By Lim Mah Hui and Ahmad Hilmy Abdul Hamid
On May 16, the vice-president of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport, Rosli Khan, called for a review of mega projects such as the East Coast Rail Link, KL-Singapore High Speed Rail and the Penang Tunnel that do not reflect a high level of economic benefits.
On the Penang Tunnel, he said, it “will induce more car travel and will lead to massive traffic gridlocks on Penang Island, a very damaging environmental impact to such a liveable heritage city”.
The Penang Transport Master Plan (PTMP) should be highlighted to the public for two reasons.
First, it is the largest project the state plans to undertake, estimated at RM46 billion. Hence it must be closely scrutinised. Does Penang need such mega projects? Is it the best use of public funds? Is it financially sound?
Second, the former and present chief ministers of Penang have made this a top priority and touted it as a plan to deliver Penang people from traffic congestion woes. Will it solve Penang’s traffic congestion? Are there better alternatives?
This is the first in a series of six articles on why the PTMP should be relooked and reviewed.
PTMP is too car-centric
The present proposed PTMP is too car-centric and focused on mega infrastructure projects, especially building highways and a tunnel are unlikely to solve the mobility and transport problems in Penang.
Even some public transport projects such as the proposed LRT from George Town to the airport are questionable in terms of financial sustainability. The state should consider other more sustainable forms of transportation that are less costly and more environmentally-friendly.
This first article will provide a brief history of the PTMP. The second will analyse how the SRS Consortium’s PTMP deviates from the officially adopted Halcrow PTMP.
The third will question whether the Request for Proposal process used by the state is an open tender system.
The fourth article will ask whether the tunnel is necessary or able to solve Penang’s traffic woes.
The fifth will examine whether the proposed LRT project is financially sustainable. The final article will address the way forward.
It must be made clear from the start that civil society does not question the need for a transport master plan for Penang. On the contrary, members of civil society initiated and recommended the idea to the newly-elected Pakatan government in 2008.
In January 2009, the state government established the Penang Transport Council (PTC), made up of about a dozen professionals from civil society, of which Dr Lim Mah Hui was a member.
The PTC, among many other things, worked on the terms of reference to engage a transport consultant to produce a comprehensive transport master plan.
In May 2011, Halcrow, a consultancy specialised in the provision of planning, design and management services for infrastructure development, was appointed to deliver a RM3.2 million study (in partnership with AJC Planning Consultants and Singapore cruise consultants) to provide a transport plan to cover a period of 20 years (2010-2030).
A major objective of the plan is to move public modal share of transport from a low 5% to 40% by 2030.
Halcrow began its study in July 2011 and completed it at the end of 2012. In this 18-month period, it undertook a series of extensive surveys on travel patterns and held a series of meetings and workshops with representatives from government bodies as well as members of the public to get their input.
One of the most important findings was that only 7% of travel is made across the channel between Penang island and the mainland during peak morning hours.
Results of public consultation by Halcrow also showed overwhelming support to make better use of the state’s existing transport systems and to adopt a balanced approach —that is a combination of improving public transport, building some new highways and introducing policy-based measures to reduce growth in private vehicle usage — to solve the state’s transportation problems.
Prior to its final acceptance by the state, the consultants were pressured into including the tunnel and three highway projects into the report. This was despite the earlier mentioned findings and the consultants’ view that the tunnel may not be needed until 2030.
The Halcrow report was completed in December 2012 and officially adopted by the Penang state government in March 2013 as the blueprint for implementation (referred to from here on as the Halcrow PTMP 2013-2030) at an estimated cost of RM27 billion.
The next article shall examine how the later version of the PTMP proposed by the SRS Consortium deviated from the official Halcrow PTMP.
Lim Mah Hui is a former professor, international banker and Penang island city councillor. Ahmad Hilmy Abdul Hamid is associate professor, USM (technology cluster-transport system).
The views expressed by the writers do not reflect those of FMT.