Get public feedback on tunnel, Penang told

A transport expert calls for publication of the feasibility report on the undersea tunnel project.

The Penang undersea tunnel project will be more expensive to build and maintain than a bridge, says a transport expert.

PETALING JAYA: A transport consultant has urged the Penang government to publicise the feasibility report for its undersea tunnel project to enable feedback from experts.

The feasibility study will be completed this September or October, according to a recent statement from Penang Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow.

Goh Bok Yen, a 30-year veteran in transport consultation, noted that the government had promised to be transparent with mega projects. “So let’s be transparent with this one,” he said of the proposed third link between Penang island and the mainland.

Early last month, the state government said the feasibility study on the project, together with the detailed design, would cost RM96.2 million.

Goh told FMT feedback from the public, particularly from experts, would help the government determine if it would be better to build a bridge than to dig a tunnel.

He said the published report must make reference to a study comparing the pros and cons of building an undersea tunnel instead of a bridge as well as determine the optimal time for the development of a third link.

“If you build it too soon, you may not get returns as soon as you expect, and if you wait too long it will mean a burden on the people. So the question is when it should be built. In five years? Ten years?”

But he said the bigger question was whether the tunnel was really needed.

He noted that undersea tunnels around the world, such as the Cross-Harbour Tunnel in Hong Kong and the one connecting England and France, were built under navigation channels with heavy maritime traffic.

This was not so with the proposed location for the Penang tunnel, he added. “Furthermore, the design of a bridge can be altered to accommodate ships.”

He noted that an undersea tunnel would be more expensive to build than a bridge and costlier to maintain and operate.

“With a bridge, you need lighting only at night,” he said. “And it already has natural ventilation. This also makes it more environmentally friendly as you are using fewer resources.

“In the event of an accident, such as a car catching fire, a bridge would be easier for emergency services to access if you need boats or helicopters.”

He also said it would be easier to carry out repairs or electrical works on a bridge and there would be room to widen the structure if needed.

“At this juncture, it’s hard to feel convinced about the need for a tunnel, especially in the absence of comprehensive and comparative studies on the project,” he said.

The RM6.3 billion contract for a traffic improvement project in Penang, including the tunnel, was awarded to a consortium in 2013.

Recently, Chow said his administration was ready to study a proposal for a bridge as an alternative to the tunnel. - FMT