GENERAL NOTE

The Transport Planning and Design Manual (the TPDM) consists of

eleven volumes and is published primarily as a working document for
Transport Department staff. It also provides information and guidance
to others involved in the planning and design of transport
infrastructures in Hong Kong.

It is intended that the information contained herein will be periodically

revised to take account of the most up-to-date knowledge and
experience. The inevitable time-lag however, means that certain
sections may at a particular time be unavoidably not up-to-date. For
this and other reasons, the standards contained in this manual should
not be followed rigidly but rather treated as a framework within which
professional judgment should be exercised to reach an optimum
solution.

Generally speaking, the standards contained in the TPDM generally

apply to new traffic and transport facilities and should not be
considered as exhaustive. Situation may arise for which
considerations and requirements are not fully covered by the TPDM.
Practitioners are particularly required to exercise professional
judgement when dealing with existing facilities that are subject to site
constraints, and to endeavour to take into account the views from
stakeholders. Practitioners are also advised to make reference to other
publications relevant to their designs such as the latest legislations,
code of practices, guidelines, datasets, etc. before applying the TPDM.
 December 2023 Edition

Transport Planning & Design Manual

VOLUME 2 - Highway Design Characteristics

 Chapter 1 - Introduction
 1.1 Purpose
 1.2 Contents of Volume 2
 Chapter 2 - Vehicle Dimensions and Design Flows
 2.1 References
 2.2 Vehicle Dimensions
 2.3 Passenger Car Units
 2.4 Design Flow Characteristics
 Chapter 3 - Road Characteristics
 3.1 References
 3.2 Road Types
 3.3 Road Alignment
 3.4 The Road in Cross Section
 3.5 Highway Clearances
 3.6 Run-ins and Footway Crossings
 3.7 Pedestrian Crossing Facilities
 3.8 Cycle Tracks
 3.9 Railings, Barrier Fences and Crash Cushions
 3.10 Road Tunnels
 3.11 Single Track Access Roads
 Annex
 Chapter 4 - Junctions
 4.1 References
 4.2 Junction Design - General
 4.3 Priority Junctions
 4.4 Traffic Signals
 4.5 Roundabouts
 4.6 Grade Separated Junctions
 Appendix
 Chapter 5 - Other Facilities
 5.1 References
 5.2 Introduction
 5.3 Petrol Filling Stations in relation to Highway Design
 5.4 Additional Speed Control Facilities
 5.5 Public Transport On-street Stopping Places
 5.6 Landscaping
 5.7 Lighting and Drainage
 Chapter 6 - Expressways
 6.1 References
 6.2 Introduction
 6.3 Expressway Design Standards
 6.4 Permanent Signs and Road Markings
 6.5 Lane and Carriageway Closures
 6.6 Maintenance Operations Centres (MOC)
 6.7 Service Areas
 6.8 Operation and Management
 December 2023 Edition

TPDM Volume 2 Chapter 1 – Introduction

1.1 Purpose

1.1.1 Volume 2

1.1.1.1 The purpose of Volume 2 of the Transport Planning and Design Manual is to provide Highway Design
Characteristic Criteria appropriate for use in the Territory.

1.1.1.2 Whilst every effort has been made to include most subjects relevant to the design of highways and is
based on the most recent information available, research on these subjects is a continuing process and it
will be necessary to expand and update information from time to time.

1.1.1.3 The criteria contained in this Volume are intended to be used as guide lines and not, unless otherwise
stated, as standards to be rigidly adhered to. At all times a flexible approach should be adopted
producing economic design commensurate with safety and practical considerations.

1.1.2 Highway Design Characteristics

1.1.2.1 Highway Design Characteristics as used in the context of this volume are intended to deal generally
with layout design, rather than construction design. The latter should be dealt with in technical
guidelines prepared by the Highways Department or other works departments.

1.1.2.2 There is obviously an interrelationship between design parameters for the layout of any scheme and the
construction of it. This Volume had been prepared in consultation with the Highways Department and
has taken into account those characteristics of construction which have been found to influence layout
design.

1.1.2.3 The criteria given in the various Chapters of this Volume will generally produce acceptable designs,
though in the case of difficult site constraint, some deviations from the criteria may be necessary.
When major deviations from the recommended criteria are contemplated, the designer should carefully
examine the consequent impact on road safety. These major deviations should also be promptly
brought to the attention of the appropriate authorities by the designer, with justifications and supporting
mitigation measures to counter the anticipated pitfalls from the recommended criteria. The designer
must obtain approval from the appropriate authorities for any major deviation. If there is any doubt as
to what constitutes a major deviation, advice from the appropriate authorities should be sought.

1.1.2.4 The qualifying term "desirable maximum", "desirable minimum", "absolute maximum" or "absolute
minimum" is frequently used in this Volume. When adopting the desirable maximum/minimum criteria
recommended in this Volume, one can generally achieve a desirable level of performance in terms of
traffic safety. However, there are circumstances that warrant the adoption of a less forgiving design due
to severe site constraints or to avoid disproportionally high construction and maintenance cost. In such
circumstances, the designer may adopt some intermediate design criteria between the desirable and the
absolute maximum/minimum. In more complicated cases that exceptional difficulty is encountered
such that the absolute thresholds recommended in this Volume become not achievable, such deviations
shall be regarded as major deviations and the designer is responsible for justifying such design is safe
with substantiations and supporting mitigation measures. Approval for major deviations must be
obtained from the appropriate authorities.
 December 2023 Edition

1.2 Contents of Volume 2

1.2.1 General

1.2.1.1 Volume 2 is composed of six Chapters, i.e. Introduction, Vehicle Dimensions and Design Flows, Road
Characteristics, Junctions, Ancillary Aspects Affecting & Highways Design, including adjacent public
transport facilities and filling stations and Expressways.

1.2.2 Chapter 2 - Vehicle Dimensions and Design Flows

1.2.2.1 This is divided into four sections as follows :

1) References

2) Vehicle Dimensions, including permissible gross vehicle weights, and information on the
turning circles of vehicles

3) Passenger Car Units

4) Design Flow Characteristics

1.2.3 Chapter 3 - Road Characteristics

1.2.3.1 This is divided into ten sections as follows :

1) References

2) Road Types

3) Road Alignment

4) The Road in Cross Section

5) Highway Clearances

6) Run-ins and Footway Crossings

7) Pedestrian Crossing Facilities

8) Cycle Tracks

9) Railings and Barrier Fences

10) Road Tunnels

11) Single Track Access Road

 December 2023 Edition

1.2.4 Chapter 4 – Junctions

1.2.4.1 Chapter 4 is divided into six section which are as follows :

1) References

2) Junction Design (General)

3) Priority Junctions

4) Signal Control Junctions (General)

[The design of signal installations is however contained in Volume 4]

5) Roundabouts

6) Grade separated Junctions

1.2.5 Chapter 5 - Other Facilities

1.2.5.1 Chapter 5 deals with the aspects of Highway Design affected by the provision of adjacent facilities
for public transport and petrol filling stations.

1.2.5.2 General policy on public transport and detailed design of bus termini and transport interchanges will
however be found by reference to Volume 9.

1.2.5.3 Details as to Highway layouts in respect of public transport priority schemes will be found in Volume 6
- Traffic and Environmental Management.

1.2.6 Chapter 6 - Expressways

1.2.6.1 This is divided into ten sections as follows :

1) References

2) Introduction

3) Expressway Design Standards

4) Permanent Signs and Road Markings

5) Lane and Carriageway Closures

6) Signing and Marking of Works Vehicles

7) Road Maintenance Operations

8) Maintenance Operations Centres (MOC)

9) Services Areas

10) Operation and Management

 December 2023 Edition

TPDM Volume 2 Chapter 2 – Vehicle Dimensions and Design Flows

2.1 References

1. Road Traffic (Construction and Maintenance of Vehicles) Regulations 1984

2. T.R.R.L. Report LR 608 "Road Width Requirements of Commercial Vehicles"

3. Technical Memorandum H9/76 D.O.E. "Design Flows for Urban Roads"

4. Technical Memorandum H6/74 D.O.E. "Design Flows for Motorway and Rural All-purpose Roads"

5. T.T.S.D. Data Record 92 - Public Light Buses. Effect on Traffic Flow (No. 18)

6. The Future of the H.K. Tramway System, C.E.O.

7. SCHNEIDER UNTERSUCHUNG UBER DIE BORDSTEINFUHRUNG BEI DER EMMUNDUNG

STADTISCHER STRASSEN STRASSE UND AUTOBAHN NO. 6 VO 14 JUNE 1963

8. Predication of Vehicle Swept Paths by G.J. HILL. The Highway Engineer December 1978

9. Departmental Standard TD 9/93. Road Layout and Geometry: Highway Link Design. U.K. Department
of Transport

10. The Government of the HKSAR Transport Department: Third Comprehensive Transport Study
 December 2023 Edition

2.2 Vehicle Dimensions

2.2.1 Statutory Dimensions

2.2.1.1 The Road Traffic (Construction and Maintenance of Vehicles) Regulations, effective from August 1984,
contain maximum dimensions for vehicles which are shown in Table 2.2.1.1.

2.2.1.2 Table 2.2.1.2 shows the maximum weight of vehicles for the new legislation and Tables 2.2.1.4 - 2.2.1.7
show how these are qualified.

2.2.1.3 The maximum permissible weights transmitted to the road surface, also contained in the Regulations, are
as follows :

(i) For one wheel, where no other wheel is in the same line transversely, not greater than 4.5
tonnes

(ii) For two wheels in the same line transversely, not greater than 9 tonnes

(iii) For two wheels in the same line transversely, if each wheel is fitted with 2 pneumatic tyres not
greater than 10 tonnes.

(iv) For more than 2 wheels in the same line transversely, not greater than 11 tonnes.

2.2.1.4 Maximum swept turning circles for vehicles given in the Road Traffic (Construction and Maintenance)
Regulations are shown in Table 2.2.1.8.

2.2.1.5 Under the legislation the Commissioner also has powers to license vehicles in excess of the dimensions or
weights shown in the tables.

Table 2.2.1.1
Overall Dimensions of Vehicles
Vehicle Overall Length(m) Overall Width(m) Overall Height(m)
Private Car 6.3 2.3 2
Taxi 6.3 2.3 2
Invalid Carriage 6.3 2.3 2
Light Bus 7.5 2.3 3
Bus
(i)Single Deck 12 2.5 3.5
(ii)Double Deck 12 2.5 4.6
Articulated 15 2.5 3.5
Light Goods Vehicle 10 2.5 3.5
Medium Goods Vehicle 11 2.5 4.6
Heavy Goods Vehicle
(i)Rigid 11 2.5 4.6
(ii)Articulated 16 2.5 4.6
Special Purpose
12 2.5 4.6
Vehicle
Tricycle - 1.1 -
Trailer 13.5 2.5 4.6
Pedestrian-controlled
4.3 1.6 -
Vehicle
 December 2023 Edition

Table 2.2.1.2
Maximum Weights of Vehicles
Maximum Gross Vehicle
Class of Vehicle
Weights(tonnes)
Private Car 3
Taxi 3
Invalid Carriage 3
Light Bus 8.5
Bus 24
Light Goods Vehicle 5.5
Medium Goods Vehicle 24
Heavy Goods Vehicle 38
Motor Cycle 0.5
Motor Tricycle 0.6
Trailer 38

Table 2.2.1.3
Maximum Weights for Rigid Vehicles
Maximum Gross Vehicle
Class of Rigid Vehicle Wheel Span Measurement(m) Weights
(tonnes)
Less than 2.65 14
2 axled vehicle
At least 2.65 16

Less than 3 16
At least 3 18
3 axled vehicle At least 3.2 20
At least 3.9 22
At least 4.9 24

Less than 3.7 18

At least 3.7 20
At least 4.6 22
4 axled vehicle At least 4.7 24
At least 5.6 26
At least 5.9 28
At least 6.3 30
 December 2023 Edition

Table 2.2.1.4
Maximum Weights for Articulated Vehicles
Maximum Gross Vehicle
Class of Motor Vehicle Wheel Span Measurement(m)
Weight(tonnes)
Less than 2.4 14
2 axled motor vehicle
At least 2.4 16

Less than 3 18
At least 3 20
3 axled motor vehicle
At least 3.8 22
At least 4.3 24

Maximum Gross Axle Weight

Distance between 2 closely
Class of Semi-trailer for 2 closely spaced
spaced axles(m)
axles(tonnes)
Less than 1.02 11
At least 1.02 16
At least 1.05 17
2 axled semi-trailer
At least 1.2 18
At least 1.5 19
At least 1.85 20

Maximum Gross Axle Weight

Distance between outer axles of
for 3 closely spaced
3 closely spaced axles(m)
axles(tonnes)
Less than 1.4 10.5
At least 1.4 12
At least 1.5 18
3 axled semi-trailer
At least 2 19.5
At least 2.55 21
At least 2.7 22.5

"2 closed spaced axles" means axles that are spaced at a distance apart of not more than 2.5 metres and
not less than 1 metre.

"3 closed spaced axles" means the outermost axles that are spaced at a distance apart of 3.25 metres or
less.
 December 2023 Edition

Table 2.2.1.5
Maximum Combined Weights for Articulated Vehicles
Type of Combination of Maximum Gross Combined
Inner Axle Spacing(m)
Articulated Vehicle Weight(tonnes)

Less than 2.1 20

2 axled motor vehicle with 1
At least 2.1 22
axled trailer
At least 3.1 24

Less than 2.9 24

At least 2.9 26
2 axled motor vehicle with 2
At least 3.1 29
axled trailer
At least 3.6 32
At least 4 34

2 axled motor vehicle with 3 or

At least 4.2 38
more axled trailer

Less than 2 22
At least 2 24
3 or more axled motor vehicle At least 2.7 26
with 1 axled trailer At least 3 28
At least 4 30
At least 4.4 32

Less than 2 24
At least 2 26
3 or more axled motor vehicle
At least 2.3 30
with 2 or more axled trailer
At least 3.2 34
At least 4 38

At least 4.7 40
3 or more axled motor vehicle
At least 5.2 42
with 2 or more axled trailer
At least 5.7 44

"inner axle spacing" means the distance between the rearmost axle of a motor vehicle and the foremost
axle of the trailer.

Table 2.2.1.6
Maximum Weights for 2 Closely Spaced Axles
Distance between 2 closely Maximum Axle Weight for
spaced axles(m) any one axle(tonnes)
Less than 1.02 5.5
At least 1.02 8
At least 1.05 8.5
At least 1.20 9
At least 1.50 9.5
At least 1.85 10

"2 closely spaced axles" means axles that are spaced at a distance apart of not more than 2.5 m and not
less than 1.02 m.
 December 2023 Edition

Table 2.2.1.7
Maximum Weights for 3 Closely Spaced Axles
Column 1 Column 2
Distance between outer axles Maximum Axle Weight
of 3 closely spaced axles(m) for any one axle(tonnes)
Less than 1.4 3.5
At least 1.4 4
At least 1.5 6
At least 2 6.5
At least 2.55 7
At least 2.7 7.5

"3 closely spaced axles" means the outermost axles that are spaced at a distance apart of 3.25 metres or
less.

Table 2.2.1.8
Maximum Swept Turning Diameters
Maximum Swept
Vehicle length
Turning Diameter
not greater than 10m 24.5m
greater than 10m 26m

2.2.2 Typical Dimensions

2.2.2.1 For design purposes typical dimensions for vehicles should be in accordance with Table 2.2.2.1, which are
in part based on maximum vehicle lengths permitted under the Road Traffic (Construction and
Maintenance of Vehicles) Regulations taking into account dimensions for vehicles shown in Tables
2.2.2.2, 2.2.2.3 and 2.2.2.4

Table 2.2.2.1
Design Dimensions
Type of Vehicle Length Length(m) Width(m) Height(m)
Car 4.6 1.7 1.5
Light Goods Vehicle 5.2 2.1 1.6
Medium Goods Vehicle 11 2.5 4
Heavy Goods Vehicle 16 2.5 4.6
Articulated Container
16 2.5 4.6
Vehicles
3.5 Single deck
Bus 12 2.5
4.6 Double deck
Light Bus 7.5 2.3 3

Notes : (i) The above dimensions are not necessarily maximum dimensions.

(ii) Container vehicles up to 18.9m have been licensed.

 December 2023 Edition

2.2.2.2 Typical dimensions of certain different types of vehicles are shown in Tables 2.2.2.2, 2.2.2.3 and 2.2.2.4

Table 2.2.2.2
Vehicle Dimensions - Private Cars
Turning
Unladen Max
Length Width Height L1 L2 L3 W1 W2 Diameter
Vehicle Make Weight G.V.W.
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (tonnes) (tonnes) Swept
(tonnes) (tonnes)
(m)
Mercedes Benz
5.038 1.855 1.450 0.867 2.965 1.206 1.830 2.400 11.7
S55
Mercedes Benz
4.526 1.728 1.427 0.755 2.715 1.056 1.490 2.045 10.7
C320
Mercedes Benz
5.158 1.855 1.447 0.867 3.085 1.206 1.880 2.460 11.7
S600
Mercedes Benz
4.343 1.728 1.406 0.788 2.715 0.840 1.540 2.050 10.7
C200
Jaguar Daimler V8 5.148 1.798 1.375 0.914 2.995 1.239 1.845 2.260 12.4
Jaguar Daimler
4.760 1.829 1.306 0.972 2.588 1.20 1.735 2.010 11.0
XKR
Jaguar S-TYPE 4.876 1.819 1.441 0.854 2.909 1.097 1.733 2.190 12.1
AUDI S8 5.034 1.880 1.438 1.011 2.887 1.136 1.750 2.350 12.3
AUDI A6 4.833 1.850 1.448 1.006 2.758 1.069 1.750 2.290 11.7
Honda Civic 4.435 1.720 1.440 0.805 2.620 1.010 1.110 1.580 10.8
Honda Accord 4.795 1.785 1.455 0.975 2.715 1.105 1.490 1.905 11.0
Honda S2000 4.135 1.750 1.285 0.805 2.405 0.930 1.240 1.350 10.8
Volvo S80 4.822 1.832 1.452 0.964 2.791 1.067 1.506 1.531 11.2
Volvo V40 4.516 1.716 1.460 0.912 2.562 1.043 1.367 1.780 10.6
Volkswagen Bora 4.374 1.735 1.445 0.874 2.513 0.987 1.261 1.800 10.9
Mitsubishi Lancer 4.455 1.770 1.450 0.895 2.625 0.935 1.400 1.695 9.8
Mitsubishi Lancer
4.370 1.695 1.430 0.850 2.600 0.920 1.140 1.600 9.8
MX5

L1 = Distance between front and front axle

L2 = Distance between axles
L3 = Distance between rear axle and rear
 December 2023 Edition

Table 2.2.2.3
Vehicle Dimensions - Light Goods Vehicles
Turning
Unladen Max
W1 W2 Diameter
Vehicle Make Length(m) Width(m) Height(m) L1(m) L2(m) L3(m) Weight G.V.W.
(tonnes) (tonnes) Swept
(tonnes) (tonnes)
(m)
Mercedes-Benz
6.590 1.988 2.610 0.939 4.025 1.625 1.750 3.200 2.360 4.600 14.3
416CDI
Mercedes-Benz
6.535 1.933 2.570 0.882 4.025 1.480 1.600 2.240 2.050 3.500 14.3
312D
Nissan Caravan 4.690 1.690 1.950 0.980 2.645 1.040 1.350 1.680 1.550 2.965 10.8
Nissan E24 4.790 1.690 1.990 1.100 2.645 1.045 1.350 1.680 1.605 2.750 10.8
Mitsubishi L300 4.805 1.690 1.960 1.280 2.435 1.090 1.200 1.450 1.370 2.505 9.8
Volswagon LT46 6.535 1.994 2.610 0.855 4.025 1.625 1.750 3.200 2.302 4.600 14.3
Volswagon LT35 5.585 1.993 2.570 0.885 3.550 1.150 1.600 2.240 1.895 3.500 12.8

Where L1 = Distance between front and front axle

L2 = Distance between axles
L3 = Distance between rear axle and rear
W1 = Maximum axle load, front axle
W2 = Maximum axle load, rear axle
 December 2023 Edition

Table 2.2.2.4
Vehicle Dimensions - Light Buses
Turning
Unladen Max
Length Width Height W1 W2 Diameter
Vehicle Make L1(m) L2(m) L3(m) Weight G.V.W.
(m) (m) (m) (tonnes) (tonnes) Swept
(tonnes) (tonnes)
(m)
Toyota BB43R-
6.255 2.025 2.665 1.150 3.200 1.920 1.840 2.620 3.290 4.000 12.5
ZCMSW
Mitsubishi
BE639ERM 6.245 2.010 2.630 0.940 3.490 1.820 1.830 2.920 3.500 4.000 12.2
HDA
Mercedes-Benz
5.640 1.933 2.450 0.939 3.550 1.149 1.600 2.240 2.440 3.500 12.8
316 CDI
Volkswagen LT-
6.535 1.933 2.670 0.885 4.025 1.625 1.600 2.240 2.690 3.500 14.3
35
Toyota BB43R -
6.255 2.025 2.600 1.150 3.200 1.908 1.840 2.620 3.270 4.000 13.6
ZEMSW
Toyota BB50R -
6.990 2.025 2.600 1.150 3.935 1.905 2.260 3.080 3.450 4.800 15.8
ZEMQZ
Toyota BZB40R
6.270 2.035 2.600 1.150 3.200 1.920 1.900 2.620 2.440 4.350 13.6
- ZCMSC
Toyota BZB50R
6.990 2.035 2.520 1.150 3.935 1.905 2.260 3.080 3.530 4.800 15.8
- ZCMSC5
Toyota BZB60R
6.325 2.080 2.630 1.150 3.200 1.905 2.240 3.340 3.850 5.100 13.6
- ZCMSC
Toyota XZB70R
6.990 2.080 2.635 1.150 3.935 1.905 2.450 3.500 3.690 5.400 15.8
- ZEMSY
Toyota XZB70R
6.990 2.080 2.703 1.150 3.935 1.905 2.450 3.500 3.750 5.400 15.8
- ZEPSY
Toyota XZB70R
6.990 2.080 2.635 1.150 3.935 1.905 2.450 3.500 3.810 5.290 15.8
- ZEMQY
Toyota BZB70R
6.990 2.080 2.703 1.150 3.935 1.905 2.450 3.500 3.670 5.290 15.8
- ZCMSC5
Mit. FUSO
BE641GR 6.990 2.010 2.630 0.940 3.995 2.055 2.500 4.800 3.630 5.500 12.8
MDA
Mit. FUSO
BE641GRM 6.990 2.010 2.630 0.940 3.995 2.055 2.330 3.360 3.760 5.500 12.8
DAD
Mit. FUSO
BE64DER 6.245 2.010 2.735 0.940 3.490 1.800 2.500 4.800 3.520 5.500 12.8
MDA
Mercedes-Benz
7.369 2.000 2.826 1.004 4.340 2.025 2.100 3.600 3.750 5.500 15.3
516BT EL
Golden Dragon
6.960 2.072 2.797 1.150 3.930 1.880 2.400 4.500 4.250 5.500 15.8
XML6701J
Ford Transit 2.0
5.339 2.032 1.977 1.011 3.300 1.028 1.750 2.015 2.390 3.365 10.9
AT LW

Where L1 = Distance between front and front axle

L2 = Distance between axles
L3 = Distance between rear axle and rear.
W1 = Maximum axle load, front axle
W2 = Maximum axle load, rear axle
 December 2023 Edition

Table 2.2.2.5
Vehicle Dimensions - Medium and Heavy Goods Vehicles
Turning
Max
Length Width Height L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 W1 W2 W3 W4 Diameter
Vehicle Make G.V.W.
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) Swept
(tonnes)
(m)
Mercedes-
7.405 2.490 2.700 1.440 3.600 1.350 0.750 7.100 9.000 9.000 24.000 17.5
Benz 2628K
Mercedes-
8.760 2.500 3.075 1.360 1.696 3.504 1.350 0.630 6.700 6.700 9.000 9.000 30.000 23.0
Benz 3234K
Mercedes-
Benz 9.190 2.490 2.650 1.440 5.400 2.350 6.500 10.00 16.000 20.5
1823LNR
Volvo
10.00 2.490 2.725 1.501 5.800 2.700 7.100 10.00 16.000 18.91
FL6E42R
Volvo FM12
7.460 2.467 2.931 1.365 3.900 1.370 0.825 7.100 9.000 9.000 24.000 15.41
6X4
Volvo FL10
9.289 2.490 2.828 1.419 1.750 3.850 1.370 0.900 7.100 7.100 9.000 9.000 30.000 22.01
8X4
Man 25.284
10.12 2.500 2.915 1.620 5.150 1.350 2.00 7.500 7.500 7.500 24.000 20.01
MNLRC
Man 35.364
9.869 2.500 3.075 1.525 1.500 4.325 1.400 0.950 7.100 7.100 9.000 9.000 30.00 26.01
VFRC
Man
9.700 2.490 2.600 1.225 5.475 3.000 6.000 10.000 16.000 19.01
15.224LRC
Hino
10.74 2.490 2.870 1.410 1.750 3.500 1.350 2.700 6.700 6.700 9.000 30.00 22.5
FY1KUMA
Hino
10.33 2.490 2.845 1.410 5.000 1.350 2.535 6.700 9.000 9.000 24.00 21.2
FS1KTMA
Hino
9.770 2.360 2.605 1.235 5.800 2.600 6.000 10.000 16.00 21.6
GH1JRKA
Nissan CWB
7.800 2.490 2.855 1.400 4.350 1.300 1.280 6.000 9.000 9.000 24.00 15.2
47LMNR
Nissan CGB
8.960 2.490 2.910 1.400 1.850 3.150 1.300 1.140 6.000 6.000 9.000 9.000 30.00 18.2
457SMNR
Nissan
9.530 2.425 2.725 1.280 5.560 2.600 6.000 10.00 16.00 18.8
PK212NHNN

Where L1 = Distance between front and first axle

L2 = Distance between first and second axle
L3 = Distance between second and third axle
L4 = Distance between third and fourth axle or rear
L5 = Distance between fourth axle and rear
W1 = First axle load
W2 = Second axle load
W3 = Third axle load
W4 = Fourth axle load
 December 2023 Edition

Table 2.2.2.6
Vehicle Dimensions - Medium and Tractor Vehicles
Turning
Max
Vehicle Length Height L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 W1 W2 W3 W4 Diameter
Width(m) G.V.W.
Make (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) Swept
(tonnes)
(m)
Man 33.464
7.075 2.490 3.250 1.525 3.175 1.400 0.725 8.000 9.000 9.000 24.000 17.00
DFLRT
Man 19.414
6.150 2.490 2.850 1.525 3.600 1.025 7.100 10.000 16.000 15.00
FLRT
Hino
5.700 2.490 2.825 1.420 3.200 1.080 6.700 10.000 16.000 12.8
SH1KDMA
Hino
6.860 2.490 3.235 1.420 3.300 1.350 0.790 6.700 9.000 9.000 24.000 15.8
SS1KKMA

Where L1 = Distance between front and first axle

L2 = Distance between first and second axle
L3 = Distance between second and third axle
L4 = Distance between third and fourth axle or rear
L5 = Distance between fourth axle and rear
W1 = First axle load
W2 = Second axle load
W3 = Third axle load
W4 = Fourth axle load

2.2.3 Turning Circles

2.2.3.1 Diagrams 2.2.3.1- 2.2.3.8and 2.2.3.11show dimensions of turning circles for various types of vehicles.

2.2.3.2 In TRRL Report LR 608 “Road Width Requirements of Commercial Vehicles”, calculations as to road
widths required for different types of vehicles have been determined.

2.2.3.3 A further means for determining the swept area of a turning vehicle is the "Schneider" method and is
summarised in Diagrams 2.2.3.9and 2.2.3.10. This method determines the turning area of a vehicle by
plotting the progressive position of the vehicle and whilst not precise is probably sufficiently accurate for
assessing road width requirements. It can be used for any radius of turn.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 2.2.3.1 : RECOMMENDED MINIMUM STANDARDS

OF TURNING CIRCLE FOR PRIVATE CARS
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 2.2.3.2 : TURNING CIRCLE

PRIVATE CAR
(LARGE SIZE)
5.49 x 1.88

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN METERS

DIAGRAM 2.2.3.3 : RECOMMENDED MINIMUM STANDARDS OF TURNING CIRCLE

AND TURNTABLE FOR GOODS VEHICLES
MIN. STANDARD TURNING CIRCLE FOR GOODS VEHICLE
 December 2023 Edition

MIN. STANDARD TURNTABLE FOR GOODS VEHICLE

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETERS

DIAGRAM 2.2.3.4 : CHARACTERISTICS OF LARGER FIRE APPLLIANCES

 December 2023 Edition

DATA
DESIGN VEHICLE EXTRA HEAVY PUMP
WHEEL BASE (B) = 5180
TURNING RADIUS (r) = 10500

NOTES: (i) MINIMUM HEADROOM REQUIRED 4.37m

(ii) PROJECTION OF OUTRIGGERS FROM BODY LINE 0.61m

(iii) HEADROOM REQUIRED OR TO ELEVATE A TURNTABLE 10.06m

(iv) ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 2.2.3.5 : CONTAINER TURNING CIRCLES

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETERS

DIAGRAM 2.2.3.6 : 90° & 180° TURNING CONTAINER

180° TURNING
 December 2023 Edition

90° TURNING

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES

DIAGRAM 2.2.3.7 : BUS TURNING CIRCLES

BUS DAIMLER FLEETLINE
 December 2023 Edition

METRO BUS

12m BUS

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METERS

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 2.2.3.8 : TURNING CIRCLES

TORUIST BUS
AUSTIN 950 FJ CHASIS
9.15 x 2.44

TOURIST BUS
35 SEATER BEDFORD
9.09 x 2.39

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METERS

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 2.2.3.9 : PREDICTION OF RIGID VEHICLE SWEPT PATH

- SCHNEIDER METHOD
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 2.2.3.10 : PREDICTION OF ARTICULATED VEHICLE SWEPT PATH

- SCHNEIDER METHOD
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 2.2.3.11 : TURNING CIRCLE

PUBLIC LIGHT BUS
6990 x 2080

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETERS

 December 2023 Edition

2.3 Passenger Car Units

2.3.1 Passenger Car Unit (pcu) Values

2.3.1.1 Passenger Car Unit values are given in Table 2.3.1.1.

Table 2.3.1.1
Passenger Car Units (pcu)

Equivalent Value in pcu's

Traffic Signal
Urban Standard Rural Standard Roundabout
Design
Private Car, Taxi 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Light Goods
1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Vehicle
Motor Cycle Motor
0.75 1.0 0.75 0.40
Scooter
Terrain
Ave Hilly Ave Hilly
Medium Goods
2.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 2.8 1.75
Vehicle
Heavy Goods
2.5 3.0 2.5 3.0 2.8 1.75
Vehicle
Bus 2.5 3.0 2.5 3.0 2.8 2.0
Pedal Cycle 0.35 0.5 0.5 0.2
Tram 3.0 - - 3.5-5.0+
Light Bus 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Special purpose bus 2.0 2.0
Light Van 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1
Tractor unit 2.5 3.0 2.5 3.0

2.3.1.2 The pcu values for hilly terrain are appropriate where the gradient is greater than 4%, or there are long
lengths of gradient approaching 4%.

2.3.1.3 The tram pcu values vary from 3.5 for a clear approach to a junction, to 5.0 where a tram island is sited
near an approach. Where a tramway reserve is provided or where the frequency of tram movements is
so high as preclude the use of its lane by other vehicles, that lane should be excluded in capacity
calculations for mixed traffic.
 December 2023 Edition

2.4 Design Flow Characteristics

2.4.1 Design Flow

2.4.1.1 Design flow is the maximum volume of vehicles using the road without the traffic density becoming
such as to cause unreasonable delay, hazard or restriction to the drivers freedom to manoeuvre. The
operating condition of a road is normally assessed by comparing its peak hourly flow against its design
hourly flow. It is not advisable to assess the operating condition of a road on the basis of its daily flow
as the daily flow pattern of a road can vary significantly depending on the types of traffic (such as
residential, industrial, or commercial developments) served by the road which affects significantly how
well the capacity in the off-peak period can be utilized. Typical values are shown in Table 2.4.1.1

Table 2.4.1.1
Design Flows
Undivided
2 lane carriageway Dual carriageway
carriageway
Peak hourly
flow Veh/hour, Peak hourly flow Veh/hour,
Peak hourly flow
one direction one direction of flow
Road Type Veh/hour, both
of flow
directions of flow+
Dual Dual
4 lane Dual 2 lane
3 lane 4 lane
Dual Dual Dual Dual
6.75m 7.3m 10.0m 13.5m 14.6m
6.75m 7.3m 11.0m 14.6m
Expressway/trunk road 3000 4700 6300
Primary distributor no
frontage crossings, no
2000 2400 2400 2600 2600 2800 4200
standing vehicles,
negligible cross traffic
District distributor
frontage development,
side roads, pedestrian
1400 1700 2200 1900 2000
crossings, bus stops,
loading restrictions at
peak hours

+Since the capacity of this type of road is significantly affected by the amount of kerb activities,
pedestrian traffic and crossings, distance between side roads and junctions, etc., careful consideration
on the actual site condition should be made before adopting these figures. For local roads, the design
flow of a 2-lane single carriageway may be taken as 800 veh/h, 2-way, due to the presence of loading
activities, standing vehicles and pedestrian crossings.

2.4.1.2 The design flows in Table 2.4.1.1 allow for a proportion of heavy vehicles equal to 15%. Heavy
vehicles include all medium/heavy goods vehicles, non-franchised buses and franchised buses.
No allowance will need to be made for lower proportions of heavy vehicles. The peak hourly flow
at the year under consideration should be reduced in accordance with Table 2.4.1.2when the
expected proportion exceeds 15%. In some extreme cases (e.g. with very high component of
heavy vehicles), converting the vehicles to pcu for analysis might be necessary.
 December 2023 Edition

Table 2.4.1.2
Reduction of Peak Hourly Flow for
Heavy Vehicles in Excess of 15%

Reduction in design flow level (%)

Expressway, trunk
Heavy vehicle Single
road and dual
content carriageway
carriageway
per lane per carriageway
15 - 20% 7 7
20 - 25% 10 10

2.4.1.3 Besides the proportion of heavy vehicles, it should be noted that the design capacity of a road would be
affected by factors such as its horizontal/vertical alignment, design standards, existence of access, kerb
side activities, etc.

2.4.1.4 The Design Year will be determined by the particular project under consideration. A design year
between 15 and 20 years after the expected commissioning of the road is preferable, but planning data
is generally unavailable for such a distant horizon. Currently the year 2016 is generally adopted since
major strategic and regional transport planning studies are carried out with a planning horizon up to
2016. However, the Design Year chosen should be subject to the agreement of Transport Department.

2.4.1.5 Where predicted flows indicate a carriageway width in excess of 3 lanes is required for a dual
carriageway road other considerations such as, the practicality of providing this, traffic operating
conditions, and whether an alternative and/or an additional route should be provided, will also need to
be taken into account.

2.4.2 Peak Hourly Flows/Design Flow Ratios P/Df

2.4.2.1 Comparison of predicted flows to design flows may be useful in analyzing a network. Such
comparisons should however always be related to hourly flows as daily flows can be extremely
misleading due to the variability of peaking characteristics.

2.4.2.2 Table 2.4.2.1 indicates the implications of various Peak Hourly Flows/Design Flow ratios, (P/Df)
for dual carriageways or single 4-lane carriageways with no frontage access and no standing
vehicles. The table is not applicable to single 2-way 2-lane carriageways, as the operational
characteristics of such roads are often dictated by road junctions, kerb-side activities, pedestrian
crossings and opportunities to overtake.

2.4.2.3 With regard to existing roads, care should be exercised in interpreting P/Df ratios as many lengths of
existing road are constrained by the capacity of existing junctions, and lack of stopping restrictions.
Whilst from Table 2.4.2.1 a P/Df ratio of 0.7 might infer adequate operating conditions, the effect
of junctions or traffic signals both within and at the end of the road link may be such that the
design flow could never be achieved in practice, and the link might be severely congested well
before a P/Df ratio of 1.0 is reached.
 December 2023 Edition

Table 2.4.2.1
Implications of P/Df Ratios

P/Df Ratio General Operational Characteristics

Free-flow conditions
Travel speeds at the free-flow speed generally prevail
Up to 0.3
Ability to manoeuvre within traffic stream almost unimpeded
Minor disruptions are easily absorbed without change in speed.
Easy flow conditions
Travel speeds close to free-flow speed
0.3 - 0.5
Ability to manoeuvre within traffic stream slightly restricted
Minor disruptions are easily absorbed with localised reduction in speed.
Generally easy flow conditions.
Travel speeds begin to be restricted by traffic conditions.
0.5 - 0.75
Ability to manoeuvre within traffic stream is noticeably restricted.
Minor disruptions may cause local congestion with short traffic queues.
Well used flow conditions.
Travel speeds reduced by increasing traffic volumes.
0.75 - 1.0
Ability to manoeuvre within traffic stream is severely restricted.
Minor disruptions may cause local congestion with traffic queues.
Unstable flow conditions.
Travel speeds substantially reduced and are highly variable & unpredictable.
1.0 - 1.2
Little or no room to manoeuvre within traffic stream.
Minor disruptions will cause substantial congestion with long traffic queues.
Forced or breakdown flow conditions.
Crawling travel speed.
>1.2
Highly unstable traffic operations with widespread congestion and extensively long
traffic queues.
 December 2023 Edition

TPDM Volume 2 Chapter 3 – Road Characteristics

3.1 References

1. Departmental Standard TD 9/93 Road Layout and Geometry: Highway Link Design D.O.Tp. 1993.

2. Country Surveyors' Society Highway Transition Curve Tables (metric). The Carriers Pub. Co. Ltd.
1965.

3. T.T.S.D. Data Record 182. Pedestrian Movement in the Central District of Hong Kong 1974.

4. D.O.E. Technical Memorandum H2/70 - Pedestrian Subways, Layout and Dimensions.

5. United Nations - Recommended Practice for the Design and Layout of Cycle Tracks, Feb. 1973.

6. Highways Office - Guide Lines for the design of Cycle Facilities - New Territories, Highways Office
of Public Works Department, 1976.

7. Traffic Engineering Division - A Policy on Run-ins, July 1970.

8. Report of the Working Party on Transport for the Disabled, March 1975.

9. Design Manual: Barrier Free Access, 1997. Buildings Department, 1997.

10. Highway Capacity Manual 1965, Highway Research Board, Special Report 87.

11. Departmental Standard TD 31/93. Subway for Pedestrians and Pedal Cyclists Layout and Dimensions,
D.O.Tp.16.B.S. 5395: 1977. Code of Practice for Stairs.

12. Road Traffic (Traffic Control) Regulation 1984.

13. Hong Kong Long Term Road Study - Freeman Fox Wilbur Smith Associates, 1968.

14. Third Comprehensive Transport Study - Wilbur Smith Associates Limited, October 1999.

15. Comprehensive Traffic Surveillance and Control Study - Maunsell Consultants Asia 1980.

16. P.I.A.R.C. Road Tunnel Technical Committee Report of Working Group IV. Geometry 1975.

17. Departmental Advice Note TD 42/95. Junctions and Accesses: Geometric design of Major/Minor
Priority Junctions. U.K. Department of Transport

18. The Research and Development Background to "Highway Link Design" D. Simpson and J.A. Kerman.
Traffic Engineering and Control, Sept. 1982.

19. Departmental Advice Note TA 66/95. Police Observation Platforms on Motorways. The Highways
Agency.

20. The Overall Effect on Accidents at Sites Where Zebra Crossings were Installed. J.R. Landles. Traffic
Engineering Control January 1983.

21. Data Record No. 361. Warrants for Escalators at Footbridges.

22. Providing For The Cyclist. Institution of Highways and Transportation July 1983.

23. Structures Design Manual for Highways and Railways, 1997.

 December 2023 Edition

24. Roads and Traffic in Urban Areas. The Institution of Highways and Transportation with the
Department of Transport. 1987.

25. Pedestrianisation Guidelines. The Institution of Highways and Transportation. 1989.

26. Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 6 Road Geometry. The Department of Transport, June
1993.

27. Public Lighting Design Manual, Highways Department

28. Highways Department Standard Drawings, Highways Department

29. The Standard Drawings of Structures Division of Highways Department

30. Departmental Standard TD 36/93, Subways for Pedestrians and Pedal Cyclists Layout and Dimensions,
D.O.Tp.

31. Roads and Traffic in Urban Areas, Institution of Highways and Transportation with the Department of
Transport, 1987

32. National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 350, Transport Research Board,
National Research Council, U.S.A.

33. Road Research Laboratory Report LR 104, Ministry of Transport, 1967

34. Road Design Guide, Section 6 - Safety Barriers for Roads and Bridges, Roads and Traffic Authority,
May 1996

35. Roadside Design Guide, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 1989.
 December 2023 Edition

3.2 Road Types

3.2.1 Rural Road Types

3.2.1.1 Trunk Roads - Roads connecting the main centres of population. High capacity roads with no frontage
access or development, pedestrians segregated, widely spaced grade-separated junctions, and 24 hour
stopping restrictions.

3.2.1.2 Rural Roads - Roads connecting the smaller centres of population or popular recreation areas with
major road networks. Frontage access should be limited wherever possible and junction design whilst
not necessarily grade separated should be of a high capacity standard.

3.2.1.3 Feeder Roads - Roads connecting villages or more remote settlements to Rural Roads.

3.2.2 Urban Road Types

3.2.2.1 Trunk Roads - Roads connecting the main centres of population. High capacity roads, with no frontage
access or development, segregation of pedestrians, widely spaced grade-separated junctions, and 24
hour stopping restrictions.

3.2.2.2 Primary Distributor - Roads forming the major network of the urban area. Roads having high capacity
junctions, though may be at-grade, segregated pedestrian facilities wherever possible and frontage
access limited if not entirely restricted, and 24 hour stopping restrictions.

3.2.2.3 District Distributors - Roads Linking Districts to the Primary Distributor Roads. High capacity at-grade
junctions, with peak hour stopping restrictions and parking restrictions throughout the day.

3.2.2.4 Local Distributors - Roads within Districts linking developments to the District Distributor Roads.

3.2.3 Expressway

3.2.3.1 Roads are designated as Expressways under the Road Traffic (Expressway) Regulations. An
expressway may be formed from a trunk road or a primary distributor road. Details of Expressway
standards are contained in Chapter 6 of this Volume.
 December 2023 Edition

3.3 Road Alignment

3.3.1 General Principles

3.3.1.1 When designing a new road or improving an existing road, the alignment should be selected with care
so as to :

(i) Minimise any detrimental effects that may be caused by noise or fumes on the surrounding
environment.

(ii) Ensure that communities are not unnecessarily severed or cross movements unduly
restricted.

3.3.1.2 On dual carriageway roads, the alignment should aim to provide at least the minimum standards
defined in the following Sections. In addition, the following principles should be followed wherever
practicable to secure a satisfactory alignment.

(i) Horizontal and vertical curves should be as large as possible.

(ii) Changes in horizontal and vertical alignment should be phased to coincide particularly on
high speed roads. Where this is not possible, one curve, usually the horizontal curve,
should embrace the other.

3.3.1.3 Rural locations and urban locations are those areas where the Road Types referred to in Section
3.2occur. Generally therefore, Hong Kong Island, Kowloon and new towns will have urban locations,
and the New Territories outside of new towns will have rural locations.

3.3.1.4 Whilst the Design Speed derived minimum geometry as detailed in the following Sections is equally
relevant to single carriageway design, the additional dimension of opposing vehicles means that the
various geometric parameters must, for rural roads, be assembled with much greater care than the
simple aesthetic design considerations described in paragraph 3.3.1.2, that is :

(i) For the improvement of existing rural single carriageways, evidence of operational
problems always exist. Sharp bends and junctions causing congestion or accidents can be
identified for improvement; hill sections causing congestion can be identified for the
provision of passing bays or climbing lanes. Proposals for improvement should concentrate
on those features with evident problems, and not on bringing the entire alignment up to
standard .

(ii) The design of significant lengths of new rural single carriageway roads, however, (in
excess of 3-4 km), creates a real problem for the designer to ensure that the design will
appear to the driver to be a conventional single carriageway, and not a high speed route.
The alignment recommendations for dual carriageways shown in 3.3.1.2, are not
appropriate for single carriageways. Great care should be taken in selecting the alignment,
and mid to large radius curves should be avoided in favour of straight, with short, low
radius curves to facilitate changes of horizontal and vertical alignment. Such curves shall
be accompanied by conventional double white line road markings and signs to prevent
overtaking at these points. Climbing lanes should be provided on gradients to ensure
regular opportunities for passing slow moving vehicles.

(iii) In urban locations, the frequency of junctions, traffic signals, etc., and low operating
speeds means that no special consideration need be paid to design, beyond normal Design
Speed geometric requirements.
 December 2023 Edition

3.3.1.5 There is clearly a dilemma where a single carriageway is considered as the first stage of an eventual
dual carriageway scheme, in that the alignment for the first stage single carriageway would be
incompatible with the eventual dual carriageway design. Such staged construction arrangement is
considered undesirable from road safety point of view. If a staged construction is absolutely necessary,
the road alignment at the first stage should be properly designed and constructed. Furthermore,
sufficient land should be allowed for expansion to accommodate the capacity required for any future
widening of the road.

3.3.2 Design Speed

3.3.2.1 The Design Speed of a road is the speed chosen to correlate the various features of design, such as the
minimum horizontal and vertical curvature, superelevation, transitions, junction visibility, signs and
road markings etc. It should be chosen to be a realistic estimate of the likely vehicle speeds that will
occur, and should represent the 85%-ile speed of light vehicles in free flow conditions.

3.3.2.2 The speed of vehicles is mainly dependant upon the type of road, whether single or dual carriageway,
the degree of access control, and the type of junctions provided. Low order geometry has been shown
to have little effect on vehicle speeds, and a few difficult locations where topographical or development
constraints necessitate low radius curves will not significantly reduce operating speeds. Where,
however, a route is continually constrained to frequent low radius curves to avoid topographical or
development features, speeds will be somewhat lower due to the sinuous nature of the route.

3.3.2.3 A 50-80-100 km/h three tier speed limit structure is to be adopted for all new roads. The design speeds
for different road types are recommended in Table 3.3.2.1.

Table 3.3.2.1
Design Speeds

Road Type Type of Junction and Access Design Speed(km/h)

i) Expressway Standards, No Frontage Access and
100
Widely Spaced Grade Separated Junctions
Rural Dual
ii) No Frontage Access and Closely Spaced Grade
Carriageway 80
Separated Junctions
iii) Some Frontage Access and At Grade Junctions 50
i) No Frontage Access, Frequent Elevated
80
Urban Dual Structures and Grade Separated Junctions
Carriageway ii) Some Frontage Access and Signal Control
50
Junctions
Rural Single i) Some Frontage Access and At Grade Junctions
50
Carriageway
Urban Single i) Some Frontage Access and At Grade Junctions 50
Carriageway ii) Local Streets 50
 December 2023 Edition

3.3.3 Horizontal Curvature

3.3.3.1 Minimum Radii

Table 3.3.3.1 shows the appropriate radii and superelevation for various Design Speeds. Wherever
possible, radius of R3 or greater should be used. Radii less than R3 should only be used at isolated
locations, where excessive cost would result from the use of R3. For new roads with a design speed of
80 km/h or above, a desirable minimum radius of R4 should be adopted. (Radii should be related to the
inside curve of the carriageway).

Table 3.3.3.1
Appropriate Radii and Superelevation
Absolute
Design Speed Normal Minimum Radius
Minimum Radius
(km/h)
R8 (m) R7 (m) R6 (m) R5 (m) R4 (m) R3 (m) R2 (m) R1 (m)
120 2800 2000 1400 1000 700 500 350 250
100 2000 1400 1000 700 500 350 250 175
85 1400 1000 700 500 350 250 175 125
80 1280 900 650 450 320 230 160 115
70 1000 700 500 350 250 175 125 88
60 700 500 350 250 175 125 88 63
50 500 350 250 175 125 88 63 44
Superelevation 2.5% 2.5% 3.5% 5% 7% 10% 10% 10%

3.3.3.2 Elimination of Adverse Camber

Adverse camber should be replaced with favourable crossfall of 2.5% when radii greater than R7 are
used.

3.3.3.3 Superelevation
For radii between R7 and R3, superelevation should be provided such that:

𝑉2
𝑆=
2.82𝑅
where: S = Superelevation (%)

V = Design Speed (km/h)

R = Radius (m)

For Radii below R3, however, which should only be used at difficult locations, a maximum
superelevation of 10% should be maintained, together with suitable road surfacing to ensure adequate
skid resistance. However, 10% superelevation should be avoided if there is a possibility of stationary or
slow moving heavy goods vehicles. For new roads with a design speed of 80 km/h or above, a desirable
maximum superelevation of 7% in conjunction with a desirable minimum radius of R4 should be
adopted, together with a suitable road surfacing to ensure adequate skid resistance.

3.3.3.4 Superelevation or Urban Roads

Roads in built up areas with at-grade junctions and accesses should not be superelevated too steeply,
and should preferably not exceed 4-5%. Where the use of radius between R5 and R1 is made necessary
by severe constraints on the alignment, superelevation should be limited to 5% together with suitable
road surfacing to ensure adequate skid resistance.
 December 2023 Edition

3.3.4 Transitional Design

3.3.4.1 Superelevation should not be introduced, nor adverse camber removed, so gradually as to create large
almost flat areas of carriageway, nor so sharply as to cause discomfort or to kink the edge of the
carriageway. Generally, the carriageway edge profiles should not vary in grade by more then 1%, and
to ensure satisfactory drainage, a minimum longitudinal gradient of 0.67% should be maintained
through the transitional area. However, in some difficult areas, even the above requirements can cause
drainage problems, and it may be necessary to increase the variation in grade of the edge profile, or
apply a rolling crown in a similar manner to that required for a level or near level road.

3.3.4.2 In general, the transition curve to be used is clothoid, as described in the Highway Transition curve
tables (metric) compiled by the County Surveyors Society (1963). Under normal design conditions, it
should be possible to apply the superelevation within the transition length, and satisfy the dual criteria
that :

(i) The superelevation should be applied so that the difference in grade of the two edge
profiles does not exceed 1%; and

(ii) The maximum rate of change of centripetal acceleration does not exceed 0.3m/sec³.

However, it will frequently be impractical to achieve such long transitional designs in the dense
constraints of Hong Kong, as these criteria tend to force contiguous curves apart, and severely restrict
the ability of the road to conform to alignment constraints.

3.3.4.3 On elevated structures where the use of clothoid transitions may create difficulties with complex
geometry it may be suitable to adopt a circular curve in place of the clothoid transition provided it can
be clearly demonstrated that there would be no significant difference in alignment.

3.3.4.4 The basic transition length shall be derived from the following formula:

𝑉3
𝐿=
46.7𝑞𝑅

where: L = Length of transition (m)

V = Design Speed (km/h)

q = Rate of increase of centripetal acceleration (m/sec3) travelling along curve at constant

speed V

R = Radius of curve (m)

3.3.4.5 Table 3.3.4.1 illustrates the transition length requirements for the various curve radii, together with the
appropriate shift. Transition lengths of 1.4V (where V = design speed km/h) or higher will often place
severe limitations in areas of difficulty, and it will be necessary to increase the rate of change of
centripetal acceleration to 0.6 or even higher where low radius curves occur in close proximity. At the
same time, especially on multi-lane highways, it will often not be possible to introduce the
superelevation as gradually as 1% within the transition, and it may be necessary to increase the
variation in edge profile to 1 % or even 2%.
 December 2023 Edition

3.3.4.6 For ease of design and setting out, the County Surveyors Society Tables provide a range of transitional
spirals and it will be appropriate to adopt the spiral with the nearest RL value to that required by Table
3.3.4.1.

Table 3.3.4.1
Transition Lengths
Rate of Change of Centripetal Acceleration
Radius (with Shift in Bracket)
0.3m/sec³ 0.43m/sec³ 0.6m/sec³ 0.86m/sec³
R6 0.7V(0.2m)
R5 1V(0.6m) 0.7V(0.3m)
R4 1.4V(1.7m) 1V(0.85m) 0.7V(0.4m)
R3 2V(4.7m) 1.4V(2.4m) 1V(1.2m) 0.7V(0.6m)
R2 2.8V(13.3m) 2V(6.7m) 1.4V(3.4m) 1V(1.7m)
R1 4V(37.8m) 2.8V(18.8m) 2V(9.4m) 1.4V(4.7m)

Design Speed
RL Values
(km/h)
120 123000 86000 62000 43000
100 71000 50000 36000 25000
85 44000 31000 22000 15000
80 37000 26000 18000 13000
70 25000 17000 12500 8500
60 15000 11000 7500 5500
50 9000 6250 4500 3125

3.3.4.7 For radii greater than R7, the normal transition designed for 0.3m/sec³ will be insignificant and not
generally required. However, where crossfall is being reversed from the adjacent curve, it may be
suitable to provide a transition to apply the superelevation change. In such circumstances, longer
transitions than normal will often be required to suit the superelevation design.

3.3.4.8 Progressive superelevation or removal of adverse camber should be achieved over or within the length
of the transition curve from the curve end. Where a transition curve is not provided, approximately two
thirds of the superelevation should be introduced on the approach, and the remainder at the beginning
of the curve.

3.3.5 Sight Distance

3.3.5.1 Table 3.3.5.1 shows the sight distances that must be provided on the approaches to and through
junctions, accesses, weaving sections and points of vehicular and pedestrian conflict, and the aim
should be to provide the desirable minimum distance, rather than the absolute minimum distance.
 December 2023 Edition

Table 3.3.5.1
Sight distances
Design speed Desirable minimum Absolute minimum
(km/h) (m) (m)
120 295 215
100 215 160
85 160 120
80 145 110
70 120 90
60 90 70
50 70 50

3.3.5.2 The sight distances should be measured from a minimum drivers' eye height of between 1.05 m and 2.0
m to an object height of between 0.26 m and 2.0 m , both above the road surface. Forward visibility
should be provided in both the horizontal and vertical planes between points in the centre of the lane
nearest to the inside of the curve.

3.3.5.3 Because of the necessity of providing sight distances in accordance with Table 3.3.5.1 and paragraph
3.3.5.1 it follows that junctions and accesses should not be located on sharp curves, as this would result
in extensive widening of verges, cuttings and bridge structures in order to obtain the required visibility

3.3.5.4 For locations, not mentioned in paragraph 3.3.5.1, that are away from the vicinity of a junction or
access or weaving section or place of vehicular or pedestrian conflict and where on the inside of a
curve an obstruction, such as cutting slope, retaining wall, noise barrier, or bridge abutment, occurs,
appropriate sight distances obtained in accordance with the following, must be provided:

(i) Low speed urban roads

Because there is little or no restriction on pedestrians and accesses along these roads the
sight distances in accordance with Table 3.3.5.1, measured in accordance with paragraph
3.3.5.2 should be provided.

(ii) Roads having design speeds of 80 km/h or greater and the radius of the bend is less than R3

(a) For a 100 km/h design speed or greater a 4 m width must be maintained clear of
obstructions on the inside of the curve, the clearance being measured from the edge of
the running carriageway and may include any hard shoulder, marginal strip or verge.

(b) For 80 km/h design speed, a 3 m width clear of obstructions must be maintained, the
width being measured as in (ii)(a) above.

(iii) Roads having design speeds of 80 km/h or greater, and the radius of the bend is R3 or
greater

(a) For a 100 km/h design speed or greater, a 4 m width in accordance with (ii)(a) above,
or a width determined from Table 3.3.5.1 measured in accordance with paragraph
3.3.5.2, whichever is the lesser, must be maintained free of obstructions.

(b) For 80 km/h design speed, a 3 m width in accordance with (ii)(b) above, or a width
determined from Table 3.3.5.1 measured in accordance with paragraph 3.3.5.2,
whichever is the lesser, must be maintained free of obstructions.

(iv) Roads having design speed of 50 km/h

This design speed in accordance with Table 3.3.2.1 is only appropriate for single
carriageway roads and therefore sight distances in accordance with Table 3.3.5.1 must be
provided.
 December 2023 Edition

3.3.5.5 Large direction signs, gantry supports or other substantial obstructions should be sited such that they do
not obscure sight lines, although isolated slim objects such as lamp columns, or sign posts can be
ignored. Laybys should wherever possible be sited on straight or the outside of curves where stopped
vehicles will not obstruct sightlines.

3.3.5.6 For information on, visibility splays required at priority junctions, visibility requirements at
roundabouts, and visibility requirements at grade separated interchanges, Sections 4.3.8, 4.5.11, and
4.6.6, respectively, of Chapter 4 in this Volume should be consulted.

3.3.6 Gradients

3.3.6.1 Whilst it is appreciated that topographical difficulties can influence considerably the economics of a
road scheme, gradients should on Trunk Roads, and Primary Distributors conform with those given in
Table 3.3.6.1.

Table 3.3.6.1
Maximum Gradients
Gradient
Type of Route Desirable Absolute
Maximum % Maximum %
1. Trunk Roads, Primary Distributors and
4 8
Bus Routes
2. Others 5 10

3.3.6.2 For new roads with a design speed of 80 km/h or above, a desirable maximum gradient of 4% should
be adopted.

3.3.6.3 For effective drainage with kerbed roads, a minimum gradient of 0.67% should be maintained
wherever possible. In flatter areas, however, the vertical alignment should not be manipulated by the
introduction of repeated reverses of vertical curvature simply to achieve adequate surface water
drainage gradients but alternative forms of edge drainage for a level or near level road should be
devised. For lower speed urban roads, drainage paths may be provided by false channel profiles with
minimum gradients of 0.67%, although for high speed roads, other forms of continuous drainage may
be necessary.
 December 2023 Edition

3.3.7 Vertical Curves

3.3.7.1 Vertical curves should be provided at all changes of gradient, and should be at least as long as that
indicated by the formula.
𝐿 = 𝐾𝐴
where L = curve length in metres
A = algebraic difference in gradients (%)
K has a value selected from Tables 3.3.7.1 and 3.3.7.2.

Table 3.3.7.1
Minimum K Values for Vertical Crest Curves
Design Desirable Absolute
Speed Minimum Minimum
(km/h) (K) (K)
120 182 100
100 100 55
85 55 30
80 55 30
70 30 17
60 17 10
50 10 6.5

3.3.7.2 Visibility is the main factor that affects the Desirable Minimum crest curvature whereas comfort
criteria apply for sag curves. Crest K-values should not be reduced below the Desirable Minimum
values shown in Table 3.3.7.1 :

(i) Where junctions or accesses are sited on or near crest curves such that approach visibility is
restricted.

(ii) On lower speed roads, where there are little or no restrictions on pedestrians and accesses.

3.3.7.3 Where K values of over 40 are used, the channel gradients will be flatter than 0.4% for more than 30m,
and surface water drainage may require special attention.

Table 3.3.7.2
Minimum K Values for Vertical Sag Curves
Design Desirable Absolute
Speed Minimum Minimum
(km/h) (K) (K)
120 37 37
100 37 26
85 26 20
80 26 20
70 20 20
60 20 13
50 13 9
 December 2023 Edition

3.3.8 Climbing lanes for Single Carriageway Roads

3.3.8.1 Gradients can cause severe congestion on single carriageways, where a slow moving goods vehicle will
create long platoons of traffic if faster vehicles are unable to overtake. These platoons will frequently
be unable to dissipate for a considerable distance, as overtaking is a difficult and hazardous manoeuvre
on a 2 lane road.
3.3.8.2 When improving an existing single carriageway road, such congested locations will be readily
identified. Significant improvements in flow will be effected by the strategic provision of climbing
lanes at frequent intervals on gradients to permit overtaking where it is most necessary. It is not
suitable to provide gradient/traffic criteria for the provision of climbing lanes on single carriageways.
Each site must be considered individually in relation to overtaking possibilities on the route as a whole,
to arrive at the most suitable means of achieving improvements to traffic flow. In some cases, the
provision of a climbing lane on a 2-3% gradient may represent the most advantageous means of
ensuring that steady progress can be made.

As an interim measure, the construction of strategically located passing bays should be considered
where it is likely that a full climbing lane could not be achieved for some period of time, and the length
of the road in question is greater than 500m.

3.3.8.3 For new single carriageway rural roads the provision of climbing lanes on hills offers the most
economic and effective means of ensuring that there are frequent opportunities for overtaking and the
strategic placing of climbing lanes will ensure steady progress. As with existing single carriageway
roads, it is not possible to provide gradient/traffic criteria and each site must be considered on its merits
in relation to overtaking opportunities on the route as a whole.

3.3.8.4 The minimum carriageway width at climbing lanes should be 10m, divided into 3 lanes. The climbing
lane should be 3.2m wide, the other two being 3.4m each. Appropriate double white line road markings
should be in accordance with Volume 3

3.3.8.5 Generally, the full width of the climbing lane should be provided at a point "S", 100m uphill from the
point where the sag curve attains a 2% gradient, as shown in Diagram 3.3.8.1. A taper of 1 in 30 to 1 in
40 should be provided over the 100m length as in Diagram 3.3.8.2

3.3.8.6 The physical width of the climbing lane should generally be maintained to a point "F", 200m beyond
the point where the crest curve reduces to 2% gradient, followed by a 100m taper. Cross hatching road
markings and advance warning signs should be provided in advance of the taper, to channelise
vehicles.(see Diagram 3.3.8.3).

3.3.8.7 At short hills, it may be necessary to commence the climbing lane in advance of point S so as to
provide a minimum length of at least 200m of full width climbing lane. For existing roads, where crest
curves may be substantially sharper than the minimum prescribed, it may be necessary to adopt a
shorter terminal detail so as to prevent the lane reduction extending too far beyond the crest.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.3.8.1 : CALCULATION OF GRADIENT

FOR CLIMBING LANE PURPOSES

DIAGRAM 3.3.8.2 : START OF CLIMBING LANE

DIAGRAM 3.3.8.3 : END OF CLIMBING LANE

 December 2023 Edition

3.3.8.8 At crests, where climbing lanes are provided both sides of the hill and there is less than 500m between
the ends of the tapers, the climbing lanes should be extended to overlap each other, providing a four
lane carriageway at least 50m long. Continuous double white lines, if not used to separate the opposing
lanes on either side of the hill, must be provided across the crest and extend at least 50m beyond the
completion/start of the tapers in either direction, as in Diagram 3.3.8.4.

3.3.8.9 Where the climbing lane exceeds 3 km in length it is advisable to provide some sections with a straight
or large radius right hand curvature as an overtaking section of downhill traffic.

DIAGRAM 3.3.8.4 : CREST CURVE BETWEEN 2 CLIMBING LANES

3.3.9 Climbing Lanes for Dual Carriageway Roads

3.3.9.1 An additional uphill lane should be provided on 2 lane dual carriageway roads if the forecast design
year traffic flow exceeds the flow level indicated in Diagram 3.3.9.1 relative to the gradient of the hill.
The Gradient G = 100 H/L should be calculated in accordance with Diagram 3.3.9.1. An additional
lane should be considered if the minimum gradient is 3% over a distance of 0.5 km.

3.3.9.2 Where costs of providing the additional land for a climbing lane are high relative to the total cost of the
works, consideration should be given to adjusting the alignment of the carriageway within the standard
highway width and reducing or eliminating the verge/marginal strip widths so that a climbing lane can
be provided without any additional land being required, as shown in Diagram 3.3.9.2.

3.3.9.3 The appropriate full width of the climbing lane should be provided in similar manner to that for single
carriageway, i.e. at a point "S", 100m from the 2% point of the sag curve. However a taper of at least 1
in 45 should be provided in the case of climbing lanes for dual carriageways, as shown in Diagram
3.3.9.3.

3.3.9.4 At the end of the climbing lane section the extreme left hand lane should be continued, and any
tapering down should affect the extreme right hand lane as shown in Diagram 3.3.9.4.
 December 2023 Edition

3.3.9.5 Passing bays are not appropriate for dual carriageway roads.

DIAGRAM 3.3.9.1 : DUAL CARRIAGEWAY CLIMBING LANES JUSTIFICATION

DIAGRAM 3.3.9.2 : CLIMBING LANE PROVISION WITHIN STANDARD HIGHWAY

WIDTH
(a) WITHOUT CLIMBING LANE

(b) WITH CLIMBING LANE

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.3.9.3 : START OF DUAL CARRIAGEWAY CLIMBING LANE

DIAGRAM 3.3.9.4 : END OF DUAL CARRIAGEWAY CLIMBING LANE

 December 2023 Edition

3.4 The Road in Cross Section

3.4.1 Cross fall

3.4.1.1 Except on curves where super elevation or elimination of adverse cross fall is required, carriageways
should normally have a cross fall of 2.5% from the crown or central reserve downhill towards the side
of the road.

3.4.1.2 At the junction of a minor road with a major road the carriageway of the minor road should be graded
into the channels of the major road, which should retain its normal cross-section throughout the
junction.

3.4.2 Carriageway Widths in Urban Areas

3.4.2.1 The carriageway widths for various types of road are given in Table 3.4.2.1.

Table 3.4.2.1
Minimum Carriageway Widths in Urban Areas
Single Carriageway Dual Carriageway
Road Type
2 lane (m) 4 lane (m) 2 lane (m) 3 lane (m) 4 lane (m)
Trunk Road /
-- -- 7.3 11 14.6
Expressways
Primary Distributor -- -- 6.75 10 13.5
District Distributor 7.3 or 10.3 13.5 6.75 10 --
Local Distributor 7.3 or 10.3 13.5 6.75 -- --
Industrial Road
-- 13.5 6.75 -- --
- Principal Access
Industrial Road 7.3 (one way)
-- -- -- --
- Secondary Access 10.3 (two way)
Cargo Handling Areas
8 - 10.0 -- -- -- --
- Access Road

3.4.2.2 The width of trunk road carriageways may be reduced below that given in Table 3.4.2.1 if this can be
justified on economic or other grounds.

3.4.2.3 Where there are Tram Tracks a 5.5m wide tram reserve must be allowed for a double track system.

3.4.2.4 With regard to Light Railway Systems, i.e. North West Railway, certain standards have been evolved
as a result of the Tuen Mun Light Rail Study and this should be referred to if information on Light Rail
Reserves is required. Where a Light Rail system is to be segregated from the carriageway it is
important that sufficient clearance is provided between any obstruction on the Rail Reserve and the
edge of the carriageway. To achieve this it may be necessary to provide a verge or marginal strip as
part of the highway.

3.4.2.5 Where a chain of refuges or tram platforms is used to separate opposing traffic streams the overall
width of the carriageway should be increased to accommodate the refuges and platforms.

3.4.2.6 On District Distributor Roads, Local Distributor Roads and Industrial Access Roads, if
loading/unloading activities are to be permitted from the carriageway, an additional 3m wide parking
strip should be provided wherever possible to avoid the loading activities interfering with the through
traffic flow. The parking strip should be terminated prior to any junctions, and if not marked out in
bays an edge of carriageway broken line marking should be used to separate the parking strip from the
carriageway.
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.2.7 The division of two way single carriageways into three lanes, either in the form of two lanes serving
one direction and one lane serving the other, or, having a common centre lane used for overtaking in
both directions, is not appropriate for roads in the Territory and therefore must not be employed. The
reasons for this being that such configurations are potentially dangerous in respect of :

(i) Where the carriageway is divided into two lanes in one direction and one lane in the other,
vehicles in the single lane attempting to overtake slower moving vehicles, even where the
double white line system is employed , by moving into the fast lane of traffic approaching
in the opposite direction.

(ii) Where the centre lane is used as a common overtaking lane by traffic in both directions,
vehicles overtaking slower vehicles moving into the path of vehicles overtaking in the
opposite direction.

(iii) Vehicles making right turns from premises fronting the road having to anticipate at the
same time, both, gaps in the lane or lanes of traffic immediately adjacent to their side of the
road, and gaps in the lane or lanes of traffic in the opposite direction.

(iv) Vehicles making right turns into premises fronting the road obstruction traffic behind them,
and in the case of turning from the single lane, because this will bring all following traffic
to a halt, causing the turning driver to attempt to negotiate gaps in the opposing traffic
which are too small, and in the case of vehicles turning from the two lane direction being in
the path of faster moving traffic which have been using this lane to overtake slower moving
traffic.

3.4.2.8 The exception to paragraph 3.4.2.7 will be in the situation where on a steep gradient, an additional
climbing lane is required to be provided in accordance with section 3.3.8of this chapter. However in
urban areas, roads of this nature will often have frontage development with access being required into
and out of premises at frequent intervals, and also vehicles stopping to service such premises. If the
latter is the case, and right turning pockets cannot be provided to protect turning traffic in both
directions and/or stopping restrictions cannot be imposed, then it is preferable to have an extra wide
two lane carriageway.

3.4.3 Carriageway Widths in Rural Areas

3.4.3.1 Table 3.4.3.1 shows the carriageway widths for the various road types in rural areas.

Table 3.4.3.1
Minimum Carriageway Widths in Rural Areas

Single Carriageway Dual Carriageway

Road Type
2 lane (m) 4 lane (m) 2 lane (m) 3 lane (m) 4 lane (m)
Trunk Roads -- -- 7.3 11 14.6
Rural Roads 7.3 14.5 7.3 -- --
Feeder Roads 6 -- -- -- --

3.4.3.2 For Trunk Roads and Rural Roads lesser widths may be used if these can be justified on economic or
other grounds.

3.4.3.3 If foreseeable development will change the function of a road to that of a different type then the
standard for this latter type should be adopted at the initial design stage.

3.4.3.4 Additional parking strips will not normally be justified in rural areas, but if for any reason they are to
be provided similar standards to that for urban areas as mentioned in paragraph 3.4.2.6 should be used.
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.3.5 For the same reasons given in paragraph 3.4.2.7 in respect of urban areas, two way single carriageways
in rural areas must not be divided into three lanes, other than on steep gradients, for the purpose of
providing an additional climbing lane, and then only strictly in accordance with section 3.3.8 of this
chapter. Where a climbing lane is proposed, right turning pockets with local widening must be
provided, for both directions, if right turning movements are to be permitted in to any premises fronting
the road.

3.4.4 Widening on Curves

3.4.4.1 Where curves of radius of 400m or less are used carriageway widths should be increased in accordance
with Table 3.4.4.1.

Table 3.4.4.1
Appropriate Carriageway Widths on Curves (m)
Curve 2 lane 3 lane 4 lane
Radius(m) 6m 6.75m 7.3m 10.3m 10m 11m 13.5m 14.6m
< 150 7.3 7.9 7.9 11.9 11.9 11.9 15.8 15.8
150 < 300 7 7.3 7.3 11 11 11 14.6 14.6
300 < 400 6.9 7.3 7.3 10.3 11 11 14.6 14.6

3.4.4.2 The widening should be achieved by increasing the width at a uniform rate along the length of the
transition curve on the inside of the curve.

3.4.4.3 Lane widths for slip roads at curves will be given in the relevant section on Junctions.

3.4.5 Service Roads

3.4.5.1 Table 3.4.5.1 indicates the carriageway widths to be used for service roads.

Table 3.4.5.1
Carriageway Widths of Service Roads (m)
Carriageway Type Cars Only All Vehicles
One Way 4.5 5.5
Two Way 5.5 6.75
Industrial Fire Escape & Rear
- 7.3
Service Road

3.4.5.2 For service roads less than 6m in width, an overall width, when clear of any obstructions, of at least
6m, but which may include adjacent kerbs, footways or verges, must be provided to allow fire service
appliances to operate in the event of emergency.

3.4.5.3 Service roads, which are sometimes provided to reduce the number of points of access on to a major
road, should only be considered when the alternative of providing a rear access road system connecting
to the major road through proper junctions is found to be impracticable. Where such service roads are
provided careful attention needs to be given to the junction arrangement of the service road with the
main road and any side road as because of the restricted visibility of traffic on the service road these
junctions can have a high accident risk potential. Consideration should be given to reducing as far as
possible likely traffic conflict points.

3.4.5.4 The verge between the main carriageway and the service road should generally be 2m in width and
never less than 1.5m. Additional local widening may be necessary however in the vicinity of junctions.

3.4.5.5 Fire Escape and Rear Service Roads in Industrial Areas should be 7.3m in width.
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.5.6 Details of turning areas are given in Diagrams 3.4.5.1 & 3.4.5.2. However Chapter 2, and Chapter 4
should also be referred to if there is any doubt as to the adequacy of the areas in terms of the type of
vehicles likely to use them.

DIAGRAM 3.4.5.1 : MINIMUM TURNING TEE FOR HEAVY GOODS VEHICLES

AND TURNING CIRCLE FOR CUL - DE - SAC
MINIMUM TURNING TEE USE BY WHERE FREQUENT HEAVY
GOODS VEHICLES OCCURS

IF THE PROPORTION OF ARTICULATED VEHICLES IS HIGH. A FURTHER INCREASE IN

THE DIMENSIONS MAY BE NECESSARY.
 December 2023 Edition

TURNING CIRCLE
.

WHERE FREQUENT USE BY HEAVY GOODS VEHICLES OCCURS, THE DIAMETER

SHOULD BE INCREASEO TO 26m
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.4.5.2 : MINIMUM TURNING AREAS

MINIMUM TURNING AREA
FOR LIGHT AND MEDIUM GOODS VECHICLES
(TYPE A)

MINIMUN TURNING AREA FOR PRIVATE CARS

(TYPE A)
 December 2023 Edition

MINIMUN TURNING AREA FOR PRIVATE CARS

(TYPE B)

MINIMUN TURNING AREA

FOR LIGHT AND MEDIUM GOODS VECHICLES
(TYPE B)
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.6 Cargo Handling Areas

3.4.6.1 The cross section for public cargo working area (PCWA) will depend on the width of the PCWA and
the type of cargo to be handled. The minimum width of a PCWA is 50 metres. The arrangement of a
cross section is as follows :
Purpose Width(m)
Working apron 10 - 24
Traffic Lane 8 - 10
Backing area 12 - 36

3.4.7 Central Reserves and Traffic Islands

3.4.7.1 On two way roads with four or more lanes it is desirable to separate the opposing traffic streams by a
central reserve. The width of such a central reserve will be dependent on the road type, the
circumstances of the particular location and the type of street furniture to be provided.

3.4.7.2 In urban areas where barrier fences or other street furniture is not required on the central reserve the
desirable and minimum widths are 1.75m and 1.25m respectively.

3.4.7.3 Where road traffic signals are to be installed on the central reserve the actual width will be determined
by the particular signal arrangement at the location. However, Table 3.4.7.1 gives some guidance as to
the minimum width requirements.

Table 3.4.7.1
Minimum Widths of Central Reserves for Road Traffic Signal Installations
Minimum Reserve Width
Size / Type of Aspects
With backing board(m) Without backing board(m)
200 1.65 1.3
300 1.95 1.4
Pedestrian Aspect -- 1.5

3.4.7.4 Where overhead traffic signals are to be installed in the central reserve, the appropriate width will
generally be determined by the diameter of the mast and the horizontal clearance requirements of
section 3.5. However, the width of the concrete foundations may also influence the position of any kerb
surround.

3.4.7.5 If traffic signs are to be mounted on the central reserve normal clearance requirements should be
maintained. However, some reduction of these in accordance with paragraph 3.5.2.2 is acceptable in
difficult conditions.

3.4.7.6 On Urban Trunk and Primary Distributor Roads, a minimum 500mm wide marginal strip must be
provided adjacent to each carriageway as part of the central reserve. This width may be increased to
effect any adjustment to the alignment of the barrier fence provided. It can also be assumed for initial
design purposes that, the road lighting columns will be located in the central reserve, and the barrier
fence to be provided will be a concrete profile barrier fence. The minimum width of the central reserve
will be determined by the sum of, the marginal strips, the width required for the lighting column or
other street furniture and the width required for the concrete profile barriers. A provisional minimum
overall width for the central reserve may be taken as 2300mm but this may need to be adjusted
depending on actual mounting details of the lighting columns, gantry signs and traffic signs to allow
the standard horizontal clearance shown in paragraph 3.5.2.1 to be achieved.
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.7.7 For Rural Trunk Roads the same considerations as given to Urban Trunk Roads apply to the central
reserve width, with the exception that the marginal strips should be increased to a minimum width of
not less than 1000mm. The minimum provisional central reserve width for a Rural Trunk Road, having
concrete profile barriers incorporating lighting columns will therefore be 3200mm, subject to the
detailed arrangements for mounting the lighting columns and gantry signing Planting in the central
reserve of a Rural Trunk Road should be viewed with caution because of the high traffic speeds that
can be generated and the maintenance problems and difficulty of access that can result. However if
such planting is considered appropriate a central reserve width of at least 4000mm will be required.
Most traffic signs should be able to be accommodated within the 3200mm minimal width without the
necessity for further widening.

3.4.7.8 On District and Local Distributor Roads and Rural Roads having dual carriageways the width of the
central reserve will vary according to the particular circumstances of the route. However in those
situations where a concrete profile barrier incorporating lighting columns is considered appropriate
marginal strips not less than 300mm wide must be provided adjacent to the barrier. Based on the
provision of concrete profile barriers and lighting columns a minimum provisional width for the central
reserve may be taken as 1700mm, subject to the detailed arrangements as to mounting requirements for
the lighting columns. If planting in the central reserve is required the minimum planting width provided
should not normally be less than 1000 mm wide, and it may be appropriate for amenity reasons to
replace the concrete profile barrier with a suitable dwarf wall and kerbs. The marginal 300mm strip
should however be retained. Where a concrete profile barrier or other barrier is not considered
appropriate or necessary paragraphs 3.4.7.2 and 3.4.7.3 will be relevant in respect of the widths for the
central reserve. If traffic signs are required to be erected on the central reserves of this type of road the
minimum provisions of paragraph 3.5.2.1 must at least be attained.

3.4.7.9 Consideration should also be given when determining the widths of central reserves as to the future
requirements, if any, of fixed track mass transit systems and elevated road structures.

3.4.7.10 Careful attention should be given to the termination of central reservations and traffic islands
particularly where turning movements may take place, and adequate road markings and signs in
accordance with Volume 3 must be provided in order to direct vehicles past the islands or reservations.
For details of barrier fences, refer to Highways Department Standard Drawings.

3.4.7.11 If refuge islands are provided for pedestrians at junctions a minimum width of 4.5m should be provided
on the exit carriageway and 3.8m on the entry carriageway. The latter may need to be increased to
4.5m if there is a high percentage of heavy goods vehicles. Additionally as shown in Diagrams 3.4.7.1
and 3.4.7.2 the nose of the islands should not generally be closer than 3mto the line of kerbs of the
other road forming the junction.

3.4.7.12 Parking should not be permitted in the vicinity of traffic islands or refuges at junctions. It is not only
because of the danger of masking pedestrians crossing the road but also it can result in vehicles running
over the island when manoeuvring past parked vehicles and negotiating the junction, causing damage
to street furniture or danger to pedestrians waiting on the island. In many cases it may be necessary to
introduce stopping restrictions in the vicinity of junctions.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.4.7.1 : TRAFFIC ISLANDS AT TEE JUNCTIONS

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETERS

DIAGRAM 3.4.7.2 : TRAFFIC ISLANDS AT 4 - WAY JUNCTIONS

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETERS

3.4.7.13 Islands, refuges and central reserves less than 1750mm in width should be paved. Whether planting or
similar treatment is appropriate where widths are greater than this will depend on considerations
mentioned previously, such as the character of the road, the requirements of pedestrians and the
location of street furniture.
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.8 Emergency Crossings and Contingency Crossings

3.4.8.1 An emergency crossing may be defined as opening of 10m in length provided in the central reserve of a
dual carriageway road solely for the purpose of emergency vehicles gaining access from one
carriageway to another. Careful consideration should be given to the provision of such facilities, as the
gaps create particular hazards in the respect that they increase the risk of vehicles encroaching onto the
opposite carriageway and that in the event that a vehicle strikes the end piece of any barrier in the
central reserve, serious injury or fatality can result to the occupants of that vehicle. The guiding
principle should be to minimize the number of emergency crossings provided.

3.4.8.2 A contingency crossing at central reserve of a dual carriageway road is considered as serving the
purpose of temporary traffic diversion. Removable concrete barriers are normally to be provided at
these crossings. As mobilization of plants is required for removing the barriers, opening of the crossing
will have to take time. Provision of contingency crossings should be based on agreed contingency plans
for major roads. New contingency plans for new major roads should be prepared during planning and
design stages of the road projects. The contingency plans should show traffic diversion proposals to
cope with traffic incidents and where justified, the locations of proposed contingency crossings at
central reserve. Comment and agreement should be sought on the contingency plans from Highways
Department, the Police, Transport Department (Strategic Roads Division, Regional Office and
Transport Incident Management Section) and other relevant parties. The agreed contingency plans
should be provided to Transport Incident Management Section of Transport Department for
maintenance.

3.4.8.3 Emergency crossing may also serve the purpose of contingency crossing but not vice versa. Hence very
strong justification is necessary to position a contingency crossing near an emergency crossing.

3.4.8.4 On high speed road (except expressway) where speed limit is 70 km/h or above, with limited access
and no frontage development, emergency crossings need not be provided unless intersections are
greater than 1.5km apart. If intersections are greater than 1.5km apart and emergency crossings are
required, they should generally not be spaced closer than 1.5km apart. Moreover, the emergency
crossing should not be located at the bend of the road for safety reason. To determine the exact
location, length and number of emergency crossings for a particular scheme, the views of the Police
and Fire Services Department should be obtained, and where feasible their requirements should be
taken into account.

3.4.8.5 On expressways, emergency openings should follow the requirements set out in Section 6.2.1.10 of
TPDM Volume 2 Chapter 6.

3.4.8.6 For dual carriageway roads other than those described above, emergency crossings should generally be
provided approximately at 600m intervals, but again the views of the Police and Fire Services
Department should be obtained, as to whether such provision is necessary or not.

3.4.8.7 Whenever emergency crossings are required care should be taken that they are not sited such that they
would encourage pedestrians to use them as convenient crossing points. For this reason they should not
be located opposite bus stops, side road junctions or any point of major pedestrian activity.

3.4.8.8 When not in operation emergency crossings should be closed by means of suitably designed barriers
which should have been agreed with the Police and Fire Services Department. It is important that such
barriers can be removed or knocked down rapidly and easily to make access through the crossing in
case of emergency. Further, they should be properly maintained and replaced when damaged.
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.8.9 When existing emergency crossings are no longer needed after reviewing in accordance with the
guidelines above, they should be regarded as superfluous and can be sealed up after consultation with
the stakeholders. In addition, existing emergency crossings identified to be sealed up under the 3km
spacing trial scheme should also be regarded as superfluous. Removable concrete barriers should be
used to seal up these superfluous emergency crossings to cater for future temporary traffic diversion.
However, if it is considered that such contingency arrangement is not necessary, e.g. alternative
temporary diversion route is available nearby, permanent concrete barrier can be used instead.

3.4.8.10 Stakeholders should be consulted to obtain comments/agreement on the proposals of emergency

crossings and contingency crossings. The following consultation list, which is not necessarily
exhaustive, is given for general guidance :
The Police, Fire Services Department,
Proposals to set up new
Case 1 Highways Department and Transport
emergency crossings
Department (Regional Office).
The Police, Highways Department,
Proposals to use
Transport Department (Strategic
removable concrete
Case 2 Roads Division, Regional Office and
barriers to set up new
Transport Incident Management
contingency crossings
Section).
The Police, Fire Services Department,
Proposals to use
Highways Department and Transport
removable concrete
Department (Regional Office).
barriers or concrete
[Remarks : Transport Incident
Case 3 profile barriers, as
Management Section of Transport
appropriate, to seal up
Department should also be consulted if
superfluous emergency
the superfluous emergency crossing
crossings
also serves as contingency crossing.]

3.4.9 Verges, Marginal Strips and Hard Shoulders

3.4.9.1 A 3300mm wide hard shoulder should be provided on all new Expressways. For details, refer to
Volume 2 Chapter 6 of this manual.

3.4.9.2 A 3000mm wide verge incorporating a 1000mm marginal strip should be provided on all Trunk Roads
with the exception of elevated structures for which a 1000mm nearside marginal strip should be
provided.

3.4.9.3 On elevated dual carriageway Primary Distributor Roads, a 1000mm nearside marginal strip should be
provided.

3.4.9.4 Marginal strips should be of the same or similar construction as the carriageway, verges may be
suitably hardened.

3.4.9.5 Any barrier fence erected along the nearside verge shall not be closer than 2500mm to the edge of the
carriageway.

3.4.9.6 In addition to the other requirements specified in this Chapter, sufficient vertical and horizontal (up to
5100mm) clearances as shown in Tables 3.5.1.1 and 3.5.2.1 should be provided for any noise barrier
provided along the edge of the carriageway.

3.4.9.7 Kerbs should not be provided on Trunk Roads as far as possible to avoid more severe consequences
caused to errant vehicles when they hit the kerbs. Where kerbs are required along Trunk or Primary
Distributor Roads they should normally have a 45 splay and not project greater than 75mm above the
adjacent marginal strip.
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.9.8 Attention is drawn to paragraph 3.3.5.2 as in locations where radii below R3 are used it may be
necessary to increase the width of the verge depending on the design speed value. Also in the vicinity
of the Advanced and Final Advanced Direction Signs, it may be necessary to provide a wider verge if
an embankment or cutting can not be utilised. If actual sign dimensions are not known a width of 7m
from the back of the marginal strip may be taken as a reasonable estimate of the space required,
including the minimum horizontal clearance, for Advanced Direction Signs on roads with a Design
Speed greater than 80 km/h.

3.4.9.9 On single carriageway elevated roads of whatever type the highway cross section should include for a
1000mm marginal strip on one side and a 500mm marginal strip on the other.

3.4.10 Police Observation Platforms

3.4.10.1 Police observation platforms are raised areas provided for police vehicles to park clear of the
carriageway and hard shoulder in order to :

(i) monitor traffic flow;

(ii) improve surveillance procedures;

(iii) reduce response time to incidents on the road;

(iv) provide a police presence and thereby improve compliance by road users of traffic
regulations;

(v) provide easy access to the main carriageway for enforcement purposes;

(vi) provide an area off the carriageway where if necessary offending motorists can be
interviewed.

3.4.10.2 Police observation platforms should be provided at approximately 2km intervals on each carriageway
on all Rural Trunk Roads of 5km or more in length. A staggered arrangement should always be
adopted so that the distance between alternate platforms is normally about 1km.
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.10.3 The location of the platforms will need to be determined in consultation with the Police, which should
take place at an early stage in the design procedure. The exact location of the platforms however may
not be able to be agreed until the construction stage has been reached when obstructions to visibility
can be identified, and will have regard to the following :
(i) additional land take over can be minimised;

(ii) where platform construction costs can be minimised e.g. at changeover points between
cuttings and embankments;

(iii) maximum unobstructed visibility in both directions from the platform can be provided.
Visibility requirements will be related to the spacing of platforms and where possible
intervisibility between alternate platforms is advantageous. If not possible either by reason
of intervening obstructions or the spacing of platforms is necessarily greater than that given
in paragraph 3.4.10.2, a visibility distance of at least 0.8 km in both directions is desirable
and priority should be given to the upstream view. But lesser visibility distances below 0.4
km are not acceptable ; Where a platform is to be used in conjunction with a speed
detection system, downstream visibility can be shortened to a distance of 0.8 km.

(iv) if emergency crossings are provided, the platform should be located upstream of the
crossing to ensure that the police vehicles can safely reach it. The platform should not
however be located downstream of the emergency crossing as it involves a manoeuvre
against the flow of traffic for the police to reach the crossings;

(v) where an emergency telephone system is provided it is advantageous to have the platform
sited near the telephone. However the telephones should not be sited within the limits of
the platform as it will encourage vehicles other than those of the police to use the
platforms;

(vi) there are certain advantages such as the early detection of unsafe or overloaded vehicles, in
siting platforms near slip roads where major diverging, merging or weaving movements
take place;

(vii) other factors that may also need to be taken into account are :

(a) Suitable radio reception qualities.

(b) Whether the site could be affected by high cross winds.

(c) Platforms should not be sited where the vehicles using them would overlook the
privacy of residential property adjacent to the carriageway.

3.4.10.4 Where part of the rural trunk road route is provided with a closed circuit television surveillance system,
such as in tunnel areas, police observation platforms are not required, though it may be necessary
depending on the available verge and marginal strip width to provide lay-bys for enforcement purposes
at strategic locations.

3.4.10.5 On Rural Trunk Roads less than 5km in length, Urban Trunk Roads and Primary Distributor Roads,
police observation platforms are not necessary unless the police make a particular request and the
platforms can be justified as part of the necessary surveillance requirements. Lay-bys at suitable
intervals may be considered if the verge and marginal strip widths is below that required for
enforcement purposes.

3.4.10.6 Where police consider the spacing mentioned in paragraph 3.4.10.2 is not required or site constraints
make such spacing difficult or expensive to achieve a wider spacing may be adopted.
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.10.7 Diagram 3.4.10.1 shows the typical layout of the platform and particular points to note are:

(i) patrol vehicles must be able to park at right angles to the traffic flow;

(ii) the exit should be tapered to the rear of the marginal strip;

(iii) the platform should not be less than 1m above the adjacent carriageway;

(iv) “Police Only, 警察專用”, should be marked on the surface of the entrance run-in, facing
on-coming vehicles, and on the platform;

(v) construction details must be in accordance with Highways Department standards;

(vi) drainage must be provided in accordance with Highways Department requirements.

DIAGRAM 3.4.10.1 : POLICE OBSERVATION PLATFORM

TYPICAL LAYOUT, ELEVATION AND SECTION

ELEVATION

PLAN

SECTION X – X

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES

3.4.11 Footways

3.4.11.1 Footways should be of adequate width to accommodate pedestrian flows, street furniture and
additionally to allow reserves for utilities installations and street trees/landscaping.
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.11.2 To cater for various functions of footways, it is desirable to adopt a three-zone concept in planning for
footway. The concept comprises the "Through Zone" for pedestrian flow, "Street Furniture & Greening
Zone" for various street furniture, landscaping, etc, and "Building Frontage Zone" for area adjacent to
building frontages. The three-zone concept is indicated in Diagram 3.4.11.1. However, in cases like
some existing urban areas, the provision of footway may be subject to severe land constraints. As a
result, the provision of "Street Furniture & Greening Zone" and desirable footway width may not be
feasible and permitted. Notwithstanding this, opportunities should be sought to increase the footway
width to desirable standard when opportunities arise such as:

(i) to request for set-back of future building lines when OZPs, ODPs, layout plans and area
improvement plans are circulated.

(ii) to request for increase in footway width by set-back of site boundaries when a major
housing/residential/commercial development or government development proposal is
circulated by Housing Department, Urban Renewal Authority, a private developer, a
government department or a railway corporation.

In case that the project proponents/developers cannot be convinced to set back their site boundaries to
incorporate a "Street Furniture & Greening Zone" on the footway, they should be asked to consider the
alternative of planting trees or including greening proposals within their site boundaries alongside the
back of the footway.

DIAGRAM 3.4.11.1 : THE THREE-ZONE CONCEPT OF A FOOTWAY

 December 2023 Edition

3.4.11.3 The Through Zone is the key space available for through movement of pedestrian. It should be of
sufficient width to cater for pedestrian flow at a satisfactory level of service (LOS). Highway Capacity
Manual (HCM) 2000 can be referred to for details on LOS. Extracted details of the HCM LOS are
tabulated in TPDM Volume 6 Chapter 10 Clause 10.5.2.2. LOS C is considered as an optimal level of
service in the HCM. In view of the public expectation for a better walking environment, the upper end
of LOS C(23 pedestrians/minute/m as stated in the HCM) is preferred. The Street Furniture &
Greening Zone(SF&GZ) acts as a buffer between the Through Zone and the road and incorporates
landscaping and a variety of street furniture. Building Frontage Zone is the area between the Through
Zone and the edge of buildings. It accommodates cross movements into adjacent buildings, areas for
browsing and shopping frontages, and provide pedestrians with the additional space when walking
along building edge/dead areas.

3.4.11.4 Footway zones which allow walking should be constructed with crossfalls between 2% and 3.3% so
that they are neither too difficult to drain, nor on the other hand so steep as to make it dangerous to
walk upon.
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.11.5 The desirable minimum effective widths of footways according to pedestrian volume and type of land
use are given in Table 3.4.11.1. While a wider footway is desirable to cater for various street functions,
it is more appropriate to provide a reasonable compromise for better pedestrian environment and the
scarce land resources, particularly in the existing urban areas. The width shown in Table 3.4.11.1
should be flexibly applied to suit individual circumstance or design. In addition, it should be flexibly
increased where practical to accommodate bus bays, urban design feature, etc.

Table 3.4.11.1
Minimum Width of Footways(5)
Through Zone Width /
Peak Pedestrian Building
Street Furniture and
Land Use Type(1) Volume Frontage Zone
Greening Zone Width
(Pedestrians per Width
minute)
Commercial
Commercial / Residential
Residential Zone 1 and those
4.5m
other areas near pedestrian
Very High (Over 100)
generators such as cinemas,
rail stations, some GIC
facilities (e.g. schools), etc
3.5m
Residential Zone 1
High (80-100)
1.5m(2)-(4)
2.75m
Residential Zone 2 0.5m for dead
Medium (60-80)
areas and
2.0m
Residential Zone 3 increase to 1m
Low (Below 60) for shopping
2.0m frontages
Rural
Very Low
4.5m
Business
Medium (80)
4.5m
General Industrial Use 4m(3)-(4)
Medium
3.5m
Special Industrial Use 2m(2)-(4)
Low to Medium
2.5m
Rural Based Industrial Use 1.5m(2)-(4)
Low
 December 2023 Edition

NOTES: (1) For classification of land use, please refer to the HKPSG.

(2) The Street Furniture and Greening Zone (SF&GZ) width should be increased to
3m for planting of large trees or understorey planting along boulevards or main
roads. The boulevard or main road should have one or more of the following
characteristics:
- as major transport and pedestrian corridors in a district
- clustering with major community and tourist attractions
- developing with line of high-grade offices, retail and hotel developments
- as important district retail street
- a road of wide scale (e.g. dual 2 or 3 lane carriageway)

(3) If a bus shelter exceeding 1m width is provided along the footpath corridor,
additional width should be suitably allowed in the SF&GZ.

(4) When street furniture exceeding normal object width of 1m (such as artwork) is
required, the SF&GZ would need to be widened to cater for its provision.

(5) Pending review of Section 3.4 to incorporate other amendments in due course,
the minimum width of footways as stipulated in Annex E of Appendix A under
TPDM Volume 6 Chapter 10 should be adopted for New Development Areas
and for major new development/ redevelopment sites in the existing built-up
areas where appropriate. For other developments, the required width of the
footways would continue to be considered on a case by case basis, having
regard to relevant considerations in Section 3.4.11.

3.4.11.6 Additional widths over those in Table 3.4.11.1 may be necessary if utilities, noise mitigation measures
and/or other landscaping features are required. Furthermore, more space should also be allowed for
anticipated future development along the road. However where tree grilles or concrete block tree
surrounds are used providing that a minimum width of footway, not including the tree grilles, of 2m is
available their widths may be included as part of the effective footway width.

3.4.11.7 In Rural Areas, it is preferable to separate footways from the edge of the carriageway by a 1.5m verge.

3.4.11.8 The provision of covers to walkways would shield pedestrians from rainfall and sunshine. In deciding
whether covers are required, the following criteria should be considered.
(i) The walkway should be a main pedestrian link, connecting major public transport facilities
including railway terminals / stations, ferry terminals and major public transport
interchanges, and the nearest developed or development areas or existing covered pedestrian
facilities.
(ii) For all destinations except public hospitals, the pedestrian flows using the walkway should
be at least 3,000 ped/hr for not less than an hour on a weekday. For each public hospital, one
covered walkway should be provided to connect to major public transport facilities
irrespective of pedestrian flows.
(iii) The provision of covers may be considered for a length of the walkway up to about 500m.
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.11.9 In the design of covers for walkways, consideration should be given to the following requirements:
(i) The cover should not by itself form any obstruction to firefighting, rescue or other
emergency operation that may be required at or near the walkway. Hence, the proposed
cover and material to be used should be designed to the satisfaction of the Director of Fire
Services and the Director of Highways.
(ii) The proposal should be vetted by the Advisory Committee on the Appearance of Bridges
and Associated Structures (ACABAS) for aesthetic considerations. The need for the
provision of a covered walkway should be evaluated against its future impact on the street
scene, taking account of street trees and other roadside landscape.
(iii) If utilities obstruct the construction of covers, the utility companies should be consulted
regarding their possible diversion.
(iv) The proposed cover should not span over road junctions or run-ins if there is headroom or
structural problem.
(v) After installation of covers, the clear width of the walkway should not be less than 3m,
particularly at column / footing locations. For walkways that cannot meet this requirement,
covers should not be considered unless it is feasible to widen the walkway where necessary.
For very wide walkways, the width of covers to be provided has to be decided on an
individual basis.
(vi) Advice from the District Office should be sought on comprehensive public consultation of
the proposal.
(vii) Priority should be given to those locations where there is little opportunity for the public to
be sheltered by other features, such as existing building or tree canopies.

3.4.12 Typical Cross Sections

3.4.12.1 Diagrams 3.4.12.1 to 3.4.12.8 illustrate cross sections for the following road types :

(i) Urban and Rural Trunk Roads

(ii) Primary Distributor Roads

(iii) District and Local Distributor Roads

(iv) Rural Roads

(v) Elevated Single Carriageway Roads

(vi) Feeder Roads

(vii) Service Roads, and

(viii) Industrial Access Roads

3.4.12.2 Whilst the cross sections are intended to represent typical situations, it may well be necessary to adjust
certain of the dimensions to suit the particular circumstances, though very localised adjustments, other
than in respect of widening on sharp curves, should be avoided wherever possible.
 December 2023 Edition

3.4.12.3 Dimensions which should be regarded as minimal and therefore not subject to any further reduction are
those for marginal strips and carriageway widths, though in the case of the latter some reduction in
respect of Rural Trunk Roads and Rural Roads may be acceptable. For further details on this and on the
other components which form the total road width the relevant sections should be consulted.

DIAGRAM 3.4.12.1 : TRUNK ROADS

TYPICAL CROSS SECTION

URBAN

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: 1. FOR DETAILS OF ROAD STUDS AND MARKINGS SEE VOLUME 3.

2. VERGE / MARGINAL STRIP EDGE DETAIL DEPENDENT ON

DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS.

3. ACTUAL VERGE AND RESERVE WIDTHS WILL BE DEPENDENT ON

STREET FURNITURE REQUIREMENTS.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.4.12.2 : PRIMARY DISTRIBUTOR ROADS

TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS

PRIMARY DISTRIBUTOR ROAD

ELEVATED ROAD

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: 1. FOR DETAILS OF ROAD STUDS AND MARKINGS SEE VOLUME 3.

2. ACTUAL CENTRAL RESERVE WIDTH WILL BE DEPENDENT ON

STREET FURNITURE REQUIREMENTS.

3. MARGINAL STRIP IS ONLY PROVIDED FOR DESIGN SPEED/SPEED

LIMIT GREATER THAN 50 km/h.

4. FOR DETAILS OF FENCE BARRIERS, SEE SECTION 3.9.3

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.4.12.3 : DUAL CARRIAGEWAY ROADS

TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS

DISTRICT AND LOCAL DISTRIBUTOR ROADS

RURAL ROADS

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: 1. THE CENTRAL RESERVE CONCRETE PROFILE BARRIER MAY BE

REPLACED BY A SUITABLE DWARF WALL AND KERB BUT THE
MARGINAL STRIP SHOULD BE RETAINED.

2. ON LOCAL DISTRIBUTOR ROADS AN ADDITIONAL 3000mm

PARKING WIDTH MAY BE PROVIDED ON ONE OR BOTH SIDES.

3. ACTUAL CENTRAL RESERVE WIDTH WILL BE DEPENDENT ON

STREET FURNITURE REQUIREMENTS.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.4.12.4 : 4 - LANE ROADS

TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS

DISTRICT AND LOCAL DISTRIBUTOR ROADS

RURAL ROADS A & B

NOT TO SCALE

DIAGRAM 3.4.12.5 : URBAN SINGLE CARRIAGEWAY ROADS

TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS

DISTRICT OR LOCAL DISTRIBUTOR ROAD

ELEVATED SINGLE CARRIAGEWAY ROAD

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: ON LOCAL DISTRIBUTOR ROADS WHERE PARKING IS PLANNED. A 3000mm

STRIP SHOULD BE ADDED TO ONE SIDE.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.4.12.6 : RURAL SINGLE CARRIAGEWAY ROADS

TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS

RURAL ROAD A

RURAL ROAD B

FEEDER ROAD

NOT TO SCALE

DIAGRAM 3.4.12.7 : SERVICE ROADS

TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS

ALL VEHICLES ( ONE WAY )

ALL VEHICLES ( TWO WAY )

NOT TO SCALE
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.4.12.8 : INDUSTRIAL ACCESS ROADS

TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS

PRINCIPAL ACCESS ( TWO WAY )

SECONDARY ACCESS ( TWO WAY )

SECONDARY ACCESS ( ONE WAY )

REAR SERVICE ROAD

NOT TO SCALE
 December 2023 Edition

3.5 Highway Clearances

3.5.1 Vertical Clearances for Structures over Pavements

3.5.1.1 Table 3.5.1.1 gives the minimum vertical clearance to be provided for various structures. The minimum
headroom requirements in Table 3.5.1.1 are also the desirable clearances.

3.5.1.2 The clearances given in Table 3.5.1.1. should take into account any street furniture e.g. lighting, traffic
signs and signals, which may be attached to the structure.

3.5.1.3 During construction of overhead structures across carriageways clearance may temporarily be reduced
to 4.7m, but adequate signing of this must be provided in accordance with Volume 3. Lower clearances
should be avoided wherever possible. However, where it is necessary to impose height restriction less
than 4.7m, requirements set out in paragraph 5.5.4 of Volume 5 should be followed.

Table 3.5.1.1
Vertical Clearance for Structures over Pavements
Beneath North-west Railway Power Wires
Beneath Sign Gantries (m)
Minimum for To be (m)
Location New Construction Maintained Minimum for
To be Normal When Wires pass under
(m) (m) New
Maintained Minimum Structures
Construction
Over, and within
600mm of a 5.1 5 5.5 5.4 5.6 Must not be less than 5.4m
carriageway but actual height will
Over a footway but depend on negotiation with
not within 600mm of 3.5 3.5 5.6 MTR
a carriageway
In pedestrian subways
and enclosed
footbridges
less than 23m
(i) 2.3 2.3
in length
23m or more
(ii) 2.6 2.5
in length
In cycle subways or
similar
less than 23m
(i) 2.5 2.5
in length
23m or more
(ii) 2.7 2.5
in length
Above tramways 5.6 5.6
Above North-west Will generally not be less than 5.8m but will depend on method of construction of structure, and be subject to
Railway consultation with MTR, and clearance of 6m or more may be necessary.

3.5.2 Horizontal Clearances from carriageways

3.5.2.1 Table 3.5.2.1 gives the recommended minimum clearances between the carriageway and obstructions
on the footways, verge or central reserve.
 December 2023 Edition

3.5.2.2 Although railings, and traffic signs and their posts should generally comply with the requirements of
Table 3.5.2.1, on existing footways of District and Local Distributor Roads, Rural Roads and Feeder
Roads this may not always be possible without causing considerable inconvenience to pedestrians. In
these situations, therefore, railings and signposts may be erected closer to the edge of the carriageway,
but no part of the railing, sign or its post should be nearer than 200mm. On Trunk and Primary
Distributor Roads and Rural Roads if the hard shoulders, marginal strips and verges are maintained
there should be little difficulty in achieving the clearance distances in accordance with Table 3.5.2.1 for
traffic signs situated on the nearside of a road. However for a traffic sign located on the central
reservation it may be impractical for various reasons to provide the full horizontal clearance and in
these situations some reduction may be acceptable but the resulting horizontal clearance should never
be less than 450 mm.

Table 3.5.2.1
Horizontal Clearances from the Carriageway to obstructions
Minimum Clearance where carriageway cross fall is :
Design Speed Away or towards Towards object Towards object
Height of object
(km/h) object but not steeper but not steeper and steeper
than 2.5% (mm) than 4% (mm) than 4% (mm)
(i) Less than 3m 500 600 600
50 or Less
(ii) 3m and above 500 600 800
Above 50 less (i) Less than 3m 600 600 600
than 80 (ii) 3m and above 1000 1000 1000
80 and above Any height 1000 1000 1000
 December 2023 Edition

3.6 Run-ins and Footway Crossings

3.6.1 Restrictions

3.6.1.1 Wherever possible run-ins should not be permitted on Trunk Roads, Primary Distributors, or District
Distributors. In some instances run-ins may have to be accepted because for example, existing lease
conditions do not provide powers to restrict access, or in new towns where District Distributor Roads
were designed to permit vehicular access.

3.6.1.2 However, where important traffic routes are concerned e.g. trunk roads and primary distributors, and
where the public interest might be severely prejudiced by the opening of a run-in, consideration may be
given to applying section 16(1)(h) of the Buildings Ordinance, although such action is almost certain to
result in an appeal by the developer.

3.6.2 Location of Run-ins

3.6.2.1 General

(i) Run-ins should be sited as far as possible away from junctions, horizontal curves, summit
curves, bus stops, zebra or other pedestrian crossings, railway level crossings and other
similar locations.

(ii) Where the lot abuts onto more than one road the run-in should be sited on the least
important of these roads

(iii) For corner lots, it is generally preferable to site run-ins on the downstream side of junctions
rather than on the approach side (roundabouts excepted).

(iv) Normally there should be not more than one run-in and one run-out, combined or separate,
on any single frontage.

3.6.2.2 Grade Separated Junctions

Run-ins should be avoided at, or in the vicinity of, grade separated junctions, as they substantially
increase the accident potential. Any exceptions must receive special attention to ensure that there is no
interference with weaving or merging/diverging movements.

3.6.2.3 Signal Controlled Junctions

Run-ins should not normally be sited within 60m of the stop line on the major road or within 45m on
the minor road, on either the approach or exit roads.

3.6.2.4 Roundabouts
Run-ins should not normally be located on the roundabout itself or within 60m on the exit carriageway
or 45m on the approach carriageway. In special circumstances these distances may be reduced to 30m
and 25m respectively.

3.6.2.5 Uncontrolled Intersections

Run-ins should be located as far as possible away from an uncontrolled junction and preferably not
closer than 30m. If there is a likelihood that a junction could be signalised in the future, the distance
should be that appropriate to those for signal-controlled junctions.
 December 2023 Edition

3.6.2.6 Horizontal Curves and Summit Curves

Run-ins should not normally be located on horizontal or summit curves. If, however, this cannot be
avoided, then the visibility distance for vehicles approaching the run-in should preferably be
appropriate to the Desirable Minimum Sight Distance given in Table 3.3.5.l, and never less than the
Absolute Minimum value.

3.6.2.7 Rear Loading/Unloading Lanes Access should be via a rear loading or unloading lane if one is
provided. However, where the size of the development is such as to cause overloading of the rear lane,
consideration may be given to access off the public road on to which the lot abuts. On some occasions
access from both the rear lane and the public road may be necessary.

3.6.3 Layout of Run-ins

3.6.3.1 The width of run-ins should be kept to the minimum compatible with satisfactory operation of vehicles
using the run-in. The minimum width should be such that a vehicle can enter the run in from the near
side lane without encroachment onto an adjacent lane. Where access by container vehicles is required
the width should not be less than 7.3m. Typical layouts for run-ins are shown on Diagrams 3.6.3.1,
3.6.3.2 and 3.6.3.3.

3.6.3.2 Visibility from a run-in should subject to paragraphs 3.6.3.3, 3.6.3.4 and 3.6.3.5be obtainable between
points 1.05m above the road and run-in level over the area described by ABCD in Diagram
3.6.3.4where :

(i) AC is a line 4.5m in length measured along the centre line of the run-in from the
continuation of the nearer edge of the carriageway of the road to which the run-in has
access, and

(ii) BC and CD, are “x” m in length, and “x” is in accordance with Table 3.6.3.1 and is
measured along the nearer edge of the road to which the run-in has access.

Table 3.6.3.1
Length of Visibility Line “x”
Design Speed of Main Road x
(km/h) (m)
80 or over 150
70 130
60 120
50 60

3.6.3.3 For difficult site conditions the length of the line AC in Diagram 3.6.3.4 may be reduced but should
never be less than 2m. Such reductions however would not normally be appropriate for Trunk and
Primary Distributor Roads.

3.6.3.4 If the road forming the access with the run-in is a dual carriageway road, providing there is no crossing
point in the central reserve opposite the entrance or it is a one way road, a single splay, defined by
ABC or ADC, depending on the direction of approaching traffic, in Diagram 3.6.3.4 would be
sufficient.

3.6.3.5 Parking within the vicinity of run-ins should be avoided wherever possible and of course should never
be permitted across the actual entrance. Ideally parking should be prevented throughout the length of
the visibility splay but on District, and Local Distributor Roads, Rural Roads and Feeder Roads this
may not always be possible to achieve.
 December 2023 Edition

3.6.3.6 Traffic signs and other street furniture such as lighting columns will often have to be erected within the
visibility splays or may in fact, be already erected. This should not be used as a reason for not
permitting a run-in, unless serious interference with sight lines occurs and it is not possible to relocate
the item of street furniture in question.

DIAGRAM 3.6.3.1 : DETAILS OF FOOTWAY VEHICLE CROSSING

PLAN

SECTION A - A

SECTION B – B

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.6.3.2 : FOOTWAY CROSSING FOR VEHICLE ENTRANCE

( FOR SKEW RUN-IN )

PLAN

ELEVATION OF KERB

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

DIAGRAM 3.6.3.3 : FOOTWAY CROSSING FOR FILLING STATIONS

PLAN

NOTE: POSITION OF DUCTS TO BE MARKED ON FOOTWAY THUS C+D

ELEVATION

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.6.3.4 : VISIBILITY AREA AT RUN-INS

3.6.4 Vehicular access to Short Term Tenancy (S.T.T.) Sites and Short Term Waiver (S.T.W.) Sites

3.6.4.1 Because it is impractical to ban vehicular access to all STT or STW sites the following guidelines
should be used when considering whether access is appropriate or not :

(i) Trunk Roads

No direct access from an STT or STW to a Trunk Road shall be permitted.

(ii) Primary Distributors

As a general rule no access direct from an STT or STW; shall be permitted. Direct access
will only be considered in exceptional circumstances when all other possible access
provisions have been examined and proved impractical. Even then direct access may only
be approved if general traffic engineering conditions such as the available sight lines,
distance from junctions or pedestrian crossings etc, taking into account the speed and
volume of existing or predicted traffic, are acceptable.

(iii) District Distributors

As a general rule direct access from an STT or STW should be avoided if possible. Direct
access will be considered for large sites only if other access provisions have been examined
and proved impractical. Even then direct access may only be approved if the location is
such that general traffic engineering conditions such as, the available sight lines, distance
from junctions or pedestrian crossings etc, taking into account the speed and volume of
existing or predicted traffic, are acceptable. The matter of predicted traffic flow in new
towns is particularly important as though traffic may be light at the time the matter is under
consideration the situation could change rapidly as development proceeds and therefore
careful consideration must be given in order not to create precedents or situations which
could later prove difficult to cater for.
 December 2023 Edition

(iv) Local Roads

Direct access from an STT or STW may be approved if the location is such that general
traffic engineering conditions such as the available sight lines, distance from junctions or
pedestrian crossings etc are acceptable.

(v) Motorable Tracks (not maintained by Highways Department)

Before agreeing to direct access from an STT or STW consideration should be given to the
following factors :

(a) Size and nature of the proposed STT or STW sites e.g. (factories or storage
area).

(b) Width of the existing track. STT or STW sites should not be considered on
single track roads of inadequate width or where the provision of passing bays at
suitable intervals is not possible due to site constraints, including structures or
private land.

(c) Need for road improvements. Each case has to be considered on its merits and
in some cases it may be necessary to carry out some minor road improvements
before such sites can be accepted.

(d) General traffic engineering conditions, such as available sight lines, distance
from junction etc.

3.6.4.2 In the detailed assessment of the location of an access to S.T.T. or S.T.W. sites the traffic engineering
aspects referred to in respect of normal run-in requirements in sections 3.6.1, 3.6.2 and 3.6.3 will also
be applicable.
 December 2023 Edition

3.7 Pedestrian Crossing Facilities

3.7.1 Planning of Pedestrian Crossing Facilities

3.7.1.1 A majority of road accidents happen to pedestrians whilst crossing the road. It is therefore essential
that proper consideration should be given to providing adequate and safe crossing facilities for
pedestrians.

3.7.1.2 Complete segregation of pedestrians from vehicular traffic by footbridges or subways is obviously the
safest form of crossing. It will also have the advantages of better environment, faster vehicle speed
and higher road capacity. Therefore, it is important at the outline planning stage of all new
development that proper consideration is given to the provision of such facilities. Even if grade
separated crossings could not be justified at the initial stages of the development, consideration may
be given to the reservation of land for future provision if appropriate. Notwithstanding the safety and
capacity benefits, however, the higher capital and recurrent costs associated with grade separated
crossings should be duly taken into consideration.

3.7.1.3 The important factor in planning for all pedestrian crossings is that the location ensures maximum
potential usage and is as convenient as possible to defined pedestrian paths. Devious routes to crossing
facilities or facilities located too far away from pedestrian routes, will lead, in spite of any railings
intended to prevent this, to pedestrians creating their own crossing points to the detriment of their own
and other road users safety.

3.7.1.4 In respect of paragraph 3.7.1.3 Regulation 39 of the Road Traffic (Traffic Control) Regulations does
make it an offence for pedestrians to climb through or over any railings, and also to cross the road
within 15m of a crossing facility other than at the facility. However it is preferable that such actions
be avoided by making the crossing facility the most obvious and direct place to cross rather than relying
on police enforcement.

3.7.1.5 Guidance as to what type of crossing facility is most appropriate for a particular location is given in
subsequent sections. However, it should be noted that substantial capital and recurrent costs, time and
effort are needed for construction, operation and maintenance of a grade-separated crossing. A grade
separated crossing at or in the vicinity of an at-grade crossing is likely to be under-utilised and therefore
not cost effective. Such provision should be avoided as far as possible and should be considered only
in exceptional circumstances with extremely strong justifications.

3.7.2 At-Grade Crossings

3.7.2.1 At-Grade Crossing are of the following types:

(i) Zebra Crossings

(ii) Light Signal Controlled Crossings

(iii) Cautionary Crossing at signal junctions

(iv) Uncontrolled cautionary crossings

3.7.2.2 At all at-grade crossing points dropped kerbs in accordance with Diagram 3.7.2.1 should be provided
to assist the elderly and people with disabilities. The lowered kerbs should be provided for the full
width of the crossing, with the ramped kerbs being located outside this width. Under no circumstances
should a dropped kerb be continuous around a corner radius as this could lead to vehicles running onto
the footway when negotiating the corner, but see also paragraph 3.7.4.10.
 December 2023 Edition

3.7.2.3 At-grade crossings should not generally be installed on Trunk Roads or Primary Distributors, where
pedestrians should be segregated from vehicular traffic. Across Primary Distributors serving also as
District Distributors consideration may be given to the use of light signal controlled crossings but no
other form of at-grade crossing should be used.

3.7.2.4 The width of at-grade crossings should generally not be less than 2.5m nor greater than 9m. Normally
the crossing width will vary between 4m and 6m, as widths less than this have been found to be too
narrow, and widths greater than this neither possible because of site limitations nor desirable because
of the effects on vehicle capacity. Width of 2.5m may be appropriate for uncontrolled cautionary
crossings.

3.7.2.5 it is important that the crossing width provided is not obstructed by street furniture and that adequate
sight lines for pedestrians are available.

3.7.2.6 Table 3.7.2.1 gives a guide to appropriate crossing widths in relation to expected flows, and also serves
as a first step in the calculation of pedestrian capacity at signal controlled crossing which is explained
in Section 3.7.4.It should however be stressed that pedestrian volumes in excess of those indicated for
a particular width have been recorded and therefore the table should not be applied rigidly. Volumes
in excess of 1200 pedestrians per metre width per hour, will generally be difficult for any at-grade
crossing to deal with satisfactorily from both a pedestrian safety and vehicular flow aspect and
improvements or alternative means of crossing should be considered when flows are at or above that
level.

3.7.2.7 Adequate reservoir space must be provided at the edge of the carriageway and on any central refuge,
for pedestrians waiting to cross.

3.7.2.8 The following factors should be considered when assessing whether a zebra crossing or a light signal
controlled crossing should be provided:

(i) the surveyed pedestrian/vehicle flows conflict;

(ii) the current accident record; and

(iii) the benefits to pedestrians in terms of convenience, safety and reduced delay against any
additional delay incurred by vehicle occupants.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.7.2.1 : RAMPING OF KERB AND FOOTWAY

AT DESIGNATED PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS

PLAN

ELEVATION OF KERB

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

Table 3.7.2.1
Crossing Widths
According to Approximate Pedestrian Flows
Crossing Width(m) Pedestrians Per Hour Both Directions
2.5 1500 - 3000
4 2400 - 4800
5 3000 - 6000
6 3600 - 7200
7 4200 - 8400
8 4800 - 9600
9 5400 - 10800

3.7.2.9 Guidelines for the provision of a zebra crossing and a light signal controlled crossing are given in
sections 3.7.3 and 3.7.4 respectively.

3.7.3 Zebra Crossings

3.7.3.1 The road markings for the crossing and the controlled area are shown in Diagrams 3.7.3.1 and 3.7.3.2
respectively. Further information on these markings and how they are formed are given in Volume 3.

3.7.3.2 Zebra crossings have the advantage of being the simplest and cheapest controlled crossing to install and
operate, generally enabling the pedestrian to cross a road safely and with minimum delay.
 December 2023 Edition

3.7.3.3 The disadvantage of zebra crossings is that they may be disruptive to vehicular traffic causing
considerable delays if pedestrian flows are heavy. Therefore, they may also be less safe for pedestrians
and should not normally be installed in the following situations:

(i) On Trunk Roads and Primary Distributor Roads.

(ii) When the speed limit of a road exceeds 50 km/h.

(iii) When the approach road before the zebra crossing has a downhill gradient of 4% or steeper
for a length of l00m or more.

(iv) When traffic signals on either side of the location of the proposed zebra crossing are linked
or form part of an ATC system.

(v) When the proposed location is at close proximity to a roundabout of small radius.

3.7.3.4 The provision of zebra crossings on District Distributor Roads and Rural Roads should be treated with
discretion as conditions such as high vehicle approach speeds or heavy traffic volumes may not be
appropriate for these crossings.

3.7.3.5 The following quantitative criteria may be used, subject to paragraph 3.7.3.6, as a guide to whether a
zebra crossing is appropriate or not for roads not affected by the criteria in paragraph 3.7.3.3.

(i) Where a central refuge is not to be provided,

PV2 > 108

where, P = No. of pedestrians per hour averaged over the six highest hours,
and V= No. of vehicles per hour averaged over the six highest hours and is > 600

(ii) Where a central refuge is provided,

PV2 > 2 x 108,

where P and V are as defined in (i) but in this case V > 800.

DIAGRAM 3.7.3.1 : INDICATION OF ZEBRA PEDESTRIAN CROSSING

NOTE: DIMENSIONS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH REF. 18.

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.7.3.2 : INDICATION OF ZEBRA CONTROLLED AREA

PATTERN OF LINES ON ONE OR BOTH SIDES OF A

CROSSING INDICATING ZEBRA CONTROLLED AREA.

NOTE: DIMENSIONS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH REF. 18.

3.7.3.6 In rural areas in the New Territories, and in some urban areas, conditions sometimes exist where the
criteria mentioned in paragraph 3.7.3.5 could not be obtained, because of the low level of pedestrian
use. However for safety reasons an uncontrolled cautionary crossing would not be appropriate and
therefore in these locations the criteria given in Table 3.7.3.1 may be used. Care however should be
exercised in the use of the table, and it should be established that there is a genuine need for a zebra
crossing. Proliferation of zebra crossings particularly where pedestrian flows are light may lead to a
debasement of the value of the crossing generally. The possible accident effect as mentioned in
paragraph 3.7.3.7 should also be taken into account.

Table 3.7.3.1
Criteria for Zebra Crossings in Rural Areas
Peak hour vehicular volume
Without Pedestrian With Pedestrian Peak Hour Pedestrian
Number of Lanes
Refuge Refuge Volume
2 lanes 1000 - 70
3 lanes 600 - 70
4 or more lanes 400 1000 70
 December 2023 Edition

3.7.3.7 Accident statistics may also be taken into account when considering the introduction of a zebra crossing
or the change of a zebra crossing to another form of crossing. If detailed analysis of the accident pattern
indicates that inadequate pedestrian crossing, facilities is one of the contributory factors of the
accidents, then these may be used to justify the need for a crossing, or a change of crossing type even
though the conditions in paragraph 3.7.3.5 may not be entirely satisfied. However, research findings
in “The Overall Effect on Accidents at Sites where Zebra Crossings were Installed” of the U.K. have
indicated that, "the installation of a zebra crossing can achieve a significant reductions in accidents
only if the accident rate, prior to installation, is at or above the average. In fact there is a danger that
the installation will have a serious effect, particularly on pedestrians, if there is no definable problem
before the crossing is installed." Territory conditions are not always the same as those in the U.K. but
it would seem worth taking these findings into consideration when deciding the merits or otherwise of
installing a zebra crossing.

3.7.3.8 Where vehicular flows averaged over the 6 hours exceed 1,000 vehicles per hour, other forms of
crossings i.e. light controlled or grade separated may be more appropriate particularly in terms of safety
and causing less disruption.

3.7.3.9 For existing zebra crossings where peak hour flows are equal to or exceed 1,700 vehicles per hour.
consideration should be given to changing the crossing to a light controlled one, or where appropriate
to a grade separated crossing.

3.7.3.10 Appropriate widths for zebra crossings are indicated in Table 3.7.2.1.

3.7.3.11 Desirable Minimum sight distances in accordance with Table 3.7.3.2 should normally be available to
motorists on the approach to a zebra crossing, and should only in exceptional circumstances be less
than the Absolute Minimum. Appropriate warning signs should be erected where visibility distances,
are at or below Absolute Minimum.

Table 3.7.3.2
Sight Distance for Zebra Crossing
Speed Limit (km/h) Desirable Minimum(m) Absolute Minimum(m)
50 70 50
60 95 70
70 125 95

3.7.3.12 The location of zebra crossing as with other crossings should take account of advice given in section
3.7.1. However particular care should be taken where zebra crossings are located near bus stops that
stopped buses will not obscure the vision of pedestrians or motorists. Zebra crossings should also be
avoided near points where traffic streams merge as the motorists will have difficulty in observing both
the traffic to be merged with, and possible pedestrians on the zebra crossing ahead. At exits From
roundabouts particular problems arise where if the crossing is sited too close to the roundabout vehicles
may tail back onto the roundabout, but if it is located too far away pedestrians may not use it. Each
situation will require individual consideration but generally the crossing should not be located closer
than 20m to the roundabout exit.

3.7.3.13 Zebra crossings impose a number of restrictions on vehicles, which are mentioned in more detail in
Volume 3, and it is important that the implications of these restrictions are taken into account when
proposing the installation of any zebra crossings. A particular point to bear in mind is the stopping
restrictions imposed by the Zebra Controlled area and what if any implications this may have on
frontage developments.

3.7.4 Signal Light Controlled Crossings

3.7.4.1 A typical layout of a signal light controlled crossing is shown in Diagram 3.7.4.1.
 December 2023 Edition

3.7.4.2 A signal light controlled crossing is more appropriate than a zebra crossing in the following situations:

(i) where there are significant numbers of elderly and disabled pedestrians;

(ii) where pedestrian and/or vehicle flows are heavy;

(iii) at sites with relatively high approaching speeds;

(iv) at special sites such as contra-flow bus lanes; and

(v) in areas operating under an Area Traffic Control System.

3.7.4.3 The use of staggered crossing should be avoided and CTEs should personally vet and approve such
installations, if absolutely necessary. If such type of crossing is provided, the staggering should
preferably be left-handed so that pedestrians stepping onto the central reserve or refuge turn towards
the approaching traffic to give them a better view of it. The central refuge should be large enough to
accommodate the expected numbers of pedestrians gathered during each signal cycle.

3.7.4.4 The pedestrian signal aspects must be so positioned that pedestrians looking at these are also facing
the approaching traffic as shown in Diagram 3.7.4.1.

3.7.4.5 In the event that the crossing width is excessive, say more than 9 m, it is advisable to conduct a site
inspection to ascertain whether the provision of two sets of pedestrian signals is required.

3.7.4.6 The method of calculating signal timings and similar details are contained in Volume 4 of this manual.

3.7.4.7 When the signal light controlled crossing forms part of a signal controlled junction, careful
consideration should be given to the form and siting of the crossing. Split vehicle movements in front
of pedestrian crossing should be avoided as far as possible as this will mislead pedestrians who may
be tempted to cross in front of stopped vehicles. If split phases have to be provided, channelising islands
should be constructed in order to provide refuges for pedestrians to wait. If refuges cannot be provided
in these circumstances it is preferable that the crossing point be relocated.

3.7.4.8 At signal controlled junction with light controlled crossings, vehicle/pedestrian conflict points should
be checked in addition to checking the vehicle/vehicle conflict points to ensure adequate vehicle
clearance time before commencement of the pedestrian green signal.

3.7.4.9 Predicted flows may be taken as the averaged four highest hours. Flows should be measured over a
50m length in the vicinity of the proposed location of the crossing, unless there is a crossing place
already defined. However even with a defined crossing place it may be appropriate to extend the survey
area to include pedestrians who may be crossing the road near but not on the crossing place.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.7.4.1 : TYPICAL SIGNALISED CROSSING LAYOUT

3.7.4.10 The location of the crossing point at signal controlled junctions with a pedestrian phase is important
on the positioning of the dropped kerb. In many occasions kerbs have been dropped around the
complete radius of the kerbs between the major and minor roads. Unfortunately this tends to encourage
vehicles to negotiate the curve much closer to the kerb than they normally would. Therefore, the
crossing should be aligned so that the tangent point of the radius on the minor road is the point where
the kerb is first ramped down to form the dropped kerb. For large radius curves, however, this may
mean that the crossing is located along the minor road footway away from the normal path of
pedestrians and with insufficient reservoir width for pedestrians waiting to cross. In these latter
instances the crossing may be positioned closer to the minor road, but the dropped kerbs should not
extend along the circumferences of the kerb radius for more than half its length. However in many
locations there is also an adjacent crossing on the major road and the adjustment of the crossing on the
minor road can result in the dropped kerbs of both crossings coinciding. If the crossing on the major
road cannot be set further back to avoid this, at least 2m and preferably 3m of raised kerbs should be
provided between adjacent crossings.

3.7.4.11 As with other crossings it is essential that there is adequate reservoir space at the side of the road and
within any refuge island provided for pedestrians to wait without encroaching onto the carriageway
and without obstructing the movements of other passing pedestrians.

3.7.4.12 Audible traffic signals must be provided at signal light controlled crossings to assist visually impaired
persons. For details of operation hours, refer to Volume 4 Chapter 4.

3.7.5 Cautionary Crossings at Signal Controlled Junctions

3.7.5.1 These are crossing places indicated by studs and incorporated as part of a signal controlled junction
installation, but have no separate pedestrian phase provided. Pedestrians have no right of way at these
places but are encouraged to cross "with the light" during the red periods to vehicular traffic.

3.7.5.2 The use of this type of crossing should be avoided wherever possible and particularly where split
phases and relatively high vehicular movements are involved.

3.7.5.3 The disadvantage of this type of crossing is that pedestrians are required to look at the signal heads
intended for vehicular traffic to see when it is appropriate to cross. The most visible one to pedestrians
is generally the secondary signal which means that pedestrians will be looking in the opposite direction
to which traffic is approaching to their obvious disadvantage should the signals suddenly change.
 December 2023 Edition

3.7.5.4 Where this type of crossing is employed similar consideration to the siting of the crossing as that for
signal light controlled crossings should be given.

3.7.5.5 Appropriate crossing widths may be determined from Table 3.7.2.1.

3.7.5.6 Only studs should be used to delineate the crossing area for these type of cautionary crossings, any
other markings which may be used for signal light controlled crossings are not appropriate.

3.7.6 Uncontrolled Cautionary Crossings

3.7.6.1 These crossings are only intended to indicate the general path that pedestrians should follow when
crossing a road.

3.7.6.2 Studs or other markings should not be used to delineate or enhance the area of the crossing. The only
indications that it is a crossing point should be a dropped kerb and railings to be provided on both sides
of the crossing, and if the carriageway is relatively wide, and subject to paragraph 3.7.6.6, a pedestrian
refuge in the middle of the carriageway.

3.7.6.3 Cautionary crossings should generally only be provided across local or feeder roads, and their use
should be avoided across dual carriageways wherever possible.

3.7.6.4 Similar considerations as that given to signal controlled crossings, will need to be given to the siting
of the dropped kerbs where the cautionary crossing is adjacent to a junction.

3.7.6.5 Table 3.7.2.1 may be used to determine the appropriate width over which the kerbs should be dropped.

3.7.6.6 Refuges should not be provided unless at least a 3.8m, or 4.5m carriageway if the percentage of heavy
goods vehicles and buses is high, can be provided on either side of the refuge.

3.7.6.7 Where a refuge is provided the nose of the island should be set back at least 3m from the edge of the
carriageway of the major road as shown in Diagrams 3.4.7.1 and 3.4.7.2.

3.7.7 Grade Separated Crossings

3.7.7.1 Grade separated crossings consist of the following types:

(i) Pedestrian footbridges

(ii) Pedestrian/cycle bridges

(iii) Pedestrian subways

(iv) Pedestrian/cycle subways

 December 2023 Edition

3.7.7.2 Because of the potential danger to pedestrians crossing at grade and the disruption to traffic by at-grade
crossing movements on congested roads, wherever justified consideration should be given to providing
grade separated crossings in order to segregate pedestrians from vehicular traffic. The justifications for
each case should be considered on its own merits, taking into account the following factors in the area
concerned:

(i) the anticipated pedestrian utilisation;

(ii) the type, characteristics and layout of the road concerned;

(iii) the volume and speed of the traffic;

(iv) road safety and capacity considerations;

(v) the desired pedestrian path;

(vi) the availability and location of alternative crossings;

(vii) the connectivity of the facility with nearby developments and walkway systems;

(viii) capital and recurrent cost considerations; and

(ix) public opinions.

3.7.7.3 The timing of providing grade separated facilities should tie in with the timing of adjacent
developments as far as possible. If a grade separated facility could not be justified initially as part of
new development, consideration may be given if appropriate to whether space should be reserved for
later construction of such facility.

3.7.7.4 To ensure maximum effectiveness of the grade separated facilities, they should be located as close as
possible to desired pedestrian paths, and their use does not involve detours or unnecessary climbing.

3.7.7.5 In developed and development areas, all footbridges, elevated walkways and subways, including
approach steps and ramps, should have covers. However, covers need not be provided for ramps or
bridges designed exclusively for bicycles. In other areas, the provision of covers depends on the
circumstances at the particular location. Any proposal of exemption from providing cover requires the
approval of Transport and Logistics Bureau. Application for permission of not providing covers shall
contain appropriate justification, including background and reasons for the request, and an account of
the extent and result of any consultation with the locals and the relevant District Office. Also, a
recommendation on whether provisions for future installation of covers should be made when
submitting the application for omission of covers to the Transport and Logistics Bureau.

3.7.7.6 Table 3.7.7.1 shows capacity flows for pedestrian bridges and subways. In front of display windows
an allowance of 0.5m dead width should be subtracted from the clear width available, when calculating
capacity figures.

Table 3.7.7.1
Capacities for Footbridges and Subways
Capacity Flow
Section
(Ped / Metre / Min)
Level 50
Stairs or ramps 40

3.7.7.7 Table 3.7.7.2 sets out the design dimension standards for footways and subways and takes into account
recommendations made to improve access for the disabled. For further information as to design details
the Structures Design Manual for Highways and Railways should be referred to.
 December 2023 Edition

3.7.7.8 Some reduction in the widths of stairways may be appropriate where sites are physically restricted such
as at tram islands, but care must be taken that there is sufficient space for pedestrians proceeding in
opposite directions to pass one another without endangering themselves or others. The use of
"absolute" maximum height risers should be avoided in these circumstances.

3.7.7.9 Where steps to footbridges incorporate a change in direction the minimum width of landing as given
in Table 3.7.7.2 may not be adequate and should be checked against the capacity of the stairs. Also as
far as possible a forward clear visibility of at least 3m should be maintained.

3.7.7.10 To minimise pedestrian fears for their safety in subways where possible corners should have a 4.6m
radius in order that a minimum visibility distance of 4m is achieved. This is also relevant if the subway
is a combined pedestrian/cycle way and in these cases a greater visibility distance is desirable, though
it is accepted that the visibility distances for cycle tracks given in paragraph 3.8.3.11 may be difficult
to attain. Similarly, consideration should be given to the design of footbridge railings or glass wall, so
that pedestrians are visible from outside.

3.7.7.11 Access for people with disabilities should be provided for all footbridges, elevated walkways and
subways either by the provision of ramps or lifts. Unless site conditions dictate one form over the
other, provision of ramps and lifts should be treated on an equal basis. For new construction projects,
the provision of both ramp and lift at the same time shall only be considered when high demands justify
the provision of both facilities. To determine whether a ramp or a lift should be provided will involve
the consideration of the following:

(i) proximity of the facility to existing and future developments where lifts may be provided
therein;

(ii) site constraints (such as underground utilities, land availability) and land use in the vicinity;

(iii) effect of ramps on adjacent properties and the environment (such as visual impact and
impact on air ventilation);

(iv) the convenience of pedestrians and/or other road users;

(v) mitigating against the felling of roadside trees;

(vi) demands for lift facilities from organisations such as those for persons with disabilities or
the elderly; and

(vii) feasibility of providing lifts/ramps.

3.7.7.12 Favourable consideration should be given to the provision of a lift if the following situations apply:

(i) a ramp cannot be provided, e.g. due to site constraint;

(ii) a reasonable alternative to crossing the road in question is not available; or

(iii) there is demand for such facilities from organisations such as those for persons with
disabilities or the elderly.
 December 2023 Edition

3.7.7.13 Where there are developments adjacent to a proposed footbridge, elevated walkway and/or subway,
care should be taken during the planning process to enable the connection of the footbridge, elevated
walkway and/or subway to the development with lifts/escalators being provided in the development.
These facilities could replace the provision of ramps and lifts. However, the lease conditions and/or
planning approval conditions must contain provisions to the effect that the developer has the
responsibility to ensure 24 hours free access of such facilities to adjoining public footways.
Connections between these facilities and the grade separated crossings should be barrier-free and are
easily accessible by the public without unreasonable detour. The completion of the footbridge,
elevated walkway and/or subway should tie in with the completion of the development. If for any
reason the footbridge, elevated walkway and/or subway is constructed in advance of the development,
temporary stairways and temporary at grade crossings for people with disabilities should be provided
before the development is completed.

3.7.7.14 The size, capacity and number of lifts to be provided should be demand-driven and well justified. The
project proponents should consider the existing and planned local demands in a holistic manner, such
as:

(i) close proximity to care centres, workshops, organisations, etc. for persons with disabilities
or the elderly; and

(ii) demands from local residents such as the aged population and persons with disabilities.

3.7.7.15 Vertical clearance of footbridges should meet the requirement in Table 3.5.1.1. Except above
tramways and railways, clearance greater than 5.5m should be avoided and only be accepted under
special circumstances (e.g. footbridge connecting two buildings without direct ground access), as
excessive height of stairs would affect walkability and discourage their usage, especially for elderly
and disabled. If excessive height has to be introduced, the number and size of lifts to be provided
should be critically reviewed, and stairs may be omitted in accordance with Table 3.7.7.2. It is
important to make sure that the whole pedestrian route is barrier free, particularly when there is
significant variation of footbridge level.

3.7.7.16 Project proponents are given the discretion on whether ramps or lifts should be provided in each case,
as well as the size, capacity and number of lifts, with due consideration to the above paragraphs. If in
doubt, the advice of the Transport and Logistics Bureau should be sought.

3.7.7.17 At some locations, physical barriers may be necessary to prevent vehicles from driving into subways
or subway approaches.

3.7.7.18 The shared use of facilities by pedestrians and cyclists is not recommended, and cyclists wherever
possible should be segregated from pedestrians preferably by level difference or guard railing as shown
in Diagram 3.7.7.1. Where these measures are not suitable, a raised dividing line should be provided.
Alternatively, cyclists should be made to dismount if a shared use has to be accepted.

3.7.7.19 The minimum dimensions for cross sections of combined pedestrian/cycle way is shown in Table
3.7.7.3.

3.7.7.20 Stopping sight distance for cyclists given in Table 3.7.7.4 within the subway and on the approaches
should be provided as illustrated in Diagram 3.7.7.2. These distances are applicable to design speeds
of 10 km/h or less on sharp curves and straights with staggered barriers, and 25 km/h or less on large
radii and straights.

3.7.7.21 An unsegregated subway may be acceptable where the total number of pedestrians and cycles is small.
The minimum dimensions for the cross sections are given in Table 3.7.7.3. The subway width may be
reduced to 3.0 m if the total number of pedestrians and cycles is very small or where the space is
restricted.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.7.7.1 : A CROSS SECTION OF

A TYPICAL SEGREGATED SUBWAY FOR COMBINED USE
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.7.7.2 : STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCES FOR CYCLISTS

 December 2023 Edition

Table 3.7.7.2
Design Standards for Footbridges and Subways
Footbridges Subways
2m (except on stairs to Tram or
Minimum similar platforms where a lesser
# 3m
effective width width is necessary because of
limited space)
Minimum Please see Table 3.5.1.1 of Volume Please see Table 3.5.1.1 of Volume 2
vertical # 2 Chapter 3 of the Transport Chapter 3 of the Transport Planning
clearance Planning and Design Manual and Design Manual
Where feasible stairs and either ramps or lifts should be provided on all
approaches. If site conditions do not permit, either ramp or lift should be
provided. Provision of ramps and lifts should be treated on an equal basis.

Desirable maximum gradient = 1 in 12

Absolute maximum gradient = 1 in 10
Ramps / Lifts
Centre line of circular ramps should never exceed 10%
Stepped ramps should not be provided

Adequate reservoir space / waiting space must be provided near the lift
entrance for lift users to wait without obstructing the movements of other
passing pedestrians.
1
Desirable maximum height of risers = 150mm
1
Absolute maximum height of risers = 165mm
(in exceptional circumstances only)
1
Desirable minimum width of tread = 280mm
1
Absolute minimum width of tread = 250mm
Stairways
Desirable maximum flight of steps = 12 risers
Absolute maximum flight of steps = 16 risers
1
Values chosen for riser height "R" and tread width "T" must satisfy both:
2R + T = 580 to 600
T x R = 42000 to 45000
Ramps steeper than 10% should have landings at vertical intervals not greater
than 3,500mm.
Ramps of 10% or less should have landings at vertical intervals not greater
than 3,500mm where space permits.
Landings *
Desirable length for stairs= 1,500mm – 1,800mm
Absolute minimum length for stairs= 1,000mm
Desirable length for ramps= 2,000mm
Absolute minimum length for ramps= 1,500mm
Width of all landings = Not less than that of the approach stairs or ramps
Handrails must be provided on both sides of all ramps and stairways, and
Handrails consideration should be given to the provision of central handrails on
stairways 4000mm wide or more.

*Ramps with gradients above 10% require approval from the respective AC for T/Region.

#Adequate allowance should be made for railings/handrails, lightings, finishes, etc. in calculating the clear width and
height of footbridges/subways.
 December 2023 Edition

Table 3.7.7.3
Minimum Dimensions for Segregated and Unsegregated
Subways for Pedestrians and Cyclists
Segregated Unsegregated
Subway length (m) < 23 ≥ 23 < 23 ≥ 23
Cycle track 2.5 2.7 2.5 2.7
Height (m)
Footway 2.3 2.6
Margin between subway wall and
0.5
cycle track
Width (m) 4.0
Cycle track 2.5
Footway 2.0

Table 3.7.7.4
Stopping Sight Distance for Cyclists
Minimum Minimum radius of Minimum radius of
Designed
stopping curvature of walls adjacent curvature of walls adjacent
speed
distance (m) to cycle track (m) to footway (m)
≤10 4.0 4.6 4.6
≤25 26.0 68.0 28.5

3.7.8 Escalators at Footbridges and Elevated Walkways

3.7.8.1 The criteria for provision of escalators at footbridges and elevated walkways are:

(i) when both stairs and ramps/lifts are provided, escalators should only be considered if the
estimated number of pedestrians using the footbridge in both directions is at least 3,000
pedestrians per hour for at least one hour on a weekday;

(ii) when stairs alone are provided, escalators should be considered where the average of the
estimated three highest hourly flows in both directions on a typical weekday exceeds 1,500
pedestrians per hour; and

(iii) both up and down escalators should be provided at footbridges and elevated walkways
fulfilling these criteria.

3.7.8.2 The above criteria only apply in developed and development area, and should be applied with flexibility.
Escalators will not normally be considered in other areas. A decision on whether to include escalators
should also take account of other factors such as:

(i) increasing the attractiveness to users of the facility in question in order to discourage
pedestrians from crossing roads at-grade, and in particular from jay-walking, thereby
reducing the danger of accidents;

(ii) the availability of facilities, e.g. lifts and escalators, in both buildings connected to the
footbridge or elevated walkway; and

(iii) site constraints which inhibit the provision of ramps.

 December 2023 Edition

3.7.8.3 The following information on the escalator is useful:

(i) In ascent, escalator have about twice the carrying capacity of steps.

(ii) Escalators should not normally be provided without an alternative means of ascent or
descent, whatever the case may be, as during times of maintenance to the escalators the
footbridge will be inoperable.

(iii) Operating capacities range between 112 persons/minute to 150 persons/minute.

(iv) Speeds of escalators range between 0.5m/s to 0.75m/s, 0.6m/s is about 130 persons per metre
width per minute.

(v) Escalators in the territory generally have an angle of inclination of 30 degrees.

(vi) Widths of escalators can vary considerably, depending on the location, aesthetics, and other
similar matters. However escalators for footbridges should not generally have an effective
width less than 1m if pedestrians are to be allowed to pass one another.

3.7.8.4 For descending escalators, care should be taken that there is sufficient reservoir space at the foot of the
escalator. Preferably descending escalators should not discharge pedestrians onto the footway directly
in line with an adjacent carriageway which they then may be required to cross at grade. Waiting
pedestrians can impede the flow of pedestrians being discharged from the escalator, or those pedestrians
being discharged may because of their momentum attempt to cross without paying sufficient attention
to approaching vehicular traffic.
 December 2023 Edition

3.8 Cycle Tracks

3.8.1 General

3.8.1.1 The sharing of facilities by cyclists and other road users unless volumes are low is generally not a
satisfactory arrangement because of the interference with the general flow of traffic and the
vulnerability of cyclists. Therefore where cycle traffic is relatively large, additional or segregated
facilities for cyclists should be provided.

3.8.1.2 The decision as to whether such facilities should take the form of cycle tracks parallel to existing or
proposed carriageways, or cycle paths entirely separate from other vehicle routes will be dependent
upon, the overall system being planned for, the land that can be made available, and the convenience of
the route to cyclists. Inconvenient routes however well constructed will not be used by cyclists if there
is a more direct route to their destination.

3.8.1.3 When considering the provision of cycle routes interested cycling organisations if possible should be
consulted so that their opinions on the proposal can be obtained because their views as to the
usefulness or otherwise of the route will be helpful.

3.8.1.4 The Road Traffic (Traffic Control) Regulations does not prevent, unless appropriate signs indicate
otherwise, cyclists from using bus lanes, and it may therefore be appropriate when planning cycle
routes to take advantage of any bus lanes provided in the area. However caution should be exercised, as
the level of flow at which cyclists and buses can mix without buses being impeded or cyclists put at
risk is not very high. Contra-flow bus lanes can present particular difficulties and danger to cyclists and
sharing of these facilities should generally not be encouraged.

3.8.1.5 Cycle lanes, forming part of the carriageway and exclusively for cyclists, are not specifically provided
for under the Road Traffic (Traffic Control) Regulations. In any event past experience and general
traffic conditions would not indicate that such schemes would be suitable at the present time.

3.8.2 Provision of Cycle Tracks

3.8.2.1 The decision to provide separate facilities for cycles will generally be based on accident records and
levels of existing or predicted cycle flows. However other arguments not necessarily having any factual
support may also be used to influence the decision on the provision of cycle facilities. In these latter
cases care should be taken that in agreeing to such facilities, a reasonable level of cycling activity can
be guaranteed and that an overprovision of facilities is not made. Cycle tracks provided but not used to
any extent will quickly deteriorate and may be occupied by undesirable activities. Such under-
utilisation can also prejudice any future provision of cycle facilities.

3.8.2.2 Cycling in the Territory at the present time is mainly recreational, although in the New Territories
some work journeys are made by cycle. However evidence on such journeys that are made is sparse
and therefore it is difficult to provide warrants for cycle tracks based on local experience. As for the
new development areas (NDAs) or new towns under planning, it is the Government’s prevailing policy
to promote a “bicycle-friendly environment” with a view to reducing the use of mechanized transport
mode for short-distance commuting and promoting cycling as a recreational activity with health
benefit, hence new cycle tracks as provided in the NDAs and new towns under planning should form a
coherent network linking up trip origins and key destinations and they should be safe, direct,
comfortable and attractive.
 December 2023 Edition

3.8.2.3 Table 3.8.2.1 gives guidelines as to when to provide cycle facilities based on information from abroad
Recommended Practice for the Design and Layout of Cycle tracks. However it is suggested that these
figures be used with caution, as given the very dense traffic conditions in urban areas in the Territory it
is quite likely on safety grounds that segregated facilities for cyclists could be justified for much lower
flows.

Table 3.8.2.1
Guidelines for the Provision of Cycle Facilities
Rural Areas Urban Areas Facility
Cycle flows Inside lane of carriageway
750 1000
per 16 hr widened to 4.5m
day 1000 1500 Provide separate cycle track

3.8.3 Design of Cycle Tracks

3.8.3.1 Table 3.8.3.1 shows appropriate minimum widths to be used for cycle tracks. For cycle tracks to be
provided in NDAs or new towns under planning, the design of cycle track width and their geometrical
configurations should be based on the projected cycle flow forecasts under different commuting and
recreational scenarios together with traffic safety considerations. The project proponents should make
use of the latest and most appropriate planning data for conducting these cycle flow forecasts. If such
information is not immediate available, then an assumption of cycling mode share of 3% to 5% of the
total mechanised trips on a weekday in the NDAs or new town under planning may be adopted as an
alternative subject to an approval by the relevant authority. In addition, the cycle track width may be
flexibly increased where practical to accommodate any site specific considerations.

Table 3.8.3.1
Cycle Track Widths
Desirable(m) Minimum(m)
One way 2.8 2
Two way 4.0 3.5

3.8.3.2 Whilst 2m should be regarded normally as the minimum width for a one way cycle track, in other
countries much narrower tracks have been used. Therefore in considering whether a cycle track should
be provided or not, it may be preferable to provide a substandard width than none at all. Normally such
widths should not be less than 1.5m for a one way track as even with this overtaking may be difficult
and lead to encroachment onto adjacent footways or verges.

3.8.3.3 Figures on capacities for cycle tracks vary considerably, however a reasonable guide for most
situations would be 500 cycles per metre width per hour for one way operations and 400 cycles per
metre width per hour for two way operations.

3.8.3.4 Cycle tracks should be separated from any adjacent carriageway by a verge of at least 1.8m in width. In
difficult situations, other than for Trunk Roads this width may be reduced to not less than 1m to allow
reasonable clearances from any street furniture.

3.8.3.5 Gradients for cycle tracks will generally be dictated by the surrounding topography, however wherever
possible these should not be excessive as this may distract from cyclists using the route.
 December 2023 Edition

3.8.3.6 Long gradients over 5% will cause cyclists to dismount, and therefore as a general guide, maximum
gradients of 3% to 4% should be the aim. Where the cycle track follows the main carriageway route,
the gradient will be dictated by this and no special attempt should be made to provide lesser gradients,
however where excessive long gradients could result consideration should be given as to the actual
usefulness of providing the cycle track or whether a more convenient route might be available
elsewhere.

3.8.3.7 At subways and footbridges the desirable and normal maximum gradients are 4% and 8% respectively.
In exceptional circumstances gradients of up to 10% may be acceptable with the approval of the
respective AC for T/Region. For combined cycle/pedestrian ramps, the flatter ramps will often not be
appropriate because of the greater pedestrian walking distances involved. Consideration should always
be given to requiring cyclists to dismount at subways and bridges, particularly those which are shared
with pedestrians.

3.8.3.8 Horizontal radii should preferably be not less than 5m, but in difficult conditions radii of 2m may be
acceptable. Sharp reverse curves should be avoided.

3.8.3.9 Normally when a cycle track follows a main carriageway route any footway will be positioned at the
rear of the verge/cycle track/footway area. However if there are bus stops along the route arrangements
will need to be made to enable pedestrians to wait adjacent to the carriageway. Such waiting areas must
be sufficiently wide to avoid pedestrians encroaching onto the cycle track or the adjacent carriageway.
Points at which pedestrians are required to cross the cycle track in the vicinity of bus stops should be
properly defined, with railings being used to prevent them crossing elsewhere. Appropriate signs and
markings for these situations are shown in Volume 3. Where cycle and pedestrian traffic in these areas
is heavy it may be safer to terminate the cycle track and instruct cyclists to dismount.

3.8.3.10 At main road junctions where there are joint pedestrian and cycle crossing facilities it is preferable that
cycle tracks be terminated prior to the junction and cyclists be instructed to dismount with proper
“Dismount” sign. This is particularly relevant where pedestrian and cycle flows are high. Pedestrians
should never be put in a position where they may be trapped on the carriageway after having crossed
the road because of the volume of cycles. Adequate reservoir space for waiting pedestrians and cyclists
must be provided. Any refuge islands must be at least 2m wide in order that a cyclist can wait without
the cycle protruding onto the carriageway.

3.8.3.11 Cyclists on cycle tracks should have a clear view ahead for a distance of preferably 25m but never less
than 15m. Adequate sight lines must be provided for both pedestrians and cyclists where these are
likely to intersect and in some instances railings may be necessary to prevent pedestrians stepping into
the paths of cyclists when emerging from a side path or at the foot of steps. Care should be taken in the
vicinity of pedestrian/cycle crossing points that street furniture, including any trees, does not interfere
with the sight lines of pedestrians or cyclists.

3.8.3.12 Horizontal and vertical clearances should be in accordance with section 3.5.

3.8.3.13 An integral part of the design of a cycle track, is the quality of the finish, see "Providing for the
Cyclist". Good surface regularity should be obtained and the materials chosen should provide a surface
texture capable of obtaining a resistance to skidding in wet weather. It is also of advantage if the
surface of the cycle track can be of a different colour to that of any adjacent footway. Adequate
drainage must also be provided. Where a cycle track crosses a carriageway it should do so at right
angles to the kerb, which should be dropped across the cycle track with an upstand not greater than
25mm.
 December 2023 Edition

3.8.3.14 In addition to the colour of the cycle track there should be a distinctive separation between the cycle
track and any adjacent footway. This may be achieved by a continuous white line marking not less than
150mm wide, or preferably by kerbs with the cycle track at a level difference of at least 50mm to the
footway. The latter method may however complicate drainage details, but is preferable as it reduces the
chances of cyclists encroaching onto the footway.

3.8.3.15 Cycle tracks should be provided with a reasonable standard of illumination with particular care be
taken at the junction of cycle tracks with other traffic routes.

3.8.4 Signs and Markings for Cycle Tracks

3.8.4.1 Appropriate traffic signs and markings for cycle tracks are shown in Volume 3.

3.8.4.2 To encourage the use of cycle routes, adequate direction signing should be provided, and in this respect
it may be necessary to incorporate in main road signing the direction to cycle routes where this is not
obvious. At the start of a cycle route, signs should indicate major destinations along and at the
termination of the route. At intersections of routes, appropriate direction signing should also be
provided. Where a cycle track is parallel to the carriageway additional direction signing would not
normally be necessary as the main road signs should be sufficient for this purpose.
 December 2023 Edition

3.9 Railings, Barrier Fences and Crash Cushions

3.9.1 General

3.9.1.1 The provision of a particular barrier fence along a road depends on many factors such as pedestrian and
traffic flow, road geometry, historic accident data, surrounding environment and sometimes,
consideration has to be given on aesthetic side. The Transport Department, Fire Services Department,
Hong Kong Police Force, Highways Department and other concerned parties as appropriate should be
consulted before a barrier fence is to be erected or replaced on public roads.

3.9.1.2 Reference should be made to the Highways Department Standard Drawings for the detailed
information of barrier fences and railings that are commonly used on public roads. As for vehicular
parapets and pedestrian parapets on highway structures, Structures Design Manual for Highways and
Railways should be referred.

3.9.2 Railings

3.9.2.1 Railings are not designed to protect pedestrians from vehicular impact but to control and guide
pedestrians for road safety and traffic management purposes. The principles for the provision and
design of pedestrian railings are stipulated in the TD/HyD Joint Departmental Circular (TD DC No.
3/2017 or HyD TC No. 2/2017) and TD Departmental Circular (TD DC No. 2/2020).

3.9.2.2 To avoid overuse of railings which could cause public inconvenience and adverse effects on streetscape
and footway capacity, alternative measures such as footway improvement, provision of planters or
bollards should be considered.

3.9.2.3 However, railings can be considered at locations with high risk of pedestrian and vehicle collision if
alternative measures are not feasible nor applicable. Examples are:

(i) Accident records indicate that it is an accident prone site involving pedestrians;

(ii) Pedestrians tend to walk on carriageway with high traffic speed; or

(iii) Visibility of pedestrians or drivers is restricted, for example, due to sharp bends or illegally
parked vehicles.

3.9.2.4 Pedestrian railings should not be provided merely to deter illegal parking and at locations where other
physical barriers such as planters or raised central medians already exist.
 December 2023 Edition

3.9.2.5 Table 3.9.2.1 categorizes various types of railings by purpose and intended use. The design and colour
of railings should be compatible with the neighbouring streetscape. As the paint would require regular
maintenance and incur additional recurrent cost, agreement with the maintenance party should be
sought if colouring of railings is proposed.

Table 3.9.2.1
Purpose and Intended Use of Various Types of Railings
Purpose Use Choice of Railing

Examples of controlling pedestrian movements: HyD Standard

Drawings –
a) on footways where pedestrian flow exceeds footway capacity; control category
Control
b) at central islands of staggered crossings; and

c) at central medians to prevent jay walking.

Examples of guiding pedestrians: HyD Standard

Drawings –
a) near pedestrian/grade-separated crossings; and guidance category
Guidance
b) on footways where there is expected surge in pedestrian flow at
times.

3.9.2.6 TD and HyD should be consulted on customized design. Any newly designed railing should be
approved by TD and HyD.

3.9.2.7 Type 2 or other suitable type of railings under control category to prevent pedestrians from falling from
height should always be provided where the footway is higher than adjacent carriageway, verge or
other area by 1500 mm or more, or there is a steep downhill slope at the back of the footway.

3.9.2.8 Railings of guidance category should be provided to prevent pedestrians spilling onto the carriageway
opposite exits to cinemas, theatres, schools, or to other places where similar sudden large pedestrian
flows might be expected. In particular, near kindergarten exits, railings of control category should be
provided and extended to a safe crossing or roadside pick-up point. In case the existing footpath width
fronting the exits is less than 2m, railings shall still be provided but footpath widening should be
explored to accommodate the expected surge of pedestrian flow. Local build-out should also be
considered if footpath widening is not feasible. Further, if large flow of small children is anticipated,
railing types which would not affect visibility nor allow small children passing through easily should
be adopted.

3.9.2.9 When pedestrian flows are in the vicinity of or exceed the capacity flows given in Table 3.4.11.1,
railings of control category should generally be erected to prevent pedestrians from walking onto the
carriageway. However, where these conditions occur on footways less than 2m in width, discretion will
be necessary, as the installation of railings might make conditions worse because of the reduction of
effective footway width (see also paragraph 3.9.2.19).

3.9.2.10 In the immediate vicinity and on either side of at-grade crossing points, railings of guidance category
should be erected to channel pedestrians to the crossing points and to discourage jay walking. The
exact length of the railings required will depend upon individual site conditions, but normally the
lengths should be limited to 6m on either side (see also paragraph 3.9.2.14).
 December 2023 Edition

3.9.2.11 In the vicinity of grade-separated crossings, generally, railings of guidance category will need to be
erected along the footway to encourage the use of such facilities. If jay walking is likely to be serious,
railings of control category should be used. The required length of railing will depend upon
circumstances prevailing, but should be kept to the minimum, for example, the minimum sufficient
railing in the vicinity of the entrance/exit will be needed to prevent pedestrians from encroaching onto
the carriageway.

3.9.2.12 For dual carriageway along District or Local Distributor Roads without planters or raised median at the
central reserve, railings of control category could be considered to be provided along the central
reserve to prevent pedestrians from crossing the roads other than at designated crossing points, if
similar railings are not provided on both sides of the carriageway.

3.9.2.13 In respect of the above paragraphs it is relevant to note that Regulation 39 of the Road Traffic (Traffic
Control) Regulations prohibits pedestrians from :
(i) Crossing within a zebra controlled area other than on a zebra crossing;

(ii) Crossing within 15m of a light signal crossing otherwise than at the crossing where such
lights operate;

(iii) Crossing within 15m of a footbridge or subway or any part of it otherwise than by means of
the footbridge or subway; and

(iv) Climbing over or through any kerbside fence or central reserve onto a carriageway.

The careful use and choice of railing type on a need basis will assist in the enforcement of this
regulation.

3.9.2.14 Railings of control category are required to contain and channel pedestrians at central traffic island of
staggered crossings. With the provision of railings, it must be ensured that there should still be
sufficient room on the island for pedestrians to wait.

3.9.2.15 Where illegal parking of vehicles on footways causes road safety or traffic problem but control of
pedestrian movements is not a problem, erection of suitable bollards may be considered if police
enforcement and other alternative engineering means are found to be ineffective. The spacing between
bollards may be varied according to prevailing circumstances and may be as much as 2.5m for
footways at which the width is not greater than 2m, or 2m where the footway is greater than 2m in
width. The wider spacing should be employed where servicing of frontage developments or the setting
down or picking up of passengers is frequent. Care should be taken to avoid excessive use of bollards
as it would cause inconvenience and unnecessary hazard to pedestrians, particularly those with
disabilities or visual impairment.

3.9.2.16 At crossing points, road junctions or similar locations, it is necessary to use railings that would not
impair visibility of motorists and pedestrians. For example, "Type 2 Railings at Junctions and
Crossings" may be considered. For similar reason, roadside advertisements, banners and any other
objects that will obstruct the visibility of motorists and pedestrians should be prohibited from being
hung on the traffic upstream side of the crossing points or road junctions for a length of about 30m.

3.9.2.17 In prestige areas dwarf walls may be used instead of railings and these are particularly applicable
where planting of verges and central reservations on District or Local Distributor Roads is considered
appropriate.

3.9.2.18 Railings or dwarf walls should not be used in the vicinity of carriageways of Trunk Roads or Primary
Distributors for which barrier fences should be used.
 December 2023 Edition

3.9.2.19 Horizontal clearances of railings from the edge of carriageway should generally be in accordance with
Table 3.5.2.1 but in circumstances where this would reduce effective footway width to below 1.5m the
minimum clearance may be reduced to 200mm.

3.9.2.20 Guidelines on the design of railings are at the Annex. For pedestrian railings or parapets to be used on
pedestrian footbridges and subways, reference should be made to the Structures Design Manual for
Highways and Railways.

3.9.3 Barrier Fences

3.9.3.1 Safety barrier fences and vehicular parapets are intended to prevent vehicles leaving the carriageway
and keep any damages and injuries to the vehicles and their occupants to a minimum. The approved
types for use in the Territory are untensioned corrugated beam barrier fences, concrete profile barrier
fences, high containment concrete barrier and vehicular parapets. Apart from vehicular parapets which
are shown in Structures Design Manual for Highways and Railways, the approved barrier fences are
shown in Diagram 3.9.3.1 and for further details, refer to Highways Department Standard Drawings.
Under circumstances when the design of a barrier has to deviate from the approved types, the project
proponent has to design the barrier to attain the appropriate containment level commensurate with the
guidance in this chapter. Explicit agreement from the Highways Department is required for design of
barrier fences deviated from the approved types.

3.9.3.2 Barrier fences will generally only be used on Trunk Roads, Primary Distributors and Rural Roads in
circumstances when it is considered that more danger will be occasioned to the vehicle and its
occupants in leaving the carriageway than if it is constrained by barrier fences. To accomplish this
goal, the barrier fences need to be long enough to shield the hazard, be strong enough to contain the
vehicle, and be designed to allow for smooth redirection of vehicle with tolerable deceleration. Where
both barrier fences and railings are provided alongside with each other, the clearance between them
should not exceed 250 mm to prevent children passing through the gap.

3.9.3.3 It is important that the required horizontal clearances as set down in Table 3.5.2.1 are achieved. In
cases where a hard shoulder or marginal strip in accordance with sections 3.4.7, 3.4.9 and 3.4.12 is
provided this will generally be automatically achieved, but elsewhere the barrier fences may have to be
set back. Where concrete profile barriers replace existing fences, or central reservation railings, the
minimum clearance between the foot of the barriers and the edge of carriageway may be reduced to
300mm. Where this reduced clearance is adopted, care should be taken that the clearance to other street
furniture such as lighting columns, gantry legs, traffic signs etc. does conform to Table 3.5.2.1.

3.9.3.4 It should be noted that concrete profile barrier fences should not normally be installed without an
accompanying marginal strip constructed to the same standard as the carriageway and incorporating a
continuous edge line marking in accordance with Volume 3. Normally the marginal strip will be
formed from the available verge or central reserve width, but where this cannot be achieved the
carriageway itself should be used and the lane widths reduced accordingly. The edge line marking is
important in clearly defining the edge of carriageway particularly at night as concrete profile barriers
are not always clearly discernible. The marginal strip provides the necessary minimum clearance from
the carriageway and gives the motorists a further chance of avoiding the barrier should he momentarily
lose control.

3.9.3.5 Terminal sections including those at emergency crossings not installed with Movable Steel Barrier
must be ramped down or provide crash cushions as appropriate to avoid more serious injury occurring
to occupants of impacting vehicles. Details of the ramp down are given in the Highways Department
Standard Drawings.
 December 2023 Edition

Containment Levels

3.9.3.6 The range of possible vehicular impacts onto a barrier is extremely large in terms of vehicle type,
approach angle, speed and other road conditions. For standardization, the performance of a barrier is
defined in terms of its containment level based on standardized impact configuration. The
configuration factors mainly involve the vehicle type, mass, impact speed and impact angle. A barrier
claimed to attain a specific level of containment shall be able to contain the impact vehicle and return
severity indices not inferior than those stipulated in BS EN 1317 when tested under each and every of
the impact configurations of the corresponding containment level.

3.9.3.7 With reference to overseas standards and the Structures Design Manual for Highways and Railways
published by the Highways Department, four containment groups are formed and shown in Table
3.9.3.1 below. The corresponding vehicle characteristics are given in Table 3.9.3.2. Products from
overseas are treated as equivalent if they are attested to the same level of protection required in this
guidance.
 December 2023 Edition

Table 3.9.3.1
Roadside Barrier Containment Levels
Equivalent
Level of Vehicle mass Impact speed Impact angle
Vehicle type Overseas
Containment (tonne) (km/h) (degrees)
Standards
TL2
(MASH* or
L1 Passenger car 1.5 80 20
NCHRP# Report
350)
TL3
(MASH or
L2 Passenger car 1.5 113 20
NCHRP Report
350)
Passenger car 1.5 113 20 TL5
(MASH or
NCHRP Report
L3 Double- 350)
22 50 20
decked bus or
H2
(EN1317)
Passenger car 1.5 113 20
L4a + L4b
L4 RHGV 30 65 20
(EN1317)
AHGV 38 65 20

Remarks RHGV – Rigid Heavy Goods Vehicle

AHGV – Articulated Heavy Goods Vehicle
* MASH – AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware
# NCHRP – National Cooperative Highway Research Programme
sponsored by AASHTO in cooperation with FHWA of the
USA
 December 2023 Edition

Table 3.9.3.2
Vehicle Characteristics
Type of Vehicle
38 tonne
1.5 tonne 22 tonne 30 tonne Rigid
Vehicle Specification Articulated
Passenger Double- Heavy Goods
Heavy Goods
car decked bus Vehicle
Vehicle
Mass (kg)
Total vehicle mass including 22000 ±
1500 ± 75 30000 ± 900 38000 ± 1100
dummy and ballast 500
Dimensions (m)
Wheel track (front to rear) 1.50 2.00 2.00 2.00
Wheel radius (unloaded) N/A 0.55 0.55 0.55
Wheel base (between extreme
N/A 6.80 6.70 11.25
axles)
Ground clearance of the front
N/A N/A 0.58 0.58
bumper measured at the corner
Number of axles
(S = Steering Axle) 1S+1 1S+2 2S+2 1S+4
(Note : Limit deviation ± 15%)
Centre of gravity location (m)
Longitudinal distance from front
1.24 4.40 4.10 6.20
axle (CGX) ±10%
Lateral distance from vehicle
± 0.08 ± 0.10 ± 0.10 ± 0.10
centre line
1.90 ± 0.10 1.90 ± 0.10
Height above ground (CGZ) 0.53 ± 0.05 1.75 ± 0.10
(for load only) (for load only)

Untensioned Corrugated Beam - W-Beam

3.9.3.8 The untensioned corrugated beam safety fence is a L1 containment roadside barrier. There are two
types of untensioned corrugated beam safety fences, i.e. with compacted earth footings and with
concrete footings.

3.9.3.9 The safety fences with compacted earth footings are less rigid than those with concrete footings. They
need considerable deflection space and are generally suitable only for wide central reservations.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 3.9.3.1 : TYPICAL BARRIER FENCES

W-BEAM BARRIER (L1)

THRIEBEAM BARRIER (L2)

CONCRETE PROFILE BARRIER FENCE (L2)

 December 2023 Edition

THRIE-BEAM BARRIER WITH ADDITIONAL RAIL (L3)

HIGH CONTAINMENT CONCRETE BARRIER (L4)

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETRES

3.9.3.10 The other safety fence type with concrete footings, which should be fixed to concrete anchor blocks,
can be used at locations where structures need to be protected and there is limited deflection space. The
untensioned corrugated beam safety fence stated in the following paragraphs refers to the concrete
footing type unless otherwise specified.

3.9.3.11 Posts of these safety fence types should normally be at 4m spacing. However, the spacing should be
reduced to 2m if greater rigidity is required for protection of lighting columns and structures or where
traffic accident black spot site is located.

3.9.3.12 The corrugated beam safety fence installed for the protection of lighting columns and structures should

(i) have posts spaced at 2m;

(ii) have sufficient clearance as suggested in Table 3.9.3.3 between the back of the post and the
face of the structure being protected; and

(iii) extend at full height at least 10m in advance of the structure and at least 6m beyond it.
 December 2023 Edition

3.9.3.13 The beam should be ‘blocked out’ for a minimum of 200mm from the support post to enable an
impinging vehicle to slide smoothly along the beam without being entrapped by the post and also helps
to maintain the height of the beam when the posts are bent back on impact, thus preventing the vehicle
from rolling over.

3.9.3.14 Where space is limited and blocking out pieces cannot be used, the beam may be attached directly to
the post. Other alternatives such as road widening, reduction of speed limit and erection of appropriate
warning sign should also be considered.

3.9.3.15 Safety fences are generally accepted to be more effective when kerbs are not present. However, if
corrugated beam fence is installed intermittently only to protect structural columns or similar on roads
other than Trunk Roads, kerbs may be provided with the safety fence positioned behind them.

3.9.3.16 The safety fence must be erected with its centre line at a height of 600mm measured from:

(i) the surface of the adjoining carriageway, margin strip or hard shoulder if this is within
1500mm of the beam; and

(ii) the surface of the ground below the beam if the beam is more than 1500mm from the
adjoining carriageway, margin strip or hard shoulder.

3.9.3.17 Beam sections should be lapped in the direction of traffic flow and its ends should be ramped down and
flared away from the carriageway.

3.9.3.18 The traffic face of safety fence should be in line with and preferably connected to any bridge parapet
with which it is contiguous.

Thriebeam

3.9.3.19 The thriebeam is a L2 containment roadside barrier. The standard thriebeam is similar to the
untensioned corrugated beam but has three number of troughs (or crests) instead of two and is mounted
higher. This is much stiffer than the conventional corrugated beam due to its stronger posts, beam rail
and closer spacing of posts.

3.9.3.20 The standard thriebeam can reduce the incidence of rolling over in large vehicle collisions more
effectively. This is accomplished by increasing the beam mounting height to 875mm and using a
stronger blockout. It is therefore preferable to the untensioned corrugated beam when there is high
frequency of traffic accidents involving vehicles of high centre of gravity.

3.9.3.21 In the event that the standard thriebeam is deemed less desirable because frequent impact by heavy
vehicles is expected, the standard blockout for thriebeam shall be replaced by a 350mm deep modified
blockout. Such blockout has a notch at the bottom which allows the lower portion of the beam and the
flange of the spacer block to bend in during collision by vehicles of high centre of gravity, keeping the
rail face nearly vertical and thereby retaining the vehicle from rolling over.

3.9.3.22 The use of standard/modified thriebeam can be considered where a higher rigidity of barrier fence than
corrugated beam is required but concrete profile barrier is not warranted due to the associated cost,
accident risk and space availability, etc. This type of barrier can more effectively reduce the incidence
of rolling over by high vehicles when impacted.
 December 2023 Edition

Concrete Profile Barrier

3.9.3.23 The concrete profile barrier is a L2 containment roadside barrier. The theory of the concrete profile
barrier is that when a vehicle strikes at an angle of 15° or less the impact energy is absorbed in
compressing the suspension of the vehicle. The front wheels of the vehicle climb up the 55° slope and
on contact with the upper slope the wheels are turned parallel to the barrier's longitudinal axis and the
vehicle is redirected.

3.9.3.24 The concrete barrier will contain most vehicles within the carriageway, though at high angle, serious
damage can result.

3.9.3.25 Concrete profile barriers require little maintenance, therefore they are ideal for locations where
maintenance would cause considerable traffic disruption. However, because of the damage that can be
caused to vehicles and their occupants by high angle impacts, the potential risk of this type of accident
occurring, particularly on roads having a design speed or speed limit of 80 km/h or more, should also
be taken into account when considering the use of this type of barrier fence.

3.9.3.26 Although the concrete profile barrier requires minimum space, it can have an inhibiting effect on
motorists and therefore a parallel hard strip should be provided between the barrier and the edge of the
carriageway. Where the hard strip is 1500mm or more the hard strip should be delineated by 200mm
wide continuous white line, where it is less than 1500mm wide the hard strip should be delineated by
100mm wide continuous white line. The hard strip should not be less than 300mm wide, and preferably
should be wider.

3.9.3.27 While planting is aesthetically pleasing on central reservations, care should be taken, particularly when
used in conjunction with concrete profile barriers, that sight lines are not obscured either at the time of
planting or by subsequent growth.

3.9.3.28 A ramp down concrete end treatment is used to terminate a concrete profile barrier in locations where
speed limit is 50 km/h or less and space is limited. For speed limit greater than this, flare end treatment
or crash cushion may be considered.

Thriebeam with Additional Rail / Modified Thriebeam with Additional Rail

3.9.3.29 The thriebeam with additional rail and modified thriebeam with additional rail are L3 containment
roadside barriers. They are similar to the thriebeam mentioned in paragraphs 3.9.3.19 to 3.9.3.22,
except that additional rails are added at the back to enhance their containment capacity.

3.9.3.30 These two types of barriers are applicable where a containment capacity in excess of those of the single
rail thriebeam, single rail modified thriebeam and concrete profile barrier is required but the use of
high containment barrier mentioned below is not warranted.

3.9.3.31 In the event that the standard thriebeam with an additional rail is deemed less desirable because
frequent impact by heavy vehicles is expected, modified thriebeam with an additional rail shall be
used.

High Containment Barrier

3.9.3.32 High containment barriers are L4 containment roadside barriers. They are applicable where high
containment capacity in excess of that of thriebeam with additional rail / modified thriebeam with
additional rail is required at high risk locations. High containment barriers must be strong enough for
the containment of heavy vehicles. If a design other than the standard reinforced concrete version is
required, consideration should be given to include features in the barrier design to reduce the potential
damages to light vehicles and injuries to passengers inside.
 December 2023 Edition

Criteria for the Provision of Safety Barrier Fences

3.9.3.33 The following criteria should be taken into account when considering the provision of safety barrier
fences :

(i) Barrier fences should always be provided to protect the supports of overbridges, gantries or
other structures that might collapse with catastrophic effects if struck by an errant vehicle.
However, lighting columns on roads with a design speed or speed limit of 50 km/h or less,
and traffic signs on single posts are not included in this category.

(ii) Consideration should be given to provide barrier fences to shield roadside installations
such as sign gantries, directional signs, traffic signs, lighting columns, fire hydrants,
catchpit, pillar box, etc. from direct impact of errant vehicles to enhance passive road
safety on roads with a design speed or speed limit of 70 km/h or above, unless these
installations are designed to be crash worthy according to BS EN 12767 or other equivalent
standards. Where the concern could not be addressed by installation of barrier fence, such
as at diverging points, crash cushion may be installed according to paragraph 3.9.4.1

(iii) Barrier fences should normally be provided on dual carriageway roads with a speed limit or
design speed of 70 km/h or greater where :

(a) the road is on an embankment which is 3m or more in height; or

(b) road is on a retaining wall which is 2m or more in height; or

(c) the central reservation is less than 3m in width; or

(d) the road is adjacent to another road, a railway or a permanent body of water
more than 0.5m deep.

(iv) Barrier fences may be provided on single carriageway roads with a speed limit or design
speed greater than 50 km/h and dual carriageway roads with a speed limit or design speed
less than 70 km/h where :

(a) the horizontal radius is at or less than the minimum radii for 10%
superelevation given in Table 3.3.3.1 of this Chapter; or

(b) the road is on an embankment or a retaining wall which is greater than 1.5m in
height; or

(c) the central reservation is less than 3m wide; or

(d) the road is adjacent to another road, a railway or a permanent body of water
more than 0.5m deep.

(v) Barrier fences should not normally be provided on single carriageway roads with a speed
limit or design speed of 50 km/h unless hazardous circumstances prevail such as steep
slope or retaining wall adjacent to the road, or sharp bend.

3.9.3.34 Barrier fences should not be placed on side slopes steeper than 1:6 to avoid errant vehicles mounting
the barrier fences and thereby affecting the performance of the barrier fences.

3.9.3.35 A distance of at least 1000mm from the traffic face of safety fence or 600mm from the back of post
whichever is greater should be provided for any corrugated beam barrier fences erected adjacent to the
edge of a downhill slope or a retaining wall to allow the dynamic deflection of the fences during the
impact. If kerbs are present, subject to the qualification in paragraph 3.9.3.44, it is desirable to set the
barrier face in the same line as the kerbline.
 December 2023 Edition

3.9.3.36 For an uphill slope, the height and slope angle are the factors determining whether barrier should be
provided in front of the slope. In the comparison of the severity of vehicular impacts with slope to that
with safety fences, Roadside Design Guide suggested that safety fences should be provided for less
severity when the slope angle is greater than 20° and the slope height is greater than 3 m.

3.9.3.37 If no barrier fence is provided in front of an uphill slope, attention should be given to ensure that the
slope surface within a height of 1000mm from the adjacent pavement should be smooth.

3.9.3.38 Dynamic deflection varies according to the impact speed, impact angle, vehicle type and the
characteristics of the barrier fences. For a passenger car with an impact angle of 20°, Table 3.9.3.3
gives the minimum distance to the hazard.

Table 3.9.3.3
Clearance for Various Barrier Types and Speeds

Distance between back of post and obstacle

Barrier type/Speed
80 km/h 100 km/h 110 km/h
W-beam barrier with posts
0.6m 1.0m 1.0m
spaced at 2m centres
Standard/Modified
Thriebeam barrier with posts 0.5m 0.9m 1.1m
spaced at 2m centres

3.9.3.39 The effective safety fences should be extended far enough upstream and downstream to prevent errant
vehicles from hitting the hazardous object.

3.9.3.40 The safety fence may be flared so that they are installed away from the kerbline as it approaches its
terminal. The flaring of safety fence has several purposes as follows :

(i) The total length of safety fences can be reduced.

(ii) The safety fences can be located further away from the travel lanes.

3.9.3.41 The disadvantage of flared fences is that the greater the flare rate, the higher the angle at which an
errant vehicle can hit. Also, greater flare rate will increase the possibility of an impacting vehicle being
redirected back into or across the carriageway following an impact. This situation is especially
undesirable on two way carriageway where the impact vehicle could be redirected into on-coming
traffic.

3.9.3.42 The detailed design for the required length of safety fence to shield the hazard can be referred to
Roadside Design Guide and Road Design Guide.

3.9.3.43 As a rough guide based on the recommendations from the above references, Table 3.9.3.4 shows the
suggested flare rates for safety fence.
 December 2023 Edition

Table 3.9.3.4
Suggested Flare Rates (1 : x) for Safety Fence
Flare rate for safety fence beyond shy line
Speed Limit Weak post system with Flare rate for safety
Strong post system
(km/h) compacted earth fence inside shy line
with concrete footing
footing
110 15 20 30
100 15 20 30
90 12 16 25
80 11 15 21
70 10 12 18
60 10 10 16
50 10 10 15

Clearance between Barrier Fences and Carriageway

3.9.3.44 When kerbs are not existent, the horizontal clearance of barrier fences from carriageway should follow
the requirements set out in Section 3.5.2 of this chapter. However, more detailed consideration is
warranted when kerbs are in close proximity of barrier fences. It is envisaged that, depending on the
exact position and height of the kerb, it can adversely affect the trajectory and stability of an errant
vehicle during a crash. The combination of kerbs and barrier systems presents additional complications
because the vehicle may not effectively interact with the barrier after hitting the kerb. For this reason, it
is desirable to set the barrier face in appropriate position relative to the kerbline whilst maintaining a
safe clearance from the carriageway traffic. On high speed roads with hard shoulder or marginal strip
etc., there should be little difficulty in achieving the clearance requirements specified in Table 3.5.2.1
and barrier faces should not be placed behind kerbs, if any. For slower roads, it may be impractical to
achieve both the clearance and kerb positioning requirements. In such circumstances, it is desirable that
the barrier face be set back 200mm from the kerbline. The 200mm offset can minimize nuisance
impacts (i.e. a high frequency of brush impacts) while enhancing the performance of the barrier during
a crash.

3.9.3.45 Concrete profile barrier should not be set back more than 3500mm from the edge of the carriageway to
reduce the probability of impacts occurring at high angles.
 December 2023 Edition

Selection Guidelines for different types of Roadside Barriers

3.9.3.46 Check against all following criteria. If more than one criterion is met, the barrier type of highest
containment capacity should be adopted
Recommended
Criteria
barrier(s)
(i) Meeting the criteria of paragraph 3.9.3.33 and the speed limit Untensioned
is lower than 70km/h corrugated beam
barrier - W-Beam
(L1)
(ii) (a) Meeting the criteria of paragraph 3.9.3.33 and the speed limit Thriebeam barrier /
is 70km/h or above; or Modified thriebeam /
(b) The speed limit is 70km/h or above and is located at the Concrete profile barrier
outside curve of a bend of radius R4 or below on top of (L2)
downhill slope; or
(c) The speed limit is 50km/h, on R3 or below road bends adjacent
to downhill slope
(iii) (a) Warranted by the "Scoring System for Selection of Thriebeam Thriebeam with
with Additional Rail / Modified Thriebeam with Additional additional rail /
Rail" in Table 3.9.3.5 below or the latest scoring system Modified thriebeam
promulgated by the authority; or with additional rail
(b) Under any special considerations deemed necessary by the (L3)
designer and agreed by the authority. Designers should
exercise judgement to consider the use of higher containment
barriers where accident risks are very high and the
consequences of accidents are serious.
(iv) (a) For high risk road sections where maximum containment is High containment
warranted. barrier(L4)
 December 2023 Edition

Table 3.9.3.5
Scoring System for Selection of Thriebeam with Additional Rail / Modified Thriebeam
with Additional Rail
Road Characteristics Criteria Score
Speed limit Speed limit ≥ 70 km/h 0.23
Height of road above
Height ≥ 20 m 0.19
ground or downhill slope
Bus usage Number of bus routes ≥ 10 0.19
Undesirable road geometry (See Note
Road geometry 0.14
3)
Annual Average Daily Traffic
Traffic volume 0.07
(AADT) ≥ 30,000 (one-way)
Percentage of commercial Percentage of commercial vehicles ≥
0.05
vehicles 20%
Residents, schools, hospital or other
similar occupants, or a water body, or
Features under road 0.08
expressways / trunk roads exist in the
vicinity.
Frequent barrier impact accidents
Accident records 0.05
occurred (See Note 4)
Total 1

Note 1: Thriebeam with Additional Rail / Modified Thriebeam with Additional Rail are
warranted for a road section with a combined score of more than or equal to 0.70.

Note 2: For individual assessment of score, a value of zero shall be adopted if the respective
criterion is not satisfied.

Note 3: Undesirable road geometry refers to a road section with radius less than 250 m for
posted speed limit greater than or equal to 70 km/h, with radius less than 88 m for
posted speed limit less than 70 km/h, with gradient greater than 8%, or at or within
20 m from junctions or interchanges.

Note 4: Frequent barrier impact accidents refers to more than 10 accidents in 5 years. For
new construction, accident records may be conservatively assumed to be frequent
where the likelihood of such accident rate is high.

End Details of Barrier Fences

3.9.3.47 Proper design on the ends of safety fences is crucial in order that the damage to occupants of the errant
vehicle could be minimized during a crash. For details, refer to the Guidelines for Design of End-
details of Thrie-beam Barrier Fence (HQ/GN/10) and the Supplementary Guidelines for Design of
End-details of W-beam and Concrete Profile Barriers published by the Highways Department.

Parapet

3.9.3.48 A parapet is a structural component installed along the edge of a bridge or similar structure intended to
prevent vehicles or pedestrians from falling off. For types, details and uses of parapets, refer to Chapter
15 of the Structures Design Manual for Highways and Railways.

Enquiries

3.9.3.49 Enquiries on details in design of barrier fences and the selection guidelines for different types of barrier
fences should be made to the Research & Development Division of Highways Department.
 December 2023 Edition

3.9.4 Crash Cushions

3.9.4.1 Where fixed objects cannot be removed, relocated or shielded by appropriately oriented barriers, crash
cushions may be provided to slow down a vehicle to a safe stop for head-on impacts or redirect a
vehicle away from the fixed object for side impacts so that the potential for serious injury to its
occupants is eliminated.

3.9.4.2 Most crash cushions perform their functions by the principle of kinetic energy absorption or
momentum transfer. Some crash cushions use a combination of these principles.

3.9.4.3 Different types of crash cushions possess different functions. The crash cushion type which suits Hong
Kong most shall be able to withstand head-on, side-angle and reverse-angle impacts up to the design
speed that the crash cushion can withstand. Where feasible, the design speed shall be taken to be the
posted speed limit plus additional safety margin speed of 10 km/h to take into account the possible
speeding of a vehicle. If there is not enough space to install the crash cushion with design speed taken
to be the posted speed limit plus 10km/h due to site constraints, the design speed may be lowered to
equal to the posted speed limit or 50km/h, whichever is the higher. Furthermore, the crash cushion
shall be able to perform the following characteristics :

(i) The crash cushion shall not allow the impacting vehicle to pass through the attenuator
when it is struck at an angle on the front or "nose" to avoid the potential for secondary
impacts.

(ii) It shall redirect vehicle in all designed side impacts on the unit at angles not exceeding 20°
back to the originally travelled direction at no greater than 60% of the impact angle to
avoid the potential for secondary accidents with vehicle travelling in adjacent travel lane.

(iii) The crash cushion shall be designed to be free from any protruding elements that may
cause an errant vehicle to change direction in an uncontrolled manner that will increase the
potential for secondary accidents.

(iv) It shall also possess anti-climb characteristics to ensure that impacting vehicle will not roll
over the system.

3.9.4.4 To ensure a crash cushion type satisfies the above required characteristics, it shall meet the evaluation
criteria of National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 350 of U.S.A. for
different test levels 1 (50 km/h), 2 (70 km/h) and 3 (100 km/h). The crash cushion must be compliant
with three dynamic performance evaluation criteria that are structural adequacy, occupant risk and
post-impact vehicular trajectory.

3.9.4.5 The crash cushion so chosen should be wide enough to shield the ends of median barriers or other
hazardous objects.

3.9.4.6 A transition section is needed between the back of the system and the barrier when the crash cushion
cannot be attached directly to a median barrier or there exists a gap between them. Such transition
section should also be provided if the median barrier terminates in sloping end.

3.9.4.7 The road surface on which the crash cushion is installed must be free from kerbs. The path between the
carriageway and the crash cushion should be clear of any obstruction or irregularities. In addition, for
structures, they should be placed free of joints.

3.9.4.8 Retroreflective sheeting should be provided on the nosing of a crash cushion to make it more
conspicuous at night and during inclement weather. The required visibility distance for a crash cushion
is stipulated in Table 3.3.5.1. When the sight distance is below the desirable minimum sight distance,
an illuminated traffic bollard should be erected behind the crash cushion. Highways Department
standard drawing No. H 2265 for the typical arrangement refers.
 December 2023 Edition

3.9.4.9 Since the crash cushions are proprietary products, the dimensions corresponding to any particular
design speed that they are designed to cater for are varied for different products. It is therefore
desirable to obtain the dimensions of those crash cushion available in the market. For design of new
highways, the largest size of the available product in the market in respect of the design speed should
be allowed for. Further, the necessary chevron road markings should be so designed to allow for the
proposed crash cushion to be installed with sufficient horizontal clearance as specified in Table 3.5.2.1.

3.9.4.10 Crash cushions are desirable to be provided under the following criteria :

(i) For high speed road with a speed limit of 70 km/h or above; and

(ii) In front of the non-crashworthy terminal* of barriers which are located at the diverging
point for main roads and/or slip road where there is no other effective means to alleviate
possible serious injury to vehicle occupants for head-on or side impacts.

* Non-crashworthy terminal is a terminal that cannot meet all of the evaluation criteria
listed in NCHRP Report 350 for each of the required crash tests.

3.9.4.11 Apart from the above criteria, crash cushion may be considered on individual basis for deployment in
front of potential hazard or fixed isolated obstruction (e.g. bridge column) where traffic is required to
travel in close proximity.
 December 2023 Edition

3.10 Road Tunnels

3.10.1 Geometric Design Standards

3.10.1.1 It is important that the geometric design standards in Tunnels should take into account those used on
the approach roads, and as far as possible no discontinuity in the route occurs, and the capacity in the
tunnel is the same as on the approach road. Each case will however need to be considered on its own
merit, according to economic and other relevant factors.

3.10.2 Road Cross Section in Tunnels

3.10.2.1 Whilst it may be economic to reduce the carriageway width, it should be remembered that the effective
carriageway width in a tunnel is in fact generally less than on the approach roads because of the double
white line system used for lane control. A further reduction of effective width may also be induced
because of the effects of "kerb shyness", though this may be difficult to determine.

3.10.2.2 To counter act the effects, of "kerb shyness" and the double white line system, for road safety reasons it
is recommended that a 500mm marginal strip be provided on both sides of the carriageway in each
tube.

3.10.2.3 It is essential that a walkway be provided on both sides of the carriageway to enable maintenance to
take place, allow access to emergency telephone equipment, and, provide sufficient width for doors of
emergency equipment to be opened without encroaching onto the carriageway. Past experience has
found that raised walkways are preferable for safety reasons and the minimum height of walkway
above the carriageway is recommended to be 500mm. The maximum height of the walkway should not
exceed 650mm unless staircases can be provided from the carriageway to allow drivers from broken
down vehicles to gain access to the emergency equipment. It is also recommended that the walkway
including the side or vertical face should be constructed of material that is of a different and contrasting
colour to the carriageway surface.

3.10.2.4 Carriageway and walkway dimensions are summarised in Table 3.10.2.1.

Table 3.10.2.1
Summary of Carriageway and Walkway Dimensions in Tunnels
Dual Tube Tunnel Dimensions for
Single Tube Tunnel
Carriageway width each one way single carriageway tube
Desirable(m) Minimum(m) Desirable(m) Minimum(m)
2-lane 7.3 7.3 7.3 6.75
10(1)(for speed
3-lane - - 11 limit of 50 km/h
only)
4-lane(2) - - 14.6 13.5
Marginal Strip 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Walkway width 1 0.8 1 0.8
Height of
0.65(3) 0.5 0.65(3) 0.5
Walkways

(1)
A 10m wide dual 3-lane carriageway can only be adopted on a very special case and
prior approval from TD is required.
(2)
It is undesirable to use a 4-lane carriageway for economic reason
(3)
If staircases from the carriageway are provided at regular intervals this may be
increased.
 December 2023 Edition

3.10.2.5 Both vertical and horizontal clearances should conform to those given in Tables 3.5.1.1 and 3.5.2.1
respectively. In respect of vertical clearances, overhead traffic signals, signs, lighting units or similar
must not project below the minimum vertical clearance. The vertical clearance is provided between the
ceiling and the structure gauge for the installation of traffic aids and surveillance equipment.

3.10.2.6 Diagram 3.10.2.1 shows a typical cross section for two tunnel types.

DIAGRAM 3.10.2.1 : TYPICAL TUNNEL CROSS SECTION

2 - LANE CARRIAGEWAY

3 - LANE CARRIAGEWAY

NOT TO SCALE

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES

 December 2023 Edition

3.10.3 Signing and Signalling for Tunnels

3.10.3.1 The signing and signalling for Tunnels should conform to Volume 3.

3.10.4 Lighting for Tunnels

3.10.4.1 More lighting should be provided at the entrance of tunnel than is usually provided within, to enable
motorists in the daytime to adapt more quickly to the darker environment inside it from the relatively
bright environment outside. It is particular important from road safety point of view.

3.10.5 Tunnel Portal Area

3.10.5.1 Various equipment and facilities are installed near the tunnel portal areas. Vehicles travel at high
speed in these areas and consequences of any collisions onto roadside installations can be serious. The
following considerations should be given:

i. For any installations on the roadside and medians, horizontal clearance under Table 3.5.2.1 of
Volume 2 shall be provided from the carriageway.
ii. Barrier fences and crash cushions should be provided to shield the roadside installations unless
they are designed to be crash worthy.
iii. Barriers and/or railings should be erected for the protection and segregation of the pedestrians,
especially the bus passengers, from the live traffic.
iv. Proper transition of barrier fences and appropriate treatment to any sharp point, blunt end and
opening in the roadside barriers should be provided.
v. Locations of entries and exits should be carefully considered to avoid causing unnecessary
safety hazard during operation stage.
vi. The above considerations should also be covered during contra-flow operations. Other than
tunnel users, the design should take into account the need of tunnel operations, e.g. provision
of staff / maintenance access.

Please refer to Section 3.9.3 and 3.9.4 of Volume 2 for details of item ii and iii.

3.10.5.2 Parking of recovery vehicles on the carriageway of tunnel portal areas should be provided off the road.
If unavoidable, proper barrier fences and Movable Steel Barrier fences, preferable remote controlled,
should be considered to shield the recovery vehicles from live traffic.
 December 2023 Edition

3.11 Single Track Access Roads

3.11.1 Introduction

3.11.1.1 In many rural and urban fringe areas there are small isolated developments which will only generate
low vehicular and pedestrian flows and to which it would be both difficult and expensive to construct
normal two lane roads. In such cases a single track access road with passing bays may be adequate.

3.11.1.2 Many single track access roads have already been constructed, both legally and illegally, and where
properly planned have been found to operate efficiently. The main reasons for a single track road not
working efficiently are :

(i) Inadequate provision of passing bays which are not intervisible.

(ii) Inadequate provision of parking spaces resulting in passing bays, footpaths, verges or even
the road being used for illegal parking.

(iii) Excessive or unsuitable land uses resulting in high traffic flows.

(iv) Motorists driving too fast.

(v) Road works or other construction works requiring partial/complete closure of the road.

3.11.1.3 This section sets out guidelines for the planning and design of single track access roads. Where a
desirable minimum is given, this is normally the absolute minimum for a design speed of 50km/h,
whereas the absolute minimum quoted is that for a design speed of 30km/h.

3.11.1.4 It should be noted that some of these traffic engineering standards are lower than for normal roads.
However, within the constraints imposed when upgrading existing tracks, it is appreciated that
difficulty may still occur in fully achieving the new standard. The designer should consider together
with the Traffic Engineer the relevant implications and agree whether a lower standard improvement is
acceptable.

3.11.2 Use

3.11.2.1 Whenever a single track road is being considered the appropriate Regional Office of Transport
Department should be consulted at an early stage to obtain their approval in principle.

3.11.2.2 Single track roads with passing places maybe provided where traffic flows will be light and where
there is, or will be, little or no kerbside activity. Their use will therefore be most appropriate as access
roads to isolated rural villages, urban fringe areas, minor recreational areas, or similar facilities with
low trip generation.

3.11.2.3 Where any new road is constructed it will be likely to generate additional traffic and open up an area
for further development. Both factors must be carefully considered when deciding whether a single
track road would be adequate to serve an area.

3.11.3 Design Flows

3.11.3.1 Whilst it has been found that a single track road when provided with adequate passing places can
accommodate 2-way flows of 100 vehicles per hour, this should not be used as a design figure. This
flow would only be acceptable as an isolated peak flow but not a regular daily occurrence. The normal
daily 2-way traffic flow should not exceed 500 vehicles per day. The effect of long vehicles using the
road should be considered when estimating traffic flows as they tend to reduce the capacity.
 December 2023 Edition

3.11.4 Horizontal Alignment

3.11.4.1 Whilst topography will often pose a constraint the alignment should be as straight as possible to
maintain sightlines and reduce the need for passing bays. It has been found that one of the most
efficient layouts is one where the bends are incorporated into passing bays which should be suitably
widened and/or lengthened.

3.11.4.2 For curves other than hairpin bends mentioned in 3.11.4.3 the minimum radius of curvature measured
along the inner edge of the carriageway are :
For 50 km/h - 44m
For 30 km/h - 30m

3.11.4.3 At some locations it may be necessary to provide hairpin bends. Where these are provided on steep
roads the gradient should be reduced through the bend. The inner radius maybe zero though the outer
radius should be sufficient for the largest vehicle likely to use the road. Provision should be made at or
near the bend for vehicles to pass.

3.11.4.4 Transition spirals are not necessary and any widening should be applied along the outer edge of the
carriageway.

3.11.4.5 Single track roads should have a crossfall of 2.5%. On bends the crossfall should normally be such as
to provide a superelevation of 2.5% though in some cases there may be a clear case on safety grounds
to increase the superelevation, in particular on steep roads with sharp bends.

3.11.4.6 Superelevation should be applied over the section of road immediately prior to the commencement of
the inner horizontal curve. The rate of change of crossfall should be between 1% and 2%.

3.11.5 Sightlines

3.11.5.1 Where the road is single track a motorist should be able to see between one passing bay and the next. A
desirable minimum stopping sight distance is 50m and an absolute minimum 30m, although at hairpin
bends or similar hazards where speeds will be very low, a lower sightline distance will need to be
accepted. Care is required where only the minimum sight distances or even smaller sight distances are
provided that vehicle speeds can be adequately controlled and that hazards to vehicles travelling in
opposite directions are avoided in particular.

3.11.6 Vertical Alignment

3.11.6.1 Where the road is to be used by large or heavy vehicles the maximum desirable gradient is 10%. For
smaller, lighter vehicles the maximum desirable gradient is 16%. If the terrain necessitates a steeper
road the design engineer should consider the following before exceeding the 16% desirable
maximum :-

(i) length of gradient which is to exceed 16%.

(ii) Visibility

(iii) Type of vehicles to use the road - Emergency vehicles would not normally operate at
gradients in excess of 16%, and public service vehicle operators may refuse to use those
roads.

(iv) Topography - alternative but longer routes

3.11.6.2 On any steep section of road particular attention will need to be paid to the texture of the finished road
surface to ensure that adequate frictional resistance can be provided.
 December 2023 Edition

3.11.6.3 On single track road the inner edge of the carriageway on a horizontal curve should be used as the
vertical control line. Vertical curves should be at least 10m long. At summit curves special
consideration will need to be given to maintaining adequate stopping sight distances and in these
locations a desirable minimum K value is 3 with an absolute minimum K value of 1.

3.11.7 Minimum Carriageway Width

3.11.7.1 As the roads serve as an Emergency Access for fire engines a minimum carriageway width of 3.5m
should be provided.

3.11.7.2 Suitable widening should be provided on bends though it has been found that, due to sightline
constraints, a two lane carriageway will often be required.

3.11.7.3 At passing bays, lay-bys and elsewhere where a two lane section of road is required a nominal
carriageway width of 6.0m should be provided, with appropriate widening on bends as shown in
3.11.7.6.

3.11.7.4 At junctions with other roads the carriageway should be widened to at least 6.0 m. The length and
width of the widened section must be sufficient to allow the largest likely vehicles to manoeuvre safely
and this assumed vehicle length should not be less than 12m. In particular at a junction with a more
major road, traffic turning right from the major road should not be obstructed by traffic waiting to exit
from the minor road.

3.11.7.5 A planning reserve should be provided to allow for future widening of the carriageway to at least 6m
(with appropriate widening on bends), and the need for an even wider carriageway must be considered.
In addition allowance should be made for additional footpaths and any engineering support works.

3.11.7.6 Table 3.11.7.1 is an indication of appropriate widths on straights and bends:

Table 3.11.7.1
Widths on Straights and Bends
Inner Radius Single Lane Two Lane
Straight 3.5m 6.0m
150m 3.5m 6.0m
100m 3.8m 6.3m
75m 4.0m 6.5m
50m 4.3m 6.9m
40m 4.5m 7.2m
30m 4.8m 7.8m
25m 5.1m 8.2m
20m 5.4m 8.7m
15m 5.9m 9.6m
10m 6.6m(8.0) 10.9m
5m 8.0m(10.0) 13.5m
0m 9.0m(14.0) 16.5m
(-) The figures in brackets are the widths required for long wheelbase vehicles.

3.11.8 Footpaths and Verges

3.11.8.1 Footpaths should be provided where necessary to cater for pedestrian needs and should be routed, as
far as possible, along the main desire lines. In particular it may be desirable to provide a separate
footpath network. The minimum widths of footpaths should be 1.6m. In cases where the footpath is
obstructed by lamp posts, fire hydrants, traffic aids etc. widening of the footpath may be required to
ensure that an effective clear width of at least 1.0m is provided and the obstructions should be placed at
the rear of the footpath.
 December 2023 Edition

3.11.8.2 A footpath along one side of a road will normally suffice except where there is development on both
sides. Footpaths should be provided fronting any development along the road.

3.11.8.3 Where the footpath is adjacent to the road a raised kerb should be provided. Consideration may also
need to be given to ways of preventing illegal parking on the footpath. Separating the footpath from the
carriageway by means of a raised verge or suitable railings as stated in paragraph 3.9.2.12 will reduce
the risk of misuse by vehicles. Both footpaths and verges should be capable of discharging storm water
from the carriageway (at appropriate points), from the footpath or verge, and from any adjacent slopes.

3.11.8.4 Where footpaths are not required a verge should be provided with the following minimum widths :-

(i) Against cuttings 0.5m

(ii) Above embankments 1.5m

(iii) On a structure with protective parapet 0.5m

3.11.8.5 The verge treatment should be capable of defining the edge of the carriageway and supporting the edge
of the carriageway construction. It should discourage use by vehicles other than in an emergency.

3.11.8.6 Where U-channels are provided in footways they should be covered.

3.11.9 Passing Places and Lay-Bys

3.11.9.1 The main criterion for passing places is that they should be intervisible and hence the most appropriate
locations will be bends and midway between bends. Where forward visibility is unrestricted passing
places should be provided at intervals of approximately 60m (measured from the end of one to the start
of the next) consistent with adjacent topography and land tenure.

3.11.9.2 The passing bays should preferably not be sited on the inside of curve or on sharp crest. Where
practical on steep gradients the passing bays should be on the 'downhill' side so that motorists
travelling downhill pull into them thus permitting the uphill motorist to continue without having to
stop.

3.11.9.3 Each passing place should preferably be at least 12m long to accommodate two light vehicles, plus
nominal tapers of 1:3. Where larger vehicles are expected the passing bays should be lengthened
accordingly. The carriageway width at passing places should be increased to a nominal 6m. Passing
places maybe signed with Traffic Sign 620 (TC 313).

3.11.9.4 Lay-bys must be provided at those locations where there is a need for vehicles to stop to load or
unload. Their dimensions should be similar to passing bays.

3.11.10 Parking

3.11.10.1 Consideration must be given to the parking requirements and it is recommended that provision for
parking should be made in areas off the road. The use of passing places, lay-bys and turnarounds for
parking should be discouraged as their use would lead to significant reductions in the capacity and
efficiency of the road.

3.11.10.2 The effect of parking on the verges needs to be considered and, where this is not acceptable, suitable
deterrent measures incorporated.
 December 2023 Edition

3.11.11 Turning Facilities

3.11.11.1 These should be provided at the end of the road and appropriate locations along the road. Typical
layouts are shown in diagrams 3.4.5.1 and 3.4.5.2 in Section 4 of this Chapter. It should be noted that a
turning 'tee' takes up less area than the equivalent turning circle. Adequate parking facilities should be
provided nearby to prevent turning facilities being misused for illegal parking.

3.11.12 Traffic Aids

3.11.12.1 Traffic signs on single track roads should be kept to a minimum. Where traffic signs or other traffic
aids are considered necessary, the land status should be checked to ensure they will not be erected on
private land.

3.11.12.2 Where a road is initially two lane for a short section prior to becoming a single track road, traffic sign
604 (TC 304) "Single track road with passing places" should be erected.

3.11.12.3 The speed limit will normally be 50 km/h, even when the road is designed to a lower speed. A lower
speed limit should only be introduced where the Police are able to adequately enforce it, not just as a
means to indicate to motorists that the road is designed to a low speed.

3.11.12.4 The use of road humps should be considered at appropriate locations as a means of controlling vehicle
speeds. Further advice is given in Chapter 5 of this Volume.

3.11.12.5 Where there is no street lighting, or the lamps are more than 200 metres apart, and there is a likelihood
of illegal parking then traffic sign PA 6 (TS 286) may be erected. However the use of this sign should
be restricted to those locations where illegal parking is a problem. The sign must not be used where
there is a system of street lighting with the lamps less than 200 metres apart.

3.11.12.6 Unless there is a need to control the type of vehicle using parking spaces these maybe designated by
the marking alone.

3.11.12.7 Passing bays should normally be signed by means of traffic sign 620 (TC 313).

3.11.12.8 Bends would not normally be signed though on very sharp or hairpin bends a chevron sign 414 (TC
210) or black and white markings on the outer kerb or barrier may be appropriate particularly if the
road is unlit.

3.11.12.9 Railings would not normally be appropriate on these roads other than where there is a steep drop with
insignificant level difference behind the footpath.

3.11.12.10 Safety fencing would only normally be required on the outside of very sharp bends or on structures
where there is a steep drop. At other locations a concrete upstand would probably suffice.

3.11.13 Use by Public Transport

3.11.13.1 These roads would not normally be considered suitable for use by buses but would however be suitable
for use by minibuses and taxis. Depending on the type of facility which each road serves, they may be
used by coaches. Consideration should be given to providing suitable facilities for GMB's and taxis to
turn round and wait close to villages and other locations where the public would be most likely to
require public transport.
 December 2023 Edition

Annex

Guidelines on Design of Railings

a) The design of pedestrian railings should generally comply with BS 7818. In actual design, the principal
design requirements including safety provisions should be outlined taking into account the local
experience.

b) The design should be simple, unobtrusive, having colours coherent with the surrounding environment
and using minimum materials.

c) Railings should be designed to withstand the envisaged loading.

d) Railing elements should not become easily detached on impact when they are placed adjacent to a
carriageway.

e) Railing components should be designed, when being struck, to minimize the risk of presenting a hazard
to pedestrians or occupants of impacting vehicles. In particular, the design should alleviate two specific
hazards:

(i) detachment of horizontal rails, particularly top rail with substantial rigidity, which could
impale vehicles; and

(ii) detachment of infill bars or other components, which could become dangerous projectiles.

f) Railing components should be free from burrs and sharp edges.

g) Railings should be designed to avoid entrapment of children’s heads/limbs in gaps (relevant provisions
in BS EN 1176). Accordingly, openings or gaps in the railings should either do not allow passing a
110mm diameter rigid sphere or allow passing of 230mm diameter rigid sphere.

h) Enquiries on the design of railings should be addressed to the Research and Development Division (on
engineering aspects) and Landscape Unit (on aesthetic aspects) of HyD.
 December 2023 Edition

TPDM Volume 2 Chapter 4 – Junctions

4.1 References

1. Department of Transport - TD 42/95 - Geometric Design of Major/Minor Priority Junctions

2. Department of Transport - TA 23/81 - Determination of Size of Roundabouts and Major/Minor

Junctions

3. Transport and Road Research Laboratory - TRRL LR492 (1980) - The traffic capacity of roundabouts

4. Transport and Road Research Laboratory - TRRL SR582 - The traffic capacity of major/minor priority
junctions

5. Department of Transport - TD 16/84 - The Geometric Design of Roundabouts

6. Department of Transport - TA 42/84 - The Geometric Design of Roundabouts

7. Department of Transport - H 12/76 - Design of weaving areas for motorways and all purpose roads

8. Department of Transport - H 18/75 - Design of rural motorway to motorway interchanges - merging

and diverging lanes

9. Department of The Environment - Layout of Roads in Rural Areas, 1968

10. Department of The Environment - Roads in Urban Areas, 1966

11. Department of Transport - TD 9/81 - Highway Link Design

 December 2023 Edition

4.2 Junction Design - General

4.2.1 Introduction

4.2.1.1 Junction design is the most important factor affecting safety and efficiency of movement within a road
network. This chapter contains information to assist the designer in choosing the most appropriate type
of junction control and designing the optimum layout for that junction type.

4.2.2 Junction Types

4.2.2.1 Junctions can be divided into four main types, viz Priority Junctions, Signal Controlled Junctions,
Roundabouts and Grade Separated Intersections.

4.2.2.2 Priority Junctionsoperate on the basis that traffic on the major road has continual priority over the
traffic on the minor road. Minor road traffic is controlled by “stop” and “give way” signs and
associated carriageway markings. The onus is entirely on the minor road traffic to decide when it is
safe to enter the major road. Section 4.3 of this chapter covers Priority Junctions.

4.2.2.3 Signal Controlled Junctions operate on a time sharing basis. Traffic streams are allowed to enter the
junction for a period of time, indicated by an illuminated signal, and during which period conflicting
traffic streams are halted. Volume 4 of this Manual deals comprehensively with Traffic Signals. Brief
mention is made in Section 4.4 of this chapter purely for reference purposes.

4.2.2.4 Roundabouts could be considered as a form of channelized Priority Junction. Vehicles enter a one way
carriageway and move in a clockwise direction around a central island. Entering vehicles give priority
to those vehicles already circulating across their entry. Section 4.5 deals with Roundabouts.

4.2.2.5 Grade Separated Intersections are junctions where some or all of the intersecting roads pass each other
at different levels. Some or all of the turning movements are catered for by ramps connecting the two
levels. Types of interchange and design considerations are covered in Section 4.6.

4.2.2.6 Junctions may be formed by a combination of two or more of the four basic types described above. For
example grade separation of two major roads with connecting ramps terminating at roundabouts is
quite common.

4.2.3 Junction Capacity

4.2.3.1 It is not possible to assign specific thresholds of flow at which one particular method of junction
control becomes more viable than the alternatives. Diagram 4.2.3.1 may be useful to designers when
considering options for a site catering for design flows at the lower end of the scale. For single
carriageway roads it shows the approximate levels of design flow at which various standards of T-
junction priority control are required. For dual two lane carriageways priority junctions are unlikely to
be viable where the minor road flow is expected to exceed about 3,000 vehicles AADT two way. For
dual three lane carriageways priority control is never recommended.

4.2.3.2 At design flows above the capacity of priority junctions the choice between traffic signals and
roundabout will generally be made, based on factors other than capacity. Both types of junction
control, with suitable layout, are capable of handling the range of flows between priority control and
grade separation. As a general principle however, the higher the ratio of major to minor road flow the
more appropriate is the signal control. Roundabouts are most appropriate with balanced major and
minor road flows, high percentages of right turning movements and low pedestrian volumes.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.2.3.1 : SINGLE CARRIAGEWAY T-JUNCTION PROVISION

4.2.4 Design Flows

4.2.4.1 In designing and evaluating all junction types it is necessary to predict design flows, which should be
peak hour volumes, for a future year not less than 10 years after scheme implementation. The junction
design needs to provide adequate capacity to handle the predicted flows in the design year.

4.2.4.2 Despite the sophisticated modelling techniques available, prediction of traffic flows for a distant year is
far from precise. It is suggested therefore that a range of flows be considered by adopting a confidence
limit of 20%. Within this range site specific factors would determine the design flows to be adopted.
For example, if subsequent adjacent land development would preclude the further improvement of a
particularly strategic junction, it would be imperative that adequate capacity was provided in the first
design. In this case the design flow adopted would be the top of the confidence range.

4.2.4.3 In considering design flows consideration should also be given to hourly, daily and seasonal variation
at the particular site in question. For example junctions feeding the Container Port are subject to
particularly high infrequent peaks corresponding with trading quota deadlines etc. In this case the
design flow may need to be considerably higher than the average future flow predicted by the model.

4.2.4.4 Where short duration queuing is expected to be a particular problem, allowance should also be made, in
deriving the design flow, for short term variation within the peak hour. For the manual calculation of
capacities, described in the sections on priority junctions and roundabouts, it is suggested that an
increase of 10-15% be applied to the peak hour flows to allow for this occurrence. (Short term variation
is automatically taken account of in the computer program assessment.)

4.2.5 Delay

4.2.5.1 Obviously delay is closely related to capacity and design flow as described in the previous two
sections. As the design flow approaches the capacity of the junction delays will increase. In this
introductory section it is considered worthwhile to briefly examine aspects of delay at the different
junction types.

4.2.5.2 At priority junctions delay will be experienced only by the minor road traffic. Major road traffic will
flow virtually unimpeded almost to the point where the major road flow equals the major road capacity.
Before this point is reached however the delays to vehicles on the minor road will have reached
intolerable proportions. Long delays to minor road traffic also encourage smaller gap acceptance and a
consequent increase in accidents.
 December 2023 Edition

4.2.5.3 Unlike priority junctions traffic signals can distribute delay fairly so that no particular movement
suffers disproportionate delays. At low levels of flow however, total delay at a junction will increase
when compared with a priority layout. Minimum cycle times are required by safety considerations and
where this cycle time is greater than that warranted on capacity grounds unnecessary delay results. This
problem is particularly prevalent at very off peak times, such as the middle of the night, despite the
facility with all modern controllers to vary phase and cycle times throughout the 24 hours. Delays can
of course be minimised by linking adjacent traffic signal controlled junctions.

4.2.5.4 With well balanced flows delays at roundabouts will be minimised over a full range of flow up to
levels which are close to capacity. Problems can arise with single predominant flows causing long
delays to those traffic streams across whose entry they pass. Also roundabouts should be avoided in
locations covered by Area Traffic Control.

4.2.5.5 Delays to major through movements are abolished completely at grade separated interchanges while
delays to minor turning movements can be minimized by use of appropriate junction control where the
ramps and minor roads intersect.

4.2.6 Safety

4.2.6.1 Junction accidents are defined as those occurring at or within 20 metres of a junction and as the
influence of a junction can extend far beyond 20m the actual percentage of accidents attributable to
junctions is probably even greater than this figure.

4.2.6.2 The high difference in speed between through and turning traffic at priority junctions, together with the
total dependence on the judgement of minor road drivers to determine what is a safe gap in the major
road traffic stream, leads to a high accident rate with this type of junction. Refuges can greatly improve
safety standards at priority junctions.

4.2.6.3 The positive indication provided to drivers by traffic signals generally results in a low accident rate at
this type of junction. Numbers of right turning and pedestrian accidents are particularly reduced when
compared to priority junctions. Rear end accidents usually increase in frequency however owing to
vehicles stopping suddenly when lights change. This problem can be particularly acute with traffic
signal installations on high speed roads.

4.2.6.4 Speeds of vehicles in the roundabout are usually low and compared with other junction types vehicle
paths intersect at small angles. When accidents do occur they tend to be less severe than with other at-
grade junction types.

4.2.6.5 At grade separated intersections major flows are free flowing with a minimum of accidents occurring at
points of merging and diverging. At such points paths intersect at small angles but the high speeds of
vehicles involved may result in increased severity of accidents.

4.2.7 Economic Considerations

4.2.7.1 Ignoring decisions which are made for political expediency, the type and scale of junction provided is
ultimately governed by economic considerations. The cost of provision of a junction in terms of
construction costs and land costs etc. can be weighed against the monetary benefits which accrue from
reduced delay and savings in accidents etc. and the scheme producing the best value of money is the
most appropriate scheme.

4.2.7.2 Priority junctions are generally the cheapest in terms of construction cost and are therefore the most
viable at low flows where delays and accident rates are low. At the top end of the flow range where
substantial widening and channelization are required, the additional land take may prove uneconomical
when compared to a more compact traffic signal design.
 December 2023 Edition

4.2.7.3 Traffic signals can be relatively economical in the use of land which will normally more than offset the
cost of equipment. High capacity can be achieved through multi lane approaches, developed over a
relatively short distance, thereby minimising the junction area.

4.2.7.4 Conventional roundabouts are always more extravagant in their use of land than traffic signals with
equivalent capacity. Opportunity costs for the alternative land uses will therefore constitute a major
factor. On the other hand small roundabouts do not use large amounts of land, sometimes less than both
signals and priority junctions with large scale channelization.

4.2.7.5 Grade separated interchanges are far and away the most expensive in terms of construction cost
irrespective of location. However in the Territory, where construction costs are sometimes dwarfed by
land costs, compact grade separated designs may represent an economic alternative. Grade separated
interchanges in rural areas are generally expensive in terms of land take as the opportunity cost of
alternative lane uses may be low. However, in urban areas compact grade separated schemes have
proved more cost effective than exclusively at-grade schemes requiring greater land take. The simplest
example of compact grade separation is a flyover spanning one or more at-grade junctions, where the
flyover is constructed within the at-grade road reserve, and turning movements are catered for below
the elevated structure.

4.2.7.6 An important aspect of the economic consideration is the feasibility of staged construction. Economic
benefits may be obtained by deferring construction of part of a junction layout until traffic volumes
increase sufficiently to warrant the more extensive design. Some junction types lend themselves more
readily to staged construction than others, though more often the feasibility of staged construction will
depend on the topography and traffic flows at the particular site. Junctions constructed initially as
priority control lend themselves readily to future conversion into signal control and to a lesser extend
small roundabouts. Planned conversion to a conventional roundabout design would normally require
the uneconomical sterilization of a large area of land in the intervening years. Both conventional
roundabouts and the larger traffic signal controlled junctions lend themselves to future conversion into
grade separated junctions.

4.2.8 Pedestrian Considerations

4.2.8.1 It is important that the needs of pedestrians are given equal importance to the needs of vehicular traffic
in junction design. Forecasts of future pedestrian demand should be given equal priority with the
design year vehicular predictions and the junction design tested to ensure adequate capacity and
minimum delay for pedestrians. Details of pedestrian capacities, design flows and pedestrian crossing
locations are given in Section 7 of Chapter 3 of this volume. The following paragraphs briefly examine
the possible advantages and disadvantages of the different junction types in respect of pedestrian
facilities.

4.2.8.2 Priority junctions in general are easy to negotiate for pedestrians and intended routes through the
junction should be indicated with guardrailing. Physical islands offer refuge to pedestrians, allowing
them to cross different directions of traffic in stages. Shadow islands do not offer the same protection
and should not be relied upon in designing a junction to accommodate pedestrians. As pedestrian
volumes increase, controlled crossings may be required on one or more arms of the junction and can be
quite compatible with priority control. Heavy pedestrian flows at priority junctions may warrant the
inclusion of footbridges or subways, however one should bear in mind the reluctance of pedestrians to
use such facilities if vehicular traffic is light.

4.2.8.3 Traffic signals offer the safest and most efficient way of dealing with pedestrians at-grade. With light
pedestrian flow levels where pedestrian aspects are not justified, pedestrians still have the opportunity
to cross streams of traffic which are halted. Wherever justified however, pedestrian aspects should be
included to give a positive indication of when to cross.
 December 2023 Edition

4.2.8.4 Roundabouts are the least appropriate type of at-grade junction where pedestrians are concerned, unless
the pedestrians are catered for on an exclusive segregated network. The flared approaches to
roundabouts make the siting of crossing facilities difficult and it is often desirable to site the crossing
some way back from the give way line where the carriageway width is less. Conventional roundabouts
in particular cause designed pedestrian paths to be circuitous and unpopular, thus encouraging
jaywalking. Zebra crossings can be compatible with roundabout design and should be considered.

4.2.8.5 At grade separated interchanges every effort should be made to include extensive grade separated
pedestrian facilities. Footpaths attached to flyovers frequently represent an economical and effective
method of providing grade separated pedestrian facilities. Care must be taken however that the
resulting pedestrian routes are not so diverse as to be unattractive.

4.2.9 Choice of Junction Type

4.2.9.1 Many junction choices will be constrained by obvious economic, environmental and topographical
considerations. The scope for weighty consideration of all the factors mentioned in the previous
sections may therefore not be possible. However choice of junction type should encompass the
examination of as many of these parameters as possible. To aid the designer Table 4.2.9.1 briefly
summarises how each junction type performs against a list of the most important parameters. The table
is perhaps of most use in comparing the signal and roundabout types of junction layout which can cater
for a similar range of traffic flows.

4.2.9.2 In making the choice of junction type, it is also necessary to ensure consistency with the surrounding
road network. An obvious example is that a roundabout which otherwise proves the most viable form
of junction control when considered against other parameters, should be avoided in an area which is
controlled by A.T.C. Similarly on high speed roads, traffic signals which require abrupt changes of
speed should be avoided.
 December 2023 Edition

Table 4.2.9.1
Factors Affecting Choice of Junction Type
Traffic Signal Roundabout
Design Parameter Priority Junction Grade Separated Junction
Junction Junction
Moderate - high Moderate - high
CAPACITY Low - moderate flows High flows
flows flows
Adjacent
junctions can be
linked to
minimise delay.
At top end of flow However No delay to major through
Little delay if
range long delays unnecessary traffic. Little or no delay
DELAY capacity not
experienced by minor delay to minor turning
exceeded
road traffic unavoidable movements
during most
quiet hours even
with minimum
cycle time
Low right turn
Some or all conflicting
and pedestrian
Generally the movements are removed
Relies heavily on accident rate but
safest form of at- with a consequent
driver judgement and may cause high
grade junction decrease in number of
SAFETY is susceptible to rear end
over a wide range accidents. The few
accidents at top end of accident rate
of flows and accidents which do occur
flow range especially on
speeds may be severe owing to
high speed
high speeds
roads
May be
Generally very extravagant in Construction costs are
Very low construction cost effective. terms of land take high but these should be
costs, but land take Cost of and consequently offset against reduction in
ECONOMIC
may be costly for equipment is expensive. community costs through
CONSIDERATIONS
larger physical island offset by However check fewer accidents, less delay
channelized junctions reduction in small and mini etc. G.S.I.'s can also be
land take roundabout economic users of land
designs
Pedestrian routes
Small simple junctions through
and those with Pedestrians can roundabout
physical generally be junctions may be
channelisation may catered for diverse and
PEDESTRIAN adequately cater for better at signals unattractive. Grade separated pedestrian
CONSIDERATIONS pedestrian demand. than at other at- Subways and/or facilities required
Shadow islands grade junctions footbridges
however should be through positive should be
avoided if pedestrian indication considered for
flow is heavy heavy pedestrian
demand
 December 2023 Edition

4.2.10 Spacing of Junctions

4.2.10.1 By limiting the number of junctions along a route the number of points of capacity reduction and high
accident potential are similarly limited. Spacing of junctions should also have regard to such matters as
the length needed for right turning, speed change lanes and weaving manoeuvres. It is recommended
that the minimum spacing set out in Table 4.2.10.1 should be adopted and where practicable even
greater distances should be used. For grade separated intersections longer spacing will often be dictated
by the simple summation of the length of slip road and the merging, weaving and diverging
requirements and it is unlikely that junction centres will within 1 km of each other.

Table 4.2.10.1
Desirable Minimum Spacing between Junctions
Route Type Spacing(metres)
Rural Trunk Roads 550
Urban Trunk Roads, Primary Distributors 300
District Distributors 200
Local Distributors 100

4.2.11 Signing and Lighting

4.2.11.1 The most elaborate and expensive junctions can be spoilt by poor signing and lighting and the
provision of these ancillary facilities should receive consideration at an early stage in the design
process. Badly located signs and lighting columns may impede visibility thereby reducing capacity and
increasing accident potential. The designer should therefore have mind of the type and location of these
facilities and ensure that his design provides space for their installation.
 December 2023 Edition

4.3 Priority Junctions

4.3.1 Introduction

4.3.1.1 Junctions which are controlled by stop or give way signs and/or markings are both the simplest and
most numerous in the Territory. Priority control is most appropriately used at junctions where it is
desirable to give continual priority to one route. The main advantage of this form of control is that little
or no delay is experienced by the through traffic on the major route.
4.3.2 Types of Priority Junction

4.3.2.1 There are three types of priority junction appropriate to single carriageways viz simple, shadow island
and physical island and they can be applied to three junction configurations viz crossroads, T-junctions
and staggered junctions.
4.3.2.2 Simple junctions are those without any shadow or physical islands on the major road and without
channelising islands in the minor road approach. They are appropriate for most accesses and minor
junctions on single carriageways but are unsuitable for junctions with substantial minor road flows (see
Diagram No. 4.2.3.1). Right turning traffic from the major road can be particularly problematic as there
is no right turn diverging lane to prevent queues from delaying major road through traffic.
4.3.2.3 Shadow island junctions use a painted hatched island in the middle of single carriageway roads to
provide a diverging lane and waiting space for vehicles turning right from the major road and thus
overcome the problems mentioned in the previous paragraph. The same island, if wide enough, also
offers protection to the right turn from the minor road thus allowing this traffic to complete its
manoeuvre in two stages. It can be seen from Diagram No. 4.2.3.1, that even with relatively light major
road flows the simple junction is only viable up to a minor road flow of about 500 vehicles 2 way
AADT, and above this level a shadow island layout should be considered. Shadow islands are effective
in improving safety, relatively cheap and should be considered for busy accesses and junctions on
single carriageway roads.
4.3.2.4 Physical island layouts simply replace the painted central island described in the previous paragraph
with a kerbed island, offering the same facility to the right turning traffic streams. Physical island
layouts are more appropriate on higher speed roads, as the through lanes are physically restricted to
cater for single file traffic thus discouraging overtaking through the junction. Physical islands may give
the appearance of dual carriageway sections and appropriate signing should be erected to dispel this
notion. In particular dual carriageway signs must not be erected at physical island layouts.
4.3.2.5 In addition to the three layouts described for single carriageways, priority junctions may also be
appropriate for dual carriageway roads. Local widening of the central reserve provides sufficient width
to harbour right turning traffic. Priority junctions on dual two lane roads are appropriate for minor road
flows up to approximately 3000 vehicles AADT 2 way (N.B. much less than physical island layouts on
single carriageway roads). On dual three lane roads priority control should never be used.
4.3.2.6 In terms of junction configuration the priority control is much more suited to T-junctions. The majority
of roads in urban areas within the Territory however are priority controlled crossroads. They continue
to operate satisfactorily only because of the low speeds involved. Generally, priority controlled
crossroads in new junction design should only be considered for very low minor road flows. They
should not be used on dual carriageways, single carriageways with physical islands and all new
junctions in rural areas.
4.3.2.7 Wherever possible staggered junctions should be used in preference to crossroads. Right/left staggered
are preferred to left/right staggers. Paragraph 4.3.13.1 contains recommendations on the design of
staggered junctions.
 December 2023 Edition

4.3.3 Siting of Priority Junctions

4.3.3.1 Where possible it is preferable to site junctions on level ground or in sags rather than at or near the
crest of hills. Drivers approaching a junction on an uphill gradient have difficulty in appreciating the
junction layout whereas when they are approaching on a down gradient they have a good view of the
situation ahead.

4.3.3.2 On curved sections of major roads, minor roads should be brought in on the outside of curves if
possible. This is especially important on climbing lane sections or dual carriageways.

4.3.3.3 On single carriageways where overtaking opportunity is limited, care must be taken in siting shadow
islands to avoid these sections being used for through route overtaking manoeuvres.

4.3.3.4 The number of junctions should be kept to a minimum by collecting lightly trafficked accesses into a
service road which can form a single junction with the major road.

4.3.4 Safety at Priority Junctions

4.3.4.1 As stated in paragraph 4.2.6.1; in the United Kingdom 57% of all injury accidents occur at junctions.
Just over half of these occur at priority junctions. It has been found that for the same major and minor
road flows priority control almost invariably produces more accidents than other junction types and
that the accidents are more serious. The accidents mainly involve right turning vehicles which feature
in 90% of accidents, equally divided into right turns to and right turns from the major road.

4.3.4.2 Again using recent statistics from the United Kingdom certain junction improvements have been found
to have the following effects : Installation of shadow islands on single carriageway roads has reduced
accidents by about 40%. The replacement of rural crossroads by a staggered junction has reduced
accidents by about 60%. The installation of deflection islands on the minor road approaches to rural
crossroads has reduced accidents by about 50%. Other improvements which have been found to
significantly reduce accidents include : restriction of turning movements, improvement to visibility,
installation of guardrails and pedestrian refuges and the provision of skid resistant material. It is
intended that more detailed advice on accidents at all junctions based on statistics collected in the
Territory will be presented in Volume 5 - Accident Analysis & Prevention.

4.3.5 Pedestrian Facilities at Priority Junctions

4.3.5.1 Pedestrian requirements at priority junctions, as with other junction types, should be given equal
weight to vehicular needs. The designer therefore needs to assess pedestrian loadings and develop his
layout, from the beginning, to cater for these predicted flows. On single carriageway roads simple
junctions and physical island junctions can cater for a reasonable volume of pedestrians but shadow
islands may lead to a false sense of security for pedestrians and should be avoided. Priority junctions at
dual carriageways also present difficulties for pedestrians owing to the width of carriageway to be
crossed.

4.3.5.2 Crossings should normally be located close to the junction but far enough back that the crossing width
is minimum. The set back should be sufficient to enable a vehicle to wait between the crossing and the
stop/give way line. Pedestrians should be channeled to the correct crossing place, which may be of
cautionary or zebra types, by the use of guardrailing.

4.3.5.3 Grade separated pedestrian crossings may provide an acceptable solution at some locations but the
reluctance of pedestrians to use such facilities on roads which are not wide and heavily trafficked
should be borne in mind.

4.3.6 Capacity of Priority Junctions

 December 2023 Edition

4.3.6.1 All priority junction layouts impose little or no delay to the through and left turning traffic streams on
the major road and consequently no loss in capacity to cater for the non priority traffic streams, i.e. the
right turn from the major road and both right and left turns from the minor road.

4.3.6.2 Capacity prediction for priority junctions in the past has been based on the theory of gap acceptance, in
which vehicles in the non priority streams are assumed to move into naturally occurring gaps in the
appropriate priority streams. The capacity was then calculated from a knowledge of minimum gaps
acceptable to non priority drivers and the likely frequency of occurrence of such gaps. For various
reasons this method has been found to be unsatisfactory and has been superseded.

4.3.6.3 Recent work has produced empirical formulae linking the capacity of the non priority traffic streams to
the major road flows and the junction geometry. The formulae are based on multiple regression
analyses from observations at a large number of sites in the United Kingdom. The viability of the
junction layout is assessed by comparing the design flow of each non priority movement with the
calculated capacity of that movement.

4.3.6.4 The parameters of junction geometry which have been found to exert the major influence on capacity
of non priority movements are : major road width, width of central median, lane width available to
waiting traffic streams and visibility distances for non priority traffic streams. These parameters are
employed in the predictive equations. Other aspects of junction geometry notably, gradient, angle of
intersection and radius of minor road vehicle path were found to have minimal influence on junction
capacity and therefore do not appear in the equations.

4.3.6.5 In evaluating a proposed junction layout the design flow, arrived at as described in paragraph 4.2.4,
should be compared with the calculated capacity to produce a design flow/capacity ratio (DFC) for
each non priority movement. The capacity is the rate of discharge when there is saturation demand and
therefore implies considerable queuing and vehicular delay. For design purposes a suitable margin is
therefore required. A DFC of 85% would indicate a reasonable capacity provision which would prevent
queuing in the majority (85%) of cases. A DFC of 70% would indicate that queuing would
theoretically be avoided in nearly all (95% of ) cases. Frequently the major road right turn would
present more of a problem, if queuing occurred, than the minor road movements. This is because such a
queue may reduce capacity on the straight through major road flow and has been found to detrimentally
affect safety. A lower DFC may therefore be desirable on the major road right turn than on the minor
road turning movements.

4.3.6.6 The predictive equations for priority junction capacity are given in Appendix 1 together with
definitions of parameters, explanatory diagrams and a worked example of the manual application of the
formulae. The manual computation of the formulae is very useful in preliminary design of priority
junctions and should certainly be used in preference to formulae previously available for capacity
calculation. This method is however best suited for computer application and the program PICADY
will compute short term variations in flow to predict peak vehicular delays and queue lengths and
optimise geometric parameters to minimise them. It is anticipated that the program will be available for
use in Hong Kong in the near future.

4.3.6.7 The predictive equations given in Appendix 1 are applicable only to T-junctions and staggered
crossroads which may be treated as two separate T-junctions.

4.3.7 General Layout Requirements

4.3.7.1 The layout should be designed to follow the natural vehicular paths. Unduly sharp radii or complex
paths involving several changes of direction must be avoided. The general aim is to achieve a layout
which is easily understood by motorists.
 December 2023 Edition

4.3.7.2 To achieve this objective, islands, traffic signs and road markings should be specifically designed to
define the paths to be taken. Cutting, merging and diverging movements can usefully be separated by
physical or painted islands. Numerous small traffic islands should however be avoided as they are
ineffective and confusing.

4.3.7.3 Allowance should be made for the swept turning paths of long goods vehicles where they can be
reasonably expected to use a junction. Consideration should also be given to the manoeuvring
characteristics of these vehicles in the design of staggered junctions.

4.3.7.4 Specific aspects of the various geometric parameters which combine to produce a satisfactory layout
are covered in the following sections. It should be remembered that the geometric standards suggested
are ideals to be aimed at but should not be so rigidly applied that a junction becomes out of scale with
its surroundings, environmentally damaging or exorbitantly expensive. Several of the standards are
related to design speed. Where junction design refers to a new junction on an existing road or
improvement to an existing junction the measured 85th percentile speed should be used, rounded up to
the next highest design speed step. Where the design is concerned with a new road, the design speed of
the road should be adopted. Suffixes A and B attached to design speeds are defined in Chapter 3,
paragraph 3.3.2.3 as :

Design Speed A represents a high standard alignment with only occasional low radius curves and
Design Speed B represents a heavily constrained alignment where low radius curves have been
frequently adopted because of difficult topography or dense development.

4.3.8 Visibility Splays

4.3.8.1 Drivers approaching a priority junction from the minor road should have unobstructed visibility to the
left and right along the major road, for a distance dependent on the major road traffic speed, to enable
them to judge safely when they may turn into or cross the major road. This visibility also allows drivers
on the major road to be aware of traffic entering from the minor road in time for them to be able to
slow down or stop safely should this be necessary.

4.3.8.2 The visibility should be available between points 1.05m above the road level and provided by means of
a visibility splay whose area is defined by lines joining the points A, B and C as shown in Diagram No.
4.3.8.1.

4.3.8.3 For roads within estates and other local roads of minor nature or experiencing low speeds the distance
AC above relating to the 50 km/h design speed may be reduced to 50m.

4.3.8.4 In difficult situations the dimensions AB may be reduced to 4.5m and in exceptional circumstances 2m
but the distance AC as recommended above should always be provided. If AB is greater than 15m high
minor road approach speeds can be expected and this situation should receive special considerations.
(The dimensions of lines AB and AC also govern the need for stop control as opposed to give way
control and more information on this point is given in Volume 3 para. 2.3.2.4.)

4.3.8.5 Where the major road is a dual carriageway, with a central reserve of adequate width to shelter traffic
turning right from the minor road, the visibility splay to the left should not be provided, but the central
reserve should be clear of obstructions to the required distance as defined by dimension AC and as
depicted in Diagram No. 4.3.8.2. Similarly if the major road is one way, only a splay in the direction of
approaching traffic is required.
 December 2023 Edition

4.3.8.6 In the vast majority of urban situations low major road speeds are accompanied by wider footpaths.
Additionally the high cost of lane and intensity of development would provide ample justification for
the reduction of dimension AB to the 4.5m to 2m range. In such cases the required minimum distance
AC would be provided without any corner splay being applied to adjacent buildings. In order to
maintain adequate footpath widths in these situations corner splays should be provided in accordance
with the standards set out in Diagram 4.3.8.3.

DIAGRAM 4.3.8.1 : VISIBILITY SPLAYS AT PRIORTY JUNCTIONS

DIAGRAM 4.3.8.2 : VISIBILITY SPLAYS ON DUAL CARRIAGEWAYS

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.3.8.3A : STANDARD FOR CORNER SPLAYS

(1) ACUTE ANGLED INTERSECTIONS (2) RIGHT ANGLED INTERSECTION

NOTE: (1) NO CORNER SPLAY IS RECOMMENDED WHEN 2 BOUNDARY LINES

INTERSECT OUTSIDE THE SEGMENT ENCLOSED BY THE FRONT
KERB RADII. SEE FIG.4

(2) CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE POSSIBLE FUTURE

SITING OF PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS

DIAGRAM 4.3.8.3B : STANDARD FOR CORNER SPLAYS

(3) OBTUSE ANGLED INTERSECTION (4) NO ANGLE SPLAY TO BE PROVIDED

NOTE: (1) NO CORNER SPLAY IS RECOMMENDED WHEN 2 BOUNDARY LINES

INTERSECT OUTSIDE THE SEGMENT ENCLOSED BY THE FRONT
KERB RADII. SEE FIG.4

(2) CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE POSSIBLE FUTURE

SITING OF PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS
 December 2023 Edition

4.3.9 Right Turning Lanes

4.3.9.1 Right turning or offside diverging lanes aid vehicles turning right from the major road by allowing
them to decelerate and if necessary wait before making the right turn manoeuvre. Through traffic on
the major route also benefits by not being impeded by vehicles waiting to turn right, while right turning
vehicles from the minor road can wait in the area provided and thus carry out their manoeuvre in two
stages.

4.3.9.2 Right turning lanes should be provided at all priority junctions on dual carriageways and at those on
single carriageways of the physical island or shadow island types of layout. The lane is made up of two
components, a deceleration length and a turning length. The deceleration length is dependent on the
design speed of the major road and the average gradient on the major road over a distance of 150m
before the minor road. Deceleration lengths are shown in Table 4.3.9.1. The turning length is always
10m irrespective of junction type, design speed and gradient.

Table 4.3.9.1
Deceleration Lengths (m) of Right Turning Lanes
Up Gradient Down Gradient
Design Speed (km/h) Above 4%
0 - 4% Above 4% 0 - 4%
(a) (b)
100A 80 55 80 80 110
85A 55 40 55 55 80
70A 40 25 40 40 55
60A 25 25 25 25 40
50A 25 25 25 25 25

For above 4% down gradients (a) refers to shadow island and physical island single carriageway
layouts while (b) refers to dual carriageway sites.

4.3.9.3 For dual carriageway and physical island type single carriageway junctions the width of the right
turning lane should be 3.5m. It should be developed by means of a taper whose length will depend on
the design speed. The length of the taper which is included as part of the total deceleration length given
in Table 4.3.9.1 is as follows :
Design speed
100 85 70 60 50
(km/h)
Length of
25 15 15 5 5
taper (m)

4.3.9.4 For shadow islands the width of the right turning lane will vary but it should be an absolute minimum
of 3m for new junctions and 2.5m for improvements to existing junctions. Where it is desirable to
shelter vehicles turning right from the minor road, widths up to a maximum of 5m should be used.
However, on high speed roads, widths greater than 3.5m should be avoided so as not to encourage
overtaking. The right turning lane should be introduced by means of a 45 degree splay, at the end of the
taper, except a left/right staggered junctions. At left/right staggered junctions the deceleration lengths
will lie side by side and the starting points of the deceleration lengths should be joined by a straight
line as in Diagram No. 4.3.16.10A & B.
 December 2023 Edition

4.3.9.5 At dual carriageway junctions and single carriageway junctions with physical islands the width of the
central reserve will be made up of the 3.5m wide right turning lane plus the width of the physical
median. With a minimum median width of 1.5m, a 5m wide central reserve will be formed. Whilst
such a width would shelter small vehicles turning right from the minor road, it is recommended that the
central reserve be locally widened to 10m if all but the longest vehicles are to be accommodated. This
10m would include the metre strips which, it is recommended, should be introduced locally if not
present through the major route.

4.3.9.6 Central islands should normally be developed to their maximum widths symmetrically about the centre
line of the major road at the tapers shown below :
Design speed (km/h) 100 85 70 60 50
Single carriageway taper
1 in 30 25 20 20 20
(physical and shadow islands)
Dual carriageway tapers 1 in 50 45 40 40 40

It is perfectly acceptable to develop central islands asymmetrically however in order to avoid utilities
for example, and in the case of climbing lanes or sections on sharp curves asymmetric development
may be essential.

4.3.9.7 At physical island layouts on single carriageway roads central islands should be introduced by hatched
markings until a width of 1.5m has been developed.

4.3.9.8 Adjacent to the right turning lanes are the through traffic lanes. At shadow island junctions the through
lane should be between 3.0m and 3.65m wide (exclusive of hard strips if present). At physical islands
on single lane carriageways the through lane should be 4.0m wide, which with two hard strips will
allow through traffic to pass a broken down vehicle. At dual carriageway sites the through lane widths
remote from the junction should be maintained through the junctions.

4.3.10 Left Turning Lanes (Diverging)

4.3.10.1 Nearside diverging lanes allow left turning major road traffic to slow down and leave the major road
without impeding the following through traffic. They should be formed by a taper to a width of 3.5m
contiguous to the corner into the minor road which should preferably be of radius 20m. The width of
entry to the minor road will depend on this radius.

A typical layout is illustrated in Diagram No. 4.3.16.4.

4.3.10.2 Nearside diverging lanes should not be provided at simple priority junctions but should be provided at
other priority junction types where the following conditions are met :

(i) Design speed 80 km/h or above and left turning traffic greater than 600 vehicles AADT.

(ii) Design speed 80 km/h or above and left turning traffic greater than 450 vehicles AADT
with at least 20% heavy goods vehicles.

(iii) At any design speed where gradient is greater than 4% and left turning traffic greater than
450 vehicles AADT.

However they should not be provided where the minor road is on the inside of a sharp curve as
traffic on the diverging lane could adversely affect visibility for drivers emerging from the minor
road.
 December 2023 Edition

4.3.10.3 The length of nearside diverging lane is defined as being from the beginning of the taper to the point of
conflict with the major road right turning traffic. For design speeds of 70 km/h or less the length should
be 35m. For design speeds greater than 70 km/h maximum and minimum lengths of diverging lane
should be in accordance with Table 4.3.10.1.

Table 4.3.10.1
Maximum and (Minimum) Lengths of Nearside Diverging Lane
Up Gradient Down Gradient
Design Speed (km/h) Above 4%
0 - 4% Above 4% 0 - 4%
(a) (b)
100A 80 (40) 55 (35) 80 (40) 80 (40) 110 (55)
85A 55 (35) 40 (35) 55 (35) 55 (35) 80 (40)

(a) = shadow and physical island single carriageway sites

(b) = dual carriageway sites

4.3.11 Left Turning Lanes (Merging)

4.3.11.1 Merging lanes allow left turning minor road traffic to accelerate before joining the major road traffic.
They are normally only appropriate at dual carriageway junctions where the design speed of the major
road is 80 km/h or above and the volume of left turning minor road traffic exceeds 600 vehicles
AADT. The flow figure may be reduced to 450 vehicles AADT where there is an up gradient
exceeding 4% or where the percentage of heavy goods vehicles exceeds 20%. Merging lanes should
never be used at single carriageway physical island layouts.

4.3.11.2 A separate turning lane, preferably of radius 25m, should be used to introduce the merging lane from
the minor road. The initial width of the lane, which will depend upon the radius of the turning lane,
should be decreased at a constant taper of 1 in 15. This taper should be introduced relative to the
perpendicular to the minor road centre line at its point of entry to the major road, not relative to the
major road centre line. A left turn merging lane is shown in Diagram No. 4.3.16.5.

4.3.12 Traffic Islands and Refuges

4.3.12.1 Section 4.3.9 has already considered in some detail the layout of the traffic island or central reservation
associated with right turning lanes. This section looks at some general points affecting islands and
refuges and more specific points concerning minor road channelising islands.

4.3.12.2 Traffic islands are provided at priority junctions for a variety of reasons viz : to give guidance on
intended vehicular paths, to channelise intersecting or merging traffic, to warn drivers of the impending
junction, to provide shelter for vehicles carrying out certain manoeuvres and to assist pedestrians.

4.3.12.3 Islands should have a minimum area of 4.5 sq.m. Smaller islands should be defined by road markings
only. The approach nose should be offset to reduce the risk of vehicles overriding the island and
colliding with the illuminated bollard which should be located at its apex.

4.3.12.4 Where a traffic island serves as a pedestrian refuge it should be at least 1.25m wide and have openings
in the centre at carriageway level to facilitate pedestrians crossing. Kerbs, opposite the refuge, should
be dropped locally. Care should be taken to ensure that visibility between motorist and pedestrian is not
obstructed by street furniture.

4.3.12.5 The recommended layouts for minor road channelising islands are shown in Diagram No. 4.3.16.15
and details of their design are discussed in Section 4.3.16.
4.3.13 Stagger Distances
 December 2023 Edition

4.3.13.1 It is important at staggered junctions that a minimum spacing be achieved between the two side roads
in order to provide for satisfactory manoeuvring of large vehicles. The following stagger distances will
cater for the longest articulated vehicle using the Territory's roads :
Minimum stagger distances (m)
between centre lines of minor roads
Type of Junction Right/Left Stagger Left/Right Stagger
Simple 50 50
Shadow Island 40 50*
Physical Island 50 60*
Dual Carriageway 60 60*

The left/right stagger values marked with an asterisk, although representing the minimum distances for
long vehicle manoeuvring, should in fact be increased for higher design speeds. This is because at
left/right staggered junctions the right turning lanes lie side by side and their combined length is greater
than the minimum length required for vehicle manoeuvring. Left right stagger distances at all but
simple junctions are therefore governed by design speeds as follows :

Design Speed (km/h) 70 85 100

Stagger Distance 60 75 100

These figures will also vary with major road gradient as described in paragraph 4.3.9.2.

4.3.14 Corner Radii

4.3.14.1 The corner radii on the layouts shown on Diagram Nos. 4.3.16.1 to 4.3.16.14 inclusive have been
designed to cater for a 16.0m long articulated vehicle with a single axle at the rear of the trailer. At
some simple junctions where the design vehicle will encroach into opposing traffic lanes, this fact is
annotated on the relevant layout.

4.3.14.2 At some junctions it may be decided that it is not necessary to cater for such a long vehicle and a
different design vehicle may be chosen. The turning requirements of this design vehicle will then
dictate the corner radii required. The increasing use of 12m buses in the Territory should not be
overlooked in the design of corner radii and at perpendicularly intersecting roads a 12m corner radius is
required for this type of vehicle.

4.3.14.3 Where long vehicles are catered for by the use of corner radii and flares the designer should be aware
of the potential problems resulting from smaller vehicles using the widened approaches for multiple
entry.

4.3.14.4 In cases where no allowance is to be made for long vehicles it is recommended that the absolute
minimum circular corner radii should be 6m in urban areas and 9m in rural areas.

4.3.15 Widths of Carriageways in Junctions

4.3.15.1 Where carriageways at junctions go round low radius corners widening should be provided to cater for
the swept path of long vehicles. Also, at physical island layouts, with single carriageways greater than
50m in length, an allowance should be made for broken down vehicles.
 December 2023 Edition

4.3.15.2 Table 4.3.15.1 shows recommended widths of carriageway corresponding to various near side corner
radii. The recommendations for Single Lane Width are based on the requirements of a 16.0m long
articulated vehicle. The recommendations for single lane width to pass stationary vehicle are
subdivided into three standards. The 6m effective width column should be considered as the normal
standard and would allow any vehicle to pass any other vehicle. Reduced standards may be considered
appropriate and the 5.2m effective width column will provide sufficient space for a goods vehicle to
pass a stationary car but not for a goods vehicle to pass another goods vehicle or bus. Similarly, whilst
the 4.3m effective width will allow a car to pass another stationary car it is unlikely that a goods
vehicle or bus would be able to pass a stationary car. The two lane width for one way or two way
traffic columns represent two standards. The normal minimum column would allow operation of the
16m articulated vehicle while the absolute minimum column represents a reduced standard which
should not be used on bus routes or in situations with more than the minimum volumes of medium and
heavy goods vehicles.

Table 4.3.15.1
Width of Carriageways in Junctions
Single lane Width with Space to Pass Two Lane Width for One
Inside Single Stationary Vehicle Including Hardstrip Way or Two Way Traffic
Corner Lane Provision (m) (m)
Radius Width
(m) (m) Effective Effective Effective Normal Absolute
Width 6m Width 5.2m Width 4.3m Minimum Minimum
10 8.4 10.9 9.5 8.4 14.9 9.5
15 7.1 9.6 8.2 7.1 13.1 9.0
20 6.2 8.7 7.3 6.2 11.8 8.7
25 5.7 8.2 6.8 5.7 10.9 8.5
30 5.3 7.8 6.4 5.3 10.3 8.2
40 4.7 7.2 5.8 4.7 9.3 7.9
50 4.4 6.9 5.4 4.3 8.7 7.7
75 4.0 6.5 5.2 4.3 8.0 7.4
100 3.8 6.3 5.2 4.3 7.6 7.3
150 3.65 6.0 5.2 4.3 7.3 7.0

Widths are exclusive of hardstrips, where present, except for single lane width to pass broken down
vehicles . For explanation of various columns see paragraph 4.3.15.2.

4.3.16 Recommended Layouts

4.3.16.1 Based on the foregoing sections, Diagram Nos. 4.3.16.1 to 4.3.16.14 have been prepared to show how
the individual elements are combined to produce typical junction layouts. It should be stressed (again)
that the junction layouts are targets for which the designer should aim. Lesser provision may well be
justified for reasons of land take, topography, environmental considerations or cost. However as many
elements of the design as possible should be incorporated.

4.3.16.2 It should also be noted that the layouts can all cater for the design vehicle which is a 16.0m long
articulated vehicle with single rear axle. Although many of the design elements are not related to
vehicular turning properties, some, such as corner radii, are and may be adjusted to suit a preferred
design vehicle.
 December 2023 Edition

4.3.16.3 Particular comments on the typical junction layouts are as follows :-

Diagram No. 4.3.16.1
This shows suggested treatments for urban and rural simple T-junctions. The encroachment of long
vehicles is annotated for each layout. It should be stressed that the layouts shown are only examples of
kerb treatment. If land constraints do not permit the use of the prescribed kerb layouts alternative
combinations of radii and straight should be tested to suit both the particular land constraints and the
swept path and turning radii of the design vehicle for that junction. For example it may be decided that
the most onerous vehicle which will use a junction will be a 12m bus and the operating characteristics
of this vehicle should then be used for design.
When using the urban layout catering for long vehicles particular care should be taken in the treatment
of pedestrians. The designer should also be aware of potential problems from multiple entry of small
vehicles using the flared section.
For the rural junction layouts the metre hardstrips can be introduced locally, if not existing throughout
the route; and in such cases the hardstrip on the side of the major road which is remote from the minor
road is not required.

Diagram No. 4.3.16.2

This shows a 7.3m wide single two lane carriageway with a 3.5m wide shadow island and could be
suitable for rural or semi urban situations. This basic layout is adaptable for roads with metre strips and
particularly suitable for 10m wide main carriageways where no widening is required. Where widening
is required it can be introduced a symmetrically to avoid utilities for example.
If a pedestrian crossing is required the shadow island should not be used as a central refuge.

Diagram No. 4.3.16.3

This shows a 7.3m wide single two lane carriageway with 5m wide shadow islands and a two lane
approach on the minor road. This layout is appropriate to a more heavily trafficked situation than the
3.5m wide islands. However shadow islands with widths greater than 3.5m should not be used on roads
with design speeds above 80 km/h.
If a pedestrian crossing is required the shadow island should not be used as a central refuge.

Diagram No. 4.3.16.4

This shows a 10m wide physical island on a single 2 lane road, appropriate to a busy rural junction.
The 10m island (including metre strips) is capable of sheltering most vehicles turning right from the
minor road. This type of layout (also depicted in Drawings 4.3.16.5, 11 and 12) requires a certain
amount of judgement and caution to be exercised by the conflicting right turning traffic movements.
A diverging lane is also shown and would be incorporated if the left turn flow into the minor road was
heavy.

Diagram No. 4.3.16.5

This shows a T-junction on a dual two lane carriageway with 10m central reserve and merging lane. It
is appropriate with a heavy left turn from the minor road and heavy right turns.

Diagram No. 4.3.16.6

This shows two possible layouts for urban crossroads with the encroachment of long goods vehicles
annotated on each. As stated for Layout 1 the kerb treatments are only examples. For new junctions
cross roads are only acceptable for low minor road flows.

Diagram No. 4.3.16.7

This shows two possible layouts for rural crossroads. Crossroads should be avoided for new
construction in rural areas and the layouts are presented for improvement to existing junctions. The
hardstrips should be introduced locally to emphasise the junction if not already present on the route.
 December 2023 Edition

Diagram No. 4.3.16.8

This shows an urban crossroads with a 3.5m shadow island. One minor road has a two lane approach
and the other a one lane approach. This layout is not recommended for new construction but for
existing junction improvement. Shadow islands should not be used at crossroads in rural areas.
If a pedestrian crossing is required the shadow islands should not be used as a central refuge.
Diagram No. 4.3.16.9
For new junctions staggered crossroads are far more preferable to straight crossroads. This layout
shows a simple right left stagger suitable for urban or rural roads.
Diagram No. 4.3.16.10
This shows right/left and left/right staggers suitable for urban situations. In particular the right left
stagger should not be used at high design speeds as it has been found that it encourages injudicious
overtaking. The staggers shown are based on the manoeuvring requirements of a long vehicle.
Staggered junctions are always to be preferred to straight crossroads and right/left staggers are
preferable to left/right staggers.
If a pedestrian crossing is required the shadow islands should not be used as a central refuge.
Diagram No. 4.3.16.11
This shows a right/left stagger drawn for a higher design speed and more suitable for a rural situation.
Indiscriminate overtaking is prevented by the use of physical islands.
Diagram No. 4.3.16.12
This shows the corresponding left/right stagger for the rural situation. The main carriageway is 7.3m
wide as opposed to 10m wide in Diagram No. 4.3.16.11.
Diagram No. 4.3.16.13
This shows a T-junction situation on a rural climbing lane section with minor road on the right of the
up gradient. Shadow islands should not exceed 3.5m in width on climbing lane sections.
If a pedestrian crossing is required the shadow islands should not be used as a central refuge.
Diagram No. 4.3.16.14
This shows two shadow island layouts for handling right hand and left hand splays. The layouts are a
target for the designer to aim at and it is envisaged that a compromise arrangement may be necessitated
on land take considerations. The layouts are intended for improvements to existing junctions rather
than new junctions which should not be designed on a skew. Care should be taken that the left turn into
the major road on the right hand splay junction is not so easy as to encourage merging.
If a pedestrian crossing is required the shadow islands should not be used as a central refuge.
Diagram No. 4.3.16.15
This shows the detailed design of the minor road channelising islands applicable to many of the
preceding junction layouts. The design procedure stipulated fro rural road channelising islands,
although fairly straight-forward would need to be simplified for on-site setting out. It is suggested
therefore that the detailed design procedure is followed and then the geometry simplified to facilitate
setting out whilst still maintaining closely the deigned shape. It is felt that such a procedure is
preferable to simplifying the actual design steps which may lead to islands of unusual and may be
unacceptable shape.
 December 2023 Edition

4.3.16.4 It will be noted from the drawing that rural channelising islands are divided into T-junctions and
crossroads and the following points should be noted concerning each :
T-junctions (layout (a))

(i) R, is tangential to the offset, d, from the minor road centre line and the offside edge of the
through traffic lane on the major road into which right turning traffic from the minor road
will turn.

(ii) Point A is established by describing an arc of radius R1 + 2 concentric with R1 and joining
its centre with the point on its circumference, where it crosses the edge of the major road
carriageway, with a straight line. A is the point where this straight line crosses the arc R1.

(iii) The circular arc R2 is tangential to the offside edge of the major road offside diverging lane
and also passes through point A.

(iv) For splay junction the centre line of the minor road is turned with a radius of at least 50m to
meet the edge of the major road at right angles, and the island should be about 15m long.

(v) For left hand splay junctions the offset d is 4.5m.

Crossroads (layout (b))

There are similarities with the design described under (a) but the following points should be noted :

(i) The long axis of the island is inclined at 5 degrees to the minor road centre line and the
island is always 3m wide.

(ii) The circular arc R1 has a radius of 11m and is tangential to the left hand side of the island
(viewed from the minor road approach) and the centre line of the major road. (In some cases
where the minor road is inclined to the major road at angles between 100 degrees and 110
degrees R1 will have to be reduced to 8m to create a suitable island.)

(iii) The circular arc R2 has a radius of 11m and is tangential to the major road centre line and
the minor road centre line.

(iv) Where the minor road centre line is inclined to the major road at angles less than 70 degrees
R1 will normally be 12m and R2 8m.

(v) Where the minor road centre line is inclined to the major road at angles greater than 110
degrees R1 will normally be 8m and R2 12m.

(vi) Where two splay minor roads meet at a crossroad the minor road centre lines should be
offset relative to one another by approximately the width of one island.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.1 : SIMPLE T-JUNCTION

ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.
URBAN - PROVIDED WHERE LONG VEHICLES ARE PREDICTED
(LONG COMMERCIAL VEHICLES ENCROACH INTO OPPOSING TRAFFIC LANES OF THE
MINOR ROAD WHEN TURNING FROM THE MAJOR ROAD)

URBAN - STANDARD LAYOUT

(LONG COMMERCIAL VEHICLES REQUIRES THE FULL WIDTH OF THE MINOR ROAD
WHEN TURNING FROM THE MAJOR ROAD AND ENCROACH INTO THE OPPOSING
TRAFFIC LANE OF THE MAJOR ROAD WHEN TURNING FROM THE MINOR ROAD)

RURAL - PROVIDED WHERE LONG VEHICLES ARE PREDICTED

(NO ENCROACHMENT INTO OPPOSING TRAFFIC LANES FOR ALL MOVEMENTS)
 December 2023 Edition

RURAL - STANDARD LAYOUT

(LONG COMMERCIAL VEHICLES ENCROACH INTO THE OPPOSING TRAFFIC
LANE OF THE MINOR ROAD WHEN TURNING FROM THE MAJOR ROAD AND
TRACK INTO OPPOSING LANE OF MAJOR ROAD WHEN TURNING FROM THE
MINOR ROAD)

COMPOUND CURVE DESIGN

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.2 : SINGLE 7.3m / SHADOW ISLAND 3.5m

DRAWN FOR 85A km/h DESIGN SPEED
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.3 : SINGLE 7.3m / SHADOW ISLAND 5m

DRAWN FOR 50 / 60 km/h DESIGN SPEED
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.
SHOWING TWO LANE APPROACH ON MAJOR ROAD

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.4 : SINGLE 7.3m / PHYSICAL ISLAND 10m

DRAWN FOR 85A km/h DESIGN SPEED
(INCLUDING DIVERGING LANE)
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.
SHOWING SINGLE LANE APPROACH ON MINOR ROAD
 December 2023 Edition

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.5 : DUAL CARRIAGEWAY WITH 10m PHYSICAL ISLAND

SHOWING MERGING LANE - DRAWN TO 85A km/h DESIGN SPEED
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.6 : URBAN SIMPLE CROSSROADS

ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.
STANDARD LAYOUT
(LONG COMMERCIAL VEHICLES REQUIRES THE FULL WIDTH OF THE MINOR ROAD
WHEN TURNING FROM THE MAJOR ROAD AND ENCROACH INTO THE OPPOSING
TRAFFIC LANE OF THE MAJOR ROAD WHEN TURNING FROM THE MINOR ROAD)

PROVIDED WHERE LONG VEHICLES ARE PREDICTED

(LONG COMMERCIAL VEHICLES REQUIRES THE FULL WIDTH OF THE MINOR ROAD
WHEN TURNING FROM THE MAJOR ROAD)
 December 2023 Edition

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.7 : RURAL SIMPLE CROSSROADS

ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.
PROVIDED WHERE LONG VEHICLES ARE PREDICTED
(NO ENCROACHMENT INTO OPPOSING TRAFFIC LANES FOR ALL VEHICLE
MOVEMENTS)

STANDARD LAYOUT
(LONG COMMERCIAL VEHICLES ENCROACH INTO OPPOSING TRAFFIC LANES
WHEN TURNING INTO THE MAJOR ROAD AND THE MINOR ROAD)
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.8 : URBAN CROSSROADS WITH SHADOW ISLANDS

ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.9 : SIMPLE RIGHT/LEFT STAGGER

(LONG COMMERCIAL VEHICLES REQUIRE THE FULL WIDTH OF THE MINOR ROAD
WHEN TURNING FROM THE MAJOR ROAD)
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.10A : URBAN RIGHT / LEFT AND LEFT / RIGHT STAGGERS

SINGLE 7.3m WITH 3.5m SHADOW ISLAND
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.
RIGHT / LEFT STAGGER
 December 2023 Edition

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.10B : URBAN RIGHT / LEFT AND LEFT / RIGHT STAGGERS

SINGLE 7.3m WITH 3.5m SHADOW ISLAND
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.
LEFT / RIGHT STAGGER

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.11 : RIGHT / LEFT STAGGER - 10m PHYSICAL ISLAND

DRAWN FOR 85A km/h DESIGN SPEED
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.12 : LEFT / RIGHT STAGGER - 10m PHYSICAL ISLAND

DRAWN FOR 85A km/h DESIGN SPEED
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.
 December 2023 Edition

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.13 : CLIMBING LANE THROUGH T-JUNCTION

DRAWN FOR 85A km/h DESIGN SPEED
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.14A : SKEW MINOR ROAD

3.5m SHADOW ISLAND
DES. SPEED 70 km/h
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.
LEFT HAND SPLAY JUNCTION (θ ≤ 70°)

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.14B : SKEW MINOR ROAD

3.5m SHADOW ISLAND
DES. SPEED 70 km/h
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.
RIGHT HAND SPLAY JUNCTION (θ ≤ 110°)
 December 2023 Edition

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.

DIAGRAM 4.3.16.15 : MINOR ROAD CHANNELISING ISLANDS

ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN METRES.
(a) LAYOUT DETAIL FOR T-JUNCTION CHANNELISING ISLAND
 December 2023 Edition

(b) LAYOUT DETAIL FOR RURAL CROSSROADS CHANNELISING ISLAND

(c) LAYOUT DETAIL FOR URBAN SEPARATION ISLAND

NOTES: 1. DIAGRAMS DEPICT TYPICAL LAYOUTS UTILISING VARIOUS

COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS. HOWEVER NOT ALL
COMBINATIONS HAVE BEEN EXHAUSTED AND ELEMENTS MAY
BE EXTRACTED FROM COMPATIBLE DIAGRAMS TO FORM A
NEW COMPOSITE LAYOUT.

2. LAYOUTS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED TO CATER FOR A 16m

ARTICULATED VEHICLE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DESIGN
BASED ON A LESS ONEROUS DESIGN VEHICLE MAY BE
JUSTIFIED AND GEOMETRIC ELEMENTS REDUCED
ACCORDINGLY.

3. DEPENDING ON PEDESTRIAN VOLUMES, LAYOUT MAY NEED

AMENDMENT TO ACCOMODATE AT GRADE PEDESTRIAN
CROSSING.
 December 2023 Edition

4.4 Signal Controlled Junctions

4.4.1 The performance of signal controlled junctions in comparison to other types of junction is dealt with in
Section 4.2 of this Chapter and summarised in Table 4.2.10.1. For a detailed account of traffic signals,
Volume 4 of this manual is dedicated entirely to the subject and the reader is referred thereto.
 December 2023 Edition

4.5 Roundabouts

4.5.1 Introduction

4.5.1.1 Roundabouts could be considered as a specialized form of Priority Junction. Unlike normal priority
junctions, however, where major road traffic receives continuous priority, with roundabouts the flow
entering the junction from all arms gives priority to vehicles already in the junction. Roundabouts are
thus well suited to situations of balanced flow. Also, because right turns, and all other movements, are
broken down into a left turn entry and a left turn exit, roundabouts are well suited to flows containing a
high proportion of right turning vehicles.

4.5.1.2 There are four basic types of roundabout, namely, Conventional, Spiral, Mini and Double. Other forms
of roundabouts which are variants of these four basic types are Grade Separated Roundabouts, Ring
Junctions and Signalized Roundabouts.

4.5.1.3 A conventional roundabout can be considered as a one-way circulatory carriageway of concentric lanes
around a kerbed central island 4m or more in diameter and usually with flared approaches to allow
multiple vehicle entry.

4.5.1.4 A spiral roundabout is similar to a conventional roundabout but the circulatory carriageway is marked
with spiral lane marking encouraging drivers to give way to exiting vehicles. The diameter of the
kerbed island of spiral roundabout should not be less than 30m. If the diameter of the inscribed circle is
small, spiral lane marking will become short-segmented, which will lead to confusion to drivers and is
not desirable.

4.5.1.5 A mini roundabout consists of a one-way circulatory carriageway around a flush or slightly raised
circular marking (1- 4m in diameter) and with or without flared approaches.

4.5.1.6 A double roundabout is a single junction with two single roundabouts either contiguous or connected
by a central link road or kerbed island.

4.5.1.7 A grade separated roundabout junction is defined as one which includes a roundabout which has at
least one entry road, via an interconnecting slip road, from a road at a different level.

4.5.1.8 A ring junction retains the large central island characteristic of a roundabout but the usual one-way
circulation of vehicles is replaced by two-way circulation with three-arm mini roundabouts and/or
traffic signals controlling the junction with each approach arm.

4.5.1.9 A signalized roundabout is a roundabout with traffic signals installed on one or more of the approach
arms.

4.5.2 Conventional Roundabouts

4.5.2.1 The long parallel sided weaving sections, required before the offside priority rule was introduced, have
now been replaced with shorter wider sections and much greater importance is attached to the
geometry of the entry. The revised geometrical requirements effectively result in a much reduced land
take when compared with the former designs and this fact is of particular significance in the territory
where land is usually a constraint.

4.5.2.2 The number of entries recommended for a conventional roundabout is three or four. Roundabouts
perform particularly well with three entries and balanced traffic flows. If the number of entries is
greater than four, driver comprehension is affected and the roundabout becomes larger with the
probability that higher circulatory speeds will be generated.
 December 2023 Edition

4.5.3 Spiral Roundabouts

4.5.3.1 With the completion of the district-wide trial of two-lane spiral roundabouts at 10 locations, a
comprehensive assessment on the performances of spiral roundabouts in aspects such as driving
behaviour, operational efficiency and accident records has been conducted. The assessment has
revealed that albeit no significant reduction in the accident figures, the use of spiral lane marking
proves to be beneficial operationally by increasing the utilization of inner circulatory lane. Since the
commencement of the trial, the 10 spiral roundabouts have been operated smoothly and are well
received by motorists.

4.5.3.2 Spiral lane markings can be considered for roundabout with diameter of kerbed island 30m or more
when the following criteria are met:

(i) number of exit arms should be at least three;

(ii) the circulatory area is of 2-lane; and

(iii) desirably all exit arms consist of two traffic lanes, or in less desirable case, only one exit arm
consists of one traffic lane.

4.5.3.3 Concentric lane marking, instead of spiral marking, should be adopted at the exit arm with one traffic
lane only. It is because spiral lane markings cannot be applied to guide the traffic at the inner
circulatory lane exiting the roundabout when the exit arm only provides one traffic lane. The details of
road markings for spiral roundabout are as shown in Diagram 5.6.5.2(ii) of Volume 3.

4.5.3.4 Spiral lane marking reduces the uncertainty experienced by drivers leaving the roundabout, and helps
drivers get in the appropriate lane for their desired exits, especially for the right-turning traffic, by not
mis-using the outer circulatory lane for right-turning. For conventional roundabout, vehicles traveling
in the inner circulatory lane may find difficulties in exiting the roundabout due to conflict with vehicles
traveling in the outer lane, and hence drivers will tend to use the outer lane even they are making right
turning movement. Such a driving behaviour will result in low usage of the inner circulatory lane. With
the spiral lane marking guiding vehicles in the inner lane exiting the roundabout, spiral roundabouts
can be effective in distributing traffic flow between the inner and outer circulatory lanes and avoiding
under-usage of the inner circulatory lane.

4.5.3.5 Spiral lane markings should only be considered where the circulatory area has sufficient width to
accommodate two traffic lanes. Where the size and shape of the roundabout is such that sharp
manoeuvres would be required between successive entries and exits when following the lanes, spiral
marking may not be appropriate.

4.5.3.6 Spiral roundabouts with three circulatory lanes will result in complex road markings and may cause
confusion to drivers. Therefore, spiral lane markings should not be used for three-lane roundabouts. For
improvement of existing three-lane conventional roundabouts, the proposal of dedicating an exclusive
left-turn lane at each of the three-lane approach arms of the roundabout and converting the three-lane
conventional roundabout to two-lane roundabout can be considered.

4.5.4 Mini Roundabouts

 December 2023 Edition

4.5.4.1 Mini roundabouts can be extremely effective in improving existing urban junctions that experience
capacity problems. Their economical use of land recommends them for many situations in Hong Kong
particularly where T-junctions with balanced traffic flows exist. They should only be used when all
approaches are subject to a 50 km/h speed limit. Above this speed, problems will arise from motorists
not being aware, sufficiently early, that they are approaching a roundabout. If the approach speed is
likely to be high, the location, layout design and signing should ensure that vehicles have slowed down
to an appropriate speed prior to reaching the roundabout. As the accident frequency tends to increase
with the number of arms, mini roundabout should not be introduced at junctions with more than four
arms.

4.5.4.2 As with other roundabouts, vehicle paths should be deflected to reduce their speed within the
roundabout. Physical deflection on the approach may not be possible with mini roundabouts, owing to
space constraints, and in such cases road markings and small deflection islands should be used. These
islands should be free of all street furniture except the keep left bollards and other essential signs.
Diagram No. 4.5.4.1 shows the use of deflection islands at conventional, spiral and mini roundabouts.

4.5.4.3 The central island (1 to 4 m diameter) should be as large as possible in relation to the site and domed
up to a maximum height of 125mm at the centre. The dome should be completely white and
reflectorized. Domes surfaced with natural stone materials etc. are not appropriate as they do not show
sufficient contrast with the surrounding road surface. A right of omni-directional reflective road studs
around the periphery of the dome has been found effective in increasing conspicuity at night. No
bollards, signs, lighting columns or any other street furniture should be placed on the dome.

4.5.4.4 Where space is very restricted, the repeated over-running of the central island by long vehicles will be
unavoidable and in such cases the dome may be replaced by a circular reflectorized road marking, with
its periphery delineated by reflective road studs.

DIAGRAM 4.5.4.1 : DEFLECTION ISLANDS AT ROUNDABOUTS

CONVENTIONAL ROUNDABOUT
 December 2023 Edition

SPIRAL ROUNDABOUT

MINI ROUNDABOUTS

4.5.5 Double Roundabouts

4.5.5.1 As mentioned in paragraph 4.5.2.2, where a junction has more than four entries, a double roundabout
may be preferable to a single roundabout. In such a situation, a double roundabout achieves better
capacity with acceptable safety characteristics in conjunction with a more efficient use of space. Other
situations where double roundabouts can be particularly useful include :

(i) The improvement to an existing staggered junction where it avoids the need to realign one
of the approach roads thereby achieving a considerable saving in construction costs;

(ii) At unusual or a symmetrical junctions, such as scissors junctions, where the installation of
a single island roundabout would require extensive realignment of the approaches or
excessive land take (see Diagram No. 4.5.5.1);

(iii) At the joining of two parallel routes separated by a feature such as a river or railway line;

(iv) At existing crossroads where it is desirable to separate opposing right turning movements
allowing them to pass nearside to nearside (see Diagram No. 4.5.5.1); and

(v) At overloaded single roundabouts where, by reducing the circulating flow past critical
entries, it increases capacity.
 December 2023 Edition

4.5.5.2 Where the double roundabout is comprised of mini roundabouts, they should only be used where all the
approaches are subject to a 50 km/h speed limit.

DIAGRAM 4.5.5.1 : TYPICAL DOUBLE ROUNDABOUT LAYOUTS

CONTIGUOUS DOUBLE ROUNDABOUT

DOUBLE ROUNDABOUT WITH SHORT CENTRAL LINK ROAD

[ FOR SITUATIONS DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH 4.5.5.1 (ii) + (iii) ]
 December 2023 Edition

4.5.6 Other Types of Roundabout

4.5.6.1 Variations on the four basic forms of roundabout discussed above include Grade Separated
Roundabouts, Ring Junctions and Signalized Roundabouts. The most common forms of roundabout
used at grade separated junctions are the two-bridge type and the dumbbell type, both of which are
shown in Diagram No. 4.5.6.1. The two-bridge type suffers from its large size which increases speeds
within the circulatory section, thereby reducing capacity and safety. Design of this type should
therefore be made as compact as possible. The dumbbell roundabout design has the advantage of
compactness and low construction costs.

4.5.5.2 The conversion to ring junction is an effective solution for very large roundabouts which exhibit entry
problems. Studies have shown that rings junction layouts can eliminate congestion without reducing
safety. There are no existing roundabouts in the territory however, which are large enough for
consideration to converting to ring junction control and it is unlikely that such layouts will ever form
part of our road network.

4.5.5.3 Signalized roundabouts, in certain circumstances, may constitute a most useful design tool. The need
for signals at a roundabout normally stems from problems associated with one or more particularly
dominant flows which tends to defeat the self regulating property of the roundabout. By installing
traffic signals, entry to the roundabout can be regulated thus creating entry opportunities for the non-
dominant flows.

DIAGRAM 4.5.6.1 : TYPES OF GRADE SEPARATED ROUNDABOUTS

TWO-BRIDGE ROUNDABOUT AT GRADE SEPARATED INTERCHANGE
 December 2023 Edition

GRADE SEPARATED INTERCHANGE WITH ONE BRIDGE AND TWO ROUNDABOUTS

– ‘DUMBBELL INTERCHANGE’

4.5.7 Siting of Roundabouts

4.5.7.1 Roundabouts should be sited on level ground or in sags, where drivers' advanced visibility of the
junction is good, rather than on crests of hills where, while approaching, they will have difficulty in
appreciating the layout.

4.5.7.2 Roundabouts are appropriate in urban areas but are generally not compatible with Area Traffic Control
systems. Roundabouts, in these situations, interfere with the platoon movement to the extent that
inflows to downstream traffic signals cannot be reliably predicted and optimization of signal setting
cannot be achieved.

4.5.7.3 As already stated, the viability of roundabout design depends on the need to reduce all vehicle speeds
through the junction. This property of the roundabout may be used to good advantage in the following
circumstances :

(i) Where there is a significant change in road standard, say from dual to single carriageways
or from grade separated to at-grade sections of road; or

(ii) To emphasise the transition from rural to urban environment.

In such circumstances, the roundabout serves as a very useful punctuation mark in the road network.

4.5.6.4 On single carriageways where overtaking opportunities are limited, it may be advantageous to replace a
large radius curve at a junction with two straight sections leading into a small radius curve at a
roundabout, as shown in Diagram No. 4.5.7.1. By so doing, overtaking sections are created and the
revised alignment may also have advantages in reduced land take.

4.5.6.5 Roundabouts may also be sited to good effect to provide "U" turn facilities for example to service
frontage properties along a dual carriageway district or local distributor road.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.5.7.1 : USE OF ROUNDABOUT TO CHANGE ALIGNMENT

4.5.8 Safety at Roundabouts

4.5.8.1 In general, a well designed roundabout will cause fewer accidents than a signal controlled junction
handling the same volume of traffic. The severity of accidents at roundabouts is also lower than that of
all other junction types and mid-link locations.

4.5.8.2 The most important factors affecting safety at roundabouts are the entry and circulatory speeds. High
speeds are normally associated with large roundabouts having excessively long and/or wide circulatory
carriageways, but they can also be caused at smaller roundabouts by inadequate entry deflection. Other
factors inducing high speeds at roundabouts include very acute entry angles which encourage fast
merging, poor visibility to the "Give Way" line and poorly designed and located warning and advance
direction signs.

4.5.8.3 Measures which have been found to improve safety at roundabouts include, the provision of
appropriate levels of skid resistance on the approaches and circulatory carriageway; the avoidance of
abrupt and excessive super-elevation in the entry region; the reduction of excessive entry width by
hatching or physical means; and the provision of "Reduce Speed Now" signs and "Yellow Bar"
markings on the approaches. Volume 3 Chapter 5 gives detailed information on the use of "Yellow
Bar" markings.

4.5.8.4 Though roundabouts have an impressive overall safety record for most vehicle types, this does not
apply equally to two wheeled vehicles. Statistics from the United Kingdom show that accident
involvement rates for two-wheeled vehicles, expressed in terms of accidents per road user movement,
are 10-15 times those of cars; with pedal cyclists having a slightly higher accident rate than
motorcyclists. It is useful to note that different types of roundabouts exhibited different results in this
respect. For example, roundabouts with small central islands and flared entries have accident rates
which are about twice those of conventional/spiral roundabouts with large central islands and unflared
entries. This relationship appears to apply consistently for all types of vehicle.

4.5.8.5 Heavy goods vehicle accidents at roundabouts frequently involve the shedding of loads. Roundabouts,
where this problem has been encountered usually exhibit one or more of the following features:
inadequate entry deflection, long straight sections of circulatory carriageway, sharp turns into exits,
excessive crossfall changes on the circulatory carriageway and excessive adverse crossfall on a
nearside lane of the circulatory carriageway.

4.5.9 Pedestrian & Cyclist Facilities at Roundabouts

4.5.9.1 Separate pedestrian routes with crossings away from the flared entries to roundabouts are preferable.
Here the carriageway widths are less and vehicular traffic movements are more straight-forward. Also,
the greater the distance between the crossing and the give way line the less the vehicular capacity of the
entry will be affected. One should ensure however that the pedestrian routing thus created is not so
diverse as to be unattractive.
 December 2023 Edition

4.5.9.2 For at-grade crossings, both cautionary and zebra installations are compatible with roundabout layouts.
A central refuge should always be provided where carriageway width permits and deflection islands; if
a minimum of 1.25m wide, can serve this purpose. Guardrails should be used to prevent indiscriminate
crossing of the carriageway. Grade separated pedestrian facilities should be considered where
pedestrian volumes are high. Subway links interconnecting within the central island can often prove to
be viable solutions where large roundabouts are concerned.

4.5.9.3 As discussed in the previous section, roundabouts can be particularly hazardous for cyclists and where
substantial numbers of cyclists are expected the following measures should be considered :

(i) Full grade separation;

(ii) A signposted alternative cycle route away from the roundabout;

(iii) A roundabout design which emphasizes safety rather than capacity;

(iv) An alternative form of junction, such as traffic signals.

4.5.10 Capacity of Roundabouts

4.5.10.1 Conventional roundabouts consisted of large central islands with long parallel sided weaving sections.
The capacity of the roundabout was measured in terms of the capacity of its individual weaving
sections using Wardrop's Formula. With the introduction of small and mini roundabouts the emphasis
was placed on shorter wider weaving sections (in fact little weaving takes place) and flared approaches.
The capacity of this type of roundabout was calculated for the junction as a whole based on the basic
road widths and areas of widening at the junction. These formulae have now been superseded by a
predictive equation, giving the capacity of each entry to the roundabout, which is applicable to all types
of roundabout.

4.5.10.2 Since the introduction of the offside priority rule, traffic waiting to enter a roundabout on one am has to
give priority to traffic already on the circulatory carriageway crossing the entry. Consequently, the
entry capacity decreases as the circulating flow increases, since there are then fewer opportunities for
waiting drivers to enter the circulation. When entry opportunities do present themselves the number of
vehicles which are able to avail themselves of the opportunity depends on the entry width, the
circulatory width, the entry angle and other geometric characteristics of the roundabout layout. The
predictive equations are thus stated in terms of the circulating flow and the geometric parameters, and
are based on multiple regression analyses from observations at a large number of sites in the United
Kingdom.

4.5.10.3 In evaluating a proposed layout, the design flow for each entry, derived as described in para. 4.2.4,
should be compared with the calculated capacity to produce a design flow/capacity ratio (DFC). The
entry capacity is defined as the maximum in-flow from an entry when the demand flow is sufficient to
cause steady queuing in the approach. A DFC ratio of 100% would therefore indicate continual
queuing and could not be considered acceptable. A DFC ratio of 85%, indicating that queuing would
theoretically be avoided in 85% of cases, can be considered reasonable. A DFC of 70% indicates that
queuing will be avoided in 95% of cases. The acceptable value of DFC will vary in relation to
individual circumstances. For example in a situation where future improvement to the junction would
be impossible a lower DFC than otherwise considered reasonable may need to be achieved.
 December 2023 Edition

4.5.10.4 The predictive equation for roundabout capacity together with definitions of parameters and
explanatory diagrams is given in Appendix 2. It will be readily appreciated however that the process of
computation is necessarily iterative in nature. As a capacity for one entry varies so does the potential
circulating flow across a different entry with a subsequent change in the capacity of that entry, and so
on. This iterative process is best suited to computer application and the program ARCADY, which
should be available in the territory in the near future, can carry out the computation. This program will
calculate queue lengths and delays for each time segment. In the absence of the computer program the
computation can be carried out manually to give a preliminary assessment of layout viability and a
worked example is included in Appendix 2.

4.5.11 General Layout Requirements

4.5.11.1 The principal objective of roundabout design is to secure the safe interchange of traffic between
crossing and weaving traffic streams with minimum delay. This is achieved by a combination of the
geometric layout features described in the following paragraphs. As relationships between aspects of
design are not always mutually compatible, design becomes a trade off between operational efficiency
minimizing delays and achieving safety.

4.5.11.2 Where geometric design parameters are speed related, at existing junctions or new junctions on
existing roads, the measured 85th percentile speed should be used, rounded up to the next highest
design speed step. For completely new junctions, the design speed of the roads should be used.

4.5.11.3 The geometric parameters described in subsequent paragraphs are depicted in Figures 1 - 5 of
Appendix 2 with accompanying detailed description.

4.5.12 Visibility

4.5.12.1 The following guidelines represent good practice concerning the provision of visibility and when not
complied with there is need for additional signing to alert drivers of all vehicles to potential hazards.
Visibility distances should be measured between a driver's eye height of 1.05m and an object height of
1.05m, both measured from the centre line of each lane.

4.5.12.2 The forward visibility at the approach to a roundabout shall not be less than that shown in Table
4.5.12.1 below (c.f. Table 3.3.5.1 in Chapter 3 of this volume). The visibility distance should be
measured to the "Give Way" line as shown in Diagram No. 4.5.12.1.

Table 4.5.12.1
Sight Distances
Design Speed
100 85 70 60 50
(km/h)
Desirable
225 165 125 95 70
Minimum (m)
Absolute
165 125 95 70 50
Minimum (m)

4.5.12.3 As drivers get closer to the "Give Way" line they should be able to see the full width of the circulatory
carriageway, to their right, as far as the previous entry or for a distance of 50m, measured along the
centre of the circulatory carriageway, whichever is the lesser. This visibility should be available from
the centre of the offside lane at a distance of 15m back from the "Give Way" line as shown in Diagram
No. 4.5.12.2.
 December 2023 Edition

4.5.12.4 In addition to the visibility to the right, approaching motorists also require visibility ahead which
similarly should extend to the next exit or for a distance of 50m, measured along the centre of the
circulatory carriageway, whichever is the lesser. This visibility should be available from the centre of
the nearside lane at a distance of 15m back from the "Give Way" line as shown in Diagram No.
4.5.12.3.

4.5.12.5 Drivers of all vehicles circulating on a roundabout should be able to see the full width of the circulatory
carriageway ahead of them as far as the next exit or for a distance of 50m, whichever is the lesser. This
visibility should be checked from a point 2m in from the central island as shown in Diagram No.
4.5.12.4.

4.5.12.6 Where a pedestrian crossing is located across the entry to a roundabout, drivers approaching the
roundabout should have visibility to the crossing of a distance not less than that shown in Table
4.5.12.1. Additionally, drivers at the "Give Way" line of one entry should be able to see the full width
of a crossing located at the next entry if this is within 50m of the roundabout. This requirement,
illustrated in Drawing No. 4.5.12.5, may be difficult to achieve in urban areas owing to adjacent
roadside development.

4.5.12.7 Particular attention should be paid to visibility requirements at grade separated junctions to ensure that
visibility is not obstructed by safety fences or bridge parapets in the case of elevated roundabouts and
by flyover abutments in the case of a flyover.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.5.12.1 : MEASUREMENT OF APPROACH VISIBILITY

DESIRABLE / MINIMUM VISIBILITY DISTANCE FOR APPROACH ROAD DESIGN
SPEED
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.5.12.2 : VISIBILITY TO THE RIGHT REQUIRED AT ENTRY

DIAGRAM 4.5.12.3 : FORWARD VISIBILITY REQUIRED AT ENTRY

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.5.12.4 : CIRCULATORY VISIBILITY REQUIRED

DIAGRAM 4.5.12.5 : PEDESTRIAN CROSSING VISIBILITY REQUIREMENTS

 December 2023 Edition

4.5.13 Roundabout Entries

4.5.13.1 The geometric parameters related to roundabout entries are entry width, flare length, entry angle and
entry deflection.

4.5.13.2 ntry width is the most important feature determining entry capacity. As a general rule one or two lanes
should be added on the entry approach up to a maximum width of four lanes. Even when two lanes are
not required on capacity grounds, the extra lane should be provided to add flexibility in dealing with
long vehicles and broken down vehicles. Entry widening should be effected on the nearside to avoid
the introduction of reverse curves. Lane widths should be a minimum of 2.5m at the entry, tapered back
in the entry flare to a minimum of 2m wide. It is generally better, for dealing with heavy goods
vehicles, to use wider lane widths e.g. 3 x 3.33m lanes in preference to 4 x 2.5m lanes.

4.5.13.3 Effective flare length should be a minimum of about 5m in urban areas whilst a length of 25m is
considered reasonable in rural areas. As a rough guide the total length of entry widening should be
about twice the average effective flare length as shown in Fig. 2 of Appendix 2.

4.5.13.4 The entry angle, as shown in Figs. 4, 5 and 6 of Appendix 2, should ideally be about 30 degrees and in
any case be within the range 20 to 60 degrees if possible. Entry angles which are too low force drivers
into merging positions where they may disregard the "Give Way" control and enter at high speeds.
High entry angles can lead to sharp breaking at entries accompanied by "nose to tail" accidents.

4.5.13.5 Entry deflection governs the speed of vehicles through the junction and is the most important factor
determining safety. Achieving adequate deflection of vehicles on entry is particularly important on
roads with high approach speeds. A measure of entry deflection is given by the entry path curvature
and this should be restricted to an absolute maximum of 100m in the vicinity of the entry; a good
practical design radius is about 20m. A suggested method for the measurement of entry path radius is
given in Appendix 2.

4.5.13.6 There are various methods for creating adequate entry deflection. On new schemes, where possible,
adequate deflection can be obtained whilst still maintaining a compact layout by staggering the entries
as shown in Diagram No. 4.5.13.1. In some cases, particularly in urban areas, the approach geometry
may be so restricted as to make it impossible to achieve adequate deflection by alignment of entries
alone. In such cases deflection should be generated by means of enlarged traffic deflection islands or
by subsidiary traffic deflection islands in the entry as shown in Diagram Nos. 4.5.13.2 and 4.5.13.3.
Subsidiary deflection islands may be surfaced in white reflective material and circumscribed with
reflecting road studs to improve their conspicuity.

4.5.13.7 It is not recommended that entry deflection be generated by sharply deviating the approach road to the
right and then to the left at entry. Approach curves should be fairly gentle, and adequately signed if
they fall below the minimum standards appropriate to the design speed.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.5.13.1 : ENTRY DEFLECTION BY STAGGERING APPROACH ROADS

DIAGRAM 4.5.13.2 : ENTRY DEFLECTION ACHIEVED BY USING

TRAFFIC DEFLECTION ISLANDS
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.5.13.3 : ENTRY DEFLECTION ACHIEVED BY

SUBSIDIARY TRAFFIC DEFLECTION ISLANDS

4.5.14 Roundabout Exits

4.5.14.1 A nearside kerb radius of about 40m at the mouth of the exit is desirable, but in any case this radius
should not be below 20m.

4.5.14.2 The beginning of the exit should ideally be one lane wider than the downstream link. For example if
the down stream link is a dual 2 the exit width should be 10m to 11m. The extra width should be
reduced on the nearside at a taper of 1:15 to 1:20, though this may be extended on an uphill gradient to
avoid intermittent congestion. Within single carriageway exits a minimum of 6m should be maintained
throughout the length of any physical island to accommodate traffic passing a broken down vehicle.

4.5.15 The Circulatory Carriageway

4.5.15.1 The width of the circulatory carriageway should be constant and lie between 1.0 and 1.2 times the
maximum entry width.

4.5.15.2 The circulatory carriageway should, if possible, be circular in plan, avoiding deceptively tight bends.
Additionally, short lengths of reverse curve between entry and adjacent exit should be avoided by
linking entry and exit curves or joining them with a straight. At T-junction configurations however, as
shown in Diagram No. 4.5.12.2, reverse curvature may result.
 December 2023 Edition

4.5.16 Inscribed Circle Diameter

4.5.16.1 The inscribed circle diameter, as shown in Appendix 2 Fig. 1, should be large enough to accommodate
the swept turning path of the design vehicle which may vary in accordance with the location and
expected classes of traffic. Taking the worst case, a 16.0m long articulated vehicle with a single axle at
the rear of the trailer, the smallest inscribed circle diameter for a conventional roundabout is 28m. If
this cannot be accommodated, a mini roundabout should be used. It should be noted however that the
requirements of adequate vehicle deflection at conventional/spiral roundabouts will generally dictate
the minimum inscribed circle diameter.

4.5.16.2 Based on the design vehicle above, as a guide, the turning space requirements for conventional
roundabout from 28m to 36m inscribed circle diameter are shown in Diagram. No. 4.5.16.1. For
diameters greater than 36m the circulatory carriageway widths should be checked against Table
4.3.15.1 in the section on Priority Junctions.

DIAGRAM 4.5.16.1 : TURNING WIDTHS REQUIRED FOR SMALLER ROUNDABOUTS

IN THESE CASES NO ENTRY DEFLECTION ISLANDS SHOULD PROTRUDE WITHIN

THE 1 CD

Central Island Minimum 1 CD

R1 (m) R2 (m)
Diameter (m) (m)
4.0 3.0 13.0 28.0
6.0 4.0 13.4 28.8
8.0 5.0 13.9 29.8
10.0 6.0 14.4 30.8
12.0 7.0 15.0 32.0
14.0 8.0 15.6 33.2
16.0 9.0 16.3 34.6
18.0 10.0 17.0 36.0
 December 2023 Edition

4.5.17 Segregated Left Turning Lanes

4.5.17.1 Segregated left turning lanes should be considered when more than 50% of the entry flow, or more than
300 vehicles per hour in the peak hours, turn left at the first exit. For design purposes, a maximum
capacity of 1800 pcu/hr may be assumed. Segregated left turning lanes should then be omitted from the
calculation of entry capacity.

4.5.17.2 In segregated left turning lanes, vehicles are channelised into the left hand lane by lane arrows and
markings, supplemented by advance direction signs, and vehicles proceed to the first exit without
having to give way to others using the roundabout. Segregation by road markings and physical islands
are shown in Diagram No. 4.5.17.1 and Diagram No. 4.5.17.2 respectively. The latter method requires
more land take but it will not subject to abuse with better safety performance. The former method is
less effective however because it is subject to abuse.

4.5.17.3 Segregated left turning lanes should be about 3.5m wide and not less than 3m. On smaller radius
curves, widths should comply with the requirements set out in Table 4.3.15.1, but should not be so
wide as to induce high speeds.

4.5.17.4 Where road markings are used to create the lane segregation double white lines (and may be with
hatching in between) are appropriate for the purpose.

4.5.17.5 The merging between vehicles from a segregated left turning lane and other vehicles exiting from the
roundabout should take place within 50m of the roundabout, where speeds are still comparatively low.
Ideally there should not be a forced merge. However, running the two streams alongside each other is
only possible where the exit link can provide two lanes in the same direction. In other cases, the
segregated left turning traffic must merge with the other stream, giving way where necessary. This
merging length should be at least 10m. Examples of typical urban situations are shown in Diagram
Nos. 4.5.17.2 and 4.5.17.3.

4.5.17.6 Segregated left turning lanes should not be used when vehicular accesses to adjacent properties exist
along the length of the lane.

DIAGRAM 4.5.17.1 : A SEGREGATED LEFT TURNING LANE USING ROAD MARKINGS

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.5.17.2 : PHYSICALLY SEGREGATED LEFT TURNING LANES

NOTE: This is not a recommendation but merely a specific example of the compromise
needed in an urban situation. It was not possible to achieve desirable values of entry
deflection because of adjacent development but the approaches have speed limits

DIAGRAM 4.5.17.3 : "STRAIGHT THROUGH" SEGREGATED LEFT TURNING LANE AT

3-WAY ROUNDABOUT

NOTE: This is not a recommendation, but merely a specific example showing the
modification of a previous major / minor junction where it was not possible (because
of site constraints) to provide desirable entry deflection on one approach. There are
however speed limits on the approaches.
 December 2023 Edition

4.5.18 Superelevation and Crossfall

4.5.18.1 Superelevation is not required on the circulatory carriageways of roundabouts whereas crossfall is
required, to drain surface water, but on the approaches and exits superelevation can assist drivers to
negotiate the associated curves.

4.5.18.2 On entry, the degree of superelevation should be appropriate to the speed of vehicles, as they approach
the roundabout, but should not exceed 5%. It should be reduced to the crossfall required merely for
drainage in the vicinity of the "Give Way" line, since with adequate advance signing and entry
deflection, speeds on the approaches should be sufficiently reduced.

4.5.18.3 On exits, superelevation may be provided to assist vehicles in accelerating away from the roundabout.
However, as with entries, crossfalls adjacent to the roundabout should be kept to the minimum required
for drainage.

4.5.18.4 Normal crossfall for drainage on roundabouts should be 2.0% and not exceed 3.0%. To avoid ponding,
longitudinal edge profiles should be graded at not less than 0.67% desirable, and 0.5% absolute
minimum.

4.5.18.5 On the circulatory carriageway, the values of crossfall should be governed by drainage requirements.
However the direction of crossfall, particularly at conventional roundabouts and spiral roundabouts,
should be arranged to assist circulating vehicles. Hence the carriageway adjacent to the central island
should slope toward the central island while the carriageway adjacent to the outside perimeter will
slope toward it. The crown line thus formed may be a straight line joining the entry and exit deflection
islands or a line dividing the circulatory carriageway in the proportion 2:1 internal to external as shown
in Diagram No. 4.5.18.1. Alternatively, a subsidiary crown line, as shown on Diagram No. 4.5.18.2,
may be used to avoid excessive changes in crossfall at the single crownline. Maximum recommended
algebraic difference in crossfall across the crown line is 5%, and lesser values are desirable.

4.5.18.6 Adverse crossfall should be eliminated from the paths of the main traffic movements at conventional
roundabouts and spiral roundabouts. Mini roundabouts and smaller conventional/spiral roundabouts in
urban areas are often superimposed upon existing pavement profiles and in these cases, the cross
section of the existing roads will influence crossfalls at the roundabout. T-junctions require particular
attention. Some adverse crossfall can be accepted in order to fit the existing levels provided approach
speeds are low.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.5.18.1 : CROSSFALL DESIGN USING ONE CROWN LINE

(a) JOINING TRAFFIC DEFLECTION ISLANDS

(b) DIVIDING CIRCULATORY CARRIAGEWAY 2 : 1

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.5.18.2 : CROSSFALL DESIGN USING TWO CROWN LINES

4.5.19 Signing and Lighting

4.5.19.1 Design of signing and lighting should form an early part of the overall design process.

4.5.19.2 "Give Way" signs should be erected in association with the "Give Way" dotted lines at all roundabout
approaches. The "Give Way" triangular marking is not required unless particular emphasis is required.

4.5.19.3 On the central island of conventional and spiral roundabouts, "Turn Left" signs and "Chevron" signs
should be erected opposite each approach. These may be moved further to the left to emphasise the
angle of turn and thereby encourage lower traffic speeds. At mini roundabouts, the central dome or
circular marking should be free of all signs, lighting columns or other street furniture.

4.5.19.4 The "Roundabout Ahead" sign should be used on all approaches and may be supplemented with a
"Reduce Speed Now" Plate, where high approach speeds are anticipated. "Count-down" markers and
"Yellow Bar" markings are also effective in reducing speeds.

4.5.19.5 A map type advance direction sign should be used on the approaches of all roundabouts on major
routes and can also prove beneficial on minor routes where the roundabout is of irregular shape.

4.5.19.6 Road markings should channelise traffic and where appropriate indicate a dedicated lane. Lane
dedication should only be used at the entry of exclusive left-turn approach lane. Lane dedication arrows
and double white lines on the circulatory carriageway are generally not recommended.

4.5.19.7 The provision of road lighting at roundabouts should be regarded as an essential safety requirement.
When an existing roundabout junction is being modified, the lighting should be checked for suitability
with the new road arrangement.

4.5.19.8 For detailed information on signing, Volume 3 of this Manual should be consulted.
 December 2023 Edition

4.5.20 Landscaping

4.5.20.1 Apart from the amenity benefits, the landscape treatment of roundabouts can have practical advantages
from a traffic engineering point of view. By earth modeling, perhaps in conjunction with planting, the
presence of the roundabout can be made more obvious to approaching traffic. The screening of traffic
on the opposite side of the roundabout to the point of entry can, without restricting necessary visibility,
avoid distraction and confusion caused by traffic movements of no concern to a driver. Planting can
provide a positive background to chevron signs and direction signs on the central island while visually
uniting the various vertical features and reducing any appearance of clutter.

4.5.20.2 Generally the planting of roundabout islands less than 10m in diameter is inappropriate as the need to
provide driver visibility leaves only a small central area available. Such a restricted area of planting is
out of scale with the roundabout as a whole, and becomes an incongruous "blob".

4.5.20.3 Any planting at the roundabout islands and adjacent to approaching arms should not impair visibility of
motorists. Visibility requirements stated in Section 4.5.12 cannot be compromised for landscaping
works design. Planting with excessive height should be sufficiently set back from the kerb line.
Planting within visibility zone should be of slow growing species with minimal maintenance and
should be less than 0.6m tall.
 December 2023 Edition

4.6 Grade Separated Junctions

4.6.1 Introduction

4.6.1.1 Grade separated junctions occur where some or all of the intersecting roads pass each other at different
levels and some or all of the turning movements are catered for by ramps connecting the two levels.

4.6.1.2 Compared with other junction types, grade separated junctions offer increased capacity, less vehicular
delay, fewer accidents and reduced operating costs. These benefits are offset by the high construction
costs and usually increased land take. Land take, which is of prime importance in the vast majority of
locations in Hong Kong, can however be minimised with prudent design. Junction layouts should be as
compact as possible within the limitations imposed by the minimum geometric standards discussed in
subsequent paragraphs.

4.6.1.3 The layouts and standards recommended in this section are most appropriate to trunk road and primary
distributor junctions where most grade separated layouts may be expected.

4.6.2 Types of Grade Separated Junction

4.6.2.1 There are very many types of grade separated junction. The choice of a particular type in any situation
will depend upon such factors as the relative status of the intersecting roads, the through route and
turning traffic volumes and the site constraints. Some of the more common types of junction are shown
on Diagram No. 4.6.2.1 and discussed below. The designer should however consider variations on
these types or totally different layouts to best suit the particular conditions.

4.6.2.2 The Trumpet Interchange is a common layout at a T or Y junction and utilizes a single bridge structure
carrying the minor road above the major road. It is most suitable where the loop movement is small and
additional structures may be required to provide a better alignment for this movement where higher
flows are involved.

4.6.2.3 The Diamond Interchange is the simplest type of 4-way junction consisting of a single bridge and four
one way ramps. It is particularly suitable in the Territory as it can be located within a relatively narrow
land area, requiring little extra width beyond that required for the major road itself. Linked traffic
signals may be required at the junctions between the slip roads and the minor road.

4.6.2.4 The Roundabout Interchange requires two bridge structures and requires more land than the Diamond
but has higher free flow capacity. It is hence more suitable when minor road/ramp conflicts are higher.

4.6.2.5 The Elevated Major Route includes those junctions where the major route is carried on bridge structure
over the minor route. A basic principle in the design of grade separated interchanges is that the minor
route should be carried above the major route. This is normally the more economical arrangement and
has the distinct advantage of providing accelerating traffic with a down gradient and decelerating
traffic with an up gradient. In the existing urban areas of the Territory however it has frequently been
necessary to provide new major routes above the existing road network. This has lead to numerous
junctions with an elevated major route. The junction between the ramps and the minor road may be
controlled by means of a roundabout or by signals.

4.6.2.6 The Cloverleaf Interchange is the only single structure 4-way interchange having no terminal right
turns at-grade. Inter-nationally it is perhaps the most common form of interchange, but its excessive
use of land does not recommend it for adoption in the Territory. The other major drawback with this
type of layout is the short weaving length between entry and exit ramps.
 December 2023 Edition

4.6.2.7 The Partial Cloverleaf Interchange is useful for accommodating a junction within a space constrained
by existing development. The quadrant in which the ramps are located can be varied to suit the site
restrictions.

DIAGRAM 4.6.2.1 : TYPES OF GRADE SEPARATED INTERCHANGE

4.6.3 Siting of Grade Separated Junctions

4.6.3.1 Interchanges should not be sited where approach roads have long steep gradients which will materially
slow heavy vehicles and cause them to bunch. For the same reason interchanges should also be avoided
at the crest of hills where additionally, signing may be a problem as drivers attempt to read signs
silhouetted against the skyline.

4.6.3.2 The siting of one interchange with respect to the adjacent ones will be governed by the requirements of
minimum merging, weaving and diverging lengths as discussed in subsequent paragraphs.

4.6.3.3 In urban areas interchange location should take account of the effect of its elevated structures on
adjacent development. To protect the privacy of occupants, it is recommended that elevated structures
should not be constructed closer than 20m to residential buildings. The nuisance caused by fumes,
noise and visual intrusion should also be taken into account and minimized. For the operation of fire
service appliances a minimum of 6m is required between elevated structures and all adjacent buildings.
 December 2023 Edition

4.6.4 Capacity of Grade Separated Junctions

4.6.4.1 The capacity of a grade separated interchange is governed by the capacity of the individual merging,
diverging and weaving sections within that interchange. Based on limiting values of main line flow,
link flow and merging, diverging or weaving capacities, standard layouts are recommended which can
cater for different combinations of major and minor route design flows. The method by which design
flows are derived, and then applied to produce a layout with adequate capacity, is covered separately
for merging lanes, diverging lanes and weaving sections under those respective headings, in subsequent
paragraphs.

4.6.5 General Layout Requirements

4.6.5.1 Interchanges should be designed to cater primarily for the major flows, with the through movements
maintaining the design speed selected for the through route between junctions. Geometric parameters
relating to turning movements should reflect the magnitude of design flow for that movement.

4.6.5.2 Generous curvature, in for example 270° loops, can be wasteful in land and capital costs and will not
necessarily lead to low operating costs, for the extra distance traveled at high speed might outweigh
slower speeds on a shorter tighter loop.

4.6.5.3 Decision points should be separated as much as possible and the number of decision points in any one
sequence kept to a minimum.

4.6.5.4 Consideration should be given to bus routes operating on the major road to identify the need for bus
stopping facilities within or adjacent to the interchange.

4.6.6 Visibility

4.6.6.1 Visibility distances are related to the design speed of the road as shown in Table 4.6.6.1.

Table 4.6.6.1
Visibility Distance at Grade Separated interchanges
Design Speed(km/h) Desirable Minimum(m) Absolute Minimum(m)
120 300 225
100 225 165
85 165 125
70 125 95
60 95 70
50 70 50
40 50 40
30 40 30

4.6.6.2 Forward visibility at the merge or diverge should be similar to that on the mainline, but once on the
link road the visibility standards applicable to that route apply.

4.6.6.3 Sideways visibility is particularly important at the merge section and this is provided by a long merge
nose which is shown on the merging layouts as 60m, which should be considered as minimum.

4.6.6.4 The minimum length of diverge nose is 40m. The vertical alignment of the diverge link beyond the
nose should be readily visible to traffic in the diverging lane so that drivers can assess the speed value
in advance.
 December 2023 Edition

4.6.7 Slip Roads

4.6.7.1 The design speed on the slip road will generally be lower than the design speed on the main line and
hence the need for acceleration and deceleration lanes. The discrepancy in speeds however should not
be so great as to hinder the safe and efficient transfer between the two. Table 4.6.7.1 shows the
minimum slip road design speed for various main line design speeds and the corresponding slip road
minimum curve radii.

Table 4.6.7.1
Minimum Slip Road Design Speed and Curve Radii
Slip Road Curve Radii
Main Line Design Slip Road Design
Desirable
Speed(km/h) Speed(km/h) Absolute Minimum(m)
Minimum(m)
120 80 230 115
100 60 125 63
85 50 88 44
70 40 60 35
60 30 40 30
50 25 30 25

4.6.7.2 Slip roads may be single lane or two lane depending on the traffic volume. In both cases the slip road
width will vary in relation to the curve radii.

4.6.7.3 The overall width of any ramp or slip road will be determined by the effective carriageway width plus
the width required for the parapets on either side.

4.6.7.4 The effective carriageway width is that occurring between the inside foot of the parapet, or any kerb
face if this is provided, on either side of the slip road or ramp, as shown for a single lane slip road in
Diagram 4.6.7.1.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.6.7.1 : EFFECTIVE CARRIAGEWAY WIDTHS OF SINGLE LANE RAMPS

AND SLIP ROADS

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

4.6.7.5 The effective carriageway width shall include marginal strip of appropriate width in accordance with
Diagram 4.6.7.1 for single lane slip roads and paragraph 4.6.7.12 for two lane slip roads. The marginal
strips must be delineated by a 100mm continuous edge line marking, as illustrated in Diagram 4.6.7.1.

4.6.7.6 The standard effective carriageway width for single lane ramps or slip roads is 5.2m, subject to
paragraph 4.6.7.11.
 December 2023 Edition

4.6.7.7 Effective carriageway widths other than the standard effective carriageway width should be considered
in accordance with the following guidelines :-

(i) Where the combined, Heavy Goods Vehicle, Medium Goods Vehicle, Bus and Coach
traffic flow is predicted to be less than 5% of the design year AADT flow, subject to
paragraphs 4.6.7.8, 4.6.7.9 and 4.6.7.11, the effective carriageway width may be reduced to
4.3m; or

(ii) Where the combined, Heavy Goods Vehicle, Medium Goods Vehicle, Bus and coach
traffic flow is predicted to be greater than 10% of the design year AADT flow, subject to
paragraph 4.6.7.11, the effective carriageway width shall be increased to 6m, except that
where very high costs may arise, the standard effective carriageway width of 5.2m may be
provided. However it will be necessary in this case to substantiate the savings that would
be obtained, and provide details of the implications of adopting 5.2m rather than 6m.

4.6.7.8 It should be noted that the 5.2m width will allow a goods vehicle to pass a stationary car, but in the
event of a goods vehicle or bus breaking down it is unlikely that another goods vehicle or bus would be
able to pass the broken down vehicle. Similarly, whilst the 4.3m width will allow a car to pass another
stationary car, it is unlikely that a goods vehicle or bus could pass the same stationary car. Therefore
when contemplating the use of an effective carriageway width less than 6m, consideration should be
given as to whether on the particular single lane ramp or slip road there is for any reason likely to be a
higher breakdown incidence than normal, the effects of which might be worsened if a too narrow width
was adopted. Consideration must also be given to the availability of alternative routes which could be
used to by-pass the obstruction. The Public Transport Planning Division of the Transport Department
should be consulted to ascertain whether there is any likelihood of a bus route being required at any
time in the future, which might be prejudiced if an inadequate operational width was provided.

4.6.7.9 Where single lane ramps or slip roads are greater than 50m in length the effective carriageway width
should not normally be less than 5.2m.

4.6.7.10 Where single lane ramps or slip roads are greater than 100m in length the Traffic Control and
Surveillance Division of the Transport Department should be consulted to ascertain whether
surveillance measures need to be included in the scheme.

4.6.7.11 To ensure adequate clearance between any vehicle and the parapets, and to maintain the passing
requirements mentioned in paragraph 4.6.7.8 the effective carriageway widths should be widened on
curves in accordance with Table 4.6.7.2.

4.6.7.12 The width of two lane slip roads is based on the need to maintain two lanes of moving traffic whilst
providing sufficient horizontal clearance between vehicle and parapet. The effective carriageway width
should be 8.75m or 7.75m comprising a 6.75m carriageway and two marginal strips which should each
be 1m wide on Rural Trunk Roads and 500mm in width on other roads. As with single lane slip roads
the effective width should be maintained through curves by appropriate widening as shown in Table
4.6.7.2. The desirable minimum standard in this Table is based on the requirements of a 16.0m
articulated vehicle. Absolute minimum values are also given but these should not normally be used and
in any case not used on bus routes and in situations with more than the minimum volumes of medium
and heavy goods vehicles. Both desirable minimum and absolute minimum values include two
marginal strips each one metre wide and the effective width should be correspondingly reduced if
500mm marginal strips are used.

4.6.7.13 For both two lane and single lane slip roads, where widening is provided through curves the marginal
strips should be maintained at the same width as those on the approach to the curve.
 December 2023 Edition

Table 4.6.7.2
Minimum Effective Carriageway Widths on Slip Roads
Related to Inside Radius of Curve (m)
Two Lane Slips (Including
Single Lane Slips (Including Marginal Strips)
Two 1 m Marginal Strips)
5.2m Standard
6m Effective 4.3m Effective
Inside Radius Effective
Carriageway Carriageway
of curve (m) Carriageway Desirable Absolute
Width Width
Width Minimum (m) Minimum (m)
Width on Width on Width on
Curve (m) Curve (m) Curve (m)
15 n/a n/a 7.1 n/a n/a
20 n/a n/a 6.2 n/a n/a
25 8.2 6.8 5.7 12.9 10.5
30 7.8 6.4 5.3 12.3 10.2
40 7.2 5.8 4.7 11.3 9.9
50 6.9 5.6 4.3 10.7 9.7
75 6.5 5.4 4.3 10.0 9.4
100 6.3 5.2 4.3 9.6 9.3
150 6 5.2 4.3 9.3 9.0
Straight 6 5.2 4.3 8.75 8.5

4.6.7.14 Recommended limiting gradients on slip roads are shown in Table 4.6.7.3. Where a high percentage of
heavy vehicles is expected in he design year greater effort should be made to achieve the desirable
maximum.

Table 4.6.7.3
Recommended Limiting Gradients on Slip Roads
Desirable Absolute
Type of Route
Maximum maximum
Trunk Roads,
Primary
4% 8%
Distributors and
Bus Routes
Others 5% 10%

4.6.8 Merging Lanes

4.6.8.1 The recommended standards for merging lanes are based on a main line operating speed of 80 km/h,
which seems the most appropriate for those roads in the Territory which will utilize grade separated
junctions. The recommended layouts may be adopted for lower or higher speeds however with suitable
adjustment to the proposed standards.

4.6.8.2 In normal circumstances the direct entry, i.e. where the merging lane joins the main road via a straight
taper, is preferred. Situations will occur however where a more generous layout, including a parallel
merging lane plus taper, will be justified by difficult site conditions as discussed in paragraph 4.6.8.5.
Both layouts are depicted in Diagram No. 4.6.8.1.

4.6.8.3 For the direct entry merging lane a taper of 1 : 30 is recommended. For single lane entries however this
should be increased to 1 : 40 wherever possible.

4.6.8.4 The length of merge nose should be a minimum of 60m to provide adequate sideways visibility for
merging traffic.
 December 2023 Edition

4.6.8.5 As stated in paragraph 4.6.8.2 an additional length of parallel merging lane may be required in the
following types of conditions :-

(i) Where the main line is on a significant left hand curve. In this case visibility is limited and
the direct entry is not so effective as the angle of convergence is too great. By providing a
length of parallel lane, drivers are able to observe conditions on the main line by using their
driving mirrors rather than turning their heads.

(ii) Where the main line and hence the merging lane is on a steep upgrade. Here the problem is
one of matching speeds and a greater distance is required by merging vehicles in which to
accelerate.

(iii) Where the main line is on a steep down gradient there may also be problems associated
with the high speed of vehicles in the near side lane.

In these situations an additional merging lane 3.7m wide and a minimum of 100m long with a 70m
taper should be provided.

4.6.8.6 At higher entry flows two merging lanes may be required and the resulting layout may be of the direct
or shadow island type. Both types of layout are depicted; Diagram No. 4.6.8.2 illustrating the situation
with a consistent number of lanes on the main line, and Diagram No. 4.6.8.3 showing the case where
there is a pick up of one lane after the junction.

4.6.8.7 The method of deciding on the appropriate merging lane layout, which will provide the required
capacity to cater for the design flows, is described in the following paragraphs. It should be
remembered however that the layout thus recommended may need adjusting through outside influences
such as a policy decision to provide the same number of lanes throughout the whole main line route,
for example.

4.6.8.8 Design year flows in vehicles per hour should be obtained for the main line and the entry link. The
worst combination of these flows, allowing for possible different timing of peaks, is then used as a
base. The base flows are then adjusted for non-standard combinations of traffic composition and
gradient as indicated in Table 4.6.8.1. The gradient should be measured over a one kilometer section of
the main line, centred on the merge nose.

Table 4.6.8.1
Percentage Corrections to Predicted Flow for
Non-standard Composition and Gradient
Percentage of Heavy Vehicles on Link or Main Line - Being
Gradient on Main Line Considered
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Downhill, Level or 1%
-8 -4 0 +4 +8 +12 +16 +20
Up
1% - 2% Uphill +2 +6 +10 +14 +18 +22 +26 +30
2% - 3% Uphill +12 +16 +20 +24 +28 +32 +36 +40

4.6.8.9 The design year flows in v.p.h., adjusted as above, are then plotted on Diagram No. 4.6.8.5 to identify a
flow region, which is indicated alphabetically.

4.6.8.10 Having identified the flow region to which the adjusted design year flows correspond, Table 4.6.8.2
should be consulted to find out which merging layout types are suitable to provide the required
capacity. The layout types most likely to be appropriate are indicated with an asterisk. Where flow
combinations are close to boundaries between different flow regions, the layout types indicated for the
adjacent flow region should also be considered.
 December 2023 Edition

Table 4.6.8.2
Type of Merging Layout Appropriate to Flow Region
Merging Lane Type
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Upstream
2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 3
Number Main Line
of Link 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 1
Lanes Downstream
2 2 3 3 3 4 3 4 4
Main Line
A * * *
B * *
C * *
D * * * *
Flow
E * * * *
Region
F * *
G * *
H * * *
I * * *

4.6.8.11 The merging lane types are shown in Diagram Nos. 4.6.8.1, 2, 3, and 4 and the following notes on each
type should also be considered in deciding upon the appropriate layout.

4.6.8.12 Types 1 + 4 (Diagram No. 4.6.8.1)

The direct entry is the most economical merging layout for single lane links. It will cater for entry
flows up to approximately 1000 v.p.h. after correction, but should only be used under favourable site
conditions. Where the main line is situated on a left hand curve, where the main line is on a gradient or
where for other reasons it is necessary to provide greater definition of the merging lane, the more
generous parallel type merging lane layout should be adopted.

4.6.8.13 Types 2 + 5 ( Diagram No. 4.6.8.2)

The direct entry layout is suitable for the higher entry flows near the limit of a single lane entry but
where diverse geometric conditions render a single lane entry unsuitable. The shadow island merging
layout is the more normal and preferred layout where entry flows dictate a two lane entry and where
there is not the need for the addition of an extra lane downstream. The layout permits the right hand
traffic on the link to enter the main line early and to dissipate to form gaps for the second merging lane.
Both layouts can accommodate a single lane link, widened to a two lane entry, where appropriate.

4.6.8.14 Types 3 + 6 ( Diagram No. 4.6.8.3)

Where an extra lane is required for downstream traffic these layouts are appropriate. The parallel entry
layout gives the left hand lane of the link free entry while the right hand lane of the link merges with the
slower traffic on the main line. The shadow island entry, on the other hand, provides free entry for the
faster traffic on the link and subsequent merging of the slower traffic and is to be preferred for the higher
ranges of traffic in this category. The shadow island entry is also preferred on left hand curves and uphill
links. In both layouts the slower moving traffic on the main line must eventually merge into the nearside
lane, but there is no immediate necessary to do so.

4.6.8.15 Types 7, 8 + 9 ( Diagram No. 4.6.8.4)

Types 7 + 9 are appropriate on routes where lane drop/pick up interchanges are used. Type 8 is more
appropriate in the situation where two routes of equal status and carrying equal volumes of traffic meet.
Experience has shown that it is advisable to present immediate weaving by the use of double white lines
and the length of such lines though varying with site conditions should be at least 50m.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.6.8.1 : MERGING LANES (DESIGN SPEED 80 km/h)

DIRECT ENTRY MERGING LANE (TYPES 1 + 4)

PARALLEL MERGING LANE (TYPES 1 + 4)

DIAGRAM 4.6.8.2 : MERGING LANES (DESIGN SPEED 80 km/h)

DIRECT ENTRY MERGING LANE (TYPES 2 + 5)

TYPE 1 SINGLE LANE LINK TO TWO LANE MAIN LINE

TYPE 4 SINGLE LANE LINK TO THREE LANE MAIN LINE

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES

SHADOW ISLAND MERGING LANE (TYPES 2 + 5)

TYPE 2 TWO LANE LINK TO TWO LANE MAIN LINE

TYPE 5 TWO LANE LINK TO THREE LANE MAIN LINE

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.6.8.3 : MERGING LANES (DESIGN SPEED 80 km/h)

DIRECT ENTRY MERGING LANE (TYPES 3 + 6)

SHADOW ISLAND MERGING LANE (TYPES 3 + 6)

TYPE 3 TWO LANE LINK - MAIN LINE TWO INCREASING TO

THREE

TYPE 6 TWO LANE LINK - MAIN LINE THREE INCREASING TO

FOUR

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES

DIAGRAM 4.6.8.4 : MERGING LANES (DESIGN SPEED 80 km/h)

ADDITIONAL LANE - NO IMMEDIATE MERGING (TYPES 7 + 9)
 December 2023 Edition

ADDITIONAL LANES - NO IMMEDIATE MERGING (TYPE 8)

TYPE 7 SINGLE LANE LINK - MAIN LINE TWO INCREASING TO

THREE

TYPE 8 SINGLE LANE LINK - MAIN LINE THREE INCREASING TO

FOUR

TYPE 9 TWO LANE LINK - MAIN LINE TWO INCREASING TO FOUR

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES

DIAGRAM 4.6.8.5 : MERGING DIAGRAM

(INDICATING APPROPRIATE FLOW REGION)

4.6.9 Diverging Lanes

4.6.9.1 As with merging lanes (see para. 4.6.8.1) a main line operating speed of 80 km/h has been used in
arriving at the recommended standards.

4.6.9.2 The direct diverging lane, i.e. where the diverging lane exits via a straight taper, is to be preferred under
normal site conditions. The diverge taper shall be 1:20 except that 1:35 should be adopted, to give
additional space for diverging traffic, at single lane links or at two lane links where one lane is dropped
from a three lane main line.

4.6.9.3 The length of diverge nose should be a minimum of 40m.

 December 2023 Edition

4.6.9.4 More generous diverging layouts may be required under the following adverse site conditions : -

(i) If the main line is on a significant right hand curve, a direct taper would result in a
tangential alignment and would be confusing to drivers.

(ii) If the main line is on a steep upgrade a longer distance is needed for the diverging
manoeuvre, to enable faster vehicles approaching in the outer lanes to penetrate through
those heavy vehicles which are moving slowly in the left hand lane.

(iii) When the main line is on a steep downgrade a problem may arise associated with the high
speed of vehicles on the main line left hand lane.

In these situations an extra diverging lane 3.7m wide and at least 100m long with a 70m taper should be
provided.

4.6.9.5 To decide upon the most appropriate diverging lane layout to accommodate design year flows, a
method is employed which is the same as that used for merging lanes. Again it should be emphasized
however that the method described in subsequent paragraphs indicates the most suitable layout for a
diverge considered in isolation. The other junctions along the main line route should also be
considered, so that drivers may be presented with a consistent set of layout features.

4.6.9.6 The main line and link flows should be assessed in terms of v.p.h. in the design year and the worst
combination of these flows, taking account of different peak periods, used as a base. The base flows
should then be adjusted for non standard traffic composition and gradient as shown in Table 4.6.8.1.
The gradient should be measured over a distance of one kilometre, centred upon the nose of the diverge
lane.

4.6.9.7 The design flows in v.p.h. adjusted as above, should then be plotted on Diagram No. 4.6.9.1 to identify
the appropriate flow region, indicated alphabetically.

4.6.9.8 Using Table 4.6.9.1 the appropriate types of layout, suitable for handling the flow region assessed as
above, are identified. The diverging lane types indicated by an asterisk are likely to prove the most
acceptable in terms of level of service. Where flow combinations are close to boundaries between
different flow regions, the layout types indicated for the adjacent flow region should also be
considered.

Table 4.6.9.1
Type of Diverging Layout Appropriate to Flow Region
Diverging Lane Type
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Number Upstream 2 2 3 3 3 4 3 4 4
of Main Line
Lanes Link 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2
Downstream 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 2
Main Line
Flow P * * * *
Region Q * *
R * *
S * * * * *
T * * *
U * * *
V * * *

4.6.9.9 The diverging lane types are shown in Diagram Nos. 4.6.9.2, 3, 4, and 5. In conjunction with Table 4.6.9.1
the following notes on each layout type should be considered in deciding upon the most appropriate layout.
 December 2023 Edition

4.6.9.10 Types 1 + 3 ( Diagram No. 4.6.9.2)

The direct diverging lane is the most economical layout for single lane links and is appropriate up to flows of
approximately 1000 v.p.h. after correction and where site conditions are favourable. Where the diverge is
situated on a right hand curve, or where the intersection is on a gradient, the parallel diverging lane layout is
more appropriate.

4.6.9.11 Types 2 + 5 ( Diagram No. 4.6.9.3)

The direct diverging lane layout is appropriate for exiting flows around the limit of the single lane exit but
where site conditions do not favour a single lane. The standard layout where two exit lanes are required, and
where there is no lane drop, is shown in the parallel diverging lane layout. The parallel diverging lane layout
is particularly preferred when the diverge is situated on a right hand curve.

4.6.9.12 Types 4 + 6 ( Diagram No. 4.6.9.4)

Where a lane is dropped at the intersection types 4 + 6 layout are appropriate. The direct diverging lane may
be used in favourable site conditions, whereas the parallel type layout is more appropriate on right hand
curves.

4.6.9.13 Types 7, 8 + 9 ( Diagram No. 4.6.9.5)

Types 7 and 8 are appropriate along routes with lane drop/pick up at interchanges. Type 9 may be used at the
divergence of two routes of equal importance and carrying equal volumes of traffic.

DIAGRAM 4.6.9.1 : DIVERGING DIAGRAM

(INDICATING APPROPRIATE FLOW REGION)
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.6.9.2 : DIVERGING LANES (DESIGN SPEED 80 km/h)

DIRECT DIVERGING LANE (TYPES 1 + 3)

PARALLEL DIVERGING LANE (TYPES 1 + 3)

TYPE 1 ONE LANE LINK FROM TWO LANE MAIN LINE

TYPE 3 ONE LANE LINK FROM THREE LANE MAIN LINE

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES

DIAGRAM 4.6.9.3 : DIVERGING LANES (DESIGN SPEED 80 km/h)

DIRECT DIVERGING LANES (TYPES 2 + 5)

PARALLEL DIVERGING LANES (TYPES 2 + 5)

TYPE 2 TWO LANE LINK FROM TWO LANE MAIN LINE

TYPE 5 TWO LANE LINK FROM THREE LANE MAIN LINE

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.6.9.4 : DIVERGING LANES (DESIGN SPEED 80 km/h)

DIRECT DIVERGING LANES (TYPES 4 + 6)

PARALLEL DIVERGING LANES (TYPES 4 + 6)

TYPE 4 TWO LANE LINK - MAIN LINE THREE LANES DECREASING TO TWO
LANES

TYPE 6 TWO LANE LINK - MAIN LINE FOUR LANES DECREASING TO THREE
LANES

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES

DIAGRAM 4.6.9.5 : DIVERGING LANES (DESIGN SPEED 80 km/h)

DIVERGING LANE (TYPES 7 + 8)

DIVERGING LANES (TYPE 9)

TYPE 7 SINGLE LANE LINK - MAIN LINE THREE DECREASING TO

TWO

TYPE 8 SINGLE LANE LINK - MAIN LINE FOUR DECREASING TO

THREE

TYPE 9 TWO LANE LINK - MAIN LINE FOUR DECREASING TO TWO

NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES

 December 2023 Edition

4.6.10 Weaving Sections

4.6.10.1 The following paragraphs cover the design of all true weaving sections, that is to say those areas where
traffic streams, each moving in the same general direction, cross each other by successive merging and
diverging manoeuvre. Such areas may occur on carriageways between adjacent junctions, between
successive entry and exit slips and on links within free-flow interchanges. The advice does not cover what
are at times wrongly referred to as weaving sections within roundabouts.

4.6.10.2 In essence the design procedure involves the assessment of the length and width of weaving section required
to cater for the predicted design year flows. The minimum weaving section length is determined from
consideration of the weaving flows and the design characteristics of the road. Based on the minimum and
actual weaving section lengths the weaving section width is derived. Each step of the procedure is described
in the following paragraphs and illustrated with examples in Appendix 3.

4.6.10.3 Predictions are made of the peak hour design year traffic volumes. These traffic volumes are required in the
form of non weaving (Qnw), major weaving (Qw1) and minor weaving (Qw2) components as illustrated
below :
Qnw = Qnw1 + Qnw2

These traffic volumes are adjusted for non standard traffic composition and gradient using Table 4.6.8.1. The
gradient should be measured over the approximate length of the weaving section plus a distance upstream of
the weaving section up to 0.5 km in length.

4.6.10.4 The minimum weaving length based on the total weaving flow (Qw1 + Qw2 adjusted) is given by reference
to Diagram 4.6.10.1. Line A should be used for very high standard rural roads with high design speeds
around 100 km/h and consequently low design flows around 1200 v.p.h. per lane. Line B should be adopted
for the more normal standard of high capacity road in Hong Kong with a design speed around 80 km/h and a
design flow of 1400 v.p.h. per lane. Line C represents the urban condition with low design speed around 50
km/h and consequently higher design flow of 1600 v.p.h. per lane
The minimum weaving section length derived as above should be compared with the minimum weaving
section length indicated by the small graph, related to design speed alone, and the larger of the two values is
the minimum acceptable length of weaving section (Lmin).
 December 2023 Edition

4.6.10.5 The actual weaving length, particularly in connection with a weaving section between rather than within
interchanges, will often be greater than the minimum weaving length. The width of weaving section is hence
defined as a function of both the minimum and actual weaving lengths together with the predicted and design
flows. The number of lanes required in the weaving section (N) is given by the equation

𝑄𝑛𝑤 + 𝑄𝑤1 𝐿𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑄𝑤2

𝑁= + (2 × + 1)
𝐷 𝐿𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝐷

Where Qnw = total non weaving flow (adjusted) v.p.h.

Qw1 = major weaving flow (adjusted) v.p.h.

Qw2 = minor weaving flow (adjusted) v.p.h.

D = design flow per lane in v.p.h. as described in para. 4.6.10.4

Lmin = minimum weaving length (m)

Lact = actual weaving length (m)

4.6.10.6 The number of lanes within the weaving section as calculated above will invariably involve a fraction and a
decision must be taken on whether to round up or down. In some cases it may be possible to vary the actual
weaving length in order to bring N nearer to a whole number and hence simplify the decision. Where the
available weaving length is fixed by outside constraints, as is normally the case, the decision to round up or
down becomes more difficult. Obviously if the fractional part is small with relatively low weaving volumes
and a low design flow, it is not unreasonable to round down. If the opposite is true, N would be rounded up.
Between these two extremes it is necessary to exercise judgement taking account of such factors as cost and
availability of lane for an extra lane.

4.6.10.7 It is also important to bear in mind that it is not sufficient merely to provide the proper number of lanes; the
physical arrangement of the lanes within the weaving section must also be considered. Care must be taken
that use of the lanes by weaving and non weaving traffic will be in proportion to their relative volumes so
that parts of the roadway do not become underused while other parts become congested. The possibility of
such an imbalance of flows occurring may well influence the decision on whether to round up or down. For
example an outer lane added to a weaving section will generally aid only an outer non-weaving flow
(particularly where 3 or more lanes are already proposed). This is likely to be of little use if most of the
traffic is weaving and the relevant outer non-weaving flow is small.

4.6.10.8 Finally it is necessary to ensure that the number of lanes in the weaving section satisfies the requirements of
the merging and diverging sections of the interchange(s) as discussed earlier.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.6.10.1 : Lmin MINIMUM LENGTH OF WEAVING SECTION

4.6.11 Signing

4.6.11.1 Of all junction types, the layout of grade separated interchanges is usually the least obvious to approaching
motorists. It is imperative therefore, particularly where high speeds are involved, to ensure adequate signing.
On trunk roads and primary distributor roads with no at grade access the signing should commence with the
first A.D. sign, half a kilometre in advance of the commencement of the deceleration lane. Full details of
signing are given in Volume 3 of this Manual.
 December 2023 Edition

Appendix 1

Calculation of Capacity at Priority Junctions

The predictive equations discussed in paras. 4.3.6 are :

𝑄𝐵−𝐴 = 𝐷[627 + 14𝑊𝐶𝑅 − 𝑌(0.364𝑞𝐴−𝐶 + 0.144𝑞𝐴−𝐵 + 0.229𝑞𝐶−𝐴 + 0.52𝑞𝐶−𝐵 )] .................. (1)

𝑄𝐵−𝐶 = 𝐸[745 − 𝑌(0.364𝑞𝐴−𝐶 + 0.144𝑞𝐴−𝐵 )] .................. (2)

𝑄𝐶−𝐵 = 𝐹[745 − 0.364𝑌(𝑞𝐴−𝐶 + 𝑞𝐴−𝐵 )] .................. (3)

(𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑌 = (1 − 0.0345𝑊))

In each of these equations the geometric parameters represented by D, E and F are stream-specific :
𝐷 = [1 + 0.094(𝑤𝐵−𝐴 − 3.65)][1 + 0.0009(𝑉𝑟𝐵−𝐴 − 120)][1 + 0.0006(𝑉𝑙𝐵−𝐴 − 150)]

𝐸 = [1 + 0.094(𝑤𝐵−𝐶 − 3.65)][1 + 0.0009(𝑉𝑟𝐵−𝐶 − 120)]

𝐹 = [1 + 0.094(𝑤𝐶−𝐵 − 3.65)][1 + 0.0009(𝑉𝑟𝐶−𝐵 − 120)]

The symbols represent the following :-

𝑄𝐵−𝐴 = the capacity of movement B − A )See Drg. No. 4.3.A.1

𝑄𝐴−𝐵 = the capacity of movement A − B and so on )Capacities and flow are in

pcu/hour (1 HGV = 2 pcu)

W = major road width )See Drg. No. 4.3.A.2

𝑊𝐶𝑅 = central reserve width (kerbed median only)

𝑊𝐵−𝐴 = lane width available to vehicle waiting in stream B − A, and so on )See Drg. No. 4.3.A.3

𝑉𝑟𝐵−𝐴 = visibility to the right for vehicles waiting in stream B − A )Visibilities distances for
minor road flow is measured

𝑉𝑙𝐵−𝐴 = visibility to the left for vehicles waiting in stream B − A, and so on )from a point 10m back from
the give way line

All distances and widths are measured in metres and the ranges of parameters in the data base were as follows :-

𝑤 = 2.05 − 4.70

𝑉𝑟 = 17.0 − 250.0

𝑉𝑙 = 22.0 − 250.0

𝑊𝐶𝑅 = 1.2 − 9.0 (kerbed central reserve only)

𝑊 = 6.4 − 20.0

The maximum values of visibility and WCR used in calculation and computation should be 250m and 10m
respectively, even if greater values are physically provided.
 December 2023 Edition

N.B.

(i) The equations for QB-A and QB-C assume separate lanes for right and left turning minor road traffic and no
simultaneous queuing for the two movements. If simultaneous queues are sometimes present Q B-A is unaffected
but the operational left turning capacity QB-C(0) is :-

0.25 𝑞𝐵−𝐴
𝑄𝐵−𝐶 (0) = 𝑄𝐵−𝐶 (1 − 𝑞 ) 𝑓𝑜𝑟 <1
𝑄𝐵−𝐴 𝐵−𝐴 𝑄𝐵−𝐴
𝑞𝐵−𝐴
and 𝑄𝐵−𝐶 (0) = 0.75𝑄𝐵−𝐶 𝑓𝑜𝑟 <1
𝑄𝐵−𝐴

If right and left turning traffic share the same lane the capacity of the combined stream is given as follows : -

𝑄𝐵−𝐶 ∙ 𝑄𝐵−𝐴
𝑄𝐵−𝐴𝐶 =
(1 − 𝐹)𝑄𝐵−𝐶 + 𝐹𝑄𝐵−𝐴

where QB-A and QB-C are determined using equations 1 and 2 with the same minor stream width w for both
streams and F is the proportion of minor road traffic turning left.

(ii) At some layouts the straight through major road stream C-A becomes blocked when there is a queue of right
turning vehicles C-B. Substantial capacity limitations will arise only in those cases where the residual width for
through traffic is less than 2.5m. In these cases QC-A is given by the equation :-
𝑞𝐶−𝐵
𝑄𝐶−𝐴 = 1800 (1 − ) 𝑝𝑐𝑢/ℎ
𝑄𝐶−𝐵

There follows an example in the use of the priority junction capacity equations.

Example of Use of Priority Junction Capacity Equation

(1) It is required to examine the feasibility of a priority junction at the T-junction between two S2 roads.

(2) The traffic information available from the traffic model indicates that the design year flows at the junction
would be :
 December 2023 Edition

(3) A layout is prepared based on a shadow island design and the initial layout has the following geometric parameters :

𝑊 = 7.3

𝑊𝐶𝑅 = 0 (because no kerbed central median)

𝑤𝐶−𝐵 = 3.5

𝑤𝑏−𝑐 = 4.0

𝑤𝑏−𝑎 = 4.0

𝑤𝑏−𝑎 = 250.0 major road

𝑉𝑟 = 200.0 minor road

𝑉𝑙 = 200.0 minor road

(4) Applying the stream specific formulae to calculate the factors D, E and F :
𝐷 = [1 + 0.094(4 − 3.65)][1 + 0.0009(200 − 120)][1 + 0.0006(𝑉𝑙𝐵−𝐴 − 150)] = 1.1405

𝐸 = [1 + 0.094(4 − 3.65)][1 + 0.0009(200 − 120)] = 1.1073

𝐹 = [1 + 0.094(3.5 − 3.65)][1 + 0.0009(250 − 120)] = 1.1013

Substituting these in the capacity formulae :

𝑄𝑏−𝑎 = 1.1405[627 + 14 × 0 − 0.74815(0.364 × 300 + 0.144 × 100 + 0.229 × 600 + 0.520 × 200)] = 293

𝑄𝑏−𝑐 = 1.1073[745 − 0.74815(0.364 × 300 + 0.144 × 100)] = 615

and

𝑄𝑐−𝑏 = 1.1013[745 − 0.364 × 0.74815(300 + 100)] = 700

comparing the capacities to the design flows yields DFC values of 85% for B-A, 33% for B-C and 29% for C-B.

The results indicated that the junction should operate satisfactorily with queuing on the B-A stream, i.e. the right
turn out of the minor road. It would therefore be appropriate to examine the effects of queuing on the minor road
and to critically examine the traffic predictions for that particular flow to ensure that the true future flow is unlikely
to be higher than that initially predicted.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.3.A.1: FLOWS AND NOTATION

The four parts of drawings show the main components of major road width. They are combined to give :

(1) the 'nearside' width: Wn

1
𝑾𝒏 = (𝑾𝟐 + 𝑾𝟒)
2
(2) the 'farside' width: Wf
1
𝑾𝒇 = (𝑾𝟏 + 𝑾𝟑)
2
(3) the total carriageway width: W
𝑾 = (𝑾𝒏 + 𝑾𝒇 )

(4) (at dual carriageway sites with kerbed central reserve)

the width of central reserve: WCR
1
𝑾𝑪𝑹 = (𝑾𝟓 + 𝑾𝟔)
2
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.3.A.2: MAJOR ROAD WIDTH W AND ITS COMPONENTS

Lane width for non-priority streams, w (m)

Where there are clear lane markings the width is measured directly. The average of measurements taken at 5m
intervals over a distance of 20m upstream from the give-way point is used. Any measurement exceeding 5m is
reduced to 5m before the average is taken. Where lane markings are unclear (or absent), Diagram (a), (b), and (c)
are used, and the lane width calculated according to :
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 4.3.A.3 : LANE WIDTHS FOR NON PRIORITY STREAMS

W = (a + b + c + d + e) / 5 metres

Diagram (a) Lane width measurements for the right-turning minor road stream

a, b, c, d, e are equal to ½ (approach width to nearside of median line)

Each ≤ 5m

Diagram (b) Lane width measurements for the left-turning minor road stream

a, b, c, d, e are equal to ½ (approach width to nearside of median line)

Each ≤ 5m

Diagram (c) Lane width measurements for the right-turning major road stream

a, b, c, d, e are equal to the lane width where there is explicit provision for right-turners (each ≤ 5m), and equal 2.1m
otherwise
 December 2023 Edition

Appendix 2

Calculation of Capacity at Priority Roundabouts

The predictive equations for entry capacity on individual arms of roundabouts is :-

𝑄𝐸 = 𝐾(𝐹 − 𝑓𝑐 𝑞𝑐 )

where

𝑄𝐸 = entry capacity in pcu/hour (1 HGV = 2cpu)

𝑞𝑐 = Circulating flow across the entry in pcu/hour

𝐾 = 1 − 0.00347(𝜑 − 30) − 0.978[(1/𝑟) − 0.05]

𝐹 = 303𝑥2

𝑓𝑐 = 0.210𝑡𝐷 (1 + 0.2𝑥2 )

𝑡𝐷 = 1 + 0.5/(1 + 𝑀)

𝑀 = exp[(𝐷 − 60)/10]

𝑥2 = v + (𝑒 − 𝑣)/(1 + 2𝑆)

𝑆 = 1.6(𝑒 − 𝑣)/𝐿

The geometric parameters are defined below together with their recommended limits : -

𝑒 = entry width 4.0 - 15.0m

𝑣 = approach half width 2.0 – 7.3m

𝐿 = effective length of flare 1.0 – 100.0m

𝑆 = 1.6(𝑒 − 𝑣)/𝐿 = sharpness of flare 0.0 – 3.0

𝑟 = entry radius 6.0 – 100.0m

𝜑 = entry angle 10 – 60 degrees

𝐷 = inscribed circle diameter 15 – 100m

The circulatory width does not appear in the equation but should be constant at 1.0 to 1.2 times the greatest entry
width subject to a maximum of 15m.

The predictive equation applies to all roundabouts except those at grade separated interchanges where the term "F"
should be replaced by "1.11 F" and the "fc" term becomes "1.4 fc".

Further explanation of the geometric parameters is given below with reference to the associated figures.

𝑒= the entry width, measured from the point A along the normal to the nearside curve

𝑣= the approach half width, measured at a point in the approach upstream from the entry flare

𝑟= the entry radius, measured as the minimum radius of curvature of the nearside kerbline at
entry. It is not important that this minimum arc may extend into the following exit provided that
half or more of the arc length is within the entry region
 December 2023 Edition

𝐿= the effective flare length, measured as shown in Fig. 2 The line GF ′ D is the projection of the
nearside kerb from the approach towards the give wayline, parallel to the median HA and at a
distance of v from it. BA is the line along which e is measured and thus D is at a distance of
(e − v)from B. The line CF ′ is parallel to BG (the nearside kerb)and at a distance of
e− v
2
from it. Usually the line CF ′ is therefore curved and its length is measured along the curve
to obtain L

𝐷= the inscribed circle diameter, is the largest circle that can be inscribed within the junction
outline as shown in Fig. 1. In cases where the outline is a symmetric, the local value in the region
of the entry is taken. The extreme case arises for a double roundabout at a scissors crossroads
and Fig. 3 illustrates the determination of D in such cases

𝜑= the entry angle and serves as a proxy for the conflict angle between entering and circulating
streams. Three constructions are used for φ. The first two shown in Figs. 4 and 5 apply to
roundabouts having a distance of more than about 30m between the offside of an entry and the
next exit. In these cases is not affected by the angle of the adjacent exit. Fig. 6 shows the
construction where entry and next exit are closed together and is more related to exit angle
than circulating angle

Fig. 1 Fig. 2

Fig. 3 Fig. 4

Fig. 5 Fig. 6
 December 2023 Edition

Fig. 4 shows a straight circulatory carriageway. AD is parallel to the straight circulatory carriageway where A is as
in Fig. 1 and D is the point nearest to A on the median island or marking of the following entry. Line EF is mid way
between the nearside kerbline and the median line and nearside edge of any median island. Line BC is a tangent to
EF at the point where it intersects the give way line. φ is measured as the acute angle between lines BC and AD.

Fig. 5 shows the equivalent construction for roundabouts with curved weaving sections. A'D' is a line in the centre
and parallel to the weaving section. BC is constructed as with Fig. 4 and φ is measured as the acute angle between
BC and the tangent to A'D' at the point of intersection.

Fig. 6 shows the construction for short weaving sections. BC is constructed as in Figs. 4 and 5. JK is the line in the
following exit mid way between the nearside kerb and the median and offside edge of any median island. GH is the
tangent to JK at the point where this line intersects the outer edge of the circulatory carriageway. BC and GH
intersect at L. φ is then defined as φ = 90 - (angle GLB)/2. GLB is measured on the side facing away from the
central island. If GLB is greater than or equal to 180° φ = 0

Entry path radius: is not one of the geometric parameters included in the capacity equation, but has a major
influence on safety. The following procedure may be adopted to measure the entry path radius :-
It is assumed that : -

(i) The entering vehicle is 2m wide and will be taking the straight ahead movement at a 4 arm
roundabout or across the head of the Tee at a 3 arm roundabout;

(ii) There is no other traffic on the approach and on the circulatory carriageway;

(iii) The driver will negotiate the site constraints with minimum deflections and road markings will be
ignored;

(iv) The vehicle is first considered at a point not less than 50m from the "Give Way" line;

(v) The vehicle proceeds towards the "Give Way" line on a path whose centre line initially 1m away
from the nearside channel or kerb of the approach arm;

(vi) Then either :-

(a) It proceeds towards the central island of the roundabout passing through a point not less
than 1m from the nearside channel or kerb; or

(b) Where a subsidiary traffic island exits, it is assumed to pass whichever side of the island
involves the least deflection;

(vii) The vehicle is then assumed to continue on a smooth path with its centre line never passing closer
than 1m from the centre island.

Based on the foregoing, which is diagrammatically represented in Drg. No. 4.5.A.1, the centre line of the most
realistic path that a vehicle would take in its complete passage through the junction is drawn on a 1/500 scale using
a flexicurve or similar. More than one line should be drawn and the most critical path considered. The entry path
curvature is taken to be the tightest radius over a 20 - 25 m length in the vicinity of the "Give Way" line (i.e.
between X and Y on Drg. No. 4.5.A.1). The radius should be measured using a suitable template.
 December 2023 Edition

Example of Use of Roundabout Capacity Equation

(1) It is required to assess the viability of a roundabout layout at the junction between a Dual 2 and a Single
2 road.

(2) The traffic information available indicates the following design year flows :-

The flows on the roundabout and its entries therefore would be :-

(3) A roundabout layout is prepared with the following design characteristics :-

ARM v (m) e (m) L (m) r (m) D (m) φ (degrees) S

SOUTH 3.65 7.30 25.0 20.0 63.0 30.0 0.23
WEST 7.30 10.50 25.0 20.0 63.0 30.0 0.20
NORTH 3.65 7.30 25.0 20.0 63.0 63.0 0.23
EAST 7.30 10.50 25.0 20.0 63.0 30.0 0.20

(4) Using these design figures the parameters in the equation :

𝑄𝐸 = 𝐾(𝐹 − 𝑓𝑐 𝑞𝑐 ) can be calculated

South West North East

𝑞𝑐 = Circulating flow across the entry 1050 900 1400 850
𝐾 = 1 − 0.00347(𝜑 − 30) − 0.978(1/𝑟 − 0.05) 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
𝑥2 = v + [(𝑒 − 𝑣)/(1 + 2𝑆)] 6.14 9.57 6.14 9.57
𝑀 = 𝑒𝑥𝑝[(𝐷 − 60)/10] 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35
𝐹 = 303𝑥2 1859.73 2899.75 1859.73 2899.75
𝑡𝐷 = 1 + (0.5/1 + 𝑀) 1.213 1.213 1.213 1.213
𝑓𝑐 = 0.210𝑡𝐷 (1 + 0.2𝑥2 ) 0.567 0.742 0.567 0.742
𝑄𝐸 = 𝐾(𝐹 − 𝑓𝑐 𝑞𝑐 ) 1264 2232 1065 2269
 December 2023 Edition

(5) Comparing the entry capacities with the entry flows gives DFC ratios for the south, west, north and east
arms of 63%, 72%, 56% and 53% respectively. The proposed roundabout would hence cater for the
design flows adequately with no queuing. If benefits were to be obtained in land take etc. a smaller
roundabout could be tested.
DIAGRAM 4.5.A.1 : DETERMINATION OF ENTRY PATH CURVATURE
 December 2023 Edition

Appendix 3

Examples of Weaving Section Calculations

Example 1
A new road is to be constructed within an existing urban area with a design speed of 50 km/h and a design flow of 1600
v.p.h. per lane. Over one particular section the weaving section length between an entry and the adjacent exit is limited by
connections to the existing road network to 200m.

The predicted design year flows in vehicles per hour are :-

Qnw1 = major non weaving flow = 1500 v.p.h
Qnw2 = minor non weaving flow = 600 v.p.h
Qw1 = major non weaving flow = 1000 v.p.h
Qw2 = minor non weaving flow = 800 v.p.h

The average gradient through the section and 0.5 km upstream of the merge is 1% uphill and the predicted heavy vehicle
content is 25%. From Table 4.6.8.1 therefore the predicted flow should be adjusted by +8% resulting in the following
adjusted flows : -

Qnw1 = 1620, Qnw2 = 648, Qw1 = 1080, Qw2 = 864

The total weaving flow is thus 1944.

From paragraph 4.6.10.4 using line C - C (for urban conditions)

Lmin = 170m (N.B. this is greater than the absolute minimum figure indicated in the small graph inset of Dia. 4.6.10.1)

Number of lanes required within weaving section :-

𝑄𝑛𝑤1 + 𝑄𝑛𝑤2 + 𝑄𝑤1 𝐿𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑄𝑤2

𝑁= + (2 × + 1)
𝐷 𝐿𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝐷

Where D = design flow per lane

And Lact = actual weaving length

1620 + 648 + 1080 170 864

𝑁= + (2 × + 1)
1600 200 1600

𝐿 = 3.55 𝐿𝑎𝑛𝑒𝑠

The decision whether to round up or down the number of lanes will depend upon site specific factors. For example with the
flows involved the main line may be a dual 2 or a dual 3 carriageway. In the case of a single lane slip joining a dual 3 it
would be sensible to maintain 4 lanes throughout the whole weaving section. Alternatively if a single lane slip were joining
a dual 2 as shown below the decision whether to add a fourth lane would depend on cost and availability of land etc.
 December 2023 Edition

In other circumstances where the actual weaving length was not fixed, opportunity could be taken to increase the spacing
between the entry and exit points. For example in the case in question, if the Lact were increased to 400m and all other
factors were identical N would be almost exactly 3 lanes and the decision regarding weaving section width would be
straight forward.

It should be noted that the minimum weaving section lengths in the above example based on urban conditions and a low
design speed are not comparable with the standards recommended for the sum of the merging and diverging section lengths
in sections 4.6.8 and 4.6.9 which are based on a design speed of 80 km/h. Example 2 is more typical of the higher standard
provision.

Example 2
A dual 3 lane by-pass with a 80 km/h design speed and 1400 v.p.h. per lane design flow is to be constructed as part of a
New Town highway network. On one particular section of the by-pass the weaving length available is approximately 1.5
km though this is somewhat flexible as all the adjoining road network is also new.

The predicted design year flows in vehicles per hour are :-

Qnw1 = major non weaving flow = 2200 v.p.h
Qnw2 = minor non weaving flow = 600 v.p.h
Qw1 = major weaving flow = 900 v.p.h
Qw2 = minor weaving flow = 700 v.p.h

The average gradient through the section and 0.5 km upstream of the merge is 2% downhill and the predicted heavy
vehicle content is 15%. From Table 4.6.8.1 therefore no adjustment is required to the predicted flows.

The total weaving flow is thus 1600 v.p.h.

From Diagram 4.6.10.1 using line B-B (for 80 km design speed and 1400 v.p.h. per lane design flow) the minimum
weaving section length Lmin = 240m (N.B. this is taken from the small graph inset which produces a larger figure than the
main graph).

Number of lanes required within weaving section :-

𝑄𝑛𝑤1 + 𝑄𝑛𝑤2 + 𝑄𝑤1 𝐿𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑄𝑤2

𝑁= + (2 × + 1)
𝐷 𝐿𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝐷
2200 + 600 + 900 240 700
𝑁= + (2 × + 1)
1500 1500 1400

𝐿 = 3.3 𝐿𝑎𝑛𝑒𝑠

As the fractional part is small and the weaving flows are not relatively high it would be advisable in this situation to
maintain the dual three character of the road and provide a three lanes wide weaving section. The full merging and
diverging lane requirements as stated in sections 4.6.8 and 4.6.9 would in any case be provided.

Consider also the situation which is the same in all respect except that the actual weaving section length is only 600m.

In these circumstances the number of lanes required in the weaving section would be 3.54. When one considers the lengths
of merging and diverging lanes required there would be less than 200m between the end of one and the beginning of the
other. In this situation it would generally be more sensible to run the additional fourth lane throughout the whole section.
December 2023 Edition
 December 2023 Edition

TPDM Volume 2 Chapter 5 – Other Facilities

5.1 References

1. Chapter 8, Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines

2. U.K. Department of Transport, Departmental Advice Note TA/36/83, Signing and Siting of Road
Humps: Two-way, 2-lane roads

3. U.K. Highways (Road Humps) Regulations1983

4. U.K. Department of Transport, Circular Roads 5/83, Road Humps

5. U.K. Department of Transport, Circular Roads 17/78, Transverse Yellow Bar Markings at Roundabouts

6. U.K. Department of Transport, Departmental Standard TD 6/79, Transverse Yellow Bar Markings at
Roundabouts

7. T.R.R.L. Laboratory Report 800, The use of rumble areas to alert drivers

8. Code of Practice for the Lighting, Signing and Guarding of Road Works

9. Volume 3, Transport Planning and Design Manual - Traffic Signs and Road Markings

10. Civil Engineering Services Department, Civil Engineering Manual, Volume II, Project Administration
 December 2023 Edition

5.2 Introduction

5.2.1 General

5.2.1.1 This Chapter is intended to provide information on facilities which may influence the design of any
road, or may be used to effect how any road is used.

5.2.1.2 It is important that consideration of the facilities mentioned in this Chapter is given at an early stage in
the design procedure. This is to ensure that the provision of the facility will not detrimentally affect the
design, e.g. that the location of a bus stop or filling station are considered during the design stage so
that if they are required they can be sited at their optimum locations where visibility is maximised and
interference with other road users is minimised rather than having to fit them in when the design has
been completed. Additionally, it should be ensured that the facility will not be required, at a later date
e.g. curve radii and visibility at hazards are sufficient that rumble strips or similar will not need to be
provided at some future time.
 December 2023 Edition

5.3 Petrol Filling Stations in relation to Highway Design

5.3.1 Location of Petrol Filling Stations

5.3.1.1 Consideration must be given to what existing facilities are already available in the area when
applications for new petrol filling stations or service areas, consisting of more than one petrol filling
station and other auxiliary services, are made. Except as otherwise specified, petrol filling station in
this chapter refers to conventional petrol filling station, petrol cum liquefied petroleum gas filling
station and liquefied petroleum gas filling station and electric vehicle (EV) charging station .

5.3.1.2 Petrol filling stations must be located such that interference with traffic flow on the frontage road and
any adjoining roads is minimised, and no additional traffic hazards are created.

5.3.1.3 Petrol filling stations should be located such that the journey distance for vehicles seeking petrol /
charging is minimised, but at the same time avoiding any undesirable increase in traffic flow in
adjacent or surrounding roads.

5.3.1.4 Turning movements into or out of the petrol filling station from/to the opposite traffic direction to the
traffic immediately adjacent to it should be prevented. On Local Distributor Roads or below for
example such movements can generally be tolerated.

5.3.1.5 Generally petrol filling stations should not be located adjacent to Trunk Roads and Primary Distributor
Roads. However on Expressway, petrol filling stations should preferably form part of service areas.

5.3.1.6 It is desirable where two or more petrol filling stations are adjacent to each other that access to and
from the main road is obtained via a common service road.

5.3.1.7 Sight distances in accordance with the minimum desirable standards on section 3.3.5 of Chapter 3
should be provided on the approach to the service area or petrol fitting station, and for vehicles leaving
the service area or petrol filling station in accordance with section 4.3.8 of Chapter 4.

5.3.1.8 Service areas or petrol filling stations should preferably be sited opposite each other on dual
carriageway roads. If they are single carriageway roads then they should be staggered within visible
distance of each other, but not less than 100m apart, with the nearside filling station being the nearest
to the approaching traffic on that side.

5.3.1.9 Where it is agreed that a filling station should be provided on a Trunk Road, including Expressways, or
a Primary Distributor Road, or a Rural Road, the following must be taken account of :

(i) Filling stations should not be located on any slip road of a grade separated junction.

(ii) On Expressways the petrol filling station, or service area, should be at least 2km from any
intersection.

(iii) Merging and diverging lanes commensurate to the design standard of that road must be
provided at access and egress points to and from the service area or petrol filling station.

(iv) The spacing between petrol filling stations or service areas should be at least :

(a) 10 km on Expressways, and

(b) 5 km on Trunk Roads and Primary Distributor Roads.

(v) The service area or petrol filling station must not be located within 100m of a bend, vertical
curve or road junction.
 December 2023 Edition

5.3.1.10 On roads other than Trunk Roads, Expressways, Primary Distributor Roads or Rural Roads, the
location of petrol filling stations or service areas should be in accordance with the following:

(i) Where petrol filling stations on the same side of the road cannot be provided with a
common service road they should preferably be situated at least 300m apart

(ii) Petrol filling stations should not be located within 50m of a bend, vertical curve or
junction.

(iii) The carriageway width of the road on which the filling station fronts should not be less
than 7.3m.

5.3.2 Layout of Petrol Filling Stations

5.3.2.1 For petrol filling stations or service areas located adjacent to Trunk Roads, particularly Expressways,
Primary Distributor Roads and Rural Roads, as mentioned in section 5.3.1, the petrol filling station or
the service areas will be served by a specially provided service road with appropriate merging and
diverging lanes. Any access by pedestrians on to the main road must be prevented by suitable fences if
necessary. Waiting spaces must be provided in accordance with section 5.3.2.2 so that queuing traffic
must not be extended on to the major road and preferably not even on to the service road. A pedestrian
footbridge may need to be provided to link the service areas on either side of the main road if a
particular facility can only be provided on one side. Also on Expressways the service area may be sited
in conjunction with a vehicle recovery centre or other facility associated with these types of road.

5.3.2.2 For all petrol filling stations a minimum of four waiting spaces should be provided within the site in
addition to one space for and adjacent to each metered filling point. However for a combined petrol
filling and service station an additional four spaces should be provided for each service bay. A service
station being where activities such as general lubrication or tyre changing or car washing, can be
carried out. An additional space should be provided between each air-pumping point. Waiting spaces
must be easily accessible and located between the entrance and the pumps. For EV charging station,
subject to the traffic review, adequate vehicle waiting spaces should be provided within EV charging
stations.

5.3.2.3 Only one entry point and one exit point is to be provided under normal circumstances and petrol filling
station shall be designed for one way operation to avoid reversion of vehicles and to prevent vehicles
from taking short-cuts by entering via the egress point and leaving via the ingress point.

5.3.2.4 However where the petrol filling station is bordered by two or more roads additional entrances or exits
may be provided if internal circulation would neither disrupt traffic circulation on the roads bordering
the site nor adversely affect vehicle evacuation in emergency.

5.3.2.5 Any servicing must be carried out entirely within the petrol filling station area.

5.3.2.6 Where an existing footway fronting the site is less than 2.75m in width the site should be set back such
that a footway of 2.75m minimum width can be provided. The length of the footway between an entry
and exit located on the same road and measured at the back of the footway must not be less than 3m
but should preferably be 10m. The site must comply with any building or widening lines and levels in
the normal way.
 December 2023 Edition

5.3.2.7 A physical barrier must be constructed along the back of the footway to prevent vehicles from crossing
the footway other than at the points of entrance or exit.

5.3.2.8 The minimum width at the back of the footway for the run-in and run-out should be 6.75m and 5m
respectively. Widening of the run-in and run-out towards the kerbline of the adjacent carriageway to
facilitate entry and exit is permitted but the widths at the kerbline should not normally exceed 10m and
8m respectively. Where wider entrances or exits are required the safety of pedestrians should not be
adversely affected. Details regarding the layout of run-ins for filling stations are illustrated in Diagram
3.6.3.3 of Chapter 3.

5.3.2.9 Buildings or other structures associated with the petrol filling station should not be erected such that
they interfere with any sight lines required.

5.3.2.10 Where road lighting does not exist adjacent to the petrol filling station lighting must be provided to
adequately illuminate the entrance and exit, but should not be of such type which will dazzle motorists
on adjacent roads.

5.3.2.11 Appropriate "IN", "OUT", "NO ENTRY" and "NO EXIT" signs must be erected to indicate the points
of entry and exit to and from the petrol filling station. For details, refer to paragraph 2.3.2.105 of
Chapter 2, Volume 3.

5.3.2.12 For details of siting, layout design, environmental, fire safety and visual consideration, refer to Chapter
12 Section 3 of Hong Kong Planning Standards and Guidelines.
 December 2023 Edition

5.4 Additional Speed Control Facilities

5.4.1 Definition

5.4.1.1 Additional speed control facilities may be regarded as devices used in addition to speed limit and
warning signs where it is regarded that approach speeds to a particular hazard are excessive, though not
necessarily above the speed limit in force, and warning signs alone are not considered sufficient to
bring to the attention of drivers the need to reduce their speed.

5.4.1.2 Additional speed control facilities may be in the form of a road marking or an actual physical change to
the road surface, or both.

5.4.2 Use

5.4.2.1 Additional speed control facilities will not generally be appropriate on Trunk Roads, including
Expressways, or Primary Distributor Roads, as normally the geometric design of the road should be of
a standard that the vehicle speeds do not need to be controlled by physical or other means over and
above the general traffic aids and design features normally provided. However in exceptional
circumstances their use may be justified but each case will need to be considered on its own merit and
care will be needed as to the type of facility installed.

5.4.2.2 On other roads the use of additional speed control facilities over and above the use of speed limits
maybe appropriate if it is considered that approach speeds to a particular hazard are excessive, and as
such a potential accident risk exists and warning signs or similar are not sufficient on their own to
reduce the speed of approaching vehicles, or provide adequate warning.

5.4.2.3 Additional speed control facilities should only be used in unusual situations where conventional
warning devices would not achieve the desired results.

5.4.2.4 It is very important that any additional speed control device proposed to be used is appropriate for the
type of road under consideration.

5.4.2.5 Certain additional speed control facilities mentioned will generate additional noise or cause vibrations
in vehicles, and it will be necessary to ensure that these will not cause annoyance or any danger to
arise.

5.4.3 Road Humps

5.4.3.1 A road hump is a raised device having a part circular shape of height not more than 75mm, installed
across the full width of the carriageway at right angles to the direction of flow and when driven across
at speeds generally in excess of 15-20 km/h causes discomfort to occupants of the vehicle. The
objective being to limit speeds to less than 20 km/h.

5.4.3.2 If road humps are installed on public roads careful attention must be given to their location, and that
they are properly signed in order to ensure that Government cannot be held responsible should an
accident or damage to a vehicle occur.

5.4.3.3 In respect of any private roads, if road humps are required their design should follow the advice in this
section. However, this advice should not in any way be taken as approval by the Transport Department
for the provision of road humps on roads, and any road humps so installed remain in all aspects the
responsibility of the Department or organisation installing them.

5.4.3.4 The cross section and dimensions of a road hump should conform to the dimensions given in Diagram
5.4.3.1. The hump should be installed across the full width of the road with 450mm wide flat channel
allowed on each kerbside for drainage.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 5.4.3.1 : CROSS SECTION AND HUMP DIMENSIONS

5.4.3.5 Road humps maybe appropriate for two way 2-lane roads of width not greater than 10m and subject to
a speed limit of 50 km/h. However on two way 3 or 4 lane roads and one way streets the use of road
humps is not advisable because of the possible dangers of vehicles overtaking one another on or near
the humps. On any road subject to a speed limit greater than 50 km/h road humps should never be used.

5.4.3.6 A road hump installation may comprise either a single hump or a series of humps up to 20 in number.
For locations where a series of road humps are used the following is applicable.

(i) Spacing between consecutive humps should be not less than 50m nor more than 150m.

(ii) On roads which have gradients of more than 10% the maximum spacing should be reduced
to 70m.

(iii) A series of road humps should not extend for more than 1 km.
 December 2023 Edition

5.4.3.7 With regard to the siting of road hump installations, they should generally not be located, other than in
special circumstances :

(i) Within 8m of a road junction.

(ii) Within 18m of the tangent point of a bend with an inner kerb radius of less than 50 metres
and which requires a vehicle to change direction by more than 45 degrees.

(iii) On the crossing itself, or within 30m of the crossing or within the limits of the zebra
controlled area whichever is the greater.

(iv) Within 70m either side of a signal controlled crossing.

(v) Within 50m of a cautionary crossing place.

(vi) On or within 20m of a light rail road crossing or similar, the 20m being measured from the
running rail of the track nearest the hump.

(vii) Within 25m of the nearest part of a structure over a road of which any part is 6.5m or less
above the surface of the carriageway.

(viii) Within 20m of any fire hydrant positioned along the footway of the road.

(ix) Where street lighting which operates throughout the hours of darkness is not available, and
preferably a lighting column should be within 5m of any hump.

(x) Opposite any run-in, or any position where they might interfere with access to the run-in.

(xi) Over any manhole cover, or where they might interfere with access to public utility
apparatus.

(xii) On or within 25m of any road carrying structure, such as a bridge, subway or culvert, in
order to avoid the risk of structural damage occurring because of the increase in impact
loading and vibration.

(xiii) In or within 25m of any tunnel.

(xiv) Within 20m of any parking place.

(xv) Within 20m of a bus stop sign or within 10m of the bus stop road markings 1047 and 1048,
or the public light bus or taxi stand marking 1049.

(xvi) Within 20m of the summit of a gradient of more than 10%.

5.4.3.8 Road humps should not normally be installed on roads forming part of a public transport route, because
of the possible delay and discomfort caused to passengers. However if it is agreed after consultation
with the appropriate public transport company or companies to install road humps, the height of any
road hump should not be greater than 75mm.
 December 2023 Edition

5.4.3.9 It is generally advisable, in order to ensure vehicle speeds are not excessive when approaching a road
hump, that the road where humps are installed incorporate wherever possible one or more of the
following features :

(i) Vehicles enter the road through a junction where they have to change direction by not less
than 70 degrees with an inner turning radius of not more than 25m.

(ii) There is a bend along the road which changes the direction of vehicles by not less than 70
degrees with an inner kerb radius of not more than 25m.

(iii) The road is a cul-de-sac.

(iv) Access is restricted to certain types of vehicles only.

(v) The road does not provide a through route between major roads.

(vi) Side road junctions along the humped road are generally at right angles to the humped
road.

5.4.3.10 If the road under consideration does incorporate one or more of the features referred to in paragraph
5.4.3.9 then to further ensure that approach speeds are not excessive it is suggested that road humps
should be located at a distance from the feature in accordance with the following :

(i) At or about 30m of the entry junction.

(ii) Approximately 30m beyond a horizontal bend, though this may need to be increased
depending on whether the road hump warning traffic sign 539 can be located satisfactorily
with sufficient visibility distance.

(iii) Approximately 30m from the closed end or turning area of a cul-de-sac, so that vehicles
coming from that direction are not encouraged to increase their speed substantially.

(iv) Approximately 30m from the point where the restriction on vehicle access applies.

5.4.3.11 The use of road humps on roads with steep gradients is not recommended as in the uphill direction
slower vehicles can find them difficult to negotiate and under adverse weather conditions in both
directions of travel they are potentially dangerous.

5.4.3.12 It is relevant that noise will be generated when vehicles pass over the humps and vehicles such as
empty or lightly laden goods vehicles can be a considerable nuisance in this respect, and this should be
taken into account before road humps are installed.

5.4.3.13 Road markings in accordance with Diagram 5.4.3.2 must be laid at the approaches to a road hump,
using suitable reflective material.

5.4.3.14 The warning line pattern is that generally associated with higher speed roads but is used to ensure that
warning line mark can be laid across the road hump.

5.4.3.15 The warning lines should commence from at least the point where the warning sign, traffic sign 539
"Road Hump or Series of Road Humps Ahead", is erected, and in the case where a road hump is
situated within 30m of a road junction, the warning line pattern should commence from the junction.

5.4.3.16 If there are stopping restrictions where humps are installed the edge line markings can be omitted, as
the appropriate yellow line markings can substitute for these.
 December 2023 Edition

5.4.3.17 Traffic sign 539 "Road Hump or Series of Road Humps Ahead" should, subject to paragraph 5.4.3.18
be generally placed approximately 45m in advance of a road hump, or where a series of road humps are
used in advance of the first or leading road hump, and the sign should have a minimum clear visibility
distance of approximately 60m.

5.4.3.18 Where a road hump or series of humps commences at or within 50m of a junction, the traffic sign
should be erected not closer than 5m and not greater than 15m from that junction.

5.4.3.19 Where a series of road humps are used, the supplementary plate 784, "For 1 km", or a suitable
equivalent, should be used in conjunction with the traffic sign, to indicate the extent of the series of
humps.

5.4.3.20 It is not necessary to use intermediary warning signs with a series of humps, other than when a side
road junction occurs within the series. In these locations the traffic sign should be erected without
supplementary plate, traffic sign 784, at the normal siting distance in accordance with paragraph
5.4.3.17, if this is possible, or if not in accordance with paragraph 5.4.3.18.
 December 2023 Edition

5.4.3.21 Diagram 5.4.3.3 shows an example of a road hump installation.

DIAGRAM 5.4.3.2 : ROAD MARKINGS FOR ROAD HUMP INSTALLATIONS

DIAGRAM 5.4.3.3 : ROAD HUMP INSTALLATION

5.4.4 Transverse Yellow Bar Markings

5.4.4.1 This type of "additional speed control device", consists of 90 No. markings, 600mm in width laid at
right angles to the carriageway over a 400m length, with the spacing between successive markings
becoming progressively smaller as the hazard is approached. A modified pattern of transverse yellow
bar markings is introduced along deceleration lanes leading to slip roads of roads with speed limits of
70 km/h or above to alert motorists of the change in speed limit.

5.4.4.2 The effect of the markings is to distort the driver's perception as to the actual speed being travelled thus
creating the impression that the vehicle is seemingly "speeding up" and so encouraging the driver to
slow down.

5.4.4.3 This type of "additional speed control device" can be used on high speed approaches to roundabouts,
toll booth, slip roads etc.
 December 2023 Edition

5.4.4.4 Transverse yellow bar markings should only be considered for road sections which meet all the
following requirements:

(i) single carriageway with one way traffic or dual carriageway roads;

(ii) being subject to a speed limit of not less than 70 km/h; and

(iii) being preceded by at least 1 km of single carriageway with one way traffic or 1 km of dual
carriageway, with no major intersections or severe bends before the start of the markings
for either situation.

5.4.4.5 The markings should be used at sites where they can contribute positively to safety. In general, such
markings should not be used on main carriageway as a device for warning of lowering speed limit or
for speed control, unless where accident statistics indicate that speeding or speed misjudgement was a
predominant factor of the traffic accidents and endorsement by the respective Chief Traffic Engineer
should be obtained prior to its use. For markings already being used along main carriageways, the
Chief Traffic Engineers should critically review whether they can meet the above criteria and are really
necessary.

5.4.4.6 Details of the actual marking and the setting out procedures are given in Volume 3, Chapter 5 and
should be followed. Modifications to the arrangement to obtain a shorter length of markings will not
achieve the desired effect and therefore is generally not recommended. However where there is
insufficient length for the full set of markings to be laid on a slip road, some reduction is acceptable,
but there should be at least 50 No. of the transverse marks, i.e. D1 to D50, in accordance with Table
5.6.5.1 of Volume 3, Chapter 5.

5.4.4.7 The markings must be laid in a suitable durable reflective material, and it is relevant to note that
assuming a two lane approach some 360 square metres to 400 square metres of material will be
required. Because of the large amount of material used the initial cost of providing the markings will be
relatively high. To remain effective, replacement will be required every two to three years, and on
some roads even more frequently. Therefore, it is essential to justify this expense by properly
demonstrating the usefulness of the markings at any particular location.

5.4.4.8 To assist surface water drainage, each end of the bar should be terminated about 100mm from the edge
of the carriageway or the edge line marking if provided. Bars should not be extended across hard strip
or hard shoulders as this would give the impression that these are traffic lanes.

5.4.5 Rumble Areas

5.4.5.1 Rumble areas are patches of rough coarse road surface which produce aural and tactile stimuli inside a
vehicle with the intention of alerting drivers to a particular hazard ahead.

5.4.5.2 Research in the UK TRRL Report 800 has however indicated that although these devices may reduce
the number of accidents occurring at a particular hazard they do not necessarily reduce the approach
speed of vehicles, and therefore if the latter is required these type of devices may not be appropriate.

5.4.5.3 Appropriate material for the patches has found to be 13-19mm roadstone set onto the road surface
using epoxy resin, and further details of this can be found in TRRL Report 800.

5.4.5.4 Six patches should normally be used to form the complete rumble area, which should normally end at
least 100m before the hazard.

5.4.5.5 Rumble areas are generally only appropriate for two way 2-lane carriageways because of possible
dangers that might occur with vehicles overtaking and simultaneously passing over the patches,
however they have been used in other countries on a dual carriageway approach to a round about.
 December 2023 Edition

5.4.5.6 It is only necessary to lay patches on the approach lane to the hazard and not the full width of the
carriageway or carriageways as vehicles in the opposite direction are proceeding away from the hazard.
However this can in the case of single carriageway roads sometimes lead to vehicles crossing over onto
the adjacent lane for opposing traffic in order to avoid the rumble areas, and therefore care has to be
taken as to the siting of rumble areas that there is adequate visibility. Alternatively it maybe
appropriate to consider the use of double white lines to confine vehicles to their lanes.

5.4.5.7 The precise method of determining the length of the patches and the spaces between can be found in
TRRL Report 800, which assumes a linear deceleration between points 250m and 100m before the
hazard and calculating the positions and lengths of the patches accordingly. However conditions in the
Territory are such that uniform speeds can generally be assumed. Based on this assumption Table
5.4.4.1 gives the length of the patches and spaces between them for various 85th percentile approach
speeds.

Table 5.4.4.1
Patch Lengths and Spacing
85th percentile speed Patch Length Space between patched Rumble strip Length
(km/h) (m) (m) (m)
60 5.69 10.96 100
70 7.08 12.36 116.64
80 8.47 13.75 133.3
90 9.9 15.1 150

5.4.5.8 Using Table 5.4.4.1 appropriate patch lengths can be obtained by rounding the actual 85th percentile
speed to the nearest 85th percentile speed given in the Table. The first patch is positioned at 100m from
the hazard with the five other patches spaced in accordance with the distances given in Table 5.4.4.1.
Some adjustment of the first patch can be made where it is considered appropriate, i.e. because of the
presence of a bend or similar but this adjustment should not generally result in the patch nearest to the
hazard being located closer than 80m or farther away than 150m. Further patches can also be added if
considered appropriate but this should not generally result in more than eight patches being used.

5.4.5.9 On the approach to the rumble area, traffic sign 434, “Uneven road” should be erected in accordance
with Table 2.2.2.1, of Chapter 2, Volume 3. It may also be appropriate to use the supplementary plate,
traffic sign, 784, or equivalent, indicating the distance over which the area extends.

5.4.5.10 Noise can be generated by the rumble areas and the possible effect of this will need to be evaluated if
there are any residential developments, Hospitals or Schools, adjacent to the road.

5.4.5.11 It should also be noted that the cost of installation and subsequent maintenance of rumble areas can be
relatively high, and therefore it is necessary to ensure that this expense is justified before any rumble
areas are agreed to.

5.4.6 Rumble Strips

5.4.6.1 Rumble strips are a further aural and tactile warning device very similar to rumble areas, but rather
than broad patches consist of narrow strips placed at regular intervals, normally used on single
carriageway roads, but may in certain circumstances be appropriate on dual carriageway roads.
 December 2023 Edition

5.4.6.2 Various types of material have been used including raised concrete strips, but these are not
recommended. However, strips formed from 13mm-19mm road stone chippings set onto the road
surface by using epoxy resin have had some degree of success and are generally recommended where it
is considered that rumble strips should be provided.

5.4.6.3 The rumble strips formed from roadstone chippings should be 1m wide spaced at intervals of 7m apart,
with at least 20 No. being used, and laid only on the approach to the hazard.

5.4.6.4 The location of the rumble strips should be in advance of any warning sign warning of the hazard and
generally not closer than 30m to such a sign.

5.4.6.5 Rumble strips like rumble areas do not necessarily reduce the approach speed of vehicles, and in fact
evidence is that only slight reductions in speed are obtained. However they do act a "wake up" device,
which does alert drivers to the hazard ahead and in this respect have been found to reduce accidents.

5.4.6.6 Rumble strips can cause problems in respect of the noise generated and the vibration effect caused. In
the case of the former careful consideration must be given regarding the use of rumble strips if there
are residential developments or hospitals or schools nearby, particularly if unladen goods vehicles are
likely to use the route as these can be the worst offenders. In respect of the vibration effect these can
cause goods to be dislodged, and given that many goods vehicle operators do not pay proper attention
to the loading of their vehicles it may not be advisable to use rumble strips on route heavily used by
these vehicles.

5.4.6.7 Rumble strips of whatever type should not be used in marginal strips or hard shoulders to warn of
adjacent barrier fences. Apart from the fact they interfere with the drainage and collect rubbish, it is far
safer to leave the marginal strip vacant of any kind of obstruction. Additionally in the event of a
vehicle breaking down there is less likelihood of the vehicle being moved onto the marginal strip
because of the obstruction caused by the rumble strips. Also it is likely to cause occupants of the
vehicle to walk along the carriageway rather than the marginal strip to avoid the rumble strips.

5.4.6.8 The provision of narrow transverse rumble strips to separate a carriageway from an adjacent tram lane
or similar, or to separate merging/diverging carriageways is not recommended, as these are of doubtful
value and may in fact increase the potential for an accident to occur rather than decrease it. It is also
relevant that they do not actually prevent a vehicle straying onto the supposedly "protected" area and
depending on the type of rumble strip and the type of vehicle they could cause the vehicle to be trapped
in that area even if only momentarily. These types of rumble strips can also be potentially dangerous to
cyclists and motor cyclists.

5.4.6.9 At the start of the rumble strips, described in paragraphs 5.4.6.2 and 5.4.6.3 traffic sign 434 "Uneven
road" should be erected in accordance with Table 2.2.2.1 of Chapter 2, Volume 3, together with the
supplementary plate, traffic sign 784, indicating the distance over which the rumble strips extend.

5.4.6.10 As with rumble areas, drivers on the approaches to rumble strips may in order to avoid them, travel on
the offside of the road where strips have not been laid. If this is likely to cause a problem the use of
double white lines to prevent this may need to be considered.

5.4.6.11 As with rumble areas, rumble strips can be relatively expensive to install and maintain and therefore it
is necessary to ensure that this expense is fully justified before agreeing to the installation of rumble
strips.
 December 2023 Edition

5.5 Public Transport On-street Stopping Places

5.5.1 Detailed Design Requirements

5.5.1.1 The detailed design requirements and dimensions for all types of public transport on-street stopping
places are given in the various chapters of Volume 9.

5.5.1.2 The purpose of this section is merely to bring to the attention of the designer the various facilities that
may need to be considered.

5.5.2 General Considerations

5.5.2.1 The necessity to provide on-street public transport stopping places will depend very much on the type
of highway scheme that is being designed, but early consultation with the appropriate Transport
Operations Divisions of the Transport Department should be made to ascertain whether any or all of
the following are required :

(i) Franchised Bus Stopping Places;

(ii) PLB Stands or Stopping Places;

(iii) Taxi Stands;

(iv) Non-franchised Bus Stopping Places.

5.5.2.2 On-street public transport stopping places should not normally be provided on Trunk Road, Primary
Distributor Roads and Rural Roads having no frontage access. Consideration will need to be given as
to where appropriate and convenient stopping places can be located adjacent to these routes.

5.5.2.3 Bus stopping places should normally not be provided on slip roads as this can interfere with the
movement of other traffic, and the presence of pedestrians along these roads where traffic speeds are
still relatively high may be detrimental to road safety. However, in certain situation there may be no
alternative other than to locate the bus stop along a slip road. In these cases although each situation will
need to be considered separately it will be important to ensure that the following points are taken into
account :

(i) That buses do not stop on the running carriageway;

(ii) That buses emerging from the bus stop can do so safely, and in this respect that the driver
of the bus can adequately see through his rear mirror vehicles approaching in the stream the
bus is to be driven into;

(iii) That pedestrians can safely reach and leave the bus stop area, preferably without crossing
the slip road at grade;

(iv) That pedestrians can safely wait at the bus stop and are discouraged from wandering onto
the slip road.
 December 2023 Edition

5.5.2.4 In terms of providing convenient stopping places for franchised buses adjacent to high speed roads,
consideration should be given early in the design stage as to whether bus only slip roads, perhaps as a
link between the main slip roads can be provided. However such facilities should not be provided for
red minibuses and any stopping places for these should be situated away from any slip roads or major
junctions.

5.5.2.5 Taxi and Public Light Bus stands will normally only be appropriate for categories of road of local
distributor road status or less.
 December 2023 Edition

5.6 Landscaping

5.6.1 General

5.6.1.1 Considerable benefit can be obtained in terms of the general appearance, and lessening the impact of a
highway project scheme on the surrounding environment by the use of landscaping techniques.
Planting, if properly designed, can reduce visual impacts such as visual intrusion, monotony and glare.
It can also help to break down noxious gas emitted from vehicles. In addition, landscape earth bunds
can serve as noise mitigation measure. Furthermore, landscape planting can be used to create a green
environment for pedestrians by creating visual interest, reducing temperature of roads by providing
shade and absorbing radiation from the sun, enhancing humidity of the air etc. The planning and design
of pedestrianisation scheme are covered in TPDM Volume 6 Chapter 10.

5.6.1.2 Early inclusion of landscaping requirement both in the feasibility study of a road project and at the
planning/design stage is necessary if the full benefits of suitable landscaping are to be obtained.
Landscape works which may include tree planting should be designed as an integral part of the
transport corridor. Any additional land provision for landscaping may be identified and allowed for.
The planting area shall be free of disturbance from underground utilities. Furthermore, tree
preservation should be thoroughly considered at the planning/design stage of the works.

5.6.1.3 Consultation with the relevant body should also be carried out in respect of any landscaping adjacent to
overhead cables of tram, or vehicles of the MTR Corporation Limited.

5.6.2 Aspects Affecting Highway Design and Operations

5.6.2.1 It is beyond the scope of this manual to give landscaping design details. However, landscaping should
be provided with full consideration of highway design and just as importantly road safety. Wherever
possible, access to the landscaped areas from the carriageway of the expressway should be avoided.

5.6.2.2 Planting should be provided in areas where they do not interfere with the sight line and visibility
requirements in respect of the following aspects :

(i) Volume 2, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.5 for sightlines along a road;

(ii) Volume 2, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.8 for visibility splays at junctions;

(iii) Volume 2, Chapter 4, Section 4.5.12 for visibility on and at the approaches to
roundabouts;

(iv) Volume 2 Chapter 6, Section 6.4.2 for visibility envelope for road side signs; and

(v) Volume 3, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.5 for visibility of directional signs.

On the central reserve of a dual carriageway approach to a roundabout and the central island of
roundabout with diameter less than 10m where tree planting is restricted for preservation of
visibility, groundcovers, turf or low shrubs can be planted. In some cases, it may be acceptable to
plant a small upright tree/palm with narrow trunks. If future growth of any plants will interfere with
sight lines, the planting should be initially set far enough back to ensure that they will not cause any
interference problem.

5.6.2.3 It is important that any planting does not obscure traffic signs and light signals. Whilst obviously
arrangements can be made for cutting back overhanging branches it is preferable that account of this is
taken in the design stage and planting should be provided sufficiently away from the traffic signs and
light signals with the clear visibility distances given in Chapters 2 and 3 of Volume 3.
 December 2023 Edition

5.6.2.4 For expressway and other high speed roads, only such low plant can be planted within the triangular
visibility envelope in front of all road side signs to ensure that the signs can be clearly read by
approaching traffic. The visibility distances for directional signs and the visibility envelope are given in
Chapter 6 Section 6.4.2. It is also important that the planting does not hinder the operation of speed
enforcement cameras and traffic surveillance equipment/facilities, such as CCTV cameras, automatic
incident detectors, police observation spots etc.

5.6.2.5 The safe operation of the road as well as the method of maintaining any planting or other elements
associated with landscaping should be considered at the design stage. In this respect, the maintenance
and/or tree felling authorities for landscape hardworks and softworks should be consulted on the
proposals before they are implemented and preferably during the design process.

5.6.2.6 Lane closure for general road maintenance and cleansing is regularly carried out by Highways
Department for primary distributors and high speed roads. The horticultural maintenance authority may
also take this opportunity to carry out the planting maintenance works.

5.6.2.7 In the planting design for central reserve, visibility shall not be interfered and the width of central
reserve shall be suitably widened if necessary to provide sufficient space for the plants to grow to their
full size without encroaching on the carriageway. If future growth of plants will interfere with sight
lines, the planting should be initially set far enough back to ensure that they will not cause any
interference problem. Watering of plants from the fast lane will not be permitted as it will cause traffic
disruption. Therefore, an automatic irrigation system for watering should be installed unless the type of
planting does not require watering to avoid maintenance vehicles having to stop on the carriageway.
Alternative access must be provided to the central reserve or arrangements made for the utilisation of
cyclic lane closure. In this respect it may be possible to provide a pedestrian access for personnel from
an elevated road or footbridge spanning over the carriageway in question. Care must also be taken to
ensure that on curved sections of road, any planting in the central reserve does not obscure forward
visibility for traffic in the fast lane, and if to achieve the required safe stopping distance it is necessary
that only low shrubs or small upright tree/palm with narrow trunks can be planted on the central
reserve within the sight line envelope.

5.6.2.8 If tree planting is planned for verges, embankment, cuttings or similar, along Trunk Roads,
expressways or Primary Distributor Roads or Rural Roads, it will be necessary to provide a piped water
supply so that any watering required for the establishment of the trees can be taken from this supply
rather than water tankers parked at the side of the road. However, the piped water supply is considered
not necessary for small isolated planting areas, such as toe planters to slopes and remote rural areas, or
hydroseeded areas or native woodland planting for which water supply from natural rainfall should be
sufficient.

5.6.2.9 Where planting is agreed in respect of verges on expressways, Trunk Roads and Primary Distributor
Roads, the 3m verge incorporating a marginal strip and provided in accordance with Section 3.4.9 of
Volume 2 Chapter 3, must be kept clear of all trees, shrubs, hedges or similar, as this area is required
for vehicles to pull off in the event of a breakdown.
 December 2023 Edition

5.6.2.10 On slip roads or flyovers, because of the tight geometry usually employed, it is not desirable from a
road safety point of view for vehicles to be parked or personnel to be working from the carriageway,
and if planting adjacent to these is required consideration must be given as to how these actions can be
avoided in respect of any future maintenance operations before such planting is agreed.

5.6.2.11 Landscaping designs should ensure, as far as possible, that any proposed planting or other landscape
features and any subsequent growth of the plants would not induce severe interference and disruption
to existing road lighting, CCTVs and Red Light Cameras etc, and their subsequent operation and
maintenance. If the existing road lighting is being shaded by the subsequent growth of plants, the
maintenance agents for trees or light poles should carry out appropriate measure to rectify the
situations. It can be in the form of proper tree works to lift the tree canopy or to remove branches
causing disruption, or modification and relocation of the existing light pole.

5.6.2.12 Where it is accepted that the maintenance of any planting or other landscape features, has to be
achieved from the carriageway, it is imperative that the advice on the signing and other procedures in
the Code of Practice for the Lighting, Signing and Guarding of Road Works is followed, and account
of this is taken in the planning of maintenance programmes. In the case of expressways, this will entail
the closure of a lane or lanes if vehicles are to be stopped on the carriageway. Failure to follow the
procedures may prejudice the safety of personnel engaged in maintenance work and may also make
them liable to prosecution. Consultation with the Police and the Highways and Transport Departments
is also required where works are to be carried out on or from the carriageway.

5.6.2.13 In landscaping design, the effects of planting and its subsequent growth on vehicular traffic should be
considered in conjunction with pedestrian traffic. Raised planters adjacent to footway can provide a
very attractive feature and improved pedestrian environment, however additional footway width should
be provided to allow for any shrubs or bushes in the planters over the footway as they will reduce the
effective footway width. For more details, refer to Volume 6 Chapters 8 and 10. To ensure that the
planters in the vicinity of crossings will not obscure pedestrians, in particular children, from the view
of approaching vehicle drivers, nor interfere sight lines of pedestrians to such vehicles, the overall
height of the planters including shrubs should not exceed 0.5m within 30m on the approach to a
crossing.

5.6.2.14 Landscaping designs on highway structures should ensure that any planting or subsequent growth of
plants would not affect the integrity of the structures nor affect their inspection and maintenance.
Except landscape plantings which have been properly considered in the design stage, only creepers
grown on dedicated frames and small shrubs in portable planters are allowed on highway structures.
Direct placement of soil onto structural elements which are not designed for this use must be avoided
as they will obstruct the inspection and maintenance of highway structures. Particular attention must be
paid to root growth and irrigation seepage that are detrimental to the well-being of structural elements
which are not installed with suitable protections.

5.6.2.15 For expressways, consideration must be given when landscape proposals include the planting of trees,
that future growth will not result in them becoming a substantial obstruction which would necessitate
the provision of protective barrier fences. In this respect, groundcovers, turf, low shrubs or other
suitable species may be considered to be planted within 5m from the rear of the shoulder.

5.6.2.16 Landscape designs which require frequent and regular maintenance whether by persons on foot or in
slow moving vehicles, increases the risk to operatives and other road users, whatever warning signing
procedures are adopted, and must therefore be avoided, if possible.
 December 2023 Edition

5.6.3 Guidelines for Considering Tree Planting Proposal

5.6.3.1 Tree planting proposals should be considered flexibly to promote greening opportunity whilst ensuring
road safety. The following serve as a checklist only and the traffic engineering requirements should be
checked for each tree planting location :
(i) Trees should be planted clear of traffic light signals and/or traffic signs to ensure their
visibility. Furthermore, they should not be planted in such locations as to hinder the
operation and maintenance of speed enforcement cameras and traffic surveillance
equipment/facilities, such as CCTV cameras, automatic incident detectors, police
observation spots, etc.
(ii) Trees should be planted at least 5m (measured along the carriageway) away from the
approach side of a pedestrian crossing, run-in or a bus stop.
(iii) Trees should be planted at least 10m (measured along the carriageway) away from a road
junction.
(iv) A minimum lateral clearance of 500mm should be maintained between the outside part of
the tree trunk including tree guard and kerbside. This dimension should be increased to
1.0m for high speed roads with a design speed or speed limit of 70 km/h or above.
(v) Adequate footpath width should be maintained to cater for pedestrian traffic. Please refer to
Volume 2 Chapter 3 Section 3.4.11 for the minimum width of clear footpath to be
maintained.
(vi) For avenue/street tree planting the trees should normally be spaced at a minimum distance
of 5m from centre to centre. However, such requirement is not applicable if the trees are
planted at the back of footpath or in the central reservation.
(vii) Partial overhang of tree planting should have a minimum height clearance of 5.5m.
Overhang on footpath and cycle track should have a minimum height of 2.5m.
(viii) Trees planted within visibility splays should be selected with a high canopy and slender
trunk to ensure that only minimal obstruction of driver vision is effected by the stem.
(ix) Trees should be planted at least 5m from existing street lighting to avoid shading effect.
(x) Agreement should be obtained from the relevant maintenance authority for the future
maintenance of tree, including trimming of branches, felling and transplanting if necessary
due to traffic management schemes. In this respect, Development Bureau Technical
Circular (Works) No. 6/2015 (or updated versions) can be referred.
5.6.3.2 Tree planting, including small canopy trees, upright tree/palm with narrow trunks, turf, groundcovers
or low shrubs, is allowed along kerbside as long as they will not cause sightline and visibility
problems. Alternatively, trees can be planted away from the kerb, such as at the back of footpath.
5.6.3.3 Trees should not normally be planted in areas which will be affected by planned road improvements in
the foreseeable future unless they are transplantable or in containers. However, temporary landscape
that may consist of hydroseeding and/or tree/shrub planting may be required to mitigate the potential
landscape and visual impacts. The scope of temporary landscape works would be advised by the
relevant authority on a case by case basis. The authority responsible for the new works/development
shall be responsible for the application for the removal of the trees when the need arises in future.
 December 2023 Edition

5.7 Lighting and Drainage

5.7.1 Lighting

5.7.1.1 Adequate lighting must be provided to all public roads. The advice of the Lighting Division of
Highways Department on the design of lighting should be obtained.

5.7.1.2 Lighting columns are best located at the back of the footpath or verge to reduce obstruction and give
maximum and give maximum clearance.

5.7.2 Drainage

5.7.2.1 Adequate drainage of pavement and storm water must be provided and the advice of Highways
Department (or the maintaining authority if not HyD) should be obtained on exclusive highway
drainage, and that of Drainage Services Department for carrier drains or main drainage.
 December 2023 Edition

TPDM Volume 2 Chapter 6 – Expressways

6.1 References

1. Transport Planning Design Manual Volume 3, Chapter 3 - Directional Signs

2. Transport Planning Design Manual Volume 2 Chapters 2, 3 and 4

3. Highways Department, Road Surface Requirements for High Speed Roads, Road Note 5, 1983

4. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, Road Geometry: Highway Link Design, Departmental

Standard TD 9/93

5. FREEMAN FOX, WILBER SMITH AND ASSOCIATES, Hong Kong Long Term Road Study

6. MAUNSELL CONSULTANTS ASIA, Comprehensive Transport and Surveillance Study 1976

7. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, Withdrawal of Motorway Design Memorandum,

Departmental Advice Note TA 26/81

8. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, Police Observation Platforms on Motorways, Departmental

Advice Note TA 66/95

9. Report of the Working Sub-group of WITSS, Expressway Legislation 1986

10. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, Cross Sections and Headroom, Departmental Standard TD
27/86

11. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, Mobile or Short Duration Static Lane Closures Using
Vehicle Mounted Signs, Departmental Advice Note TA 55/87

12. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, Mobile or Short Duration Static Lane Closures Using
Vehicle Mounted Signs, Departmental Standard TD 29/87

13. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, Treatment of Gaps in Central Reserve Safety Fences,
Departmental Advice Note TA 45/85

14. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, Highway Features: Roadside Features, Departmental

Advice Note TA 57/87

15. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, Junctions: Layout of Grade Separated Junctions,

Departmental Standard TD 22/92

16. Highways Department Technical Circular No. 29/97

17. Highways Department Technical Circular No. 5/91

18. Highways Department, Code of Practice for the Lighting, Signing and Guarding of Road Works
 December 2023 Edition

6.2 Introduction

6.2.1 General

6.2.1.1 Expressways, which will be designated as such under Expressways Legislation, are roads connecting
the main centres of population within the Territory. They must be to dual carriageway standard with
appropriate alignment, and widely spaced grade separated junctions. No frontage access will be
allowed and the provision of intermediate grade separated junctions to allow for specific developments
should not be permitted. Pedestrians, cyclists, learner drivers, hand carts and animals will be prohibited
and all pedestrian cross movements must be fully segregated. The stopping of vehicles, other than in an
emergency or similar, will generally be prohibited and therefore lay bys, or other off road stopping
facilities, should not be provided, except for appropriately spaced police observation platforms and
purpose designed service areas. A hard shoulder should be provided adjacent to the slow lane of each
carriageway throughout the length of the Expressway. The hard shoulder must be of the same
construction as the adjacent carriageway so that it can be utilised as a traffic lane in emergencies or for
maintenance purposes.

6.2.1.2 In the hierarchy of road types referred to Chapter 3 of this Volume, an Expressway may be formed
from a trunk road.

6.2.1.3 At each grade separated junction the roads connecting the Expressway with the minor road system are
referred to as "slip roads".

6.2.1.4 Roads connecting one Expressway with another Expressway are "link roads" and must be designed to
full Expressway standards.

6.2.1.5 An overbridge is a bridge that spans across an Expressway.

6.2.1.6 The near side lane of each carriageway adjacent to the hard shoulder is the "slow lane" whilst the off
side lane of each carriageway next to the central reserve, is the "fast lane". On carriageways having
three or more lanes, the intermediate lanes will be referred to as the "middle lane or lanes".

6.2.1.7 Roads are designated as Expressways only if they meet the required Expressway standards. Roads
should not be incorporated into the Expressway system as isolated sections. Therefore until at least a
major part of it can be designated as an Expressway, such sections should not be included as part of the
network. In this respect a major part should be regarded as, at least, that section of a route connecting
two major areas of population.

6.2.1.8 Route numbering for Expressways must follow the Territory route numbering system as detailed in
Chapter 3 of Volume 3 of this Manual.

6.2.1.9 The provision of bus lanes, exclusively for the use of franchised buses, is not generally appropriate for
Expressways, as these will interfere with weaving movements at junctions and complicate enforcement
in respect of excluding medium and heavy goods vehicles from the fast or outer lane of a three lane
dual carriageway. However, in the event that the movement of public transport is impeded on an
Expressway, an exclusive bus lane is still considered desirable if no alternative solution can be worked
out.
 December 2023 Edition

6.2.1.10 The provision of emergency crossings along Expressways should generally be in accordance with
Section 3.4.8 of Chapter 3 of this Volume. However because of the higher operational speeds
prevailing along these roads, careful consideration should be given to the provision of such facilities, as
the gaps create particular hazards in the respect that they increase the risk of vehicles encroaching onto
the opposite carriageway and that in the event that a vehicle strikes the end piece of any barrier in the
central reservation, serious injury or fatality can result to the occupants of that vehicle. If on
Expressways it is decided that emergency crossings are required they should preferably not be spaced
closer than 3km apart and not be located near or at the bend of the Expressway. It should also be noted
that the standard 10m width is totally inadequate in the event that contra flow working is anticipated,
but it is not appropriate to increase this width to meet this contingency, see Section 3.9.3.
 December 2023 Edition

6.3 Expressway Design Standards

6.3.1 Design Speed

6.3.1.1 The concept and assessment of design speed is set out in Section 3.3.2 of Chapter 3 of this Volume. On
Expressways the elimination of access other than at interchanges, the prohibition of use by pedestrians,
together with the more generous alignment, gives confidence to the driver and higher operating speeds
will result. It is essential therefore that the design speed adopted should be in the highest band possible
for dual carriageways.

6.3.1.2 Table 6.3.1.1 provides details of appropriate design speeds for Expressways in Rural and Urban
situations, for the main route, link roads, and slip roads.

Table 6.3.1.1
Expressway Design Speeds (km/h)
Main Routes Link Roads Slip Roads
Rural Conditions 100 100 80 or above
Urban Conditions 80 or above 80 50 or above

6.3.1.3 With regard to Table 6.3.1.1 the aim should be to adopt the highest design speed possible,
commensurate with economic design. It is not appropriate to vary design speeds along a route because
of localised difficulties, but in these situations consideration should be given to varying particular
design elements such as horizontal curvature or sight distance so that instead of desirable minimum
values, lesser values and if necessary, absolute minimum values are provided. However it is stressed
that at junctions along Expressways, design elements should not be less than desirable minimum values
except where an Expressway passes from rural to urban conditions, and to avoid excessive costs it may
be appropriate to adopt standards less than the desirable minimum to maintain the same design speed
throughout the route. If for any reason it is proposed to depart from the standards given in Table 6.3.1.1
full justification must be provided and approval from the Transport Department must be obtained.

6.3.1.4 In order to provide a surface commensurate with the higher design speeds adopted, Expressways
should normally, but see paragraph 6.3.1.7, have a friction course surfacing, which is an open graded
porous bituminous material described and set out in the Highways Department Road Note 5.

6.3.1.5 The use of friction course surfacing is generally recommended for Expressways as this material has
amongst others the following properties compared with continuously graded bituminous materials :

(i) minimisation of road spray from vehicles during and after raining;

(ii) greatly increased texture depth;

(iii) reduction of the potential for vehicles to aquaplane;

(iv) improved skid resistance at high speeds.

6.3.1.6 The purpose of friction course surfacing is to produce a very permeable material with continuous voids
so that water can percolate into the pavement and disperse towards the drainage systems at the
pavement edge.
 December 2023 Edition

6.3.1.7 It should be noted that friction course is generally suited and applied to free flow conditions with
relatively gentle gradients. It is therefore advisable to omit it on slip roads with gradients or where
there may be queuing and/or stop/start conditions, and free flow conditions cannot be achieved.

6.3.2 Horizontal and Vertical Alignment

6.3.2.1 The standards for horizontal and vertical alignment are set out in Chapter 3 of this Volume. Other than
in the particular circumstances mentioned in paragraph 6.2.1.3, and only if it is absolutely necessary,
radii of horizontal curvature should not be less than R4 for new roads. Similarly for vertical curvature
‘K’ values should not be less than the Desirable Minimum.

6.3.2.2 The enhanced free drainage properties of friction course are best achieved where the carriageway has
both crossfall and longitudinal fall. Sections of road with zero or small gradients should be kept to a
minimum and curves should be phased so that changes in superelevation occur at places where there is
a reasonable longitudinal gradient.

6.3.3 Cross Section

6.3.3.1 Diagrams 6.3.3.1 to 6.3.3.8 illustrate cross sections for Expressways in rural and urban situations, for
the main line and link roads, whilst Diagrams 6.3.3.9 and 6.3.3.10 illustrate cross sections for
Expressway slip roads.

6.3.3.2 The cross sections in Diagrams 6.3.3.1, 6.3.3.2, and 6.3.3.4 to 6.3.3.9, represent, ignoring additional
land that might be required for road signs etc., the desirable minimum cross sections which should be
attained as far as possible.

6.3.3.3 Diagrams 6.3.3.3 and 6.3.3.10 indicate absolute minimum cross sections for both the main line and slip
roads respectively, which may be used in certain circumstances subject to the conditions expressed
below.

6.3.3.4 The dimensions for carriageways, and marginal strips, should be regarded as minimal and should not
be reduced. Two lane carriageways, 7.3m in width, should only be provided on Expressways, other
than along slip roads or link roads, in exceptional circumstances.

6.3.3.5 The 3300mm nearside hard shoulder provides an essential reserve in respect of :

(i) broken down vehicles;

(ii) temporary storage for vehicles following a traffic accident;

(iii) working space for maintenance operations;

(iv) space for traffic police to "pull in" a vehicle;

(v) access for emergency vehicles to accident scenes; and

(vi) temporary lane for traffic when maintenance works is taking place on other lane.

6.3.3.6 Hard shoulders should be provided on all sections of the Expressway including parts :

(i) beneath structures;

(ii) on bridges or viaducts;

(iii) on embankment;

(iv) in cuttings.
 December 2023 Edition

6.3.3.7 The hard shoulder must be kept unobstructed, and in particular kept clear of :

(i) road furniture;

(ii) road lighting columns;

(iii) road signs;

(iv) landscape planting including ground cover;

(v) earth mounding;

(vi) kerbs or raised kerbs;

(vii) open drainage channels; and

(viii) police observation platform.

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.3.1 : RURAL EXPRESSWAY TYPICAL CROSS SECTION ON

EMBANKMENTS
A. WITH LONGITUDINAL ROAD DRAINAGE

B. WITH KERBS AND GULLIES

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: 1. FOR DETAILS OF ROAD STUDS AND MARKINGS SEE VOLUME 3 OF

THIS MANUAL.

2. ADDITIONAL VERGE WIDTH WILL BE NECESSARY TO

ACCOMODATE ROAD SIGNS, AND ROAD FURNITURE, AND MAY
BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE VISIBILITY REQUIREMENTS AND IF
FLAT GROUND IS REQUIRED FOR LANDSCAPING WORKS.

3. VOLUME 2 SECTION 3.9.3 SHOULD BE REFERRED TO FOR

REQUIRED DISTANCE BETWEEN BARRIER FENCE AND SLOPE
EDGE WITH RESPECT DIFFERENT BARRIER FENCE TYPE.

4. ANY KERBS, IF PROVIDED, SHOULD BE POSITIONED ON THE

SAME LINE AS THE BARRIER FENCE.

5. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETRES.

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.3.2 : RURAL EXPRESSWAY

TYPICAL CROSS SECTION IN CUTTINGS
A. WITH LONGITUDINAL ROAD DRAINAGE

B. WITH KERBS AND GULLIES

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: 1. FOR DETAILS OF ROAD STUDS AND MARKINGS SEE VOLUME 3 OF

THIS MANUAL.

2. ADDITIONAL VERGE WIDTH WILL BE NECESSARY TO

ACCOMODATE ROAD SIGNS, AND ROAD FURNITURE, AND MAY
BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE VISIBILITY REQUIREMENTS AND IF
FLAT GROUND IS REQUIRED FOR LANDSCAPING WORKS.

3. VOLUME 2 SECTION 3.9.3 SHOULD BE REFERRED TO FOR

REQUIRED DISTANCE BETWEEN BARRIER FENCE AND SLOPE
EDGE WITH RESPECT DIFFERENT BARRIER FENCE TYPE.

4. ANY KERBS, IF PROVIDED, SHOULD BE POSITIONED ON THE

SAME LINE AS THE BARRIER FENCE.

5. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETRES.

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.3.3 : RURAL EXPRESSWAY CROSS SECTION

WHERE FULL HARD SHOULDERS CANNOT BE PROVIDED
A. WHERE LOCAL DIFFICULTIES PREVENT A FULL HARD
SHOULDER FROM BEING PROVIDED

B. TO BE USED IN EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES ONLY

(NORMALLY ONLY APPLICABLE IN RESPECT OF EXISTING CARRIAGEWAYS)

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: 1. FOR DETAILS OF ROAD STUDS AND MARKINGS SEE VOLUME 3 OF

THIS MANUAL.

2. ADDITIONAL VERGE WIDTH WILL BE NECESSARY TO

ACCOMODATE ROAD SIGNS, AND ROAD FURNITURE, AND MAY
BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE VISIBILITY REQUIREMENTS AND IF
FLAT GROUND IS REQUIRED FOR LANDSCAPING WORKS.

3. VOLUME 2 SECTION 3.9.3 SHOULD BE REFERRED TO FOR

REQUIRED DISTANCE BETWEEN BARRIER FENCE AND SLOPE
EDGE WITH RESPECT DIFFERENT BARRIER FENCE TYPE.

4. ANY KERBS, IF PROVIDED, SHOULD BE POSITIONED ON THE

SAME LINE AS THE BARRIER FENCE.

5. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETRES.

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.3.4 : URBAN EXPRESSWAY

TYPICAL CROSS SECTION ON EMBANKMENTS
A. WITH LONGITUDINAL ROAD DRAINAGE

B. WITH KERBS AND GULLIES

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: 1. FOR DETAILS OF ROAD STUDS AND MARKINGS SEE VOLUME 3 OF

THIS MANUAL.

2. ADDITIONAL VERGE WIDTH WILL BE NECESSARY TO

ACCOMODATE ROAD SIGNS, AND ROAD FURNITURE, AND MAY
BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE VISIBILITY REQUIREMENTS AND IF
FLAT GROUND IS REQUIRED FOR LANDSCAPING WORKS.

3. VOLUME 2 SECTION 3.9.3 SHOULD BE REFERRED TO FOR

REQUIRED DISTANCE BETWEEN BARRIER FENCE AND SLOPE
EDGE WITH RESPECT DIFFERENT BARRIER FENCE TYPE.

4. ANY KERBS, IF PROVIDED, SHOULD BE POSITIONED ON THE

SAME LINE AS THE BARRIER FENCE.

5. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETRES.

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.3.5 : URBAN EXPRESSWAY

TYPICAL CROSS SECTION IN CUTTINGS
A. WITH LONGITUDINAL ROAD DRAINAGE

B. WITH KERBS AND GULLIES

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: 1. FOR DETAILS OF ROAD STUDS AND MARKINGS SEE VOLUME 3 OF

THIS MANUAL.

2. ADDITIONAL VERGE WIDTH WILL BE NECESSARY TO

ACCOMODATE ROAD SIGNS, AND ROAD FURNITURE, AND MAY
BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE VISIBILITY REQUIREMENTS AND IF
FLAT GROUND IS REQUIRED FOR LANDSCAPING WORKS.

3. VOLUME 2 SECTION 3.9.3 SHOULD BE REFERRED TO FOR

REQUIRED DISTANCE BETWEEN BARRIER FENCE AND SLOPE
EDGE WITH RESPECT DIFFERENT BARRIER FENCE TYPE.

4. ANY KERBS, IF PROVIDED, SHOULD BE POSITIONED ON THE

SAME LINE AS THE BARRIER FENCE.

5. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETRES.

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.3.6 : ELEVATED EXPRESSWAY URBAN OR RURAL SITUATION

TYPICAL CROSS SECTION

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: 1. FOR DETAILS OF ROAD STUDS AND MARKINGS SEE VOLUME 3 OF

THIS MANUAL.

2. ADDITIONAL VERGE WIDTH WILL BE NECESSARY TO

ACCOMODATE ROAD SIGNS, AND ROAD FURNITURE, AND MAY
BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE VISIBILITY REQUIREMENTS AND IF
FLAT GROUND IS REQUIRED FOR LANDSCAPING WORKS.

3. VOLUME 2 SECTION 3.9.3 SHOULD BE REFERRED TO FOR

REQUIRED DISTANCE BETWEEN BARRIER FENCE AND SLOPE
EDGE WITH RESPECT DIFFERENT BARRIER FENCE TYPE.

4. ANY KERBS, IF PROVIDED, SHOULD BE POSITIONED ON THE

SAME LINE AS THE BARRIER FENCE.

5. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETRES.

DIAGRAM 6.3.3.7 : EXPRESSWAY IN DEPRESSED ROADWAY

WHERE THERE ARE RETAINING WALLS OR ABUTMENTS OR
SIMILAR URBAN OR RURAL SITUATION

TYPICAL CROSS SECTION

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: 1. FOR DETAILS OF ROAD STUDS AND MARKINGS SEE VOLUME 3.

2. ROADWAY DRAINAGE IN DEPRESSED ROADWAY SECTIONS WILL

NORMALLY BE BY SUMPED GULLIES LOCATED AT THE BACK OF
THE HARD SHOULDER.

3. WIDENING MAY BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE VISIBILITY

REQUIREMENTS AND TO ACCOMODATE ROAD SIGNS AND
STREET FURNITURE.

4. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETRES.

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.3.8 : EXPRESSWAY LINK ROAD DEPRESSED OR ELEVATED

TYPICAL CROSS SECTION

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: 1. FOR DETAILS OF ROAD STUDS AND MARKINGS SEE VOLUME 3.

2. DRAINAGE ON DEPRESSED SECTIONS WILL NORMALLY BE BY

SUMPED GULLIES LOCATED AT THE BACK OF THE HARD
SHOULDER.

3. THE MARGINAL STRIP MAY BE REDUCED TO NOT LESS THAN

500mm FOR 2-LANE URBAN EXPRESSWAY LINK ROADS WHERE
LOCAL DIFFICULTIES EXIST.

4. WIDENING MAY BE NECESSARY TO ACCOMODATE ROAD SIGNS

AND STREET FURNITURE AND TO ACHIEVE VISIBILITY
REQUIREMENTS.

5. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETRES.

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.3.9 : EXPRESSWAY SLIP ROADS

TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS
A. ON EMBANKMENT WITH LONGITUDINAL ROAD DRAINAGE

B. IN CUTTING WITH KERBS AND GULLIES

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: 1. FOR DETAILS OF ROAD STUDS AND MARKINGS SEE VOLUME 3 OF

THIS MANUAL.

2. ADDITIONAL VERGE WIDTH WILL BE NECESSARY TO

ACCOMODATE ROAD SIGNS, AND ROAD FURNITURE, AND MAY
BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE VISIBILITY REQUIREMENTS AND IF
FLAT GROUND IS REQUIRED FOR LANDSCAPING WORKS.

3. VOLUME 2 SECTION 3.9.3 SHOULD BE REFERRED TO FOR THE

NECESSITY OF BARRIER FENCE AT SLOPE TOE.

4. ANY KERBS, IF PROVIDED, SHOULD BE POSITIONED ON THE

SAME LINE AS THE BARRIER FENCE.

5. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETRES.

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.3.10 : EXPRESSWAY SLIP ROADS

WHERE FULL WIDTH HARD SHOULDERS CANNOT BE PROVIDED
(A) WHERE LOCAL DIFFICULTIES PREVENT A FULL HARD SHOULDER FROM BEING
PROVIDED

(B) TO BE USED IN EXCEPTIONAL CRCUMSTANCES ONLY

NOT TO SCALE

NOTES: 1. FOR DETAILS OF ROAD STUDS AND MARKINGS SEE VOLUME 3 OF

THIS MANUAL.

2. ADDITIONAL VERGE WIDTH WILL BE NECESSARY TO

ACCOMODATE ROAD SIGNS, AND STREET FURNITURE, AND MAY
BE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE VISIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.

3. ADDITIONAL VERGE WIDENING FOR LANDSCAPING IS NOT

ACCEPTABLE IF FULL WIDTH HARD SHOULDERS CANNOT BE
PROVIDED.

4. VOLUME 2 SECTION 3.9.3 SHOULD BE REFERRED TO FOR

REQUIRED DISTANCE BETWEEN BARRIER FENCE AND SLOPE
EDGE WITH RESPECT DIFFERENT BARRIER FENCE TYPE.

5. VOLUME 2 SECTION 3.9.3 SHOULD BE REFERRED TO FOR THE

NECESSITY OF BARRIER FENCE AT SLOPE TOE.

6. ANY KERBS, IF PROVIDED, SHOULD BE POSITIONED ON THE

SAME LINE AS THE BARRIER FENCE.

7. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETRES.

 December 2023 Edition

6.3.3.8 It is most desirable that the standard 3300mm hard shoulder width is maintained throughout the
Expressway Network. However whenever this is not possible, this may be reduced to 3000mm, as
shown in Diagrams 6.3.3.3 and 6.3.3.10 to meet local difficulties for both rural and urban conditions.
Any reduction below 3000mm, and never to less than 2500mm, on the main line, including any link
roads, will only be permitted in extenuating circumstances and a full justification will be required as to
why such reduction is necessary. Cost alone should not be regarded as sufficient justification in this
respect.

6.3.3.9 In 'B' in Diagram 6.3.3.10, along slip roads the provision of a marginal strip only may be acceptable,
generally in urban conditions, where exceptional situations prevail which makes the provision of a
shoulder or full hard shoulder highly impractical. In such circumstances a full justification of why only
a nearside marginal strip can be provided must be given.

6.3.3.10 Where, as in Diagrams 6.3.3.3 and 6.3.3.10, the shoulder consists of a hardened verge, this verge
should only be grassed, preferably with height not more than 200mm, but in any case not taller than
300mm. Ground cover plants with sprawling habit such as 'Wedelia Trilobata' must not be used at
hardened verges.

6.3.3.11 The cross sections shown are for typical situations and extra width may be necessary where for
instance, the carriageway crossfall reverses and additional drainage channels are thereby required. Also
the central reserve widths are minimal and if for example traffic signs, other than repeater signs, are
required to be erected on the central reserve, which will need to be of the 1200mm size, to obtain the
normal clearances of 1000mm for this type of road a reserve width of 3200mm will be required. For
isolated signs in extenuating circumstances this may be reduced, but the clearance between the sign and
the edge of the carriageway should never be less than 600mm, which implies a central reserve width of
at least 2400mm.

6.3.3.12 Additionally as mentioned in paragraph 6.3.3.2 the cross sections do not allow for the provision of road
side signs; any visibility splays which might be required; and landscaping. For these latter elements
additional land will be required. If lighting columns are located on the nearside of the road due to
whatever reason, additional land will be required and a barrier fence should be provided as a protection
for the columns. This is particularly relevant to slip roads and link roads, where often road lighting
columns will need to be located on the nearside.

6.3.3.13 Where only a marginal strip is provided along a slip road the taper in respect of the widening to or from
the hard shoulder provided along the main route should be in accordance with Diagram 6.3.3.11.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.3.11 : MARGINAL STRIP TO HARD SHOULDER TAPERS

MERGE LANE

DIVERGE LANE

6.3.4 Drainage Considerations

6.3.4.1 Where longitudinal road drainage of the slotted channel type is to be used, and this is particularly
preferable in flat terrain, the covers of the slotted channels should be laid at the rear of the hard
shoulder.

6.3.4.2 Where drainage is required the kerb should be laid at the rear of the hard shoulder, with gullies located
adjacent to the kerb.

6.3.4.3 Wherever manhole covers are provided, they should be located in the hard shoulder or preferably in the
verge beyond this. This implies that the road pavement drainage carrier drains should also be located
beneath the hard shoulder or verge but where this is not possible the manhole access shaft and hence
the manhole cover should be located within the hard shoulder or as near to it as possible. Heavy duty
manhole covers should always be used, even where they are located within the verge or hard shoulder.

6.3.4.4 Any longitudinal drains placed at or within 3m of the rear of the shoulder should be covered, where for
any reasons this is not possible or not desirable from a maintenance point of view, a barrier fence must
be erected in front of the drain.

6.3.5 Boundary Fences

6.3.5.1 Boundary fences should be located to define the extent of the Expressway and to prevent pedestrians
from inadvertently walking onto the Expressway. They will normally be sited at the top of cuttings or
at the bottom of embankments or at the back of the verge where there are no earthworks.

6.3.5.2 The dimension to the fence from the top or bottom of earthworks should take account of whether or not
a drainage channel is present.

6.3.5.3 The dimensions shown on diagrams 6.3.3.1 to 6.3.3.10 give a guide to the normal positions for
boundary fences but these may need to be varied according to the site conditions.
 December 2023 Edition

6.3.5.4 It is stressed that boundary fences must not be used to deter illegal parking on verges forming part of
the Expressway by locating the fence in the immediate vicinity of the hard shoulder. Apart from the
fact that in this location they will not properly indicate the boundary of the Expressway, they could also
by being so close to the carriageway, constitute a hazard. It also makes difficult access to the verge for
maintenance purposes.

6.3.5.5 In some situations the boundary of the Expressway may be extremely close to the carriageway and a
boundary fence may be required to separate for example an adjacent cycle track from the Expressway.
In these cases the boundary fence should be erected as far away from the edge of the hard shoulder as
possible, providing at least 1000mm clearance between the fence and the hard shoulder. It may also be
necessary to erect a barrier fence immediately in front of the boundary fence to lessen the hazardous
effect of the latter.

6.3.5.6 Details of boundary fences should accord with the Highways Department's current standard drawings
for such fences.

6.3.6 Junctions

6.3.6.1 Junctions on Expressways will always be grade separated. Detailed requirements for the layout of
grade separated junctions are given in Section 4.6 of Chapter 4 of this Volume.

6.3.6.2 Junctions on Expressways should preferably be spaced at about 5km intervals but where circumstances
require a closer spacing, this should not be reduced to below 2km.

6.3.6.3 New junctions giving access onto an existing Expressway should only be permitted to allow an
extension of the Expressway system or to link a primary distributor road to an Expressway. Junctions
or accesses, even when provided with full acceleration and deceleration lanes, just to serve adjacent
developments, however large, should not be permitted. Such developments should be connected via the
minor road network to the Expressway by means of an existing junction.

6.3.6.4 Where it is essential to adopt a close spacing for junctions, particular attention must be paid to the
weaving length between the end of the merge taper and the start of the diverge taper, as detailed in
Section 4.6.10 of Chapter 4 this Volume.

6.3.6.5 Junctions should be designed with the minor road crossing over the major road so that entry slip road
gradients are down towards the major road of the Expressway and exit slip roads are up away from the
major road of the Expressway. This aids the acceleration of vehicles entering the Expressway and
likewise assists their deceleration as they leave.

6.3.6.6 Where large traffic flows with nearly full capacity are joining the mainline in an interchange or
junction, turbulence can occur with short headways and sudden braking. A parallel merge lane should
be provided to increase local capacity.

6.3.6.7 If the joining flows are greater than one lane capacity then an additional lane should normally be added
to the mainline as a lane gain.

6.3.6.8 Any queuing back to rejoin the local network to impede the mainline traffic should be prevented by
providing an auxiliary lane.
 December 2023 Edition

6.3.6.9 Whilst it may be possible to justify lane drops within grade separated junctions on capacity grounds,
the number of lanes through the junction should not be reduced to less than three and lane drops should
not differ by more than one. Furthermore, the Expressway Legislation requires drivers 'to keep to the
left unless overtaking' and thus lane drops will necessitate additional signing and marking. Advice on
this is included in Chapters 2 and 5 respectively of Volume 3.

6.3.6.10 Lane drops do complicate enforcement procedures particularly with regard to the general prohibition
for medium and heavy goods vehicles and buses using the fast lane of a three lane carriageway, as at
the point the lane drop starts the carriageway ceases to be regarded as three lanes. Additionally lane
drops particularly can cause difficulty to drivers on the nearside lane who either have to make a sudden
movement to remain on the main line, or to follow the slip road. Both situations can be the cause of
accidents occurring. Therefore when considering the use of lane drops along Expressways account
must be taken: of the necessity to use gantry signs, and not road side signs; whether the use of a "lane
drop" will create unnecessary difficulties in respect of any future maintenance requirements; and that
all regulations in respect of overtaking, lane prohibitions, and keeping to the left can be adequately
enforced.

6.3.6.11 Junction designs requiring offside slip roads where by the fast lane in effect becomes the slow lane for
vehicles leaving the Expressway should be avoided. Apart from the obvious dangers such designs can
cause because of the necessary weaving involving vehicle travelling at high speed, it also complicates
enforcement in respect of vehicles keeping to the left and heavier vehicles not being permitted to use
the fast lane of a three or more lane carriageway.

6.3.6.12 At an intersection of two Expressways where a carriageway diverges to form two carriageways of
equal status, it will be necessary for vehicles to weave across lanes and the notion of having a fast and
slow lane in the vicinity of these junctions will generally not apply. However it is essential that a
sufficient weaving length is provided for the manoeuvres to be carried out safely, and that adequate
directional signs in the form of gantries are provided.

6.3.6.13 Access to Service Areas or Maintenance Operation Centres should be either off the Expressway by
purpose designed grade separated facilities or from the minor road network adjacent to a grade
separated junction, and further advice on this is contained in Section 6.7.

6.3.6.14 Although the general principles in respect of the design of merging and diverging lanes given in
Sections 4.6.8 and 4.6.9 respectively of Chapter 4 of this Volume will apply to Expressways, the
various dimensions regarding merging and diverging lane lengths will not, as in Sections 4.6.8 and
4.6.9 the dimensions are based on a main line design speed of 100 km/h or less.

6.3.6.15 Diagrams 6.3.6.1 to 6.3.6.7 show the appropriate dimensions and entry and nose taper angles for
Expressway merging and diverging lanes for main line design speeds appropriate to 100 km/h or less.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.6.1 : EXPRESSWAY MERGING LANES ( DESIGN SPEED 100 km/h OR

LESS )
DIRECT ENTRY MERGING LANE (TYPES 1 + 4)

PARALLEL MERGING LANE (TYPES 1 + 4)

NOTES: (i) TYPE 1 SINGLE LANE LINK TO TWO LANE MAIN LINE

(ii) TYPE 4 SINGLE LANE LINK TO THREE LANE MAIN LINE

(iii) SEE ALSO SECTION 4.6.8 OF CHAPTER 4

DIAGRAM 6.3.6.2 : EXPRESSWAY MERGING LANES ( DESIGN SPEED 100 km/h OR

LESS )
SHADOW ISLAND MERGING LANE (TYPE 2 + 5)

NOTES: (i) TYPE 2 TWO LANE LINK TO TWO LANE MAIN LINE

(ii) TYPE 5 TWO LANE LINK TO THREE LANE MAIN LINE

(iii) SEE ALSO SECTION 4.6.8 OF CHAPTER 4

(iv) ONLY USED WHERE DESIGN FLOWS ON MAINLINE ARE LIGHT

AND THERE ARE 3 LANES OR MORE ON MAINLINE
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.6.3 : EXPRESSWAY MERGING LANES ( DESIGN SPEED 100 km/h OR

LESS )
SHADOW ISLAND MERGING LANE (TYPE 3 + 6)

NOTES: (i) TYPE 3 TWO LANE LINK - MAIN LINE TWO INCREASING TO
THREE

(ii) TYPE 6 TWO LANE LINK - MAIN LINE THREE INCREASING

TO FOUR

(iii) SEE ALSO SECTION 4.6.8 OF CHAPTER 4

DIAGRAM 6.3.6.4 : EXPRESSWAY MERGING LANES ( DESIGN SPEED 100 km/h OR

LESS )
ADDITIONAL LANE - NO IMMEDIAFE MERGING (TYPES 7 + 9)

NOTES: (i) TYPE 7 SINGLE LANE LINK - MAIN LINE TWO INCREASING
TO THREE

(ii) TYPE 9 SINGLE LANE LINK - MAIN LINE THREE

INCREASING TO FOUR

(iii) TYPE 8 TWO LANE LINK - MAIN LINE TWO INCREASING TO

FOUR

(iv) SEE ALSO SECTION 4.6.8 OF CHAPTER 4

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.6.5 : EXPRESSWAY DIVERGING LANES ( DESIGN SPEED 100 km/h OR

LESS )
DIRECT DIVERGING LANE (TYPES 1 + 3)

PARALLEL DIVERGING LANE (TYPES 1 + 3)

NOTES: (i) TYPE 1 ONE LANE LINK FROM TWO LANE MAIN LINE

(ii) TYPE 3 ONE LANE LINK FROM THREE LANE MAIN LINE

(iii) SEE ALSO SECTION 4.6.9 OF CHAPTER 4

DIAGRAM 6.3.6.6 : EXPRESSWAY DIVERGING LANES ( DESIGN SPEED 100 km/h OR

LESS )
DIRECT DIVERGING LANES (TYPES 2 + 5)

PARALLEL DIVERGING LANES (TYPES 2 + 5)

NOTES: (i) TYPE 2 TWO LANE LINK FROM TWO LANE MAIN LINE

(ii) TYPE 5 TWO LANE LINK FROM THREE LANE MAIN LINE

(iii) SEE ALSO SECTION 4.6.9 OF CHAPTER 4

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.3.6.7 : EXPRESSWAY DIVERGING LANES ( DESIGN SPEED 100 km/h OR

LESS )
DIRECT DIVERGING LANES (TYPES 4 + 6)

PARALLEL DIVERGING LANES (TYPES 4 + 6)

NOTES: (i) TYPE 4 TWO LANE LINK - MAIN LINE THREE LANES
DECREASING TO TWO LANES

(ii) TYPE 6 TWO LANE LINK - MAIN LINE FOUR LANES

DECREASING TO THREE LANES

(iii) SEE ALSO SECTION 4.6.9 OF CHAPTER 4

6.3.7 Access

6.3.7.1 Access to and from any Expressway should be provided only at the regularly spaced grade separated
junctions, as access at any other location should be prohibited. Direct access off slip roads, which must
be regarded as an integral part of an Expressway, should not for any reason be permitted.

6.3.7.2 Intermediate access, for whatever purpose, must not be allowed, and the boundary fence must be
regularly maintained to ensure that no illegal accesses are created.

6.3.7.3 Before a road can be designated as an Expressway any existing unauthorised accesses must be
effectively curtailed and physically closed up. The same applies to any authorised accesses, such as,
entrances/exits from service roads, bus stops, or similar, which must be removed and/or relocated away
from the Expressway before the road may be considered as an Expressway.

6.3.7.4 Pedestrians and animals are prohibited from using any Expressway. However following a vehicle
breakdown, a driver is permitted to walk along the verge or hard shoulder to reach the nearest
emergency telephone and thus the verge should be designed with this in mind, to discourage the driver
from walking on the carriageway.
 December 2023 Edition

6.4 Permanent Signs and Road Markings

6.4.1 General

6.4.1.1 Detailed information on the size, location and mounting of permanent traffic signs and directional signs
is given in Chapters 2 and 3 of Volume 3 respectively of this manual.

6.4.1.2 The start and end of an Expressway which will generally mean all entry and exit points at the junction
of the slip roads with the minor road network, must be signed by the appropriate Expressway sign as
shown in Diagram 6.4.1.1 to indicate that the legislation pertaining to Expressways applies.

6.4.1.3 The Expressway signs should be located on the nearside verge in the case of single lane slip roads, and
opposite each other on both sides of the carriageway on two-lane slip roads, as shown in Diagram
6.4.1.2.

6.4.1.4 A "NO ENTRY" sign, traffic sign 115, should be mounted on the reverse side of each "END OF AN
EXPRESSWAY" sign, traffic sign 354, to make it clear that traffic must not enter the exit slip road.

6.4.1.5 Expressway confirmation signs should be placed approximately l00m beyond the end of each
acceleration taper. The signs, which must also show the appropriate route number shield, should
always be located singly at the back of the nearside verge, as shown in Diagram 6.4.1.2. Further
information on these confirmatory signs is given in Chapter 3 of Volume 3.

6.4.1.6 If speed limit of slip road is lowered within 400m from the tip of chevron marking, 10 No. of
transverse yellow bar markings of 600mm wide with 5m gap should be provided at the diverge lane of
roads with speed limits of 70 km/h or above as shown in Diagram 6.4.1.3. Provision of these bar
markings should be in accordance to the following:

(i) For direct diverge, the first bar marking should be provided where the lane width is at least
2.5m as shown in Diagram 6.4.1.3(i); and for short diverging lane, bar marking should be
provided in accordance with Diagram 6.4.1.3(ii);

(ii) Traffic sign TS 737 "REDUCE SPEED NOW" should be provided at the start of the bar
marking.

(iii) As for other slip roads where the lowering of speed limit is beyond 400m from tip of
chevron marking, transverse bar marking is not required, as it is similar to the situation of a
main carriageway, and traffic signs 570 and 769 should be adequate as shown in Diagram
6.4.1.3(v).

6.4.1.7 All regulatory and warning traffic signs used along an Expressway must be reflectorised and, other
than for repeater signs, should be of the equivalent 1200mm size.

6.4.1.8 Warning signs used along Expressway should be located assuming the highest speed limit, in
accordance with Table 2.2.2.1 of Chapter 2, Volume 3, that is 250m - 300m in advance of the hazard
and having a minimum clear visibility of 100m. Any supplementary plates used with these signs should
be the largest plate size available, again, in accordance with Table 2.2.2.1 of Chapter 2, Volume 3,
assuming the highest approach speed.
 December 2023 Edition

6.4.1.9 On Expressways, because of the need to maintain an unobstructed shoulder along the nearside of each
carriageway, it is essential that careful consideration is given to the location of permanent road signs at
the design stage. Whilst the smaller repeater signs used for speed limits can usually be accommodated
behind the barrier fence or at points where extra space is available, the larger signs such as 'direction
signs', 'advanced direction signs', main speed limit signs, and the start/end of Expressway signs, will
require specific space to be made available. Guidance on the location of permanent road signs is given
in Diagrams 6.4.1.4 to 6.4.1.6 inclusive, and further advice can be found in Chapters 2 and 3 of
Volume 3.

DIAGRAM 6.4.1.1 : EXPRESSWAY SIGNS

START AND CONTINUATION OF AN EXPRESSWAY
TS 353

END OF AN EXPRESSWAY
TS 354
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.4.1.2 : LOCATION OF EXPRESSWAY SIGNS

 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.4.1.3 : WARNING SIGN AND MARKINGS TO

ALERT MOTORISTS TO REDUCE SPEED AT SLIP ROADS

(i) NORMAL ARRANGEMENT

(ii) ALTERNATIVE ARRANGEMENT WITH SHORT TAPER LENGTH

(iii) PARALLEL DIVERGING LANE

(iv) DIVERGING LANE - LANE DROP ARRANGEMENT

 December 2023 Edition

(v) SPEED LIMIT CHANGE For L > 400m (SIMILAR FOR LANE DROP ARRANGEMENT)

6.4.1.10 Details on the mounting height of traffic signs and directional signs are given in Sections 2.2.3 and
3.2.4, of Chapters 2 and 3, respectively, of Volume 3. However as pedestrians are not allowed on
Expressways, the lower range of mounting heights i.e. 900mm - 1500mm will normally be adopted
and, within this range, 900mm is considered to be the safest and most economic and should be adopted
wherever possible, as shown in Diagrams 6.4.1.4 to 6.4.1.6.

6.4.1.11 The use of galvanised steel sections for sign mountings on Expressways is preferred. Fabrication of
individual sign mounting components should be completed before galvanising and the system designed
to obviate the need for on site welding, thereby minimising future maintenance work.

6.4.1.12 Galvanised sign mountings on Expressways should not be painted. The grey colour of the galvanised
coating is acceptable as a finished colour and any attempt to paint it will incur unnecessary future
maintenance requirements and costs.

6.4.1.13 The erection of specific regulatory traffic signs restricting or prohibiting particular actions will not be
necessary providing such restrictions or prohibitions are referred to in the relevant Expressway
Legislation. Therefore, for example, traffic signs or road markings relating to no stopping will not be
required but speed limit signs will. Additionally the use of traffic sign 216, "Hard Shoulder for
Emergency Only" is not necessary as it will not be permitted for vehicles to stop other than in an
emergency or to carry out works on any part of the Expressway. The erection of this sign is therefore
superfluous and will only create an additional hazard.

6.4.1.14 It is particularly important on Expressways that any signs erected along the route are well maintained.
Regular inspection and cleaning procedures should therefore be introduced to ensure that signs are
always legible and do not constitute a hazard because of the need for some repair.

6.4.1.15 Road markings provide a very necessary guidance for traffic along Expressways and it is therefore
essential that any faded or worn markings are replaced, as soon as reasonably possible, and if necessary
in advance of any general re-marking programme.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.4.1.4 : LOCATION OF SMALL ROAD SIGN

NOT TO SCALE
ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

DIAGRAM 6.4.1.5: LOCATION OF LARGE ROAD SIGN

NOT TO SCALE
ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.4.1.6 : LOCATION OF GANTRY SIGN SUPPORTS

NOT TO SCALE
ALL DIMENSIONS IN MILLIMETRES

6.4.2 Directional Signs

6.4.2.1 Details of the design format for directional signs along Expressways are given in Chapter 3 of Volume
3, and will be similar to those for Directional Signs along Trunk Roads and Primary Distributor Roads,
except that the background colour of expressway signs should be green as opposed to blue on non
expressway signs. Details of colour of direction signs is given in Section 3.2.7 of Volume 3.

6.4.2.2 Along Expressways it is preferable that wherever possible gantry or overhead cantilever directional
signs are used, with the exception of the signing of service areas where gantry signs will seldom be
justified. Overhead cantilever and roadside directional signs are therefore appropriate.

6.4.2.3 Where roadside signs are used they will, as mentioned before, require the verge to be widened to create
sufficient space to accommodate the sign structure. The same may apply to gantry and overhead
cantilever signs but to a lesser extent. However it is most important for all types of signs that allowance
for the extra land that may be required is made at the design stage, as otherwise the provision of
adequate guidance to road users may be prejudiced. The actual width required for this purpose will
depend on the particular sign being used, but for roadside signs, widths of 4000mm or more merely for
the sign itself are not uncommon. The overall space required for the sign will be greater than just the
width of the sign, to allow both, for the necessary clearances, as shown in Diagrams 6.4.1.3 to 6.4.1.5
to be achieved, and any working space that may be required around the sign.

6.4.2.4 Although this is a necessity in respect of directional signing for all road types, it is essential with regard
to Expressways that care is taken to ensure that directional signs are positioned correctly in relation to
the junction to which they refer, and such that they are clearly visible to approaching drivers from the
appropriate distance. Table 6.4.2.1 provides information as to the location of signs on Expressways,
Table 6.4.2.2 on the minimum clear visibility distance requirements, and Diagram 6.4.2.1 illustrates the
visibility envelope necessary for roadside signs. Particular care should be exercised in sag curve
situations, where a gantry sign may be obscured by another gantry sign or overbridge.

6.4.2.5 Diagram 6.4.2.2 illustrates typical arrangements for gantry and roadside and gantry directional signing
but further information on this may be found in Chapter 3 of Volume 3, and should be consulted.
 December 2023 Edition

6.4.2.6 To avoid the erection of additional structures and to reduce the possibility of signs being obscured, the
use of convenient overbridges should be considered as a possible alternative for mounting overhead
signs but due regard must be given to the suitability of the bridge structure for this purpose.

DIAGRAM 6.4.2.1 : VISIBILITY ENVELOPE FOR ROADSIDE SIGNS

DIAGRAM 6.4.2.2 : DIRECTION SIGN LAYOUT

 December 2023 Edition

Table 6.4.2.1
Sign Locations
"x"-height
Sign Type Location Illumination
(mm)
Cantilever or 500m - 1000m Externally
Advance
gantry or 250 ** before start of illuminated and
Direction Sign
Roadside* deceleration lane reflectorised
300m
Roadside, 200m
Countdown
(1200mm x - 100m Reflectorised
Markers
700mm) **before start of
deceleration lane
Externally
Final Advance Gantry or At start of
250 illuminated and
Direction Sign Roadside* deceleration lane
reflectorised
Confirmatory
Roadside 250 Located near gore Reflectorised
Direction Sign

* Mixed Cantilever/Gantry/Roadside Signs may be the best method of signing, but once a
roadside sign is introduced in the sequence of approach signing, roadside signs must be
used for all direction signs in advance of that roadside sign, in that particular sequence.

** The exact location depends on the higher design speed and the number of traffic lanes as
shown in Diagram 6.4.2.2.

Table 6.4.2.2
Visibility Distances for Directional Signs
Minimum clear visibility
Sign Type
distance to sign(m)
180
Advance Direction Sign
(135 for gantry signs)
Final Advance Direction Sign 180
Confirmatory Direction Sign 105

6.4.3 Chainage Markers

6.4.3.1 Expressways which will normally form part of the Strategic Road Network should be provided with
chainage markers. Guidelines on the design of and provision of chainage markers are given in Section
3.3.11 of Chapter 3, Volume 3.

6.4.4 Road Markings and Road Studs

6.4.4.1 Reflective hot applied thermoplastic material or its equivalent, in accordance with the current
Highways Department Specification, but not road paint, must be used for permanent road markings on
Expressways. For temporary road markings, only preformed pavement tapes shall be used.

6.4.4.2 Detailed requirements for road markings are given in Volume 3, Chapter 5 of this manual, but for all
Expressways, markings utilised must be based on the assumption of a 70 km/h or more vehicle speed.
 December 2023 Edition

6.4.4.3 The removal of thermoplastic road marking material from friction course surfacing is virtually
impossible using conventional scouring methods, and it will usually be necessary for the whole friction
course layer to be removed. Consequently, where road markings have to be altered or removed,
consideration should be given to phasing the operation to coincide with the renewal of the friction
course surfacing. If this cannot be achieved then areas of the friction course surfacing must be removed
and relaid to effectively remove the old markings. Removal of the old friction course in small patches
is not acceptable, and resurfacing of a whole lane width is required, except at the edge of the
carriageway where it would be acceptable to remove the edgeline by removal and replacement of the
friction course over the width of the hard shoulder or marginal strip, as the case may be.

6.4.4.4 Because of the difficulty of removing thermoplastic material from the friction course, careful attention
must be paid in the initial design as to the road markings proposed, in order to avoid as far as possible,
the need to have to remove them at a later date.

6.4.4.5 All lane and edge line thermoplastic road markings used on Expressways must be supplemented by
road studs with reflective lenses. The studs shall not present any sharp edges to traffic. The reflective
portions of the studs shall be free from crevices or ledges where dirt might accumulate. The body
which does not form part of the lens of the studs shall be white, silver or light grey in colour.

6.4.4.6 Reflective road studs may be of depressible or non-depressible type as described below :

(i) Non-depressible road stud

A road stud shall be either in the shape of circle having a diameter of not more than
210mm; or rectangle having a length of not more than 210mm and a width of not more
than 170mm which shall project not more than 6mm at their edges nor more than 18mm
above the road surface, having a unidirectional reflective panel. The reflective panel will
usually be coloured either red, amber or green, as they should not normally be used for lane
markings.

(ii) Depressible road stud (Cats eyes)

A self wiping depressible road stud shall revert to its original form after being traversed by
a vehicle. It is approximately 180mm by 140mm and projects not more than 25mm above
the road surface. The base of the marker should be made of metal and be strong enough to
withstand vehicle loading. A removable housing, usually made of rubber, fitted into the
metal base must be able to hold at least two reflective "eyes" to face oncoming traffic
which will normally be uni-directional.

6.4.4.7 In Expressways, it is desirable to use depressible road studs as far as possible as lane markers.
 December 2023 Edition

6.4.4.8 The provision of road studs shall be in accordance with the following :
Colour of lens/lenses Colour of body of studs Spacing
Lane line White White 12 or 18m
Warning lane line White White 6 or 9m
Left hand edge
(only where a hard strip or Red White 18m
shoulder is provided)
Right hand edge adjacent to
central reserve
Amber White 18m
(only where a hard strip is
provided)
Across slip road entrance/exit
Green White 4m
and lay-by
Temporary road works Fluorescent
Yellow Varies
saturn yellow

6.4.4.9 In most situations along Expressways only uni-directional road studs will be necessary. However, if
tidal flow operations or similar are envisaged at any location, the road studs must be bi-directional and
the reflective lenses of the appropriate colours as viewed by approaching drivers from both directions.

6.4.4.10 The specification for and installation of road studs should be in accordance with the current Highways
Department Specification.

6.4.4.11 Road studs and cats eyes must be located as shown in Diagrams 6.3.3.1 to 6.3.3.10.

6.4.4.12 Further information on permanent road studs and their use may be found in Chapter 5 of Volume 3.

6.4.4.13 At road works along an Expressway it is sometimes necessary or advisable to use temporary road
studs, to delineate traffic lanes, which are yellow bodied studs with appropriately coloured lenses. Only
temporary reflective road studs approved by CHE/R&D shall be used for temporary road works. They
shall be designed to be removed without damage to the road surface. Such studs must however
conform to the Highways Department Specification.
 December 2023 Edition

6.5 Lane and Carriageway Closures

6.5.1 General Requirements

6.5.1.1 All temporary signing, guarding and lighting for lane or carriageway closures in respect of :

(i) road works;

(ii) road and horticultural maintenance;

(iii) road cleansing;

(iv) traffic control after traffic accidents;

(v) traffic control in emergency situations; and

(vi) any other temporary traffic diversion arrangement;

must be carried out in accordance with the Code of Practice for the Lighting, Signing and Guarding
of Road Works.

6.5.1.2 Guidance for the closure of a lane or lanes of a dual carriageway by means of temporary road signs is
given in Fig. 8.1 to 8.5 of the Code of Practice.

6.5.1.3 A single lane closure (slow lane) will require similar advance signing to that in Fig. 8.1 to 8.4 of the
Code of Practice except that the "advanced warning of closure of traffic lane" sign TS 497 would be
changed to TS 494. Additionally only the first half of the taper would be required and the line of cones
in the parallel section would of course be moved to the edge of the slow lane.

6.5.1.4 In respect of a closure of hard shoulder Fig. 8.5 of the Code of Practice illustrates the signing required.

6.5.1.5 The Traffic Console of the Regional Traffic Police Command Centre must always be informed before a
lane closure is implemented.

6.5.1.6 Wherever possible and particularly for major works, the Regional Traffic Police should be consulted at
least 28 days prior to commencement of the works.
 December 2023 Edition

6.6 Maintenance Operations Centres (MOC)

6.6.1 Location and Use

6.6.1.1 The patrol, emergency attendance, cleansing and maintenance of the Expressway should be
administered from a Maintenance Operations Centre (MOC), conveniently located at or near a grade
separated junction on the length of Expressway concerned.

6.6.1.2 The length of Expressway that may be administered from one MOC, will depend on the geographical
layout and the complexity of the roads in question, but about 40 km may be taken as a guide. Providing
the MOC is centrally located the response time for an incident on any part of the Expressway should be
under 30 minutes.

6.6.1.3 Location at or near a grade separated junction is very important and for reasons of efficiency and
economy, it is essential that the junction chosen has four way access to and from the Expressway.
Provision of grade separated facilities on the Expressway, specifically for the MOC, may be acceptable
but are unlikely to be economically justified.
 December 2023 Edition

6.7 Service Areas

6.7.1 Location

6.7.1.1 In planning the Expressway system, sites suitable for service areas should be sited at approximately 30
km intervals in respect of both directions of travel.

6.7.1.2 Ideally service areas should be provided opposite each other on both sides of the Expressway, with,
where possible, an overbridge across the Expressway to allow the connection of rear access roads for
use by vehicles servicing the Service Areas, but not the general public, other than perhaps as
pedestrians.

6.7.1.3 Each service area will require about 3 hectares of land depending on the type of facilities to be
provided.

6.7.1.4 Each service area will require as shown in Diagram 6.7.1.1, its own separate slip road connections to
and from the Expressway which must be designed to the full standard in accordance with Section 6.3 of
this Chapter, complete with acceleration and deceleration lanes.

6.7.1.5 Where it is not possible to provide service areas in pairs opposite each other consideration should be
given to having a single 4 hectare site located adjacent to a grade separated junction. However access
to the service area must be able to be provided from a convenient side road or directly from a
roundabout, as direct access to a service area from the junction's slip roads is unacceptable.

6.7.1.6 In selecting sites, consideration should be given to the availability of sewerage, water, gas, electricity
and telephone services and to the proximity of local transport which staff may need.

DIAGRAM 6.7.1.1 : EXPRESSWAY SERVICE AREA

NOT TO SCALE
 December 2023 Edition

6.7.2 Facilities

6.7.2.1 The facilities provide at each service area may include :

(i) parking for cars and heavy goods vehicles;

(ii) toilets;

(iii) fast food facility;

(iv) petrol filling station; and

(v) vehicle recovery service.

6.7.2.2 The petrol filling station, which is essential to all service areas, should be the last facility before traffic
rejoins the Expressway.

6.7.2.3 Where rear access is provided, see paragraph 6.7.1.2, the access should be for the use of staff vehicles,
supply vehicles, emergency service vehicles, breakdown lorries and expressway maintenance vehicles
only, and to ensure this the access roads should be closed by means of lockable gates. The general
public must not be permitted to use these service roads for vehicular access. However where identical
facilities cannot be provided for each opposite service, consideration might be given to using the
service road as a pedestrian link.

6.7.2.4 Part of the site should be set aside for landscape works to help screen the service area.

6.7.2.5 Service Areas should be signed at regular intervals, in advance, to allow drivers to make rational
decisions on where they wish to stop. The signface designs for Service Area directional signs are
illustrated in Diagram 6.7.2.1, but Chapter 3 of Volume 3 should also be referred to.

6.7.2.6 On joining an Expressway where service areas are provided, drivers should be informed of the distance
in 'km' to the next service area by appropriate signing as indicated in (i) in Diagram 6.7.2.1. The sign
should be placed about 200m beyond the end of the acceleration taper i.e. about 100 m beyond the
Expressway confirmation sign, see paragraph 6.4.1.5. The sign should be located at the rear of the hard
shoulder or hardened verge.

6.7.2.7 Where junctions are closely spaced it is sufficient to have the distance informatory sign, in (i) in
Diagram 6.7.2.1, erected only at the far junction of a pair of closely spaced junctions. As a guide in this
respect the signs need not be closer to each other than 5 km.

6.7.2.8 Where a service road has its own direct access slip roads serving it from the Expressway, signing
should be in accordance with the normal junction signing as set down in Chapter 3 of Volume 3, that
is, there should be an Advance Direction Sign, ½ km in advance of the service area, a Final Advance
Direction Sign at the start of the slip road and a Direction Sign at the nose of the junction. However as
explained in Chapter 3, Volume 3, Section 3.5.7, directional signs should only show the direction to the
service area and not forward destinations beyond this. Also in terms of the symbols to be used it is not
really necessary to include the parking symbol "P" if the refreshment symbol is used, as it can be
assumed that parking will be provided.
 December 2023 Edition

DIAGRAM 6.7.2.1 : SERVICE AREA DIRECTION SIGNS

(i) DISTANCE TO SERVICE AREA

(ii) ADVANCE DIRECTION SIGN

(iii) FINAL ADVANCE DIRECTION SIGN

(iv) DIRECTION SIGN

6.7.2.9 Where a service area is located on a minor road served by a grade separated junction from the
Expressway the appropriate symbols for the service area should be incorporated into the directional
signs for the junction.
 December 2023 Edition

6.8 Operation and Management

6.8.1 Utility Services

6.8.1.1 Expressways should not be used for the location of utility services which are not related to the
operation of the Expressway, except of course for services which are essential to the operation of the
Expressway such as power cables for the road lighting, and telephone lines for the emergency
telephones as well as power and communication cables for traffic surveillance and control facilities.

6.8.1.2 In the event that a non-operational utility service is required to be placed along or across an
Expressway consent in writing with justification to allow this must be obtained from the Regional
Chief Highway Engineer of Highways Department. Approval should not be given unless :

(i) it is in the interest of the public for the proposed services to be installed;

(ii) the installation works would not involve any open cut excavation works within the
carriageway or the hard shoulder nor would require any access from the Expressway;

(iii) the underground services are installed in such a way that it will not be necessary to
excavate any part of the carriageway and hard shoulder for future inspection, maintenance
or replacement.

6.8.1.3 Additionally such utility services should only be permitted to be laid along adjacent verge. In the
situation that non-operational utility services need to be laid across an Expressway beneath the
carriageway, their provision should be such that for any future inspection, maintenance or replacement
it will not be necessary to excavate any part of the carriageway and preferably any part of the hard
shoulder, nor should manholes for these service be permitted in the carriageway and, if possible, not in
the hard shoulder either.

6.8.1.4 Where there are existing non-operational services in an Expressway, consideration should be given to
their removal or relocation when repairs or alterations are being entertained.

6.8.1.5 Any illegal services encountered within the boundary of the Expressway should be removed as quickly
as possible. Such illegal services will generally be a safety hazard and very often produce highway
maintenance problems due to their presence.

6.8.2 Activities Affecting Operation

6.8.2.1 Advertisements
It is not appropriate for any advertising or decoration materials to be displayed on or adjacent to an
Expressway. In this respect an advertisement must include any sign or device extraneous to the
operation of an Expressway, such as :

(i) decorative lights at Christmas and Chinese New Year or at any other time;

(ii) business advertisements, including election posters;

(iii) bunting, flags and drapes for special visits;

(iv) notice boards and display cubes indicating particular Districts; and

(v) flower/planting displays, additional to any agreed landscaping requirements.

Advertisements at locations such as junctions, approaches to low bridges or other places where
special traffic hazards may exist should be discouraged.
 December 2023 Edition

6.8.2.2 Contra-flow Working

From time to time it may be necessary to introduce contra flow working along an Expressway in order
to carry out certain maintenance works. It is not appropriate to try to foresee such events by the
provision of permanent emergency crossings for this purpose, for the following reasons :

(i) the precise location will be dictated by the location and extent of any works, which can
only be determined at the time the works are required;

(ii) the length to be provided for the gap in the central reserve is difficult to determine in
advance as it will be related to traffic and operating conditions at the time the works are
required to be carried out, as a general guide a gap of at least 30m will generally be
required but at times this may need to be substantially increased; and

(iii) the provision of such a large gap at times of non-use, increases the accident potential in
terms of vehicles striking any ramped down section of any barrier fence and breaking
through into the opposing carriageway.

6.8.3 Emergency Telephones

6.8.3.1 Chapter 3 of Volume 10 provides advice on the provision of Emergency Telephones and should be
referred to.

6.8.4 Traffic Control and Surveillance Equipment

6.8.4.1 A policy has yet to be determined on the use of lane control signals or surveillance equipment for
Expressways and therefore where it is considered that such equipment may be advantageous the
iTransport Division of the Transport Department should be consulted.

6.8.4.2 Further advice on surveillance methods for such roads will be provided in Volume 10.

6.8.5 Vehicle Recovery

6.8.5.1 There is at present no policy regarding the appointment by Government of an authority to be officially
responsible for the recovery of vehicles on Expressways except Tsing Ma Control Area, and at present
this is left to the individual owners of the vehicles to arrange.