daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Asian Forums > Asian Skyscraper Forums > South East Asia > Singapore Skyscraper Forum > The Urban Fabric > Transport / Infrastructure



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old January 3rd, 2016, 04:40 AM   #581
y2koh
Moderator
 
y2koh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,261
Likes (Received): 290

I don't see any issue with deep tunnelling across the nature reserve. Any tunnel below the depth of 40m below the ground level would have almost zero impact on the soil, and if managed properly, even ground water conditions will not be affected at all. With forward probing technology integrated with tunnelling, measures can be taken to reduce problems and impact when encountering any adverse undergound soil and rock conditions, without requiring any SI works on the ground level at all.

An elevated line will have a lot more impact on the environment, temporary roads have to be built to move heavy machinery to the construction site of the columns. Beams and bridge sections have to lifted along the entire stretch, requiring trees to be cleared. Huge foundations required for the bridge columns will also affect the soil and ground water conditions. Trees that may grow up to 60m, above the level of the bridge deck will have to be trimmed or even cut down to ensure operational safety.

If a cross island line is deemed to be critical, I do not see costs as a main consideration. Unless the system can allow trains to travel at up to twice the speed (140km/h) skirting along the edge of the CCNR, without placing any stations in between, and prove that it can be cheaper and have less environmental and real estate impact, cutting through the CCNR underground is the obvious way to go. For comparison sake, the 7km South Island line which includes a deep tunnelling section, costs HKD15.2billion (SGD2.5billion).
__________________

mcarling liked this post

Last edited by y2koh; January 3rd, 2016 at 04:55 AM.
y2koh no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old January 3rd, 2016, 04:37 PM   #582
mtrinjani
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 77
Likes (Received): 33

Quote:
Originally Posted by pioneerboy View Post
Actually, for the section at Nature Reserve, I think it is better for the line to be elevated.

This is because elevated viaducts, as compared to underground tunnels, has less impact on the soil.

Underground tunnels, when the tunnel-boring machine bores through the soil, break the roots of the plants above... this is especially when the line is near the MacRitchie Reservoir.

Elevated viaducts only use the soil a little, for the pillars to go inside. Even if they excavate deep deep to plant the pillars firmly to the ground, the amount of soil they use in total could be less than the amount of soil they use if they were to bore underground.

If we have elevated viaducts running through the Nature Reserve, we could build walls beside and above the viaducts, to prevent collision with animals...

If the government has the money (around S$5.9 billion), we could use suspension bridge, to minimize the use of soil even further... it is only up to 1.6 kilometers across the Nature Reserve... it may be possible to plant pillars at the two ends at the golf courses, and build a suspension bridge across the nature reserve, without using the soil at the Nature Reserve at all... we could even build a bridge that goes over the topmost layer, since the trees are not that tall anyway...



I do not know how much money it costs to bore tunnels...

It may be better, financially and environmentally, to let the line run along the boundary of the Nature Reserve, outside the Nature Reserve.



The line can skip DTL King Albert Park station, for a smoother curve...

I do not know.

I don't you where you got that idea from :L that'd be the opposite of preserving the rainforest lol. It'd send all the environmentalists into a tizzy and they'd probably commit suicide in protest outside LTA's office.
A train line physically cutting through the thick of the forest would require immense destruction of the flora and fauna, and the suspension bridge idea wouldn't work here because there's no way the government or the public will be able to justify building a humongously expensive suspension bridge in the middle of nowhere just to serve one MRT line.

Underground is the way to go. Tunnel deep enough, like mine into the bedrock or something so that the topsoil won't be affected and the rainforest will just continue to tick as it always does.
__________________

luacstjh98, mcarling liked this post
mtrinjani no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 5th, 2016, 04:15 PM   #583
ddes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 6,823
Likes (Received): 541

I wish they would include a vehicular road as a shortcut to the west.
ddes no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 5th, 2016, 04:24 PM   #584
oahiyeel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 460
Likes (Received): 8

Hmmm. Could they possibly deep tunnel a road at the same time?
oahiyeel no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 5th, 2016, 04:27 PM   #585
luacstjh98
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 371
Likes (Received): 48

Theoretically they could have a single-bore tunnel - two CRL tracks on the lower level and a roadway above - but don't we already have the ORRS for that? And then the talk of realigning Lornie Road?
__________________
Doors closing. Please stand clear of all train doors.

I have a bad habit of retroactively editing my posts without prior warning.
luacstjh98 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 5th, 2016, 06:03 PM   #586
mtrinjani
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 77
Likes (Received): 33

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddes View Post
I wish they would include a vehicular road as a shortcut to the west.
then they would have flattened Bukit Brown for nothing
__________________

y2koh liked this post
mtrinjani no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2016, 08:12 PM   #587
raxip
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 67
Likes (Received): 20



Drove along Punggol Central a few days ago and saw SI rigs along these locations. Most probably they are for the CRL as I am not sure what other infrastructure will run under that road.
raxip no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 30th, 2016, 06:26 AM   #588
mcarling
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 4,484
Likes (Received): 405

Quote:
Originally Posted by luacstjh98 View Post
Theoretically they could have a single-bore tunnel - two CRL tracks on the lower level and a roadway above
The bore diameter to put a roadway above the CRL would require one of the largest TBMs ever built. Allowing vehicles with internal combustion engines into the tunnel would make the ventilation issues much more complex and would increase the pressure to ventilate the tunnel via the nature preserve, which should be avoided. Of course, by the time it would open in 2030, maybe all vehicles on Singapore's roads will be electric.
mcarling no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 5th, 2016, 12:09 PM   #589
luacstjh98
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 371
Likes (Received): 48

Environmental impact studies for CRL through CCNR gazetted:

http://www.todayonline.com/singapore...inglepage=true
__________________
Doors closing. Please stand clear of all train doors.

I have a bad habit of retroactively editing my posts without prior warning.
luacstjh98 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 5th, 2016, 12:30 PM   #590
Mith252
Proud to be Malay-Chinese
 
Mith252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Singapore
Posts: 14,917
Likes (Received): 1521

News from CNA about the same thing. You can read the full article in the source link below.

Quote:
LTA to minimise environmental impact of Cross Island Line site investigation works
By Melissa Zhu and Olivia Siong, Channel NewsAsia
Posted 05 Feb 2016 18:21


The Land Transport Authority will reduce the number of boreholes it plans to dig from the original 72 to 16, following the first phase of an Environmental Impact Assessment and feedback from nature groups.

source: CNA
__________________
MAN CITY FAN SINCE 1999!!
THANKS PELLEGRINI!! WELCOME GURDIOLA
Mith252 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 6th, 2016, 09:03 AM   #591
CHT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 886
Likes (Received): 69

There are several new SI rig spotted around Mas Kunning area in Clementi. One is right along AYE, and the other along West Coast Road. If this is related to CRL, then perhaps CRL coming from Clementi Ave 4 could continue along Ave 3, before turning south at the Clementi Sport Hall, cutting cross AYE and then continue westward along West Coast Road. Will there be sufficient turning radius to execute a "U=turn"
CHT no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2016, 12:25 AM   #592
Mith252
Proud to be Malay-Chinese
 
Mith252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Singapore
Posts: 14,917
Likes (Received): 1521

News from TODAY. You can read the full article in the source link below.

Quote:
Impact of Cross Island work on MacRitchie significant without LTA mitigation measures
BY NEO CHAI CHIN
chaichin@mediacorp.com.sg
PUBLISHED: 4:20 AM, FEBRUARY 11, 2016
UPDATED: 5:24 AM, FEBRUARY 11, 2016


The impact on MacRitchie fauna — like the lesser mousedeer and the slow loris — from site investigation work for the future Cross Island MRT Line would be “large” if mitigation measures were not adopted following a report commissioned by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) now open for public inspection.

source: TODAY
__________________
MAN CITY FAN SINCE 1999!!
THANKS PELLEGRINI!! WELCOME GURDIOLA
Mith252 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2016, 07:48 AM   #593
luacstjh98
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 371
Likes (Received): 48

http://www.todayonline.com/voices/ma...versible-error

"Take the Lornie Road route," says a member of the public.
__________________
Doors closing. Please stand clear of all train doors.

I have a bad habit of retroactively editing my posts without prior warning.
luacstjh98 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2016, 09:11 AM   #594
y2koh
Moderator
 
y2koh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,261
Likes (Received): 290

The same argument may apply for the Lornie Route. That's why LTA has embarked on the exercise to conduct SI for both routes. The Lornie route may in fact affect the ground water conditions more than the CCNR route. In short, let the experts do their job and have a proper survey of the geotechnical conditions before making the call yourselves.
y2koh no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2016, 11:39 PM   #595
Mith252
Proud to be Malay-Chinese
 
Mith252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Singapore
Posts: 14,917
Likes (Received): 1521

News from CNA. You can read the full article in the source link below.

Quote:
LTA speaking to those likely to be affected by Cross Island Line’s route
By Yeo Kai Ting
Posted 18 Feb 2016 23:09
Updated 18 Feb 2016 23:15


Authorities say they will consider factors such as land use, transport links, and how it will affect residents and businesses before making any decision.

source: CNA
__________________
MAN CITY FAN SINCE 1999!!
THANKS PELLEGRINI!! WELCOME GURDIOLA
Mith252 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 19th, 2016, 10:14 AM   #596
horlick97
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 207
Likes (Received): 7

There is no obvious solution.

I'd prefer not to disturb the nature reserve at all, even below tunnelling below ground.

Of course, you can route it along the new lornie road alignment. But, you will have tow issues: (a) duplicating thomson line from along thompson road, say about three stations. (b). the CRL will be running additional distances but will you open up stations along the duplicated sections? Cost is one thing. Space requirement for stations is another. If this section is just a diversion without stations, then this will be a waste. If you opens up stations, then there will be the issue of cost, land and impact on the built environment.

Let me moot another controversial idea. The CRL from the east should reach AMK and then connect to Mayflower or Sin Ming. Passengers from the east can change to Thompson line to reach Stevens. They can then change to DTL to reach Beauty World. From Beauty World, the remaining part of CRL can continue the alignment of Clement Road towards south west.

Of course, with this, the CRL will not be CRL anymore. Basically, it will be two:
- Pasir Ris >>>> Hougang >>> Mayflower/Sin Ming.
- Beauty World >>>> Clementi Road >>>> .....

This will involve three changes for those travelling all the way from the east to west coast. But, I'd submit that on the whole, this will provide the optimal solution within the constraints:
1. Nature reserve will not be affected.
2. Savings in cost, landuse. Minimise impact on the built environment in not having to duplicate the stretch Thomson Road.
3. Addition catchment of passenges from thomson line to connect them either eastward or westward.
4. Three changes should be acceptable over such a long distance. Not usual in Tokyo, London.
horlick97 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 19th, 2016, 11:50 AM   #597
luacstjh98
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 371
Likes (Received): 48

This was raised before - it's not going to happen.

There is a very high possibility that CRL will provide express services, like the LU Metropolitan Line, or the NYC Subway (I can think of the 2, 3, 4 and 5 trains offhand).

Making the most of the express service will require that the line literally be a "cross island" line - and your proposal to break the line into two will not help. I might just as well scrap Hougang-Sin Ming and just build the North Coast Line direct to Sembawang/Republic Poly. Beauty World-Clementi-onwards can be just another branch of the JRL.

If CRL duplicates TEL, perhaps we can consider improving the transfer experience (here I call for cross-platform interchanges again!). This has happened before (Prince Edward-Yau Ma Tei, the Keihin-Tohoku Line between Shinagawa and Tabata). Alternatively, one or two of the "shared" stations can be transferred to the CRL, with the TEL non-stopping through those stations.

If you want to know more about the discussion on why CRL should NOT be split, I refer you to page 26 of this thread (or post numbers 501 to 513, if you show more posts per page)
__________________
Doors closing. Please stand clear of all train doors.

I have a bad habit of retroactively editing my posts without prior warning.

Last edited by luacstjh98; February 19th, 2016 at 11:59 AM.
luacstjh98 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 19th, 2016, 12:17 PM   #598
3wood
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 45
Likes (Received): 1

If CRL is to cut through the natural reserve along the existing foot paths and Rifle Range Road, then the SI will not affect any vegetation at all
3wood no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2016, 04:55 AM   #599
Mith252
Proud to be Malay-Chinese
 
Mith252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Singapore
Posts: 14,917
Likes (Received): 1521

News from CNA. You can read the full article in the source link below.

Quote:
LTA releases online environmental impact assessment report on Cross Island MRT line
By Neo Chai Chin, TODAY
Posted 20 Feb 2016 07:47
Updated 20 Feb 2016 08:41


TODAY reports: Close to 100 people also braved the rain and turned up for a talk on the environmental impact of the Cross Island Line on the Central Catchment Nature Reserve held at the office of the Nature Society (Singapore) in Geylang.

source: CNA
__________________
MAN CITY FAN SINCE 1999!!
THANKS PELLEGRINI!! WELCOME GURDIOLA
Mith252 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2016, 08:41 AM   #600
y2koh
Moderator
 
y2koh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,261
Likes (Received): 290

Here's the possible station locations based on an ARUP plan done last year for the feasibility study.


CRL-Ctr by y2koh, on Flickr
y2koh no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu