Our love for cement and steel

THREE recent news reports highlight varying facets of this country's concrete affection for cement-and-steel structures.

First, media hype over the opening of Penang's epochal second bridge on Feb 28 this year. With 16.9km over water, this 24km curvilinear aqueduct is the longest bridge in Malaysia and in Southeast Asia as well as the first globally to use natural rubber seismic bearings that will enable the structure to withstand a severe earthquake.

Proposed by then Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad in 1995, work on the RM4.5 billion project began in November 2008 and took more than five years to complete.

Second, the minimal publicity about the sad state of another construction triumph. Possibly, one of the world's longest curvilinear suspension links, Langkawi's 125m-long Sky Bridge has been closed for almost 20 months.

Ironically, the Sky Bridge – which attracts an average of 400,000 visitors annually – will be out of bounds to visitors until late this year, which has been designated Visit Malaysia Year.

Both iconic bridges underscore one indisputable fact – Malaysian government institutions appear to give priority to building structures but are lackadaisical about their maintenance.

Panorama Langkawi Sdn Bhd (PLSB), which maintains the Sky Bridge, faced difficulties in obtaining funding from the federal government, The Star article said.

"It is not easy to get a huge allocation for the maintenance and it usually takes a year before we can get funds. We requested for the allocation immediately after we took over. It has since been approved and work is expected to start this April," said PLSB chief operating officer Mohd Ali Makkit.

He said the standard operating procedure set by the original designers and architects calls for maintenance after six years.

PLSB also had to employ the original contractors, architects and design consultants from Switzerland to do a survey, Ali said.

Work will include rectifying the Sky Bridge's main structure, replacing the steel structure at the cable car's top station and replacing the bridge's middle span with a 9m glass walkway.

This raises several questions.

News reports indicate the Sky Bridge is 10 years old. If so, maintenance was scheduled in 2009. Why was there a three-year delay in effecting this maintenance between 2009 and 2012, when the Sky Bridge was closed? Were efforts made to secure funding before 2009?

TripAdvisor, the largest global travel website, has touted the 10-year-old Langkawi Sky Bridge as the number one among the world's top five scariest bridges.

Why make the Sky Bridge even scarier for visitors by installing a glass walkway in the middle span? Since it is a suspension bridge, visitors should be able to see the view below. What is the need to install a glass walkway?

Another question relevant to all government-owned and managed buildings and structures: why aren't small sums set aside annually for probable massive repairs or upgrading needed in later years?

In condominiums, a portion of the service charge is set aside for a sinking fund which is then used to pay for replacements or major repairs to items like lifts, rubbish chutes and CCTVs.

Yet another issue: what was the rationale for PLSB to agree to hire the original contractors, architects and design consultants to do a survey? What is the special expertise needed to undertake this survey?

Third, the astonishing proposal to de-gazette 106.55ha of forest reserves in four areas – where critical water catchment areas are located – to facilitate construction of the Kuala Lumpur Outer Ring Road (KLORR).

On Feb 14, the Selangor Forestry Department placed a notice in newspapers requiring stakeholders in the Ulu Langat and Gombak districts to object to the proposed KLORR within 30 days, Isabelle Lai wrote in The Star recently.

Comprising World Wildlife Fund-Malaysia, Malaysian Nature Society, Save Our Sungai Selangor and Treat Every Environment Special, the Protection of the Selangor State Park coalition claims calls have been made – unsuccessfully – for a change in the KLORR road alignment since 2009.

Why is the right to object given only to those in Ulu Langat and Gombak? Since the proposed KLORR realignment could affect consumers in the Klang Valley who pay for water, shouldn't the approving authorities take their views into consideration?

Admittedly, the KLORR is needed to relieve traffic congestion in the Klang Valley. But should this be given priority over the need to ensure a continuing adequate water supply in the future?

With thousands of households and businesses severely impacted by water rationing in Kuala Lumpur and Selangor, why are the approving authorities maintaining their eloquent silence about the KLORR's proposed alignment?

If protests since 2009 against the KLORR's alignment have been futile, what can Malaysians do to curb approving authorities' continuing steely attachment to construction projects at the expense of taxpayers' future well-being?

By Tan Siok Choo, The Sun