Penang project"s crucial issues

GEORGE TOWN: A public forum by property developer Eastern and Oriental (EO) Bhd over the last weekend gave Penang residents a look into the future of the island.

The now turtle-shaped Penang island, covering 285 sq km, will soon have its silhouette altered when EO commences with the second phase of its master-planned Seri Tanjung Pinang (STP) development.

A new kidney-shaped island measuring 307ha will greet islanders on the sea in front of the Straits Quay retail marina, which is part of STP’s first phase in Tanjung Tokong.

Penang’s famous seafront promenade — Gurney Drive — will be reclaimed by 53ha and this will push the island’s coast out by 80m to 100m.

EO has been tasked by the state government with carrying out this reclamation at its own cost and cede the land over to the state.

The Penang government, which has a 21.2 per cent share in Tanjung Pinang Development Sdn Bhd, which is involved in the STP development and reclamation of the coast of Tanjung Tokong, is said to be mulling options on what it intends to do with its increased land bank, courtesy of the developer.

Apart from the more than 20ha reclaimed from Gurney Drive which is being earmarked as government reserve land, EO is also expected to hand over a further 31ha of land from the reclamation, of which artists’ renderings have shown that 8ha is meant for an outer ring road.

Two bridges would also be built to the reclaimed island, one from Straits Quay and the other from Gurney Drive, the drawings revealed.

EO subsidiary Tanjung Pinang Development had in 1992 won the right to reclaim and develop 396ha in Tanjong Tokong, and has reclaimed some 97ha in Phase 1, which has seen the emergence of a millionaires’ enclave of residential homes, a commercial block and marina.

In April last year, EO announced that it had received approval-in-principle to reclaim the balance concession area.

Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng had told a financial daily that the land obtained from EO would be used as a “bargaining chip” to get companies to build highways and a tunnel at no cost to the state government.

This forms an integral part of Lim’s earlier plan to build RM5 billion to RM8 billion worth of infrastructure to cope with the expected rise in traffic volume and traffic congestion, especially on the island.

While research houses are impressed by the proceedings of yesterday’s forum, calling EO’s conceptual masterplan of STP and its settlement formula with the Penang government “impressive”, some aspects remain hazy and beg answers.

One, would the reclamation of the strip of land fronting Gurney Drive on the original drawings for Seri Tanjung Pinang, deprive Penang residents and visitors their daily exercise spot and an iconic point to enjoy the city’s skyline?

Two, what kind of mechanism has been worked out between the state and EO on the status of the reclaimed land on STP once commercial and residential properties are completed?

In Phase 1, EO was allowed freehold status for its high-end properties, excluding its retail and affordable housing units as part of a deal to “rescue” the project, which has a meandering past.

The project’s history can be traced back to 1984, when it started off as a joint venture between Permaijana Ribu (M) Sdn Bhd (owned by UEM Bhd, Penang Bumiputera Foundation and Magma Bhd) and Koperasi Gabungan Negeri Pulau Pinang and Penang Development Corporation.

Today, with the state holding more than a 20 per cent stake in the company, the question that needs to be asked is the kind of land the new properties on STP will be sited as this will have ramifications on the pricing of the properties.

Thirdly, the issue of who will bail out the project if EO should find it no longer viable was not given a satisfactory answer during the forum.

Likewise, who will be the authority responsible in ensuring the safety of the project, given its exposure to natural disasters, like tsunamis, and environmental degradation?

A feeble attempt was made by a panel member at the forum in absolving the Department of Environment of its role in playing watchdog over the project by stating that the agency was not able to monitor the job and that a private company should be hired (at EO’s expense).

Many of those present were uneasy, given recent alleged failures by the authorities in safeguarding Penang’s environment.

For a project as massive as STP, it is imperative that an independent party steps in at the onset to determine issues, such as the stability of the land after it is reclaimed, before the local council gives its nod for the development and building plans and physical works to commence.

It may be time for the Federal Government to make the unprecedented move to decide who takes the role to sign-off on the project and who has the technical competence — whether the Public Works Department or Drainage and Irrigation Department, or if a new urban land authority, such as one formed in Singapore to oversee projects involving reclaimed land, is set up.

While EO has gathered a pool of top-notch professionals and consultants with sterling reputations globally to guide it with the project, the government’s responsibility in seeing to public interest should not be abdicated for a project of this proportion.

EO’s plan to place Penang on the world map of waterfront cities must move in tandem with a close watch by the government on whether works carried out comply with international engineering standards, and take into consideration public safety and interest.

An artist’s impression of the second phase of Eastern and Oriental Bhd’s Seri Tanjung Pinang development.

Penang project"s crucial issues