Is Bishkek at a standstill because of the excess of private cars and the work of traffic controllers? Survey results, part II

Bishkek (AKIpress) – AKIpress conducted a surveyto understand how traffic jams change the lifestyle of citizens.

2524 respondents took part in the survey.

IN Part I we talked about the impact of traffic jams on the daily life of Bishkek residents.

The second part of the survey results is devoted to the causes of traffic jams in Bishkek, barriers to switching to public transport, and citizens’ expectations from the authorities. Respondents also assessed what changes in infrastructure would help relieve congestion on the roads and whether they were ready to change their own habits.

Why does the city stand

Citizens cite several reasons for congestion, and none seems to be the only one. The leaders are “too many private cars” (67% of respondents), “narrow streets and congested intersections” (59%), “congestion of cars near schools, kindergartens, markets and shopping centers” (58%) and “parking and stopping in the wrong places” (58%). This is followed by ineffective operation of traffic lights and traffic management (51%), violations of traffic rules by drivers (47%) and road works (40%). Problems with public transport and the lack of conditions for pedestrians and cyclists are mentioned less frequently: from a quarter to a third of respondents.

Respondents most often associate traffic jams with overload of the street network.

Excess of private cars. According to respondents, the demand for car travel exceeds the capacity of the existing street network.

Parking and transport attractions. In free-flowing comments, respondents describe cars seeking space in the center, dropping off children, or taking up part of a lane. They estimate that this reduces the actual capacity of the street.

Motion Control. 51.1% cited ineffective traffic lights and traffic management as a factor, 47.3% cited traffic violations. In the comments to the “Other” option, there are complaints about regulation at intersections, the work of traffic controllers on the roads, blockages for the passage of motorcades, and a lack of discipline during maneuvers and stops. The survey does not show that each of these factors leads to specific congestion.

Public transport. About 29% of respondents called public transport inconvenient, which is noticeably less common than the leading reasons.

Temporary ceilings. 40% named road works and closures. Detailed responses mention protracted repairs, closures during peak hours and the need to transfer some work to the night.

Urban layout. 111 respondents (about 4% of the sample) chose the “Other” option. Their responses include overcrowding, chaotic high-rise developments, a lack of schools, gardens and services near their homes, a daily influx of cars from the suburbs and concentration of jobs.

Thus, from the responses and comments, the following picture emerges: respondents associate congestion with an increase in the number of cars with a limited network, with local losses of capacity due to parking, disembarking passengers and traffic violations, with inconvenient public transport and with temporary road closures. The survey shows how residents perceive the causes of congestion, but does not measure the contribution of each factor.

Why not switch to public transport

The main barrier is quality. Overcrowding is cited by 68% of respondents, long waits and irregular traffic by 54%, and long travel times by 44%. A small number of routes and inconvenient location of stops were noted by 31%, inconvenient transfers – 21%, unsafe or uncomfortable – 18%. Only 2% indicated the high cost of travel.

Another 31% responded that they were simply more comfortable driving their own car, and 9% were satisfied with public transport.

For those who could walk, ride a bicycle or ride a scooter, the obstacles are largely infrastructural: no sidewalks or they are in poor condition (47%), few safe bike lanes (46%), dangerous intersections and crossings (45%), cars on sidewalks (38%), insufficient lighting (32%), poor winter cleaning (26%). Nothing interferes with only 9%.

What do citizens think will help?

Among the measures that, according to respondents, would most reduce traffic jams, the leaders are new roads, interchanges and bypass routes (65%) and smart traffic lights with traffic flow management (55%). Next comes the construction of a subway (45%), stricter controls on illegal parking (44%) and high-speed public transport such as the metro or tram (40%). Dedicated lanes for public transport were chosen by 33%, increasing the number of buses – 32%, safe sidewalks and bicycle paths – 28%.

Thus, in the first place are the decisions that the city makes: roads, traffic lights, control. Measures that depend on the residents themselves – remote work and flexible schedules (24%), different start times for work and classes (21%) – are heard less frequently.

One change for the authorities

Despite the language of one change, many respondents considered traffic jams a complex problem and proposed a package of measures – for example, public transport along with dedicated lanes, interchanges along with parking policies, or car restrictions along with improved alternatives.

Metro. In 251 questionnaires, almost only “metro”, “build a metro” or a similar wording was written. The broader category of rail transport also includes trams, electric trains and the use of a rail corridor. For respondents, this is both a concrete idea and a symbol of a quality alternative to a car.

However, the broader topic is road infrastructure. 506 responses contain ideas for interchanges, extensions, bypasses, tunnels, new connections and opening dead ends. Those surveyed want alternatives to congested avenues and fewer bottlenecks.

Public transport is perceived as a daily solution. 402 answers suggest more buses, regularity, clear routes, trolleybuses and convenient transfers. Dedicated lanes are mentioned less frequently, but usually in conjunction with bus improvements and controls; this shows a request for a predictable travel speed.

Limiting demand. People propose reducing the number of personal cars, limiting entry, controlling non-resident and freight transport, introducing paid entry or “even/odd number” modes. That is, a significant portion of respondents do not consider the construction of new roads to be the only solution.

Residents associate quick measures with controllability. Answers about traffic lights, intersection control, parking, illegal stops, roadworks and closures are things that can be tested faster than capital projects. They should be checked through measurable pilots – before and after changing the driving mode.

Part of the answers – remote work, different start times for work and school, schools and services near home, development of satellite cities, limiting chaotic development. In this logic, traffic jams occur because too many essential trips are made in the same city and during the same hours.

3.7% of respondents’ answers did not contain a meaningful sentence or expressed difficulty. That is, some respondents perceive a problem, but are not ready to name a realistic measure.

Are the residents themselves ready to change?

When asked what they are personally willing to change in order to spend less time stuck in traffic jams, respondents answered quite actively: 39% are ready to walk, ride a bicycle or scooter, 35% are ready to travel at other times, 32% are ready to combine things into one trip, use public transport more often – 30%, work remotely more often – 29%. Another 16% would switch to public transport if park-and-ride stations appeared, and 8% would travel with fellow travelers. 12% are not ready to change their habits.

There is a contradiction here. More than half of the respondents name the personal car as the main reason, and the main reason for traffic jams is considered to be an excess of personal cars. At the same time, conditions influence the willingness to switch to public transport: people cite overcrowding and irregularity as the main obstacle, and willingness is higher where a convenient alternative is offered, such as parking at the entrance or pedestrian and cycling infrastructure.

Who answered

2524 people took part in the survey. Most respondents live in Oktyabrsky (34%) and Leninsky (32%) districts, 15% in Pervomaisky, 10% in Sverdlovsky, 7% live outside of Bishkek, but regularly come to the city.

Age composition: 35–44 years – 32%, 45–54 years – 32%, 55 years and older – 21%, 25–34 years – 10%, 18–24 years – 2%.

By occupation, hired employees (34%) and civil servants and public sector workers (32%) predominate; entrepreneurs, self-employed and freelancers make up 11%.

The survey is not a representative sample of city residents: participants were selected independently.

Main findings of the survey

• Traffic jams are a daily experience for 90% of respondents; 54% lose more than an hour a day in them.
• 85% of respondents rate the impact of traffic jams on life as 4–5 out of five.
• People change their schedule: 71% leave home earlier, 68% return later, 44% spend less time with family.
• Traffic jams affect the wallet (55% spend more on gasoline) and life decisions: 23% have changed jobs or housing, another 35% have thought about it.
• The demand for flexible hours and remote work (61%) is much higher than the opportunity to take advantage of it.
• Public transport is deterred not by price (2%), but by overcrowding (68%) and irregularity (54%).
• Survey participants expect new roads (65%), smart traffic lights (55%), metro (45%) and parking control (44%) from the city, but they themselves are ready to change: only 12% do not want to change their habits.

AKIpress is open to conducting public opinion polls commissioned by government, commercial and non-profit organizations.