Dhanaraj (left) says Kinrara folk are against the proposed highway. — Filepic
A GROUP representing Puchong residents has denied claims by Selangor government that they support the Petaling Jaya Dispersal Link (PJD Link).
Gerakan Menentang Penilaian Impak Tebuk Atap (Gempita) spokesperson Dhanaraj Arumugam said they were disappointed by Selangor infrastructure and agriculture committee chairman Izham Hashim’s statement that Puchong residents were more in favour of the project.
On July 4, Izham had said at the Selangor State Assembly that in the previous Social Impact Assessment (SIA) report, “it was clear many people in Petaling Jaya had objected to PJD Link but Puchong residents were more in favour of the project”.
“This is not true,” said Dhanaraj.
“Many of us from Kinrara are against it too, because another highway would just mean more air and noise pollution as well as increased traffic congestion for us,” he said.
He urged the state to be more focused on providing better public transport options instead of building another highway.
PJD Link is a proposed 25.4km dual-lane elevated expressway connecting Damansara to Bandar Kinrara in Selangor.
Dhanaraj added that Gempita had sent a memorandum objecting the PJD Link on Dec 18 last year to Selangor Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Amirudin Shari.
Izham had said PJD Link, which was “discontinued” in April, might now be reconsidered, adding that it was among the seven highway projects under consideration in Selangor.
Previous news reports quoted Communications Minister Fahmi Fadzil’s statement that the project had been discontinued as the developer had failed to meet certain requirements.
Izham said the PJD Link developer had made some changes to the alignment in Petaling Jaya, based on the SIA and objections from the public.
He had also said that the new alignment would be discussed at the Selangor Economic Action Council meeting.
Damansara Jaya Resident Owners Association (DJROA) secretary Melvin David said the new PJD Link alignment would no longer pass in front of his property and that had eased some of his worries.
Petaling Jaya social activist Selva Sugumaran chided the authorities for the various flip-flops over the highway.
“The highway was cancelled just before two state elections, but after that it has made a comeback,” he said.
Tan Yew Leong, a property owner in Section 19, Petaling Jaya, said the public were still not aware of the new changes made to the alignment, as well as the toll charges.
“Highways that are built close to people’s properties worry us.
“We are not convinced that the highway will benefit us, as the noise and air pollution will start at the construction stage,” he said.
Stakeholders and Residents Against PJD Link (ScRAP) chairman David Yoong said that despite the touted “improvements”, PJD Link would not bring any benefit to Petaling Jaya.
“It offers poor connectivity to existing highways and no direct connectivity at all to LRT stations; it is toll-centric and at best is a ‘pass-through’ passageway.
“Instead of relieving traffic, the elevated decks will pool traffic at hotspots surrounding the ingress and egress ramps, and worsen vehicle flow conditions,” he highlighted.
Yoong said Petaling Jaya and Kinrara stakeholders believe their focus group discussions held between December 2022 and March last year had been ignored.
Petaling Jaya MP Lee Chean Chung, too, questioned the request for PJD Link to be put into the draft Selangor State Structure Plan 2035.
He said there was no basis to claim quantum meruit under Section 72 of the Contracts Act.
Quantum meruit is a legal term that refers to the reasonable value of services rendered.
“The best option is for the public to have (access to) transparency and visibility over what transpired in the past few years,” he said in a statement.
“I call on part of the concession agreement deemed important to evaluate the legal and financial impact to the government, to be declassified,” Lee added.
