MRT Cross Island Line

[y2koh]

Probably all the discrepancies are made deliberately to confuse speculators, so as far as actual alignments, there is no verdict yet.

[oahiyeel]

I wouldn't say that the LTA's alignment is not accurate thou, except maybe for JRL which looks really off.
It seems LTA deliberately planned for CRL to interchange at KAP. Also, LTA's route seem to avoid Jurong Hill by going north of it, with a potential interchange at JBP entrance, while the URA's map seem to indicate a preference of the route going south of the hill.
Also, LTA's map showed the CRL ending approximately at the Gul Circle station. Maybe the stacked station can accommodate the CRL, and the Tuas South Extension now becomes part of the CRL.
Now that doesn't sound too far-fetched does it?
Plans do change don't they? It all depends on the stakeholders involved to come to an agreement. And surely subjected to physical constrains

[Seloloving]

That's a very likely possibility. I have long wondered why LTA chose to build an enormous Gul Circle cross platform interchange to facilitate a link to Tuas South. Maybe Tuas South is part of CRL after all.

Of course that would mean CRL will have to find space to go underground after Gul Circle. Floorplans of Gul Circle also indicate that all platforms are 6-car.

As for JRL, I am convinced it's just the same old plans since 2001 with a few minor tweaks, so I wouldn't bother about it. LTA is probably not too serious about it and added it in so they can boast about announcing 2 new lines. More on JRL on JRL's thread.

[y2koh]

Yes plans change, and I'm prepared to see that it gets changed again. If you look at some of the drawings for TSL, you will find that all the drawings done from the announcement in 2007 to the early part of 2011, had the line running along Stevens and Scotts Rd all the way from Stevens Stn to Great World, somehow around the time LTA called for tender for design consultancy in early 2011, they had changed the alignment significantly. In fact, the alignment of ERL on all the maps we have seen so far could not explain the large number of houses the tunnels are supposed to run under as stated in the docs uploaded by zeywery.

As for terminating the CRL at Gul Curcle as a cross platform, the only way I see it can work is to run the line elevated along the AYE before turning at the PIE interchange to meet TWE, looking at LTA's map, it seems not to be doing so, in fact if we are to take the alignment that seriously, the line will have to be underground, requiring it to cross below several industrial developments just before ending at Gul Circle, which means the CRL Gul Circle station will have to be underground in this case. Otherwise, a couple of industrial plots will have to be acquired for the line to be elevated, then do a 200m radius sharp turn into Gul Circle station, both options would have been better resolved by running it on either AYE (terminate at Gul Circle) or Jalan Buroh/Pioneer Rd (terminate at Tuas Crescent) instead.

[CHT]

Notice some SI activities along west coast highway at the area which I mark with red cross. i think LTA might be planning to build a flyover across the this junction.

I wonder how will this affect future plan to connect west coast station to CCL.

[Mith252]

News from 90 cents.


https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.n...31592329_o.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.n...81223031_o.jpg

source: The Straits Times

[ddes]

I thought the reference to New York's 2nd Ave subway line and Paris' Arc Express was inappropriate on ST.

[Aranho]

Originally Posted by Mith252

News from 90 cents.

I always love this from you, Mith

Originally Posted by ddes

I thought the reference to New York's 2nd Ave subway line and Paris' Arc Express was inappropriate on ST.

It seems very random when ST wrote these. Other than that, the graphics itself may be interesting to those who are not familiar with the duration of MRT projects.

[deskoh91]

The wordsmiths of a nation building press got to do their job so their paymasters will bestow upon them their monthly bread. Thanks mith.

[samuel_1991]

Originally Posted by ddes

I thought the reference to New York's 2nd Ave subway line and Paris' Arc Express was inappropriate on ST.

Why not? Elaborate plz.

[eX.A.K.R.]

New York City Subway's Second Avenue Line was delayed for nearly a century for a large number of reasons, mostly having to do with budget cutbacks and red tape.

They actually started construction around the 1970's, but the oil crisis back then put a stop to it. 1980's and 1990's were spent rehabilitating the long-neglected, quickly degrading system. For the 1930's and 1940's, it was thanks to the Great Depression and World War II putting a hold on construction for that subway line.

http://secondavenuesagas.com/second-ave-subway-history/

[ddes]

Right, and the Grand Paris Express is in fact, a reconciliation between the Paris region's white paper and former president Sarkozy's wish to add 130km of new metro lines. Actual studies began in the early 2000s, and will begin construction next year. However, with the 60km route costing up to 10 billion Euros, more than half of the transport budget for the capital region, there's some debate if it's indeed worth to build what is essentially a circle line for the outer suburbs, especially when many existing lines are calling out for renewal (either the transition to full automation, steel rail to tire-based stock, and/or the refurbishment of what's really the 2nd oldest system in the world).

The point is these 2 examples are delayed for various reasons, particularly financial priorities, rather than in the concept phase, which is what ST was trying to infer by bringing New York and Paris.

Overall, it'd be interesting to see what LTA ultimately rolls out for the Cross Island Line - the decisions on route and particularly capacity will haunt or elevate their status. It was a daring undertaking, when the government took that bold step to build our first two lines (in contrast, KL went straightforward with 3-car lines that went nowhere basically), and it paid off, with little problem until nearly 25 years after.

[zoneoutz]

Letters to the Straits Times forum about the CRL route and its impact on the Nature Reserve:

http://www.straitstimes.com/premium/...ref_map=%5B%5D

http://www.straitstimes.com/premium/...ref_map=%5B%5D

[ddes]

I don't want to go off topic here, but I think either the government or us speculated a HDB estate taking up the space at the current Grandstand. Question: why might a HDB estate be built here in the first place, in the middle of very high income private property?

[samuel_1991]

Originally Posted by ddes

I don't want to go off topic here, but I think either the government or us speculated a HDB estate taking up the space at the current Grandstand. Question: why might a HDB estate be built here in the first place, in the middle of very high income private property?

I remembered there was a dispute for the existing tenants in the Turf City due to the authorities are not giving extension / renew land lease to it.

It was mentioned by the authorities / govt that the area will be re-developed for residential use and they never say is HDB in the first place.

It was shown on the TV (Moneyweek in Chinese channel, if I am not wrong) that people in the property /real estate industry are speculating the area to be developed into a low density residential area. Which means, it can be a new condos, villas or whatever targeted for high end market one.

HDB is almost certain out of question, before they face the "Serangoon Garden" issue (Of allowing workers dormitory in the middle of a private estate), as in the area's value will drop considerably and affect their land price, the prestige feel of living there etc. more than safety concerns.

And probably commoners who cannot own a car also don't want to stay there due to the inaccessibility too.

[y2koh]

There will definitely be redevelopment in the area, what kind we do not know yet. But I think it may be mid density housing, judging that there will be MRT stations in the vicinity. HDB housing is unlikely, or I should rather say affordable housing is out of the question. Any residential developments in this area however, will ultimately take advantage of the MRT stations, so I doubt it will all be low rise housing. My speculation is that it will be developed between 2025-2035.

[Mith252]

A letter in TODAY from LTA regarding the concerns.


https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.n...63587624_n.jpg

source: TODAY

[Mith252]

News from TODAY.


https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.n...54762751_n.jpg

source: TODAY