LTA's Bus Service Enhancement Programme (BSEP) (Part 2)
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
964 nope. There is high demand from Woodlands interchange and high demand at Admiralty MRT. 962 can, 964 better start from Woodlands. 963 can.
965/969 cannot. People going friday prayers depends on 965, people schooling at AISS living in Woodlands depend on 965. People going to Chong Pang from Woodlands needs 969 and also those ITE students from Simei depends highly on this bus to get them back to Woodlands/Admiralty.
966 can start from Sembawang, 960 also. 961 better dont, route is long enough. 966/960/963 can enhance connectivity to BPJ, Worst case 171 extend to Sembawang.
The rest must stay
the task here is more to relieve WRI first then Yishun Int
963 Sembawang to HarbourFront?
960 over 171 anyway (renumbered as 840??)
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
the task here is more to relieve WRI first then Yishun Int
963 Sembawang to HarbourFront?
171 Sembawang to Marina Central?
There is currently no connectivity to BPJ from Sembawang though. People from Sembawang need to go to yishun to take 171 or go woodlands n change.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Woodlands North Interchange should take care of Woodlands, and more space at Sembawang should take care of Yishun for now. In future, I believe Simpang will have a bus interchange, so some Yishun services might start from there.
For now, quick fix 39 should be extended to Sembawang. 962/964/963 is a strict no according to me.
I would not touch 857/860 also. Already too much crowd to disturb routing.
852 is an interesting suggesting and worth considering as it will provide new links.
what should go over to Woodlands North from Woodlands Regional?
"i think at one point of time our ministers have zero foresight. "Regional" interchange built way too small for its purpose. Punggol Interchange is also way under its capacity."
39 should be extended. likewise for 852.
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
There is currently no connectivity to BPJ from Sembawang though. People from Sembawang need to go to yishun to take 171 or go woodlands n change.
i think 960 is a better choice of extending
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
I am concerned about how they are going to manage CCK. BPJ new interchange is not big, nor is Bukit Batok. These towns are growing, and they do not have space for new services, whereas it is most needed here.
Will Tengah be the one to provide relief here? But Tengah according to me will still take few years to develop.
Yew Tee Interchange or Sungei Kadut Interchange? for north of CCK?
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
what should go over to Woodlands North from Woodlands Regional?
"i think at one point of time our ministers have zero foresight. "Regional" interchange built way too small for its purpose. Punggol Interchange is also way under its capacity."
39 should be extended. likewise for 852.
39 can loop at Pasir Ris Drive 2 and go back to Yishun coz the main demand is PSR not Tampines. 852 extend or not extend also not much difference. It is a backup svc for 74/851.
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
39 can loop at Pasir Ris Drive 2 and go back to Yishun coz the main demand is PSR not Tampines. 852 extend or not extend also not much difference. It is a backup svc for 74/851.
my point is to relieve Woodlands and Yishun Interchanges.
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
my point is to relieve Woodlands and Yishun Interchanges.
39 shld stay at Yishun so does 85, the demand is there. If they want, put 1 SBST bus at SBW. The one that can extend to relieve is 171,852,853 n maybe 855. The rest shld stay at Yishun coz of the demand of those service in Yishun during peak hours.
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
39 shld stay at Yishun so does 85, the demand is there. If they want, put 1 SBST bus at SBW. The one that can extend to relieve is 171,852,853 n maybe 855. The rest shld stay at Yishun coz of the demand of those service in Yishun during peak hours.
hmm
better than nothing.
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
964 nope. There is high demand from Woodlands interchange and high demand at Admiralty MRT. 962 can, 964 better start from Woodlands. 963 can.
965/969 cannot. People going friday prayers depends on 965, people schooling at AISS living in Woodlands depend on 965. People going to Chong Pang from Woodlands needs 969 and also those ITE students from Simei depends highly on this bus to get them back to Woodlands/Admiralty.
966 can start from Sembawang, 960 also. 961 better dont, route is long enough. 966/960/963 can enhance connectivity to BPJ, Worst case 171 extend to Sembawang.
The rest must stay
966 should not.
PLEASE.
-
Originally posted by TIB1234T:
Woodlands North Interchange coming up in URA plan...
Actually old Marsiling Terminal SHOULD NOT BE CLOSED...
Now they are setting up a WDL NORTH...
Ironic...
We are beginning to see Towns with 2 bus interchanges(those near MRT stations)... Hopefully it will be a norm soon so as to better distribute out the bus services in the Estate rather than all CF in one central location which may sometimes not be appropriate -
Eh noticed dd77 very quiet these few days...
PERHAPS collating info in these threads to report to Michael L?! hehe -
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
There is currently no connectivity to BPJ from Sembawang though. People from Sembawang need to go to yishun to take 171 or go woodlands n change.
171 to Sembawang is a better option. I have proposed it plies CCK to Sembawang, bringing new connections between CCK, BPJ, Yishun and Sembawang. To Sembawang, it should go via Yishun Ave 5 and then Yishun Ave 2, so that it does not disturb the current people there. -
Originally posted by SMB145B:
what should go over to Woodlands North from Woodlands Regional?
"i think at one point of time our ministers have zero foresight. "Regional" interchange built way too small for its purpose. Punggol Interchange is also way under its capacity."
39 should be extended. likewise for 852.
Punggol Interchange is temporary as well - depends what the new plan looks like. For the current # of services, Punggol is okay - can in fact take in 2 more services. But once Punggol West and North develop, there is definitely need for another interchange, which will be at Punggol Matilda.
For which services should got to Woodlands North from WRI, it completely depends on the exact location of Woodlands North interchange.
-
Originally posted by TIB 585L:
39 shld stay at Yishun so does 85, the demand is there. If they want, put 1 SBST bus at SBW. The one that can extend to relieve is 171,852,853 n maybe 855. The rest shld stay at Yishun coz of the demand of those service in Yishun during peak hours.
39 should be extended according to me and ply uni-directional DDs from SBST side. This will provide uniqye connections. I agree with the other suggestion here that 39 should loop at Loyang and come back because its route from Loyang to Tampines is redundant.
I would extend 171 as I have stated in my post above. 853/855 should stay at Yishun. 852 according to me can also be extended to Sembawang, because today it is just as a backup service to 851/74/157. If extended to Sembawang, then SMRT has to take care of appropriate fleet deployment and frequency improvement.
-
Originally posted by SMB145B:
i think 960 is a better choice of extending
No way. 960/963/966 should stay at WRI - already long routes. Extending to Sembawang just does not make sense. -
Originally posted by Acx1688:
Eh noticed dd77 very quiet these few days...
PERHAPS collating info in these threads to report to Michael L?! hehe
Ha ha.. .let dupdup be... it is good if LTA is reading our posts.. i am happy if they are.. -
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Woodlands North Interchange should take care of Woodlands, and more space at Sembawang should take care of Yishun for now. In future, I believe Simpang will have a bus interchange, so some Yishun services might start from there.
For now, quick fix 39 should be extended to Sembawang. 962/964/963 is a strict no according to me.
I would not touch 857/860 also. Already too much crowd to disturb routing.
852 is an interesting suggesting and worth considering as it will provide new links.
last time someone wrote to smrt to enquire why 860 is not a feeder svc since it plies like a feeder service, apparently smrt says there are future extension plans for 860. so im not really sure.
-
Originally posted by SBST163:
last time someone wrote to smrt to enquire why 860 is not a feeder svc since it plies like a feeder service, apparently smrt says there are future extension plans for 860. so im not really sure.
Possible, but 860 extending to Sembawang is a bit unlikely because it is meant to provide connectivity between Yishun MRT and Ring road and Khatib MRT. Khatib MRT comes on Yishun Ave 2, so further extension from there is always a possibility. -
Leave those 96x svc at Woodlands la..Sembawang can have 171 start from there and shortened to CCK in near future.Can have another svc going to Northeast also.860 also can start from there.Kranji need a new bus terminal.Marsiling imho doesnt need one.
-
I dont agree 39 should be shortened. 39 has high demand in the Tampines > Loyang sector during peak hours. Lots of students depend on the service. It provides an direct connection towards Pasir Ris along Tamp ave 2, and helps relieve sv 81 load.
Demand for 39 towards Tampines is probably low after Blk 302 stop, because there's 292 in parallel, and people living around the MRT track usually walk under the tracks instead of taking a bus.
I do advocate extending to SBW if it means DDs can be deployed on it. Likewise with sv 969, its main problem is capacity during peak hours. Adding more buses will just create more bunching and chaos at interchanges. -
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
39 should be extended according to me and ply uni-directional DDs from SBST side. This will provide uniqye connections. I agree with the other suggestion here that 39 should loop at Loyang and come back because its route from Loyang to Tampines is redundant.
I would extend 171 as I have stated in my post above. 853/855 should stay at Yishun. 852 according to me can also be extended to Sembawang, because today it is just as a backup service to 851/74/157. If extended to Sembawang, then SMRT has to take care of appropriate fleet deployment and frequency improvement.
Hi mr BusAnalyser, sbs 39 should stop at an interchange. The distance is too long for a looping service to and fro. The bus schedule will be better managed. Cheers.
-
SBW should ve their own NEW links to oth parts of SG, has enough population to cater n requests for NEW svcs...
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Punggol Interchange is temporary as well - depends what the new plan looks like. For the current # of services, Punggol is okay - can in fact take in 2 more services. But once Punggol West and North develop, there is definitely need for another interchange, which will be at Punggol Matilda.
For which services should got to Woodlands North from WRI, it completely depends on the exact location of Woodlands North interchange.
The location is most likely together with Woodlands North Coast Interchange(MRT)
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
Leave those 96x svc at Woodlands la..Sembawang can have 171 start from there and shortened to CCK in near future.Can have another svc going to Northeast also.860 also can start from there.Kranji need a new bus terminal.Marsiling imho doesnt need one.
You are just typing what I have said ;)
