Can the whole stretch be built by boring?There are other ways of conducting soil investigation, such as ground penetrating radar. I wouldn't go so extreme as to say that there should be something that can be damaged, but rather areas that can be disturbed in some sense. I think we can expect the EIA to include recommendations on the type of system to use, and the extend of intrusion into the CCNR. The engineering aspect of the project may have to give and take as well, in terms of having slightly less reliable data, or higher costs involved to acquire state of the art equipment to conduct the SI non-instrusively.
Agreed. Deep tunneling has very minimal im apace on the surface if managed well. We may concern ourselves on the boundaries of the CCNR too much, but the fringes of the CCNR is just as important too. The danger with running a longer route along the fringe is that escape shafts and ventilation buildings have to be built along the route, which means more excavations and permanent structures. The construction process itself will have far reaching impact on the area around it, due to surface run-off which can stretch as far as 1km from the worksites. Running the route across the CCNR, with probably around 1-1.5km below both the core and the buffer, the need for escape shafts can be waived, and can be located within the 2 golf courses at either ends, or even as far as Venus Drive and PIE respectively.I don't think going deep under the nature reserve would be the same as going through the nature reserve.
I believe there's a provision to extend CAL towards the east, so definitely they will all be connected. In the case of T5, we are given a clean slate so I'm sure LTA will take full advantage of it to make the transfers as seem less as possible.I hope the planners will take into consideration of T1/2/3 as well or else we could get into a situation of it turning into an undesirable destination for passengers, airlines and employees alike.
Thanks a lot zeywery!!Hi I have extracted some useful info from the tender document which we could use to discuss: Enjoy! :cheers:
Thanks zeywery! Now there are 12 interesting and important details to note.Hi I have extracted some useful info from the tender document which we could use to discuss:
7. I believe the unidentified depot sites for CRLw could be at the Jurong industrial area, former Turf City/ Eng Neo (if cutting through CCNR) and/or Bukit Brown (if skirting CCNR). All of these options would likely require land acquisition to some extent, which could be why the sites are not named in the document.Thanks zeywery! Now there are 12 interesting and important details to note.
1. The line if I may say, would be built like Hong Kong's South Island Line, where there's an east and west branch, only that ours is one line to be built in two major phases, East (CRLe) and West (CRLw)
2. From the documents, CRLe will span from Sin Ming on the TSL to Changi East. CRLw will span from Jurong to Sin Ming via Clementi. For the CRLe there will be a short branch in the northeast, which we know it as the Punggol branch.
3. In relation to (2), it is highly possible that the Punggol branch will open with the CRLe together at the same time or in stages.
4. 50km, 30-34 stations. I suppose 30 is for a direct crossing through the nature reserve while 34 is for skirting.
5. 3 types of rolling stock config. to be studied: 4-car trains, 6-car trains & 8-car trains.
6. The line will be fully underground. But LTA says it WILL NOT EXCLUDE the possibility of having at-grade and/or elevated sections where possible. Subject to more studies.
7. 4 sites have been identified for the depots. Changi East & Lorong Halus are the obvious ones, as we might have discussed this earlier. These two will facilitate the CRLe ops. The other 2 sites are in the west and will facilitate ops on the CRLw.
8. Possible future interchange station within Changi Airport. As what I have speculated before and in y2koh's recent map, a T5 station. Subject to more studies.
9. Punggol branch to have 3 stations. 2 interchanges (Punggol is the obvious one)
10. If after the EIA is released, and if skirting is chosen, 2 TSL stations will be made interchanges with CRLw. Sin Ming and Upp Thomson are the more likely ones, looking at NSS' alignment.
11. A particular "Spur Line"... What could this be? And provisions are to be made for this "Spur Line".
12. Express services to be considered for this line, possibly the first in the MRT history...
Thanks y2koh! I would find future versions of this map clearer if they were to show the interchange stations by including a short section of each line, in the appropriate colour, which will interchange with the CRL.
I think from the delayed implementation of DTL, TSL and ERL and going by this pace of development, LTA is heading for a "meet the deadline on time and successfully" approach, which might suggest the tight timeline for bidders to submit their bids and the winner to be announced. Following which, LTA might push the winner to conduct SIs, feasibility studies and EIAs early and submit reports early. For a mega MRT project like the CRL, 10 years should be more than enough for all works.Tender closing date is 14th April 2014, its only around 5 weeks. Is this a realistic frame time to prepare the engineering feasibility study for the entire CRL? Would the participating companies required to do their own SI before submitting their proposal?
The 5 weeks are preparation time for participating firms to submit their interest by tendering. The authority would then leave the various studies and proposals in their hands, which is the purpose of the tender.Tender closing date is 14th April 2014, its only around 5 weeks. Is this a realistic frame time to prepare the engineering feasibility study for the entire CRL? Would the participating companies required to do their own SI before submitting their proposal?