidelines should be followed for kerb ramp:
● The kerb ramp slope should not be steeper than 1:15 and
slope on flared sides should be 1:10 as shown in Fig. 48.
● The width of kerb ramp should be equal to the width of the
pedestrian crossing.
● Ensure minimum clear 1.2 m wide walking space is available
after bollards.
● Warning tactile pavers should be provided at the ramp top and
bottom as shown in Fig. 48 to warn a visually impaired person
on the level difference due to ramp slope and the beginning of
the carriageway.
● The carriageway surface at the ramp bottom should be well
drained.
Fig. 48 Kerb Ramp
Detail (Top View)

‘STOP’ line should be provided before the zebra crossing as per IRC:35, if the crossing is
signalized. Stop line provides buffer space between zebra crossing and waiting vehicles.

Pedestrian Refuge at Median

Pedestrian refuge at median provides safe space for pedestrians to wait while crossing the
divided carriageway. It is recommended that the minimum median width be 1.2 m as shown
in Fig. 47. 2 m median width should be provided for a cyclist to wait. For wheelchair and pram
access, median level should be at the same level as tabletop crossing or as carriageway level
incase of zebra crossing. Pedestrian median refuge should be properly highlighted with the help
of road markings, delineators, median markers or solar studs based on the site requirement.

Bulb-outs

Where on-street parking is provided, bulb-out should be provided at pedestrian crossing as

shown in Fig. 49. Bulbout is a footpath kerb extension into the MUZ to reduce the crossing
distance for pedestrians and provide visibility to motorists and pedestrians at the crossing. Bulb-
out enhances the pedestrians safety. Bulb-out length before the crossing should be long to
ensure higher visibility.

24
 IRC:103-2022

Fig. 49 Bulb-out at Pedestrian Crossing (Top View)

Transverse Bar Marking

Incase if signalized crossings are not feasible on high-speed corridors such as highways and
urban expressways, it is recommended to provide transverse bar markings before crossings
for pedestrian safety as shown in Fig. 50. Transverse bar markings slightly reduce the vehicle
speeds and warn drivers as they approach the crossing. Markings reduces confusion while
crossing and help pedestrians to make a better judgement before crossing. IRC:99 should be
referred for the details on the specification of transverse bar marking, its location and its distance
from crossing.

Fig. 50 Transverse Road Markings before Pedestrian Crossing (Top View)

Signalized Crossings
Signalized crossings improve the pedestrian safety at intersections and midblock. Following
warrants, can be considered if:
a. Pedestrians have to wait more than 45 seconds to cross the street.
b. Traffic speed increases above 40 km/h, 60 km/h or 80 km/h for 2-lane undivided road,
4-lane or 6-lane divided road respectively.
c. Psychological Gap Size (PGS)8 becomes less than 1.65s, 2.0s, or 2.55s for 2-lane
undivided road, 4-lane or 6-lane divided road respectively.

8
Pedestrian Psychological Gap Size (PGS) is defined as the time gap perceived safe by a pedestrian, who feels
confident to cross the national potential-vehicle conflict area including the width of the vehicle.

25
IRC:103-2022
d. Vehicular flow on a 2-lane undivided road, 4-lane or 6-lane divided road respectively
increases beyond 940, 1250 or 1860 PCU/hour respectively.
It is recommended to consider signalized crossings on 6-lane divided streets or one-ways streets
with more than 2 lanes in one direction, as it is difficult to cross more than two lanes. Crossings
and intersections that have shown history of road crashes in the black spot data of the city.
The nomographs depicting the relationships between pedestrian flow9, vehicular flow10, vehicle
speed and pedestrian psychological gap size are given in Annexure 2. These can be used to
decide a type of crossing facility which shall be provided at a location (Jain & Rastogi, 2018).

Traffic Signals with Pedestrian Phase

Traffic signals should have exclusive pedestrian phase. Pedestrian phase timing should consider
the walking speeds of all age groups, gender and persons with different abilities. Walking speeds
of various pedestrians is given in Annexure 1. Following pedestrian walking speeds should be
considered for the design of signal timings:
● 15th percentile speed (approximately 0.95 m/s)
● If older pedestrians are high in volume, a walking speed of 0.8 m/s should be used.
● If young children accompanied by caregivers are high in volume, a walking speed of
0.5 m/s should be used. This will be also helpful to persons with disabilities. School,
recreation and hospital zones should consider a walking speed of 0.5 m/s.
Pelican signals may be used on streets with high vehicle volumes. Pelican signals are activated
by the pedestrians using a push button are useful on midblock crossings. Signals should have
audible device for the benefit of visually impaired pedestrians and children. IRC:SP:117 should
be referred for further details.

6.7.2 Grade-Separated Crossings

Grade-separated pedestrian crossings are often inconvenient for pedestrians, as it increases
the walking length and involves high effort of climbing up and down. It is not suitable for the
elderly, and those with disabilities. Access to persons on wheelchair is impossible without a lift.
Grade-separated crossings especially subways are often perceived unsafe by women, due to
the fear of crimes. If present grade-separated crossings are not usable or unsafe as found in the
audits, feasibility of at-grade crossings should be considered. Grade-separated crossings to be
only provided under the following conditions:
● On urban expressways or high-speed corridors where vehicle speeds are very high.
● To cross the railway corridor.
● Psychological Gap Size (PGS) is less than 0.77s or 0.98s on a 4-lane or 6-lane
divided road respectively.
● When vehicular flow on a 4-lane or 6-lane divided road increases beyond 4200 or
6300 PCU/h respectively.
9
Number of pedestrians passing a given point per unit time expressed as pedestrians per hour or pedestrian per
minute or pedestrians per 15 minutes.
10
Total number of vehicles that pass over a given point of a street in a given interval of time. It is expressed as PCU/hr.

26
 IRC:103-2022
Where pedestrian grade-separated facilities are built, they should ensure universal accessibility,
and convenience to pedestrians by providing lifts, escalators, and ramps for cyclists. Tactile
pavers should be provided for the visually impaired persons. They should be well-lit, shaded
and safe to use. Additional design details of grade-separated pedestrian crossings are given in
Annexure 3.

6.8 Bus-Stops

Bus-stop should be placed at the kerb edge in MUZ on footpaths above 4.5 m width as shown in
Fig. 51 (a) to ensure continuous movement. For footpaths below 4.5 m width, bus-stop should
be placed along the property edge to provide sufficient space for pedestrians to walk as shown
in Fig. 51 (b). Bus-stop should be well-lit and well-shaded. Bus-stop should have a clear waiting
space of minimum 1.2 m and seating should be provided especially for elderly, caregivers with
young children, pregnant women and persons with disabilities. Bus-stop waiting area should be
at the same level as the footpath.

Fig. 51 Placement of Bus-Stop on Footpath (Top View)

The area around the bus stop should be planned as shown in Fig. 52. Vendors, signages,
advertisements and trees should be located in a way that they do not hinder the vision of
the passengers waiting at the bus-stop and pedestrian movement. Bus-stop marking should
be provided as per IRC:35. The back-side of the bus stop should be visually transparent to
ensure personal security while waiting. Dustbin and drinking water facilities may be provided.
Pedestrian crossings should be before the bus-stop to ensure passengers cross safely at the
rear end of the bus. IPT stands should be provided near bus stops for multi-modal integration.
Passenger information system in terms of static information and real time information should be
made available. Static or schedule information should be made available in printed sign board
with route network map, bus number information, emergency helpline numbers etc. Real time
information on estimated arrival of bus will increase the dependency of public bus transport.

27
IRC:103-2022

Fig. 52 Bus-Stop Area Planning (Top-View)

It is recommended that bus-stops should be placed 40-45 m away from the pedestrian crossing
at the intersection. IRC:70 should be further referred for guidelines on planning of bus stops.

6.9 Landscaping

Landscaping improves the livability on streets and enhances walking experience if planned
properly. Trees provide shade to pedestrians and other road users, and keep the street
environment cool. Trees and shrubs should be planted in MUZ. Existing trees should be retained,
and footpath should be planned around it. Trees that suit the local climatic conditions should
be planted. Narrow columnar trees should be used where footpath space is limited. Vertical
clearance of 2.4 m should be maintained. Branches should be pruned to ensure visibility of
signages. An integrated plan of street lights and trees should be prepared to ensure they do not
block the streetlight.

Tree pits of around 1.8 m x 1.8 m (area without concrete) should be provided around trees to
accommodate roots. On narrow footpaths, the same surface area can be achieved with tree
pits of size 1.25 m x 2.6 m as shown in Fig. 53. IRC:SP:119 should be referred for details on
landscaping on urban streets.

Fig. 53 Tree Pit Detail (Top View)

28
 IRC:103-2022
Surmountable tree gratings should be used over tree pits to increase the effective walking
zone width especially on narrow footpaths as shown in Fig. 54. Tree gratings should be at the
same level as footpath. Precast concrete gratings may be used. Tree grating gaps should be
perpendicular to the movement of wheels of a wheelchair,

Fig. 54 Tree Grating Detail

6.10 Street Vending

Well-planned on-street vending provides for a vibrant social
space and passive personal security especially for women,
children and elderly. The Street Vendors (Protection of
Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 makes
it mandatory to integrate vending areas in the street design.
On-street vending should be managed to ensure vendors
and buyers do not hinder the pedestrian movement. Vending
spaces to be provided in the MUZ as shown in Fig. 55.
Vending spaces should be clearly demarcated. An On-street
vending management plan should be prepared. Supporting
infrastructure like water taps, electricity points, waste bins,
and public toilets should be provided.

Fig. 55 Planning of On-Street

Vending on Footpath
(Top-View)

6.11 On-Street Parking

Street space is meant to move people efficiently and allow people to sit, play and socialize.
Parking is a sub-optimal use of limited street space. More and more on-street parking (except
cycle parking) should move to off-street to ensure all road users have fair road space. On-street
parking should be limited and priced. On-street parking on urban streets should be provided as
per the following hierarchy as shown below:

29
IRC:103-2022
First Non-motorized vehicle parking (cycle)
Non-motorized IPT vehicle stand (cycle rickshaw stand)
Motorized IPT vehicle stand (auto rickshaw, share auto rickshaw and taxi stand)
Parking for persons with disabilities
Loading/unloading bays for light commercial vehicles
Last
Private motor vehicle parking (2-wheelers)
Private motor vehicle parking (4-wheelers)

On-street parking is not desired on arterial streets for better traffic flow. However, it can be
provided on service lane. On-street parking may be provided on collector and local streets. On-
street parking should be parallel, instead of angular or perpendicular as shown in Fig. 56. Parallel
parking occupies less space. It also allows flexibility between four-wheeler and two-wheeler
parking. Angular and perpendicular car parking should be avoided since they occupy more road
space and hamper visibility to drivers on approaching vehicles while reversing. Parking bay for
four-wheeler (car) should be 2 x 6 m, two-wheeler and cycle parking should be 2 x 1 m. Parking
space for one auto rickshaw, e-rickshaw and cycle rickshaw should be 1.5 m x 3 m and for taxis
should be 2 m x 6 m. Each parking bay should be clearly defined and marked to avoid haphazard
parking. Appropriate parking signages giving information on timings, vehicle type parking and
price should be provided. Parking signages and markings should be provided as per IRC:67 and
IRC:35 respectively.

Fig. 56 Parallel Parking is preferred for all 3 & 4 Wheeler Vehicles

30
 IRC:103-2022
Parking for two-wheelers and cycles should be perpendicular.
On narrow streets with high density of two-wheeler parking,
angular two-wheeler parking may be considered as shown in
Fig. 57.

Fig. 57 Angular 2-Wheeler Parking

on Narrow Street (Top View)
Intersections should be free of on-street parking. Parking should not be provided within 50 m
from the intersection on collector streets and 10 m from the intersection on local streets. Parking
should be interrupted by bulb-out after every 5 car parks as shown in Fig. 58, to provide other
amenities such as seating, trees, utilities and other footpath elements. The kerb edge of parking
can be at right angle as vehicles enter and exit parking bays at different times, whereas the kerb
end for an IPT stand may have 45-degree splayed edge as the vehicles move in rotation.

Fig. 58 On-Street Parking Planning Detail

Dedicated on-street and off-street cycle parking should be provided. On-street cycle parking can
be accommodated in the MUZ. IPT stands should preferably be located near bus stops, transit
stations, hospitals, markets and other major destinations. Appropriate signages for IPT stand
should be provided. Usually, 5-6 IPT waiting bays may be provided in one stand. However, at
transit stations and other major destinations, the number of waiting spots can be provided as per
the context.

Accessible car parking for persons with impaired mobility

Designated car and tri-cycle parking spaces for persons with impaired
mobility should be provided. It is recommended to provide off-street
accessible parking spaces. On-street accessible parking space
numbers should be provided in discussion with the disability groups.
On-street accessible parallel car parking of size 3.6 x 6.5 m should be
provided. 1 m wide ramp should be provided for wheelchair user to
access the footpath as shown in Fig. 59. The ramp slope should be
1:15. Parking bay should have the international symbol of accessibility
painted on the ground, along with a signpost around it. IRC:SP:117
should be further referred.

Fig. 59 On-Street Accessible Parking (Top-View)

31
IRC:103-2022
6.12 Shared Streets

Shared streets are designed in a way where pedestrians and motor vehicles use the same street
space in safe conditions as shown in Fig. 60. There is no segregation in the form of footpaths.
The concept of shared streets is to ensure that each street user becomes more aware and
considerate of the others on the street. The speeds are regulated below 15 kmph through various
traffic calming measures such as speed bumps and chicanes. Chicanes are angular deflections
created in streets to break the linear travel movement. This can be created by strategically
placing diversions in the form of bollards, planters, parking and other street elements as shown
in Fig. 61.

Shared streets can be considered on narrow local residential streets (RoW > 9 m) where physical
segregation through footpath may not be feasible. They can also be considered on crowded
commercial streets, or in urban historic core. They are not meant to carry through traffic.

Fig. 60 Shared Street in Bengaluru

Fig. 61 Chicane tested in Jabalpur

32
 IRC:103-2022
6.13 Consistent Carriageway Width

Often urban streets in Indian cities have inconsistent

Right of Way width. While designing such urban streets,
it is important that the carriageway width be consistent
throughout the length of the street as shown in Fig. 62 to
avoid bottlenecks and ensure smooth traffic flow. Footpath
widths should be increased in portions where a wider RoW
width is available to maintain consistent carriageway.

Fig. 62 Consistent Carriageway

7. PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES AT INTERSECTION

Intersection design involves two important goals of efficient vehicle throughput and safety of
pedestrians crossing the intersection. This can be achieved by compact intersection design.
Compact intersections bring the stop line and pedestrian crossing as close as possible to the
intersection. This improves the throughput of vehicles. This section briefly introduces the various
elements that make intersection safer for pedestrians. It is illustrated in Fig. 63.

Fig. 63 Safe Intersection Design

Turning Radius

Small turning radius slows down vehicles while turning and increases pedestrian safety while
crossing. Turning radii at intersections should be 4 m on local and collector streets, and maximum
9 m on arterial and sub-arterial streets. Fig. 64 shows how a large vehicle will turn on the small
turning radius by driving ahead in the farthest carriageway lane.
33
IRC:103-2022

Fig. 64 Large Vehicle making a Turn on Small Kerb Radius

Pedestrian Crossings

Pedestrian crossings should be provided along pedestrian desired lines to prevent pedestrians
from walking longer lengths. Pedestrian crossings should be provided as per Section 6.7.1. Traffic
calming measures should be provided before the unsignalized crossings to ensure pedestrian
safety. Kerb ramps should be provided when crossings are not raised.

Pedestrian Refuge at Median

Pedestrian refuge at median provides intermediate resting point for pedestrians while crossing
a divided carriageway. It breaks the pedestrian crossing length in small segments. Pedestrian
refuge at median should be provided as per Section 6.7.1. Shrub height on median should be
restricted to 0.7 m height from carriageway level to ensure visibility to pedestrians and vehicles.

Pedestrian Refuge Islands

Refuge islands provide easy crossing and safety to pedestrians at large intersections. It provides
intermediate resting point for pedestrians while crossing a large intersection. It breaks the
crossing length in small segments. The unused carriageway space at intersections should be
converted to pedestrian refuge for safe crossing and efficient vehicle throughput. Refuge islands
should be free of landscaping and fencing to ensure usability. Advertisements on pedestrian
refuge islands should not impede the pedestrian movement and visibility. Refuge islands should
be properly highlighted with the help of road markings, delineators, median markers or solar
studs based on the site requirement. It should provide access to wheelchair.

Left Turn Pockets

At large intersections, often free or signalized left turns are provided to increase vehicle
throughput. However, free left turns are not desired for safety of pedestrians and cyclists as it
becomes difficult to cross due to high vehicular traffic. Left turn pockets should be avoided on
intersections up to right of way of 30 m. In case where they exist, vehicular speeds at left turn
pockets should be reduced with the help of tabletop crossing and small turning radius as shown
in Fig. 63.

34
 IRC:103-2022
Roundabouts
In unsignalized intersections, a roundabout can improve safety by consolidating intersection
movements and reducing speeds. Roundabouts also simplify the conflict associated with right
turns, which are a major cause of intersection crashes. In small intersections, the roundabout
itself as well as the islands in the centre of the four street arms may be constructed with truck
aprons that are surmountable by trucks and buses, but not by cars and two-wheelers. Such a
design accommodates the larger turning radius of heavy vehicles while maintaining a smaller
turning radius for other vehicles as shown in Fig. 65.

Fig. 65 Intersection with Roundabout

8. NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORT ONLY STREETS AND GREENWAYS

Many cities such as Gangtok and Amritsar have pedestrian-only streets as shown in Fig. 66.
These are market streets and streets around transit zones with high pedestrian footfall. These
streets are designed as vibrant public spaces with ample seating, landscaping, children play
elements and other street furniture for people to enjoy. Access to emergency vehicles and
loading/unloading of goods should be planned. Parking management11 is crucial. All facilities
should be universally accessible. Temporary street closures can be considered for on-street
weekly markets, recreation and concerts. Local stakeholders such as shopkeepers, residents
and traffic police should be involved during the planning and design process.

Fig. 66 Pedestrian Only Street in Amritsar

Parking management implies pricing and enforcing on-street parking supply. On-street parking slots is well
11

demarcated.
35
IRC:103-2022
Greenways are exclusive walking and cycling facilities along natural features such as water
bodies, lakes and parks with a variety of public spaces and natural features. Motor vehicle traffic
is prohibited on this network. It is recommended that greenways have a minimum clear width
of minimum 8 m to accommodate two-way movement of cyclists and pedestrians. The city of
Coimbatore is developing a network of greenways around its lakes in the city.
Necessary signboards as per IRC:67 indicating ‘pedestrians and cyclists only’ shall be provided
at the start and end of these streets to prohibit the entry of motorized vehicles.

9. PLACEMAKING

Streets are not only meant to move, but also to

pause and enjoy. Providing places to sit, play
and socialize enhances the walking experience
of a pedestrian (Fig. 67). Placemaking makes
streets a vibrant public place. Placemaking also
improves the local retail business by attracting
higher pedestrian footfall. It also makes a street
active and lively, which improves the perception
of security amongst women, elderly and children.
Streets when designed as vibrant public spaces
improves the physical and mental well-being of
Fig. 67 Seating Space on JM Road citizens.
Footpath in Pune

10. SKYWALKS

Skywalks are grade-separated walking paths as shown in Fig. 68. They are built with the
intention to provide quick and unhindered entry/exit to major buildings in high crowded zones
such as railway stations, metro stations, malls, airport terminals and office complexes. However,
it is important to note that skywalks are not a replacement to footpaths. Pedestrians will require
footpaths to access shops and other buildings at street level. Skywalks, if planned well, can help
in managing crowd in high crowded zones. Following points should be considered for planning
and design of skywalks:
● Skywalks should not be a standalone facility, but integrated with building entry/exit at
same level for seamless and convenient walking.
● Skywalk length and entry/exit points should be planned carefully to ensure pedestrians
find it purposeful and convenient to use.
● Skywalks should be well-shaded with roof to provide protection from heat and rain.
● They should be well-lit and visually transparent to improve passive personal security.
Patrolling should be done especially during late evening time.
● Lifts, escalators and tactile pavers should be provided for access to persons with
disabilities and elderly.

36
 IRC:103-2022
● The sub-structure of an elevated skywalk should not hinder the pedestrian movement
on footpath below.
● Seating may be provided along the skywalk corridor.
● They should be clean and well-maintained.

Fig. 68 Skywalk

11. PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES AROUND SCHOOL ZONE

Infants, toddlers and children travel along with their caregivers to aanganwadis (pre-primary
school) and schools. Many walk, cycle or take public transport to reach the above facilities.
Children are one of the most vulnerable road users. Streets that are designed to prioritize the
road safety of children, prove safe for all road users. Following guidelines should be considered
to ensure children and their caregivers’ safety:

Planning Recommendations
● It is recommended that the streets around schools should be traffic calmed to ensure
vehicle speeds are below 20 kmph. The city of Dublin in Ireland has a city-wide 30
kmph zone plan which includes streets around schools and local streets in residential
areas in the city. Street stretches 50 m before and after the entry/exit gates should be
traffic calmed.
● A dense street network should be available around schools to facilitate easy movement
of crowd during peak school hours.
● Streets should provide wide footpaths and priority to bus movement.
● Streets should have protected cycle tracks if vehicle speeds are above 30 kmph.
● On-street parking should be avoided 50 m before and after the entry/exit gates.
● On-street and off-street cycle parking should be provided.
● It is recommended that the nearest bus-stop and IPT stand be available within 50 m
distance of entry/exit gate.

37
IRC:103-2022
Pedestrian Facilities
● Footpaths should be provided and designed as per Section 6.2.
● Tabletop crossings should be provided in case of unsignalized crossing. If the
institution is located on an arterial or sub-arterial street, signalized crossings should
be provided. The width of the crossing should be atleast 4 m to ensure comfortable
crossing of high pedestrian volumes during school peak hours.
● The pedestrian signal time should be provided as per the walking speed of 0.5 m/s.
● It is recommended to have guardrails near the school entry/exit gate to ensure
children’s safety.
● Seating and wastebins should be provided near schools.
● Children-friendly art installations and play elements may be provided on streets.
● Appropriate road signs and markings should be provided as per IRC:67 and IRC:35
respectively. Annexure 6 should be referred for signages.

Management
● Traffic wardens should be deployed during peak hours to manage pedestrians and
vehicular traffic. Traffic wardens to be equipped with necessary personnel protective
equipment such as hand-held Stop signs and reflective jackets.
● On-street parking especially of school bus and vans should be managed to ensure
smooth traffic flow and comfortable walking experience.
● On-street vending should be managed around schools.

12. PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES AROUND TRANSIT STATIONS

Transit stations include railway station, metro station, bus terminal and depot, bus rapid transit
station and bus-stop. Transit stations see a high footfall of pedestrians entering and exiting the
stations. Transit stations see a variety of modes such as auto-rickshaws, cycle system and
bus system waiting to provide last-mile connectivity. Transit station should ensure multi-modal
integration of different modes to facilitate seamless and fast transfers. Following recommendations
to be followed for pedestrian facilities around transit stations:

Planning Recommendations
● Streets around 500 m entry/exit of railway station, metro station, bus rapid transit
station and bus terminal should prioritize walking, cycling and movement of other
intermediate public transport such as auto-rickshaws and others.
● Streets around transit stations should be traffic calmed to 30 kmph.
● Pedestrian only streets or streets that only allow non-motorized transport and public
transport may be considered. Temporary pedestrianization may also be considered.
● Dense street network should be provided to facilitate easy distribution of crowd.

38
 IRC:103-2022
● Bus-stop, cycle rental stations, cycle parking and public toilets should be provided
within 50 m walking distance of the entry/exit to the mass rapid transit station such as
railway, metro and bus rapid transit station.
● IPT stands should be planned within 100 m walking distance of the entry/exit to the
station.
● Provision of way-finding maps of a 1 km radius area around transit station should be
provided.
● It is recommended to avoid on-street parking in the transit zone for smooth traffic flow.
● Off-street car parking facility in the transit station and zone should not be provided to
discourage private vehicle use, and avoid traffic congestion.
● Any grade-separated pedestrian facilities like skywalk should be integrated with the
station exit/exit points.

Pedestrian Facilities
● Wide footpaths should be provided as per high intense footfall zones in Section 6.2.
● Frequent at-grade pedestrian crossings should be provided every 80-150 m.
● Appropriate way-finding signages should be provided.

Management
● Traffic wardens should be deployed at critical locations during peak hours to manage
pedestrians and vehicular traffic.
● On-street parking and on-street vending should be managed to ensure smooth traffic
flow and comfortable walking experience.
● Traffic circulation and traffic management plan (including freight) should be prepared.

13. IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE

Poor execution reduces the usability of pedestrian facilities and increases the risk of safety
while walking. It also increases the maintenance cost. Poor execution may be due to the use
of low-grade materials, lack of adherence to design details, defective construction and lack of
supervision.

Along with the right design standards, it is important to adopt high quality implementation
standards. Good materials provide high usability of the design. When materials are not selected
properly, the facility becomes unfit for use in a short time, either due to difficulty in maintenance
or due to wear and tear. Materials used should be durable, easy to install, easy to maintain, slip
resistant, resistant to vandalism and provide universal accessibility. Details on various materials
are given in Annexure 4. Coordination of all different government departments and utility
agencies is important during implementation and maintenance. MoHUA’s Complete Streets –
Implementation Workbook should be further referred for guidelines on implementation.

39
IRC:103-2022
Test On-Site

It is recommended to first test the proposed design before making it permanent. Testing can
be done through a ‘tactical urbanism’ method which involves using low-cost, temporary and
easy to install materials. Testing helps to evaluate the performance and impact of the design on
road users movement and safety. The learnings from testing can help modify the design before
making it permanent. It is recommended to test the trial run for atleast 1-2 weeks at a stretch.
The proposed design is marked on the road using chalk, traffic cones, and other temporary
objects. It is tested for functionality and safety. Necessary instructions, barricades and signages
shall be put in accordance to inform the road users. During the process of testing, involve traffic
police and other relevant local stakeholders such as residents, shop owners and others for their
support and feedback. Fig. 69 shows the testing of an intersection design in Coimbatore.

Fig. 69 Intersection Trial in Coimbatore

14. MANAGEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT

Often well-designed pedestrian infrastructure is encroached by parking, shop and residential

extensions and street vendors. Sometimes, two-wheelers are seen riding on the footpath
especially when the streets are congested. This reduces the usability, and harms the safety
of pedestrians. Along with right street design and implementation, effective management and
enforcement is needed. On-street parking, vending, utility and waste collection should be
managed to ensure usability of the footpaths.
Strict enforcement is required to prevent encroachment, wrong-side driving and other nuisance
that obstruct pedestrian movement. Any encroachment by adjoining shopkeepers or residential
unit on footpath in the form of display, storage, security cabins, flower pots etc. should be avoided.
On-street vendors should not be allowed to extend outside their dedicated vending space.
The city Traffic Police Department, Urban Local Bodies, Shopkeepers’ association, Residents’
Welfare Association etc. can play an important role in safeguarding the functionality of public
pedestrian facilities.

40
 IRC:103-2022
During implementation, city should have work zone management plan to ensure all road users
can move and cross safely, and access private properties. Any digging work that happens for
utility management should be well-levelled and finished.

15. AUDITS

Audits during the testing and final implementation helps to revise and rectify the design in a
timely manner. Audits include evaluation of pedestrian infrastructure to know if they are walkable,
universally accessible and safer for women and children. The findings from audits help to identify
gaps and provide solutions to ensure its usability. This would provide clear data to the authorities
on what factors need immediate attention and improvement. A detailed checklist for audit can be
found in Appendix 1 of IRC:SP:117.

Calculating Walkability Score for Pedestrian Infrastructure

‘Walk Score’ is a qualitative method to evaluate the walking experience of pedestrians. It helps to
give insights on the satisfaction level of pedestrians. A greater score implies that the pedestrian
facility is safe and attractive to use. ‘Walk Score’ is derived against various attributes that impacts
one’s walking experience. The factors affecting Walk Score are provided below:
● Traffic volume: High traffic volume especially at residential and commercial areas
results in noise, air, unsafe urban street conditions and affects the quality of life. This
deters pedestrians to walk or spend time on streets.
● Traffic speed: Vehicles plying at high speeds makes walking unsafe.
● Shade: Availability of shade while walking and waiting at the bus stop makes walking
comfortable.
● Police patrolling: Police patrolling enhances pedestrians’ sense of security against
crime or theft.
● Street lighting: Street lighting provides visibility to both pedestrians and motorists, and
improves personal security of pedestrians against crimes.
● CCTV cameras: Installation of CCTV cameras along streets improves surveillance
and helps to enhance the perception of security.
● Width: Wider footpaths provide pedestrians with sufficient space to move and enjoy
the surroundings at their pace.
● Surface: Even, firm and anti-skid walking surface provides continuous movement to
pedestrians and persons with physical disabilities.
● Obstacles: Footpaths that are unhindered due to obstructions (wrongly placed
overhead utilities and street furniture in the walking zone) provide continuous
movement to pedestrians.
● Encroachments: Footpaths that are free of encroachments (illegal parking, shop
spillover, residential extension, unmanaged on-street vending) provide continuous
walking experience.

41
IRC:103-2022
● Continuity: Frequent up and downs while walking makes walking difficult for pedestrians
and impossible for persons on wheelchairs and elderly.
● Cleanliness: Cleaner pedestrian facilities that are free from garbage and litter provides
pleasant walking experience.
● Amenities: Availability of amenities such as toilets, drinking water provisions, etc.
enhances the attractiveness of pedestrian environment.
● Facilities for disabled persons: Tactile pavements and ramps provide universal
accessibility.

The perception of walk score factors produce different reactions in each pedestrian. The above
information on factors was gathered through questionnaire surveys. Respondents were asked to
state their level of satisfaction with all the above factors on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from
one (strongly disagree) to five (strongly agree). For example, statements like “There is so much
traffic along the street where I work/live which makes it difficult to walk” is used for assessing
pedestrian satisfaction on the factor “Traffic speed”.

Factors are categorized under safety, security, movement and comfort.

Grouping of Attributes
Latent Variables Attributes
Safety x1 Traffic volume
x2 Traffic speed
Security x3 Police patrolling
x4 Street lighting
x5 CCTV Cameras
Movement x6 Width
x7 Continuity
x8 Encroachments
x9 Surface
x10 Amenities
x11 Shade
Comfort x12 Cleanliness
x13 Facilities for disabled persons
x14 Obstructions

Following methodology is followed to calculate walk score (Bivina & Parida, 2019):
The pedestrian attributes level of service indicator has been calculated from the model results on
the basis of weights estimated for latent variables. The values assigned to each latent variable
were obtained by using the estimated weights for each observed indicator and the corresponding
average satisfaction rate expressed by pedestrians, as explained by equations 1 to 5.

42
 IRC:103-2022
Accordingly, Walk Score is calculated as per the following steps:
1. Walk score = 0.50 walk (safety) + 0.60 walk (security) + 0.39 walk (movement) + 0.52
walk (comfort)
2. Walk (safety) = 0.841 x1 + 0.842 x2
3. Walk (security) = 0.793 x3 + 0.531 x4 + 0.481 x5
4. Walk (movement) = 0.699 x6 + 0.635 x7 + 0.528 x8 + 0.760 x9 + 0.514 x10 + 0.577 x11
5. Walk (comfort) = 0.850 x12 + 0.460 x13 + 0.651 x14

where, x1 = traffic volume, x2 = traffic speed, x3 = police patrolling, x4 = street

lighting, x5 = CCTV, x6 = width, x7= continuity, x8 = encroachments, x9 = surface, x10 =
amenities, x11 = shade, x12 = cleanliness, x13 = facilities for persons with, disability x14 = obstructions.
6. Walk Score max = Maximum possible Walk Score
(if average satisfaction ratings for all the factors scoring the maximum scores)

Converting in the scale of walkability types from A to F (1 To 6)

7. Walk Score index = (Walk Score / Walk Score max) * 6

Walkability Type Index Values

A >4.5

B <4.5-4.2

C <4.2-3.8

D <3.8-3.5

E <3.5-3.1

F <3.1

An illustration to calculate Walk Score is given in Annexure 5

43
IRC:103-2022
Annexure 1
(Refer Clause 6.7.1)

PEDESTRIAN WALKING SPEEDS

User group Speed

(meters/second)
Adult men (as per Indian Highway Capacity Manual (INDO-HCM), 2017) 1.3

Adult women (as per INDO-HCM, 2017) 1.1

Persons with assistance in form of canes, walkers, crutches (as per NACTO’s 0.3-0.5
Global Street Design Guide)
Person on wheelchair (as per NACTO’s Global Street Design Guide) 1.4

Caregiver with an infant (0-2 years) on stroller/pram (as per MoHUA’s Infant, 0.5-0.6
Toddler, Caregiver friendly neighborhood design guidelines, 2019, adopted by
Smart Cities Mission)
Caregiver with a toddler (2-3 years) holding hands (as per MoHUA’s Infant, Toddler, 0.3-0.5
Caregiver friendly neighborhood design guidelines, 2019, adopted by Smart Cities
Mission)
Caregiver with a toddler (3-5 years) not holding hands (as per MoHUA’s Infant, 0.25-0.3
Toddler, Caregiver friendly neighborhood design guidelines, 2019, adopted by
Smart Cities Mission)

44
 IRC:103-2022
Annexure 2
(Refer Clause 6.7.1)

NOMOGRAPHS FOR PLANNING PEDESTRIAN CROSSING

The nomographs depicting the relationships between pedestrian flow, vehicular flow, vehicle
speed and pedestrian psychological gap size are given below (Jain & Rastogi, 2018). These can
be used to decide a type of crossing facility which shall be provided at a location. The procedure
to be adopted is outlined in the nomograph itself. These are given for a 2-lane undivided
carriageway, 4-lane and 6-lane divided carriageways.

PV2 value ranges*

Crossing facility**
2-lane undivided 4-lane divided 6-lane divided

No facility < 1.00 x 108 < 2.00 x 108 < 2.00 x 108

Zebra crossing 1.00 x 108 – 6.41 x 109 2.00 x 108 – 1.14 x 1010 2.00 x 108 – 2.78 x 1010
Signalized
6.41 x 109 – 2.66 x 1010 1.14 x 1010 – 4.92 x 1010 2.78 x 1010 – 1.17 x 1011
crossing
Grade separated
> 2.66 x 1010 > 4.92 x 1010 > 1.17 x 1011
crossing
*Where ‘P’ is the peak hour pedestrian flow & ‘V’ is the peak hour vehicle flow of both directions for
2 lane undivided roads and of one direction for 4 lane and 6 lane divided roads. Pedestrian flow is
defined as the number of pedestrians passing a given point per unit time expressed as pedestrians
per hour or pedestrian per minute or pedestrians per 15 minutes. Vehicle flow is defined as the total
number of vehicles that pass over a given point of a street in a given interval of time. It is expressed
as PCU per hour.

**It is recommended that the design specifications of these facilities should be as per Section 6.7

Pedestrian Crossing Warrants for 2-Lane Undivided Roads

● Calculate vehicle flow ‘V’ in both directions for 2 lane roads and in one direction for all
other roads.
● Calculate peak hour pedestrian flow ‘P’ for both directions of pedestrian crossing
movements.
● Use V v/s P graph to identify the appropriate pedestrian crossing facility for the
location.
● V=943 represents pedestrian delay of 45 sec beyond which zebra crossing should not
be provided.
● Signal controlled crossing may be upgraded to grade separated crossings before
PV2 = 2.66x1010 if the signal reaches capacity after regulating the cycle time.
● Calculate PGS using either vehicle flow or vehicle speed.
● If PGS > 1.417, pedestrians are at low risk of being in a road accident and no
45
IRC:103-2022
intervention is needed.
● If 1.417 > PGS > 0.565, pedestrians are at medium risk, in this case, provide
appropriate crossing facility using V v/s P graph.
● If PGS < 0.565, pedestrians are at high risk. In this case, the location should be
upgraded to signal controlled or grade separated, irrespective of the pedestrian and
vehicle flows on site.

Pedestrian Crossing Warrants for 4-Lane Divided Roads

● Calculate vehicle flow ‘V’ in both directions for 2 lane roads and in one direction for all
other roads.
● Calculate peak hour pedestrian flow ‘P’ for both directions of pedestrian crossing
movements.
● Use V v/s P graph to identify the appropriate pedestrian crossing facility for the
location.
● V=1252 represents pedestrian delay of 45 sec beyond which zebra crossing should
not be provided.
● Signal controlled crossing may be upgraded to grade separated crossings before
PV2 = 4.92x1010 if the signal reaches capacity after regulating the cycle time.
● Calculate PGS using either vehicle flow or vehicle speed.
● If PGS > 1.749, pedestrians are at low risk of being in a road accident and no
intervention is needed.
● If 1.749 > PGS > 0.776, pedestrians are at medium risk. In this case, provide
appropriate crossing facility using V v/s P graph.
● If PGS < 0.776, pedestrians are at high risk. In this case, the location should be
upgraded to signal controlled or grade separated, irrespective of the pedestrian and
46
 IRC:103-2022
vehicle flows on site.

Pedestrian Crossing Warrants for 6-Lane Divided Roads

● Calculate vehicle flow ‘V’ in both directions for 2 lane roads and in one direction for all
other roads.
● Calculate peak hour pedestrian flow ‘P’ for both directions of pedestrian crossing
movements.
● Use V v/s P graph to identify the appropriate pedestrian crossing facility for the
location.
● V=1866 represents pedestrian delay of 45 sec beyond which zebra crossing should
not be provided.
● Signal controlled crossing may be upgraded to grade separated crossings before
PV2 = 1.17x1011 if the signal reaches capacity after regulating the cycle time.
● Calculate PGS using either vehicle flow or vehicle speed.
● If PGS > 2.054, pedestrians are at low risk of being in a road accident and no
intervention is needed.
● If 2.054 > PGS > 0.945, pedestrians are at medium risk. In this case, provide
appropriate crossing facility using V v/s P graph.
● If PGS < 0.945, pedestrians are at high risk. In this case, the location should be
upgraded to signal controlled or grade separated, irrespective of the pedestrian and
vehicle flows on site.

47
IRC:103-2022

48
 IRC:103-2022
Annexure 3
(Refer Clause 6.7.2)

GUIDELINES FOR SAFE AND ACCESSIBLE GRADE-SEPARATED

CROSSINGS

Foot-over Bridges

Following guidelines should be considered:

● Tread and riser of the staircase should be 0.3 m wide and 0.15 m high respectively.
The riser should not be open.
● The clear walking zone width of the staircase should be minimum 2 m.
● There should be no more than 12 risers in one flight run.
● Handrails should be circular in section with a diameter of 38-45 mm. It should have a
firm grip. It should be positioned at two levels – 0.76 m and 0.9 m above the pitch line
of a flight of stairs.
● Along with escalators, elevator should be provided for wheelchair access. Minimum
size of elevator should be 1.4 x 1.4 m to accommodate person on wheelchair.
● A ramp along the staircase should be provided for cycle access.
● Tactile pavers should be provided 0.3 m at the beginning and at the end of the stairs.
● All steps should be fitted with a permanent colour and tone contrasting at the step
edge for the visually impaired persons. It should extend the full width of the step,
reaching a minimum depth of 50 mm on both tread and riser.
● The facility should be well-covered including the stairs.
● It should be well lit with illumination levels between 100-150 lux.
● The foot-over bridge should not be covered entirely with advertisement panels to
ensure visual connectivity.

Subways
It is recommended to avoid subways keeping in mind the issues of personal security especially
for women, children and elderly. However, if provided, following guidelines may be followed:
● The subway clear width should be 4.8 m and vertical clear height of 2.75 m should be
provided. 50 lux of lighting is required.
● Small shops should be encouraged to increase passive safety.
● Subway with over 40 m length should be provided with mechanical ventilation. Natural
lighting and ventilation through skylights may be provided.

49
IRC:103-2022
Annexure 4
(Refer Clause 13)

MATERIAL DETAILS
PCC Stamped Concrete

Pros
● Variety of stencils available
● Monolithic surface; does not start
dismantling like pavers
● Uniform finish
● Easy to clean and maintain

Cons
● Stamping too deep may disrupt wheelchair
movement Fig. 70 PCC Stamped Concrete at
D.P Road, Pune
● Expansion joints should be provided to
prevent cracking
● Has to be demolished in case of future repairs of underground utilities
● Need additional care during curing to avoid paw-prints

Application
It can be applied on footpaths, plazas; intricate stencils not recommended for cycle track. Colour
pigment can be added to the concrete to differentiate between functions.

PCC Broomed Finish

Pros
● Relatively quick to install
● Grooves provide sufficient grip
● Cheaper than other PCC finishes
● Monolithic surface; does not start
dismantling like pavers
● Uniform finish

Cons
Fig. 71 PCC Broomed Finish at J.M
● Finish has to be even to avoid poor cycling
Road, Pune
experience
● Has to be demolished in case of future
repairs of underground utilities
● Need additional care during curing to avoid paw-prints
50
 IRC:103-2022
Application
It can be applied on footpaths, cycle tracks, parking bays, and carriageways. Colour pigment can
be added to the concrete to differentiate between functions. They are preferred over all other
surface finishes.

Rubberised Floor Finish for Play Area on Footpath

Pros
● Rubber surface helps in impact absorption
● Reduces the risk of permanent injury by
cushioning the fall
● Highly durable, less prone to weathering
● Offers permeability

Cons
● Comparatively expensive Fig. 72 Rubberised Flooring at J.M
● Prone to staining Road, Pune

Application
It is suitable for play areas for children.

Stone Blocks

Pros
● Highly durable, less prone to weathering;
0.08 m thick stone blocks can be used for
bearing vehicular load as well
● Can be laid in variety of design patterns
● Easy to dismantle for future repairs

Cons
● Expensive; heavy to transport
● Results in uneven surface and sinking if
sub-base is not prepared with care
Fig. 73 Stone Block Paving in Calicut
● Prone to dismantling if kerbs are not installed
properly

Application
It is suitable on carriageways for slowing traffic, landscaped zones, shared streets, at entries for
gates and ramps; not suitable for footpath due to its highly undulated surface.

51
IRC:103-2022
Stone Slabs/Tiles

Pros
● Thicker slabs are durable; less prone to
weathering
● Can also be used as cladding for seating
to compliment the pavement finish

Cons
● Expensive and heavy
Fig. 74 Stone Slab Tiles on Harrington
● Thinner slabs prone to breakage if Road Footpath, Chennai
mishandled or dropped
● Labour-intensive to install
● Slippery during rains if polished
● Results in uneven surface and sinking if sub-base is not prepared with care

Application

It is generally applied in selected projects; not recommended on cycle tracks and heavy load-
bearing areas. The stone is sand blasted or leather finished stone for footpath surface.

Concrete Blocks

Pros
● Variety of sizes, colours, and patterns
available
● Cost-effective
● Easier to install than stone slabs
● Anti-skid due to rough surface

Cons
● Results in uneven surface and sinking if
the base is not prepared with care Fig. 75 Concrete Blocks used in J.M
Road Footpath, Pune
● Un-chamfered edges may lead to chipping
of blocks
● May become pigmented and slippery due to growth of moss on constant exposure to
water

Application

It is applied on footpaths, parking bays, and carriageways to control speed; not recommended
on cycle tracks. Porous concrete blocks are also available which help in water percolation which

52
 IRC:103-2022
are recommended in parking bays. It requires regular cleaning to avoid blockage due to dust
and oil.

Cement Tiles

Pros
● Cost-effective
● Lighter than stone tiles, stone/concrete
pavers
● Available in different textures, colours,
designs, patterns, and shapes

Cons
● Prone to breakage if mishandled or
dropped Fig. 76 Cement Tiles on a Footpath
in Chennai
● More labour-intensive to install than PCC
finish
● Slippery during rains if without anti-skid studs
● Results in uneven surface and sinking if the base is not prepared with care
● Prone to dismantling

Application
On footpaths, especially tactile flooring; not recommended on parking bays and cycle tracks.

Interlocking Tiles/Paver Blocks

Pros
● Variety of sizes, colours, and patterns
available
● Cost-effective
● Easy to install and replace
● Anti-skid due to rough surface

Cons
● Results in uneven surface and sinking if
the base is not prepared with care Fig. 77 Interlocking Tiles used in
● More labour-intensive to install than PCC Footpath in Chennai
finish
● Prone to dismantling
● May become pigmented and slippery due to growth of moss on constant exposure to
water

53
IRC:103-2022
Application

It is applied on footpaths and parking bays; not recommended on cycle tracks. They are not
recommended on footpaths as they often come out if not implemented properly, and makes it
difficult to walk.

RCC Bollards

Pros
● Cost-effective
● Can be cast in different shapes as per
design

Cons
● Tends to chip off with time two white color, Fig. 78 R.C.C Bollards with
Reflector Strips
Retro reflector strips with width 100 mm of Type IV
grade, flexible reboundable sheeting that meets the
required parameter as per ASTM D 4956 Clause S2
should be provided on bollards. M 40 grade concrete
mix is recommended.

Galvanised Iron Bollards

Pros
● Can be fabricated in different shapes as
per design

Cons
● More expensive than RCC bollards
Fig. 79 GI Bollards used at
J.M Road, Pune
Similar application of flexible reboundable reflective
sheeting as in RCC bollards is recommended.

Stainless Steel Bollards

Pros
● Lighter and easier to handle

Cons
● Limited in shape - generally available only
as pipes.

Similar application of flexible reboundable reflective

sheeting as in RCC bollards is recommended. Fig. 80 Stainless Steel Bollards

54
 IRC:103-2022
Stone Seating

Pros
● Highly durable, less prone to weathering
● Does not chip away easily

Cons
● Expensive
● Labour-intensive to install

Precast Concrete Seating

Pros Fig. 81 Stone Seating at D.P Road, Pune

● Cost-effective
● Can be cast in different shapes as per
design
● Pigmented concrete mixture results in
homogenity, as opposed to painted seats

Cons
● Tends to chip off with time
● If painted, colour chips off with time

Metal Bench
Fig. 82 Precast Concrete Seating at
Pros J.M Road, Pune
● Can be fabricated with varying degrees of
ornamentation- highly suited for traditional
design themes
● Durable
● Less prone to weathering

Cons
● Becomes easily hot or cold depending
on outside temperature, making it
uncomfortable to use
● Hard and not comfortable to use for long -
preferred to avoid squatters
Fig. 83 Metal Bench
● Prone to vandalism

55
IRC:103-2022
Fibre Reinforced Plastic

Pros
● Can be cast in different shapes as per
design
● Pigment added to FRP mixture results in
homogenity, as opposed to painted seats
● Can be made translucent, providing for
embedded lighting options
● Durable, being plastic in nature

Cons
Fig. 84 Fibre Reinforced
● Expensive Plastic Bench
● Relatively difficult to source, owing to
fewer FRP vendors dealing with seating.

56
 IRC:103-2022
Annexure 5
(Refer Clause 15)

TO EVALUATE QUALITATIVE LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR PEDESTRIAN

INFRASTRUCTURE (WALK SCORE)

Problem Statement: Footpath width of 2 m in a commercial area is to be redesigned and

improved based on pedestrian needs and satisfaction on various qualitative footpath
characteristics. Pedestrian movements are restricted by the on-street parking that also invades
into the footpath. The street configuration is such that it does not allow good vigilance by police
and other pedestrians, also, absence of street lights at many areas making the area highly prone
to threats for pedestrians. At some places, footpaths are neither segregated nor raised from the
road level. Estimate the walk score of the footpath.
Step 1: A field assessment is done by transport planner. Satisfaction ratings (1 = Strongly
Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree) for each of the qualitative footpath characteristics are collected
using questionnaire surveys from pedestrians. Average pedestrian satisfaction ratings for
attributes from the questionnaire are provided in table below.

Factor Notation Factors Average Satisfaction Ratings

x1 Traffic volume 3
x2 Traffic speed 4
x3 Police patrolling 3
x4 Street lighting 3
x5 CCTV cameras 2
x6 Width 3
x7 Continuity 3
x8 Encroachments 3
x9 Surface 3
x10 Amenities 3
x11 Shade 3
x12 Cleanliness 3
x13 Facilities for disabled persons 3
x14 Obstructions 3

Step 2: Calculate constructs identified from the study such as safety, security, comfort and
movement by substituting corresponding values of footpath factors in the following equations:

Obtained values for constructs are provided in the following table:

Safety Security Movement Comfort
5.891 4.934 11.139 5.883

57
IRC:103-2022
Step 3: Substituting the above values of constructs for PLOS in calculation using the following
equation.

Maximum score of PLOS (if average satisfaction ratings of all factors = 5)

Step 4: Converting in the scale of PLOS index range from A to F (1 to 6)

The walk score came out to be 3.63, which is at LOS D from the table as shown below.
Level of Service Index Values
LOS A >4.5
LOS B <4.5-4.2
LOS C <4.2-3.8
LOS D <3.8-3.5
LOS E <3.5-3.1
LOS F <3.1

Problem Statement: Footpath stretch of width 2.5 m with good pedestrian infrastructure
except for some part of the stretch where pedestrian movement is affected by encroachment.
Pedestrians’ security is highly ensured by police & presence of CCTV cameras. Street lighting
and clear line of sight with low concealment that reduces the risks of criminal activities. Vehicles
ply with a high-speed threating pedestrian as there is no guard rails or buffer between footpath
and road stretch. Also, pedestrian amenities such as toilets, drinking water facilities, etc. and
facilities for persons with physical disability such as ramps, tactile tiles, etc. are not provided.
The possible improvement measures need to be suggested by analyzing walkability score of the
footpath.

Answer

Step 1: A field assessment is done by transport planner. Satisfaction ratings (1 = Strongly Disagree
to 5 = Strongly Agree) for each of the qualitative sidewalk characteristics are collected using
questionnaire surveys from pedestrians. Average pedestrian satisfaction ratings for attributes
from the questionnaire are provided in table below.

58
 IRC:103-2022

Factor Notation Factors Average Satisfaction Ratings

x1 Traffic volume 3
x2 Traffic speed 2
x3 Police patrolling 4
x4 Street lighting 4
x5 CCTV cameras 4
x6 Width 5
x7 Continuity 4
x8 Encroachments 3
x9 Surface 4
x10 Amenities 3
x11 Shade 3
x12 Cleanliness 4
x13 Facilities for disabled persons 2
x14 Obstructions 3
Step 2: Calculate score for each construct identified from the study such as safety, security,
comfort and movement by substituting corresponding values of footpath factors in the following
equations:

Obtained values for constructs are provided in the following table:

Safety Security Mobility & Infrastructure Comfort & Convenience

4.207 7.22 13.932 6.273

Step 3: Substituting the above values of constructs for PLOS is calculation using the following
equation.

Maximum score of PLOS (if average satisfaction ratings of all factors = 5)

Step 4: Converting in the scale of Walk Score index range from A to F (1 to 6)

59
IRC:103-2022
The walk score came out to be 4.13, which is LOS C from the table as shown below:
Level of Service Index Values
LOS A >4.5
LOS B <4.5-4.2
LOS C <4.2-3.8
LOS D <3.8-3.5
LOS E <3.5-3.1
LOS F <3.1

Improvement 1: Reducing traffic speed limits by strict enforcement and adopting traffic calming
measures would improve pedestrians’ perception on safety factor. Speed humps and rumble
strips should be provided on road stretch. Road markings, signage and lighting are mandatory
within areas of.

Improvement 2: Pedestrian amenities in the form of toilets, drinking water facilities, benches,
etc. need to be provided along the footpath. These improvement measures would improve
pedestrians’ perception score on comfort construct which would ultimately improve the walk
score.

60
 IRC:103-2022
Annexure 6
(Refer Clause 11)

SIGNAGES AND MARKINGS

All the sign boards (except indoor exit signs) shall be retro reflective with type XI retro reflective
sheeting as per IRC:67 and ASTM D 4956-19 standards which performs better in both short and
medium distance. To differentiate vulnerable areas like school zones and pedestrian crossing
which need utmost attention even during daytime special style of signs of given design with
fluorescent yellow green type XI retro reflective materials to be used. Typical design of signs is
shown below.

Fig. 85 School Ahead Fig. 86 No Free Left Fig. 87 Pedestrian Crossing

Signage Signage Ahead

Fig. 88 Pick-up and Drop Point Fig. 89 Tow Away Zone Fig. 90 Informal Public
Signage in School Zone Signage Transport Stop Signage

IRC:SP:55 should be followed for all the signages during construction.

Pavement Marking

All the pavement marking shall be as per IRC:35 standards. For symbols and legends/arrows
preformed adhesive tapes shall be used. Transverse bar marking to be provided as per IRC:99
with the inclusion of road studs to have a better visibility and rumbling effect.

61
IRC:103-2022
Delineators

All the delineators, median markers and object markers shall be as per IRC:79.

LED Type Smart VMS (Variable Message Signboard) for realtime passenger information
system

Real time information intelligent variable message sign should be placed atleast at a height of
3.5 m with a size of minimum 0.95 m x 1.9 m. These Intelligent VMS boards shall be with full
color (RGB) DIP LED boards with 10 mm pitch (subject to availability of approval document from
acceptable national/international approving authorities). These Intelligent VMS boards shall
have the facility to switch to low power mode screens in case of mains power failure. Maximum
power consumption per cabinets should not exceed 400W/sq meter. These screens should be
monitored remotely for pixel level failure detection via a dashboard at the control room and
generate real time information of traffic data i.e. journey time, congestion data live weather
and air quality information automatically using a thin client windows embedded system. The
solution should have capability to be integrated with 3rd party applications to display real time
bus arrival schedules and estimated journey time for nearest buses. The solution should also
provide mobile application for disaster management and emergency messages. This solution
should support 128-bit encryption along with dongle-based access control to ensure secure
access and communications with server.

62
 IRC:103-2022
REFERENCES
1. Bivina, G., & Parida, M. (2019), Modelling perceived Pedestrian Level of Service of
Sidewalks: A Structural Equation Approach, Transport, 34 (3), 339-350.

2. Complete Street Implementation Workbook (2019), New Delhi: Smart Cities Mission,
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs.

3. Complete Streets Design Workbook (2019), New Delhi: Smart Cities Mission, Ministry
of Housing and Urban Affairs.

4. Complete Streets Evaluation Metric (2019), New Delhi: Smart Cities Mission, Ministry of
Housing and Urban Affairs.

5. Corporation, P. M. (2016), Urban Street Design Guidelines, Pune.

6. Council, A. D. (n.d.), Abu Dhabi Street Design Manual.

7. Infant, Toddler, Caregiver-friendly Neighbourhood Design Guidelines (2019), New Delhi:

Smart City, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs.

8. Initiative, G. D., NACTO, & Island Press. (n.d.), Global Street Design Guide.

9. Indian Highway Capicity Manual (INDO-HCM), 2017 : CSIR-Central Road Research

Institute (CRRI), New Delhi.

10. IRC:67-2012 “Code of Practice for Road Signs” (Third Revision), New Delhi: Indian
Roads Congress.

11. IRC:11-2015 “Recommended Practice for the Design and Layout of Cycle Tracks” (First
Revision), New Delhi: Indian Roads Congress.

12. IRC:35-2015 “Code of Practice for Road Markings” (Second Revision). New Delhi:
Indian Roads Congress.

13. IRC:86-2018 “Geometric Design Standards for Urban Roads and Streets” (First
Revision), New Delhi: Indian Roads Congress.

14. IRC:99-2018 “Guidelines for Traffic Calming Measures in Urban and Rural Areas” (First
Revision), New Delhi: Indian Roads Congress.

15. IRC:SP:117-2018 “Manual on Universal Accessibility for Urban Roads and Streets”, New
Delhi: Indian Roads Congress.

16. IRC:SP:118-2018 “Manual for Planning and Development of Urban Roads and Streets”,
New Delhi: Indian Roads Congress.

17. IRC:SP:119-2018 “Manual of Planting and Landscaping of Urban Roads”, New Delhi:
Indian Roads Congress.

63
IRC:103-2022
18. ITDP & EPC, (2011), Better Streets, Better Cities, Ahmedabad.

19. ITDP, Janki Devi Memorial College, & Safetipin, (2018), Safety Audits and Walking
Assessment around Bus Terminals in Delhi.

20. Jain, U., & Rastogi, R. (2018), Development of Guidelines for Pedestrian Crossing
Facilities. Journal of Indian Roads Congress, 79 (4)(Paper No. 688), 39-48.

21. Shah, S., Viswanath, K., Vyas, S., & Gadepalli, S. (2017), Women and Transport in
Indian Cities, New Delhi: ITDP and Safetipin.

22. UTTIPEC, (2010), Street Design Guidelines, New Delhi: Delhi Development Authority.

64