prefeasibility study for bishek report_kyrgyzstan.pdf · kara balta, a crossroad to the second...
TRANSCRIPT
Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
Promotion of Investment in the selected Asian Highway Routes
in four countries (Bangladesh, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia and Myanmar)
Final Report
Prefeasibility Study of Upgrading Bishkek – Chaldovar
Highway (AH5) in Kyrgyzstan
i
This study was undertaken with the financial assistance of
Korea Expressway Corporation
Bangkok
November 2014
Disclaimer
The analyses, findings, views and opinions expressed and arguments employed in the report are those of
the study team members involved with the prefeasibility study, and do not necessarily reflect the official
views of the ESCAP secretariat or of the Government of Kyrgyzstan.
The data and other information, analyses, and findings presented in the report are provided without
warranty of any kind, either express or implied, including their accuracy and completeness for investment
or for any other purpose. The user of the report specifically acknowledges the limitations of the study and
agrees that the use of any materials of the report is at the user’s sole risk.
The designations employed and the presentation of the material including on the maps in this report do
not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations
concerning the legal status of any country territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the
delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
Mention of firm names and commercial products does not imply the endorsement of the United Nations.
This report has been issued without formal editing.
ii
Foreword
This prefeasibility study is based primarily on data that were readily available from various
secondary sources, including concerned government departments, and previous studies and reports. The
study itself did not commission any field study to complement data available from secondary sources. A
field trip was however undertaken by the study team mainly to understand the project’s physical and overall
development contexts, and the nature of its likely social and environmental impacts in broad terms. The
available data and information from secondary sources were mostly limited to physical (topographical and
cross-sectional), traffic flow, standard construction costs for different road construction items and some
socio-economic aspects. The study lacks any quantitative assessment of environmental and social impacts
based on surveyed data. However, some initial comments based on observations during the field trip are
included. Given the significance of environmental and social impacts of a road project, any future full-scale
feasibility study of the project should carefully investigate these impacts and consider suitable mitigation
measures through detailed field-level studies.
An attempt was made by the study team to understand the broader development contexts of the
project, including future potential benefits due to improved domestic and cross-border connectivity with the
neighboring countries. However, these understandings were mainly qualitative in nature (and reflected so in
narrative text in the report). A full-scale feasibility study may investigate this aspect further and examine how
the benefits of enhanced cross-border connectivity may be assessed and evaluated for use in a conventional
economic or investment analysis.
iii
Abbreviations and Acronyms
AADT
AH
ADB
AHN
B/C
BCA
CAS
COS
CPS
CSP
DBST
EIA
EIP
ESCAP
GOK
GMS
IA
IEE
IR
IRR
KEC
MDB
MOTC
NPV
O/D
PCE
PPP
RSDS
SIP
TA
UNESCAP
VOC
WB
Annual Average Daily Traffic
Asian Highway
Asian Development Bank
Asian Highway Network
Benefit/Cost Ratio
Benefit Cost Analysis
Country Assistance Strategy
Country Operational Strategy
Country Partnership Strategy
Country Strategy and Program
Double Bituminous Surface Treatment
Environmental Impact Assessment
Environmental Investment Program
Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
Government of Kyrgyzstan
Greater Mekong Sub-region
Implementation Agency
Initial Environmental Examination
Involuntary Resettlement
Internal Rate of Return
Korea Expressway Corporation
Multilateral Development Bank
Ministry of Transport and Communications
Net Present Value
Origin/Destination Survey
Passenger Car Equivalent
Public-Private Partnership
Road Sector Development Strategy
Social Investment Program
Technical Assistant
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
Vehicle Operating Cost
World Bank
iv
Table of Contents
Foreword……………………………………………………………………………………….. ii
Abbreviations and Acronyms………………………………………………………………….. iii
Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………………… iv
Section 1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Project Description ..................................................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................... 3
1.4 Study Team ................................................................................................................................................. 4
1.5 Limitation of the study (Recommendations for a formal feasibility study) ................................................ 4
Section 2 Data Survey and Review of Previous Studies ............................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Data Survey................................................................................................................................................. 6
2.2 Review of previous studies ......................................................................................................................... 6
Section 3 Development Plan and Socio-economic Characteristics ............................................................................................ 1 3.1 Development Plan (National and Regional Level) ..................................................................................... 1
3.2 Socio-economic Characteristics .................................................................................................................. 1
3.3 Road System Inventory ............................................................................................................................... 5
3.4 Asian Highway Network ............................................................................................................................. 6
Section 4 Technical Feasibility .......................................................................................................................................................... 8 4.1 Route Assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 8
4.2 Traffic Forecast ......................................................................................................................................... 12
4.3 Improvement Plan ..................................................................................................................................... 15
4.4 Cost Estimation ......................................................................................................................................... 15
Section 5 Economic Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................. 1 5.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................... 1
5.2 Benefit/Cost Analysis.................................................................................................................................. 2
5.3 Sensitivity Analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Section 6 Environmental and Social Impact .................................................................................................................................. 7 6.1 Environmental Impact ................................................................................................................................. 7
6.2 Social Impact .............................................................................................................................................. 7
Section 7 Recommendation ................................................................................................................................................................ 8 7.1 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 8
7.2 Recommendation ........................................................................................................................................ 8
7.3 Implementation Plan ................................................................................................................................... 9
Section 8 Alternative Scenario with high Traffic Volume .........................................................................................................10 8.1 Alternate Traffic Volume ........................................................................................................................... 10
8.2 Traffic Forecast ......................................................................................................................................... 10
8.3 Viability of the Project Road ..................................................................................................................... 11
Appendices Appendix A. List of persons met .............................................................................................................................. 13
Appendix B. Implementation Agency ....................................................................................................................... 14
Appendix C. Economic Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 14
Appendix D. Asian Highway Database (UNESCAP, 2010) ..................................................................................... 16
Appendix E. Asian highway Design Standard (1993) .............................................................................................. 19
Appendix F. Data Survey Request ............................................................................................................................ 20
1
Section 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Efforts have been made in recent years to assess the current level of investment and to identify
investment needs and priorities for the development, mainly upgrade of Asian Highway (AH) to the
required technical standard, of AH Network (AHN) including:
Priority Investment Needs for the development of the Asian Highway Network (2006,
UNESCAP)
Prefeasibility study of the selected routes (upgrading of priority routes) in Armenia,
Bangladesh, Mongolia and Myanmar (2007, UNESCAP)
Investment Forum (16 November 2007, UNESCAP)
To facilitate the promotion and development of AH investment, a second phase of prefeasibility study
of selected routes in Bangladesh, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia and Myanmar is being implemented as an
ongoing effort by UNESCAP with the financial support from Korea Expressway Corporation (KEC).
ESCAP decided that study routes should be nominated by recipient countries considering a set of
given criteria reflecting their needs and overall strategic development contexts.
Figure 1. Asian Highway Network
2
1.2 Project Description
Project Summary
The Ministry of Transport and Communications (MOTC), Kyrgyzstan, has proposed:
Capacity expansion of Bishkek-Kara Balta-Chaldovar section (92km) on AH5; and
Construction of a new PPP expressway (4 lanes) in parallel with the above mentioned project
from Bishkek to Kara Balta additionally during the meeting in Bishkek on July 5, 2012
It was noted that ADB intervention was already underway for the rehabilitation of Bishkek-Kara Balta
section.
Figure 2. Bishkek-Karabalta-Chaldovar section in Kyrgyzstan
Source: Based on AH Network (see Figure.1)
Strategic context of the project
1. Rehabilitation of Bishkek-Kara Balta-Chaldovar section (92km): This east-west corridor is in the
GOK’s top priority as well as north-south Bishkek-Torougart (AH61) and Kara Balta-Osh corridors. It
is one of the main arterials, which connects:
Bishkek, the Capital of Kyrgyzstan;
Kara Balta, a crossroad to the second largest city Osh; and
Chaldovar, a border to Kazakhstan.
It is AH Class I and II in light of AH classification and design standards and the main access to
Kazakhstan from this landlocked country.
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
3
2. Construction of a new Bishkek-Kara Balta highway (4 lanes) by PPP: The capacity of Bishkek-
Kara Balta corridor could be enhanced significantly with the new highway.
In 1988, Preliminary Design of the new road was done to enhance the capacity of the corridor as well
as to accommodate demand from neighboring Kazakhstan since it can be a short cut of A2 Highway
in Kazakhstan between the western and the eastern borderline of Kyrgyzstan at that time.
Considering the relatively low traffic volumes of the existing road and intervention made by ADB,
economic and financial viability of the new road, and the capacity expansion of the existing road,
should be explored carefully by a separate formal study. This new road can be listed in the long term
plan based on the level of traffic demand in the future. Three alternatives were identified and reviewed
as below:
Construction of new PPP road in Bishkek~Kara Balta section (MOTC proposal)
Widening of Kara Balta~Chaldovar section from 2 to 4 lanes
Overlay with partial repairs and improvement for Kara Balta~ Chaldovar section.
Due to the limited resources given including the budget of the study, within Bishkek-Kara Balata-
Chaldovar section, improvement of the remaining Kara Balta-Chaldovar section (2 lane, 32km) has
been studied as the main focus of this study.
1.3 Methodology
The overall approach of the prefeasibility study is represented diagrammatically in Figure 3 and
summarized as below. A simple trend analysis has been used for the future traffic forecasting due to
the limited availability of resources.
Figure 3. Prefeasibility Study Process
4
1.4 Study Team
This prefeasibility study report has been issued by the Transport and Tourism Division, Economic and
Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). The external consultant, Mr. Woohyun Kwon
has prepared the report with assistance from other consultants and ESCAP officials.
Mr. Hyunha Kwon and Mr. Byungryeol Kim from Naekyung Engineering, Korea, provided additional
assistance with the technical study, traffic forecast and economic evaluation. Mr. Mohammad Nurul
Amin (Deputy Secretary, Roads and Railway Division, MOC) provided relevant data and inputs as the
national expert.
1.5 Limitation of the study (Recommendations for a formal feasibility study)
1. Given the limited resources including the budget, this study has been conducted with the objective
of providing initial evaluation of the candidate route, which was proposed by the Government of
Kyrgyzstan (GOK), to facilitate the interventions from bilateral and/or multilateral donors. In this
regards, the limitation of this study and recommendations for a formal feasibility study are as follows:
The rationale review of the candidate route, which was suggested by the recipient county, and
an exploration of its alternatives have been omitted;
The output of the report is mainly relied on the information and data provided by GOK due to
the limited availability of information in English;
The route assessment for 92km long project was done during one-day site survey only while
thorough investigation of the site should be in place for the efficient planning/design and
estimation of quantities regarding the improvement plan;
Unit cost analysis instead of estimation of BOQ has been used in this study. Cost estimates of
the previous study and CPI, as an inflator, have been used; and
5
The aerial photos from secondary sources were used for the review since the terrain maps
were not provided due to the national security concerns.
2. In countries with a low traffic demand such as Kyrgyzstan, traditional Benefit Cost Analysis may
not capture the need of infrastructure development properly. By the nature of traffic demand, a derived
secondary function of a variety of socio-economic activities and development plans, the output of the
traffic forecasting and economic analysis in Kyrgyzstan may be insignificant since the initial values of
major indicators including population (5.3million) and number of registered vehicles (318,581) arelow.
A holistic, instead of demand-driven, approach may be appropriate, if a higher priority was given for
the project by the government.
3. The economic viability of the project could have been enhanced considerably by the provision of
following information.
Socio-economic data/statistics including development plan of regions and transport facilities
in the catchments;
Per-unit data for economic analysis in the context of Kyrgyzstan including reduction of
traffic accidents and environmental benefits; and
Traffic survey data including O/D, network, sectional volumes, and travel speed
6
Section 2 DATA SURVEY AND REVIEW OF PREVIOUS STUDIES
2.1 Data Survey
The project team requested the background materials for data collection in the form of a country
Report (Appendix F). National, regional and project level survey was done by the collection of
country report from project country, internet research, document review and field mission.
Major data collection and survey items are as follows:
A. National (and Regional) Outlook
Area, population, Currency and exchange rate
GDP/GRP, GDP per capita, Economic growth rate, Inflation rate, Employment rate by
sector
Trade (Import, Export), Major trade commodities, Major trade partners (Import, Export)
B. National & Sub-national strategy and priority
Road Master Plan, Regional & sub-regional Planning
Development and upgrading plan of AHN
Strategies and priorities
C. Implementation Agency (Road authority)
Organization
Implementation process including planning, design, construction and maintenance
D. Engineering data
Design specification
Road and bridge inventory
Traffic data (volume, O/D, travel speed, number of accident)
Unit construction cost(road, box & culvert, bridge, T/N)
Maintenance cost (Routine maintenance, periodic overlay)
Toll rate
Geotechnical and hydraulic survey
E. Socio-economic data
Social discount rate (%)
Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE), Vehicle occupancies, Number of registered Vehicles
Time Value, Vehicle Operating Cost (VOC)
GRP/GDP
Land use plan
2.2 Review of previous studies
Previous studies regarding AH were thoroughly reviewed and be incorporated as needed. Major
previous studies are as follows:
1. Priority Investment Needs for the development of the Asian Highway (AH) Network (2006, UNESCAP)
National priorities and intermodal connectivity have been identified as follows:
Status of AH network: Kyrgyzstan has a total 1,695km long AH network, among which
720km is below class III.
Traffic volume in Bishkek-Kara Balta was 20,976 AADT in 2006
7
Priority investment needs: Bishkek-Torougart (AH61, 539km) and other sections (1,050km)
were identified as priority projects.
Intermodal connectivity: The importance of regional cooperation in improving the
intermodal connections of AH network to landlocked countries including Kyrgyzstan was
addressed.
2. CAREC Corridors (Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation, ADB)
Four regional transport corridors passing through Kyrgyzstan was identified and prioritized.
CAREC 1: Europe-East Asia(Bishkek-Naryn-Torugart Road)
CAREC 2: The Mediterranean- East Asia (Osh-Sarytash-Irkeshtam Road)
CAREC 3: Russian Federation-Middle East-South Asia (Osh-Sarytash-Karamyk road)
CAREC 5: East Asia- Middle East-South Asia (Irkeshtam- Sarytash-Karamyk road)
3. Interim Strategy Note (ISN) FY 2012-2013 (June 2011, The World Bank)
In response to the internal conflict in 2010, ISN was prepared for the transition period of FY2012-
FY2013.
The ISN aims to partner the transition from recovery (Internal conflict in 2010), via
stabilization, to long-term sectoral development
In road transport, the government’s focus is on rehabilitating six strategic road corridors
Financing road maintenance at the required level remains a challenge
Support for the ongoing Bishkek and Osh Urban Infrastructure project (FY12) for the social
stability in the south.
4. Country Assistance Program Evaluation (CAPE, Aug 2012, ADB)
The CAPE covers three country strategies (i.e., the 1996–2003 COS, the 2004–2006 CSP, and the
2007–2010 JCSS)
The country has to overcome obstacles posed by the difficult topography (mountainous) and
isolation (landlocked) with a small population dispersed over a vast area (small domestic
market).
The importance of road rehabilitation and regional cooperation shall be recognized for rapid
growth.
By improving infrastructure and connectivity in the Bishkek-Osh road, Bishkek-Almaty
road, and Southern Transport Corridor road, regional trade and economic activities are
generated and isolation of the south has been reduced along the roadsides.
8
Figure 4. ADB supported Road Projects in Kyrgyzstan
Source: Based on UN country map for Kyrgyzstan available at
http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/kyrgysta.pdf
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
1
Section 3 DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS
3.1 Development Plan (National and Regional Level)
Not available
3.2 Socio-economic Characteristics
3.2.1 General
The Kyrgyz Republic is a landlocked country in Central Asia with a multi-ethnic population of 5.5million. It
is surrounded by China, Republic of Tajikistan, Republic of Uzbekistan, and Republic of Kazakhstan.
Figure 5. Location of Kyrgyzstan
Source: Same as in Figure 2.
Over 80% of the country is covered by mountains with the remainder made up of valleys and basins. The
climate varies regionally. The south-western Fergana Valley is subtropical and extremely hot in summer, with
temperatures reaching 40 °C. The northern foothills are temperate and the Tien Shan varies from dry
continental to polar climate, depending on elevation.
Figure 6. Topography of Kyrgyzstan
Source: Same as in Figure 2.
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
2
The key Socio-economic indicators of Kyrgyzstan (World Bank, 2010) are as follows:
Surface Area: 200,000㎢
Population: 5.5 million
Population growth: 0.65%
Urban population: 35%
GDP: US $ 4,617 million
GDP growth: -1.4%
GNI: US $ 4.7 billion (Atlas method)
GNI per capita: US $880
Economic growth rate: 5.7% (ADB)
Consumer Price (Annual % change): 8.0%
Export : US $ 1,837 million
Import : US $ 3,354 million
Currency unit: Kyrgyz Som (KGS)
US $1=47.07KGS (effective as of Oct 3, 2012 )
3.2.2 Socio-economic characteristics
Population
The population of Republic of Kyrgyastan is 5.5 million (2010) with very low annual growth rate of 0.65%
since 2001.
Table 1. Population trend in Kyrgyzstan
Year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Growth
Rate
(‘01~‘11)
Population
(thousand
person)
4,893.2 4,911.0 4,927.9 4,959.6 4,994.1 5,018.9 5,049.0 5,062.3 5,093.1 5,163.1 5,222.4 0.65%
Source) Kyrgyzstan Statistics committee Homepage, http://212.42.101.112/pxlocal/Database/STATRU/databasetree.asp
Figure 7. Population trend in Kyrgyzstan
4,700
4,800
4,900
5,000
5,100
5,200
5,300
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Population(Thousands)
3
Regional distribution of Population
Kyrgyzstan’s Topography divides the population into two main segments, the north around Bishkek and the
south, mainly Oshskaya. The capital city Bishkek represents 890 thousand, 17% of the total population,
while Oshskava represents 1,026 thousand, 19.6% of the total population. The Chui region represents total
32.4% including Bishkek, Kara Balta-Chaldovar sections out of total population.
Figure 8. Regional distribution of population
Bishkek, 889.6
Osh, 240.9
Chui, 802.1
Talas, 224.6
Oshskaya area, 1026.2
Naryn, 249.7
Issyk-Kul region, 431.2
Jalal-Abad region, 965.4
Batken, 392.7
Table 2. Regional distribution of population
Region/City
2011 2010 2009
Populaion
(B) B/A
Populaion
(B) B/A
Populaion
(B) B/A
Bishkek 889.6 17.0% 876.3 17.0% 862.3 16.9%
Osh 240.9 4.6% 244.2 4.7% 243.1 4.8%
Chui 802.1 15.4% 795.4 15.4% 788.7 15.5%
Talas 224.6 4.3% 221.8 4.3% 219.1 4.3%
Oshskaya area 1026.2 19.6% 1013.2 19.6% 996.5 19.6%
Naryn 249.7 4.8% 246.9 4.8% 244.8 4.8%
Issyk-Kul region 431.2 8.3% 428 8.3% 424.4 8.3%
Jalal-Abad region 965.4 18.5% 951.9 18.4% 935.5 18.4%
Batken 392.7 7.5% 385.4 7.5% 378.7 7.4%
Total(A) 5,222.4 100.0% 5,163.1 100.0% 5,093.1 100.0%
4
Number of Registered Vehicles
Kyrgyzstan represents relatively small number of registered vehicles, 315,002, in 2008. It is noted that
annual growth rate has increased sharply since 2007.
Table 3. Number of registered vehicles
Year 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Growth
Rate
(‘98~‘08)
# Vehicles 210,273 206,877 208,550 200,630 199,545 198,391 205,037 211,489 227,260 237,589 315,002 4.1%
Source: UNECE Transport Division Database
Figure 9. Number of registered vehicles
GDP
The annual growth rate of GDP represents 4.2% from 2001 to 2011.
(unit : Million 2000 US dollars)
Table 4. GDP trend (2000 Nominal price)
Year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Growth Rate
(‘01~‘11)
GDP 1,443 1,442 1,544 1,652 1,649 1,700 1,846 2,001 2,059 2,031 2,173 4.2%
Source: World Bank Data Homepage, http://data.worldbank.org/country/kyrgyz-republic
5
Figure 10. GDP trend
3.3 Road System Inventory
The road network in the Kyrgyz Republic comprises 34,720 kilometers, 18,810 km of which are public roads
and 15,910 km are other roads.
Table 5. Summary of the Road Network (2007)
By Class International National Local Total
Length (km) 4,163 5,678 8,969 18,810
% 22 30 48 100
By Type Paved Gravel Earth Road Total
Length (km) 7,228 9,961 1,621 18,810
% 38 53 9 100
Source: Ministry of Transport and Communications, the Kyrgyz Republic
The development of road network was primarily done under the former Soviet Union. Due to a backlog in
road maintenance and insufficient funding in the past two decades, roads at all levels are deteriorating. The
Government of the Kyrgyz Republic has made an effort to improve the condition of major arterials through
Road Sector Development Strategy for 2007-2010 (RSDS) and collaboration with donors including CAREC
(Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation, ADB).
6
Figure 11. Major Arterials in Kyrgyzstan
Source: Based on UN country map for Kyrgyzstan available at
http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/map/profile/banglade.pdf
Major arterials connect with neighboring countries are as follows:
Bishkek-Naryn-Torugart road connects Republic of Kyrgyz with China
Bishkek-Georgievka and Bishkek-Kara Balta-Chaldovar highways end in the borderline with
Kazakhstan eastward and westward, respectively.
Osh-Sary Tash-Karamyk road connects Tajikistan whereas Sary Tash-Irekstam road ends in the
borderline with China.
Osh-Bakten-Sulukta road connects Tajikistan
There are several roads connecting Uzbekistan.
All the roads are open for international traffic. The railway system, Balykchy-Tokmok-Bishkek-Kara Balta-
Chaldovar, also runs for Kazakhstan.
3.4 Asian Highway Network
The Asian Highway network in Kyrgyzstan consists of four routes, AH5, AH7, AH64, and AH65, as below.
Out of total 1,695km long AH, 309km (part of AH 61 and 65) is below the class Ⅲ standard.
The boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
7
Table 6. Current Status of AH network in Kyrgyzstan (2011)
AH No. AH5 AH7 AH61 AH65 Total (km)
Major cities
Georgievka-
Bishkek-
KaraBalta-
Chaldovar
Kara Balta-
Dzhalal Abad-
Uzghen-Osh
Bishkek-
Naryn-
Torugart
Osh-Sary Tash-
Irkestam
Sary Tash-
Karamyk
Grade Primary - - - - -
Ⅰ 60 - - - 60
Ⅱ 66 432 313 184 995
Ⅲ - 194 115 22 331
Below
Ⅲ - - 111 198 309
Other - - - - -
Total 126 626 539 404 1,695
Source: Asian Highway Database 2011, United Nations ESCAP
Figure 12. Asian Highway Routes in Kyrgyzstan
Source: United Nations, ESCAP
8
Section 4 TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
Technical viability of candidate route was assessed in terms of its geometry, alignment, traffic volume,
project cost and cross-border connectivity.
4.1 Route Assessment
4.1.1 Field Mission
A UNESCAP mission comprising Mr. Abdul Quium (UNESCAP), Mr. Woohyun Kwon (KEC), Mr. Hyunha
Kwon and Bongjung Kim (Naekyung Engineering) visited Kyrgyzstan from June 4 to 8, 2012. Meetings
were held with H.E. Abdyldaev Sheraly Itibaevich (Deputy Minister), Mr. Mamaev (Director of Investment
Projects Implementation Groups), Mr. Toktomambetor (Head of Road Management Department),
Mr. Temir Niyazbekov (Head of External Economic Relations Division) in the Ministry of Transportation
and Communication (MOTC).
The mission undertook a one day site visit to Bishkek-KaraBalta-Chaldovar (L=92km) on June 7, 2012. Mr.
Alibegashvili Levan Markovichi (Deputy Head of Design Institute, MOTC) and Ms. Yulia Amanbaeva
(Contract Administrator, MOTC) joined the mission.
The objectives of the mission were:
To identify the strategic context of the project;
To assess the road and traffic conditions; and
To identify social and environmental constraints, if any
The mission provided comments to MOTC to assist them with formulating investment proposal including
traffic forecast, economic analysis and safeguard during the meetings and a two day capacity building
workshop from June 5 to 6. The risk management of new PPP road proposal was also discussed in the light
of similar experiences elsewhere. The PPP road will lie parallel to the existing Bishkek-Kara Balta highways
to be widened shortly.
4.1.2 Review of road and traffic conditions
General
Alignment and traffic condition: The Bishkek-Kara Balta-Chaldovar section is 92 kilometers long, and passes
through a level terrain. The alignment is quite straight without steep gradients or sharp curves. The number
of lanes is four to six on Bishkek-Kara Balta section and two on Kara Balta-Chaldovar. The traffic volumes
(AADT) were about 7,198 and 2,650 vehicles per day, respectively in 2010.
Social and Environmental: From Bishkek to Kara Balta, several medium-sized cities are dispersed, and also
many resident buildings and various markets are located alongside of the road.
Geology: The project road was built on the huge alluvial fan from the mountainous region of Tien Shan, the
region forms the extensive rich black soil-belt like other countries in Central Asia. This may cause a uneven
settlement for the new road.
Pavement condition: The road was mostly paved with asphalt concrete and its surface condition of both
Bishkek-Kara Balta and Kara Balta-Chaldovar sections appear to be good except of several short sections. It
is noted that rehabilitation was done in 2007 (Bishkek-Kara Balta) and 1985 (Kara Balta-Chaldovar).
9
1. Bishkek-Kara Balata section
Review of this 60km section was omitted since rehabilitation of Bishkek-Kara Balta section had already been
arranged by ADB’S CAREC Corridor 3 (Bishkek-Osh Road) Improvement Project, Phase 4.
ADB interventions: ADB is assisting GOK in rehabilitating 130km of Bishkek-Kara Balta (60km) and
Madaniyak to Jalabad (70km), which is a part of CAREC Corridor 3 (Bishkek-Osh Road) with an estimated
cost of $120 million.
PPP road construction: The MOTC expressed its desire to enhance the capacity of Bishkek-Kara Balta
corridor by providing new 4 lane highway during the meeting in Bishkek on July 5, 2012 with the mission.
Based on the preliminary design, which was done in 1988, the new road will run parallel to the project road,
approximately 5km northward. The road will be built on the current location of Chuy stream while the
stream would be relocated into an open concrete culvert to avoid uneven settlement issue. The rationale for
the relocation of the stream and construction of large scale open culvert may be revisited considering its
environmental impact and efficiency of construction.
Figure 13. Typical section of PPP road
Source: MOT, Kyrgyzstan
Preliminary traffic projection in terms of various toll rate and GDP growth is as follows:
The total traffic volume for both PPP road and existing road is less than 23,000 vehicles per day
The maximum traffic volume for each road is less than 20,000 vehicles per day.
It demonstrates that the financial viability of an additional PPP road may be slim in the near
term.
10
Table 7. Traffic Projection in Bishkek ~ Kara Balta (Year 2044)
Toll rate for PPP road
(Som)
PPP road travel time (%) in
compare to existing road
Traffic Volume (2044, vehicle/day)
PPP road Existing Road
free 75.0% 16,174 6,607
10 84.2% 13,441 9,340
20 93.2% 11,163 11,618
30 102.3% 8,429 14,352
40 113.0% 5,695 17,086
50 120.5% 3,417 19,364
2. Kara Balta-Chaldovar section
The Kara Balta-Chaldovar section is 32km long, 2 lane highway and passes on the level terrain (Asian
Highway Class Ⅱ standard). It starts from a three-leg intersection and ends at Kazakhstan border.
The horizontal and vertical alignment comprises mostly straight without steep gradients or sharp curves. The
ROW is 30 to 50 meters with 7 to 14 meter carriageway and 1 to 2 meter shoulders. The traffic volume is
about 2,500 vehicles per day. No specific constraints were identified for the future widening since it passes a
dispersed settlement and farms mostly.
Road surface condition
It was built in 1955 and the latest rehabilitation was done in 1985. The overall surface condition is fair. Many
potholes and scaling were found and some aggregate separations were also identified. Remedies including
patching and overlay are needed to be done by thorough inspection.
Figure 14. Road surface condition
11
Source: Study team
Railway crossing
There is an at-grade railway crossing at about 8 km station from Kara Balta. The frequency of the train is
relatively low; the passenger train runs between Bishkek and Lugovaya, Kazakhstan three times a day and
freight train also runs one or two times per day irregularly. Construction of a flyover is not needed.
It is highlighted that the angle of intersection between the road and railway forced to be changed from 25° to
50° just before the railway. Considering the insufficient sight distance due to relatively cute angle and future
development alongside the road, improvement of this at-grade section including better angle (75°) provision
was suggested. Impact of this improvement has been incorporated into the economic analysis by with and
without assessment.
Kara Balta bridge
The Kara Balta Bridge consists of two span slab bridge and one span pre-stressed concrete girder bridge
without any joint devices on the deck. The condition of deck surface pavement is good overall while bearings
need to be replaced based on the thorough investigation. Lots of fungus and stains were found on the surface
of all girders and piers, which need to be cleaned. No severe cracks were identified.
Figure 15. Deck surface pavement and substructure of Kara Balta bridge
Source: Study team
Cross drain pipe
In this region, only a few drain pipes are identified since there is very little precipitation, about 360㎜ a year.
A drain pipe installed on the downstream from a reservoir is shown below. The cross drain pipes are clogged
with soils and gravels due to a slope failure. Addition of wing wall and parapet at the inlet and outlet of pipe
would be beneficial to prevent clogging.
Figure 16. Clogged cross drain pipe
12
Source: Study team
Safety furniture
Line markings and traffic signals, especially for major intersections and village area, are need to be installed.
Figure 17. Lack of Line marking
Source: Study team
4.2 Traffic Forecast
4.2.1 Current Traffic condition
The Asian Highway Database provides that the traffic volumes of Asian Highway No. 5 Bishkek~Kara Balta
(4 lane) and Kara Balta ~Chaldovar (2 lane) sections are from 7,198 and 2,650 vehicles/day in 2010
respectively. This corridor connects national capital Bishkek and is the main transportation and
communication link between Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. It is also designated as a CAREC (Central Asia
Regional Cooperation) Corridor by ADB.
Table 8. Current traffic volumes in AH5 Bishkek~Kara Balta~Chaldovar (2010)
City/Town
Name at
Start Point
City/Town
Name at
End Point
Traffic Volume by Vehicle Type
Passenger
Car
Pick-up
Bus
Truck
Trailer
Motor-
cycle Total
Georgievka Bishkek 4,132 99 832 1,198 217 0 6,478
Bishkek Kara Balta 4,214 478 307 1,952 123 124 7,198
Kara Balta Chaldovar 1,318 0 354 854 124 0 2,650
Source: UNESCAP Asian Highway DATABASE,
http://www.unescap.org/ttdw/common/tis/ah/Member%20countries.asp
13
4.2.2 Traffic forecast
Based on the current traffic volumes and traffic projection, widening of the project road was not considered.
Overlay with partial repairs and improvements were explored only.
Simple Trend Analysis
A simple trend analysis has been used for the future traffic forecasting considering the limited budget,
absence of comprehensive traffic database including traffic count and O/D survey and transport network data.
The annual growth rate of nominal GDP during last 7 years from 2001 to 20071 (5% per annum on average)
was used as an independent variable for the regression model of traffic forecasting considering the strong
correlation between traffic growth and GDP growth. The growth rate of registered number of vehicles (4.1%)
and population (0.65%) were also explored.
Traffic Projection of existing road
30 year traffic projection has been provided as below to synchronize the period of economic analysis from
year 2015 to 2044 considering 2-year construction periods from 2013 to 2014.
Table 9. Traffic projection in Kara Balta~Chaldovar
Section Year Passenger
Car Pick-up Bus Truck Trailer
Motor cycle
Total
Annual Average Growth
Rate
Bishkek- Kara Balta
2015 5,590 634 407 2,589 163 164 9,548
2019 6,691 759 487 3,099 195 197 11,429 4.6%
2024 8,067 915 588 3,737 235 237 13,779 3.8%
2029 9,443 1,071 688 4,374 276 278 16,129 3.2%
2034 10,819 1,227 788 5,011 316 318 18,480 2.8%
2039 12,195 1,383 888 5,649 356 359 20,830 2.4%
2044 13,571 1,539 989 6,286 396 399 23,180 2.2%
Kara Balta-
Chaldovar
2015 1,748 - 470 1,133 164 - 3,515
2019 2,093 - 562 1,356 197 - 4,208 4.6%
2024 2,523 - 678 1,635 237 - 5,073 3.8%
2029 2,953 - 793 1,914 278 - 5,938 3.2%
2034 3,384 - 909 2,192 318 - 6,803 2.8%
2039 3,814 - 1,024 2,471 359 - 7,669 2.4%
2044 4,244 - 1,140 2,750 399 - 8,534 2.2%
1 Year 2008 to 2010 were eliminated due to short term financial distress and internal conflict.
14
Generalized cost and Diversion Curve
Considering the strong commitment for the new PPP road from MOTC, a diversion curve has been used to
forecast traffic diversion between the project road and new PPP road in the future (year 2044).
Figure 18. Diversion curve
Source) Xinhao Wang, Rainer vom Hofe, (2007) Research Methods in Urban and Regional Planning, Springer, 2007, p.373
Various toll rates were converted into an additional travel time as a penalty (generalized cost) for the traffic
assignment.
Table 10. An estimation of Generalized Cost
Classification Detail
Per capita GNI (US$) 920 (WB, 2011)
Annual workdays(days) 280
Average working hour for a day(hours) 8
Value of Time (US$/hour) 0.4107
(Som/Hour) 18.4815(1US$=45Som, Oct 2011)
Travel speeds for the two roads are used as follows:
Project road: 60km/h
PPP road: 80km/h considering an additional approaching/exiting time and toll collection time
Table 11. Comparison of travel time
Category Travel distance
(km) Travel Time
(minitue)
Toll rate Travel time + Generalized
cost(minutes) Toll rate (Som) Generalized cost (minute)
Project Road 60 60 - - 60
PPP Road 60 45
free - 45
10 5.5 50.5
20 10.9 55.9
30 16.4 61.4
15
40 22.8 67.8
50 27.3 72.3
Traffic projection in Bishkek ~ Kara Balta section considering PPP road (2044)
Table 12. Traffic projection for both project road and PPP road
Toll rate for PPP road
(Som)
PPP road travel time (%) in
compare to existing road
Traffic Volume (2044, vehicle/day)
PPP road Existing Road
free 75.0% 16,174 6,607
10 84.2% 13,441 9,340
20 93.2% 11,163 11,618
30 102.3% 8,429 14,352
40 113.0% 5,695 17,086
50 120.5% 3,417 19,364
4.3 Improvement Plan
Summary of Current status
Based on the given information, discussion and site survey, major findings are as follows:
The project road represents Asian Highway Class I and II standard and overall alignment doesn’t
need to be improved.
Most sections run through flat terrain.
Rehabilitation of the Bishkek-Kara Balta is underway (ADB)
To address these challenges, upgrading plan was proposed as follows:
Alternative 1: Construction of new PPP road in Bishkek~Kara Balta section (MOTC proposal)
Alternative 2: Widening of Kara Balta~Chaldovar section from 2 to 4 lanes
Alternative 3: Overlay with partial repairs and improvement for Kara Balta~ Chaldovar section.
Economic viability of the 3rd
option (overlay with partial repairs), the lowest cost one, has been explored.
4.4 Cost Estimation
Unit cost estimation
Overall overlay with partial repairs and improvements were proposed considering the road and traffic
conditions and marginal economic viability. Thorough investigation is needed for the implementation. Due to
the absence of cost estimates including unit cost, cost estimates from other ADB projects in Kyrgyzstan were
used mainly as below.
16
Table 13. Cost estimation
Contents Unit Unit cost
in USD Remarks
a. Pavement (Overlay) Km 168,000 Bishkek-Osh Project
b. Improvement of road Km 457,500 〃
c. Replacement of bearing EA 6,100 Similar project in Korea
d. Installation of wing wall at Pipe EA 1,050 〃
Note: Unit cost for Pavement and Improvement of road quoted Completion Report, "Kyrgyz Republic : Third Road
Rehabilitation Project", October 2008, ADB.
Quantity Estimation
Based on the site survey, the estimated quantities for the improvement of Kara Balta ~ Chaldovar section is
as below.
Table 14. Estimated Quantities
Contents of improvement plans Quantities Remarks
a. Pavement for the whole section 32km
b. Improvement at railway crossing 960m
c. Replacement of bearing of Kara Balta bridge 20EA
d. Installation wing wall and parapet for cross
drain pipe 2EA
Preliminary Cost Estimation
According to the above considerations, the preliminary projects costs are estimated as follows:
Table 15. Preliminary estimation of project cost
Work Name Unit Quantities Unit cost
(US $)
Cost
(US $ in thousand)
A. Base Cost
1. Civil Works
17
a. Pavement km 32 168,000 5,376.0
b. Improvement of road2 km 0.96 457,500 439.2
c. Replacement of bearing EA 20 6,100 122.0
d. Installation of wing wall at Pipe EA 2 1,050 2.1
2. Consulting Services 36.5
Subtotal (A) 5,975.8
B. Contingencies
1. Physical Contingency 597.6
2. Price Contingency 280.9
Subtotal (B) 878.5
Total 6,854.3
2 Possible Land acquisition and resettlement costs have not been included
1
Section 5 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
5.1 Methodology
General
Economic feasibility will be reviewed by Benefit/Cost Analysis (BCA). Benefit Cost Analysis is a
calculation of the stream of both benefits and costs over the lifetime of the facility or strategy. Major indices
of BCA are as follows:
Internal Rate of Return (IRR): The ratio of the total discounted benefit to the total discounted cost
),....2,1(0)1(1
nir
CiBiN
ti
Net Present Value (NPV): The discounted value of the absolute welfare gain minus discounted
value of the investment over the whole life of the project
),....2,1()1(1
nid
CiBiNPV
N
ti
Benefit Cost ratio (B/C): The discount rate that equates the present value of a future stream of
benefits to the investment (Discount rate such that NPV=0)
N
ti
N
ti
nid
Ci
d
BiCB
11
),.....,2,1()1(
/)1(
/
Where, Ci = cost in year i, Bi= benefit in year i, i = year, N = project life, i = discount rate
Figure 19. Economic Analysis Process
2
Evaluation Criteria
Internal Rate of Return (IRR) > Social Discount Rate
Benefit - Cost Ratio (B/C) > 1 (or 1.2)
Net Present Value (NPV) > 0
5.2 Benefit/Cost Analysis
5.2.1 Economic Analysis Criteria
Basic assumptions for the analysis are as follows:
Project road: Kara Balta – Chaldovar section (32km, 2 lane)
Construction period: 2 years (2013-2014)
Analysis period : 2015 ~ 2044 year (30 years after opening)
Discount rate : 12.0% (proposed value of ADB)
Basic Price: Market price in 2011
(Economic price, converted from market price, was used for the analysis)
5.2.2 Estimation of Costs
Construction (overlay with partial repair), maintenance and land compensation cost were estimated and used
for the analysis. For the economic analysis, the shadow price was calculated by eliminating taxes and
interests from the total costs.
Initial Cost
Construction cost was equally divided into first 2 years as below.
Table 16. Allocation of initial construction cost
Alternative 1: Including the improvement of Railway crossing
Year Initial Cost (US thousand dollars)
2013 3,427.15
2014 3,427.15
Total 6,854.30
Alternative 2: Excluding the improvement of Railway crossing
Year Initial Cost (US thousand dollars)
2013 3,175.25
2014 3,175.25
Total 6,350.50
3
Maintenance Cost
It is assumed that the periodic maintenance shall be done in every 10 years and the cost of routine
maintenance is estimated as 10% of periodic maintenance work.
Table 17. Estimated Maintenance Cost
Contents Maintenance Cost(US thousand dollars)
Periodic 5,376.0
Routine 537.6
5.2.3 Estimation of Benefits
Vehicle Operation Cost Saving (VOCS)
The costs of operation of a selection of vehicle types, when used under a range of operating conditions can
be estimated by Vehicle Operating Cost models. Due to the absence of relevant data from Government of
Kyrgyzstan, Korean VOC model has been used. Vehicle types are modified in the context of Kyrgyzstan.
Table 18. Vehicle operating cost for vehicles under various speed (2009)
(Unit: Korean Won/km)
Speed(km/h) Passenger car Pick-up Bus Truck Trailer
10 440.40 384.62 758.41 601.31 856.25
20 356.45 307.64 606.76 463.47 678.65
30 302.56 256.91 498.49 395.27 573.27
40 258.87 222.01 424.54 343.42 505.78
50 227.08 200.79 379.76 314.02 457.58
60 209.93 187.20 353.58 296.70 432.27
70 198.03 179.51 339.52 290.20 419.52
80 186.08 176.21 332.23 292.85 417.90
90 180.47 179.53 330.49 308.11 440.10
100 178.57 190.10 339.93 347.08 465.02
110 179.54 384.62 363.26 - -
120 183.15 - 758.41 - -
Source: Guidelines for Transport project evaluation, 4th
edition (MLTM, 2011)
VOC model for this study was estimated by regression as below.
VOC = a + bV + c/V + d/V2
Where, VOC: VOC for vehicles under ideal conditions (Won/Veh-km)
V: Speed under ideal conditions (km/hr)
a,b,c,d: parameters
4
Table 19. VOC model parameters
Vehicle type A b c d R2
Passenger car 400.734 -4.68767 1,172.673 0.024462 0.997121
Pick-up 690.8032 -9.26246 2,119.066 0.05802 0.996183
Bus 366.5035 -5.04615 933.398 0.033327 0.998794
Truck 551.848 -7.98578 1,653.167 0.059748 0.998844
Trailer 795.9204 -10.7247 2,215.565 0.075531 0.999495
Travel speed with and without the project were estimated as below.
Alternative 1 (with improvement of railway crossing): 50km/h and 60km/h before and after the
improvement for the whole section
Alternative 2 (without improvement of railway crossing): 50km/h and 60km/h before and after the
improvement for the whole section except the crossing section
Table 20. Per unit cost of VOC
(unit: won/km)
Speed Passenger car Pick-up Bus Truck Trailer Motorcycle3
60km/h 227.08 199.27 379.24 315.35 461.27 45.42
50km/h 250.96 216.18 415.11 334.99 492.82 50.19
VOCS benefit is as follows:
Table 21. VOC saving
(Unit: US thousand dollars/yr)
Year 2015 2024 2034 2044
Alternative 1 873.8 1,261.0 1,691.1 2,121.3
Alternative 2 847.6 1,223.1 1,640.4 2,057.7
Travel Time Saving
Due to lack of proper data in the context of Kyrgyzstan, GNI Per capita was used to estimate the value of
time (VOT) in Kyrgyzstan instead of average wage rate per various types of vehicles, which shall be used in
the Marginal Substitution method to value all activities. Experience demonstrates that approximately 30% of
Travel Time Savings could be used as a production inputs in developing countries. The output of VOT
estimation in Kyrgyzstan is as below.
3 For a per unit cost of motorcycle, 1/5 of passenger car was used considering its fuel efficiency.
5
Table 22. VOT Calculation by GNI, Annual workdays and Average working hours
Classification Detail
Per capita GNI (USD) 920 (WB, 2011)
Annual workdays(days) 280
Average working hour for a day(hours) 8
% of Travel Time Savings can be used as a
Production inputs 30%
Per capita VOT (USD/hours) 0.1232
Table 23. Time Value of Passenger by Vehicle Types
(Unit: USD/ vehicle·hour)
Classification Passenger
car
Bus Truck Motor-cycle
Small large
Passenger4 2.3 10 18 1 1.5
VOT/vehicle 0.28336
1.232 2.2176 0.1232 0.1848
average VOT/vehicle 1.7248
The output of Travel time saving has been found very low comparing VOCS due to the level of income in
Kyrgyzstan
Table 24. Travel Time Saving
(Unit: US thousand dollars/yr)
Year 2015 2024 2034 2044
Alternative 1 57.0 82.3 110.4 138.5
Alternative 2 55.3 79.9 107.1 134.3
Other Benefits
Given the limited availability of data, only two user benefits including Vehicle Operating Cost (VOC) and
Travel Time Saving are used in this project. Other benefits can be considered are as follows:
Change in Externality Costs: Traffic accident, Environmental costs, Regional developments
Change in system operating costs and revenue
Co-benefits (CO2 emission reduction)
4 VIENTIANE 3'rd RING ROAD FEASIBILITY STUDY, December, 2008, Lao People's Democratic Republic
6
5.2.4 Results of Economic Analysis
The output of economic analysis represents as below.
Table 25. Economic Analysis
Content Ÿ Alternative 1 Ÿ Alternative 2
B/C 0.746 0.753
NPV (USD 1,000) -2,465.3 -2,302.8
IRR 6.61% 6.59%
In terms of the evaluation criteria, the economic viability of the project is relatively low as below (Alt. 2).
Alternative without the improvement of railway crossing (Alt. 2) was selected as a representative of the
project since it would better to improve the crossing during future widening work.
Internal Rate of Return (IRR) = 6.59% < Social Discount Rate (12%)
Benefit - Cost Ratio (B/C) = 0.753 < 1
Net Present Value (NPV) =-2,302 < 0
5.3 Sensitivity Analysis
The sensitivity of economic analysis will be assessed by re-running B/C, NPV and IRR calculations for:
Total Benefits at +/- 10% and 20%
Total Costs at +/- 10% and 20%
Table 26. Sensitivity Analysis (Alternative 2)
Cost Indicator Benefit
0% -10% -20%
0%
B/C 0.753 0.678 0.603
NPV -2,302.8 -2,684.3 -3,312.6
IRR 6.59% 4.70% 2.60%
10%
B/C 0.685 0.616 0.548
NPV -2,890.0 -3,518.2 -4,146.5
IRR 4.88% 3.00% 0.89%
20%
B/C 0.628 0.565 0.502
NPV -3,723.8 -4,352.1 -4,980.4
IRR 3.32% 1.44% -0.70%
7
Section 6 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT
6.1 Environmental Impact
For the project road, Environmental Safeguarding would not be triggered since no alignment change has
been proposed except the railway crossing section. Followings are the Environmental Categorization in
MDB guidelines.
Table 27. Environmental Categorization (ADB)
A
• Environmental Impact Assessment(EIA) report
• Environmental Management Plan including a budget
• Public consultation(at least twice)
• Disclosure 120 days in advance of Board Consideration
B • Initial Environmental Examination(IEE) report
• Public consultation
C • Review of Environmental Implications(No EIA or IEE is required)
FI
• Environmental Management System(Equity Investment)
• EMS including Environmental Assessment and Review Procedures
for Subprojects(Credit Lines)
However, for the PPP road in the future, the Environmental impact is needed to be assessed thoroughly since
it involves wide range of relocation of the stream, construction of open concrete culvert and 4 lane highways.
6.2 Social Impact
Approximately 20 households may need resettlement due to the improvement of railway crossing.
Women’s economic and social empowerment is essential in economic growth and poverty reduction. For
instance, Transport provides access employment, child care, education, health & political processes. Women
tend to make more complex and more trips than men. No specific gender issue has been identified since
connectivity is already there.
Social Safeguarding including Involuntary Resettlement (IR) and Gender Impact shall be assessed in terms
of National, World Bank and ADB guidelines during a formal study.
8
Section 7 RECOMMENDATION
7.1 Conclusion
1. It is noted that the Bishkek~Kara Balta~Osh corridor is one of the major transport corridors in Kyrgyzstan.
ADB intervention has already been made for Bishkek~Kara Ballta~Osh rehabilitation project (CAREC
Corridor 3). Given this situation, three alternatives could be formulated for the proposed Bishkek~Kara
Balta~Chaldova section as follows:
Construction of new PPP road in Bishkek~Kara Balta section (MOTC proposal)
Widening of Kara Balta~Chaldovar section from 2 to 4 lanes
Overlay with partial repairs and improvement for Kara Balta~ Chaldovar section.
2. Traffic forecasting for 4-lane Bishkek~Kara Balta Corridor represents relatively low to moderate demand,
maximum 23,200 vehicles, in 2044. It means that further capacity enhancement for the Bishkek~Kara Balta
section may not be needed until 2044.
3. Economic viability of the 3rd
option (overlay with partial repairs, Alt. 2), the lowest cost one, has been
explored and its viability was found to be as follows:
Internal Rate of Return (IRR) = 6.59% < Social Discount Rate (12%)
Benefit - Cost Ratio (B/C) = 0.753 < 1
Net Present Value (NPV) = -2,302 < 0
It infers that the economic viability of other two options could be low since significant investments are
needed comparing to the 3rd
option.
7.2 Recommendation
Considering relatively low to moderate demand until year 2044 in Bishkek~Kara Balta~ Chaldovar corridor,
capacity enhancement could be done as follows:
1. AC overlay with partial repairs (Kara Balta-Chaldovar) is found to be the default option as a whole.
2. However, widening of Kara Balta~ Chaldovar section from 2 to 4 lane can be consideredto ensure the
consistency of the corridor
3. Secondly, prepare a new PPP road in Bishkek~Kara Balta section as demand in Bishkek~Kara Balta~Osh
corridor grows in the future.
9
7.3 Implementation Plan
7.3.1 Preparation and Procurement
The output of this study was presented during an Investment Forum in October 2013 (Bangkok, UNESCAP)
for identification of major donors. Subsequently, project preparation, project appraisal, loan/credit
negotiations, loan/credit approval and signing will take minimum two years depending on the internal
process of multi-lateral or bi-lateral donors. Thereafter the procurement process may follow.
7.3.2 Implementation
The project area around Bishkek represents a humid, continental climate with:
Average 322 clear days per year due to its mountainous terrain
Average precipitation of 440 mm per year
Average daily temperatures range from −3 °C in January to about 25 °C in July.
Pavement works can be done for 7 months, from April to October in this regards.
Table 28. Implementation Plan
Work Item 1st Year 2nd Year
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Road improvement at railway crossing
Installation of concrete wing wall at Pipe
Overlay and partial repairs for the whole section
Cleaning girder and substructure of Kara Balta Bridge
Replacement of bearings of Kara Balta Bridge
Replacement of traffic signal
Line marking
10
Section 8 ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO WITH HIGH TRAFFIC VOLUME
8.1 Alternate Traffic Volume
During Asian Highway Investment Forum in Bangkok (October 8-9, 2013), the study team was given the
updated traffic data from the concerned official in Kyrgyzstan. The new traffic volume count as of October
2013 is significantly, 5.8 times (Bishkek-Kara Balta), high compared with the previous traffic count data in
2010 which was provided earlier to the study team. It is noted that the change of traffic volume in Kara
Balta- Chaldovar section, the main focus of this study considering the intervention of ADB intervention for
Bishkek-Kara Balta, has been increased 1.33 times, which represents relatively lower than Bishkek-Kara
Balta section.
As per the given updates, the suggested PPP road (Bishkek-Kara Balta) may be financially viable while the
viability of widening (Alternative 1) or overlaying (Alternative 2) for Kara Balta~ Chaldovar section has not
been changed significantly.
However, it is highlighted that this very high increase in traffic volume count may need to be further
validated with reliable traffic studies and any decision on investment required to accommodate such high
volume of traffic may only be taken after further validation of traffic counts.
The results of this alternative traffic growth scenario are presented next.
8.2 Traffic Forecast
8.2.1 Current Traffic condition
Given the updated traffic data as of October 2013, the traffic volume of Bishkek-Kara Balta has significantly
been increased from 7,200 to 41,500, 580% increase within three years, vehicles per day.
Table 29. Current traffic volumes in AH5 Bishkek~Kara Balta~Chaldovar (2013)
City/Town
Name at
Start Point
City/Town
Name at
End Point
Traffic Volume by Vehicle Type
Passenger
Car
Pick-up
Bus
Truck
Trailer
Motor-
cycle Total*
Georgievka Bishkek 5,495 1,202 391 1,374 121 491 9,074
(6,478)
Bishkek Kara Balta 30,224 1,552 1,095 8,050 312 241 41,474
(7,198)
Kara Balta Chaldovar 1,760 978 157 470 0 155 3,520
(2,650)
* ( ): Traffic volume in 2010
Source: Roads and Railway Division, MOTC, Republic of Kyrgyzstan
8.2.2 Traffic forecast
Based on the suggested traffic volume, the traffic projection (year 2044) of Bishkek-Kara Balta has
significantly been increased from 23,180 to 111,682 vehicles per day while the one of Kara Balta-Chaldovar
has been increased, relatively low, from 8,534 to 9,479 vehicles per day.
11
Table 30. Traffic projection in Bishkek~Kara Balta~Chaldovar
Section Year Passenge
r Car Pick-up Bus Truck Trailer
Motor cycle
Total
Annual Average Growth
Rate
Bishkek- Kara Balta
2015 33,525 1,721 1,215 8,929 346 267 46,004
2019 40,127 2,060 1,454 10,688 414 320 55,063 4.6%
2024 48,379 2,484 1,753 12,885 499 386 66,386 3.8%
2029 56,631 2,908 2,052 15,083 585 452 77,710 3.2%
2034 64,883 3,332 2,351 17,281 670 517 89,034 2.8%
2039 73,135 3,755 2,650 19,479 755 583 100,358 2.4%
2044 81,388 4,179 2,949 21,677 840 649 111,682 2.2%
Kara Balta-
Chaldovar
2015 1,952 1,085 174 521 0 172 3,904
2019 2,337 1,298 208 624 0 206 4,673 4.6%
2024 2,817 1,565 251 752 0 248 5,634 3.8%
2029 3,298 1,832 294 881 0 290 6,595 3.2%
2034 3,778 2,100 337 1,009 0 333 7,557 2.8%
2039 4,259 2,367 380 1,137 0 375 8,518 2.4%
2044 4,739 2,634 423 1,266 0 417 9,479 2.2%
8.3 Viability of the Project Road
New PPP road (Bishkek ~ Kara Balta)
Considering the strong commitment for the new PPP road from MOTC, a diversion curve has been used to
forecast traffic diversion between the project road and new PPP road in the future (year 2044).
Figure 20. Diversion curve
Source) Xinhao Wang, Rainer vom Hofe, (2007) Research Methods in Urban and Regional Planning, Springer, 2007, p.373
12
The traffic forecast of PPP road represents possible viability based on the level of toll tariffs as below.
Table 31. Traffic projection for both project road and PPP road
Toll rate for PPP road
(Som)
PPP road travel time (%) in compare
to existing road
Traffic Volume (2044, vehicle/day)
PPP road Existing Road
Free 75.0% 79,294 32,388
10 84.2% 65,892 45,790
20 93.2% 54,724 56,958
30 102.3% 41,322 70,360
40 113.0% 27,920 83,762
50 120.5% 16,752 94,930
Project Road (Kara Balta - Chaldovar)
Based on the given updates, the viability of widening (Alternative 1) or overlaying (Alternative 2) for Kara
Balta~ Chaldovar section has slightly decreased. The B/C of Alt 1 and 2 represent 0.704 and 0.710
respectively. This is due party to the portion of Buses, which represents bigger benefits, has been decreased
from 13.4% to 4.5% while the one of Motorcycles has been increased from 0 to 4.4%.
Table 32. VOC saving
(Unit: US thousand dollars/yr)
Year 2015 2024 2034 2044
Alternative 1 835.6 1,205.8 1,617.2 2,028.5
Alternative 2 810.5 1,169.6 1,568.7 1,967.7
Table 33. Travel Time Saving
(Unit: US thousand dollars/yr)
Year 2015 2024 2034 2044
Alternative 1 42.2 60.9 81.6 102.4
Alternative 2 40.9 59.0 79.2 99.3
Table 34. Economic Analysis of Project Road
Content Ÿ Alternative 1 Ÿ Alternative 2
B/C 0.704 0.710
NPV (USD 1,000) -2,879.1 -2,704.2
IRR 5.59% 5.53%
13
Appendices
Appendix A. List of persons met
MOTC
Mr. Abdyldaev Sheraly Itibaevich (Deputy Minister, MOTC)
Mr. Mamaev (Director of Investment Projects Implementation Groups, MOTC)
Mr. Toktomambetor (Head of Road Management Department, MOTC),
Mr. Temir Niyazbekov (Head of External Economic Relations Div. MOTC)
Ms. Marina S. Asankulova (Chief, Strategic Development and Investment, MOTC)
Mr. Alibegashvili Levan Markovichi (Deputy Head of Design Institute, MOTC)
Ms. Yulia Amanbaeva (Contract Administrator, MOTC)
14
Appendix B. Implementation Agency
Appendix C. Economic Analysis
Alternative 1
discount rate 12.0% B/C 0.746
15
Base Year 2011 NPV -2,465.3
IRR 6.61%
Unit:1,000US ＄
Year
Cost Benefit
CV PV VOCS Time saving VOCS+Time
saving PV
2013 3,427.2 2,732.1
2014 3,427.2 2,439.4
2015 537.6 341.7 873.8 57.0 930.9 591.6
2016 537.6 305.0 916.8 59.9 976.7 554.2
2017 537.6 272.4 959.8 62.7 1,022.5 518.0
2018 537.6 243.2 1,002.9 65.5 1,068.3 483.3
2019 537.6 217.1 1,045.9 68.3 1,114.2 450.0
2020 537.6 193.9 1,088.9 71.1 1,160.0 418.3
2021 537.6 173.1 1,131.9 73.9 1,205.8 388.2
2022 537.6 154.5 1,174.9 76.7 1,251.6 359.8
2023 537.6 138.0 1,217.9 79.5 1,297.5 333.0
2024 5,376.0 1,232.0 1,261.0 82.3 1,343.3 307.8
2025 537.6 110.0 1,304.0 85.1 1,389.1 284.2
2026 537.6 98.2 1,347.0 87.9 1,434.9 262.2
2027 537.6 87.7 1,390.0 90.7 1,480.8 241.5
2028 537.6 78.3 1,433.0 93.6 1,526.6 222.3
2029 537.6 69.9 1,476.1 96.4 1,572.4 204.5
2030 537.6 62.4 1,519.1 99.2 1,618.2 187.9
2031 537.6 55.7 1,562.1 102.0 1,664.1 172.5
2032 537.6 49.8 1,605.1 104.8 1,709.9 158.3
2033 537.6 44.4 1,648.1 107.6 1,755.7 145.1
2034 5,376.0 396.7 1,691.1 110.4 1,801.5 132.9
2035 537.6 35.4 1,734.2 113.2 1,847.4 121.7
2036 537.6 31.6 1,777.2 116.0 1,893.2 111.4
2037 537.6 28.2 1,820.2 118.8 1,939.0 101.8
2038 537.6 25.2 1,863.2 121.6 1,984.8 93.1
2039 537.6 22.5 1,906.2 124.4 2,030.7 85.0
2040 537.6 20.1 1,949.2 127.3 2,076.5 77.6
2041 537.6 17.9 1,992.3 130.1 2,122.3 70.8
2042 537.6 16.0 2,035.3 132.9 2,168.2 64.6
2043 537.6 14.3 2,078.3 135.7 2,214.0 58.9
2044 537.6 12.8 2,121.3 138.5 2,259.8 53.7
Total 32,659.1 9,719.7 44,926.8 2,933.0 47,859.8 7,254.4
Alternative 2
discount rate 12.0% B/C 0.753
Base Year 2011 NPV -2,302.8
IRR 6.59%
Unit:1,000US ＄
16
Year
Cost Benefit
CV PV VOCS Time saving VOCS+Time
saving PV
2013 3,175.3 2,531.3
2014 3,175.3 2,260.1
2015 537.6 341.7 847.6 55.3 902.9 573.8
2016 537.6 305.0 889.3 58.1 947.4 537.6
2017 537.6 272.4 931.0 60.8 991.8 502.5
2018 537.6 243.2 972.8 63.5 1,036.3 468.8
2019 537.6 217.1 1,014.5 66.2 1,080.7 436.5
2020 537.6 193.9 1,056.2 69.0 1,125.2 405.8
2021 537.6 173.1 1,098.0 71.7 1,169.6 376.6
2022 537.6 154.5 1,139.7 74.4 1,214.1 349.0
2023 537.6 138.0 1,181.4 77.1 1,258.5 323.0
2024 5,376.0 1,232.0 1,223.1 79.9 1,303.0 298.6
2025 537.6 110.0 1,264.9 82.6 1,347.4 275.7
2026 537.6 98.2 1,306.6 85.3 1,391.9 254.3
2027 537.6 87.7 1,348.3 88.0 1,436.3 234.3
2028 537.6 78.3 1,390.0 90.7 1,480.8 215.7
2029 537.6 69.9 1,431.8 93.5 1,525.2 198.3
2030 537.6 62.4 1,473.5 96.2 1,569.7 182.3
2031 537.6 55.7 1,515.2 98.9 1,614.1 167.3
2032 537.6 49.8 1,557.0 101.6 1,658.6 153.5
2033 537.6 44.4 1,598.7 104.4 1,703.0 140.7
2034 5,376.0 396.7 1,640.4 107.1 1,747.5 128.9
2035 537.6 35.4 1,682.1 109.8 1,791.9 118.1
2036 537.6 31.6 1,723.9 112.5 1,836.4 108.0
2037 537.6 28.2 1,765.6 115.3 1,880.9 98.8
2038 537.6 25.2 1,807.3 118.0 1,925.3 90.3
2039 537.6 22.5 1,849.0 120.7 1,969.8 82.5
2040 537.6 20.1 1,890.8 123.4 2,014.2 75.3
2041 537.6 17.9 1,932.5 126.2 2,058.7 68.7
2042 537.6 16.0 1,974.2 128.9 2,103.1 62.7
2043 537.6 14.3 2,016.0 131.6 2,147.6 57.1
2044 537.6 12.8 2,057.7 134.3 2,192.0 52.1
Total 32,155.3 9,339.6 43,579.0 2,845.0 46,424.0 7,036.8
Appendix D. Asian Highway Database (UNESCAP, 2010)
1. Geometry and pavement type
Section Bishkek-Kara Balta Kara Balta-Chaldovar
Number of Lanes 2 - 32km
17
4 53km -
6 7km -
Surface Type Asphalt Concrete 60km 26km
PM DB SB - 6km
Surface
Condition
Good 60km 32km
Bad - -
Terrain Flat Flat
Number of Major Intersections 3 5
Bridges Total No. 7 2
Total Length 96m 47m
Vertical Clearance < 4.5m No No
Design Load Below HS 20-44 No No
AH Design Standard Ⅰ, Ⅱ Ⅱ
Section Bishkek-Kara Balta Kara Balta-Chaldovar
Row Width 30-50m 60km 32km
Carriageway Width 7-14m - 32km
14m ≤ 60km -
Width of Median ≥1m 2km 0
1m < 8km 0
Type of Shoulder Hard 60km 32km
Shoulder Width ≥1m 0 0
(One Side) 1-2m 23km 32km
<2m 37km 0
Side Walk With 29km 18km
Without 31km 14km
18
2. Traffic data
Section Bishkek-Kara Balta Kara Balta-Chaldovar
Year of Construction 1964 1955
Year of Rehabilitation Improvement 2007 1985
Traffic Volume Passenger Car 4,214 1,318
by Vehicle Types Pick-up 478 0
Bus 307 354
Truck 1,952 854
Trailer 123 124
Motor Cycle 37 0
Other 87 0
Non-Motorized 0 0
Traffic Accident No. of Accidents 15 -
No. of Fatalities 5 -
Number of Rest Areas 2 0
Number of Refueling Points 23 7
Remarks CAREC Corridor 1 CAREC Corridor 1, 3
19
Appendix E. Asian highway Design Standard (1993)
Notes: Figures bracket are desirable values
Minimum horizontal curve shall be determined in conjunction with super-elevation
20
Appendix F. Data Survey Request
Section 1. General Information
1.1 National/Regional Outlook
Area, Population
Currency and exchange rate:
GDP/GRP/GNI, GDP/GNI per capita:
Economic growth rate, Inflation rate, Employment rate by sector
Trade (Import, Export), Major trade commodities, Major trade partners (Import, Export)
1.2 Traffic related information
Driving style: Left-hand side drive
International border crossing points (example)
Maximum gross weight and axle load permissible
Major Tourism spot
Section 2. Data Collection and Survey
2.1 Implementation Agency (Road authority)
Organization
Implementation process including planning, design, construction and maintenance
2.2 National & Sub-national strategy and priority, Guidelines
Road Master Plan
Regional & sub-regional Planning
Development and upgrading plan of AHN
Strategies and priorities
Design specification
2.3 Asian Highway Database – Any update of AHDB 2011(draft, Appendix 1) including:
Traffic data (volume, accident, etc.)
Road and bridge inventory
Toll rate
2.4 Other Engineering and Socio-economic data (Appendix 2) including
Social Discount Rate
Travel speed, Time value, Value of Time
O/D
Number of registered Vehicles
Land use plan
Unit construction cost(road, box & culvert, bridge, T/N)
Maintenance cost (Routine maintenance, periodic overlay)
Geotechnical and hydraulic survey
Appendices
Appendix 1. AHDB 2011(draft version to UNESCAP)
Appendix 2. Engineering & Socio-economic Data (attached)