Phase 1 Diagnostic Review Report PDF

Kurdistan Regional Government
Ministry of Construction and Housing
KURDISTAN HIGHWAY MASTER PLAN
Diagnostics Review Report
Beirut • Cairo • London

dar al-handasah
August 2010 shair and partners
FINAL REPORT - Rev. C

Kurdistan Highway Master Plan Diagnostics Review Report
Contents
1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 The Project .............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 This Report .............................................................................................................. 4
2. ASSEMBLE DATA, EXISTING STUDIES AND DOCUMENTS .................................. 5
2.1 Administrative Boundaries ................................................................................ 5
2.2 Planning Documentation .................................................................................. 10
2.3 Public Transport Services ................................................................................ 12
2.4 Heavy Goods Vehicles Axle Loading ............................................................ 15
3. TRANSPORT NETWORK INVENTORY & CONDITION SURVEYS ....................... 22
3.1 Road Inventory .................................................................................................... 28
3.2 Road Conditions Surveys ................................................................................. 35
3.3 Road Roughness Surveys ................................................................................ 41
3.4 Major Structures Surveys ................................................................................ 43
4. TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL SURVEYS ............................................................................ 51
4.1 Automatic Traffic Counts.................................................................................. 55
4.2 Manual Classified Counts ................................................................................. 61
4.3 Roadside Interviews........................................................................................... 64
4.4 Public Transport User Interviews .................................................................. 84
5. SOCIO-ECONOMIC REVIEW ....................................................................................... 93
5.1 Population .............................................................................................................. 93
5.3 Employment ........................................................................................................ 103
5.4 Income .................................................................................................................. 106
5.5 Economic Activity .............................................................................................. 108
5.6 Gross Domestic Product ................................................................................. 108
5.7 Vehicles Registered .......................................................................................... 111
5.8 Car Ownership .................................................................................................... 112
5.9 Road Accidents ................................................................................................... 114
6. GIS DATABASE ............................................................................................................ 119
6.1 Introduction......................................................................................................... 119
6.2 GIS Technology Adopted ............................................................................... 119
6.3 GIS Database Design ...................................................................................... 120
6.4 GIS Data Conversion ....................................................................................... 121
6.5 GIS Data Correction and Checking ............................................................ 123
6.6 GIS Data Usage in this Project .................................................................... 124
7. TRAFFIC MODELLING AND FORECASTS .............................................................. 128
7.1 Base Year Traffic Model .................................................................................. 128
7.2 Base Year Transport Networks .................................................................... 129
7.3 Base Year Travel Demand ............................................................................. 137
7.4 Model Calibration and Validation ................................................................ 144
7.5 Base Year Assignment Plots ......................................................................... 148
7.6 Future Year Networks...................................................................................... 152
7.7 Future Year Demand Forecasts ................................................................... 160
8. DEVELOP HIGHWAY SECTOR STRATEGIES ........................................................ 162
8.1 Diagnostic Review ............................................................................................. 162
8.2 Development of Highway Strategies ......................................................... 162
IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Contents

8.3 Overall Transport Strategy............................................................................ 167

8.4 Recommendations for Future Work ........................................................... 168
Appendices
Appendix A: Detailed Analysis of Road Conditions Surveys
Appendix B: Detailed Analysis of Road Imperfections
Appendix C: Geo-database for the Kurdistan Highway Master Plan
Appendix D: Detailed Vehicle Trip Matrices by Mode and Purpose
Appendix E: Estimation of Public Transport Services and Passengers at Major Stations
Appendix F: Traffic Accidents in Erbil by Type and Causes
Appendix G: Detailed Surveys of Major Structures
Figures
Figure 1 Governorates of Kurdistan ............................................................................... 2
Figure 2 Sub-Districts (Traffic Zones) of Kurdistan Governorates ............................ 9
Figure 3 Correlation between Axle Load and Pavement Damage .......................... 15
Figure 4 Legal Limits for Commercial Vehicle Weights in Iraq ................................ 20
Figure 5 Primary and Secondary Road Networks in Dohuk ..................................... 25
Figure 6 Primary and Secondary Road Networks in Erbil ........................................ 26
Figure 7 Primary and Secondary Road Networks in Sulaimani Governorate and
Garmian Administration ........................................................................................................ 27
Figure 8 IRI Roughness Scale ...................................................................................... 42
Figure 9 Correlation Between IRI and BIU For Asphalt Concrete Roads .............. 42
Figure 10 Location of Major Structures in Kurdistan Region ...................................... 45
Figure 11 Location of Major Structures in Erbil Governorate ..................................... 46
Figure 12 Location of Major Structures in Dohuk Governorate .................................. 47
Figure 13 Location of Major Structures in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian
Administration......................................................................................................................... 48
Figure 14 Traffic and Travel Survey Locations in Dohuk ............................................ 52
Figure 15 Traffic and Travel Survey Locations in Erbil................................................ 53
Figure 16 Traffic and Travel Survey Locations in Sulaimani Governorate and
Garmian Administration ........................................................................................................ 54
Figure 17 Average Daily Traffic Profile (Both Directions) for Primary Roads .......... 58
Figure 18 Average Daily Traffic Profile (Both Directions) for Secondary Roads ..... 59
Figure 19 Average Daily Traffic Profile (Both Directions) for Additional Sites ......... 59
Figure 20 Average Weekday Traffic per Month and Direction at Location P01 ...... 60
Figure 21 Average Daytime Traffic Composition on Primary Roads ........................ 62
Figure 22 Average Daytime Traffic Composition on Secondary Roads ................... 63
Figure 23 Distribution of Main Origins in Erbil............................................................... 67
Figure 24 Distribution of Main Origins in Dohuk ........................................................... 68
Figure 25 Distribution of Main Origins in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian
Administration......................................................................................................................... 68
Figure 26 Distribution of Main Destinations in Erbil ..................................................... 68
Figure 27 Distribution of Main Destinations in Dohuk.................................................. 69
Figure 28 Distribution of Main Destinations in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian
Administration......................................................................................................................... 69
Figure 29 Distribution of Trip Purpose in Kurdistan ..................................................... 72

Figure 30 Distribution of Vehicle Manufacturing Years in Kurdistan ......................... 74

Figure 31 Distribution of Public Transport Trip Purpose in Kurdistan ....................... 88
Figure 32 2009 Sub-District Population Distribution in Kurdistan ............................ 100
Figure 33 2009 Sub-District Population Density Distribution in Kurdistan ............. 101
Figure 34 Average Household Size per Sub District (In persons) ........................... 102
Figure 35 Projected Population Growth for Erbil and Sulaimani.............................. 103
Figure 36 Distribution of Household Unemployment ................................................. 105
Figure 37 Distribution of Household Income ............................................................... 107
Figure 38 Historical and Projected Real GDP Growth for Iraq ................................. 109
Figure 39 Long-Term Real GDP Growth Forecasts for Iraq ..................................... 110
Figure 40 Proportion of Oil and non-Oil Contribution to Iraq’s GDP ....................... 110
Figure 41 Distribution of Household Car Ownership ................................................. 113
Figure 42 Traffic Accident Locations in Erbil (2009) .................................................. 116
Figure 43 Traffic Accident Locations in Dohuk (2009) .............................................. 117
Figure 44 Traffic Accident Locations in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian
Administration (2009) .......................................................................................................... 118
Figure 45 Dynamic Segmentation................................................................................. 123
Figure 46 Example of Roads, Structures and Cities in an Area of Dohuk ............. 125
Figure 47 Customized Toolbar ...................................................................................... 125
Figure 48 Graphical User Interface Samples .............................................................. 126
Figure 49 Administrative Map of the Project Area ...................................................... 127
Figure 50 Methodology for Building the Base Year Observed Model ..................... 128
Figure 51 The GIS Road Database as Depicted in EMME ...................................... 130
Figure 52 Base Year Taxi Routes ................................................................................. 134
Figure 53 Base Year Mini-Bus Routes ......................................................................... 135
Figure 54 Base Year Bus Routes ................................................................................. 136
Figure 55 Methodology for In-Filling the Observed Demand.................................... 144
Figure 56 Aggregated Sectors of Kurdistan ................................................................ 146
Figure 57 Erbil Cordon Crossing Sector ...................................................................... 146
Figure 58 Sulaimani Cordon Crossing Sector............................................................. 147
Figure 59 Dohuk Cordon Crossing Sector................................................................... 147
Figure 60 EMME/ 3 – Kurdistan Base Year Modelled AAWDT ............................... 148
Figure 61 EMME/ 3 – Erbil Region Base Year Modelled AAWDT .......................... 149
Figure 62 EMME/ 3 – Sulaimani Region Base Year Modelled AAWDT ................. 150
Figure 63 EMME/ 3 – Dohuk Region Base Year Modelled AAWDT ....................... 151
Figure 64 Future Road Plans for Dohuk 2020 Horizon ............................................. 153
Figure 65 Future Road Plans for Dohuk 2030 Horizon ............................................. 154
Figure 66 Future Road Plans for Erbil 2020 Horizon ................................................. 155
Figure 67 Future Road Plans for Erbil 2030 Horizon ................................................. 156
Figure 68 Future Road Plans for Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian
Administration 2020 Horizon .............................................................................................. 157
Figure 69 Future Road Plans for Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian
Administration 2030 Horizon .............................................................................................. 158
Figure 70 Proposed Railway Network in Kurdistan .................................................... 159
Figure 71 Total Road Costs for Different Maintenance Conditions ......................... 165
Tables
Table 1 Administrative Zones in Erbil Governorate........................................................ 6

Table 2 Administrative Zones in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian

Administration........................................................................................................................... 7
Table 3 Administrative Zones in Dohuk Governorate .................................................... 8
Table 4 National Transport Demand Forecasts ............................................................ 11
Table 5 Summary of Public Transport Service Provision in Erbil .............................. 12
Table 6 Number of Public Transport Vehicles Operating in Dohuk ........................... 12
Table 7 Number of Public Transport Vehicles Operating in Sulaimani ..................... 13
Table 8 Routes and Fares at Zakho Bus Station in Dohuk ......................................... 13
Table 9 Routes and Fares at Dyana (Soran District) Bus Station in Erbil ................ 14
Table 10 Routes and Fares at Bus Stations in Sulaimani ......................................... 14
Table 11 Number of Vehicles Operating at Dukan Bus Station in Sulaimani ......... 14
Table 12 Average Vehicle Distribution by Road Type ................................................ 16
Table 13 Weight Distribution for Heavy Vehicles by Axle .......................................... 17
Table 14 ESAL per 1000 Vehicles by Road Type....................................................... 17
Table 15 Average Axle Load for Heavy Vehicles with Different Number of Axles 18
Table 16 Summary of Heavy Vehicles Weight Violations .......................................... 19
Table 17 Length of Transport Network in Kurdistan ................................................... 22
Table 18 Distribution of the Length of Primary Roads in Kurdistan ......................... 22
Table 19 Distribution of the Length of Secondary Roads in Kurdistan .................... 23
Table 20 Distribution of Road Length according to Land Use .................................. 31
Table 21 Distribution of Road Length according to Road Surface ........................... 31
Table 22 Distribution of Road Length according to Topography .............................. 31
Table 23 Distribution of Road Length according to Road Conditions ...................... 32
Table 24 Distribution of Road Length according to Road Sign Conditions ............. 32
Table 25 Distribution of Road Length according to Road Marking Conditions....... 32
Table 26 Distribution of Road Length according to Drainage Type ......................... 33
Table 27 Distribution of Road Length according to Drainage Conditions ............... 33
Table 28 Distribution of Road Length according to Carriageway Width .................. 33
Table 29 Distribution of Road Length according to Hard Shoulder Width .............. 34
Table 30 Summary of Conditions of Road Network in Kurdistan ............................. 38
Table 31 Estimation of Alligator Cracks ........................................................................ 39
Table 32 Estimation of Bumps and Sags ..................................................................... 39
Table 33 Estimation of Depressions ............................................................................. 39
Table 34 Estimation of Potholes .................................................................................... 40
Table 35 Estimation of Weathering ............................................................................... 40
Table 36 Estimation of Longitudinal Cracks................................................................. 40
Table 37 Estimation of Rutting ....................................................................................... 41
Table 38 Distribution of the IRI Index by Governorate and Road Type................... 43
Table 39 Number of Major Structures Surveyed ......................................................... 44
Table 40 Types of Major Structures Surveyed ............................................................ 49
Table 41 Summary of Conditions of Major Structures Surveyed ............................. 49
Table 42 Number and Locations of Traffic Surveys ................................................... 51
Table 43 Total and Peak Hour Traffic Volume at ATC Locations............................. 56
Table 44 Average Traffic Composition by Road Type and Governorate ................ 64
Table 45 Surveyed and Expanded RSI Survey Results ............................................ 66
Table 46 Origin/Destination Pattern of Vehicular Trips in Kurdistan ........................ 67
Table 47 Distribution of Vehicle Occupancy in Kurdistan by Vehicle Category ..... 70
Table 48 Distribution of Trip Purpose in Kurdistan by Vehicle Category ................ 73
Table 49 Distribution of Years of Vehicle Manufacturing by Vehicle Category ...... 75
Table 50 Distribution of Kilometrage in Kurdistan by Vehicle Category .................. 76

Table 51 Distribution of Commodity Transported in Kurdistan ................................. 78

Table 52 Distribution of Engine Capacity in Kurdistan by Vehicle Category .......... 79
Table 53 Distribution of Household Sizes in Kurdistan .............................................. 81
Table 54 Distribution of Employed People in Households in Kurdistan .................. 82
Table 55 Distribution of Household Income in Kurdistan ........................................... 83
Table 56 Distribution of Car Ownership in Kurdistan ................................................. 83
Table 57 Distribution of the Number of Public Transport Interviews by Station ..... 85
Table 58 Origin/Destination Pattern of Public Transport Trips in Kurdistan ........... 86
Table 59 Distribution of Public Transport Vehicle Capacity in Kurdistan ................ 87
Table 60 Distribution of Public Transport Trip Purpose by Vehicle Category ........ 89
Table 61 Distribution of Public Transport User Household Sizes............................. 90
Table 62 Distribution of Employed People in PT User Households ......................... 91
Table 63 Distribution of Public transport user Household Income in Kurdistan ..... 91
Table 64 Distribution of Car Ownership by Public Transport User in Kurdistan .... 92
Table 65 Population Estimates ...................................................................................... 93
Table 66 2009 Population Estimates by District and Sub-district in Erbil ............... 94
Table 67 2009 Population Estimates by District and Sub-district in Sulaimani
Governorate and Garmian Administration ......................................................................... 96
Table 68 2009 Population Estimates by District and Sub-district in Dohuk ............ 98
Table 69 Labour Force and Employment ................................................................... 104
Table 70 Employee Income .......................................................................................... 106
Table 71 Household Income......................................................................................... 106
Table 72 GDP by Economic Sector and Governorate (2001, million ID) .............. 111
Table 73 Non-Oil GDP Projections by Governorate (million US$) ......................... 111
Table 74 Vehicles Registered per Governorate ........................................................ 112
Table 75 Reported Road Traffic Accident for Kurdistan Region ............................ 114
Table 76 Public Transport Services and Passengers at Major Stations ............... 132
Table 77 RSI Records and the Percentage of Rejected Records .......................... 141
Table 78 Accepted RSI Records, Counts and AAWDT per Survey Station ......... 142
Table 79 Observed AAWDT Vehicle Trips by Mode and Purpose ........................ 145
Table 80 Observed AAWDT Vehicle Trips Assigned to the Network by Sector . 145
Table 81 Cordon Crossing Comparison of Observed & Modelled AAWDT .......... 148
Table 82 Passenger and Cargo Forecasts for Erbil Airport Expansion ................. 161
Table 83 Average Unitary Cost Rates ........................................................................ 164

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Project
Dar al-Handasah Shair and Partners have been commissioned to develop the
Highway Master Plan for Kurdistan, a region of Iraq. Kurdistan Region comprises
3 Governorates: Erbil, Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration and
Dohuk, as shown in the illustration overleaf.
The Highway Master Plan will cover all regional primary and secondary roads,
including the major structures such as bridges and culverts. Ultimately, it will
provide a comprehensive investment programme for the highway sector,
including:
 Construction of new roads: important missing links which will increase the
efficiency of the road transport network;
 Upgrading and improvement of existing roads through their widening,
doubling and/or re-alignment (horizontally and vertically);
 Rehabilitation of existing roads and programs of periodic (road
strengthening) road maintenance work; and
 Programmes of routine and recurrent road maintenance work.
IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Page 1

Figure 1 Governorates of Kurdistan

The main outcomes from this project will be:
 A comprehensive GIS database (roads, bridges, conditions, traffic and

travel, photos, socio-economics, etc.);
 Appraisal processes (e.g. transport model, evaluation framework);
 Determination of key projects to ensure that the region can continue

developing economically;
 Project costs;
 Priority of projects by category and phasing.
Some of these are also requirements by major funding agencies.

Before we can determine how the future road network might look like, it is
essential to have a very good understanding of the current conditions. The
analysis is hence based on a comprehensive survey programme, involving:
 On the supply side, an assessment of the existing network:

 Road inventory and conditions;
 Road roughness; and
 Major structures.
 On the demand side, an assessment of the travel volumes and patterns:
 Automatic and manual traffic counts;
 Traveller interviews at roadside and bus stations.
1.2 This Report
This report describes the work carried out so far during ―Phase 1: Diagnostics
Review and Strategy Development‖, in the context of the Kurdistan Highway
Master Plan. According to the terms of the contract, Phase 1 covers the following
tasks:
 Task 1.1 Assemble Data, Existing Studies and Documents (chapter 2);
 Task 1.2 Transport Network Inventory and Condition Surveys (chapter 3);
 Task 1.3 Traffic and Travel Surveys (chapter 4);
 Task 1.4 Socio-Economic Review (chapter 5);
 Task 1.5 GIS Database (chapter 6);
 Task 1.6 Traffic Modelling and Forecasts (chapter 7);
 Task 1.7 Develop Highway Sector Strategies (chapter 8).
The objective of this report is to provide a diagnostic review on road transport

infrastructure and demand in the Iraqi Kurdistan region, highlighting the
strengths and weaknesses of the existing transport system as well as identifying
the target areas for improvement. This report will be the basis for developing a
highway sector improvement plan, which will aim to correct and improve the
identified areas of weaknesses (in the context of Phase 2).
The following chapters describe the progress achieved so far under each of these
tasks.

2. ASSEMBLE DATA, EXISTING STUDIES AND DOCUMENTS
A large number of data bases and reports have been collected for the purposes
of this study, including:
 The administrative boundaries for Kurdistan Region; and
 Planning documentation.
Most of this information has been presented in the Inception Report, however,
significant new data and information have been collected since the previous
submission, hence the need to revise some of the original premises and include
them in this report again. The socio-economic data collected at this stage of the
project is presented under Task 1.4 Socio-Economic Review (Chapter 5).
2.1 Administrative Boundaries
Kurdistan Region has recently suffered a number of changes in the boundaries of

its administrative authorities, that is, districts and sub-districts. The autonomous
Region is now divided into 3 major Governorates, 33 districts and 137 sub-
districts:
 Erbil Governorate: 10 districts and 47 sub-districts;
 Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration: 16 districts and 61

sub-districts;
 Dohuk Governorate: 7 districts and 29 sub-districts.
Kurdish administrative zones are shown in the following tables.
The Highway Master Plan, as well as the transport model developed within its
scope, will be carried out at the sub-district level, hence the relevance of data
collection at the same administrative level.

Table 1 Administrative Zones in Erbil Governorate

District No. District Sub-district No. Sub – District/Zone
1 Erbil City Center
1 Erbil Center 2 Bahrka
3 Ankawa
5 Bnaslawa Center
6 Daratu
2 Dashti Hawler
7 Qushtapa
8 Kasnazan
9 Soran City Center
10 Khalifan
3 Soran
11 Diyana
12 Sidakan
13 Shaqlawa City Center
14 Salahaddin
15 Harir
4 Shaqlawa
16 Hiran
17 Basrma
18 Balisan
19 Choman City Center
20 Haji Omaran
5 Choman 21 Smilan
22 Galala
23 Qasre
24 Koy City Center
25 Taqtaq
26 Shorish
6 Koysnjaq
27 Ashti
28 Sktan
29 Segrtkan
Mergasur City Center &
30 & 35
Goratu
31 Barzan
7 Mergasur
32 Piran
33 Sherwan Mazn
34 Mezne
4 Shamamk
36 Khabat City Center
8 Khabat 37 Darashakran
38 Rizgari
39 Kawar gosk
40 Rwandz City Center
41 Warte
9 Rwandz
42 Barzewa
43 Akoyan
44 Makhmor City Center
45 Kandenawa
10 Makhmor
46 Qaraj
47 Gwer

Table 2 Administrative Zones in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian

Administration
Sulaimani City Center &
48 & 49
Bakrajo
11 Sulaimani Center
50 Bazyan
51 Tanjaro
52 Qaradagh City Center
12 Qaradaq
53 Swesinan
Halabjay taza &
13 Sharazur 54 & 55
Warmawa
56 Said Sadq City Center
14 Said Sadq
57 Sruchk
Halabja City Center &
58 & 59
Sirwan
15 Halabja
60 Khurmal
61 Biyara
62 Penjwen City Center
16 Penjwin 63 Garmk
64 Nalparez
65 Chwarta
66 Siwayl
17 Sharbazher 67 Sitak
68 Zalan
69 Gapilon
18 Mawat 70 Mawat
71 Pshdar City Center
72 Hero
73 Halsho
19 Pshdar
74 Zharawa
75 Nawdasht
76 Esewi
Ranya City Center &
77 & 78
Chwarqurna
20 Ranya 79 Hajiawa
80 Betwta
81 Sarkapkan
82 Dukan City Center
83 Surdash
84 Piramagrun
21 Dukan
85 Chinaran
86 Khdran
87 Bngird
88 Darbandikhan City Center
22 Darbandikhan
89 Bawakhoshin
90 Kalar City Center
91 Rizgari
23 Kalar
92 Pebaz
93 Shekh Tawil
94 Kifri City Center
95 Awa spi
24 Kifri 96 Sar qala
97 Nawjol
98 Koks


99 Sangaw
100a Chamchamal City Center East
100b Chamchamal City Center West
101 Shorish
25 Chamchamal
102 Takiya
103 Aghjalar
104 Qadri Karam
105 Takyay Jabari
106 Maydan
26 Khanaqin 107 Bamo
108 Qoratu
Table 3 Administrative Zones in Dohuk Governorate

109 Dohuk City Center
27 Dohuk 110 Mangesh
111 Zawita
112 Semel City Center
28 Semel 113 Fayda
114 Batil
115 Zakho City Center
116 Rizgari
29 Zakho
117 Darkar
118 Batifa
119 Amedi City Center
120 Deraluk
121 Sarsng
30 Amedi
122 Chamanke
123 Bamarne
124 Kani Masi
125 Shekhan City Center (Esfne)
126 Atrush
31 Shekhan 127 Qasrok
128 Zilkan
129 Baadre
130 Akre City Center
131 Bujil
32 Akre
132 Dinarta
133 Grdasin
134 Bardarash City Center
135 Daratu
33 Bardarash
136 Rofiya
137 Kalak

Figure 2 Sub-Districts (Traffic Zones) of Kurdistan Governorates
IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C
Page 9
2.2 Planning Documentation
The following key planning documents have been reviewed:
 National Development Strategy;
 Kurdistan Regional Government‘s Economic Development Strategy;
 Iraqi Transport Master Plan.
National Development Strategy
Kurdistan Region has been allocated nearly US$1000 million (6.3% of the total
budget of Iraq) as part of the proposed projects in the National Development
Strategy 2005-20071. This first National Development Strategy produced by a
democratically elected government of Iraq sets out strategic priorities for Iraq‘s
reconstruction and development. It is established on four major pillars that will
govern strategic public actions for reconstruction and development:
 Strengthening the foundations of economic growth.
 Revitalizing the private sector.
 Improving the quality of life.
 Strengthening good governance and security.
Kurdistan Regional Government‘s Economic Development Strategy
The aim of the KRG‘s strategy2 is to develop Kurdistan‘s economy to the long-
term benefit of the people, by nurturing a new and more innovative private
sector that will produce goods and services in a competitive and sustainable
environment. In order to support a vibrant private sector, the Kurdistan National
Assembly, the Region‘s parliament, passed in 2006 an investment law that is one
of the most investor-friendly in the entire Middle East. This policy is in line with
Iraq‘s Economic Reform Strategy.
Iraqi Transport Master Plan
The Iraqi transport Master Plan3 was produced as a joint venture between the
Iraqi and Italian Governments, with the aim to identify a plan of infrastructure
investments and maintenance operations for roads, railways, airports, maritime
1
National Development Strategy 2005-2007, June 2005, Republic of Iraq, Iraqi Strategic Review Board, Ministry
of Planning and Development Cooperation
2
http://www.krg.org/articles/detail.asp?lngnr=12&smap=03010800&rnr=145&anr=18617
3
Iraqi Transport Master Plan (ITMP), October 2005, CIITI, Italian Consortium for Iraqi Transport Infrastructure.

and fluvial and intermodal facilities. Although they are mentioned here, railways,
airports, and maritime are not within the scope of the Kurdistan Highway Master
Plan study.
A strategic multi-modal transport model was developed for the whole country
with 91 internal zones, each corresponding to one or more districts, and 43
external zones representing other countries. In Kurdistan Region, there is a
greater level of aggregation with 3 model zones in the Governorate of Dohuk, 4
for Erbil and 5 for Sulaimani. Under this study, the values of time for Iraq were
estimated at US$1.30/hour for employed people and US$0.432/hour for non-
employed people, and at US$2.94/hour for freight vehicles (2004 values).
The main weakness of the road traffic model is that it was calibrated using
counts carried out in 1972, 1978 and 1981, which were then brought up to year
2000 using growth rates.
The passenger and freight forecasts produced in the scope of the Iraqi Transport
Master Plan are summarised in the following table. These national figures can
later be used as a reference for comparison against the regional forecasts to be
produced in the scope of the Kurdistan Highway Master Plan.
Table 4 National Transport Demand Forecasts

Demand Unit 2004 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
million pass/day 1 1.4 1.9 2.4 3.1 3.9 4.8
Domestic
% p.a. 5.8% 6.3% 4.8% 5.3% 4.7% 4.2%
Passengers
International
million pass/year 0.1 5.1 6.5 7.9 4.6 11.7 11.7
-Inbound
% p.a. 92.6% 5.0% 4.0% -10.3% 20.5% 0.0%
million pass/year 2.6 3.3 3.9 4.8 5.8 5.8
-Outbound
% p.a. - 4.9% 3.4% 4.2% 3.9% 0.0%
million tonnes/day 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 2.6 3.3 4.1
Domestic
% p.a. 7.0% 5.9% 4.6% 5.4% 4.9% 4.4%
International
million tonnes/year 15.8 16 18.6 20.7 23.5 27.5 31.8
Freight
-Inbound
% p.a. 0.2% 3.1% 2.2% 2.6% 3.2% 2.9%
million tonnes/year 0.2 2.7 6 11.4 18.9 28.8 40.6
-Outbound
% p.a. 54.3% 17.3% 13.7% 10.6% 8.8% 7.1%
million tonnes/year 234.9 276.6 307.3 335.1 360.6 383.7 404.6
Transit
% p.a. 2.8% 2.1% 1.7% 1.5% 1.2% 1.1%
Source: Iraqi Transport Master Plan, 2005. Average annual growth calculation by the Consultant.

2.3 Public Transport Services
The provision and organization of public transport services varies widely within
Kurdistan. There is no single source of information and the existing information is
not consistent in terms of content and format. Hence, all relevant information
about the public transport routes available and the applicable fares have been
collected by the relevant local authority or at the station. The following tables
summarise the information gathered.
Table 5 Summary of Public Transport Service Provision in Erbil
Vehicle No. of Fare No. Passengers Service Bus Station

Route Name
Capacity Vehicle (ID) per day per year Frequency Name
Erbil - Sulaimani 21 41 8,000 84 30,660 02:00 h South Garage
Erbil - Mosel 21 11 3,500 168 61,320 01.15 h North Garage
Erbil - Kirkuk 21 13 4,000 84 30,660 02:00 h South Garage
Erbil - Baghdad 44 4 15,000 44 16,060 N/A North Garage
Erbil - Diyana 21 8 6,000 84 30,660 02:00 h North Garage
Erbil - Harir 14 2 4,000 14 5,110 N/A North Garage
Erbil - Shaqlawa 14-21 9 3,000 49 17,885 03:00 h North Garage
Erbil - Salahaddin 14 6 2,000 56 20,440 02:30 h North Garage
Erbil - Makhmour 14 9 3,000 42 15,330 02:30 h Erbil Makhmour
Erbil - Koysnjaq 21 1 3,000 147 53,655 00:45 h Koysinjaq
Erbil - Ranya 21 16 6,000 84 30,660 01:00 h Koysinjaq
Source: Erbil Transport Directorate
Table 6 Number of Public Transport Vehicles Operating in Dohuk

No. of Vehicles Operating at Station
Route Name
Taxi Bus
Dohuk - Zakho 71 0
Dohuk - Mosel 26 14
Dohuk - Erbil 6 0
Dohuk - Sarsange 16 0
Dohuk - Amedi 11 0
Dohuk - Mangesh 27 0
Dohuk - Deraluk 2 0
Dohuk - Bamarne 1 0
Total 160 14
Source: Dohuk Transport Directorate

Table 7 Number of Public Transport Vehicles Operating in Sulaimani

No. of Vehicles Operating at Station
Route Name Bus Station Name
Taxi Bus
Chwarta 50 7 Chwarta (Sharbazer)
Mawat 7 0 Chwarta (Sharbazer)
Bazyan 54 47 Dokan
Dokan / Piramagrun 42 20 Dokan
Ranya 37 29 (South Garage) Baghdad
Qaladza 9 2 (South Garage) Baghdad
Arabat 50 33 Sharazoor
Said Sadq 21 35 Sharazoor
Penjwin 92 62 Sharazoor
Halabjay 26 28 Sharazoor
Twila (Khurmal) 5 0 Sharazoor
Khurmal 1 5 Sharazoor
Halabjay taza 13 24 Sharazoor
Darbandikhan 18 12 Sharazoor
Kalar 26 31 Sharazoor
Barazanch 8 0 Sharazoor
Koysnjaq 24 0 (South Garage) Baghdad
Chamchamal 30 28 (South Garage) Baghdad
Kirkuk 105 34 (South Garage) Baghdad
Baghdad 141 44 (South Garage) Baghdad
Qaradaq 5 0 (South Garage) Baghdad
Musel 2 0 (South Garage) Baghdad
Khanaqin 8 0 Sharazoor
Erbil 114 44 (South Garage) Baghdad
Total 888 485
Source: Sulaimani Transport Directorate
Table 8 Routes and Fares at Zakho Bus Station in Dohuk

Available Routes One-Way Fare (ID)
Zakho – Dohuk 6,000
Zakho – Mousel 13,000
Zakho – Erbil 25,000
Zakho – Batifa 20,000
Zakho – Darkar 1,000
Zakho – Kani Mase 6,000
Zakho – Bikofa 6,000
Zakho – Tilkery 500
Zakho – Birsefi 1,500
Zakho – Ibrahim al-Khalil 500
Source: Dohuk Transport Directorate

Table 9 Routes and Fares at Dyana (Soran District) Bus Station in Erbil
Available Routes One-Way Fare (ID)
Soran - Akre 10,000
Soran - Erbil 10,000
Soran - Duhok 20,000
Soran - Choman 10,000
Soran - Sulaymaniya 20,000
Soran - Mergasur 6,000
Soran - Shaqlawa 8,000
Soran - khalifan 2,500
Soran - Ranya 10,000
Soran - Harir 5,000
Source: Erbil Transport Directorate
Table 10 Routes and Fares at Bus Stations in Sulaimani

One-Way Fare (ID)
Available Routes
Taxi Bus
Sulaimani - Kifri 11,000 -
Sulaimani - Halabja Taza 2,500 1,250
Sulaimani - Dukan 5,000 -
Sulaimani - Piramagrun 2,000 1,250
Sulaimani - Erbil 15,000 -
Sulaimani - Chamchamal 3,000 2,000
Sulaimani - Bazyan 2,000 1,000
Sulaimani - Halabja 5,000 3,000
Sulaimani - Darbandikhan 3,500 2,500
Sulaimani - Kirkuk 7,000 3,500
Sulaimani - Said Sadq 2,500 1,500
Sulaimani - Khanaqin 12,000 -
Sulaimani - Penjwin 8,000 3,500
Sulaimani - Khurmal 5,000 2,500
Sulaimani - Pshdar (Qalat Deza) 8,000 6,000
Sulaimani - Ranya 6,000 5,000
Sulaimani - Koysnjaq 10,000 5,000
Sulaimani - Baghdad 30,000 -
Source: Sulaimani Transport Directorate
Table 11 Number of Vehicles Operating at Dukan Bus Station in Sulaimani

N. Vehicles Operating
Available Routes
Taxi Bus
Sulaimani - Dukan 27 0
Sulaimani - Piramagrun 22 13
Sulaimani - Bazyan 0 7
Source: General Directorate of Roads and Bridges in Sulaimani

2.4 Heavy Goods Vehicles Axle Loading
Equivalent Single Axle Load
Most of the damage to roads is caused by heavy goods vehicles (HGVs), while
passenger cars do very little damage, if any at all. HGV axle load is a very
important consideration for pavement conditions because the damage caused to
the roads is geometrically proportional (roughly to the 4th power) to the weight
carried by each axle, or combination of axles.
Although it is not too difficult to determine a wheel or an axle load for an

individual vehicle, it becomes quite complicated to determine the number and
types of wheel/axle loads that a particular pavement will be subject to over its
design life. Furthermore, it is not the wheel load but rather the damage to the
pavement caused by the wheel load that is of primary concern. The most
common historical approach is to convert damage from wheel loads of various
magnitudes and repetitions ("mixed traffic") to damage from an equivalent
number of "standard" or "equivalent" loads. The most commonly used equivalent
load in the U.S. is the 8.16 tonne equivalent single axle load (normally
designated ESAL). This single number can be used to represent all traffic loading,
which in turn can be used for predicting future levels of pavement damage.
The following figure shows the correlation between axle load and pavement
damage, for single and tandem axle heavy goods vehicles.
Figure 3 Correlation between Axle Load and Pavement Damage
9
8
Load Equivalency Factor
7
6
5
4 Single Axle
3 Tandem Axle
2
1
0
0.9 4.5 6.4 8.2 9.1 13.6 15.4 18.1 22.7
Axle Load (Tonnes)
Source: Produced by the Consultant based on Typical Load Equivalency Factors
(http://www.pavementinteractive.org/index.php?title=ESAL)

A basic element in pavement design is estimating the ESALs a specific pavement

will encounter over its design life. This helps determine the pavement structural
design and is done by forecasting the traffic the pavement will be subjected to
over its design life then converting the traffic to a specific number of ESALs
based on its makeup.
In order to determine the ESAL in Kurdistan, the first requirement is to estimate

the vehicle fleet distribution for different types of roads, as illustrated in the
following table.
Table 12 Average Vehicle Distribution by Road Type

Vehicle Type Primary Roads Secondary Roads
Private Vehicles 41.4% 42.0%
Taxi 12.8% 8.6%
Mini Bus 2.0% 1.7%
Bus 1.8% 0.9%
Large Bus 0.1% 0.2%
Pickup/Van/LGV 24.2% 29.6%
2 Axle Truck 7.4% 6.4%
3 Axles 4.7% 4.8%
4 Axles 0.5% 0.6%
5 Axles 4.3% 4.4%
6 Axles 0.8% 0.8%
Total 100.0% 100.0%
A sample of axle weight data made available for 129 measurements shows the
average distribution of axle weights for vehicles with different numbers of axles,
as presented in the following table.

Table 13 Weight Distribution for Heavy Vehicles by Axle
Number Indicator Front of the Vehicle Back of the Vehicle

of Axles Axle 1 Axle 2 Axle 3 Axle 4 Axle 5 Axle 6
Average axle weight (tonne) 5.8 11.0
2 Axles
% distribution 35% 65%
Average axle weight (tonne) 5.7 11.4 8.7
3 Axles
% distribution 22% 44% 34%
Average axle weight (tonne) 3.4 4.95 6.3 7
4 Axles
% distribution 16% 23% 29% 32%
Average axle weight (tonne) 5.7 9.4 8.0 7.9 8.4
5 Axles
% distribution 14% 24% 20% 20% 21%
Average axle weight (tonne) 6.5 9.6 7.7 7.4 8.7 8.0
6 Axles
% distribution 13% 20% 16% 16% 18% 17%
By applying load equivalency factors per axle and using an assumption that
approximately half of the HGVs travel empty (i.e. full in one direction and empty
in the other), the ESLA for each 1000 vehicles, for primary and secondary roads
can be calculated, as follows.
Table 14 ESAL per 1000 Vehicles by Road Type

Vehicle Class ESAL
Primary Roads Secondary Roads
Private Vehicles 0.3 0.3
Taxi 0.1 0.1
Mini Bus 0.0 0.0
Bus 16.8 8.7
Large Bus 1.3 3.5
Pickup/Van/LGV 0.3 0.4
2 Axle Truck 149.0 128.6
3 Axles 128.2 132.3
4 Axles 3.3 3.4
5 Axles 95.9 98.9
6 Axles 21.4 22.1
Total 416.7 398.3
Note: Totals may not add up due to rounding to one decimal.

Axle Loading in Kurdistan
Another set of data made available from the Semel Batil Weight Station (289
measurements made between 7 and 14th April 2010) has enabled us to estimate
the average axle load for vehicles with different number of axles, as summarised
in the following table.
Table 15 Average Axle Load for Heavy Vehicles with Different Number of Axles
N. of Axles Average of Axle Weight (kg/axle) N. of Vehicles with same number of Axles
2 13,328 4
3 9,289 130
4 8,784 15
5 8,499 119
6 7,573 21
All vehicles 8,869 289
Source: Data from Semel Batil Weight Station, 2010.
As it can be verified, vehicles with more axles tend to distribute their load more
than vehicles with less axles and therefore presenting a lower average axle
weight. However, since the weight distribution is not homogeneous, this data is
inconclusive in regards to the vehicles causing more damage to pavement
conditions.
Further data collected from a number of weigh stations in Kurdistan have shown
that only a relatively small proportion of all lorries carries weight above the
acceptable level, but in some cases the average additional weight can be
significant (i.e. above 3 tonnes).

Table 16 Summary of Heavy Vehicles Weight Violations

Weigh Station Period Proportion of Average overweight
vehicles (tonnes) per
overweight violating vehicle
Semel Batil 01/02/2010 to 31/03/2010 3.00% 1.4
Semel Batil 07/04/2010 to 14/04/2010 3.20% 1.2
Semel Fayda 01/02/2010 to 31/03/2010 4.10% 3.1
Shekhan 01/02/2010 to 28/02/2010 1.10% 1.5
Shekhan 01/04/2010 to 08/04/2010 2.00% 1.5
Erbil street - Shaqlawa 07/12/2008 to 13/12/2009 1.80% N/A
Qwir street 07/12/2008 to 13/12/2009 2.60% N/A
Erbil - Qoi 07/12/2008 to 13/12/2009 3.70% N/A
Erbil - Aqra 07/12/2008 to 13/12/2009 4.50% N/A
Erbil - Kahabat 07/12/2008 to 13/12/2009 1.70% N/A
Erbil - Ifraz 07/12/2008 to 13/12/2009 3.40% N/A
Erbil - Makhmour 07/12/2008 to 13/12/2009 1.40% N/A
Erbil - Karkok 07/12/2008 to 13/12/2009 3.20% N/A
Erbil - Spilak 07/12/2008 to 13/12/2009 2.60% N/A
Institutional Framework
Legislation in Iraq is applicable whereby no axle carries more than 12 tonnes and
no two axles combined carry more than 18 tonnes, as illustrated below. It is
important to note that in some parts of Kurdistan slightly different limits apply,
for instance, with 13 and 20 tonnes as the limit for single and combined axle
loads.

Figure 4 Legal Limits for Commercial Vehicle Weights in Iraq
Source: Iraqi Highway Design Manual, 1982
However, the legislation is incorrectly applied, with fines only being charged in
relation to the total vehicle weight, and not also in relation to individual
maximum axle load weights. For instance, a 4 axle vehicle carrying 36 tonnes in
total, could be less damaging if the distribution is such that no single axle carries
more than 12 and no two nearby axles carry more than 18 tonnes (as shown in
any of the configurations for 4 axles shown above) than if two axles were
carrying 15 tonnes each and the remaining two axles were carrying 3 tonnes
each. Weigh stations are more concerned with collecting total vehicle weights,
and applying fines to vehicles which carry more than the total allowed for
vehicles in each category. In fact, the scales used at some weigh stations are
designed to measure the total vehicle weight and not axle weight. In Erbil, for
instance, the road maintenance directorate (which is responsible for all weight

stations within the Governorate) has stopped working with the axle weight
system in all weight stations due to excessive delays. As a result, actual axle
load data in Kurdistan has been difficult to collect.
Recommendations
The key recommendations in regards to axle weighting:
 All areas in Kurdistan should have the same weight limits, in line with
national legislation in Iraq;
 All weigh stations should measure individual axle loads as well as the total
vehicle weight. The weigh stations which already have scales for the entire
vehicle should measure the cumulative weight of each axle, by taking
measures axle by axle. This should not necessarily cause excessive delays
if carried out efficiently;
 Weight limits should be per axle as well as per vehicle, so that penalties
are applied to vehicles carrying weights which are above the limits on any
axle or combination of axles or the total vehicle weight.
The ideal solution would be the installation of dynamic axle weigh scales, which
permit weighing the vehicle while in motion, and speeds up the whole process.
There are various systems of different accuracy. At a low level of accuracy,
heavy vehicles can be weighed at high speed as they move along the
carriageway. This is useful for monitoring axle loads on different road sections
but not so useful for catching overloaded offenders, since the lorry drivers tend
to tell each other when the police are having a crack down and avoid that road
section. There are then mobile scales, which use pre-prepared fixed sites but the
actual scales can be moved around so as to cover a large number of sites with a
few scales. This type gives sufficient accuracy for prosecution purposes. There
are also usually a number of fixed sites which can either be used intermittently
to check vehicles that look overloaded or have been chased and caught by police
monitoring a high speed site. Police sometimes also have mobile wheel weighing
scales, which they can use for quick spot checks and direct apparently
overloaded vehicles to fixed stations for accurate weighing. The high accuracy
dynamic scales work by the vehicle driving at a low speed (around 8km/h) over
the scales, when the weight of each individual axle and the total vehicle weight
are printed out.

3. TRANSPORT NETWORK INVENTORY & CONDITION SURVEYS
The length of the total primary and secondary networks, which have been
surveyed in Kurdistan, is approximately 5280km, split as shown in the following
table. This estimate excludes the roads under construction.
Table 17 Length of Transport Network in Kurdistan

Governorate Primary (km) Secondary (km) Total (km)
Dohuk 559.6 852.4 1412.0
Erbil 771.8 1129.9 1901.7
1
Sulaimani 698.1 1269.4 1967.5
Total 2029.5 3251.7 5281.2
Note: Totals may not add up due to rounding to the nearest decimal on each cell.
1. Denotes: Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration
The distribution of the length of the surveyed primary and secondary road
networks by Governorate is given in the two tables to follow, by road section.
Table 18 Distribution of the Length of Primary Roads in Kurdistan

Road Code Dohuk (km) Erbil (km) Sulaimani (km) 1 Total
P - 01 107.9 65.7 77.7 251.2
P - 02 41.1 59.0 50.8 150.8
P - 03 16.0 88.3 - 104.3
P - 04 41.5 128.2 142.1 311.8
P - 05 88.2 62.6 - 150.8
P - 06 41.0 8.4 47.8 97.2
P - 07 69.5 37.5 - 107.0
P - 08 33.7 - - 33.7
P - 09 21.8 34.7 - 56.5
P - 10 41.0 - 90.3 131.3
P - 11 - 13.4 - 13.4
P - 12 - - 71.1 71.1
P - 13 - 75.9 91.4 167.2
P - 14 39.4 45.5 - 84.9
P - 15 - 60.1 - 60.1
P - 16 - 28.2 - 28.2
P - 17 - 21.1 - 21.1
P - 18 - 43.1 - 43.1
P - 24 - - 40.6 40.6
P - 41 - - 68.0 68.0
P - 53 - - 18.4 18.4
P - 65 18.7 - - 18.7
Total 559.6 771.8 698.1 2,029.5

Table 19 Distribution of the Length of Secondary Roads in Kurdistan

1
Road Code Dohuk (km) Erbil (km) Sulaimani (km) Total
S - 01 6.0 83.7 - 89.7
S - 02 21.3 50.4 - 71.8
S - 03 11.4 60.8 33.5 105.8
S - 04 109.7 66.6 - 176.3
S - 05 82.1 89.9 - 172.1
S - 06 59.5 73.3 - 132.8
S - 07 43.7 - 25.9 69.6
S - 08 11.4 - 69.2 80.5
S - 09 24.0 12.0 - 36.0
S - 10 24.0 - - 24.0
S - 11 - 51.0 45.3 96.2
S - 12 43.9 58.8 - 102.6
S - 13 24.0 20.3 - 44.3
S - 14 13.5 9.4 - 22.8
S - 15 6.6 7.6 11.8 26.0
S - 16 19.0 17.1 35.3 71.3
S - 17 23.4 20.7 17.2 61.4
S - 18 3.6 1.4 51.2 56.1
S - 19 - 22.5 11.8 34.2
S - 20 12.0 17.9 34.1 64.0
S - 21 12.6 13.5 56.8 82.9
S - 22 12.0 29.5 32.3 73.9
S - 23 10.8 49.9 5.9 66.6
S - 24 16.2 10.2 - 26.4
S - 25 53.7 24.4 67.6 145.8
S - 26 48.1 - 45.3 93.4
S - 27 12.6 62.9 20.2 95.7
S - 28 - 31.2 10.2 41.4
S - 29 6.0 29.3 92.9 128.3
S - 30 - 26.9 33.4 60.3
S - 31 47.5 10.0 44.7 102.2
S - 32 44.5 7.8 34.7 87.0
S - 33 24.0 21.3 11.2 56.5
S - 34 17.8 - 70.0 87.8
S - 35 7.2 - 54.1 61.3
S - 36 - - 8.9 8.9
S - 37 - - 11.8 11.8
S - 38 - 4.7 12.4 17.0
S - 39 - 6.8 - 6.8
S - 40 - 9.9 - 9.9
S - 41 - 14.0 - 14.0
S - 42 - - 5.2 5.2
S - 43 - 9.9 11.2 21.1
S - 44 - 1.6 - 1.6
S - 45 - 4.2 18.2 22.4
S - 46 - 5.2 11.8 17.0

Road Code Dohuk (km) Erbil (km) Sulaimani (km) 1 Total

S - 47 - 9.4 2.7 12.1
S - 48 - - 31.2 31.2
S - 49 - 31.2 5.9 37.1
S - 50 - 47.8 5.9 53.7
S - 51 - - 4.2 4.2
S - 52 - - 21.9 21.9
S - 53 - 5.2 - 5.2
S - 54 - - 10.7 10.7
S - 55 - - 12.4 12.4
S - 56 - - 11.3 11.3
S - 57 - - 21.4 21.4
S - 58 - - 11.2 11.2
S - 59 - - 34.1 34.1
S - 60 - - 11.2 11.2
S - 61 - - 5.2 5.2
S - 62 - - 11.8 11.8
S - 63 - - 40.6 40.6
S - 64 - - 34.1 34.1
Total 852.4 1,129.9 1,269.4 3,251.7
The road coding system adopted in the inventory surveys, corresponding to

those in the tables above, is an empirical system and does not represent the
actual road numbering in place in Iraq (see section 8.4 Recommendations for
Future Work). This road coding system can be seen in the following figures.

Figure 5 Primary and Secondary Road Networks in Dohuk

Figure 6 Primary and Secondary Road Networks in Erbil

Figure 7 Primary and Secondary Road Networks in Sulaimani Governorate

and Garmian Administration

The following inventory and conditions surveys have been carried out:
 Road inventory;
 Road conditions;
 Road roughness; and
 Major structures.
3.1 Road Inventory
The main purpose of the road inventory survey was to assess the existing road
network condition in terms of road characteristics such as:
 Pavement type;
 Road and shoulder widths;
 Median type and widths;
 Road signs and road marking;
 Guard Rail & New-Jersey barriers;
 Side and cross drainage facilities;
 Location of bridges and retaining walls;
 Cut and fill slopes;
 Junction type;
 Terrain type and adjacent land use.
The Kurdish strategic road network has been surveyed by engineers who were
trained in undertaking key field observations and completing the survey forms.
They were also equipped with a GPS device which has been used to track the
travelled road network and to locate geographically any special features, such as
bridges, culverts, junctions, etc.

Horizontal and Vertical Alignments Suitability of Road Signage
Road Erosion Guard Rail and New-Jersey Condition
Pavement Conditions Box Culvert

Earth Road Cut and Fill Slopes
Junction Safety and Signage
The full methodology and survey forms used for the road inventory surveys have
been reported in the ―Survey Data Analysis Report‖.
The following tables show the distributions of key attributes from the road
inventory survey, in terms of the length of the road network with different
characteristics, by road type (i.e. primary and secondary) and Governorate.

Table 20 Distribution of Road Length according to Land Use

Dohuk (km) Erbil (km) Sulaimani 1 (km) Grand
Land Use Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Total
Agriculture 48.2 132.2 180.4 27.5 147.1 174.7 66.0 187.4 253.4 608.4
Commerce 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.6 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.6
Industry 7.3 0.6 7.9 2.3 10.4 12.7 14.2 5.3 19.5 40.1
Residential 77.2 119.0 196.2 160.3 185.9 346.2 134.5 144.2 278.7 821.1
Vacant 426.9 593.4 1020.3 530.1 770.7 1300.9 471.7 917.2 1389.0 3710.1
Mixed use 0.0 1.2 1.2 49.8 0.0 49.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 51.0
N/A 0.0 6.0 6.0 1.9 12.1 13.9 11.6 15.3 26.9 46.9
Grand Total 559.6 852.4 1412.0 771.8 1129.9 1901.7 698.1 1269.4 1967.5 5281.2
Table 21 Distribution of Road Length according to Road Surface

Surface Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Total
Asphalt 549.2 845.2 1394.4 762.0 1085.5 1847.4 679.8 1246.5 1926.3 5168.1
Concrete 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 2.4 2.4
Earth 10.4 0.0 10.4 0.0 3.6 3.6 2.0 1.2 3.2 17.2
Gravel 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 16.1 20.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.3
Track 0.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 3.7 3.7 1.0 0.0 1.0 6.0
N/A 0.0 6.0 6.0 5.6 20.9 26.5 15.2 19.4 34.6 67.2
Grand Total 559.6 852.4 1412.0 771.8 1129.9 1901.7 698.1 1269.4 1967.5 5281.2
Table 22 Distribution of Road Length according to Topography

Topography Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Total
Flat 8.3 17.4 25.7 221.2 195.0 416.2 15.2 90.0 105.2 547.1
Mostly Rolling 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.6 16.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.6
Mountainous 165.4 527.7 693.1 280.6 385.0 665.8 161.9 466.7 628.6 1987.3
Mountainous
and Rolling 2.1 9.0 11.1 26.8 14.5 41.2 10.2 89.4 99.5 151.8
Rolling 383.8 292.2 676.1 241.4 496.9 738.2 484.9 588.7 1073.6 2487.9
Rolling & Flat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 2.4 2.4
N/A 0.0 6.0 6.0 1.9 21.9 23.8 25.9 32.3 58.2 88.0
Grand Total 559.6 852.4 1412.0 771.8 1129.9 1901.7 698.1 1269.4 1967.5 5281.2

Table 23 Distribution of Road Length according to Road Conditions

Road Dohuk (km) Erbil (km) Sulaimani 1 (km) Grand
Conditions Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Total
Excellent 87.0 173.7 260.6 324.4 263.0 587.4 294.2 732.3 1026.5 1874.5
Very Good 75.2 71.9 147.1 59.6 54.6 114.2 64.7 121.9 186.5 447.8
Good 64.8 105.4 170.2 122.2 72.5 194.5 66.6 64.7 131.3 496.0
Fair 96.5 183.5 279.9 59.1 88.8 147.9 146.8 44.6 191.4 619.2
Poor 31.1 84.5 115.6 91.8 137.4 229.2 10.2 31.5 41.7 386.4
Very Poor 120.0 85.6 205.7 55.4 132.3 187.7 49.7 47.0 96.8 490.2
Critical 56.5 140.6 197.1 57.1 363.4 420.5 50.8 203.3 254.0 871.7
N/A 28.5 7.2 35.7 2.3 17.9 20.2 15.2 24.1 39.3 95.3
Grand Total 559.6 852.4 1412.0 771.8 1129.9 1901.7 698.1 1269.4 1967.5 5281.2
Notes: Derived as the average road conditions between the left and right carriageways.
Totals may not add up due to rounding to one decimal.
Table 24 Distribution of Road Length according to Road Sign Conditions

Sign Conditions Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Total
Damage 6.2 1.2 7.4 3.3 4.2 7.4 6.6 10.1 16.7 31.6
Eroded 0.0 6.0 6.0 0.9 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0
Good 305.4 210.5 515.9 483.1 315.7 798.8 294.0 125.5 419.4 1734.1
Mostly Good 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4
Mostly Damage 0.0 4.2 4.2 19.2 49.4 68.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 72.8
N/A 247.9 630.5 878.5 263.8 758.6 1022.4 397.5 1133.8 1531.3 3432.2
Grand Total 559.6 852.4 1412.0 771.8 1129.9 1901.7 698.1 1269.4 1967.5 5281.2
Table 25 Distribution of Road Length according to Road Marking Conditions

Marking Dohuk (km) Erbil (km) Sulaimani 1 (km) Grand
Eroded 293.1 29.9 323.0 324.5 195.3 519.8 9.1 17.1 26.2 869.1
Good 91.8 58.3 150.1 70.9 80.8 151.6 221.3 25.3 246.6 548.3
Mostly Eroded 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.1
Mostly Good 0.0 0.6 0.6 8.4 5.2 13.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.2
N/A 174.7 763.6 938.3 368.0 846.5 1214.5 467.6 1227.1 1694.7 3847.5
Grand Total 559.6 852.4 1412.0 771.8 1129.9 1901.7 698.1 1269.4 1967.5 5281.2

Table 26 Distribution of Road Length according to Drainage Type

Drainage Type Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Total
Concrete 15.0 8.7 23.8 129.5 33.8 163.3 19.8 23.9 43.7 230.7
Concrete/Earth
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 6.6 4.2 10.8 11.8
Ditch
Earth Ditch 83.6 125.6 209.2 131.9 260.6 392.5 140.6 319.7 460.3 1062.0
Mostly Earth
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.3 0.3 1.1
Ditch
Blank/N/A 461.0 718.1 1179.0 510.5 833.7 1344.1 531.1 921.3 1452.4 3975.6
Grand Total 559.6 852.4 1412.0 771.8 1129.9 1901.7 698.1 1269.4 1967.5 5281.2
Table 27 Distribution of Road Length according to Drainage Conditions

Drainage Dohuk (km) Erbil (km) Sulaimani 1 (km) Grand
Blocked 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.7 35.7 48.4 4.6 5.0 9.6 58.0
Operational/
Mostly 12.4 103.0 115.4 150.8 87.1 237.5 79.2 93.1 172.3 525.6
Operational
Silted/Mostly
86.2 31.3 117.5 96.9 171.3 268.3 83.2 248.3 331.5 717.2
Silted
Blank/N/A 461.0 718.1 1179.0 511.4 835.7 1347.5 531.1 923.0 1454.1 3980.3
Grand Total 559.6 852.4 1412.0 771.8 1129.9 1901.7 698.1 1269.4 1967.5 5281.2
Table 28 Distribution of Road Length according to Carriageway Width

Carriageway Width Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Total
Non-Existent/
22.3 6.0 28.3 3.8 26.5 30.3 11.6 23.8 35.5 94.1
Unsuitable (0 - 2m)
1 lane (2.5 - <4m) 195.5 838.0 1033.5 430.2 582.8 1012.9 381.4 1179.4 1560.7 3607.4
2 lanes (4 - <8m) 174.3 7.2 181.5 121.1 463.2 584.3 114.1 55.9 170.0 935.8
3+ lanes (8m or more) 167.5 1.2 168.7 216.7 52.3 269.0 190.9 10.4 201.3 639.0
Grand Total 559.6 852.4 1412.0 771.8 1129.9 1901.7 698.1 1269.4 1967.5 5281.2

Table 29 Distribution of Road Length according to Hard Shoulder Width

Hard Shoulder Dohuk (km) Erbil (km) Sulaimani 1 (km) Grand
Width Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Prim. Second. Total Total
No Hard Shoulder (0 -
40.2 152.0 192.2 114.9 210.1 324.9 27.9 389.3 417.2 934.3
1m)
Narrow Hard Shoulder
45.6 282.7 328.4 115.4 280.5 395.9 277.6 570.2 847.7 1572.0
(>1 - <3m)
Wide Hard Shoulder
442.7 414.6 857.3 541.6 603.9 1145.5 368.7 308.2 676.9 2679.8
(3 - <5m)
Extra Wide (5m >) 31.1 3.0 34.1 0.0 35.4 35.4 23.9 1.8 25.6 95.1
Grand Total 559.6 852.4 1412.0 771.8 1129.9 1901.7 698.1 1269.4 1967.5 5281.2
It can be seen that:
 Land use: a large part of the land use around the roads surveyed is
vacant, which is what could be expected from inter-urban sites such as the
primary and secondary roads surveyed. The second most common land
use is residential, followed by agriculture.
 Road surface: the vast majority of the roads surveyed are asphalted.
 Topography: most of the terrain is characterised by ―rolling‖, while the

second most frequent topography is ―mountainous‖.
 Road conditions: a significant proportion of the roads surveyed are in

―excellent‖ condition. In Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian
Administration, approximately half of the road network is in ―excellent‖
conditions. However, some 872 km of roads are in ―critical‖ conditions,
about half as much just in Erbil.
 Road signs: from the sites where signage has been found, the majority are
in ―good‖ conditions.
 Road markings: from the sites where markings have been found, most
have been categorised as ―eroded‖.
 Drainage type: only around 4% of the drainage is in concrete, with some

20% as Earth Ditch. Most of the network (75%) does not have specific
drainage.
 Drainage conditions: some 15% of the roads are either blocked, silted or
mostly silted.

 Carriageway width: Some 68% of the roads have 1 lane per direction,
while around 12% have 3 lanes or more.
 Hard shoulder width: around 51% of the roads have wide hard shoulders,
while around 30% have narrow hard shoulder and 18% have no hard
shoulder.
3.2 Road Conditions Surveys
The conditions of the road network were assessed in conjunction with the road
inventory survey. A sample of 225 m2 of the road was inspected regularly at
approximately every 10km. A range of imperfection types were measured and
assessed according to their severity level:
 Alligator cracks: Alligator cracking is a series of interconnecting cracks that

form many-sided, sharp-angled pieces that develop a pattern resembling
chicken wire or skin of an alligator (measured in area – unit m2);
 Bumps and sags: Small localized upward or downward displacement of the

pavement surface (measured in linear meters);
 Depressions: Localized areas with elevations slightly lower than the

surrounding pavement. In rainy days, depressions can be spotted by
looking for stains caused by ponding water on the pavement surface
(measured in area – unit m2);
 Potholes: Potholes are small diameter bowl-shaped depressions that have

sharp edges and vertical sides near the top of the hole. They may be
reached after the occurrence of high severity alligator cracks (measured in
number of holes);
 Weathering and ravelling: Weathering and ravelling is the wearing away of

the pavement surface due to loss of asphalt binder and dislodged
aggregate particles (measured in area – unit m2);
 Longitudinal and transversal cracks; Longitudinal cracks are parallel to the

pavement centerline, while transversal cracks are cracks that extend
across the pavement at approximately right angles to the pavement
centerline (measured in linear meters);

 Rutting: Rut is a surface depression along the wheel paths. The mean rut
depth is calculated by laying a straightedge across the rut and measuring
its depth (measured in area – unit m2).
Records from these measurements and assessments were registered in the

Asphalt Pavement Inspection Calculation Sheet, which sorts entries by the type
and severity level of each imperfection. Dar Al-Handasah has developed a
spreadsheet model to calculate the PCI (Pavement Conditions Index4) in each
road section where pavement conditions were surveyed. The PCI is derived from
the critical score, from a combination of the amounts of different types of
distress and its severity. Finally, the PCI is converted into a qualitative measure
which reflects the overall conditions of each road sample, according to the
following criteria:
 Failed: PCI below 10
 Very Poor: PCI between 10 and 25
 Poor: PCI between 25 and 40
 Fair: PCI between 40 and 55
 Good: PCI between 55 and 70
 Very Good: PCI between 70 and 85
 Excellent: PCI between 85 and 100
A number of tools have been used for these measurements, such as a manual
odometer and a three-meter straight-edge and ruler.
Manual Odometer: Cracks Pavement Conditions Survey: Cracks
4
The Pavement Condition Index is a widely used statistical index between 0 and 100, based on a visual survey of
the pavement, and is used to indicate the condition of roads.

Three-Meter Straight-Edge and Ruler: Rutting Pavement Conditions Survey: Potholes
Alligator Cracks Weathering and ravelling
It is important to note that the pavement condition index (PCI) method deals
with surface conditions only. Surface conditions are often symptoms of
underlying problems, while in many cases latent distresses may well be hidden
under the pavement without necessarily showing any visual distress signs on the
surface. There could also be cases of recent pavement maintenance treatments,
such as overlays or other global surfacing solutions, which can hide old distresses
for a certain time, in which case they do not appear in the PCI survey. A more
detailed evaluation campaign would need to include other testing and inspection
methods, such as load deflection testing (falling weight deflectometer) and
laboratory tests on the various pavement layers (CBR, sieve analysis, bitumen
extraction, etc..) in order to properly analyze the pavement‘s structural strength.
In this context, the reported PCI values should be considered for guidance only
and not conclusive information on the conditions of the pavement.
The full methodology and survey forms used for the road condition surveys have
been reported in the ―Survey Data Analysis Report‖. A summary of the results of
the road condition survey is presented in the following table, in terms of the
length of the network considered in excellent, very good, good, fair, poor, very

poor or failed, by Governorate and road type (primary or secondary roads). The
complete analysis of road conditions is presented in Appendix A.
Table 30 Summary of Conditions of Road Network in Kurdistan
Road Road Length (km)

Governorate Total
Type Excellent V. Good Good Fair Poor V. Poor Failed
Prim. 77.4 74.4 46.3 175.7 32.3 97.0 56.6 559.6
Dohuk
Sec. 158.1 65.7 107.5 182.6 79.5 127.4 131.6 852.4
Prim. 356.5 38.4 133.1 45.1 91.1 50.8 62.3 777.3
Erbil
Sec. 249.8 52.2 76.2 88.1 144.3 143.8 370.1 1,124.5
Prim. 287.9 74.0 104.7 121.8 11.0 65.8 32.9 698.1
Sulaimani 1
Sec. 732.3 133.6 72.9 41.8 30.2 42.9 215.7 1,269.4
Total 1,861.9 438.3 540.8 655.0 388.5 527.6 869.1 5,281.2
% of total 35.3% 8.3% 10.2% 12.4% 7.4% 10.0% 16.5% 100.0%
While some 35% of all roads appear to be in ―excellent‖ conditions, this only
means that in all such cases, the survey team found nothing or very little to
measure, leading to PCIs above 85. However, caution needs to be taken when
interpreting these results. Conversely, approximately the same proportion
(almost 34%) of the network is considered to be in poor, very poor or failed
conditions.
The following tables summarise the analysis of each individual imperfection

measured on the road condition surveys by Governorate and road type.

Table 31 Estimation of Alligator Cracks

Road Length Affected Total Length
Road Alligator Cracks
Governorate with Alligator Cracks of Road % Road Affected
Type Observed (m2)
(km) surveyed (km)
Prim. 609 123 559.6 21.9%
Dohuk
Sec. 1,403 176 852.4 20.6%
Prim. 793 185 777.3 23.8%
Erbil
Sec. 2,871 305 1,124.5 27.1%
Prim. 672 102 698.1 14.6%
Sulaimani 1
Sec. 1,948 238 1,269.4 18.8%
Total 8,296 1,128 5,281.1 21.4%
Notes: Totals or percentages may not add up due to rounding to one or zero decimal.
Table 32 Estimation of Bumps and Sags

Bumps and Road Length Affected Total Length
Road
Governorate Sags Observed with Alligator Cracks of Road % Road Affected
Type
(m) (km) surveyed (km)
Prim. 38 18 559.6 3.1%
Dohuk
Sec. 220 64 852.4 7.5%
Prim. 243 65 777.3 8.4%
Erbil
Sec. 395 156 1,124.5 13.8%
Prim. 22 10 698.1 1.4%
Sulaimani 1
Sec. 59 55 1,269.4 4.3%
Total 977 367 5,281.1 7.0%
Table 33 Estimation of Depressions

Road Length Affected Total Length
Road Depression
Governorate with Alligator Cracks of Road % Road Affected
Type Observed (m2)
(km) surveyed (km)
Prim. 3 10 559.6 1.8%
Dohuk
Sec. 70 14 852.4 1.7%
Prim. 85 30 777.3 3.8%
Erbil
Sec. 354 89 1,124.5 7.9%
Prim. 0 0 698.1 0.0%
Sulaimani 1
Sec. 3 10 1,269.4 0.8%
Total 515 153 5,281.1 2.9%

Table 34 Estimation of Potholes

Road Length Affected Total Length of
Road Potholes
Governorate with Alligator Cracks Road surveyed % Road Affected
Type Observed (no.)
(km) (km)
Prim. 8 40 559.6 7.2%
Dohuk
Sec. 51 180 852.4 21.1%
Prim. 69 116 777.3 14.9%
Erbil
Sec. 210 511 1,124.5 45.4%
Prim. 22 70 698.1 10.0%
Sulaimani 1
Sec. 169 484 1,269.4 38.1%
Total 529 1,401 5,281.1 26.5%
Table 35 Estimation of Weathering

Road Weathering
Type Observed (m2)
(km) (km)
Prim. 4,173 378 559.6 67.5%
Dohuk
Sec. 12,012 759 852.4 89.1%
Prim. 6,900 551 777.3 70.9%
Erbil
Sec. 11,280 910 1,124.5 80.9%
Prim. 6,686 498 698.1 71.4%
Sulaimani 1
Sec. 10,739 1,077 1,269.4 84.8%
Total 51,790 4,172 5,281.1 79.0%
Table 36 Estimation of Longitudinal Cracks

Longitudinal Road Length Affected Total Length of
Road
Governorate Cracks with Alligator Cracks Road surveyed % Road Affected
Type
Observed (m) (km) (km)
Prim. 3,124 449 559.6 80.2%
Dohuk
Sec. 3,486 431 852.4 50.5%
Prim. 2,317 283 777.3 36.4%
Erbil
Sec. 6,241 590 1,124.5 52.4%
Prim. 2,182 284 698.1 40.7%
Sulaimani 1
Sec. 3,683 459 1,269.4 36.2%
Total 21,033 2,494 5,281.1 47.2%

Table 37 Estimation of Rutting

Road Rutting
Type Observed (m2)
(km) (km)
Prim. 2,107 278 559.6 49.7%
Dohuk
Sec. 1,878 175 852.4 20.6%
Prim. 2,878 160 777.3 20.6%
Erbil
Sec. 4,283 428 1,124.5 38.1%
Prim. 878 178 698.1 25.5%
Sulaimani 1
Sec. 504 89 1,269.4 7.0%
Total 12,528 1,308 5,281.1 24.8%
The full results from the road imperfection estimates are presented in Appendix
B.
3.3 Road Roughness Surveys
Road roughness is one of the characteristics of road conditions (unevenness of

the surface), and it is also one of the key determinants of vehicle operating
costs, which is one of the factors considered in the economic assessment. Drivers
incur more costs from driving in bad (or rougher) roads than in good (or
smoother) roads, from fuel consumption, tyre wear and other vehicle operating
and maintenance costs.
The road roughness surveys have been undertaken continuously throughout the
entire primary and secondary road networks, using a Bump Integrator. A sample
measurement index (IRI) has been derived for each kilometre of road surveyed.
This index provides an indication of how rough or bumpy the road is. The full
methodology and survey forms used for the road roughness surveys have been
reported in the ―Survey Data Analysis Report‖. The IRI roughness scale is shown
in the following illustration.

Figure 8 IRI Roughness Scale
Bump Integrator counts (in counts/km) have been calibrated against the manual
IRI measures (m/km), and the results of the calibration procedure for asphalt/
concrete roads are illustrated in the following figure.
Figure 9 Correlation Between IRI and BIU For Asphalt Concrete Roads
The following assumptions have been made for categorising IRI measures by
pavement conditions:
 IRI from 1 to 1.75: Superhighways
 IRI from over 1.75 to 3: New Pavements

 IRI from over 3 to 4.75: Older Pavements
 IRI from over 4.75 to 7: Maintained Unpaved Roads
 IRI from over 7 to 9.5: Damaged Pavements
 IRI from over 9.5 to 16: Rough Unpaved Roads
A summary of the results from the analysis of the pavement roughness surveys
in the Kurdish primary and secondary transport networks are summarised in the
following table, in terms of the number of IRI measurements under each road
conditions category and for each road type and Governorate.
Table 38 Distribution of the IRI Index by Governorate and Road Type

Road Type Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1 Total %
New Pavements 49 128 218 395 20%
Older Pavements 378 450 326 1,154 59%
Primary Maintained Unpaved Roads 105 138 73 316 16%
Roads Damaged Pavements 12 27 42 81 4%
Rough Unpaved Roads 2 7 1 10 1%
Sub-Total 546 750 660 1,956 100%
New Pavements 73 115 278 466 15%
Older Pavements 399 540 813 1,752 56%
Secondary Maintained Unpaved Roads 252 298 138 688 22%
Roads Damaged Pavements 77 56 29 162 5%
Rough Unpaved Roads 25 29 15 69 2%
Sub-Total 826 1,038 1,273 3,137 100%
Total 1,372 1,788 1,933 5,093
% 27% 35% 38% 100%
Note: 1. Denotes: Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration
The results from this analysis indicate that approximately 59% of the primary
road network and 56% of the secondary network is equivalent conditions to
―Older Pavements‖, while 21% of the primary roads and 29% of the secondary
roads are equivalent to ―damaged or unpaved‖ surfaces.
3.4 Major Structures Surveys
Bridges of one span and more, box culverts of 5 spans and more and pipe
culverts of 15 spans and more have been determined as major structures.
Surveys took place during the period October 2009 until January 2010. The total
number of structures surveyed is 357, as shown in the table below and
illustrated in the following figures. This table also shows the number of structures

which are actually located on the primary and secondary road networks (262),
hence within the scope of this work.
Table 39 Number of Major Structures Surveyed

Description Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1 Total Kurdistan
Number of Structures Surveyed 60 131 166 357
Percentage Distribution 17% 37% 46% 100%
N. Structures on Primary & Secondary Roads 41 101 120 262
Percentage Distribution 16% 38 % 46% 100%
It is important to note that not necessarily all major structures have been
surveyed, and some have even been surveyed outside the primary and
secondary road networks. The lack of an official map of the areas outside the
Kurdistan Region but which are protected by Kurdish troops has limited the
capacity of the survey team to plan the field surveys. In addition, security
concerns have prevented our team from undertaking surveys in regions of
conflict.
These surveys have covered bridges, culverts and tunnels, and included all
relevant items that describe the structures in terms of dimension, location and
condition of the various components of the structure. The assessment of the
condition of each structure were also supported by digital photographs showing
details of relevant components and the articulation of the bridge or culvert, such
as sub and superstructure, support conditions, type of piers, abutments and
deck. Obvious defects were briefly described and shown in the photographs. A
file for each structure was created separately, except for a few adjacent and
connected ones. The bridge, culvert and tunnel reports do not constitute, in any
manner, evaluation reports, but are basically initial survey reports which can be
used as the baseline for any future detailed assessments. No scores could be
given to the conditions of each of the existing structures, as the survey scope
was limited due to its nature, the broad process of gathering data and the limited
resources, access and thorough investigations. Each of the surveyed structures
was given an assessment of their general condition based on the visual
inspection of the accessible parts and based on the experience of the engineers
who have conducted the survey.

Figure 10 Location of Major Structures in Kurdistan Region
Page 45
Figure 11 Location of Major Structures in Erbil Governorate
Page 46
Figure 12 Location of Major Structures in Dohuk Governorate
Page 47
Figure 13 Location of Major Structures in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration
Page 48
The following tables summarise the type and condition of the structures surveyed
per Governorate.
Table 40 Types of Major Structures Surveyed
Structure Culverts Bridges

Tunnels Total
Type Pipe Box Concrete Composite Steel
N. Structures 11 32 161 51 99 3 357
Rate % 3% 9% 45% 14% 28% 1% 100%
Table 41 Summary of Conditions of Major Structures Surveyed

Structure Under Need Major Destroyed by Total
Condition Construction Maintenance Failure military actions
N. Structures 6 340 3 8 357
Rate % 2% 95% 1% 2% 100%
Our main observations from the undertaking of these surveys are as follows:
 95% of all bridges and tunnels currently need some kind of maintenance.
A high percentage of them needs immediate maintenance and/or
rectification.
 Inadequate hydrological and geotechnical studies have led to several

failures as several bridges were built short of their minimum hydraulic
requirements.
 Temporary steel structures such Bailey bridges were used permanently

beyond their intended lifespan.
 Corrosion and rusty connections and exposure of reinforcement bars are

very commonly found.
 Many bridges were built without bearings and several have inadequate
bearings.
 Expansion joints were found damaged or not installed, leading to damages

to the wearing surface and leakage of water through the joints to the
abutment and pier faces.
 Bad workmanship was very commonly verified, and this has lead to
honeycombing and segregations.

In view of the serious problems verified, the following are recommended:
 Immediate measures to maintain the structures in operation.
 Detailed evaluation and assessment studies using destructive and non-

destructive techniques and thorough hydrological and geotechnical
investigations are necessary for a proper evaluation of the existing
structures.
 The development of maintenance guidelines and manual, to be prepared

by experienced engineers and used to guide future contractors and/or the
Ministry teams to carry out the necessary and periodic inspection and
maintenance works.
The full methodology and survey forms used for the major structures surveys
have been reported in the ―Survey Data Analysis Report‖. The complete set of
results from the surveys for all structures (included those outside the scope of
this study) is included in Appendix G, as well as in the GIS database prepared by
Dar Al-Handasah in the scope of this study and submitted to KRG.

4. TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL SURVEYS
A series of traffic and travel surveys were conducted across the whole Kurdistan
region, including:
 Automatic Traffic Counts (ATC);
 Manual Classified Counts (MCC);
 Roadside Interviews (RSI);
 Public Transport Users Interviews.
The three first surveys (ATCs, MCCs and RSIs) were carried out at the same
locations along primary and secondary roads, except for ―Additional Locations‖,
where only ATCs were carried out (the sole purpose of the counts at additional
locations is to calibrate the transport model). The following table summarises the
number and locations of traffic surveys.
Table 42 Number and Locations of Traffic Surveys
Survey Location Erbil Dohuk Sulaimani 1 Total

ATC MCC RSI ATC MCC RSI ATC MCC RSI
Primary roads 6 2 3 11
Secondary roads 10 3 1 14
Additional locations 6 - - 3 - - 8 - - 17
Total 22 2 16 82 5 12 2 4 42
Notes: 1. Denotes: Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration
2. These figures include those ATC locations in conjunction with RSI and MCC.
The traffic and travel surveys were conducted by Dar al-Handasah staff together
with some 24 local staff recruited from the Ministry of Construction and Housing,
who were trained and supervised by the Consultants. The surveys were carried
out on to typical working days in Kurdistan Region (from Sunday to Thursday). It
should also be noted that all traffic surveys were carried out using hand held GPS
(Global Positioning System) devices to determine geographic coordinates and
referencing points to all survey locations.
The following figures indicate the locations of each field survey.

Figure 14 Traffic and Travel Survey Locations in Dohuk

Figure 15 Traffic and Travel Survey Locations in Erbil

Figure 16 Traffic and Travel Survey Locations in Sulaimani Governorate and

Garmian Administration

4.1 Automatic Traffic Counts
Automatic Traffic Counts (ATC) are pneumatic devices which can be installed
along cross sections of roads to measure the number of vehicle axles driving
over it. ATCs are carried out to estimate the profiles of traffic volumes through
the day (including the estimation of the peak traffic) and to allow the estimation
of the Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT), without the presence of surveyors.
ATCs were conducted at 42 locations in Erbil, Dohuk and Sulaimani Governorate

and Garmian Administration, covering varying number of days, from 1 day to the
entire year in one particular location. Averages are presented for locations where
ATCs were conducted over more than one day.
The total daily (24-hour) traffic volumes for all 42 locations, by direction, are
presented in the following table. The table also shows the peak hour traffic, when
it takes place and the percentage they represent over the daily traffic.

Table 43 Total and Peak Hour Traffic Volume at ATC Locations

Peak Hour % Peak
Total Traffic
Governorate Station Direction Peak Hour Traffic Traffic over
(Vehicle/24h)
(vehicle/hour) 24-hours
Erbil A01 NB 1128 11:00 - 12:00 157 13.9%
Erbil A01 SB 1285 11:00 - 12:00 187 14.6%
Erbil A02 EB 1671 07:00 - 08:00 135 8.1%
Erbil A02 WB 1655 17:00 - 18:00 141 8.5%
Sulaimani 1 A03 NB 2023 07:00 - 08:00 195 9.6%
Sulaimani 1 A03 SB 2054 16:00 - 17:00 245 11.9%
Sulaimani 1 A04 EB 2490 16:00 - 17:00 246 9.9%
Sulaimani 1 A04 WB 2486 08:00 - 09:00 234 9.4%
Sulaimani 1 A05 NB 6842 16:00 - 17:00 580 8.5%
Sulaimani 1 A05 SB 6845 07:00 - 08:00 747 10.9%
Sulaimani 1 A06 EB 4462 08:00 - 09:00 461 10.3%
Sulaimani 1 A06 WB 4383 16:00 - 17:00 503 11.5%
Dohuk A07 NB 951 16:00 - 17:00 93 9.7%
Dohuk A07 SB 928 09:00 - 10:00 106 11.4%
Dohuk A08 EB 1441 17:00 - 18:00 170 11.8%
Dohuk A08 WB 1423 09:00 - 10:00 173 12.2%
Dohuk A09 NB 1058 10:00 - 11:00 123 11.6%
Dohuk A09 SB 1115 09:00 - 10:00 116 10.4%
Sulaimani 1 A10 EB 7020 16:00 - 17:00 651 9.3%
Sulaimani 1 A10 WB 6950 16:00 - 17:00 602 8.7%
Erbil A11 NB 1143 07:00 - 08:00 106 9.3%
Erbil A11 SB 1110 09:00 - 10:00 114 10.3%
Erbil A12 EB 3666 08:00 - 09:00 354 9.7%
Erbil A12 WB 3763 17:00 - 18:00 394 10.5%
Erbil A13 NB 776 15:00 - 16:00 78 10.1%
Erbil A13 SB 777 16:00 - 17:00 78 10.0%
Erbil A14 NB 593 17:00 - 18:00 68 11.5%
Erbil A14 SB 614 10:00 - 11:00 55 9.0%
Sulaimani 1 A15 NB 660 14:00 - 15:00 65 9.8%
Sulaimani 1 A15 SB 695 08:00 - 09:00 83 11.9%
Sulaimani 1 A16 EB 2690 09:00 - 10:00 270 10.0%
Sulaimani 1 A16 WB 2659 16:00 - 17:00 250 9.4%
Sulaimani 1 A17 EB 3492 16:00 - 17:00 317 9.1%
Sulaimani 1 A17 WB 3492 16:00 - 17:00 317 9.1%
Erbil P01 NB 7702 16:00 - 17:00 642 8.3%
Erbil P01 SB 9112 16:00 - 17:00 760 8.3%
Erbil P02 EB 10752 09:00 - 10:00 973 9.0%
Erbil P02 WB 10861 16:00 - 17:00 1054 9.7%
Erbil P03 NB 9061 15:00 - 16:00 857 9.5%
Erbil P03 SB 9067 08:00 - 09:00 841 9.3%
Erbil P04 EB 3001 14:00 - 15:00 258 8.6%
Erbil P04 WB 2938 08:00 - 09:00 253 8.6%

Peak Hour % Peak

Total Traffic
Governorate Station Direction Peak Hour Traffic Traffic over
(Vehicle/24h)
(vehicle/hour) 24-hours
Erbil P05 NB 1376 08:00 - 09:00 125 9.1%
Erbil P05 SB 1485 11:00 - 12:00 153 10.3%
Erbil P06 NB 1370 09:00 - 10:00 120 8.7%
Erbil P06 SB 1608 15:00 - 16:00 162 10.1%
Sulaimani 1 P07 EB 15555 16:00 - 17:00 1803 11.6%
Sulaimani 1 P07 WB 15467 14:00 - 15:00 1589 10.3%
Sulaimani 1 P08 NB 3472 08:00 - 09:00 345 9.9%
Sulaimani 1 P08 SB 3407 15:00 - 16:00 271 7.9%
Sulaimani 1 P09 EB 8615 16:00 - 17:00 933 10.8%
Sulaimani 1 P09 WB 8494 08:00 - 09:00 800 9.4%
Dohuk P10 NB 6631 16:00 - 17:00 492 7.4%
Dohuk P10 SB 6998 16:00 - 17:00 596 8.5%
Dohuk P11 NB 11540 11:00 - 12:00 940 8.1%
Dohuk P11 SB 13263 11:00 - 12:00 944 7.1%
Erbil S01 NB 6206 08:00 - 09:00 520 8.4%
Erbil S01 SB 5720 17:00 - 18:00 518 9.1%
Erbil S02 EB 3922 16:00 - 17:00 319 8.1%
Erbil S02 WB 3392 08:00 - 09:00 366 10.8%
Erbil S03 NB 6506 08:00 - 09:00 584 9.0%
Erbil S03 SB 7212 08:00 - 09:00 690 9.6%
Erbil S04 NB 2842 17:00 - 18:00 288 10.1%
Erbil S04 SB 3069 08:00 - 09:00 305 9.9%
Erbil S06 EB 3123 13:00 - 14:00 284 9.1%
Erbil S06 WB 3150 07:00 - 08:00 331 10.5%
Erbil S07 NB 1499 08:00 - 09:00 133 8.9%
Erbil S07 SB 1445 16:00 - 17:00 159 11.0%
Erbil S08 NB 1443 09:00 - 10:00 145 10.0%
Erbil S08 SB 1476 09:00 - 10:00 128 8.7%
Erbil S09 EB 1308 08:00 - 09:00 119 9.1%
Erbil S09 WB 1335 17:00 - 18:00 123 9.2%
Erbil S10 EB 3363 16:00 - 17:00 335 10.0%
Erbil S10 WB 3081 14:00 - 15:00 277 9.0%
Erbil S11 NB 1462 17:00 - 18:00 156 10.7%
Erbil S11 SB 1475 14:00 - 15:00 147 10.0%
Sulaimani 1 S14 NB 2788 07:00 - 08:00 273 9.8%
Sulaimani 1 S14 SB 2661 16:00 - 17:00 348 13.1%
Dohuk S17 NB 2197 17:00 - 18:00 208 9.5%
Dohuk S17 SB 2144 10:00 - 11:00 215 10.0%
Dohuk S18 EB 7369 16:00 - 17:00 629 8.5%
Dohuk S18 WB 6725 07:00 - 08:00 516 7.7%
Dohuk S19 EB 4093 16:00 - 17:00 339 8.3%
Dohuk S19 WB 4016 16:00 - 17:00 330 8.2%

The following figures illustrate the average traffic profile by one-hour interval,
over 24 hours, for all primary roads (―P‖ locations), secondary roads (―S‖
locations) and additional (―A‖ locations) ATC sites, for both directions of traffic.
Figure 17 Average Daily Traffic Profile (Both Directions) for Primary Roads

Figure 18 Average Daily Traffic Profile (Both Directions) for Secondary Roads
Figure 19 Average Daily Traffic Profile (Both Directions) for Additional Sites

It can be seen that:
 The average traffic profile for all types of locations are very similar, with one
morning peak (8:00-9:00) and one just as important afternoon peak
(16:00-17:00). The inter-peak traffic volumes are also significant in all
cases;
 As expected, the average level of traffic on primary roads is higher than at

secondary roads, which in turn is higher than at additional locations
(although all additional locations are also secondary roads, but less busy).
In order to determine the seasonality of traffic, ATC is being continually carried

out at one location for an entire year, starting in October 2009. The average
weekday traffic from October 2009 to May 2010 at location P01 is shown in the
next figure, per month and direction. It can be seen that there is a slight
seasonality effect, with a higher average traffic in April, but little difference in the
other months.
Figure 20 Average Weekday Traffic per Month and Direction at Location P01
Appropriate seasonality factors will be applied to the traffic counts in order to

derive the annual average traffic flows.

4.2 Manual Classified Counts
Manual Classified Counts (MCC) were conducted at all ―P‖ and ―S‖ locations (25
in total) using manual counters. Counts of vehicles by category were input into
purposely designed forms. Vehicles have been classified into eight classes that
are commonly used in Kurdistan Region:
 Private Cars,
 Taxis and Services,
 Minibuses (12-14 seats),
 Buses (18-24 seats),
 Large Buses (44 seats),
 Van/Pick-ups, Light Goods Vehicles (LGV),
 Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV) 2 axles,
 Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV) >2 axles.

These surveys were undertaken for a period of 12 hours (from 7:30 to 19:30) at
each location, in both directions of traffic. Each location and direction has its own
specific distribution by vehicle category, and this distribution also often varies by
time of the day. The following figures summarise the typical vehicle category
distributions for the primary roads (―P‖ locations) and secondary roads (―S‖
locations) across Kurdistan Region, where surveys have been carried out.
Figure 21 Average Daytime Traffic Composition on Primary Roads

Figure 22 Average Daytime Traffic Composition on Secondary Roads
It can be seen that the distributions for primary and secondary roads in
Kurdistan are very similar, but there is a tendency for a lower occurrence of taxis
but more pick-up/van/LGV on secondary roads in comparison to primary roads.
For light goods vehicles, this makes sense since these vehicles tend to operate at
a more local level. However, the higher incidence of taxis on primary roads
appears counter-intuitive. This is a phenomenon particular to Sulaimani
Governorate and Garmian Administration, where a relatively high incidence of
taxis can be found both in primary and secondary roads.
The following table summarises the same results but broken down by
Governorate, so that regional variations can be assessed, as well as vehicle
category distribution for the whole Kurdistan region.

Table 44 Average Traffic Composition by Road Type and Governorate

% Distribution on Primary Roads % Distribution on Secondary Roads
Sulaimani 1
Sulaimani 1
Kurdistan
Kurdistan
Vehicle Category
Dohuk
Dohuk
Erbil
Erbil
Private Cars 41.4% 41.3% 47.0% 34.8% 42.0% 48.4% 38.6% 47.5%
Taxis, Service 12.8% 7.3% 12.0% 16.5% 8.6% 6.1% 8.8% 15.8%
Minibuses (12-14 seats) 2.0% 1.3% 2.2% 2.1% 1.7% 1.2% 1.9% 1.5%
Buses (18-24 seats) 1.8% 0.5% 0.7% 3.7% 0.9% 0.2% 1.2% 0.9%
Large Buses (44 seats) 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.3% 0.0%
Van, Pick-ups, LGVs 24.2% 18.3% 25.9% 25.1% 29.6% 23.9% 31.8% 31.9%
HGVs 2 axles 7.4% 15.5% 4.0% 7.6% 6.4% 12.1% 4.5% 2.1%
HGVs >2 axles 10.3% 15.8% 8.1% 10.1% 10.6% 8.0% 13.0% 0.3%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Notes: Totals may not add up due to rounding to one decimal.
The main findings are as follows:
 Secondary roads in Dohuk have the highest proportion of private vehicles,

while primary roads in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration
have the lowest;
 Lorries are relatively more common in primary roads in Dohuk and much
less prevalent in secondary roads in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian
Administration;
 Secondary roads in Erbil and Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian

Administration have the greatest proportion of pickups, in contrast with
primary roads in Dohuk;
 Taxis and buses are more common in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian
Administration than in the other Governorates, both on primary and
secondary roads, while Dohuk has the lowest incidence of these types of
vehicles.
4.3 Roadside Interviews
Roadside Interviews (RSI) were conducted at 25 locations (the same locations

and simultaneously with the MCCs), with the objective of collecting information
about the origin, destination, trip purpose and further characteristics of trip

making within the study area. It was conducted on one direction of traffic,
intercepting as many vehicles as possible (at busy locations representing only a
sample of the total traffic).
In these surveys, a sample of vehicles of all categories were stopped (with the
authority of police officers) and asked to respond to a series of questions about
their journey, vehicle and household.
The results from these surveys have been checked for logic errors and
consistency, before being expanded to reflect the situation for the entire daily
traffic (since only a sample of the total traffic has been stopped for the purposes
of the RSI). This was done using a software called Visual-tm, by firstly expanding
the results for each site to the manual classified count, taking into account the
time of the survey and the vehicle type. The next step was to make this traffic
reflect an average day which was achieved by expanding to the corresponding
daily traffic (from ATCs). The numbers of the field surveys and the expanded
results are summarised in the following table.

Table 45 Surveyed and Expanded RSI Survey Results
Governorate Location No. of Survey Sample Expanded Survey Results Expansion Factor
P10 361 3,003 8.3
P11 528 4,751 9.0
Dohuk S17 467 1,053 2.3
S18 361 3,377 9.4
S19 417 1,929 4.6
Dohuk Total 2,134 14,113 6.6
P01 522 5,057 9.7
P02 428 6,499 15.2
P03 343 4,723 13.8
P04 537 1,709 3.2
P05 185 471 2.5
P06 204 555 2.7
S01 544 3,510 6.5
S02 494 1,617 3.3
Erbil
S03 347 2,156 6.2
S04 342 1,213 3.5
S06 292 1,255 4.3
S07 248 569 2.3
S08 164 626 3.8
S09 237 582 2.5
S10 434 1,488 3.4
S11 358 950 2.7
Erbil Total 5,679 32,981 5.8
P07 339 9,493 28.0
P08 329 1,622 4.9
Sulaimani 1
P09 499 5,525 11.1
S14 345 1,791 5.2
Sulaimani 1 Total 1,512 18,431 12.2
Grand Total 9,325 65,525 7.0
These adjustments and expansions to the survey results from the RSIs have
been implemented and incorporated into the modelling exercise and GIS
database.
Overall Origin-Destination Pattern
The analysis of RSI data shows the origin/destination pattern of vehicular trips in
Kurdistan and individual Governorates, in terms of whether the trip originates

and/or terminates within or outside Kurdistan, as illustrated in the following

table.
Table 46 Origin/Destination Pattern of Vehicular Trips in Kurdistan

Percentage in Survey Sample
Origin-Destination Pattern
Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1
Internal-Internal 91.0% 76.6% 96.1% 93.0%
Internal-External/External-Internal 8.5% 22.9% 3.2% 7.0%
External-External 0.5% 0.5% 0.7% 0.0%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
As it can be seen, the vast majority of surveys have intercepted regional trips
within Kurdistan. The surveys in Dohuk have intercepted the highest percentage
of trips which have either originated and/or are destined to other Iraqi regions or
indeed to other countries (around 23%), whereas it was in Erbil that the largest
proportion of through trips was found (external to external = 0.7%).
The following figures show the distribution of the most popular districts by origins
and destinations, for each Kurdistan Governorate, from the results of the RSIs.
Figure 23 Distribution of Main Origins in Erbil

Figure 24 Distribution of Main Origins in Dohuk
Figure 25 Distribution of Main Origins in Sulaimani Governorate and

Figure 26 Distribution of Main Destinations in Erbil

Figure 27 Distribution of Main Destinations in Dohuk
Figure 28 Distribution of Main Destinations in Sulaimani Governorate and

These figures show that:
 For Erbil, top origins are Erbil Center (72%), Koysnjaq (5%) and Soran
(5%), while top destinations are: Erbil Center (21%), Dashti Hawler
(13%), Khabat (12%) and Shaqlawa (12%).
 For Dohuk, top origins are Dohuk Center (41%), Shekhan (17%) and Semel
(14%), while top destinations are Zakho (26%), Dohuk Center (18%) and
Mosel (15%).
 For Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration, the

overwhelmingly top origin is Sulaimani Center (92%), while top

destinations include Sulaimani Center (37%), Sharbazher (7%), Kalar

(7%) and Chamchamal (7%).
Vehicle Occupancy
Vehicle occupancy was measured in terms of the number of people in the vehicle
at the time of the RSI survey. The following table shows the average vehicle
occupancy distribution broken down for each individual Governorate and by
vehicle category.
Table 47 Distribution of Vehicle Occupancy in Kurdistan by Vehicle Category

No of Vehicle Type
Region Passengers/ Passenger Small Bus Bus (18-24
Taxi Van/Pickup/LGV
vehicle Car (12 Seats) Seats)
1 38% 28% 40% 18% 14%
2 30% 18% 33% 14% 7%
3 17% 14% 16% 5% 6%
Kurdistan 4 9% 19% 6% 5% 1%
5 5% 17% 3% 1% 1%
>6 2% 4% 2% 57% 70%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
1 27% 22% 37% 29% 3%
2 32% 16% 37% 11% 0%
3 19% 21% 17% 8% 0%
Dohuk 4 12% 16% 4% 10% 0%
5 8% 22% 3% 3% 0%
>6 3% 3% 2% 39% 97%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
1 42% 36% 41% 15% 23%
2 29% 16% 33% 9% 21%
3 15% 11% 16% 6% 20%
Erbil 4 7% 17% 5% 5% 4%
5 5% 15% 3% 1% 0%
>6 2% 4% 2% 63% 32%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
1 40% 21% 39% 18% 9%
2 28% 21% 32% 22% 0%
3 18% 16% 17% 2% 0%
Sulaimani 1
4 10% 21% 7% 3% 0%
5 3% 17% 3% 0% 2%
>6 2% 4% 2% 54% 88%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Notes: Totals may not add up due to rounding to the nearest decimal on each cell.

The results show a homogeneous distribution of occupancy by geographical

locations in Kurdistan. Furthermore, it can be seen that:
 For Cars, the most frequent occupancy is 1 or 2 in more than 60 % of the

sample, and this is valid for all Kurdistan regions (71% in Erbil). In Dohuk,
some 11% of the private vehicles sampled were carrying 5 passengers or
more.
 For Taxis, the distribution is more uniform, with the largest proportion of
vehicles having 1 passenger (22% in Dohuk, 36% in Erbil and 21% in
Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration), but with a significant
proportion carrying 4 or more passengers (some 40% in the whole
Kurdistan).
 The majority of Vans/Pick-ups were carrying 1 or 2 passengers, but it is

not uncommon the use of this type of vehicle to carry more passengers,
probably for purposes other than work and business.
 Buses are designed to carry a greater number of passengers, hence the

average occupancy is much greater than for other vehicles. The majority
of buses surveyed (ranging from 32% of medium buses in Erbil to 97% in
Dohuk) were carrying more than 6 passengers.
Trip Purpose
A question in the survey was asked about the purpose of the journey intercepted
by the RSI, and the expected responses were grouped into the following four
categories of journey purpose:
 Business;
 Work (commuting);
 Education;
 Shopping/Leisure/Other.
The next figure presents the distribution of trips by purpose and by Governorate,
considering all vehicle categories.

Figure 29 Distribution of Trip Purpose in Kurdistan
Notes: Totals may not add up due to rounding to the nearest decimal.
Sulaimani denotes: Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration
Overall, it can be seen that the largest proportion of trips are made for work
purposes, for all Kurdistan regions, while business and shopping/leisure/other
purposes also account for a significant percentage of all trips. The following table
shows the same results as above, but each figure is further broken down by
vehicle category.

Table 48 Distribution of Trip Purpose in Kurdistan by Vehicle Category

Distribution per Mode
more axles
Passenger
Small Bus
(12seats)
Van/Pick
HGV 3 or
24seats)
Bus (18-
up/LGV
HGV 2
Region Trip Purpose
axles
Taxi
Car
All
Vehicles
Business 21% 10% 31% 18% 25% 38% 35% 46%
Work (Commuting) 47% 48% 43% 51% 41% 26% 51% 40%
Kurdistan Education 10% 11% 8% 12% 7% 10% 6% 5%
Shopping/Leisure/Other 22% 31% 19% 19% 27% 26% 8% 8%
All Purposes 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Business 20% 6% 28% 14% 22% 26% 35% 55%
Work (Commuting) 53% 55% 49% 56% 63% 74% 60% 39%
Dohuk Education 9% 11% 8% 12% 0% 0% 3% 3%
All Purposes 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Business 18% 9% 28% 15% 28% 13% 31% 47%
Work (Commuting) 48% 48% 41% 53% 42% 28% 54% 40%
Erbil Education 10% 11% 8% 12% 6% 5% 6% 2%
All Purposes 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Business 26% 15% 35% 25% 21% 51% 39% 33%
Work (Commuting) 42% 42% 44% 45% 29% 23% 36% 41%
1
Sulaimani Education 10% 11% 7% 11% 11% 13% 9% 15%
All Purposes 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
The most frequently used vehicle categories for different trip purposes are:
 The largest proportion of car trips is made for work purposes, followed by
shopping/leisure/other and business purposes in all Governorates (but
especially in Dohuk where 55% of car trips are for work).
 A similar pattern is found in trips by van/pickup/LGV trips, with the

majority of trips being made for work purposes (56% in Dohuk).
 Relative to cars, taxis represent a greater proportion of business trips (up

to 35% of all taxi trips in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian
Administration), but smaller proportion of shopping/leisure/other trips in
all Governorates.
 Small and medium buses carry an equally significant proportion of trips

undertaken for work, business and shopping/leisure/other purposes.

 As it could be expected, most HGV trips are carried out for work or
business purposes.
Fleet Age and Usage
The next figure presents the distribution of the years of vehicle manufacturing for
Kurdistan, considering all vehicle categories, while the following table shows the
same results split for each individual Governorate by vehicle category.
Figure 30 Distribution of Vehicle Manufacturing Years in Kurdistan
Notes: Totals may not add up due to rounding to the nearest decimal.
Sulaimani denotes: Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration

Table 49 Distribution of Years of Vehicle Manufacturing by Vehicle Category

Year of Passenger Van/ Pickup/ Small Large HGV 2 HGV 3
Region Taxi Bus
Manufacturing car LGV Bus Bus axle + axles
Before 1990 19% 16% 14% 7% 52% 16% 20% 19%
1990-1995 39% 13% 6% 11% 1% 0% 23% 24%
1996-2000 5% 6% 7% 24% 5% 84% 17% 29%
Kurdistan
2000-2005 12% 19% 21% 28% 33% 0% 19% 24%
After 2005 25% 46% 51% 29% 9% 0% 21% 4%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Before 1990 12% 10% 11% 0% 63% 0% 24% 17%
1990-1995 51% 10% 8% 27% 0% 0% 29% 28%
1996-2000 3% 1% 7% 33% 0% 0% 17% 42%
Dohuk
2000-2005 8% 19% 15% 21% 37% 0% 12% 13%
After 2005 25% 59% 59% 19% 0% 0% 18% 0%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100%
Before 1990 19% 14% 15% 7% 37% 0% 17% 25%
1990-1995 39% 14% 5% 4% 3% 0% 23% 29%
1996-2000 5% 2% 6% 28% 17% 100% 10% 22%
Erbil
2000-2005 11% 22% 18% 23% 40% 0% 17% 20%
After 2005 27% 48% 55% 38% 3% 0% 33% 4%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Before 1990 26% 21% 15% 11% 59% 100% 17% 10%
1990-1995 29% 13% 5% 18% 0% 0% 14% 8%
Sulaimani 1996-2000 8% 12% 11% 15% 0% 0% 25% 28%
1
2000-2005 19% 16% 33% 40% 29% 0% 30% 44%
After 2005 19% 38% 36% 16% 12% 0% 14% 10%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
The results from the analysis of vehicle age for different vehicle categories in
Kurdistan reveal the following:
 For passenger cars, almost 60% of the cars running on the roads of
Kurdistan and its regions are manufactured before the year 1995. This
proportion is slightly higher in Dohuk.
 In case of taxis and LGV/pickup/van, it has been found that approximately

half of these vehicles are manufactured after 2005, indicating that they
are quite new, in contrast to passenger cars. This proportion is highest in
Dohuk and lowest in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration.
 Within the fleet of small buses, there is a trend for newer vehicles,
whereas buses tend to be much older (over half of those vehicles are

manufactured before 1990). Since the count of large bus is very low (or
not applicable as in the case of Dohuk), no conclusion can be drawn from
these results.
 HGVs are more or less uniformly distributed in different periods of their

manufacturing years, except that there are proportionally many less
vehicles with 3 or more axles which have been manufactured after 2005.
The following table summarises the total kilometrage operated by each vehicle
by type of vehicle and Governorate.
Table 50 Distribution of Kilometrage in Kurdistan by Vehicle Category

Kilometrage Region
Vehicle Type
From To Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1
No Response 12% 11% 10% 15%
0 5000 7% 5% 8% 7%
5000 20000 8% 9% 8% 7%
Passenger
20000 50000 13% 11% 14% 11%
Cars
50000 100000 10% 9% 11% 8%
> 100000 51% 55% 49% 52%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
No Response 11% 9% 12% 12%
0 5000 7% 11% 8% 4%
5000 20000 16% 10% 21% 12%
Taxi 20000 50000 21% 22% 17% 24%
50000 100000 11% 18% 6% 14%
> 100000 35% 30% 37% 34%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
No Response 11% 12% 10% 11%
0 5000 8% 7% 9% 5%
5000 20000 16% 12% 17% 15%
Pickup/ Van/
20000 50000 20% 19% 21% 19%
LGV
50000 100000 15% 19% 14% 14%
> 100000 31% 31% 28% 37%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
No Response 12% 15% 6% 24%
0 5000 6% 3% 9% 0%
5000 20000 4% 0% 7% 1%
Small Bus (12
20000 50000 18% 14% 24% 8%
Seats)
50000 100000 15% 16% 17% 11%
> 100000 45% 52% 37% 56%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

No Response 28% 97% 13% 33%

0 5000 4% 0% 4% 4%
5000 20000 4% 0% 0% 6%
Bus (18-24
20000 50000 9% 0% 3% 13%
Seats)
50000 100000 6% 0% 10% 4%
> 100000 49% 3% 71% 40%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
No Response 18% 0% 3% 100%
0 5000 0% 0% 0% 0%
5000 20000 82% 0% 97% 0%
Large Bus (44
20000 50000 0% 0% 0% 0%
Seats)
50000 100000 0% 0% 0% 0%
> 100000 0% 0% 0% 0%
Total 100% 0% 100% 100%
No Response 28% 32% 21% 28%
0 5000 7% 3% 10% 9%
5000 20000 8% 6% 14% 4%
HGV 2 Axles 20000 50000 11% 7% 11% 17%
50000 100000 8% 8% 11% 6%
> 100000 39% 44% 32% 36%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
No Response 34% 21% 46% 23%
0 5000 3% 3% 1% 7%
HGV 3 or 5000 20000 3% 3% 4% 3%
more Axles 20000 50000 6% 3% 5% 11%
50000 100000 12% 29% 7% 3%
> 100000 42% 40% 37% 53%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
It can be seen from the results in the above table that for all vehicles types
(except large buses, but this is due to a small sample size and the fact that these
vehicles have only recently started operation in Kurdistan), the largest proportion
of vehicles has run more than 100,000 km, as indicated in the odometer. The
proportion of low-kilometrage vehicles is relatively small for all vehicle types.
Vehicle Load and Type
The O-D survey provided information on whether light and heavy goods vehicles
were travelling empty, with half load or full at the time of the survey, as well as
the type of commodity carried. The commodity types were grouped into the
following categories:

 Food (processed);
 Agricultural produce;
 Construction materials;
 Fuel;
 Water;
 Manufactured goods;
 Vehicles;
 Other.
The following table summarises the distribution of the type of commodity carried
by goods vehicle only, by region.
Table 51 Distribution of Commodity Transported in Kurdistan
Type of Commodity for Goods vehicles Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1
Empty 62% 64% 67% 51%

Food/Agricultural Produce 4% 3% 4% 5%
Water 1% 0% 1% 1%
Construction Materials 5% 6% 6% 3%
Manufactured Goods 3% 3% 2% 3%
Fuel 2% 1% 1% 4%
Others 3% 1% 3% 4%
No response 21% 23% 16% 29%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
Over half of the goods vehicles surveyed have declared that they were running
empty. This is because goods vehicles normally travel full in one direction and
empty in the return journey. In addition, as reported above, many light goods
vehicles are used for other purposes than moving goods.
Of those goods vehicles which were transporting goods, the type of goods varied
by region, with ―construction materials‖ having greater prominence, followed by
―food and agricultural produce‖ and ―manufactured goods‖.
Engine Capacity

The following table summarises the engine capacity distribution, tabulated

against the type of vehicle and Governorate.
Table 52 Distribution of Engine Capacity in Kurdistan by Vehicle Category

Engine Capacity Region
Vehicle Type
From To Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1
No Response 13% 8% 14% 14%
0 1500 8% 2% 13% 3%
1500 3000 71% 78% 67% 74%
Passenger Car 3000 4500 6% 8% 4% 7%
4500 6000 2% 3% 1% 2%
> 6000 1% 1% 1% 0%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
No Response 13% 4% 12% 19%
0 1500 6% 1% 13% 0%
1500 3000 77% 91% 73% 78%
Taxi 3000 4500 2% 2% 1% 3%
4500 6000 0% 1% 0% 0%
> 6000 1% 1% 1% 0%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
No Response 17% 8% 19% 20%
0 1500 7% 1% 11% 2%
1500 3000 70% 83% 66% 71%
Van/Pickup/LGV 3000 4500 5% 8% 4% 4%
4500 6000 1% 0% 0% 3%
> 6000 0% 0% 0% 0%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
No Response 28% 16% 28% 32%
0 1500 8% 5% 12% 3%
1500 3000 49% 62% 47% 47%
Small Bus (12
3000 4500 13% 15% 11% 18%
Seats)
4500 6000 1% 2% 1% 0%
> 6000 0% 0% 0% 0%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
No Response 36% 0% 40% 36%
0 1500 0% 0% 1% 0%
1500 3000 34% 63% 36% 31%
Bus (18-24
3000 4500 12% 0% 3% 17%
Seats)
4500 6000 18% 37% 20% 16%
> 6000 0% 0% 0% 0%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

No Response 82% 0% 97% 0%

0 1500 0% 0% 0% 0%
1500 3000 2% 0% 3% 0%
Large Bus (44
3000 4500 0% 0% 0% 0%
Seats)
4500 6000 16% 0% 0% 100%
> 6000 0% 0% 0% 0%
Total 100% 0% 100% 100%
No Response 22% 14% 29% 27%
0 1500 9% 2% 6% 23%
1500 3000 26% 32% 29% 16%
HGV 2 axles 3000 4500 19% 25% 15% 13%
4500 6000 5% 6% 5% 5%
> 6000 19% 22% 16% 16%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
No Response 23% 11% 25% 33%
0 1500 14% 7% 14% 20%
HGV 3 or more 1500 3000 17% 35% 15% 4%
axles 3000 4500 21% 35% 16% 15%
4500 6000 6% 5% 9% 3%
> 6000 19% 7% 21% 25%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
The main conclusions from these figures are:
 Within the Passenger Cars and Taxis categories, between 67 and 91% of
the sample have engine capacity between 1500 and 3000 cc. This trend is
particularly accentuated for Dohuk, where there is a large percentage of
vehicles of this size.
 The same trend is found for LGV/Pickup/Van, where the largest proportion
of vehicles falls in the category of 1500-3000 cc, and again, this is
particularly the case for Dohuk.
 There is a significant proportion of ―No Response‖ for small buses, buses,

and HGVs, and this suggests that professional drivers of commercial
vehicles were not aware of the engine capacity of the vehicles they drive.
Household Structure and Socio-Economic Characteristics
The roadside surveys provided information on household size, number of adults,

children and employed people, income level and car ownership. The distribution

of households by household size (measured in terms of the number of people

living at the same address) is displayed in the following table.
Table 53 Distribution of Household Sizes in Kurdistan
Household Size (n. % Distribution of Household Sizes

people/household) Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1
1 1% 1% 1% 1%
2 4% 3% 5% 3%
3 10% 9% 9% 14%
4 13% 15% 12% 14%
5 14% 12% 14% 17%
6 15% 11% 15% 17%
7 11% 10% 11% 11%
8 9% 8% 10% 8%
9 5% 7% 6% 4%
10 and more 16% 22% 17% 8%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
In general, there is a relatively even distribution of household sizes in Kurdistan,

with a greater frequency for households with 4 to 6 people or with more than 10
people. There is a larger proportion of households in Dohuk where households
tend to have a larger number of people (22% of the households have 10 or more
people, and this is explained by the fact that in Dohuk one man can have two or
more wives living together with their children at the same address).
The following table shows the distribution of employed people in households in

Kurdistan and each of its Governorates.

Table 54 Distribution of Employed People in Households in Kurdistan
No. of workers in Household Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1
0 1% 0% 1% 2%
1 70% 77% 71% 63%
2 18% 14% 16% 25%
3 5% 4% 5% 5%
4 1% 1% 2% 1%
5 and more 2% 2% 2% 2%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
These cross tabulations suggest that:
 The percentage of households with one or more employed people is

around 97% of the overall survey sample. The vast majority of households
(70% for Kurdistan, but 77% for Dohuk) have only one household member
under employment.
 The level of unemployment appears low at around 1%, although it is

possible that this figure could increase to 3%, considering the likelihood of
many respondents under the category of ―No responses‖ not having any
workers at home.
 Only some 3% of households have 4 or more persons employed, in

contrast with the previous table showing that some 84% of the households
have 4 or more members.
The following table summarises the distribution of household income in Kurdistan

and each of its Governorates.

Table 55 Distribution of Household Income in Kurdistan

Household Income (in % Distribution of Household Income
Dinars/Month) Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1
Below 100,000 1% 0% 1% 2%
100,000 – 250,000 10% 10% 7% 13%
250,000 – 500,000 27% 27% 22% 37%
500,000 – 750,000 24% 25% 25% 23%
750,000 – 1,000,000 15% 17% 17% 10%
1,000,000 – 2,000,000 11% 9% 14% 7%
2,000,000 – 4,000,000 3% 2% 5% 2%
Above 4,000,000 1% 1% 2% 1%
Not Disclosed/No Response 7% 10% 6% 5%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
Weighted Average
(Dinars/month) 783,186 720,231 894,377 633,061
According to the results from the RSIs, the highest frequencies of response about
average household income levels have concentrated around 250,000 to 750,000
Dinars per month. The average income for Kurdistan is at around 783,000 Dinars
per month, but is highest in Erbil (894,000 Dinars per month), followed by
Dohuk (720,000 Dinars per month) and Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian
Administration (633,000 Dinars per month).
The following table summarises the distribution of car ownership in Kurdistan and
its Governorates, from the results of the RSIs. The number of vehicles includes
the sum of cars and pick-ups, but excludes trucks and motorcycles.
Table 56 Distribution of Car Ownership in Kurdistan

No. of Vehicles owned by Region
household Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1
0 4.8% 2.3% 4.5% 7.2%
1 85.5% 90.8% 85.6% 81.4%
2 8.1% 5.8% 8.2% 9.5%
3 1.2% 0.7% 1.2% 1.4%
>4 0.4% 0.3% 0.5% 0.4%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
The survey results indicate that the vast majority (81-91%) of RSI households
own one vehicle, while very few own three or more. Around 2-7% of the

households do not own a vehicle, and this proportion is highest in Sulaimani

Governorate and Garmian Administration.
4.4 Public Transport User Interviews
Public Transport User Interviews were conducted at 11 locations across

Kurdistan, with a sample of public transport (Taxi/Service, Mini Bus, Bus, Large
Bus) users (in total, some 1874 users were interviewed). This survey has the
same objectives as the RSI, however, capturing inter-urban travellers and hence
collecting information about the existing public transport usage. The summary of
the survey locations is given in the following table, together with the expansion
factors used to generate a representative sample of the population.

Table 57 Distribution of the Number of Public Transport Interviews by Station

Public Transport No. of Field Survey N. of Expanded
Governorate Expansion Factor
Station Sample Survey Results
Erbil South Garage 139 574 4.1
North Garage 312 953 3.1
Koysinjaq 92 225 2.4
Shaqlawa 59 173 2.9
Soran-Diyana 206 410 2.0
Erbil Total 808 2334 2.9
Dohuk Dohuk Garage 227 366 1.6
Zakho 86 197 2.3
Dohuk Total 313 563 1.8
2
Sulaimani Chawrta 54 133 2.5
Dokan 64 124 1.9
Sharazoor 95 471 5.0
1
South Garage 540 2472 4.6
2
Sulaimani Total 753 3199 4.2
Total 1,874 6097 3.3
Notes: 1. Surveys at this station were carried out over two days with 384 and 156 surveys, respectively.
These interviews were carried sometimes outside and sometimes inside the
vehicle, depending on the vehicle size and public transport station. When
passengers were travelling together (for instance, husband and wife, or siblings,
etc.), only one passenger in the group was interviewed because they would all
provide the same information. The surveyors attempted to interview as many

passengers as possible in each service, and this in many cases reached 100% of
the passengers of taxis, but a smaller percentage in larger vehicles.
A detailed account of the number of surveys carried out at each public transport
station for each route, together with an estimation of public transport services
and daily number of passengers transported on each route and public transport
vehicle size at all these major stations is given in Appendix E. A summary of the
results from the public transport user surveys is presented below.
Overall Origin-Destination Pattern
The analysis of public transport user interview data shows the origin/destination
pattern of public transport trips in Kurdistan and individual Governorates, in
terms of whether the trip originates and/or terminates within or outside
Kurdistan or each individual Governorate, as illustrated in the following table.
Table 58 Origin/Destination Pattern of Public Transport Trips in Kurdistan

% in Public Transport user Survey Sample
Origin/Destination Pattern 1
Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani
Internal-Internal 78.6% 64.1% 77.1% 82.1%
Internal-External/External-Internal 20.3% 35.9% 21.3% 16.8%
External-External 1.2% 0.0% 1.6% 1.1%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Notes: Totals may not add up due to rounding to the nearest decimal on each cell.
As it can be seen from the above table, the surveys have indicated that the
majority of public transport trips (79%) are made within the Kurdistan area, with
a higher proportion for Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration. Only
about 1% of the trips have been found to be through trips in Kurdistan, that is,
trips both originating and destining outside the region. Erbil has a slightly higher
proportion of through trips because of its strategic connections with Turkey and
the rest of Iraq.
Public Transport Vehicle Capacity
Buses and other public transport vehicles do not have specific frequencies in
Kurdistan; instead, they tend to leave the terminal only when full. Thus, as far as
public transport vehicles are concerned, vehicle capacity was measured in terms
of the number of seats in each public transport vehicle surveyed. The next table
presents the average public transport vehicle capacity distribution for the whole

of Kurdistan and its Governorates, considering all public transport vehicle

categories (i.e. Taxi/Service, Mini Bus, Bus, Large Bus).
Table 59 Distribution of Public Transport Vehicle Capacity in Kurdistan

Number of % Distribution of Public Transport Vehicle Capacity
Passengers 1
Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani
0–5 27.7% 54.0% 35.1% 17.8%
5 – 10 0.4% 1.7% 0.3% 0.2%
10 – 15 7.0% 11.1% 15.0% 0.4%
15 – 20 3.0% 3.0% 7.0% 0.0%
> 20 61.7% 30.2% 42.6% 81.3%
N/A 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
The majority of public transport services in Kurdistan is constituted by small

vehicles (such as Service or Taxi), which have the capacity for around 4
passengers, although greater capacity is achieved by larger buses (59%),
especially in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration (79%).
Trip Purpose
The analysis of public transport trip purpose was carried out in the same way as
for the roadside interviews. The next figure presents the distribution of trips by
purpose for the whole of Kurdistan and by Governorate, considering all public
transport vehicle categories.

Figure 31 Distribution of Public Transport Trip Purpose in Kurdistan
Note: Sulaimani denotes: Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration
These results show that public transport in Kurdistan is primarily used for work
purposes (commuting), especially in Erbil, followed by shopping/leisure/other.
There is a relatively low proportion of trips performed by public transport for
business purposes, especially in Erbil. The following table shows the same results
broken down by vehicle category.

Table 60 Distribution of Public Transport Trip Purpose by Vehicle Category

All PT Type of Public Transport Vehicle
Region Trip Purpose
vehicles Taxi/Service Mini Bus Bus Large Bus
Business 7% 6% 10% 6% 26%
Work(Commuting) 46% 59% 40% 41% 15%
Kurdistan Education 19% 9% 14% 25% 8%
Shopping/Leisure/Other 29% 26% 36% 28% 51%
All Purposes 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Business 11% 14% 22% 3% -
Work(Commuting) 51% 60% 31% 46% -
Dohuk Education 4% 6% 0% 1% -
Shopping/Leisure/Other 34% 20% 48% 50% -
All Purposes 100% 100% 100% 100% -
Business 4% 4% 10% 3% 0%
Work(Commuting) 55% 64% 42% 53% 14%
Erbil Education 7% 6% 9% 8% 0%
All Purposes 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Business 9% 6% 3% 8% 33%
Work(Commuting) 37% 50% 42% 35% 15%
Sulaimani
1 Education 30% 15% 38% 34% 10%
All Purposes 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
The distribution of public transport trip purpose in Kurdistan suggests the

following:
 Taxis/service is the most popular public transport means, and is used for
journeys of all purposes, although with different frequencies for different
Governorates. Work (commuting) and shopping/leisure/other trips by
taxi/service feature highly in all regions, while business trips by taxi are
more popular in Dohuk and education trips by taxi are more popular in
Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration.
 Mini buses and buses constitute a popular means of education trips in

Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration and of
Shopping/Leisure/Other trips in Dohuk.
 The sample of large bus usage is very low, hence no firm conclusions can
be drawn for this vehicle type at this stage.

Household Structure and Socio-Economic Characteristics

Like the roadside interviews, the public transport user surveys provided
information on household size, number of adults, children and employed people,
income level and car ownership. The distribution of households by household size
is displayed in the following table.
Table 61 Distribution of Public Transport User Household Sizes

Household Size (n. % Distribution of Household Sizes
people) Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1
1 3.9% 1.8% 2.8% 5.1%
2 3.2% 3.9% 4.6% 2.1%
3 11.4% 6.1% 14.1% 10.3%
4 12.3% 12.8% 15.3% 10.0%
5 17.1% 7.5% 15.9% 19.6%
6 13.4% 14.1% 12.4% 14.1%
7 12.8% 16.3% 10.5% 13.9%
8 8.2% 5.4% 7.2% 9.4%
9 7.1% 7.1% 6.7% 7.4%
10 and more 9.7% 21.1% 10.2% 7.3%
N.A 1.0% 3.9% 0.3% 1.1%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
These figures suggest an approximately homogeneous distribution of household

sizes between 3 and 7 people per household. There are particularly few
households with 1 or 2 people. Dohuk presents a larger proportion of households
with 10 people or more in comparison with the other two Governorates.
The following table shows the distribution of employed people in public transport
user households in Kurdistan and each of its Governorates.

Table 62 Distribution of Employed People in PT User Households
% Distribution of Employed People in PT User Households

No. of Workers in Household
Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1
0 8.7% 9.9% 5.3% 10.9%
1 51.7% 69.3% 62.5% 40.7%
2 27.0% 15.5% 20.8% 33.6%
3 8.4% 3.5% 6.3% 10.9%
4 2.2% 1.4% 2.5% 2.2%
5 0.9% 0.4% 0.8% 1.1%
6 and more 1.0% 0.0% 1.8% 0.6%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
It can be seen that over 91% of the households in the public transport user
survey sample have at least one of household member employed (this figure is
even greater for Erbil at 95%). However, these figures are still lower in
comparison to the results from the roadside interviews, suggesting a slightly
greater incidence of unemployment amongst public transport users.
The following table summarises the distribution of public transport user

household income in Kurdistan and each of its Governorates.
Table 63 Distribution of Public transport user Household Income in Kurdistan

Household Income % Distribution of Household Income
(Dinars/month) Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1
Below 100.000 2.5% 7.2% 1.7% 2.3%
100.000 – 250.000 9.7% 23.7% 8.9% 7.9%
250.000 – 500.000 28.1% 27.9% 23.7% 31.4%
500.000 – 750.000 26.0% 19.4% 23.3% 29.2%
750.000 – 1.000.000 13.5% 8.3% 16.6% 12.1%
1.000.000 – 2.000.000 7.1% 1.6% 12.8% 4.0%
2.000.000 – 4.000.000 2.1% 0.6% 3.3% 1.5%
Above 4.000.000 0.3% 0.0% 0.4% 0.2%
Not Disclosed 10.6% 11.5% 9.3% 11.3%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Weighted Average
654,927 435,031 775,802 603,396
(Dinars/month)

The majority of respondents to the public transport user surveys in Kurdistan

declared that their household income ranges between 250,000 and 750,000
Dinars per month. The average income is highest in Erbil and is lowest in Dohuk.
As expected, average income levels by public transport users are lower than by
those surveyed at the roadside.
The following table summarises the distribution of car ownership by public

transport users in Kurdistan and its Governorates.
Table 64 Distribution of Car Ownership by Public Transport User in Kurdistan
Vehicle Ownership/ % Distribution of Car Ownership by Public Transport User

Household Kurdistan Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1
0 52.6% 64.4% 47.0% 54.6%
1 40.3% 32.4% 44.3% 38.9%
2 5.5% 3.0% 5.8% 5.7%
3 or more 1.6% 0.2% 2.9% 0.9%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
From these results, it can be seen that almost half of the public transport users
interviewed in Kurdistan do not own a vehicle (this figure is higher for Dohuk and
lower for Erbil) and about 40% own one single vehicle (this figure is again lower
for Dohuk and higher for Erbil). As it could be expected, these results confirm
that public transport user households have a lower level of car ownership
compared to those of car users.

5. SOCIO-ECONOMIC REVIEW
The following socio-economic characteristics of the region have been analysed:

 Population
 Households
 Employment
 Income
 Economic activity
 Gross Domestic Product
 Vehicles registered.
5.1 Population
The most recent Census has been carried out in 1997 by the Ministry of Planning
or the Central Administration for Statistics, and the previous one was in 1987.
However, more recent population estimates, also by district, are available from
various sources. The following table summarises the trends in population growth
by Governorate.
Table 65 Population Estimates
Annual
1 2 3 Growth
Location 2003 2004 2005 2006 2008 2009
2004-
2004-09
06
Dohuk 299,971 472,238 483,106 494,191 616,600 1,176,420 2.3% 20.0%
Erbil 831,169 1,392,093 1,440,590 1,490,695 1,845,200 2,142,685 3.5% 9.0%
4
Sulaimani 555,154 1,715,585 1,773,100 1,832,440 2,159,800 2,000,310 3.3% 3.1%
Kurdistan 1,686,294 3,579,916 3,696,796 3,817,326 4,621,600 5,319,415 3.3% 8.2%
Iraq 27,139,585 27,962,968 28,810,441 27,475,300 3.0%
Compilation from various sources (which may not necessarily be fully compatible):
1. Rapid Assessment Process (RAP)
2. Iraq Living Conditions Survey, 2004 United Nations Development Program and Central
Organization for Statistics and Information Technology, Ministry of Planning and Development
Cooperation, Iraq.
3. Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) www.sigir.mil
Elsewhere: Kurdistan Regional Statistical Office (KRSO) http://www.krso.net
In the past, the average population growth has taken place at a rate of
approximately 3% per annum for all Kurdistan Governorates. This is in line with
historical annual growth rates reported from various sources in Iraq Living

Conditions Survey, 20045. However, taking into account the latest estimates for
2009, the average annual growth would appear much higher, possibly due to the
fast immigration rates in the region but also possibly due to any changes in the
recording and estimating methods.
The disaggregated 2009 population for districts and sub-districts in Kurdistan

have been estimated with basis on different sources, and where necessary,
projected to 2009 based or previous years‘ estimates, or split by sub-district so
that a complete set of figures could form the basis of the analysis for the
purposes of this study. The 2009 population estimates by district and sub-district
are shown in the following tables. The district and sub-district classification is
entirely consistent the definitions in Table 1, Table 2 and Table 3.
Table 66 2009 Population Estimates by District and Sub-district in Erbil
District N. District Sub-district N. Sub - District Population 2009

1 Erbil Center 1,194,643
1 Erbil Center 2 Bahrka 33,279
3 Ankawa 10,300
District Sub-Total 1,238,222
5 Bnaslawa Center 43,096
6 Daratu 41,387
2 Dashti Hawler
7 Qushtapa 27,789
8 Kasnaz 24,720
District Sub-Total 136,993
9 Soran Center 152,460
10 Khalifan 29,721
3 Soran
11 Diyana 51,367
12 Sidakan 15,199
13 Shaqlawa Center 74,857
14 Salahaddin 22,080
15 Harir 31,746
4 Shaqlawa
16 Hiran 5,958
17 Basrma 18,556
18 Balisan 4,507
19 Choman Center 22,891
20 Haji Omaran 4,835
5 Choman 21 Smilan 5,757
22 Galala 1,212
23 Qasre 3,664
5
Part II, Table 24, Page 42.


24 Koysnjaq Center 66,058
25 Taq Taq 30,900
26 Shorsh 8,365
6 Koysnjaq
27 Ashti 5,028
28 Sktan 2,549
29 Segrtkan 7,622
Mergasur Center
30-35 30,864
Goratu
31 Barzan 14,519
7 Mergasur
32 Piran 6,583
33 Sherwan Mazn 3,770
34 Mezne 10,620
4 Shamamk 35,159
36 Khabat Center 27,466
8 Khabat 37 Darashakran 8,632
38 Rizgari 27,466
39 Kawar gosk 4,316
40 Rawanduz Center 20,568
41 Warte 522
9 Rawanduz
42 Barzewa 522
43 Akoyan 522
44 Makhmor Center 7,426
45 Kandenawa 1,061
10 Makhmor
46 Qraj 1,061
47 Kwer 1,061
Sub-Total Erbil 2,142,685
Sources: Population estimates for 2007 in all Governorates: obtained from the Kurdistan Information
Center, Statistical office, Ministry of Planning. Population estimates for 2008 in Erbil and Sulaimani:
obtained in consultation with local authorities and publication: "Kurdistan region sub-districts profile" –
nd
2 edition, March 2008 – Ministry of planning. Population estimates for 2009 in Dohuk and Sulaimani:
obtained in consultation with local authorities.

Table 67 2009 Population Estimates by District and Sub-district in Sulaimani

Governorate and Garmian Administration

Sulaimani Center
48-49 744,577
Sulaimani Bakrao
11
Center 50 Bazyan 40,521
51 Tanjaro 26,616
52 Qaradaq Center 10,862
12 Qaradaq
53 Swisinan 2,472
Halabjay taza
13 Sharazur 54-55 57,539
Warmawa
56 Said Sadq Center 59,068
14 Said Sadq
57 Sruchk 6,935
Halabja Center
58-59 67,148
Sirwan
15 Halabja
60 Khurmal 26,469
61 Biyara 10,027
62 Penjwin Center 23,904
16 Penjwin 63 Garmk 19,516
64 Nalparez 9,553
65 Chwarta 6,245
66 Siwayl 9,594
17 Sharbazher 67 Sitak 3,900
68 Zalan 3,608
69 Gapilon 3,080
18 Mawat 70 Mawat 19,385
71 Pshdar Center 60,645
72 Hero 8,740
73 Halsho 10,890
19 Pshdar
74 Zharawa 11,631
75 Sangasar 17,578
76 Esiwi 9,308
Ranya Center
77-78 124,213
Chwarqurna
20 Ranya 79 Hajiawa 42,472
80 Betwta 23,304
81 Sarkapkan 9,785


82 Dukan Center 11,428
83 Surdash 6,078
84 Piramagrun 28,450
21 Dukan
85 Kalakan (Chinaran) 5,824
86 Khdran 4,930
87 Bngrd 10,835
88 Darbandikhan Center 35,982
22 Darbandikhan
89 Bawakhoshin 1,236
90 Kalar Center 126,201
91 Rizgari 33,242
23 Kalar
92 Pebaz 4,518
93 Shekh Tawil 9,557
94 Kifri Center 32,589
95 Awa spi 892
24 Kifri 96 Sar qala 10,931
97 Nawjol 5,251
98 Koks 2,662
99 Sangaw 15,640
100a Chamchamal Center East 32,729
Chamchamal Center
100b West 32,729
25 Chamchamal 101 Shorsh 49,238
102 Takiya 25,181
103 Agjalar 19,931
104 Qadri Karam 4,083
105 Takyay Jabai 1,350
106 Maydan 10,506
26 Khanaqin 107 Bamo 2,372
108 Qoratu 6,362
Sub-Total Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration 2,000,311
nd

Table 68 2009 Population Estimates by District and Sub-district in Dohuk

109 Dohuk Center 284,040
27 Dohuk 110 Mangesh 11,642
111 Zawita 16,554
112 Semel Center 72,205
28 Semel 113 Fayda 62,368
114 Batil 18,951
115 Zakho Center 175,155
116 Rizgari 17,800
29 Zakho
117 Darkar 14,998
118 Batifa 20,104
119 Amedi Center 8,705
120 Deraluk 45,095
121 Sarsng 20,715
30 Amedi
122 Chamanke 4,745
123 Bamarne 6,936
124 Kani Mase 9,180
125 Shekhan Center 21,270
126 Atrush 11,902
31 Shekhan 127 Qasrok 59,995
128 Zilkan 15,398
129 Baadre 13,217
130 Akre Center 66,346
131 Bjil 17,478
32 Akre
132 Dinarta 24,630
133 Grdasin 40,345
134 Bardarash Center 26,550
135 Daratu 28,820
33 Bardarash
136 Rofiya 29,910
137 Kalak 31,366
Sub-Total Dohuk 1,176,420
nd

The first figure below illustrates the sub-district 2009 population distribution in
Kurdistan, the following figure shows the population density distribution
(measured in pop/km2) and the subsequent figure shows the average household
site throughout Kurdistan.

Figure 32 2009 Sub-District Population Distribution in Kurdistan

Figure 33 2009 Sub-District Population Density Distribution in Kurdistan

Figure 34 Average Household Size per Sub District (In persons)

Population forecasts have been prepared by previous studies for Erbil and
Sulaimani, under different growth scenarios, as shown in the following figure.
Figure 35 Projected Population Growth for Erbil and Sulaimani
Sources: 1. Erbil Strategic Master Plan (Dar al-Handasah, 2006). Also reported in Erbil International Airport
Master Plan, by Dar al-Handasah, April 2010. Rebased by Consultant to 2009 population level.
2. Sulaimani Master Plan (IGCO, June 2009).
Average annual growth rates between 2009 and 2030 range from 1.1% to 3.6%
for Erbil and from 1.7% to 2.5% for Sulaimani.
5.3 Employment
The labour force participation rate, given in percentage of the population aged 15
years and above on employment, in 2004, is shown in the following table.
Sulaimani overall rate is boosted by a large proportion of females in the
workforce. The percentage of the economically active population aged 15 years
and above is also shown in this table.

Table 69 Labour Force and Employment

1
Labour Force Participation Rate (%)
All Male Female Employment

Governorate 3
Not in in Not in Not in
Rate (%)
Labour in Labour in Labour
Labour Labour Labour
2 Force Force
Force Force Force Force
Dohuk 64 36 23 67 94 6 84.1
Erbil 61 39 29 71 89 11 95.3
4
Sulaimani 55 45 28 72 82 18 89.3
Source: Iraq Living Conditions Survey, 2004 United Nations Development Program and Central Organization for
Statistics and Information Technology, Ministry of Planning and Development Cooperation, Iraq.
Notes: 1. Labour force participation rate is defined as the economically active population divided by the working
age population.
2. Persons that cannot be classified as either employed or unemployed (i.e. those not working and are
not actively seeking work) are classified as outside the labour force or “not in labour Force Market”.
For example, students and women who are engaged in activities such as child rearing and domestic
works.
3. The employment rate is defined as the number of actually employed persons divided by the total
number of persons included in the “in labour Force”.
The results from the roadside interviews and public transport surveys were
combined and used in order to derive average levels of unemployment at the
sub-district level. The results from this analysis are show in the following figure.

Figure 36 Distribution of Household Unemployment

5.4 Income
Income levels, given in three separate percentile categories (25%, 50% and
75%), are shown in the following tables. The first table shows estimates of
employee income (2004) and the second shows estimates of household income
(2003). These two data sets are not consistent since they have been derived
from different methods.
Table 70 Employee Income

Income Levels for Kurdistan Monthly Income
Governorate Number of hours/week
(Iraqi Dinars/h) (Iraqi Dinars)
25% 75% 25% 75% 25% 75%
Median Median Median
Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile Percentile
Dohuk 534 890 1432 42 60 81 97,188 231,400 502,632
1
Sulaimani 640 1189 2174 30 44 70 83,200 226,703 659,447
Erbil 750 1273 2225 36 48 60 117,000 264,784 578,500
Notes: Monthly income calculated by Consultant.
Table 71 Household Income

Annual (2003) Monthly (2003)
Governorate (Iraqi Dinar) (Iraqi Dinar)
25% 75% 25% 75%
Percentile Median Percentile Percentile Median Percentile
Dohuk 1,295,048 2,290,813 3,870,232 107,921 190,901 322,519
1
Sulaimani 1,376,935 2,191,960 3,395,311 114,745 182,663 282,943
Erbil 1,582,137 2,684,085 4,338,801 131,845 223,674 361,567
Notes: Monthly income calculated by Consultant.
The results from the roadside interviews and public transport surveys were used
in order to derive average household income at the sub-district level. The results
from this analysis are show in the following figure.

Figure 37 Distribution of Household Income

5.5 Economic Activity
Iraq's economy is dominated by the oil sector, which has traditionally provided
about 95% of foreign exchange earnings. In the 1980s Iraq suffered economic
losses from the war with Iran. After the war ended in 1988, oil exports gradually
increased with the construction of new pipelines and restoration of damaged
facilities.
The economic activities in Kurdistan Region are the conventional income-

generating sectors, such as trade, construction, agriculture, basic manufacturing,
real estate, small-scale investment projects and government services. The
second category of economic activity, which started recently, is large
infrastructure projects including universities, roads, schools, shopping centres,
hospitals, housing developments and two international airports. These are mainly
short to mid-term projects that provide work for some of the professional local
workforce.
5.6 Gross Domestic Product
Estimates of historic and projected real GDP annual growth for Iraq, according to
different international sources, are shown in the following figure. After a sharp
decline in growth in the early 2000s, the economy has quickly recovered with
extremely high records of growth in 2004-05. Since 2006 the economy has
become more stable and the forecast real GDP growth rate for 2009 and 2010
are 6.9% and 6.7%, respectively.

Figure 38 Historical and Projected Real GDP Growth for Iraq
60%
Index Mundi
50%
40%
Central Intelligence
Agency; Global Finance
30%
Business Services
20%
Industry
10%
The Economist
0%
-10% International Monetary

Fund
-20%
Central Bank of Iraq
-30%
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Sources:
Index Mundi: http://www.indexmundi.com/iraq/gdp_real_growth_rate.html\
CIA: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/iz.html
BSI: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb5614/is_200706/ai_n23618989/
The Economist: http://www.economist.com/countries/Iraq/profile.cfm?folder=Profile%2DEconomic%20Data
IMF: http://www.imf.org/external/country/IRQ/index.htm; IMF World Economic Outlook
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2009/01/pdf/supptbls.pdf
CBI: Iraq National Development Strategy, quoted from: Central Bank of Iraq, Ministry of Finance.
Long-term GDP forecasts have been made by two different set of professionals,
CPA consultants and the ITMP consultants, considering real GDP growth, oil GDP
growth and non-oil GDP growth. The results are summarised in the following
figure. While the ITMP forecasts are considerably higher than those by CPA, both
agreed that oil GDP growth will be virtually nil after 2016.

Figure 39 Long-Term Real GDP Growth Forecasts for Iraq
Source: Iraqi Transport Master Plan
The contribution of oil revenues to Iraq‘s GDP is expected to gradually reduce in

the future in favour of other sectors of the economy, in particular services,
manufacturing and construction, as shown in the following figure.
Figure 40 Proportion of Oil and non-Oil Contribution to Iraq’s GDP

The distribution of regional GDP for the Kurdistan Governorates by economic

sector in 2001 is given in the following table.
Table 72 GDP by Economic Sector and Governorate (2001, million ID)
Economic Sector Dohuk Erbil Sulaimani 1

Agriculture 50,414 129,028 97,928
Oil - - -
Mining 208 - -
Manufacturing 2,737 17,422 17,476
Construction 5,768 14,720 4,355
Trade, restaurants, hotels 11,205 40,409 53,704
Utilities 456 1,278 1,688
Transport services 39,779 110,131 131,610
Other services 27,681 81,808 96,674
GDP 138,248 394,796 403,435
Non oil GDP 138,248 394,796 403,435
The following table shows the non-oil GDP projections per Governorate.
Table 73 Non-Oil GDP Projections by Governorate (million US$)
Annual Growth Annual Growth Annual Growth

Governorate 2004 2010 Rate 2004-2010 2020 Rate 2010-2020 2030 Rate 2020-2030
Dohuk 63 242 25.1% 700 11.2% 1384 7.0%
Erbil 184 721 25.5% 2119 11.4% 4226 7.1%
Sulaimani 1 192 754 25.6% 2226 11.4% 4450 7.2%
5.7 Vehicles Registered
The historical trends in the number of vehicles registered in Kurdistan by

Governorate are shown in the following table.

Table 74 Vehicles Registered per Governorate
Average Annual
Governorate 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Growth 2005-09
Erbil
Motorcycles 5,422 5,431 5,049 5,049 5,439 0%
Private cars 97,864 101,301 102,655 113,005 129,000 7%
Taxis 22,933 23,350 23,333 23,333 23,333 0%
Goods vehicles 40,808 48,420 48,535 61,199 66,122 13%
Farm & constr. vehicles 4,207 4,462 4,732 5,082 5,788 8%
Dohuk
Motorcycles
Private cars 47,825 49,876 50,014 51,365 53,615 3%
Taxis 10,425 11,044 11,112 11,112 11,012 1%
Goods vehicles 17,000 19,080 19,914 23,833 24,361 9%
Farm & constr. vehicles 2,719 2,763 2,763 2,763 3,000 2%
Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration
Motorcycles - - - - -
Private cars 37,185 37,094 37,174 40,307 50,808 8%
Taxis 15,262 15,735 15,961 16,120 17,624 4%
Goods vehicles 20,356 21,647 22,597 28,745 36,157 15%
Government vehicles 3,491 4,398 5,324 6,369 7,122 20%
Agriculture vehicles 4,348 4,486 4,674 4,761 4,890 3%
Kurdistan
Private cars 182,874 188,271 189,843 204,677 233,423 6.3%
Taxis 48,620 50,129 50,406 50,565 51,969 1.7%
Goods vehicles 78,164 89,147 91,046 113,777 126,640 12.8%
Government vehicles 3,491 4,398 5,324 6,369 7,122 19.5%
Farm/constr./agric. vehicles 11,274 11,711 12,169 12,606 13,678 5.0%
Source: Traffic Police Directorates
A steady growth in the number of private vehicles can be verified, but the largest
growth is accounted for by the increases in the number of goods vehicles and
Government vehicles in Sulaimani Government and Garmian Administraiton.
5.8 Car Ownership
The results from the roadside interviews and public transport surveys were used
in order to derive average car ownership levers for each sub-district. The results
from this analysis are show in the following figure.

Figure 41 Distribution of Household Car Ownership

5.9 Road Accidents
The available data for road accidents in Kurdistan region is presented by the
annual number of fatalities, injuries and traffic accidents. The following table
shows the accident data available for different years and for the three
Governorates of Kurdistan (Dohuk, Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian
Administration and Erbil).
Table 75 Reported Road Traffic Accident for Kurdistan Region

Dohuk Sulaimani 1 Erbil
Year no. of no. of no. of
Fatality Injured Fatality Injured Fatality Injured
accidents accidents accidents
2000 7 30 187 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
2001 11 75 293 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
2002 10 195 160 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
2003 15 279 197 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
2004 47 329 278 372 3684 291 N/A N/A N/A
2005 46 481 339 389 2551 1380 17 48 N/A
2006 51 254 207 244 2257 669 61 204 N/A
2007 57 467 585 317 2505 789 165 620 N/A
2008 140 2133 589 200 2199 798 150 655 N/A
2 2 2 3 3
2009 53 1119 510 254 2831 623 228 2871 N/A
Annual
average
1% 64% 35% 1% 8% -2% 55% 141%
growth
2006-09
Sources: Erbil Traffic Directorate; Dohuk Traffic Directorate; Sulaimani Traffic Directorate
Notes: N/A: Not Available
2: Statistics are for the first 8 months, but pro-rated to 12 by the Consultant.
3: Statistics are for the first 7 months, but pro-rated to 12 by the Consultant.
Not all statistical data presented above is necessarily consistent, in part, due to
the different methods for data collection, aggregation and analysis used by
different authorities and at different times. In general, the numbers of accidents,
fatalities and injuries have increased in recent years. In Dohuk and Erbil, this
increase has been much greater than the equivalent growth in the number of
vehicle registrations for the same period, but the trend is somehow unclear in
Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration.
An additional analysis was carried out for road traffic accidents with information
on the location of the accident, type of accident (fatality, injury) and cause. This

will help to determine accident blackspots, and be considered in the proposals for
road upgrades in the master plan. The following figures show:
 The locations of traffic accidents in 2009 in Erbil. Detailed information of

traffic accidents in Erbil by type and causes can be seen in Appendix F.
 The number of traffic accidents in 2009 in Dohuk for selected roads. No

information as to the precise location of the accidents nor cause has been
made available.
 The number of traffic accidents in 2009 in Sulaimani Governorate and

Garmian Administration at specific locations. Where not indicated, the
number of accidents is not available, however, these locations are just as
hazardous and many accidents happened at each of these locations in
2009.
If further information becomes available at a later stage, this will be used in the
master plan as a indication of the locations which may need to be upgraded or
improved in order to address any safety concerns.

Figure 42 Traffic Accident Locations in Erbil (2009)
Source: Erbil Traffic Directorate

Figure 43 Traffic Accident Locations in Dohuk (2009)
Source: Dohuk Traffic Directorate

Figure 44 Traffic Accident Locations in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian

Administration (2009)
Source: Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration Traffic Directorate

6. GIS DATABASE
6.1 Introduction
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) was used in the Highway Master Plan for
Kurdistan to assist in the preparation of a comprehensive database of primary
and secondary roads. GIS acts as a Management Information System which can
be best described as a system to store data and deliver reliable data, in an
efficient manner to the required design and planning processes. Ultimately, GIS
will be a tool at the Ministry of Housing and Construction to manage, maintain
and update the database. Accordingly, the main objectives of implementing the
state-of-the-art GIS technologies in this project are:
 Act as a storage pool for digital spatial data;
 Provide an easy access to spatial data;
 Be used as an analytical tool in the modelling and planning of roads;
 Aid in conducting statistical analysis;
 Act as a support decision making process; and
 Be used as a tool in monitoring Kurdistan main roads.
The GIS scope of work for this project has been listed hereafter in this document
and is based on the Consultants previous experience in similar projects.
6.2 GIS Technology Adopted
The most recent technology and GIS software have been used in order to design
the database structure and develop the system. The development process was
based on ESRI6 products, which have been designed using object-oriented
technology. ArcGIS 9.3.1 was the main GIS software used to perform the
required analysis and queries. Final output data is in the form of ESRI Personal
Geo-database data format. The Geo-database data model is an intelligent format
for data storage where the user can simulate real objects using his data.
Accordingly, and for the Ministry of Housing and Construction to be able to make
use of the submitted Geo-database, the following minimum requirements in
terms of software and hardware shall be available:
6
ESRI: Environmental Systems Research Institute

 Software: One license of ArcGIS - ArcView version 9.3.1 (Standalone

License) shall be acquired.
 Hardware: Workstation with the following specifications:
 Processor: Intel Xeon Quad-core Processor W3580 (3.33 GHz, 8

MB cache, 1333 MHz memory),
 Memory: 8 GB DDR2 SDRAM ECC
 Hard Drive: 300 GB SATA hard disk 10K rpm
 SCSI Adapter Ultra 320 SCSI adapter non-RAID
 Graphic Card: NVIDIA Quadro FX1800 (768 MB)
 Monitor: 19‖ LCD
 CD-ROM: 48X DVD-ROM/CDRW
 Network Card 0/100/1000 Mbps PCI adapter
 Quantity: 1
6.3 GIS Database Design
The process of GIS development borrows from the more established Database
Management practice. The major difference between the two is the presence of a
spatial (geographical) component in the GIS. Moreover and with the new Geo-
database format, even spatial data are now being stored as tabular databases.
The GIS database design for this project started with the logical system design
followed by developing the physical components of the Geo-database and the
data structure. Besides, and as part of this project, all geographic data have
been converted into GIS layers. One Personal Geo-database ‗Kurdistan
Highway Master Plan.mdb’ has been created and delivered for this purpose.
The data layers generated in this project are related to the following themes:
 Administrative divisions (Governorates, districts, sub-districts);
 Infrastructure (including roads and superstructures);
 Environment (rivers);
 Traffic survey.
Tables are also provided in the database. They provide additional information on
the roads identification, roads characteristics, roads conditions, traffic survey
results, sub-districts characteristics, and major structure identification
information and main characteristics.

Geo-database Overview
This report defines the ArcGIS Geo-database elements that are used in the
Highway Master Plan for Kurdistan. The next paragraphs define and describe
these elements in general, followed by detailed diagrams (presented in Appendix
C) that will make easier the understanding of the current Geo-database.
Objects/Tables
An object or table represents a real world object such as roads, superstructures,

etc. An object is stored as a row in a relational database table.
Objects in the ArcGIS System do not have a geographic representation, such as

the table of the Pavement Condition. This table can be associated to the Roads
Feature Class through a relationship based on a common ID, the road name in
this case.
Features Classes
Features are geographic objects that have a spatial location defined. More
specifically, a feature is just like an object but it also has a geometry or shape
column in the relational database table for the object. Through inheritance, a
feature has all of the methods of the Object class, but it also has more methods.
In other words, a feature is a special kind of object with additional capabilities.
A Feature Class can be a point, polyline or polygon and it has many fields
(columns) and many attributes (rows).
Feature Datasets
A Feature Dataset is simply a collection of feature classes that share a common

spatial reference. A spatial reference is part of the definition of the geometry
field in the database.
Also, we can group the Feature Classes on the base of the different themes that
they represent, for example the Roads and Structures are located in the Feature
Dataset Transportation.
6.4 GIS Data Conversion
The process involves the conversion of data in excel and GPS formats into the
proper GIS format, and projection to the target coordinate system. This was

achieved by coding several automated extraction tools, insuring data is extracted

in the fastest and most accurate way possible.
Data collected for the various sectors under study in this project were in the form
of:
 Excel Spreadsheets;
 GPS files;
 Site Photos.
Spreadsheets
The main form of data is Excel spreadsheets. Two types of data are included. The
first is related to information with (x,y) coordinates that would directly be
converted to a GIS layer; this applies to the structures survey. The second type
is related to attribute/descriptive data with a unique key identifier that will link
with the existing GIS roads layer. Users can at any one time, view the roads
geometry and retrieve all the related information in GIS, thanks to the Dynamic
Segmentation technique (as illustrated in the following figure).
Dynamic segmentation is the process of transforming linearly referenced data

that have been stored in a table into features that can be displayed and analyzed
on a map. Route locations and associated attributes stored in a thematic table
are known as route events or simply events. These are split into two types—point
and linear events. Point events describe discrete locations on a linear feature and
require only one measure value. For example, drainage locations along surveyed
roads were collected and detailed (Box Culverts, Pipe Culverts, etc.), with the
measure value provided via the vehicle odometer. Linear events describe
portions of a linear feature and require two measure values, typically referred to
as the ―From‖ and ―To‖ measures. For instance, Pavement Conditions, such as
Alligator Cracks and Potholes, were represented as linear events for sections of
roads delineated by station measure values at specific intervals.

Figure 45 Dynamic Segmentation
For the end user, it means attribute information describing characteristics

specific to each road segment can then be maintained without splitting the road
network.
GPS Files
The roads tracks, the traffic survey location, the structures location were all
surveyed using GPS. GPS files were converted to GIS layers using Map source,
Google Earth and XTools Pro-an extension for ArcGIS. The output layers are
either polylines (for roads) or points (for superstructures and traffic survey
locations).
Site Photos and Charts
Another source of data is site photos taken for roads, structures and traffic
locations. More than 5500 photos were acquired. They were all renamed and
indexed in order to link them with the already converted GIS features. This was
done by providing a unique ID to both sets of data. While some images were
extracted from excel spreadsheets, others were provided as standalone images.
Moreover charts showing results of traffic flows were generated and indexed to
be linked with survey traffic locations.
6.5 GIS Data Correction and Checking
Based on the converted Roads layer from GPS tracks, a topology check was
performed using advanced geo-processing tools. Errors such as self intersecting,
overlapping, or non connected roads were easily spotted and underwent
immediate correction.

Moreover, a geometric network was generated allowing for automating snapping

of traffic stations and structures locations to the nearest road features.
6.6 GIS Data Usage in this Project
The GIS data was used in this project mainly to conduct queries, spatial analysis
and photo browsing as well as for map production.
Query and Spatial Analysis
The GIS analytical power is crucial in this project to assess the existing
conditions of roads and superstructures. End users can spatially select
road(s)/superstructure(s) directly on the screen and retrieve their information.
Based on a selected layer, they will be capable of doing any of the following
listed types of analysis (as illustrated in the following figure):
 Query and identify whole, or parts of surveyed roads that have been
dynamically segmented to reflect survey data taken at given intervals.
 Categorise roads by type, carriageway width, condition, etc.
 Categorise superstructures by type (tunnels, bridges, culverts, etc.),

length, condition, etc.
 Depict the connectivity of the roads network. For example P-1-D is

connected to P-1-E, S-09-D and S-01-D, etc.

Figure 46 Example of Roads, Structures and Cities in an Area of Dohuk
Photo Browsing Application
A GIS Desktop Application was developed to allow easy and intuitive retrieval of
site photos taken for roads and structures, as well as specific traffic data graphs.
The application was coded as a toolbar (see next figure) in an ArcGIS Desktop
9.3.1 Map Document.
Figure 47 Customized Toolbar
Functionalities include the ability to query selected features for photos and
graphs meeting a number of criteria, based on the collected survey data sheets
(see following figure).

Figure 48 Graphical User Interface Samples

Map Production
One of the main outputs of utilizing GIS in this project is map production.
Various thematic and composite maps of different sizes and scales were
produced using the GIS cartographic power, as illustrated in the following figure.
Figure 49 Administrative Map of the Project Area

7. TRAFFIC MODELLING AND FORECASTS
7.1 Base Year Traffic Model
The initial task under traffic modelling was to build a 24-hour base year model
which can be used to produce a diagnostic on the current traffic demand
situation in Kurdistan. This model will be a platform to forecast traffic flow in the
future, taking into account planned changes in the networks and the expected
growth in demand. The following figure shows the structure and methodology
deployed for producing the observed base year model.
Figure 50 Methodology for Building the Base Year Observed Model
As can be seen from this figure, the supply (highway and public transport
network) and demand (Annual Average Weekday Traffic) aspects of the base
year traffic model have been produced through an iterative process until a final
model that fulfils the validation criteria had been achieved. A number of software
tools have been used for the purposes of building the traffic model, including:
 ArcView for GIS;

 ERICA for matrix building 7; and
 EMME (using the latest software, EMME/3 for trip distribution and
assignment modelling 8.
7.2 Base Year Transport Networks
Base Year Traffic Zone System
The base year traffic model consists of 151 traffic zones; 138 in the Kurdistan
region, representing 137 sub-districts (see Figure 2 and Table 1 to Table 3) plus
one further zone (sub-district 100 which has been split into two), and 13 external
zones representing neighbouring regions or countries.
Base Year 2010 Kurdistan Highway Network
The base year highway network has been produced using the results from the
road inventory surveys, which have been coded using GIS. These data have been
converted into a representation of the network suitable for the traffic model built
in the ―EMME‖ software. EMME is a French-English acronym for Equilibre
Multimodal / Multimodal Equilibrium. It is a complete travel demand forecasting
system for urban, regional and national transportation planning.
Highway Road Network Hierarchy
The hierarchy for the base year highway road network in Kurdistan is classified
into:
 Primary Roads,
 Secondary Roads, and
 Tertiary Roads.
At present, at the top of the road hierarchy in Kurdistan are Primary roads.
These are defined officially in the Highway Standards as highways of
―international importance and are the main highways connecting cities. They are
to be designed to the highest standards‖. Primary roads usually carry large
volumes of traffic and are often divided into major and minor arterials.
Secondary roads are in second place in the road hierarchy. They are defined
officially as ―highways connecting major cities of economic or other importance...
7
http://www.peter-davidson.com/software/walkmxbuild.htm
8
http://www.inro.ca/en/products/EMME/index.php

connecting agricultural, recreational or touristic areas‖. Secondary roads are

usually defined as collector roads that distribute traffic from the Primary roads to
local access roads or tertiary roads.
The last in the road hierarchy are the Tertiary roads, which are defined as
―highways of district and local importance‖. These roads carry local traffic and
link development units with the Secondary roads.
Conversion of GIS Database to EMME Format
The surveyed attributes of the Kurdish road network have been exported to the
EMME transport modelling software platform. The following figure illustrates the
GIS road database as depicted in EMME.
Figure 51 The GIS Road Database as Depicted in EMME
The Volume-Delay Functions
The performance of the transport network is modelled via functions which

determine the cost of travel when a traffic assignment is performed. The costs
are expressed as travel times or as generalised costs. Volume-Delay Functions
(VDF) specify the relationship between traffic flows and travel time (or

generalised travel cost) on each link of the highway network (representing the
effects of congestion).
The attributes from the field surveys used in the VDF of the model include:
 Road hierarchy (primary, secondary, tertiary);
 Terrain (flat, rolling, mountainous);
 Road surface (paved: asphalt, concrete; or unpaved: earth, gravel, track);
 Road conditions; and
 Carriageway width (as a proxy to the number of lanes per direction).
Since all these attributes affect traffic speeds, they were combined to produce 13
different speed categories into the model, and each of these categories was
assigned a unique volume-delay function. For instance, a primary road with 3
lanes on a flat paved terrain has a VDF representing a much larger capacity and
higher speed than an unpaved secondary road on a mountainous terrain.
Base Year Public Transport Network
At present, public transport in Kurdistan constitutes of taxis and buses (including

mini-buses, buses and large buses). The surveys at major public transport
stations produced information on the routings of these services and the origin
and destination of passengers. The 29 public transport routes have been pre-
loaded onto the network with relevant EMME attributes.
Three public transport vehicle types have been employed:
 Large bus: it includes all large buses with a seated capacity between 25
and 44. An average seated capacity of 31 has been assumed.
 Minibus: it includes small buses with seated capacity between 8 and 24.
An average capacity of 21 has been assumed (over 14 hours).
 Taxi: seated capacity between 4 and 5.
Default speeds for the three public transport modes are as follows:
 Large bus: 30 km/h

 Minibus : 35 km/h
 Taxi: 40 km/h
The provision of public transport services, in terms of the number of daily

services, varies by station, route, operating period and mode. The following table

summarises the results from the surveys at major public transport stations in
terms of the number of services and estimated daily passengers for each route
and public transport vehicle type.
Table 76 Public Transport Services and Passengers at Major Stations

Number of Daily Services Estimated
Mini Medium & N. of Daily
PT Station Route Taxi Bus/Bus Large Bus Passengers
South Garage (Erbil) Erbil - Baghdad 6 0 1 62
South Garage (Erbil) Erbil -Karkuk 15 7 0 177
South Garage (Erbil) Erbil -Sulaimani 7 13 2 334
North Garage (Erbil) Erbil - Diyana 11 2 8 263
North Garage (Erbil) Erbil - Haji Omran 4 0 0 20
North Garage (Erbil) Erbil - Khlefan 1 0 0 5
North Garage (Erbil) Erbil - Mosel 13 10 0 223
North Garage (Erbil) Erbil - Rawnados 1 0 0 4
North Garage (Erbil) Erbil - Salah Al Den 10 7 0 138
North Garage (Erbil) Erbil - Shaqlawa 11 7 2 190
North Garage (Erbil) Erbil -Akre 4 0 0 20
North Garage (Erbil) Erbil -Dohuk 5 0 0 25
North Garage (Erbil) Erbil -Harer 6 0 0 30
North Garage (Erbil) Erbil -Joman 2 0 0 10
North Garage (Erbil) Erbil -Zakho 5 0 0 25
Koysinjaq (Erbil) Koysinjaq - Erbil 16 5 0 154
Koysinjaq (Erbil) Koysinjaq - Taktak 4 0 0 16
Koysinjaq (Erbil) Koysinjaq -Karkuk 2 0 0 8
Koysinjaq (Erbil) Koysinjaq -Sulaimani 7 1 0 47
Shaqlawa (Erbil) Shaqlawa - Erbil 7 11 0 173
Soran-Diyana (Erbil) Soran - Dohuk 5 1 0 30
Soran-Diyana (Erbil) Soran - Erbil 18 0 8 242
Soran-Diyana (Erbil) Soran - Mergasur 6 0 0 24
Soran-Diyana (Erbil) Soran -Akre 3 0 0 12
Soran-Diyana (Erbil) Soran -Harer 2 0 0 8
Soran-Diyana (Erbil) Soran -Khalefan 3 0 0 12
Soran-Diyana (Erbil) Soran -Rania 4 0 0 16
Soran-Diyana (Erbil) Soran -Rawandos 1 0 0 4
Soran-Diyana (Erbil) Soran -Salah Al Den 3 0 1 33
Soran-Diyana (Erbil) Soran -Shaqlawa 2 0 0 8
Soran-Diyana (Erbil) Soran -Sulaimani 5 0 0 20
Chawrta (Sulaimani) Sulaimani - Chwarta 7 4 0 118
Chawrta (Sulaimani) Sulaimani - Jwman 1 0 0 5
Chawrta (Sulaimani) Sulaimani - Mawat 2 0 0 10
South Garage (Sulaimani) Sulaimani - Erbil 8 8 2 246
South Garage (Sulaimani) Sulaimani - Qaladza 7 5 4 225
South Garage (Sulaimani) Sulaimani -Baghdad 7 0 4 172
South Garage (Sulaimani) Sulaimani -Chamchamal 9 9 2 266

Number of Daily Services Estimated

Mini Medium & N. of Daily
PT Station Route Taxi Bus/Bus Large Bus Passengers
South Garage (Sulaimani) Sulaimani -Chwarqurna 0 1 0 22
South Garage (Sulaimani) Sulaimani -karkuk 17 5 5 298
South Garage (Sulaimani) Sulaimani -Koysinjaq 8 2 1 98
South Garage (Sulaimani) Sulaimani -Rania 10 10 1 274
South Garage (Sulaimani) Sulaimani -Takia 1 0 0 4
Dokan (Sulaimani) Sulaimani - Piramagroon 12 1 0 68
Dokan (Sulaimani) Sulaimani -Bazyan 0 2 0 41
Dokan (Sulaimani) Sulaimani -Dukan 4 0 0 16
Sharazoor (Sulaimani) Sulaimani - Darbandikhan 0 3 0 62
Sharazoor (Sulaimani) Sulaimani - Khanaqeen 3 0 0 13
Sharazoor (Sulaimani) Sulaimani - Penjwen 1 4 0 87
Sharazoor (Sulaimani) Sulaimani - Said Sadq 3 2 0 39
Sharazoor (Sulaimani) Sulaimani -Halabja Taza 4 7 0 152
Sharazoor (Sulaimani) Sulaimani -Kalar 3 2 0 54
Sharazoor (Sulaimani) Sulaimani -Khurmal 1 3 0 65
Dohuk Garage (Dohuk) Dohuk - Domez 1 0 0 4
Dohuk Garage (Dohuk) Dohuk - Erbil 4 0 0 16
Dohuk Garage (Dohuk) Dohuk - Mosel 16 6 0 177
Dohuk Garage (Dohuk) Dohuk - Zakho 23 3 0 149
Dohuk Garage (Dohuk) Dohuk -Akre 2 0 0 8
Dohuk Garage (Dohuk) Dohuk -Amedi 1 0 0 4
Dohuk Garage (Dohuk) Dohuk -Bamarni 1 0 0 4
Dohuk Garage (Dohuk) Dohuk -Sarsink 1 0 0 4
Zakho (Dohuk) Zakho - Batifa 4 0 0 16
Zakho (Dohuk) Zakho - Darkar 2 0 0 8
Zakho (Dohuk) Zakho - Dohuk 8 5 0 95
Zakho (Dohuk) Zakho - Erbil 4 0 0 16
Zakho (Dohuk) Zakho - Kani Masi 2 0 0 8
Zakho (Dohuk) Zakho - Mosel 2 0 0 8
Zakho (Dohuk) Zakho - Rizgari 0 1 0 17
Zakho (Dohuk) Zakho Center 1 1 0 14
Zakho (Dohuk) Zakho -Persefa (Darkar) 4 0 0 16
A representation of the surveyed public transport routes (surveyed at major

stations) is given in the following figures, for each main public transport mode:
taxi, mini-bus and bus.

Figure 52 Base Year Taxi Routes

Figure 53 Base Year Mini-Bus Routes

Figure 54 Base Year Bus Routes

7.3 Base Year Travel Demand
For the production of the base year demand matrices, the following steps have
been taken:
 Build an observed Annual Average Weekday Traffic (AAWDT) demand from

Roadside Interview Surveys (RSIs) for private cars, light good vehicles and
heavy good vehicles.
 Build observed AAWDT public transport passenger trips using RSI

expanded records.
The first step has produced pre-validated observed AAWDT vehicular traffic, and
in the second step, the pre-validated person trips have been produced. As these
matrices represent the fully observed elements of the overall travel pattern of
the study area and there are cells in the matrix that had not been observed
(intercepted) to be accounted for, these matrices have then been subjected to
further infilling using direct demand modelling techniques.
The following sections describe:
 The building of the observed trip matrices from the results of the
expanded RSIs;
 The extensive data processing required to convert results for the RSI into
usable model inputs;
 The process of building travel matrices; and
 The infilling process using Direct Demand Modelling.
Build Observed Trip Matrices from Roadside Interview Surveys
The coded and cleaned RSI survey records had to undergo a range of additional
checks before they became suitable for use in matrix building, including:
 Illogical Movement Checks – these seek to identify movements recorded in

the roadside interview data that are considered to be illogical. This can
happen for a number of reasons, for example, the interviewer may have
made a coding error, the interviewee may have misunderstood the
questions or the data coder may have made a data input error. It is
important that these errors are identified and removed prior to additional
data processing. This has been done at regional level.

 Missing Data Checks – when processing the roadside interview data there
are a certain number of fields that have to be present if the interview
record is to be suitable for building matrices. These fields include: origin
zone, destination zone, origin purpose, destination purpose, vehicle type
and time of the interview. Where this data is missing, the record can either
be excluded or inferred from other sources (the method used depends
upon the quality of the data, the sample rate, etc.)
 Range and Logic Checks – these include checking the RSI data for range
errors or illogical data. For example, if on the RSI form for a particular
question there are 8 choices and the data includes a 9 then this would
need to be identified in the range checks. Logic checks include, for
example, looking at the origin and destination information. If a traveller is
moving from zone ―a‖ to zone ―b‖ and yet their origin purpose is home and
the destination purpose is also home this could be illogical and therefore
would need to be identified during the logic checking process. Again
whether to exclude these records or infer data from others are decided
during the data checking process.
Data Processing
Data processing tasks have been undertaken using the survey results in Excel
spreadsheet and involve the following:
 Formatting: In order for the data from the RSI, MCC and ATC surveys to
be useable in the ERICA software, it is important that it is in the required
format. This requires all the data to be stored in Excel spreadsheets with
named ranges applied and the correct column headers and data formats to
be used. Some preliminary data formatting has been required.
 Data Mining: The RSI and public transport survey questionnaires include
questions on the socio-economic status of the interviewee‘s household.
Because not a great deal of socio-economic data is available at the sub-
district level in Kurdistan, data such as car ownership, employment,
household size and income have been extracted from the surveys for each
model zone based on the interviewed populous of that zone. Simple data
mining techniques have been used for this purpose.

 Market Segmentation: This is used to both simplify the matrix building

process and to enable matrices by a very wide range of market segments
to be derived.
 Transposing: Since the RSI and public transport surveys have been
conducted in one direction of travel, these results needed to be transposed
to form an estimate of the pattern of movement in both directions.
 Expansion: Expansion is the process of making the sampled surveys

reflect the overall levels of traffic through the site. For the RSI data, this
was done by firstly expanding the sample to the results from the manual
classified counts, taking into account the time of the survey and the
vehicle type. This was done using ERICA. The next step was to make this
traffic reflect an average day which was achieved by expanding it
according to the ATC results for 24 hours. Additional expansion was
required to produce an Average Annual Weekday Traffic (AAWDT) estimate
of traffic at each site. Expanding the results from the public transport
surveys has required a more complicated process because individual
boarding and alighting counts have not been undertaken at the survey
locations. The results from manual classified count data have been used to
identify the number of buses crossing survey locations and this has been
used as an approximate measure for calculating the total number of public
transport users to which the bus surveys have been expanded.
ERICA Matrix Building Process
Once the data has been expanded to reflect the required representation of travel,
it was then ready for building into trip matrices. ERICA software has been used
for this process.
The RSI ERICA build setup involves three key tasks:
 Allocating RSI sites to screenlines and cordons.
 Allocating zones into a sector system.
 Defining which screenlines are used to estimate demand for which sector
to sector movements.

The definition of these three tasks specifies all the parameters required for
building matrices in ERICA. It is usual that many quality checks are undertaken
to ensure that the best specification has been defined. Issues identified include:
 Multiple Cordon – Using ERICA, it is possible to build an estimate of trips

for a particular sector to sector movement from a variety of different
cordons. A statistically robust method is provided for combining these
estimates using the variance of the estimate which is a function of the
expansion factor.
 Expansion Factor Size – This check aims to identify any particularly high or
low expansion factors.
 Individual RSI Site builds – This check aims to identify the proportion of
movements within an RSI site that are being written to the trip matrix.
 Individual Screenline builds – This has been used to assess how

appropriate the cordon definition specifications were.
The results from the public transport surveys have been built into trip matrices
using a simpler method where an assumption has been made that no traveller
will be picked up at more than one survey location. ERICA was then used to
tabulate the expansion factors at each of the survey locations to the required
market segmentation split.
The following table shows the total RSI records and the number and percentage
of records rejected at each RSI site, for the reasons highlighted above.

Table 77 RSI Records and the Percentage of Rejected Records

RSI Number Total Records Number of Excluded Records Proportion Excluded
Dohuk H10 361 15 4%
Dohuk H11 528 9 2%
Dohuk S17 467 24 5%
Dohuk S18 361 1 0%
Dohuk S19 417 26 6%
Erbil H1 522 10 2%
Erbil H2 428 4 1%
Erbil H3 343 9 3%
Erbil H4 537 31 6%
Erbil H5 185 4 2%
Erbil H6 204 2 1%
Erbil S1 544 8 1%
Erbil S2 494 6 1%
Erbil S3 347 7 2%
Erbil S4 342 108 32%
Erbil S6 292 15 5%
Erbil S7 248 3 1%
Erbil S8 164 1 1%
Erbil S9 237 19 8%
Erbil S10 434 17 4%
Erbil S11 358 2 1%
Sulaimani 1 H7 339 36 11%
Sulaimani 1 S14 345 4 1%
Total 9,325 379 4.1%
As can be seen, out of the original 9,325 RSI records, only about 4% (379
records) were deemed unsuitable for further data analysis and thus rejected.
The largest number of records rejected was at survey station S04 (in Erbil) with
32%.
A comparison between the accepted RSI records, the MCCs and the AAWDT is
shown in the following table, together with the average expansion factor for each
survey station. Similar expansion factors have been produced for the transposed
RSI records (but this task in not reported here due to its repetitive nature).

Table 78 Accepted RSI Records, Counts and AAWDT per Survey Station
Accepted RSI MCC Counts AAWDT Traffic Average Expansion
RSI Number Records (Vehicles) (Vehicles) Factor 1
Dohuk H10 346 3115 7,092 20
Dohuk H11 519 4909 11,695 23
Dohuk S17 443 1073 2,226 5
Dohuk S18 360 3475 6,815 19
Dohuk S19 391 2024 4,148 11
Erbil H1 512 5060 9,087 18
Erbil H2 424 6501 10,832 26
Erbil H3 334 4728 9,036 27
Erbil H4 506 1712 2,993 6
Erbil H5 181 472 1,480 8
Erbil H6 202 563 1,366 7
Erbil S1 536 3514 5,705 11
Erbil S2 488 1624 3,383 7
Erbil S3 340 2231 6,488 19
Erbil S4 234 1214 2,834 12
Erbil S6 277 1257 3,141 11
Erbil S7 245 605 1,441 6
Erbil S8 163 627 1,439 9
Erbil S9 218 584 1,332 6
Erbil S10 417 1751 3,353 8
Erbil S11 356 952 1,458 4
Sulaimani 2 H7 303 9495 16,057 53
Sulaimani 2 H8 321 1675 3,452 11
Sulaimani 2 H9 489 5528 8,927 18
Sulaimani 2 S14 341 1792 2,825 8
Total 8,946 66,481 128,605 -
Notes: 1. Expansion factors produced by vehicle type and by direction
Base Year Demand Model Setup
A demand model is required for a number of purposes. Initially, because the

observed matrices have not sampled many origin destination pairs, the demand
model was used to smooth the matrix out over these unobserved cells. The
demand model is also required for forecasting future travel demand, but it will
need to be calibrated on base year data beforehand.
There are a number of options available for the demand model, but the Direct
Demand Model has been selected as the most appropriate method for the
purposes of this project. It estimates a relationship between a range of attributes
of a zone (such as population, number of jobs, car ownership, etc.) and
attributes about travelling between these zones (e.g. travel times, distances and

costs), and uses this relationship to estimate unobserved movements or produce

forecasts based on estimates of future year conditions.
Base Year Model Checking
Once the demand model has been used to smooth the matrix and synthesize
unobserved movements, a range of simple checks (including matrix totals check,
sector to sector checks and assigned flow checks) has been required to ensure
the model is functioning properly.
Matrix In-filling using Direct Demand Model
Using only the results from the roadside interviews, it is inevitable that some
movements will not be observed and need to be in-filled. The following figure
illustrates and the infilling of the observed demand using Direct Demand
Modelling. This technique estimates a relationship between a range of attributes
of a zone such as GDP, population, number of jobs, etc. and attributes about
travelling between these zones (e.g. travel time and distance) and uses these
relationships to estimate unobserved movements. The most important variables
utilised in the Direct Demand Model are: population, household income,
household structure and vehicle availability.

Figure 55 Methodology for In-Filling the Observed Demand
7.4 Model Calibration and Validation
The adequacy of a base year model depends on how well it replicates the
existing traffic conditions (in this case, at all primary and secondary road
locations). Model calibration is the process of ensuring that the model can
reproduce the results of counts throughout the study area. At this stage of
reporting, the model calibration is presented for the observed element of the
vehicular trips and the calibration of the whole matrix including the un-observed
cells will be reported in Phase 2 Report.
Once the model has been calibrated, an additional process is required to test the
adequacy of the model: assignment model validation. Model validation consists
of ensuring that modelled base year traffic volumes assigned onto the network

can also represent with a reasonable level of accuracy the traffic observed at
independent locations (i.e. counts at additional locations, which have not been
utilised as part of the matrix building process).
The results from the RSI and Public transport surveys were expanded to daily
flows and this enabled trip matrices by mode and journey purpose to be
produced. The summary of the daily vehicle trips by mode and purpose (in terms
of the AADWT) is presented below, whereas the full matrices are given in
Appendix D.
Table 79 Observed AAWDT Vehicle Trips by Mode and Purpose

Vehicle Type Business Commute Education Other Total
Car 8,910 40,367 9,023 26,538 84,838
Taxi 7,829 9,465 1,965 4,666 23,925
LGV/Van/Pickup 9,313 27,975 6,316 10,775 54,379
Bus 2,309 2,838 618 1,825 7,591
Goods Vehicles 14,296 14,904 1,835 2,941 33,976
Total 42,656 95,550 19,757 46,746 204,709
The final observed trip matrices assigned to the highway network have been
aggregated into seven sectors, according to urban and rural areas in each
Governorate, and these are shown in the following table and illustrated in the
following figure.
Table 80 Observed AAWDT Vehicle Trips Assigned to the Network by Sector

Erbil Erbil Sulaimani Sulaimani Dohuk Dohuk External
1 1
From/To Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Sectors Total
Erbil Urban 54,713 12,479 3,522 172 983 602 1,453 73,924
Erbil Rural 12,186 8,007 2,911 310 860 1,890 243 26,407
Sulaimani 1 Urban 1,255 2,972 26,801 11,372 764 107 2,557 45,828
Sulaimani 1 Rural 207 381 11,256 2,817 0 18 57 14,736
Dohuk Urban 988 894 744 13 18,717 2,589 3,466 27,411
Dohuk Rural 334 1,901 87 24 2,509 1,240 488 6,583
Externals 1,440 184 2,362 73 4,306 615 839 9,819
Total 71,123 26,817 47,682 14,781 28,140 7,061 9,105 204,709

Figure 56 Aggregated Sectors of Kurdistan
The assignment of the observed trip matrices to the network has been calibrated
for three cordons representing the Kurdistan major urban areas, as shown in the
following figures.
Figure 57 Erbil Cordon Crossing Sector

Figure 58 Sulaimani Cordon Crossing Sector
Figure 59 Dohuk Cordon Crossing Sector
The total modelled flows crossing each cordon have been compared with the
observed traffic counts, and the results are shown in the following table for each
direction of traffic.

Table 81 Cordon Crossing Comparison of Observed & Modelled AAWDT

Direction A Direction B
Observed Observed % Observed Observed %
Cordon Assigned Counts Difference Assigned Counts Difference
Dohuk 23,163 22,334 3.7% 24,486 21,013 16.5%
Erbil 48,157 47,799 0.7% 50,577 47,365 6.8%
Sulaimani 25,401 27,680 8.2% 25,636 27,776 7.7%
As can be seen, apart from one location (Dohuk Cordon) where the percentage
difference is 17%, the rest of the cordon flows are well within the acceptable
level for matrix validation.
7.5 Base Year Assignment Plots
The EMME/3 base year observed AAWDT results are shown in the following figure
for the whole network (the thickness of the line represents the amount of daily
traffic on each link). Detailed base year model observed traffic flow patterns for
each Kurdistan region are presented in the subsequent figures.
Figure 60 EMME/ 3 – Kurdistan Base Year Modelled AAWDT
Average Annual Weekday Traffic:

Vehicles per day

Figure 61 EMME/ 3 – Erbil Region Base Year Modelled AAWDT

Vehicles per day

Figure 62 EMME/ 3 – Sulaimani Region Base Year Modelled AAWDT

Vehicles per day

Figure 63 EMME/ 3 – Dohuk Region Base Year Modelled AAWDT

Vehicles per day
From the above base year model results for the observed elements of the matrix,
the following observations can be made:
 The observed base year average weekday traffic generated and attracted
to Kurdistan is estimated at approximately 205,000 vehicles;
 Internal traffic (traffic to/from Kurdistan Regions) accounts for some 90%
of the total observed vehicular traffic;
 External traffic to and from Kurdistan has been observed as approximately

19,000 vehicles, amounting to around 9% of the total traffic;
 Erbil urban sector contributes to the majority of vehicular traffic in the

whole of Kurdistan, generating approximately 74,000 average weekday

traffic going to other regions; Erbil internal ―Urban-to-urban‖ traffic

accounts for about 73% of this traffic;
 The second largest base year observed traffic is from Sulaimani urban
sector, generating around 46,000 average weekday vehicular traffic; the
Sulaimani ―Urban-to-urban‖ traffic accounts for about 59% of this traffic;
 Dohuk urban sector generates around 27,000 vehicles per day; its ―Urban-
to-urban‖ movements account for some 70% of this traffic.
7.6 Future Year Networks
Future Road Plans
The future year road network has been developed taking into account the
existing plans for road improvements, upgrades, widening and new roads, for
different time horizons. For the purposes of the modelling of future year
networks, the following has been assumed:
 2020 – this time horizon takes into account all short-term schemes which
are not part of the base year network, including on-going projects and
those planned for this and next years;
 2030 – this long-term horizon takes into account strategic projects which
have been proposed by different authorities, and which are in early stages
of concept and/or planning.
The following figures show the proposed road plans for 2020 and 2030 according
to road hierarchy (primary or secondary) and to the intervention type (new road
or upgraded), for each Governorate.

Figure 64 Future Road Plans for Dohuk 2020 Horizon

Figure 65 Future Road Plans for Dohuk 2030 Horizon

Figure 66 Future Road Plans for Erbil 2020 Horizon

Figure 67 Future Road Plans for Erbil 2030 Horizon

Figure 68 Future Road Plans for Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration 2020 Horizon

Figure 69 Future Road Plans for Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration 2030 Horizon

Future Rail Plans
The existing rail network does not serve any part of Kurdistan. The re-
instatement of the railway connecting Erbil to Kirkuk and the rest of Iraq is part
of the national transport master plan, supported by the Central Iraqi
Government. In addition, this line will be extended westwards to Dohuk and the
border with Turkey and eastwards to Sulaimani. An additional rail line is
proposed by the KRG, connecting Erbil, Sulaimani and the border with Iran. The
proposed railway plans are summarized in the following figure.
Figure 70 Proposed Railway Network in Kurdistan
For the purposes of this study, the following timescales for implementation have
been assumed:
 2020 – Proposed railways by the Central Iraqi Government.
 2030 – Proposed railways by the KRG.

7.7 Future Year Demand Forecasts
Growth in Trip Making
A trip growth model will be produced to estimate changes in travel in the future
as a result of changes in population, car ownership and wealth. The provisional
growth figures are:
 GDP growth rate, 2010-2020: 6.5%
 GDP growth rate, 2010-2030: 5.8%
 GDP per capita, yr 2010, ($, 2010 constant prices): 2,551
 GDP per capita growth rate, 2010-2020: 3.9%
 GDP per capita growth rate, 2010-2030: 3.5%
 Kurdistan, cars per 1000 pop, yr 2010: 54
New Development Sites
New developments will produce demand additional to what has been considered
as part of the natural population and economic growth of the region. The
following key new developments have been identified and estimates have been
made for the levels of demand expected from them:
 The Dohuk international Airport is planned to be accommodated into a

24km2 area along the Dohuk-Zakho, in the Semel Center sub-district
(Zone 112), with a 3.6km runway and cargo facilities. The underlying
assumptions for demand are:
o Opening year: by 2020

o Number of employees: 100
o Number of average daily passengers arriving or departing: 300

 Erbil airport expansion (Ankawa sub-district9, Zone 3). The key demand
assumptions (Erbil International Airport Master Plan, Aviation Demand
Forecast Report, Dar Al-Handasah, April 2010) for the Base Case are
summarized in the following table.
Table 82 Passenger and Cargo Forecasts for Erbil Airport Expansion

Item 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Annual passengers 380,000 593,000 901,000 1,282,000 1,751,000
Annual cargo (tonnes) 16,300 22,100 28,200 35,100 43,700
9
The airport extends over 4 modelling zones, but additional trips have been allocated to Ankawa.

8. DEVELOP HIGHWAY SECTOR STRATEGIES
8.1 Diagnostic Review
This report sets out a review of the existing diagnostic of problems associated
with the highway sector in Kurdistan. This diagnostic work will continue to be
developed as further analysis is made of the assembled road network data and
the dynamics of the transport demand, both in terms of passengers and freight,
is modelled. However, certain key observations may be made from the current
review, which would include:
 A significant proportion of the existing road network (1,785 km or circa

34%) has been assessed to be in poor to critical condition;
 The condition of bridges and other major structures is rather alarming,

with some 95% of these being in need of urgent maintenance work;
 A high proportion of public transport trips are made by taxis, rather

than by bus (i.e. 13% by taxi and 4% by bus on primary roads and 9%
taxis and 3% by bus for secondary roads);
 The vehicle fleet is quite aged, with more than 40% of vehicles being
more than 15 years old, in particular for buses and goods vehicles;
 Road accident rates seem to be growing at an alarming rate, in

particular in Dohuk (injury growth 64% p.a. between 2006 and 2009)
and Erbil (injury growth 141% p.a. between 2006 and 2009).
As noted above, in the coming weeks further analysis will be made of the
assembled data and further diagnostic conclusions will be reached. These
analyses will also include projections of existing trends under different road
maintenance and traffic control and safety interventions, leading to a future Road
Sector Strategy to be developed and agreed.
8.2 Development of Highway Strategies
In order to develop a time-phased programme of road improvements and road

maintenance work (periodic, routine and recurrent), it will be necessary to
investigate various strategies and policies in order to arrive at a composite
solution that will best serve Kurdistan during the coning two decades or so. This
Strategy should have at its core the aims of:

 Progressively improving the standard of the regional road network, and

in particular of its road pavements and major structure conditions;
 Making the road network progressively safer and reducing road

accidents, and in particular reducing road injuries and fatalities;
 Making the transport of people and goods progressively more efficient,

in terms of reducing the costs and travel times of transport and the
consumption of resources (such as fuel, tyres, spare parts, etc.);
 Improving the environmental quality of the road network surroundings

by progressively reducing vehicle noise and emissions;
 Reducing the cost of road maintenance work and developing the

capacity of the local contracting industry in new road construction and
maintenance.
In order to estimate future maintenance and construction costs, unit cost rates
(per km) will be applied. The following table summarises average cost rates for
different types of projects, compiled from a range of actual projects implemented
as well as on-going or proposed schemes in each of the Kurdish Governorates.
This table also shows the standard deviation around the average costs. As it can
be seen, there is a wide variation around the averages, and this is due to a
number of reasons, including the wide variation on the specific type of project,
their location, the terrain, specifications, the inclusion of street furniture, signing,
markings, etc.

Table 83 Average Unitary Cost Rates

Actual Projects On-Going/Proposed Projects
Project Type Average of St. Dev. of Average of St. Dev. of
Number Cost/km (ID Cost/km (ID Number Cost/km (ID Cost/km (ID
Million) Million) Million) Million)
Bridge 7 1,029 2,480 3 22,661 26,237
Bridge
Rehabilitation 10 9,591 12,403 - - -
Dualling - - - 18 419 480
Maintenance - - - 26 166 265
Maintenance and
resurfacing - - - 16 369 769
New construction - - - 39 669 1,057
Resurfacing 2 58 38 12 203 118
Retaining wall - - - 1 3,568
Sub-base road - - - 7 54 25
Survey and design
for new road - - - 1 1,554
Designing and
Construction 10 731 1,029 1 590
Maintenance and
widening - - - 3 4,102 3,058
Upgrade 7 567 680 - - -
Sources: General Directorate of the Road and Bridges and Construction and Housing in Erbil, Dohuk, Sulaimani.
Maintenance Strategy
In respect of Road Maintenance Strategy, an allowance for the maintenance of

the existing roads needs to be ensured before any new construction takes
precedence, since, in the long run, a well maintained road will have lower overall
costs. This principle is illustrated by the following figure produced by the World
Bank, where a well maintained road needs only 2% of its total lifecycle cost
allocated to maintenance, while a road without any maintenance costs 42% more
in the long run.

Figure 71 Total Road Costs for Different Maintenance Conditions

160
140
124
120
100 91
80
Costs
80 User Costs
Maintenance Costs
60
Construction Costs
40
20 2 1 0
18 18 18
0
Well Maintained (R = Poorly Maintained (R = Zero Maintenance (R =
2.5m/km IRI) 4.0m/km IRI) 10.0m/km IRI)
Sources: World Bank HDM Analysis.
One key decision will concern the type and extent of road maintenance work to
be contracted out and that to be undertaken in-house (Force-Account). For
contracted-out maintenance work, various means of creating efficiency and
driving down unit costs, such as introducing Term Contracts, will need to be
investigated and agreed with the Client.
Investment Strategy
As far as a Highway Investment Strategy in concerned, the opportunities for the

participation of the private sector need to be identified in each case, whereby
certain roads may be constructed and maintained by private companies under a
real or shadow toll system. In the case of real tolls, a suitable free alternative
needs to be available.
When financed by the private sector, it is important to consider the possible

financing methods available for delivery of infrastructure projects and which are
suitable for Kurdistan, including, for instance, the following or variations to
these:
 Design-Bid-Build (DBB), Design-Build (DB);
 Design-Build-Operate-Maintain (DBOM);
 Design-Build-Operate-Transfer (DBOT);

 Design-Build-Finance-Operate (DBFO);
 Build-Own-Operate (BOO), Build-Lease-Transfer (BLT);
 Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT)/Build-Transfer-Operate (BTO);
 Design-Build-Own-Operate-Transfer (BOOT);
 Construction Manager At Risk (CM@Risk).
The private sector could participate in many different aspects of the delivery of
highway infrastructure, as shown in the illustration below.
Possible Areas of Private Sector Participation
Planning & Finance Build & Operation Maintenance

Design Construction
The main benefit from the participation of the private sector would be a reduced
need for investment by the public sector, freeing up resources for other aspects
of the transport strategy. There are different ways to promote schemes and
attract international investment (funding and delivery), and this will have to be
considered in due course.
Each new proposed scheme identified will later need to be assessed in more
detailed in terms of design and feasibility before implementation.
Optimising Economic Benefits
The strategy also needs to be developed to optimise the economic benefits of a

road improvement programme for a region as a whole, whilst taking into
consideration the overall expenditure required to rehabilitate/upgrade the road
network. The main economic benefits will be experienced by road users in the
form of reduced vehicle operating costs and passenger time costs. An improved
highway system should also result in a reduction in the number of road
accidents, which will further increase economic benefits for the country.
These benefits need to be quantified and compared, by road section or link, with
the anticipated life cycle costings (investment costs and annual maintenance
costs) of the same link. If benefits to a country as a whole are to be considered,
then the higher the benefit/cost ratio for a particular section, the higher priority
the road section should be given in the overall road investment programme. It

should be noted that the magnitude of economic benefits often reflect traffic
volumes, i.e. improvements to highly trafficked roads generally tend to lead to
greater economic benefits than improvements to roads with low traffic volumes.
The most appropriate approach for estimating and comparing road user benefits
and investment costs is through the use of the World Bank‘s Highway Design and
Maintenance IV model, which has been widely used throughout the developing
world. Using this model, the Consultants will prepare vehicle operating costs for
traffic volumes for road conditions in the ―with‖ and ―without‖ the
implementation of the Master Plan over an evaluation period of 20 years. This is
compared to investment and maintenance costs, enabling a ranking of
investment. In addition to this, a multi-criteria analysis will be undertaken to
ensure that other important factors are considered, such as access to developing
areas and links that could promote tourism and environmental impacts.
8.3 Overall Transport Strategy
In order to implement the above Strategies that are to be developed and agreed
with the Client, it is likely that a series of associated policy and regulatory
measures will need to be taken. The general approach adopted would be that of
the ―carrot and stick‖, whereby the required road user behaviour would be
encouraged and adverse behaviour would be penalised. The various associated
measures are likely to include:
 A system of Road User Charges that encourages fleet renewal and the
use of less damaging axle configurations for HGVs, and favours the use
of busses for public transport against smaller inter-urban taxi and
minibus services;
 Annual vehicle inspection and testing to ensure roadworthiness and to

control vehicle emissions and encourage fleet renewal;
 Laws concerning axle load controls for different vehicle types and the
enforcement of these controls via axle weigh-stations.
In addition to the above regulatory measures, a number of road strategy policies

will need to be agreed with the Client for each Governorate. These policies will
cover such highway development matters as:

 The proportion of projected annual transport budgets to be assigned to

new road construction, road improvements and road maintenance work,
which are to be established on the basis of total road network life cycle
costs, covering road construction, maintenance and road user costs,
over a certain period, say 20 years;
 An agreed road network development policy, integrating road hierarchy

and design standards, route alignments and a balance between efficient
long distance travel and serving and supporting urban economic
activity. In particular, setting a policy for the use of urban bypasses and
rural motorway alignments;
 Establishing typical urban and rural road cross-section standards and

the criteria for their application and estimate normal capacity levels;
 Setting future year target levels for:

 Average road conditions and maximum % of network in poor
condition;
 The number of inter-urban licensed public transport routes and
services;
 Road accident levels and numbers of injury and fatal accidents;
 Establishing air-pollution and noise levels for urban and rural
locations;
 Reducing HGV average axle loads and vehicle over-loading;
 Reducing the average age of the vehicle fleet, in particular for HGVs
and for public transport vehicles, etc.
As noted at the outset of this Chapter, our work on Highway Sector Strategies is
ongoing and will be developed, progressed and discussed with the Client over the
next few weeks.
8.4 Recommendations for Future Work
A number of areas have been identified as requiring further work after the
completion of this master plan, such as:
 Setting up a continuous GIS monitoring and updating programme,

whereby new and updated data is incorporated into the database on a

regular basis. A proposal for a short-term management of the GIS

system has been submitted by Dar Al-Handasah;
 Developing a equivalent database for the tertiary roads in the region,

which involves collecting information about the existing routes, their
conditions and importance. A proposal for the development of a
databank for the tertiary network in Kurdistan has been submitted by
Dar Al-Handasah;
 Developing a coherent numbering system for the primary and secondary

(and possibly also tertiary) routes in Kurdistan. This is especially
important considering that the current numbering system in Iraq is very
old, and when newer roads were built, these were inconsistently added
to the original road system. A new numbering system was later
implemented in Iraq, but because of the instability of the country in the
last decades, this system was not completely followed. Hence, there is
no systematic road numbering in the country at present. A new system
will need to take account of, for instance:
 Other systems in practice in the world (e.g. orthogonal or radial),

their advantages, disadvantages and appropriateness for Kurdistan;
 Numbering progression (e.g. from north to south, east to west,
clock-wise, starting from main centres, etc.);
 Road hierarchy in terms of the road function (motorways, primary,
secondary and tertiary roads), and whether, for instance, the
system should comprise one letter for the hierarchy and two
numbers (or three numbers for secondary roads);
 Full consistency and compatibility with the system in place in the
rest of Iraq, so that national roads crossing into Kurdistan can have
the same numbering everywhere;
 The need to add into the system new roads to be implemented in
the future, preserving consistency;
 Cases of ramifications and branching of certain roads, or at which
point they start/end, become urban, turn primary/secondary;
 Jurisdiction by municipalities, districts or the regional ministry.

Phase 1 Diagnostic Review Report PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Phase 1 Diagnostic Review Report PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Phase 1 Diagnostic Review Report PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kurdistan Regional Government

Ministry of Construction and Housing

KURDISTAN HIGHWAY MASTER PLAN

Diagnostics Review Report

Beirut • Cairo • London

FINAL REPORT - Rev. C

IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Contents

8.3 Overall Transport Strategy............................................................................ 167

IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Contents

Figure 30 Distribution of Vehicle Manufacturing Years in Kurdistan ......................... 74

IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Contents

Table 2 Administrative Zones in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian

IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Contents

Table 51 Distribution of Commodity Transported in Kurdistan ................................. 78

IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Contents

1.1 The Project

IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Page 1

Figure 1 Governorates of Kurdistan

IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Page 2

The main outcomes from this project will be:

 A comprehensive GIS database (roads, bridges, conditions, traffic and

 Appraisal processes (e.g. transport model, evaluation framework);

 Determination of key projects to ensure that the region can continue

 Priority of projects by category and phasing.

Some of these are also requirements by major funding agencies.

IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Page 3

 On the supply side, an assessment of the existing network:

1.2 This Report

 Task 1.3 Traffic and Travel Surveys (chapter 4);

 Task 1.4 Socio-Economic Review (chapter 5);

 Task 1.5 GIS Database (chapter 6);

 Task 1.6 Traffic Modelling and Forecasts (chapter 7);

 Task 1.7 Develop Highway Sector Strategies (chapter 8).

The objective of this report is to provide a diagnostic review on road transport

IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Page 4

2. ASSEMBLE DATA, EXISTING STUDIES AND DOCUMENTS

 The administrative boundaries for Kurdistan Region; and

2.1 Administrative Boundaries

Kurdistan Region has recently suffered a number of changes in the boundaries of

 Erbil Governorate: 10 districts and 47 sub-districts;

 Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian Administration: 16 districts and 61

 Dohuk Governorate: 7 districts and 29 sub-districts.

Kurdish administrative zones are shown in the following tables.

IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Page 5

Table 1 Administrative Zones in Erbil Governorate

IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Page 6

Table 2 Administrative Zones in Sulaimani Governorate and Garmian

IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Page 7

District No. District Sub-district No. Sub – District/Zone

Table 3 Administrative Zones in Dohuk Governorate

IQ09036-01D-RPT-TR 01 REV C Page 8

Figure 2 Sub-Districts (Traffic Zones) of Kurdistan Governorates

2.2 Planning Documentation

The following key planning documents have been reviewed:

 National Development Strategy;

 Kurdistan Regional Government‘s Economic Development Strategy;

 Iraqi Transport Master Plan.