Services affected by CCL

last SG · 2004-06-11T15:59:57+00:00

[quote]Originally posted by leeJZ: [b] HarbourFront (need to go to BDK for 30), Didn't sv 10 plies Harbourfront Lee JZ?

SBS9818A SG

I still feel Sv. 22 shouldn't be cut, Sv. 93 should go bye-bye.

freakybuses SG

22 go Sims Pl for what... no use... or must well cover 80's withdrawn route then go to AMK.
No hope for revival of 93.

leeJZ SG

Sims Place only got 64 now, can give them another service...and 64 doesnt even connect them to nearest MRT station...Aljunied.

How can 22 cover 80's route? How to amend to ply Geylang East Ctrl? Plus it will still duplicate CCL then.

service_238 SG

SIms Place residents can even WALK to the nearest mrt station as its so damn near. What's the use of taking a bus?

Duplicating CCL doesnt mean duplicating for 1-2 stations. If u notice properly, 82 153 duplicates the NEL for 3 stations, while 80 81 136 duplicates 2 consecative stations with 147 serving as the backbone of the rail line.

You cant simply cut and cut all the services along the Paya Lebar corridor. Otherwise what's left is only a miserable 2 or 3 services. Do u think the people living and working there would like it?!

iveco SG

70 should be the backbone of the CCL as it serves the downtown area. Others are not so vital. 24, 76 & 93 can have minor amendments, but the rest may have to be axed.

leeJZ SG

24 should stay also, maybe 70 24 should be untouched and others all chopped / ammended.

gynobcard SG

i said before suggest chopping the others and i will chop the person. So what if several routes duplicate the CCL for several stations? Do you know that the distance between CCL stations is rather far and dont forget there are people living @ places BETWEEN CCL stations. don't be so myopic as to suggest chopping just because a route duplicates other stuff. like that can chop svc 2 since it runs from outram park mrt right up to Tanah Merah mrt izzit?

buses serve to complement the rail network and toprovide alternative links to other places. do your homework, visit the CCL areas and think before making comments that are uncalled for.

freakybuses SG

22 via Hougang. Don't go Lor Chuan.

freakybuses SG

133 is always more than 60% of people. Same for 147. If either one mati, the other will kena flooded. If both mati, residents protest liaoz... maybe even riots... (but that's impossible.... I thought too much le)

SBS9818A SG

Residents have Sv. 125 on weekdays, and it's only a 10 mins walk at most. Duplication of certain sectors is good, imagine withdrawing Sv. 80 just because it duplicates what, 3 stations?

freakybuses SG

Withdrawal of backbones will result in the lost of strength in the spine. Therefore, let some backbones be there.

gynobcard SG

you hit the point.

just like the hooha to withdraw the HG/SK portion of 502

leeJZ SG

2 is the backbone of EWL. 147 is the backbone of the EWL and so is 133 somewhat.

80 actually duplicates MRT lines throughout the route, NEL from Sengkang to Kovan, CCL from S'goon to Paya Lebar, EWL from Paya Lebar to Outram Park, then NEL to HarbourFront.

Now i think that 24 28 70 should be left untouched, the others amended or withdrawn. 24 can also be amended to ply S'goon Ctrl.

80 I think should still be withdrawn, possibly 2 can ply Geylang East Central and perhaps extended down to HarbourFront via 80's route. Pax from SEK - HGN have alternative services 27 87 89 and SEK - KOV 119.

22 should be withdrawn or amended to loop at MacPherson Estate or terminate at Sims Place. 93 be withdrawn or cut to Bishan - HarbourFront. 76 can be amended somehow, with 24 70 as backbones of this part of CCL, this should be enough.

sbs&tibs SG

--DOUBLE POST DELETED--

sbs&tibs SG

2 should be shorten from NBR to kallang( Gelang lor 1-Changi Village ). 147 is also the bakebone of NEL. 80 should be withdrawn.
After 80 is withdrawn, I do agree that 2 can cover up Gelang East Central sector. 93 also duplicates CCL even if you amend it to Bishan. Why not merge with 28 (TAM to TPY) to become a new TAM to TPY service covering 93 route from EUN Int to Upper Paya lebar Rd and then all the way to TPY. I do agree that somehow 28 & 93 duplicates from UPP Paya Lebar to Braddell Rd.

supremebull SG

There must be a reason why 28 and 93 duplicate each other from Bartley Road all the way to Braddel Road or SBST would have tweaked it a little when 28 merged with 152

leeJZ SG

Good idea for your 28 plan.

But the west side of 93's route doesnt really duplicate CCL, CCL goes down to Buona Vista but 93 doesnt hit BNV / NUS.

2 should not shorten to Lor 1 Geylang, thats a SMRT terminal and SBST doesnt want services terminating there except 11, as they even made 62 loop there. And by cutting it short, 2 would loose alot of pax wanting to go from Geylang to the city.

In my opinion after CCL rationalization 2 should be this -

Changi Village Terminal - Changi Village Rd - Loyang Ave - Loyang Way - Upp Changi Rd North - Upp Changi Rd East - Upp Changi Rd - Bedok Rd - New Upp Changi Rd - Changi Rd - Geylang Rd - Paya Lebar Rd - Geylang East Central - Aljunied Rd -Geylang Rd - Kallang Rd - Victoria St - Hill St - New Bridge Rd - Upp Pickering St - South Bridge Rd - Tanjong Pagar Rd - Keppel Rd - Telok Blangah Rd - HarbourFront Interchange

sbs&tibs SG

You imagine 93 route and the CCL route on a blank Sg map.
Doesn't it looks duplicating with CCL?
2 can start from St Michael's Ter. But I don't think it is a good idea. The route oy suggested is fine, but it still looks duplicating with EWL. Shorten it is better, do you UNDERSTAND what am I saying? Make it ply Gelang East Central to cover up 80 withdrawn sector.

SBS9818A SG

Lor 1 Geylang is NOT a TIBS terminal. It is actually a neutral zone. Sv. 22 should stay as an alternative from Paya Lebar - Lor Chuan, rather then alienating an entire section of population. Same for Sv. 80, it is a very popular service, especially on weekends.

iveco SG

Better to revert to former route of North/South Bridge Rds.

« Previous Page Next Page »