About terminals with only one service
-
There are many terminals that have only one service terminating there, Upper East Coast, Queen St, Sembawang, Sims Place, Lim Chu Kang...why bother keep operating them?
Sv 170 of Queens St & Sv 64 of Sims Place can go to Geylang/Eunos/HarbourFront/New Bridge Rd instead. Upp East Coast can probably remain, as there are no terminals in the area and the nearest one (Bedok) is jammed.
Sv 175 of Lim Chu Kang can be changed to a Choa Chu Kang - Lim Chu Kang loop service, instead of the opposite direction. Sv 980 of Admiralty can be moved to Woodlands or Sembawang, making it two at Sembawang. And so on. -
i think some terminals are operated for the sake of public convenience. for eg LCK ter has Sarimbun Camp/Police Coast Guard LCK Base and some farms nearby. Queen St ter is also the terminal for the Singapore-Johore express bus and the taxi service to JB.Admiralty Rd West serves primarily Sembawang shipyard.
yup these are my views. any comments? -
Service 175 is a bit of a problem. Because there is still a need for a link to Upp Bukit Timah Road from LCK. One alternative is to make it terminate at BP Int, via Cashew Road, but this may result in route duplication.Originally posted by leeJZ:Sv 175 of Lim Chu Kang can be changed to a Choa Chu Kang - Lim Chu Kang loop service, instead of the opposite direction. Sv 980 of Admiralty can be moved to Woodlands or Sembawang, making it two at Sembawang. And so on. -
Upp East Coast has 2 svcs... 13 & 853 (Suns & PHs) perhaps allow the long route of 853 to operate all days...Originally posted by leeJZ:There are many terminals that have only one service terminating there, Upper East Coast, Queen St, Sembawang, Sims Place, Lim Chu Kang...why bother keep operating them?
Sv 170 of Queens St & Sv 64 of Sims Place can go to Geylang/Eunos/HarbourFront/New Bridge Rd instead. Upp East Coast can probably remain, as there are no terminals in the area and the nearest one (Bedok) is jammed.
Sv 175 of Lim Chu Kang can be changed to a Choa Chu Kang - Lim Chu Kang loop service, instead of the opposite direction. Sv 980 of Admiralty can be moved to Woodlands or Sembawang, making it two at Sembawang. And so on.
Queen's St Ter has got other services other than 170. S'pore-Johor Express Stop is there too... cannot remove
Admiralty Rd West Ter may be closed down when Sembawang Int opens. Same for Sembawang Rd End Ter... may operate one more svc from sembawang to sembawang rd end then.
Sims Place Ter ... perhaps 64 can extend to Hougang to have more commuters on the svc
175 needs a ter.... cannot be CCK - LCK route. Or the svc will be almost no demand... maybe extend the route to bt batok. -
Svc 64 cannot be extended to Hougang. If that's the case what will happen to the Sims Pl residents? It's possible to extend it to Geyland lor 1 though...Originally posted by freakybuses:Upp East Coast has 2 svcs... 13 & 853 (Suns & PHs) perhaps allow the long route of 853 to operate all days...
Queen's St Ter has got other services other than 170. S'pore-Johor Express Stop is there too... cannot remove
Admiralty Rd West Ter may be closed down when Sembawang Int opens. Same for Sembawang Rd End Ter... may operate one more svc from sembawang to sembawang rd end then.
Sims Place Ter ... perhaps 64 can extend to Hougang to have more commuters on the svc
175 needs a ter.... cannot be CCK - LCK route. Or the svc will be almost no demand... maybe extend the route to bt batok. -
Agreed!Originally posted by service_238:Svc 64 cannot be extended to Hougang. If that's the case what will happen to the Sims Pl residents? It's possible to extend it to Geyland lor 1 though... -
SBST has no intention of having anymore services terminating at Lor 1 Geylang terminal, else service 62 would have terminated there instead of looping there.Originally posted by service_238:Svc 64 cannot be extended to Hougang. If that's the case what will happen to the Sims Pl residents? It's possible to extend it to Geyland lor 1 though... -
Sv. 175 provides a problem here, unless it is to terminate at Turf City, the closest place I can think of.Originally posted by Yusry:Service 175 is a bit of a problem. Because there is still a need for a link to Upp Bukit Timah Road from LCK. One alternative is to make it terminate at BP Int, via Cashew Road, but this may result in route duplication. -
I was thinking of Svc 175 using Hillview Ave & Bt Batok East Ave 2 then terminate at BBT. How abt it?Originally posted by SBS9818A:Sv. 175 provides a problem here, unless it is to terminate at Turf City, the closest place I can think of. -
Sounds fine with me, but dunno if TIBS like the minor duplication with services 176 and 963.Originally posted by service_238:I was thinking of Svc 175 using Hillview Ave & Bt Batok East Ave 2 then terminate at BBT. How abt it? -
not to forget svc 20 once used sims place terminal. most of the terminals like LCk, sembawang rd end used to serve the villages and have a long history...
-
Service 175, in my opinion, should be a CCK - LCK loop service. Passengers travelling beyond CCK to Upp Bt Timah Rd can transfer to service 67.
-
It should go to Bukit Batok. Easier too, as minimal route diversions necessary.Originally posted by tranquilice:Service 175, in my opinion, should be a CCK - LCK loop service. Passengers travelling beyond CCK to Upp Bt Timah Rd can transfer to service 67. -
From Bt Batok to loop at Lim Chu Kang would be too long a route.Originally posted by SBS9818A:It should go to Bukit Batok. Easier too, as minimal route diversions necessary. -
It would be similar to the current Sv. 82, Upp S'goon Rd compared to Upp Bt. Timah Rd, then CCK stretch compared to HG, etc. That's why LCK Ter is somewhat indispensable!Originally posted by tranquilice:From Bt Batok to loop at Lim Chu Kang would be too long a route. -
You should think about the CCK residents also too, a lot of people take 175 from CCK but do not alight @ LCK terminal.Originally posted by SBS9818A:It should go to Bukit Batok. Easier too, as minimal route diversions necessary.
CCK's services have been downgrading since TIBS took ove. The services are getting lesser from around 12 in 1999 to 9 in 2003. Pity Us Choa Chu Kang Citizens
-
Toa Payoh also.. Back then 56 137 150 used to terminate there. Now... there's 21 services terminating/looping there.
-
But service 82 route is not that long. In fact, Lim Chu Kang now only need connection to the nearest town, ie. Choa Chu Kang, not like in the past where there can be a connection to the city, ie. service 172 to Shenton Way.Originally posted by SBS9818A:It would be similar to the current Sv. 82, Upp S'goon Rd compared to Upp Bt. Timah Rd, then CCK stretch compared to HG, etc. That's why LCK Ter is somewhat indispensable! -
Yes, but the link to Upp Bt. Timah Rd needs to be maintained. Anyway LCK ter is just a parking lot. Drivers change at CCK.Originally posted by tranquilice:But service 82 route is not that long. In fact, Lim Chu Kang now only need connection to the nearest town, ie. Choa Chu Kang, not like in the past where there can be a connection to the city, ie. service 172 to Shenton Way. -
How is the demand from Lim Chu Kang, Tengah A.B. to Upp Bt Timah Rd and vice-versa?Originally posted by SBS9818A:Yes, but the link to Upp Bt. Timah Rd needs to be maintained. Anyway LCK ter is just a parking lot. Drivers change at CCK. -
It's a historical route. Little demand to LCK, but there is an army camp there. Tengah AB - CCK has demand.Originally posted by tranquilice:How is the demand from Lim Chu Kang, Tengah A.B. to Upp Bt Timah Rd and vice-versa? -
There is also quite a sizeable demand after CCK interchange. The last time I took 175, there was about 7 - 10 pax in the bus when I alighted at CCK interchange.Originally posted by tranquilice:How is the demand from Lim Chu Kang, Tengah A.B. to Upp Bt Timah Rd and vice-versa? -
Considering Sv. 175 also serves Teck Whye area and parts of the private estates off Upp Bukit Timah Rd.Originally posted by Yusry:There is also quite a sizeable demand after CCK interchange. The last time I took 175, there was about 7 - 10 pax in the bus when I alighted at CCK interchange. -
Alternative service 172.Originally posted by SBS9818A:It's a historical route. Little demand to LCK, but there is an army camp there. Tengah AB - CCK has demand. -
I would say it's a small demand.Originally posted by Yusry:There is also quite a sizeable demand after CCK interchange. The last time I took 175, there was about 7 - 10 pax in the bus when I alighted at CCK interchange.