Winding feeder routes: I call those feeders winding that do not
go directly to MRT but instead loop around other estates before
going to MRT. I have seen such services are not favored by
commuters and often do not enjoy good patronage.
229: only service connecting HDBs at Bedok South road (UEC
side)... Yet goes via chai chee before going to mrt
282: service for west st 2 residents goes via ave 2, 5, 4 before
reaching MRT.
333: service winds Via Toh guan, IMM and Jurong town hall before
going to MRT. St 32 residents prefer to walk and take 99/334
instead. Jurong East Ave 1 residents also rely solely on 98. Hence
333 does not help relieve loads on either services.
Winding feeder routes that do enjoy good loading but still have
winding routes.
300: super high loading but 90% loading corms from ave 4, 5
residents. Those along ave 2/3 seldom take given long winding
nature of route. Bad part is ave 2 residents don't have another
option but to walk long distance and take LRT or bus 67/188
315: very high loading but for SGN north ave 1 residents as well
as ave 5 residents, it's a raw deal considering bus winds around
chomp chomp, boundary road before going to MRT. Would have been
good if 116 plied SGN north ave 1 instead.
325: winding route for HG st 91/93 residents to MRT who seldom
take It.. Would rather walk and take 72 to MRT instead. Also route
winds via ave 10/2/upper SGN road... Though given MRT access at ave
10 not major issue
372: route has v high loading between Anchorvale and SGK MRT but
very low between Anchorvale and PGL road.
just few of my observations...
For 229 its Chai Chee St/Rd leg has to do with its roots of
being a ex-Chai Chee Ter sv. But you can't possibly leave Chai Chee
St (between Chai Chee Rd & Bedok North Ave 1) w/o a bus sv
right, just like how you complained of other areas such as Haig Rd
with no bus sv? Only 229 serves that sector presently (222 enters
from New Upp Changi Rd and Chai Chee Rd and turn left to Chai Chee
St).
For 282 maybe they should have just left sv287 behind in the
1980s and withdraw sv282, showing that routes in the past may not
fit usage nowadays.
For 300 add 975 as an alternative for Ave 3 side, which
partially causes the overcrowding of sv975 during weekdays
peak.
For 315 I'd say leave the North Ave 1 part around. At least
commuters in S'goon Gdn can get home (to Sgn North Ave 1) directly
w/o trf at S'goon Int to your "proposed 116."
For 325 the "winding part" between Hougang Ave 10, Ave 2 and Upp
S'goon Rd was added during NEL bus rationalization. Redundant move
made by the authorities then.
For 333 I agree, but at least the alternatives are there for Toh
Guan Rd residents. 41, 52, 105, 990.
For 372 the Punggol Rd leg was only added in 2007 lol. I agree
that that sector has a lot of room for improvement in terms of
demand.