ART suitable for Kuching, but for Penang?
Kuching will soon have their autonomous rail rapid transit (ART), as announced by Sarawak Chief Minister Datuk Patinggi Abang Johari Tun Openg.
ART is a new bus system that is designed like a tram. The advantage of ART compared to conventional tram is that it doesn’t require extensive groundwork to build its track.
As Penang is currently on its way to construct Light Rail Transit (LRT), there are NGOs lobbying for the ART, Bus Rapid Transit, and conventional tram.
The main difference between the NGOs’ suggestion and the State Government’s is whether to build the transport system on the ground or on elevated tracks.
The NGOs want the system on the ground, regardless if it’s ART, BRT, or tram. Their main rationale is that it is cheaper.
The basis for the NGOs’ claim is the Halcrow Report, prepared by third-party consultants in 2013 as a guide for Penang’s transport plan.
But they are wrong for two reasons.
First, the estimated cost stated in Halcrow Report that the NGOs referred to is unverified and incomplete.
Halcrow’s estimate doesn’t even include the cost for land acquisition, which can go up to the billions, depending on the roads and properties to be acquired.
Here is Halcrow’s disclaimer which the NGOs do not show to the public (emphasis added):
“It should be noted that all infrastructure provision costs exclude costs associated with land acquisition. It should also be noted that these cost estimates have been produced for the sole purpose of gaining a high-level understanding of the overall costs that are likely to be associated with implementing the 'Recommended Transport Master Plan Strategy'. As such, they are based on the adoption of a number of assumptions that are yet to be verified through the undertaking of more detailed feasibility studies.”
(Halcrow's report: The 'Recommended Transport Master Plan Strategy', March 2013, page 39)
Halcrow made it clear that their estimation was unverified and incomplete.
To be sure, the ART is not listed in Halcrow Report. Nonetheless, the unverified costing listed in Halcrow for other on-ground transport system has been misused by NGOs.
The second reason why the NGOs are wrong is that they have failed again and again to take note the important qualification stated in Halcrow Report about transport system that is built on ground in Penang.
Halcrow explicitly warned that on-ground system will add more traffic problems to the existing roads (emphasis added):
“On Penang Island, particularly within George Town and on the approaches to George Town, many of the existing roads are fronted by established development and are already catering for a wide mix of transport uses. The introduction of an extensive Tram and Bus Rapid Transit system, as proposed under the 'Recommended Transport Master Plan Strategy', with [sic] further add to these problems.”
(Halcrow's Report: The Highway Improvement Plan, May 2013, page 7)
As stated in Halcrow, transport system that is built on ground such as tram or bus rapid transit will cause more problems to the present built environment in Penang.
If Penang wants to build on-ground system, many existing buildings and structures will need to be demolished to construct new roads for public transport.
That’s what will happen in Kuching – new roads will be built for ART.
In Sarawak Chief Minister’s announcement, he has remarked that from next year onwards, they will construct new roads as dedicated lanes for ART.
Sarawak as the largest state in Malaysia has more unused and underused land to build new roads for ART, but not so for Penang, the second smallest state.
Land acquisition cost in Sarawak may be very different from Penang too. For any State Government to acquire premium land with standing building will cost a lot.
The ART works for Sarawak but might not work for Penang.
ART is a new bus system that is designed like a tram. The advantage of ART compared to conventional tram is that it doesn’t require extensive groundwork to build its track.
As Penang is currently on its way to construct Light Rail Transit (LRT), there are NGOs lobbying for the ART, Bus Rapid Transit, and conventional tram.
The main difference between the NGOs’ suggestion and the State Government’s is whether to build the transport system on the ground or on elevated tracks.
The NGOs want the system on the ground, regardless if it’s ART, BRT, or tram. Their main rationale is that it is cheaper.
The basis for the NGOs’ claim is the Halcrow Report, prepared by third-party consultants in 2013 as a guide for Penang’s transport plan.
But they are wrong for two reasons.
First, the estimated cost stated in Halcrow Report that the NGOs referred to is unverified and incomplete.
Halcrow’s estimate doesn’t even include the cost for land acquisition, which can go up to the billions, depending on the roads and properties to be acquired.
Here is Halcrow’s disclaimer which the NGOs do not show to the public (emphasis added):
“It should be noted that all infrastructure provision costs exclude costs associated with land acquisition. It should also be noted that these cost estimates have been produced for the sole purpose of gaining a high-level understanding of the overall costs that are likely to be associated with implementing the 'Recommended Transport Master Plan Strategy'. As such, they are based on the adoption of a number of assumptions that are yet to be verified through the undertaking of more detailed feasibility studies.”
(Halcrow's report: The 'Recommended Transport Master Plan Strategy', March 2013, page 39)
Halcrow made it clear that their estimation was unverified and incomplete.
To be sure, the ART is not listed in Halcrow Report. Nonetheless, the unverified costing listed in Halcrow for other on-ground transport system has been misused by NGOs.
The second reason why the NGOs are wrong is that they have failed again and again to take note the important qualification stated in Halcrow Report about transport system that is built on ground in Penang.
Halcrow explicitly warned that on-ground system will add more traffic problems to the existing roads (emphasis added):
“On Penang Island, particularly within George Town and on the approaches to George Town, many of the existing roads are fronted by established development and are already catering for a wide mix of transport uses. The introduction of an extensive Tram and Bus Rapid Transit system, as proposed under the 'Recommended Transport Master Plan Strategy', with [sic] further add to these problems.”
(Halcrow's Report: The Highway Improvement Plan, May 2013, page 7)
As stated in Halcrow, transport system that is built on ground such as tram or bus rapid transit will cause more problems to the present built environment in Penang.
If Penang wants to build on-ground system, many existing buildings and structures will need to be demolished to construct new roads for public transport.
That’s what will happen in Kuching – new roads will be built for ART.
In Sarawak Chief Minister’s announcement, he has remarked that from next year onwards, they will construct new roads as dedicated lanes for ART.
Sarawak as the largest state in Malaysia has more unused and underused land to build new roads for ART, but not so for Penang, the second smallest state.
Land acquisition cost in Sarawak may be very different from Penang too. For any State Government to acquire premium land with standing building will cost a lot.
The ART works for Sarawak but might not work for Penang.
