IRC 41-1997

GUIDELINES FOR TYPE DESIGNS

FOR
CHECK BARRIERS
(First Revision)

THE INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS

 IRC4M997

GUIDELINES FOR TYPE DESIGNS

FOR
CHECK BARRIERS

(First Revision)

Published by
THE INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS
Jamnagar House, Shahjahan Road,
New DeIhi-110011
1997

Price Rs. 80/-

(plus packing and postage)
IRC: 41-1997

First Published : August, 1972

Reprinted : June, 1983
Reprinted : September, 1990
First Revision : April, 1 997
Reprinted : August, 2005
Reprinted : July, 2008

(Rights of Publication and Translation are reserved)

Printed at Options Printofast, Delhi- 1 10092

(500 copies)
 1

IRC:4 1-1997

MEMBERS OF THE HIGHWAYS SPECIFICATIONS AND

STANDARDS COMMITTEE
(As on 31 J. 96)

A.D. Narain* DG (RD), Ministry of Surface Transport

(Convenor) (Roads Wing), New Delhi

S.C. Sharma Chief Engineer (R) Stds/R, Ministry of

(Member-Secretary) Surface Transport (Roads Wing), New Delhi

3. G.C. Garg Engineer-in-Chief, Municipal Corporation

of Delhi, Town Hall, Delhi- 11 0006

Dr. M.P. Dhir Director, CSIR (Retd.),A-l/133, Safdarjang

Enclave, New Delhi- 1 10029

5. R.N. Malik Chief Engineer (Mech.), Ministry of Surface

Transport (Roads Wing), NEW DELHI

G.S. Tawarmalani Addl. Director General (S&P), CPWD,

Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi- 1 1001

Dr. A.K. Gupta Professor & Coordinator, Centre of Transport

Engg., University of Roorkee, Roorkee

H.P. Jamdar Secretary to the Govt, of Gujarat, R&B

Deptt., Block No. 14, Sachivalaya Complex,
Gandhinagar-382010

M.B. Jayawant Synthetic Asphalts, 103, Pooja Mahul Road,

Chembur, Bombay-400074

10. K.S. Narayanan Chief Engineer (CCU), M/o. Environment &

Forests (Retd.), E-23, Central Govt. Qtrs.,
St. Martin Marg, New Delhi ! 10021

11. P.D. Agarwal Chief Engineer (N.H.), U.P. PWD,

Lucknow -226001
12. Maj. C.R. Ramesh Engineer-in-Chief, Public Health Engg.
Ananda Rao Circle, Bangalore -560009

13. Dr. L.R. Kadiyali Chief Consultant, Dr. L.R. Kadiyali &
Associates, S-487, find Floor, Greater
Kailash-L New Delhi- 1 10048
ADG(R) being not in position, the meeting was presided by Shri A.D. Narain,
DG(RD), Govt, of India, MOST
IRC:4 1-1997

14. Ninan Koshi DG(RD), MOST (Retd), 56, Nalanda Apartment,

Vikaspuri, New Delhi- 1 10018

15. The Director General, National Council for Cement & Building
Materials, P-21, South Extn. II, Ring Road,
New Delhi- 110049

16. Dr. S. Raghava Chari, Transport Engg. Section, Deptt. of Civil

Engg., Regional Engg. College, Warangal

17. Vinod Kumar Director & Head (Civil Engg.), Bureau of

Indian Standards, Manak Bhawan, 9,
Bahadurshah Jafar Marg, New Delhi- 1 10002

18. P.J.Rao Dy. Director & Head, Geotechnical Engg.

Division, Central Road Research Institute,

Delhi-Mathura Road, New Delhi -1 10020

19. Prof. G.V.Rao Prof, of Civil Engg., LIT., Hauz Khas,

New Delhi-1 10016

20. Prof. C.G. Swaminathan 'Badri', 50, Thiruvankadam Street,

R.A. Puram, Madras-600028

21. B.Megu Chief Engineer (Zone-I), Arunachal Pradesh,

PWD, Itanagar-791111

22. M.K. Saxena Director, National Institute for Training of

Highway Engineers, 174, Jor Bagh,
New Delhi- 110003

23. Prof. D.V. Singh Director, Central Road Research Institute,

Delhi-Mathura Road, P.O.CRRI, Okhla,
New Delhi-1 10020

24. The Director Highway Research Station, Guindy,

Madras-600025

25. A. Sen Chief Engineer (Civil), Indian Roads

Construction Corpn. Ltd., 6, Core, 6th Floor,
Scope Complex, Ia>dhi Road, New Delhi

26. R.D. Mehta Chief Engineer (T&T), Ministry of Surface

Transport (Roads Wing), New Delhi

27. S.C. Sharma Chief Engineer (R), S&R, Ministry of Surface

Transport (Roads Wing), New Delhi
(ii)
 1

IRC:41-1997

28. R.L. Koul Chief Engineer (Plannning), Ministry of

Surface Transport (Roads Wing), New Delhi

29. Prof. C.E.G. Justo Prof, of Civil Engg., Faculty of Engg. -

Civil, Bangalore University, Bangalore

30. O.P. Goel B-l 1/8164, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-1 10030

31. M.R. Kachhwaha Chief Engineer (B) Std./R, Ministry of Surface

Transport (Roads Wing), New Delhi-1 10001

32. Maj. Gen. C.T. Chari D.G.W., E-in-Chief's Branch, Army Hqrs.,
Kashmir House, DHQ PO, New Delhi-1 1001
33. Prof. N. Ranganathan Prof. & Head, Deptt. of Transport Planning,
School of Planning & Architecture, 4,
Block-B, Indraprastha Estate, New Delhi

34. B.N. Srivastava Chief Engineer, Dy. Director General/DS

Dte. General Border Roads, Kashmir House,
DHQ PO, New Delhi-1 10011
35. A.K. Mishra Director (Technical), Oil Coordination
Committee, 2nd Floor, Core-8, Scope Complex,
7, Institutional Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi- 1 10003

36. U.S. Bkatia Chief Consultant, Engineers & Management

Associates, 3/5, Kalkaji Extn., New Delhi

37. R.K.Jain Project Director, ADB Project, Kothi No.l,

Nirman Kunj, Sector-16A, Faridabad
38. President, M.S. Guram, - Ex-Officio
Indian Roads Congress Chief Engineer, Punjab PWD,
B&R Branch, Patiala
39. Hon. Treasurer, A.D. Narain, - Ex-Officio
Indian Roads Congress Director General (Road Development),
Ministry of Surface Transport
(Roads Wing), New Delhi

40. Secretary, S.C. Sharma Ex-Officio

Indian Roads Congress Chief Engineer (R), Ministry of
Surface Transport (Roads Wing),
New Delhi

CORRESPONDING MEMBERS
L.N. Narendra Singh B-36, Plot 86, Kakateeya Apartments,
Patparganj, Delhi -1 10092

R.S. Shukla B-l 90. Sector 55,\oida-201 301

(iii)
 Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2014

https://archive.org/details/govlawircy1997sp41_0
 IRC41-1997

CONTENTS

Page No.

1 . Introduction 1

2. Scope 3

3. Type Design of Check Barrier 3

4. Designs 4

5. Signs, Marking and Lighting 9

6. Offices, Weigh Bridges and 11

other Facilities

7. Safety Measures 12

8. Road Side Development Controls 12

ANNEXURES

Annexure-1 - Check Barriers in Urban Areas 13

Annexure-2 - User Guidelines for Planning of 15

Parking Bays at Check Barriers

Annexure-3 - Electrically Operated Barrier Gate 16

 IRC:4 1-1997

GUIDELINES FOR TYPE DESIGNS FOR

CHECK BARRIERS

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. The need IRC Standard on "Type

for the revision of the existing
Designs for Check Barriers" was by the Traffic Engineering Committee (TEC)
felt

in 1987. Therefore, in its meeting held on 12th June, 1987 a Sub-Committee

comprising Shri R.P. Sikka, Chief Engineer (Traffic & Transportation), MOST,
Shri J.B. Mathur, Dy. Secretary, IRC and Shri D. Sanyal (NATPAC),
Member- Secretary of Traffic Engineering Committee, was formed to revise the
scope of the standard so as to include design aspects, drainage and other facilities
for the checking authorities as well for the drivers of the vehicles. The revised draft
prepared by Shri Sanyal was discussed in TEC meeting held on 23rd August, 1991.
A Sub-Group consisting of S/Shri M.K. Bhalla, Member-Secretary, TEC, V.K.
Arora, Chief Engineer, MOST and D. Sanyal was constituted to review the draft
and reviseit in the light of the comments offered by the members in the said

meeting.The draft prepared by this Sub-Group was again discussed in the Traffic
Engineering Committee in its meeting on 3 1 st August, 1992 when some additional
comments were given by the members. The draft was again discussed during the
meeting of Traffic Engineering Committee held on 18th October, 1993 when
members felt that it required further modification in the light of the discussions. A
Sub-Group was again constituted comprising of S/Shri D. Sanyal, T.S. Reddy,
Maxwell Pereira, A.P. Bahadur and Dr. Vishwanath to finalise the document. The
document was finally discussed by TEC (personnel given below) in its meeting
held on 31st August, 1995 and approved.

R.L. Koul
CE(T&T),MOST ... Convenor
A.P. Bahadur
SE(T&T),MOST ... Member -Secretary
Members
Dr. L.R. Kadiyali Dr. P.S. Pasricha
D.C.P. (Traffic), Delhi Police Prof. N. Ranganathan
Dr. A.C. Sarna T.S. Reddy
Dr. M.S. Srinivasan Prof. P.K. Sikdar
D. Sanyal Dr. A.K. Gupta
R.G. Gupta Nirmal Jit Singh

1
IRC:4 1-1997

Dr. S. Vishwanath Prof. Dinesh Mohan

Arun Mokashi H.C. Sethi
Brig. S.B. Joshi S.S. Ralhore

Corresponding Members

M.K. Agarwal Adviser (Transport), DTR, MOST

V.V.Thorat Prof.B.R.Marwah
Prof. S. Raghava Chari

Ex-Officio Members

President, IRC (K.K. Madan) DG(RD), MOST (M.V. S as try)

Secretary, IRC (S.C. Sharma)

1 .2 The Highways Specifications & Standards Committee discussed

the draft in its meeting held on 19th March, 1996 and approved the draft for being
sent to the Council after the comments received from the members were duly
incorporated. The guidelines were approved by the Executive Committee in its
meeting held 17th April, 1996 and the Council in their meeting held at Darjeeling
on 24th May, 1996.

1 .3. It has been noticed that highway check barriers in use at present
are often crude improvisations, and are unsatisfactory from the point of view of
both safety and free flow of traffic. Moreover, they have usually no proper lighting
arrangements and warning devices like signs, at their approaches which causes
further hazard.

1.4. The Indian Roads Congress as a body is totally against the

erection of any barriers on roads since these act as an impediment to the smooth
flow of vehicles, thereby destroying the function of the highway, besides being a
source of accidents. But in the interest of road users it has been felt that the designs
of barriers might be made as less objectionable as possible. Towards this end, the
Highways Specifications and Standards Committee has evolved the type designs
given herein for general adoption.

1 .5. The publication of these Guidelines should, however, in no way

be taken to mean Roads Congress in regard to
that the basic policy of the Indian
highway barriers has undergone a change. These designs should be made use of
only when it becomes unavoidable to have a barrier.

2
 IRC:41-1997

2. SCOPE

This document deals with guidelines for type designs of highway check
barriers excluding toll tax collection barriers for which the Ministry of Surface
Transport has issued separate guidelines. Type design for check barriers in urban
location has also been briefly covered.

3. TYPE DESIGN OF CHECK BARRIER

3.1. There are different types of check barriers in use for different
purposes and at different locations. The more important types of check barriers in
use are as follows:

(i) Highway check barriers

Such check barriers are usually erected for the purpose of
collection of sales tax, octroi tax, commercial tax and entry tax.
These are also at times used for the purpose of checking by forest
and road transport authorities;

(ii) Toll barriers

This is a special type of barrier that is specifically used for the

purpose of collection of toll;
(iii) Check barriers in urban areas
Check barriers in urban areas are usually erected for security
purpose by local police authorities.

3.2. Design of check barrier is a highly case-specific exercise and

each design has to take into account various local considerations including traffic

requirements and physical constraints peculiar to any specific site. However,

certain degree of uniformity and consistency in design must be maintained for the
purpose of ensuring the desired levels of safety, efficiency and economy of traffic
operation through such areas. With a view to provide uniformity and consistency,
three type designs, applicable to the most commonly occurring situations, are
given below:

(i) Highway check barriers with lay-byes on one side - Plate I

This is applicable to all roads where checking is required for

vehicles on one lane only i.e. while entering or exiting a
jurisdiction of an authority.

3
IRC:4 1-1997

(ii) Highway check barriers with lay-byes on both sides -Plate II

This is the most common type of design required at all inter-state

border locations and on entry into major towns or cities. This is

required where checking of commercial traffic is required in
both directions for purposes of tax collection etc.

(iii) Check barriers in urban areas - Plate III

A brief description of check barriers in urban areas is placed in

Annexure-1.

3.3. The choice of a design shall be based on a consideration of

conditions existing at site including the volumes of traffic requiring checking and
being allowed free passage. These designs may be modified, with the approval of
the Highway Authority, to suit local site conditions.

4. DESIGNS

4.1. Location

The barrier shall be so located as to be visible from a sufficient distance

ahead when approached from either direction. This distance shall at- least be equal
to the stopping sight distance corresponding to the design speed of the highway on
which the barrier is set up. For sight distance values, reference may be made to
IRC: 66-1976 "Recommended Practice for Sight Distance on Rural Highways".

4.2. Surveys

4.2.1. The design of barrier depends largely on the purpose for which
it is to be put up, the length of time it is likely to remain volumes,
in operation, traffic
permissible delays and queue lengths. The studies to be carried out for design of
check barriers are as follows:

(i) Traffic volume survey, parking surveys (in case vehicles are
being made to halt);

(ii) Road and space inventory surveys;

(iii) Requirements of the concerned authorities at the proposed site

of the barrier.

4
 IRC:4 1-1997

4.2.2. Traffic volume surveys

Seven days continuous, categorywisc, traffic volume counts, preferably

during peak season, are to be taken at the location (or within its influence area)
where a check barrier isbe erected. If due to some local constraints, it
proposed to
is not possible to carry out the seven days count, at least three days continuous

traffic volume count must be done. This data is to be analysed for finding out the

average number of commercial and other vehicles that may have to be handled at
the barrier. Depending on past trends or, on the basis of any other study carried out,
this data shall be projected for the design period of 1 5 years (after commissioning
of facility) for estimating the design volume for which lay-byes arc to be provided.
Such a traffic volume survey will also help to ascertain the actual number of lanes
that would be required to be provided at and near such a barrier. Care must be taken
to account for seasonal fluctuation in traffic wherever such trends arc known to
exist such traffic volume surveys, as mentioned here, are also recommended at
locations where redesign of an existing check barrier becomes necessary.

4.2.3. Parking and accumulation survey

4.2.3.1. At locations where check barriers already exist, both parking

accumulation and parking duration surveys need to be carried out. In case of
queuing at such locations, maximum queue lengths arc also to be recorded. The
time required for servicing the queue through the check barrier must also be studied
in this context. Parking survey should be carried out continuously for a period of
three days. Data, so collected, shall be projected for the design period for estimating
the parking duration and parking usage. Parking survey is to be carried separately
for each approach direction.

4.2.3.2. At locations where no check barrier exists, (i.e. while designing

a new facility), the parking demand should be on the basis of expected delays as
may have been observed under similar conditions elsewhere and the average
existing parking demand if any, within the influence area of the chosen location.
Continuous survey for 24 hours on a sample day may be adequate for this purpose
under ordinary circumstances. However, if peaking is known to occur on any
particular day of the week, survey should be carried out on such days. Parking data
collected like this is to be used in conjunction with the design parking demand that
may be estimated from the number of vehicles that would be serviced at the
proposed location after erection of the check barrier. A sample calculation in this

regard is placed aiAnnexure-2.

5
IRC:4 1-1997

4.2.4. Road and space inventory survey

Whether it is for redesign of an existing check barrier or design of a new

one, road and space inventory surveys are essential and must be carried out with
utmost care and precision. Accurate physical survey plans for the road stretch upto
500m on cither side of the designated check barrier location must be prepared to a
scale of 1:500. The survey must cover a strip of 100m on either side of the center
line of the road for the entire designated check barrier stretch. All physical features
including road land boundary, control lines, details of road side developments and
properties and cross roads if any, drainage pattern of the area etc., must be correctly
depicted in the plan so prepared. Well grown trees and their exact locations must
also be marked on the plan.

4.3. Geometric Design

4.3. 1 . Carriageway width

The maximum width of carriageway for through traffic movement of

trafficmust not be less than the formation width of the approach road for a two lane
highway. Thus for a two lane highway with 7.0m of approach carriageway width,
the through carriageway at the check barrier must be 12.0m wide while, in the case
of four lane divided section of approach carriageway, the minimum width of
through carriageway at the lay-by must not be less than 8.5m in each direction.

4.3.2. Lay-by

4.3.2. 1 . Length The length of the lay-by

: (s) should be adequate to cater
to peak parking demand estimated on volume projections and average delays
expected.

4.3.2.2. Width : Each lay-by must be two lane wide (7.5m) so as to

enable parking of one vehicle on the left side and another vehicle to pass the parked

vehicles along the adjacent lane. Islands separating the lay-bys within the parking
area should have adequate width and in any case, not less than 1.5m for
accommodating various service lines, electric poles etc.

4.3.2.3. Entry/exit : Entry to and exit from lay-by(s) shall be designed

with a taper of not less than 1 in 15 and no entry/exit curve (turning) shall be less
than 18.0m in radius. For mulli axle vehicles, the turning-radius may be increased.

6
 IRG41-1997

All edges and corners within this area must be suitably rounded off.

4.3.2.4. Segregation of lay-by from main carriageway : Segregation

of the lay-by from the main carriageway be achieved through the provision of
is to

a barrier island with a minimum width of 3.0m. This island must have suitable
guard rails. No bus bays are to be provided within the influence area of the check
barrier.

4.4. Barrier Gate

Wherever possible, the electrically operated barrier gate may be provided
at the exist lane of the check barrier as per the details mentioned in Annexure-3.
Details of manually operated barriers are shown in Fig. 1.

4.5. Vertical Clearance

The vertical clearance below the barrier on the main carriageway shall be
such as to allow movements of light motor vehicles, government vehicles and
military vehicles without any interruption. Under normal circumstances traffic on
the main carriageway will not be required to slop at the barrier. The vertical
clearance below the barrier on the main carriageway shall not be less than 2.5m
and such barrier will be designated as high barriers.

The barriers across the lay-by must have a more effective control on the
passage of vehicles through these lanes and as such, the vertical clearance below
the barriers across the lay-by shall be 1 .5m. Such barriers will be designated as low
barriers.

4.6. Pavement Design for Lay-by

The pavement for the through carriageway must be designed as per

IRC:37-1984. The pavement for lay-bys should be designed keeping in view the
local soil characteristics and the expected loading patterns in the proposed lay-bys.
Reference maybe made to 1RC:37-1984 for this purpose.

4.7. Drainage of the Area

The entire area occupied by the lay-bys must have adequate drainage
facilities. The agency maintaining the check barrier area must ensure regular and
effective cleaning of gully pits and drainage channels. Usually the area must have

7
IRC4M997

8
 IRC41-1997

a longitudinal slope of not less than 0.5%.The parking bays within the area must
also have a transverse slope of2%. Gully pits should normally be located with silt
trap at a distance of 30m c/c. The paved parking area will have underground
transverse drains made up of precast concrete pipes. The gully pits should be
suitably connected to such transverse drains that would ultimately discharge onto
the main drain running along the highway. The diameter of the pipe drains will
have to be determined on the basis of design discharge and, in no case, should be
less than 300mm. At places where the drainage will have to be linked with a nearby
culvert, the corresponding levels will have to be designed keeping in view the invert
level of the drainage channel at the culvert. While deciding the direction of slopes
etc., the general topography of the area must be kept in view. Adequate drainage

from toilets to sewers and soakpits should be provided.

5. SIGNS, MARKING AND LIGHTING

5.1. Signs

The entire area around the lay-bys must have adequate signages so as to
guide the drivers efficiently through the area. Being essentially an eccentric design,
adequate care must be taken to evolve the signage and marking scheme in a
scientific and case specific manner. ReLrorcflcctive sheeting shall preferably be
used.

Some of the more important signs to be put up at any highway check

barriers arc as follows:

5.1.1. Warning signs

The signs "Slow - Barrier Ahead" (Fig. 2) and "Dead Slow - Barrier
Ahead" (Fig. 3) should be placed at 200m and 20m
1 respectively in advance of the
high barrier location.

5.1.2. Mandatory signs

Mandatory signs such as "Compulsory left turns for HTVs and MCVs"
etc.,must be provided 60m in advance of the high barrier location. Preferably,
gantry mounted signs should be provided for better visibility.

9
IRC:4 1-1997

BLACK

RED BORDER

plate white

black letters
plate white

T-IRON POST
8cm x 8cm x 8mm

ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN CENTIMETRES

Fig. 2 Warning Sign for "Slow - Barrier Ahead"

"TTT TTTTTT
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN CENTIMETRES

Fig. 3 Warning Sign for "Dead Slow - Barrier Ahead"

10
 IRC:4 1-1997

5.1 .3. Informatory signs

Informatory signs indicating various facilities/amenities available must

be provided at appropriate places.

5.2. Marking

The carriageways and the lay-bys, including the approach areas must have
proper pavement markings for traffic guidance as per IRC:35 (under revision). As
far as possible thermoplastic paints must be used for pavement marking purposes.
In order to further accentuate the lay-bys, suitable delineators should be installed
at the entry /exit areas to/from ihe lay-by.

5.3. Lighting

The entire area, including the parking areas, must be properly illuminated.
Road side/median lighting may be provided with the help of sodium vapur lamps
allowing a 6m clearance over the carriageway. Lamp posts may be located at 30m
c/c. Provision of adequate high mast lighting may be considered for parking areas.

6. OFFICES, WEIGH BRIDGES AM) OTHER FACILITIES

6.1. Offices

Checking offices will essentially be sturdy structures with a covered area

as per the requirements of the concerned agencies/govt. deptts. The checking office
must have adequate visual transparency. These should be properly equipped with
toilet, drinking water facilities, etc. Provisionmay also be made for Police Booths
if required. These offices must be conveniently located with adequate space for the
drivers to queue up under shade. The entire area around these offices must be
adequately lighted. Part of the office structure should pro ject into either lay-bys or
the carriageway.

6.2. Weigh Bridges

Generally, each separate service channel must be provided with a flush

type wQigh bridge for checking the laden weights of commercial vehicles. In order
to facilitate the entire process of checking, such weigh bridges must be located
before entry to the idle parking area. The weighing bay must have certain office
space for the inspector.

11
IRC41-1997

6.3. Wayside Amenities

Wayside amenities would generally include eating places, drinking water

points, toilets and washing areas, public telephone, first aid facilities etc. Filling
stations, auto repair shops, spare parts shops etc., must be located at least 500m
away from the lay-by area. No such development should be encouraged along the
opposite flank of the road within the influence area of the check barrier. If there

are other built up properties along the road over this section, efforts must be made
to serve such properties with the help of service roads.

6.4. Landscaping

Beautification of check barrier areas should be done on a scientific basis

through proper landscaping/plantation etc. Landscaping must be done in such a
manner that it could discourage encroachments. Low height plants/shrubs should
be planted on medians/islands, separating the lay-bys.

7. SAFETY MEASURES

7.1. The barrier shall be painted in alternate blac& and white bands
of 25cm width so as to improve its visibility.

7.2. For safely of night traffic, a railway type lamp and red reflector
shall be fitted to the barrier.

7.3. In urban areas, flickering electric lights should be provided on

approaches to the barriers if considered necessary by the traffic authority.

7.4. All the safety devices mentioned above must be kept well
maintained and functioning properly. This applies especially to pavement markings
and the lamps for night traffic.

8 ROAD SIDE DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS

No uncontrolled road side development must be permitted within the

influence area of the check barrier. Barring wayside amenities essential for waiting
drivers and cleaners, no other uses must be permitted adjacent to the lay-bys.

12
 IRC41-1997

Annexure-1

CHECK BARRIERS IN URBAN AREAS

1. Check barriers on urban roads arc usually put up for security

reasons generally by the concerned police departments. The
objective behind erection of such barriers is to slow down the
traffic and bring such vehicles to a halt as arc considered
necessary by the police personnel.

2. Check barriers along busy urban streets are obviously an

impedement to smooth flow of traffic and Ihc erection of the
same must, therefore, be decided very judiciously. Such barriers
must not be left unattended at any time of day or night.

3. Visibility along urban streets is of paramount importance and as

such, the barriers used in urban areas must ensure adequate

visibility across the baffles.

4. Since all vehicles arc usually not required to be stopped or

checked, the barriers in urban areas arc required to have
segmental construction and layout as shown in Plate III.

5. Usually mobile barriers are made use of in urban areas as these

may be required to be moved to different points depending on
the exigency of the situation. A typical design of such a check
barrier is shown in Plate III.

6. Extreme caution must be exercised towards placing of such

barriers along urban streets. These must be placed only on
straight sections of roads having adequate widths and clear
visibility. These must not be placed close to an intersection or a
side road. When placed across an undivided carriageway, care
must be taken to ensure that sufficient space is available for
simultaneous movement of two opposing files of vehicles
through barrier location. For better visibility at night such
barriers must be painted in yellow and must be placed at a well
lit portion of the road. Additional visibility and safety must be

13
IRC:4 1-1997

ensured, if necessary, through the use of flickering lights

mounted on the barrier frame.

7. A rest room for security personnel must be provided at locations

where such barriers are erected on a permanent basis.

8. Under no circumstances the barriers should obstruct the

movements of pedestrians along the footpaths.

14
 IRC:4 1-1997

Annexurel

USER GUIDELINES FOR PLANNING OF PARKING

BAYS AT CHECK BARRIERS
It is proposed to set up a check barrier along a National Highway having
surveyed A.D.T. of 5000 vehicles. The various design parameters could then, be
calculated as follows:

Given Average Daily Traffic Volume - 5000 vehicles

Volume of commercial vehicles (as

may be assumed or as may be revealed
by actual field surveys) 40% of ADT (say)

Total number of commercial vehicles 2000v.p.d.

Directional split 60:40 (say)

Volume of commercial traffic in 2000x0.6 v.p.d.

predominant direction 1200v.p.d.

Peak hour peak direction component 10%

Peak hour arrivals 1200x0.10 v.p.h.
120v.p.h.

Average time required for checking

(assumed or verified from another
check barrier) 5 minutes (say)

Handling capacity of a single

channel service checking window facility 12 v.p.h.

If an effort is tobe made to match the service rate with the rate of arrivals,
this particular complex would require 1 0 service channels (checking windows). In
case it is not possible to provide adequate number of service channels (10 in the
present example) number of windows could be reduced depending on site
constraints with suitable increase in the lengths of the lay-bys. However, the
service rate, under such circumstances, being less than the rate of arrival, one could
expect building up of queues for which separate holding areas of adequate capacity
must be planned. For example, if only 4 service windows can be provided at the
site, instead of 10 service windows as described above, the number of commercial

vehicles, that could be serviced in 1 hour work out to (60/5 x 4)48. Therefore the
idle parking requirement would be (120-48)-72 vehicles during the peak hours.
However the total requirement of the idle parking lot must be assessed on the basis
of the availability of land and other local considerations.

15
IRC:4 1-1997

Annexure-3

ELECTRICALLY OPERATED BARRIER GATE

Electrically operated barrier gates shall be provided at exit lane of the

check barrier. The gate unit shall have the following salient features.

(i) Remote push-button control from the toll booth;

(ii) Quick operation - 5 seconds for lilting/lowering (90 degrees)

for booms upto 4.5m length and 8-1 0 seconds for booms in wider
lanes. However the effective tijme of opening will be less and
the vehicles will be able to pass when the gate opens to an angle
of about 75 to 80 degrees;

(iii) Automatic stop in fully raised/lowered position and automatic

locking of the boom wherever it stops;

(iv) Alternate stripes of black and yellow or red and white on the
boom for high visibility. Bands of reflective tape for night
warning would be required;
(v) The driving unit shall be totally sealed for external use;

(vi) Manual operation of the gate shall be possible in case of power

failure or break down.
A general arrangement of the barrier gate is shown in Fig.4.

separate switch shall also be provided, operation of which shall cut out
A
the automatic control and enable the operator to control opening, closing
and mid
stopping of the barrier by means of the 3 push buttons provided in a small barrier
control box besides the cash register. This direct operator control may be used by
him in case a continuous stream of vehicles are passing, and he feels that there is
no need to open and close the barrier for each vehicle. This override switch may
also be required in case of any failure of the vehicle sensor unit.

The electrically operated barrier shall have a system for disengaging the
electrical drive system from the boom and counter-weights, so that the
barrier can

be operated by hand just as if it was a manually operated barrier. This facility can

be used in case of power failure for operation of the barrier or during breakdown.

16
 IRC4M997

17
 PLATE - I

NOTE
LEGEND
DRAINAGE SYSTEM
[MENS )NS AS SHOWN IN THE DRAWING ARE IN METRES AND
ARE INDICATIVE OF A TYPICAL CASE AND SHOULD GENERALLY BE PEDESTRIAN RAILING
TREATED AS DESIRABLE MINIMUM (UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED)
DIFFERENT COMPONENTS OF DESIGN SUCH AS MEDIAN
OPENINGS. SERVICE ROADS. TURN ROUND AREAS. AMD EVEN
ROW OF THE ROAD WILL HAVE TO BE TREATED IN A CASE-
SPECIFIC MANNER
UGHT POLES
ROAD SIGNS
GULLY PIT
r
LIGHTING

TYPICAL LAYOUT OF HIGHWAY CHECK BARRIER WITH

KEY PLAN
LAYBYE ON ONE SIDE ( r0R ™0 lane highway.
 AREA TO BE SUITABLY
LANDSCAPED TO AVOID
NOTE ENCROACHMENTS

DIMENSIONS AS SHOWN IN THE DRAWING ARE IN METRES. AND

ARE INDICATE OF A TYPICAL CASE AND SHOULD GENERALLY BE
TREATED AS DESIRABLE MINIMUM (UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED)
DIFFERENT COMPONENTS OF DESIGN SUCH AS MEDIAN
OPENINGS. SERVICE ROADS. TURN ROUND AREAS, AND EVEN
R O W OF THE ROAD WILL HAVE TO BE TREATED IN A CASE
LEGEND
SPECIFIC MANNER DRAINAGE SYSTEM
PEDESTRIAN RAJ LING
THE TYPE DESIGN PROVIDES FOR TWO WEIGH-BRIDGES ON THE
ENTRY POINT AND ONE OF THE EXITS If THE DEMAND FOR WEIGH- LIGHT POLES
BRIDGE IS NOT ADEQUATE THE WEIGH-BRIDGE AT ENTRY MAY BE
ELIMINATED AND EXTRA PARKING LANE BEYOND THE WEIGH-BRIDGE HIGH MAST LIGHTING (HMT)
AT EXIT POINT SHOULD BE PROVIDED.
ROAD SIGNS
GULLY PIT

LIGHPNG TYPICAL LAYOUT OF HIGHWAY CHECK BARRIER WITH

LAYBYE ON EITHER SIDE
IRC:4 1-1997