BOQ Builder·Auto-BOQ from dimensions, DSR ratesNEW→BidEasy·Government tenders, searchableLIVE→InfraLens App·Free on Play Store, offline-readyNEW→

IRC 70 : 2017Guidelines on Regulation and Control of Mixed Traffic in Urban Areas

Q: What are the main challenges addressed by this IRC code regarding mixed traffic in urban areas?

The primary challenges are ensuring safety for all road users, improving traffic flow efficiency, and equitably distributing road space among diverse vehicle types. This includes managing conflicts between fast-moving motorized vehicles and slower non-motorized vehicles, ensuring adequate space for pedestrians and cyclists, and reducing accidents at intersections and on road sections. The code aims to provide a framework for urban planners and engineers to develop strategies that mitigate these issues effectively.

Q: How does the code suggest allocating road space for different vehicle types?

The code emphasizes the need for a systematic approach to road space allocation based on the traffic volume and composition. It recommends providing dedicated lanes or clearly demarcating space for different vehicle types, such as motor vehicles, auto-rickshaws, motorcycles, and pedal cycles. The appropriate width for each lane is determined based on the operating characteristics of the vehicles and the need for adequate lateral clearance to ensure safety and prevent sideswipes. This often involves a trade-off analysis to balance the needs of different user groups.

Q: What specific traffic control devices are recommended for mixed traffic environments?

The code recommends a range of traffic control devices tailored for mixed traffic. This includes standard road signs and markings, but also emphasizes the need for specific signage and markings to guide and regulate non-motorized vehicles. Traffic signals should be designed with appropriate phasing to accommodate slower moving vehicles. Additionally, the code discusses the use of traffic bollards, channelizers, and other devices to define traffic paths and manage conflicts at intersections and along road segments. The effectiveness of these devices is paramount for regulating behavior.

Q: What are traffic calming measures and how are they relevant to this code?

Traffic calming measures are physical design features or operational strategies intended to slow down or reduce the volume of traffic, thereby improving safety. In the context of mixed traffic, they are crucial for protecting vulnerable road users like pedestrians and cyclists. The code discusses various measures such as speed humps, chicanes, raised pedestrian crossings, and narrowed lanes. These are particularly important in residential areas, near schools, and in commercial zones where pedestrian and cyclist activity is high and conflicts with motorized traffic are more likely to occur.

Q: How does the code address the safety of pedestrians and cyclists?

The code places significant emphasis on the safety of pedestrians and cyclists. It provides guidelines for the design of adequate and safe infrastructure, including footpaths and cycle tracks, ensuring they are well-separated from motorized traffic where possible. The code also discusses the importance of safe pedestrian crossings, proper lighting, and traffic calming measures in areas with high pedestrian and cyclist activity. The aim is to create an environment where these vulnerable road users can travel with confidence and minimal risk.

Q: What are the capacity implications of mixed traffic compared to homogeneous traffic?

Mixed traffic generally has a lower capacity compared to homogeneous traffic due to the slower speeds and varied operating characteristics of different vehicle types. The presence of slower vehicles, larger vehicle dimensions, and potential for interactions between different vehicle types all contribute to reduced throughput. The code provides guidance on estimating capacity reduction factors for mixed traffic scenarios, which are essential for traffic flow analysis and network planning.

Q: How should intersections be designed to handle mixed traffic effectively?

Intersections are critical points of conflict in mixed traffic. The code recommends providing adequate sight distances, designing appropriate turning radii, and implementing suitable traffic control devices. Phasing of traffic signals is crucial, often requiring longer green times for pedestrian crossings and specific phases for non-motorized vehicles. The design should aim to minimize conflict points and ensure that all road users have sufficient time to navigate the intersection safely.

Q: What role does parking play in the context of mixed traffic management?

Parking, especially on-street parking, can significantly obstruct the flow of mixed traffic and create safety hazards. This code provides guidelines for regulating parking to minimize its impact. It emphasizes the importance of designated parking areas and strict enforcement of parking restrictions in zones with high traffic volumes. Proper planning for off-street parking facilities is also encouraged to reduce the demand for on-street parking, thereby improving overall traffic mobility.

Q: Are there any specific guidelines for managing cycle-rickshaws and auto-rickshaws?

Yes, the code recognizes the significant presence of cycle-rickshaws and auto-rickshaws in urban mixed traffic. It provides specific recommendations for their lane width requirements, operational safety, and their integration into the traffic system. This includes considerations for their turning movements, parking, and their interaction with faster moving vehicles. The code aims to ensure these modes of transport are accommodated safely and efficiently within the urban road network.

Q: How frequently should traffic surveys be conducted for mixed traffic analysis?

The frequency of traffic surveys for mixed traffic analysis depends on the dynamism of the urban area and the rate of change in traffic composition. However, it is generally recommended to conduct comprehensive surveys periodically, for instance, every 2-3 years, to understand evolving traffic patterns, vehicle mix, and modal split. More frequent spot surveys might be necessary in rapidly developing areas or after significant infrastructure changes. These surveys are crucial for validating design assumptions and updating traffic management strategies.

PDF Google Compare IRC Portal

Link points to Internet Archive / others. Not hosted by InfraLens. Details

Austroads Guide to Traffic Management Part 6: Intersections and Geçits · NCHRP Report 600: Recommended Guidelines for the Implementation of Road Safety Audits · FHWA Traffic Analysis Tools Volume III: Traffic Speeds and Throughput

CurrentFrequently UsedCode of PracticeTransportation · Roads and Pavement

PDF Google Compare IRC Portal

Link points to Internet Archive / others. Not hosted by InfraLens. Details

IRC 70:2017 is the Indian Standard (IRC) for guidelines on regulation and control of mixed traffic in urban areas. This guideline is essential for urban traffic engineers and planners to manage the complexities of mixed traffic scenarios. It delves into the planning, design, and operational aspects of urban roads that accommodate a diverse range of vehicle types, prioritizing safety and traffic flow. The code emphasizes appropriate road geometry, traffic control devices, and management strategies to mitigate conflicts and improve the overall mobility experience for all road users in congested urban environments. By adhering to these recommendations, authorities can create more predictable and safer travel conditions for both motorized and non-motorized traffic.

This IRC code provides comprehensive guidelines for the regulation and control of mixed traffic in urban areas. It addresses the challenges posed by the coexistence of various vehicle types, including motor vehicles, cycle-rickshaws, auto-rickshaws, and pedal cycles, to ensure safety and efficiency on urban road networks.

Quick Reference — IRC 70:2017 Mixed Traffic in Urban Areas

Key reference values — verify against the current code edition / project specification.

✓ Verified 2026-05-15

Reference	Value	Clause
Subject	Regulation & control of mixed urban traffic	Scope
Problem	Coexistence of fast + slow + NMT + pedestrians	Context
Measures	Segregation, lane discipline, speed management	Strategy
NMT/pedestrian	Dedicated facilities (cycle track/footpath)	Provision
Read with	IRC 103 (pedestrian) / IRC 11 (cycle) / IRC 106	Cross-ref

⚠ Indicative reference values from the code/standard practice; the binding figures are those in the current edition and the project specification.

Overview

Status: Current
Usage level: Frequently Used
Domain: Transportation — Roads and Pavement
Type: Code of Practice

International equivalents

Austroads Guide to Traffic Management Part 6: Intersections and Geçits NCHRP Report 600: Recommended Guidelines for the Implementation of Road Safety Audits FHWA Traffic Analysis Tools Volume III: Traffic Speeds and Throughput ITE Manual of Traffic Engineering Studies

Also on InfraLens for IRC 70

18Key values 6Tables 10FAQs

Practical Notes

! Prioritize dedicated lanes or distinct space allocation for different vehicle types to minimize conflict zones.

! Traffic calming measures should be context-specific, considering local needs and user acceptance.

! Effective enforcement of lane discipline and traffic rules is crucial for the success of mixed traffic management.

! Regular traffic surveys are essential to understand the changing composition and behavior of mixed traffic.

! Consider the use of variable message signs (VMS) to inform drivers about changing traffic conditions or specific road use regulations.

! Footpath and cycle track design should ensure seamless connectivity and avoid abrupt terminations.

! At intersections, phasing of traffic signals should be optimized to give adequate green time to slower moving vehicles like cycle-rickshaws and auto-rickshaws during peak hours.

! Surface condition of cycle tracks and footpaths should be maintained regularly to prevent accidents.

! Provision for safe pedestrian crossings, including zebra crossings and raised crossings, is paramount in urban mixed traffic areas.

! Community engagement and public awareness campaigns can significantly improve compliance with traffic regulations.

! Parking regulations, especially on-street parking, must be strictly enforced to prevent obstruction of mixed traffic flow.

! The design of bus bays and lay-bys should not impede the free movement of other traffic when buses are not stopping.

! Consider the impact of weather conditions on braking distances and visibility for all types of vehicles.

! Dynamic lane management systems can be explored for highly congested urban corridors to adapt lane usage based on real-time traffic demands.

! The integration of non-motorized transport (NMT) facilities should be a primary consideration in all urban road development and improvement projects.

! Regular maintenance and repair of road furniture like bollards, signs, and traffic signals are critical for effective traffic control.

Frequently referenced clauses

Cl. 2.1Introduction and Scope

Cl. 3.1Traffic Characteristics and Classification

Cl. 4.1Principles of Road Design for Mixed Traffic

Cl. 5.1Lane Widths and Roadway Cross-Section

Cl. 6.1Intersections and Junctions

Cl. 7.1Traffic Control Devices

Cl. 8.1Traffic Management and Operational Strategies

Cl. 9.1Pedestrian and Cyclist Facilities

Cl. 10.1Traffic Calming Measures

Cl. 11.1Parking and Loading/Unloading Facilities

urban trafficmixed traffictraffic managementroad designtraffic engineeringnon-motorized transportpedestrian safetycyclist safetytraffic control devicestraffic calmingroad capacityintersection designurban planningIndian roadsIRC codesIRC

Engineer's Notes

In Practice — Editorial Commentary

When IRC 70 is your governing code

IRC 70 specifies guidelines on regulation and control of mixed traffic in urban areas — the methodology for managing the unique Indian urban traffic mix (cars + two-wheelers + auto-rickshaws + bicycles + buses + trucks + animal carts + pedestrians) that operates in shared road space.

Use IRC 70 when: - Designing urban arterial / collector / local roads - Smart city / urban mobility plans - Traffic management on urban corridors - Pedestrian / cyclist safety improvements - BRTS (Bus Rapid Transit System) integration with mixed traffic - Shared-space street designs - Tactical urbanism + complete streets

Key urban traffic challenges in India: - High two-wheeler share (30-50 % of vehicles) - Cycle + pedestrian share growing in modern cities - Auto-rickshaw + paratransit - Animal carts in tier-2/3 cities - Heavy commercial vehicle through-traffic mixed with local - High pedestrian crossing demand - Limited road width - Mixed land use along roads

IRC 70 covers: - Lane discipline + lane width per vehicle mix - Pedestrian + cyclist provisions - Speed management in urban context - Signal control for mixed traffic - Public transport priority (bus lanes, BRTS) - Non-motorised transport (NMT) infrastructure - Conflict management at intersections + crossings - Lighting + signage for urban operations

Reference values + key design principles

Lane width (urban): - Standard car lane: 3.0-3.5 m - Bus lane: 3.5 m - Truck lane: 3.5 m - Mixed traffic lane: 3.5 m (allows safe overtaking of two-wheeler) - Two-wheeler lane (segregated, where present): 1.5-2.0 m - Cycle lane: 1.5-2.0 m - Footpath: minimum 1.5 m (recommended 2.5-3.5 m on busy streets)

Speed limits in urban areas: - Arterial: 50-60 km/h - Collector: 40-50 km/h - Local street: 25-30 km/h - School zone: 25 km/h - Hospital approach: 30 km/h - Pedestrian-priority street: 10-15 km/h

Signal phasing for mixed traffic: - Pedestrian phase: 7-15 sec (depending on crossing length + pedestrian count) - Two-wheeler advance start (some signals): 3-5 sec head start - Right-turn phase: separate or protected - Cycle phase: dedicated where bike volume is high

Pedestrian crossings: - Marked zebra: minimum 4 m wide - Refuge island in median: minimum 1.5 m wide - Signalled crossing: at busy intersections + school zones - Raised pedestrian crossing (speed table per IRC SP 88:2019) at school zones - Pedestrian Foot Over Bridge (FOB) / subway: at high-volume + high-speed roads

NMT / cyclist infrastructure: - Painted cycle lane: 1.5-2.0 m - Segregated cycle track (raised or kerb-separated): 2.0-3.0 m - Cycle box at signal-controlled intersection (advance stop line) - End-of-trip facilities (parking, lockers)

Public transport: - Dedicated bus lane (BRTS): 3.5 m carriageway - Bus stops (IRC 80:1981) — lay-by type to avoid blocking traffic - Inter-modal hubs (bus + metro + auto + cycle parking)

Heavy vehicle restrictions: - Time-of-day restrictions (no trucks 8-10 AM / 6-9 PM in city centres) - Designated truck routes - Truck terminals at city periphery

Mixed traffic conflict zones: - Intersections (most accidents) — geometric + signal design - Pedestrian crossings — speed reduction + visibility - Bus stops — pedestrian-vehicle conflicts - Parking + un-parking — slow-moving vs through-traffic

Companion codes (must pair with)

IRC:106:1990 — capacity of urban roads.
IRC SP 41:2005 — at-grade intersections.
IRC 92:2017 — interchanges in urban areas.
IRC SP 78:2014 — decongestion of traffic in urban areas.
IRC:67:2012 — road signs.
IRC:35:2015 — road markings.
IRC:99:2018 — vehicular barriers.
IRC:103:2012 — pedestrian facilities.
IRC SP 64 — lighting on highways.
IRC SP 69:2018 — traffic calming.
IRC SP 88:2019 — speed breakers.
IRC SP 44:2019 — Highway Safety Code.
IRC 80:1981 — bus stops.
IRC 86:2018 — geometric design rural highways.
IRC SP 73:2018 — two-laning of highways with paved shoulders.
IRC SP 37 — guidelines for use of high performance fibre reinforced shotcrete (related material).
National Urban Transport Policy (NUTP) — urban transport framework.
ITDP India guidelines for urban street design.
Smart Cities Mission operational guidelines.
Vision Zero framework.

Common pitfalls / what reviewers flag

1. Pedestrian + cyclist mixed with vehicle traffic without segregation. High accident risk. Provide footpath + cycle facilities. 2. Lane width too narrow for mixed traffic. < 3.0 m doesn't accommodate cars + two-wheelers safely. Maintain 3.5 m for mixed. 3. Inadequate signal phasing. Pedestrian phase too short; pedestrians stranded. 7-15 sec walk phase. 4. No bus lay-by. Bus stops in carriageway block traffic. Lay-by per IRC 80:1981. 5. Auto-rickshaw + cycle in vehicle lane. Speed differential causes accidents. Separate facilities. 6. No speed management in residential zone. Speeding through neighbourhoods. Calming measures per IRC SP 69:2018. 7. Inadequate pedestrian refuge in long crossings. Pedestrians stranded in middle. Refuge island minimum 1.5 m. 8. No FOB / subway at busy + high-speed road. Pedestrian fatalities. Provide grade-separated crossing. 9. Heavy vehicle through city centre. Congestion + safety + noise. Designated truck routes + city periphery terminals. 10. No cycle infrastructure in cycle-friendly cities. Cyclist mortality. Segregated cycle tracks. 11. Inadequate lighting at intersections + pedestrian crossings. Night accidents. Lighting per IRC SP 64. 12. No periodic safety audit. Accident hotspots emerge; not addressed. Annual safety audit per IRC SP 44:2019.

Where it sits in urban transport

Urban traffic management cascade:

1. Land use + transport planning — match infrastructure to expected demand. 2. Network design: - Hierarchy: arterial / collector / local - Public transport corridors (BRTS, metro, MRTS) - NMT network (cycle + pedestrian) 3. Cross-section design (this code, IRC 70:2017): - Lane width per vehicle mix - Footpath + cycle facilities - Public transport lanes - Parking + un-parking 4. Intersection design (IRC SP 41:2005, IRC 92:2017): - Signal vs roundabout vs grade-separated - Pedestrian + cyclist phases - Right-turn movements 5. Pedestrian + cyclist facilities (IRC:103:2012): - Crossings - Refuge islands - FOB / subway 6. Public transport integration: - BRTS / dedicated bus lanes - Bus stops + inter-modal hubs 7. Speed management: - Posted limits + enforcement - Calming measures (IRC SP 69:2018) - Speed cameras 8. Operations + monitoring: - Traffic counts + accident statistics - User feedback - Iterative improvement

Modern Indian urban traffic trends: - Smart city projects + complete streets initiatives - Cycle infrastructure expansion (Bengaluru, Pune, Chennai) - BRTS implementation (Ahmedabad, Indore, Jaipur) - Pedestrianisation of central business districts - Last-mile connectivity through e-rickshaws + bike-share - Vision Zero adoption in selected cities

IRC 70:2017 is one of the foundational codes for Indian urban traffic management. Effective implementation requires multi-disciplinary integration (engineering, planning, enforcement, public engagement) — engineering provides the framework but operations + culture determine actual outcomes.

International Equivalents

Similar International Standards

Austroads Guide to Traffic Management Part 6: Intersections and Geçits

MediumCurrent

NCHRP Report 600: Recommended Guidelines for the Implementation of Road Safety Audits

MediumCurrent

FHWA Traffic Analysis Tools Volume III: Traffic Speeds and Throughput

MediumCurrent

ITE Manual of Traffic Engineering Studies

MediumCurrent

Key Differences

≠

Key Similarities

≈

Parameter Comparison

Parameter	IS Value	International	Source
Lane Widths
Design Speeds (Urban)
Sight Distance
Pedestrian Facility Width
Traffic Calming Measures

⚠ Verify details from original standards before use

Key Values18

Quick Reference Values

design speed urban low traffic20-30 kmph

design speed urban medium traffic30-40 kmph

design speed urban high traffic40-50 kmph

minimum width pedal cycle lane1.5 m

minimum width auto rickshaw lane2.5 m

minimum width motorcycle lane2.0 m

minimum width car lane3.5 m

minimum width bus lane3.75 m

maximum gradient urban arterial6%

minimum sight distance junction urbanVaries based on design speed and vehicle type, e.g., 60m for 40kmph.

capacity reduction factor mixed traffic0.7-0.9 (depending on mix)

minimum setback from carriageway for structuresVaries, e.g., 1.5m for footpaths, 3m for utility poles.

recommended traffic calming measuresSpeed humps, chicanes, narrowed lanes, raised pedestrian crossings.

pedestrian crossing minimum width2.0 m

minimum clearance for parking1.0 m from edge of carriageway.

lane discipline enforcement levelHigh

typical service level urban arterial mixed trafficC-D

peak hour factor urban mixed traffic0.8-0.95

Key Formulas

W_lane = O_vehicle + C_lateral

SD = 0.278 * V * t + (V^2 / (2*g*f))

Capacity_mixed = Capacity_ideal * F_mix * F_ped * F_cycle

W_footpath = V_ped * n_ped

Tables & Referenced Sections

Key Tables

Classification of Vehicles in Mixed Traffic

Recommended Lane Widths for Different Vehicle Types

Roadway Cross-Sectional Elements for Urban Roads

Sight Distance Requirements at Urban Intersections

Standard Signage for Mixed Traffic Control

Width of Pedestrian Walkways and Cycle Tracks

Frequently Asked Questions10

What are the main challenges addressed by this IRC code regarding mixed traffic in urban areas?+

The primary challenges are ensuring safety for all road users, improving traffic flow efficiency, and equitably distributing road space among diverse vehicle types. This includes managing conflicts between fast-moving motorized vehicles and slower non-motorized vehicles, ensuring adequate space for pedestrians and cyclists, and reducing accidents at intersections and on road sections. The code aims to provide a framework for urban planners and engineers to develop strategies that mitigate these issues effectively.

How does the code suggest allocating road space for different vehicle types?+

The code emphasizes the need for a systematic approach to road space allocation based on the traffic volume and composition. It recommends providing dedicated lanes or clearly demarcating space for different vehicle types, such as motor vehicles, auto-rickshaws, motorcycles, and pedal cycles. The appropriate width for each lane is determined based on the operating characteristics of the vehicles and the need for adequate lateral clearance to ensure safety and prevent sideswipes. This often involves a trade-off analysis to balance the needs of different user groups.

What specific traffic control devices are recommended for mixed traffic environments?+

The code recommends a range of traffic control devices tailored for mixed traffic. This includes standard road signs and markings, but also emphasizes the need for specific signage and markings to guide and regulate non-motorized vehicles. Traffic signals should be designed with appropriate phasing to accommodate slower moving vehicles. Additionally, the code discusses the use of traffic bollards, channelizers, and other devices to define traffic paths and manage conflicts at intersections and along road segments. The effectiveness of these devices is paramount for regulating behavior.

What are traffic calming measures and how are they relevant to this code?+

Traffic calming measures are physical design features or operational strategies intended to slow down or reduce the volume of traffic, thereby improving safety. In the context of mixed traffic, they are crucial for protecting vulnerable road users like pedestrians and cyclists. The code discusses various measures such as speed humps, chicanes, raised pedestrian crossings, and narrowed lanes. These are particularly important in residential areas, near schools, and in commercial zones where pedestrian and cyclist activity is high and conflicts with motorized traffic are more likely to occur.

How does the code address the safety of pedestrians and cyclists?+

The code places significant emphasis on the safety of pedestrians and cyclists. It provides guidelines for the design of adequate and safe infrastructure, including footpaths and cycle tracks, ensuring they are well-separated from motorized traffic where possible. The code also discusses the importance of safe pedestrian crossings, proper lighting, and traffic calming measures in areas with high pedestrian and cyclist activity. The aim is to create an environment where these vulnerable road users can travel with confidence and minimal risk.

What are the capacity implications of mixed traffic compared to homogeneous traffic?+

Mixed traffic generally has a lower capacity compared to homogeneous traffic due to the slower speeds and varied operating characteristics of different vehicle types. The presence of slower vehicles, larger vehicle dimensions, and potential for interactions between different vehicle types all contribute to reduced throughput. The code provides guidance on estimating capacity reduction factors for mixed traffic scenarios, which are essential for traffic flow analysis and network planning.

How should intersections be designed to handle mixed traffic effectively?+

Intersections are critical points of conflict in mixed traffic. The code recommends providing adequate sight distances, designing appropriate turning radii, and implementing suitable traffic control devices. Phasing of traffic signals is crucial, often requiring longer green times for pedestrian crossings and specific phases for non-motorized vehicles. The design should aim to minimize conflict points and ensure that all road users have sufficient time to navigate the intersection safely.

What role does parking play in the context of mixed traffic management?+

Parking, especially on-street parking, can significantly obstruct the flow of mixed traffic and create safety hazards. This code provides guidelines for regulating parking to minimize its impact. It emphasizes the importance of designated parking areas and strict enforcement of parking restrictions in zones with high traffic volumes. Proper planning for off-street parking facilities is also encouraged to reduce the demand for on-street parking, thereby improving overall traffic mobility.

Are there any specific guidelines for managing cycle-rickshaws and auto-rickshaws?+

Yes, the code recognizes the significant presence of cycle-rickshaws and auto-rickshaws in urban mixed traffic. It provides specific recommendations for their lane width requirements, operational safety, and their integration into the traffic system. This includes considerations for their turning movements, parking, and their interaction with faster moving vehicles. The code aims to ensure these modes of transport are accommodated safely and efficiently within the urban road network.

How frequently should traffic surveys be conducted for mixed traffic analysis?+

The frequency of traffic surveys for mixed traffic analysis depends on the dynamism of the urban area and the rate of change in traffic composition. However, it is generally recommended to conduct comprehensive surveys periodically, for instance, every 2-3 years, to understand evolving traffic patterns, vehicle mix, and modal split. More frequent spot surveys might be necessary in rapidly developing areas or after significant infrastructure changes. These surveys are crucial for validating design assumptions and updating traffic management strategies.

QA/QC Inspection Templates

📋

QA/QC templates coming soon for this code.

Browse all 300 templates →

BOQ Builder·Auto-BOQ from dimensions, DSR ratesNEW→BidEasy·Government tenders, searchableLIVE→InfraLens App·Free on Play Store, offline-readyNEW→

IRC 70 : 2017Guidelines on Regulation and Control of Mixed Traffic in Urban Areas

PDF Google Compare IRC Portal

Link points to Internet Archive / others. Not hosted by InfraLens. Details

CurrentFrequently UsedCode of PracticeTransportation · Roads and Pavement

PDF Google Compare IRC Portal

Link points to Internet Archive / others. Not hosted by InfraLens. Details

Quick Reference — IRC 70:2017 Mixed Traffic in Urban Areas

Key reference values — verify against the current code edition / project specification.

✓ Verified 2026-05-15

Reference	Value	Clause
Subject	Regulation & control of mixed urban traffic	Scope
Problem	Coexistence of fast + slow + NMT + pedestrians	Context
Measures	Segregation, lane discipline, speed management	Strategy
NMT/pedestrian	Dedicated facilities (cycle track/footpath)	Provision
Read with	IRC 103 (pedestrian) / IRC 11 (cycle) / IRC 106	Cross-ref

⚠ Indicative reference values from the code/standard practice; the binding figures are those in the current edition and the project specification.

Overview

Status: Current
Usage level: Frequently Used
Domain: Transportation — Roads and Pavement
Type: Code of Practice