[BSEP] Bus interchange expansions for Tampines & Sengkang
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
They also need to consider new depots for Ang Mo Kio,Another at Sengkang,one at Bt Merah area..If not how svc from these district park?
Agreed. Unless they plan to rationalize some services on account of DTL & TEL.
-
They got plans for Mandai,Changi and Woodlands integrated depot
-
https://www.facebook.com/WeKeepYourWorldMoving?hc_location=timeline
Read this article. It says both Sengkang and Tampines Interchange will get additional 12 parking bays.
This means the earlier press release was misunderstood to think 12 parking bays are for Tampines North Interchange.
This will be in addition to Tampines North Interchange.
At same time, given the high amount of devleopment along Buangkok/Sengkang/Punggol, Sengkang interchange will also get 12 additional bus parking bays.
-
Location of tampines interchange extension very weird la... don't you think!?
-
Land limited la friend,Our Gahmen add buses here and there thinking can solved everything...So cramped already thats why you will see extend here and there in a weird areas..Im not surprised if SMRT Amdep extension bus park in just opp the depot itself..They got plans to refurbish the depot to accomodate double decker buses
-
-
Good thing is we can expect 4 more services in both Sengkang and Tampines Interchange.
For Tampines Interchange, need to plan properly and send those routes to the extended part of interchange for which there is not heavy loading from interchange.
These routes can be:
18, 38, 39, 81
All feeders and heavily used services from interchange such as 4/28/31/65/72 etc. should continue to operate from current interchange.
-
For now Hgdep might need a sub bus park to introduce 4 more new svc,Already bursting.Tampines no problem cause Loyang depot can back up.
-
Originally posted by carbikebus:
For now Hgdep might need a sub bus park to introduce 4 more new svc,Already bursting.Tampines no problem cause Loyang depot can back up.
yes.. or might start practicing overnight parking..
But I also feel very high chance of many services getting transferred to Loyang, at least partially such as 24/53/59/88 from BRBP/AMDEP... 27/89 from HGDEP...
With this change of depots... space can be created in existing depots.
-
Also IMO... the new services will be mostly feeders from Sengkang to Fernvale/Anchorvale areas... one for Crescent, one for Jalan Kayu etc.
83 might start at Sengkang, loop @ Punggol, so that space is created for another feeder service for Punggol Waterway and Punggol Matilda.
-
So the other day, a guy made a remark that tampines TC newsletter mentioned about an additional interchange, prompting me to ask if there will be 2 or 3 interchanges (tampines north and tampines current int) in tampines in future. This extra interchange turns out to be an extension of current tampines interchange with links. Cheers.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Also IMO... the new services will be mostly feeders from Sengkang to Fernvale/Anchorvale areas... one for Crescent, one for Jalan Kayu etc.
83 might start at Sengkang, loop @ Punggol, so that space is created for another feeder service for Punggol Waterway and Punggol Matilda.
Hi mr busanalyser, no need to change sbs 83 current route and its starting interchange. This is because sbs 83 serves as a very important feeder service for the Punggol residents along Punggol central/east/field. This is more crucial a feeder service for Punggol rather than sengkang. Thus sbs 83 originates from Punggol interchange so that the timing from Punggol can be better controlled and the residents do not have to depend too heavily on traffic conditions along the dreadful Punggol road bus stop after TPE turn-in in sengkang. By starting from sengkang, this objective will definitely be compromised. Better to introduce new services from sengkang interchange to link those sengkang west fernvale/anchorvale area and the Punggol west current unpopulated area. Cheers.
-
I believe the two "second" bus interchanges will be temporary, and will both be replaced when the new bus interchange at Buangkok is built in future.
-
In my opinion, I feel that LTA should have constructed new bus interchanges somewhere away from the MRT and have some bus routes re-routed to originate from there, and loop around the current bus interchanges.
The new expressway bus stop was a good move, and I thought LTA was considering this option.
Personally, I am disappointed that LTA chose to build a "second" bus interchange near to bus interchanges that are already operating at full capacity.
Firstly, are the roads able to cope with more buses utilising it? Hopefully, the "second" bus interchanges can have the exits and entrances at a road different than the road being used by the bus interchange.
Secondly, when the land is about to be re-developed for mixed-used developments in future, where will the "second" bus interchanges relocate to? That is why I think both are temporary, and will be replaced when the new bus interchange at Buangkok is built in future.
Thirdly, speaking of which, I am curious why did LTA not implement the plan to have the temporary bus terminal at Joo Koon in year 2009, and have something like Bukit Merah Bus Interchange. If they had that tempoary bus terminal, some bus services could already be re-routed and Boon Lay Bus Interchange would already have capacity for new bus services.
Fourth, if LTA can build a "second" bus interchange near to bus interchanges that are already operating at full capacity, why did it not use the temporary bus interchange at Boon Lay (Jurong West) to have new bus services at Boon Lay Bus Interchange, but instead demolish it two years ago in year 2012? It could have been a temporary "second" bus interchange to enable Boon Lay to have new bus services, until the new bus interchange at Joo Koon is built. Well, at least now the new Joo Koon Bus Interchange will open soon, in around three to six months' time, which means Boon Lay Bus Interchange can have new bus services soon. So, this argument is rather invalid now. :/ Nonetheless, this supports my first point on the possible road congestions that may occur when the "second" bus interchanges are built.
I hope when this decision to build "second" bus interchanges was made, there are also plans to expand the surrounding roads (my first concern) and delay the development of the land used (my second concern). Otherwise, LTA should consider studying the possible impacts and take the necessary measures to prevent them.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Good thing is we can expect 4 more services in both Sengkang and Tampines Interchange.
For Tampines Interchange, need to plan properly and send those routes to the extended part of interchange for which there is not heavy loading from interchange.
These routes can be:
18, 38, 39, 81
All feeders and heavily used services from interchange such as 4/28/31/65/72 etc. should continue to operate from current interchange.
Are you kidding me that all these 4 services do not have heavy loading from the Int?
I suggest you go and observe at Tampines Int again soon, your info is really outdated.And, the heavy loadings are during Off-Peak too. The only service that really don't have much pax all day round from Tampines Int is Sv 18. (and this even depends on whether a Sv 8 / 38 bus has left the Int before the Sv 18). Regards.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Location of tampines interchange extension very weird la... don't you think!?
In my opinion, I have a feeling that the "second" Tampines bus interchange could be a temporary bus interchange, having parking bays that can accomodate twelve more buses than the current bus interchange.
I guess there may be plans to re-develop the current bus interchange into Integrated Transport Hub.
-
Originally posted by SBS 9631X:
Are you kidding me that all these 4 services do not have heavy loading from the Int?
I suggest you go and observe at Tampines Int again soon, your info is really outdated.And, the heavy loadings are during Off-Peak too. The only service that really don't have much pax all day round from Tampines Int is Sv 18. (and this even depends on whether a Sv 8 / 38 bus has left the Int before the Sv 18). Regards.
What is your definition of heavy loading? sv 81 for sure does not have heavy loading from Tampines interchange (around 10-15 pax). Please go check. sv 18/38 same. sv 39 also does not have heavy loading from interchange.
I know what I have typed. Sorry bro. You need to go and observe more as well. Which service according to you should be kicked out to the new extension if services had to be transferred there? I would be interested to hear your choices.
-
Originally posted by JurongWestresident:
In my opinion, I have a feeling that the "second" Tampines bus interchange could be a temporary bus interchange, having parking bays that can accomodate twelve more buses than the current bus interchange.
I guess there may be plans to re-develop the current bus interchange into Integrated Transport Hub.
It is possible that when Tampines north interchange is constructed, they might remove this one. Depends completely on number of services and buses needed once Tampines north comes up.
Also, let's not forget there will be space for 4 services even at CBP from next year.
-
I dont get the thread title...?
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
What is your definition of heavy loading? sv 81 for sure does not have heavy loading from Tampines interchange (around 10-15 pax). Please go check. sv 18/38 same. sv 39 also does not have heavy loading from interchange.
I know what I have typed. Sorry bro. You need to go and observe more as well. Which service according to you should be kicked out to the new extension if services had to be transferred there? I would be interested to hear your choices.
Depends on what time you observe for all the above services. Mid-day definitely not much people from Tampines Int, that I agree.
But from 2pm onwards on Weekdays, which isn't exactly Peak Hour yet, all three services will get more than about 15-25pax from Int. Depends on the timings nearby schools are dismissed and the departure timings of services plying along the same route (Sv 8 18 38 39 81). Some pax are too lazy to walk to the far end to board Sv 81 and end up waiting for Sv 39 or 38 instead. Vice versa applies too. Depends on how far the pax willing to walk.A mix of services to the new extension would be good. I mean, in your list, you suggested services which don't have much pax loadings from the Int. I think it might be better if there's a mix of packed & not-so-packed services (the same way how they classified the svcs to call at the TPE bus stops).
Might be good too for them to mix services with varying heavy pax sector loads. Like, I don't see how is it possible for them to kick all the Tampines feeders out to the extension, nor is it possible for them to kick all the Industrial-estate bound svcs (sv 19, 37, possibly 4 & 29) to the extension, without getting any complaints from residents in Tampines.
Otherwise the extension would be like a ghost-town and not that fair to some pax who has to walk that far i feel.
-
Originally posted by SBS 9631X:
Depends on what time you observe for all the above services. Mid-day definitely not much people from Tampines Int, that I agree.
But from 2pm onwards on Weekdays, which isn't exactly Peak Hour yet, all three services will get more than about 15-25pax from Int. Depends on the timings nearby schools are dismissed and the departure timings of services plying along the same route (Sv 8 18 38 39 81). Some pax are too lazy to walk to the far end to board Sv 81 and end up waiting for Sv 39 or 38 instead. Vice versa applies too. Depends on how far the pax willing to walk.A mix of services to the new extension would be good. I mean, in your list, you suggested services which don't have much pax loadings from the Int. I think it might be better if there's a mix of packed & not-so-packed services (the same way how they classified the svcs to call at the TPE bus stops).
Might be good too for them to mix services with varying heavy pax sector loads. Like, I don't see how is it possible for them to kick all the Tampines feeders out to the extension, nor is it possible for them to kick all the Industrial-estate bound svcs (sv 19, 37, possibly 4 & 29) to the extension, without getting any complaints from residents in Tampines.
Otherwise the extension would be like a ghost-town and not that fair to some pax who has to walk that far i feel.
Precisely. They cannot kick the industrial nor feeder services to extension. 31 cannot coz of ITE.. same for 8/23.. should not coz of Temasek. 4/20 should not as well. 3 also acts like a mini feeder for st 21. 28/29 act like feeders for ave 9/st 44/45.
What is left: 22/65/67/969 - I would rather that all these operate from current interchange given the huge number of pax who would be inconvenienced.
For 81/39, those who do not want to walk, have alternative of 21 from outside MRT as well.
For 18/38, there is sv 8 from interchange.
Just saying... I couldn't think of better 4 services to be pushed to extension.
Also we have to note, new services can be introduced. But given the trend, I think one will be feeder for Tampines ave 8/10, hence may start from current interchange itself.
It could be possible that they might launch 27M on full day basis that could operate from the extension.
Dont take anything seriously - just evaluating different options.
-
Originally posted by JurongWestresident:
In my opinion, I feel that LTA should have constructed new bus interchanges somewhere away from the MRT and have some bus routes re-routed to originate from there, and loop around the current bus interchanges.
The new expressway bus stop was a good move, and I thought LTA was considering this option.
Personally, I am disappointed that LTA chose to build a "second" bus interchange near to bus interchanges that are already operating at full capacity.
Firstly, are the roads able to cope with more buses utilising it? Hopefully, the "second" bus interchanges can have the exits and entrances at a road different than the road being used by the bus interchange.
Secondly, when the land is about to be re-developed for mixed-used developments in future, where will the "second" bus interchanges relocate to? That is why I think both are temporary, and will be replaced when the new bus interchange at Buangkok is built in future.
Thirdly, speaking of which, I am curious why did LTA not implement the plan to have the temporary bus terminal at Joo Koon in year 2009, and have something like Bukit Merah Bus Interchange. If they had that tempoary bus terminal, some bus services could already be re-routed and Boon Lay Bus Interchange would already have capacity for new bus services.
Fourth, if LTA can build a "second" bus interchange near to bus interchanges that are already operating at full capacity, why did it not use the temporary bus interchange at Boon Lay (Jurong West) to have new bus services at Boon Lay Bus Interchange, but instead demolish it two years ago in year 2012? It could have been a temporary "second" bus interchange to enable Boon Lay to have new bus services, until the new bus interchange at Joo Koon is built. Well, at least now the new Joo Koon Bus Interchange will open soon, in around three to six months' time, which means Boon Lay Bus Interchange can have new bus services soon. So, this argument is rather invalid now. :/ Nonetheless, this supports my first point on the possible road congestions that may occur when the "second" bus interchanges are built.
I hope when this decision to build "second" bus interchanges was made, there are also plans to expand the surrounding roads (my first concern) and delay the development of the land used (my second concern). Otherwise, LTA should consider studying the possible impacts and take the necessary measures to prevent them.
Hi mr jurongwestresident, for sengkang extended interchange, it is just across the road. The site is ideal. Traffic is not much. I will disagree with you that they will dismantle this extension even when Buangkok is up next time. The extension is needed as the current interchange is small. It is always better to build bigger than smaller as the number of buses will increase not drop. There must always be additional bus bays for standby aa not very appropriate to build all up to capacity. You can always rest assured homework is done by LTA when site is selected. Cheers.
-
Originally posted by BusAnalayzer:
Precisely. They cannot kick the industrial nor feeder services to extension. 31 cannot coz of ITE.. same for 8/23.. should not coz of Temasek. 4/20 should not as well. 3 also acts like a mini feeder for st 21. 28/29 act like feeders for ave 9/st 44/45.
What is left: 22/65/67/969 - I would rather that all these operate from current interchange given the huge number of pax who would be inconvenienced.
For 81/39, those who do not want to walk, have alternative of 21 from outside MRT as well.
For 18/38, there is sv 8 from interchange.
Just saying... I couldn't think of better 4 services to be pushed to extension.
Also we have to note, new services can be introduced. But given the trend, I think one will be feeder for Tampines ave 8/10, hence may start from current interchange itself.
It could be possible that they might launch 27M on full day basis that could operate from the extension.
Dont take anything seriously - just evaluating different options.
I think what is possible here is that there is a service selected from each of the groups you classified together that goes out to the extension.
Notice that you classified the services into groups like Industrial and Feeder and say at one shot all those in each group cannot go out.
My point is, if they really want to minimise the damage, they'll probably take one feeder, one Industrial-bound, one city-bound and one intratown out to the extension.
37, 18, 292 and one city-bound. (Dk which city-bound because Sv 10 & 65 is always packed). I wouldn't say all the services are not packed. Just that they aren't that packed for like 3/4 of the day, when compared to the rest in their groups. (eg. don't compare the Sv 37 load versus Sv 81, compare Sv 37's all-day loading to 19 or 29, or Sv 292 vs 291 & 293.
-
Originally posted by dupdup77:
Hi mr jurongwestresident, for sengkang extended interchange, it is just across the road. The site is ideal. Traffic is not much. I will disagree with you that they will dismantle this extension even when Buangkok is up next time. The extension is needed as the current interchange is small. It is always better to build bigger than smaller as the number of buses will increase not drop. There must always be additional bus bays for standby aa not very appropriate to build all up to capacity. You can always rest assured homework is done by LTA when site is selected. Cheers.
Anyway... there is no news of Buangkok interchange yet... even if they announce now... will not come up until 2019/2020... so there is still 4-5 years for the temporary extension... and i agree that this extension will stay.
Not sure about tampines extension though.. in a weird place.. and with CBP and tampines north interchange.. may or may not need it in few years time.
-
Originally posted by SBS 9631X:
I think what is possible here is that there is a service selected from each of the groups you classified together that goes out to the extension.
Notice that you classified the services into groups like Industrial and Feeder and say at one shot all those in each group cannot go out.
My point is, if they really want to minimise the damage, they'll probably take one feeder, one Industrial-bound, one city-bound and one intratown out to the extension.
37, 18, 292 and one city-bound. (Dk which city-bound because Sv 10 & 65 is always packed)
But if they want to reduce the # of complaints... they will have to select not-very-high loading or trunk services to go there. For instance, it could be okay for 969 to operate from there. Anyway... most ppl are long distance travellers.. with travelators on the connector between interchange... complaints would be far less than on 37 or 292 moving to new interchange.