Woo has ignored the facts. He begins his response with “NGOs such as Penang Forum”. Must we remind him that Penang Forum is a coalition of dozens of NGOs worth their salt?
He claims PTMP was built on Halcrow’s recommendations. This is not true.
He also claims that the Pan Island Link 1 (PIL 1) highway was recommended by Halcrow – which is also not true. There was no mention of the 19.5km highway anywhere in their 2013 proposal. There was a mention of the “Georgetown Outer Bypass” (GOB). It is less than 10km and the alignment is completely different.
The GOB was included by Halcrow after the Penang government signed a project to build the undersea tunnel and three paired roads in 2012. Halcrow included the GOB as a broad-brush proposal when it concluded its report in March 2013.
Whatever said and done, the Penang government has the last say in this. They can say “yes” or “no” to it and they need not follow the Halcrow report strictly.
PIL1 also cannot be said to have been inspired by GOB because it is starkly different. PIL1 is not just different in terms of length but will cross three fault lines on the Penang Hill range, and at one point, would be just 350m away from the Air Itam Dam (at its nearest point).
I’d be gobsmacked if Woo says the GOB is similar to PIL 1.
Woo also claims that there are five highways “that Halcrow recommended”. This is also wrong. As mentioned, four highways (including the undersea tunnel) were decided by the state government, not Halcrow.
The GOB is merely an extension of one of the three said paired roads. Halcrow’s recommendation for the fifth highway is a link to the North-South Expressway – in Seberang Perai.
Woo identified himself as a “member of the traffic management committee and urban planning committee of the Seberang Perai Municipal Council”.
He could have said that he is a staffer at Penang DAP’s “Communications and Research” section. At least that would show where he is coming from and also shine light on his objectivity – or lack thereof – so readers can see.
Woo cited a paragraph from Page 27 of the “Halcrow Report, The RTMPS, March 2013”, which read: “(There) is also a longer term need to provide additional vehicular crossing capacity between the mainland and Penang island, over and above that which will be provided through the opening of the Second Penang Crossing … it will be constructed as a tunnelled sea crossing.”
Missing after the three fullstops (Second Penang Crossing …) are these words: “Given the current positioning of Penang Bridge and the Second Crossing it has been concluded that such a new facility, if it is to be a new stand alone facility, should be provided at the northern end of the island, linking the northern portion of the George Town Outer Bypass to the Butterworth Outer Ring Road. At this, it has been assumed that this new facility will be needed by 2025-2030. It has additionally been assumed that …”
These words that were missed out show that there was a lot of uncertainty about the undersea tunnel expressed by Halcrow. Halcrow is making assumptions here simply because it is not their idea, to begin with.
Woo also quoted what he said was from Page 56 of the same report. “(The) most flexible way forward, in timetabling terms, would be to prioritise the George Town-Airport Line as the first scheme to be constructed …”
Try as I did, I could not find this sentence on the said Page 56.
Woo is trying to provide justification for the Light Rail Transit (LRT) as the first of the PTMP projects to be launched. However, as many people know, the LRT is not in the Halcrow Report.
His equation of RFP (Request for Proposal) with an open tender is without merit and it would be a waste of time to refute this.
Therefore, I see fit to reiterate my seven reasons why PTMP is wrong:
- The present PTMP is a gross deviation from the Halcrow Plan. (Halcrow provides for two dedicated bus lanes on the mainland, a commuter rail from Pinang Tunggal to Nibong Tebal and also additional ferries from Butterworth to George Town and from Butterworth to Gurney/Queensbay.)
- PTMP is way too expensive.
- PTMP will devastate the environment.
- PTMP is not progressive in terms of urban transport development process.
- PTMP ignores mainland Seberang Perai.
- PTMP lacks transparency.
- PTMP, through PIL, will pose a threat to the Air Itam Dam.
Eric Cheah is an FMT reader.
The views expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.