Loading Events

« All Events

Downtown Line 3 Bus Rationalisation – Amendment of Bus Services 22, 65, 66 & 506

December 12

Express 506 - SBS Transit Volvo B9TL CDGE (SBS7367Y)

From Sunday, 12 December 2021, the following bus services will be amended as part of the Downtown Line 3 Bus Service Rationalisation:

Service Existing Destination New Destination from 12 Dec 2021
22 Ang Mo Kio ↔ Tampines Ang Mo Kio ↔ Eunos
66 Bedok ↔ Jurong East Jurong East ↺ Upper Bukit Timah Road
506 Jurong East ↔ Upper East Coast Jurong East ↔ Serangoon

In addition, Bus Service 65 will be amended to ply Tampines Avenue 4 instead of Tampines Avenue 1 to cover lost sectors of Service 22.

Short Trip Service 66C will also be withdrawn with the amendment of Service 66 to loop at Beauty World.


Operator Posters
Service 22
Service 65
Service 66 / 66C
Express 506

See Also:

Details

Date:
December 12
Event Category:

29 thoughts on “Downtown Line 3 Bus Rationalisation – Amendment of Bus Services 22, 65, 66 & 506

  • 23 November 2021 at 9:05 AM
    Permalink

    Actually its very very wrong to assume 22, 66 and 506 does not have demand. This sercices do have loads in their lost sector. It jus that it not equal tru out the whole day but that is the same case for every service in singapore and around the world. You cant expect each service to be packed the whole day. At most its more justified to instead just make it full single deck services. And given covid its always gd to have more options to aviod huge crowds. So that means lta wants ppl to jam pack themself n risk it. I truely dont understand what brain this ppl have.

    Reply
  • 22 November 2021 at 8:52 PM
    Permalink

    22,66 and 506 goes to the bedok reservoir road and it doesn’t go on kaki bukit ave 1 which are those downtown line. so the residents there will be in a great lost if those buses doesn’t ply there. i think the government should amend those buses that ply along kaki bukit area like 5,15,58,59 and 87 instead of amend those that ply along bedok reservoir area.

    Reply
  • 22 November 2021 at 7:59 PM
    Permalink

    i think the amendment for 506 is the same as 105 cause 2 goes to the same destination. jurong east to serangoon. why not amend 506 from jurong east to punggol since there is no direct bus to the west from punggol.

    Reply
    • 24 November 2021 at 1:28 PM
      Permalink

      Because 506 is faster than 105

      Reply
  • 22 November 2021 at 5:22 PM
    Permalink

    The loss of service 22 is the real kicker here. 66 and 506 have lost much demand here in Bedok Reservoir (60 and 228 provide connections to Bedok), but 22 is the real loss due to the frequency of services 21 and 65. Plus, the positioning of the Downtown Line MRT stations here are pretty awkward, and requires a long walk to get there. 21 and 65 ply through high volume areas, so bus bunching will be a big problem moving forward without 22 to alleviate the frequencies.

    I suggest that 22 terminate at Bedok instead of Eunos, so it can still compliment 65 on the residential stretch of Bedok Reservoir Road (plus, with 66 gone, there is an open berth there). Otherwise, please reduce the off-peak frequencies of the Downtown Line.

    Reply
    • 24 November 2021 at 1:52 PM
      Permalink

      Agree, 22 can merge with 228 such that there can be cost savings as well (using part of an existing service’s routes & buses), and this mitigates issues from the loss of 66.

      Going to Eunos isn’t really helpful since Ubi – Eunos already has 61/63 and Paya Lebar Rd – Eunos has 76.

      Reply
  • 22 November 2021 at 12:16 PM
    Permalink

    Bedok reservoir (more to eunos side) loose 3 services in an instant

    Reply
    • 22 November 2021 at 7:55 PM
      Permalink

      You can the following petition to make a difference https://click.e.change.org/f/a/bEWebTO98_sJdtM_E1admg~~/AANj1QA~/RgRjfgPqP4QuAWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmNoYW5nZS5vcmcvcC9sYW5kLXRyYW5zcG9ydC1hdXRob3JpdHktc3RvcC10aGUtYW1lbmRtZW50LW9mLTUwNi10by1zZXJhbmdvb24_Y3NfdGs9QXNPZnJ4Qi11S200U1dxNXBHRUFBWGljeXl2TnlRRUFCRjhCdk52N055T19odVZ3WVhocFNJeEg2MFklM0QmdXRtX2NhbXBhaWduPTZiZDBkODgxMjczODQyZjk4ZmJkZTZlYWZhMzM1MWQ1JnV0bV9jb250ZW50PWluaXRpYWxfdjBfMl8wJnV0bV9tZWRpdW09ZW1haWwmdXRtX3NvdXJjZT1wZXRpdGlvbl9zaWduZXJfcmVjZWlwdF93ZWxjb21lJnV0bV90ZXJtPWNzVwNzcGNCCmGO6n6bYa6CLyhSEnlvdW5vZW1pQGdtYWlsLmNvbVgEAAAAAg~~

      Reply
      • 24 November 2021 at 6:33 AM
        Permalink

        Svc 22 – Shortening to eunos seems to duplicate svc 76 which starts and terminates at the same area, with duplication along the entire stretch of upper serangoon rd. Then again if it was to terminate at bedok, it duplicates svc 24 in terms of destination as well as the same stretch of upp paya lebar rd. However, there is no denial that svc 22 indeed had suffered ridership issues long ago, with a maj DD fleet changed to SD fleet.

        Svc 66 – Seeing the road map itself, it does duplicate a considerable amount of DTL stations, over 30% especially at bukit timah area. I think behind LTA’s mind, they would want Jurong resident to take 66 to beauty world, alight change to DTL. If going bedok area can take DTL all the way, or switch to svc 67 at little india. Also, can save on long deadhead trips for 66 buses required to travel bulim – bedok to start trips.

        Svc 65 – Nothing much to say.

        Svc 506 – A service that does not duplicate DTL. Shortening to serangoon means only 1 thing, prepping for bidadari ITH which shld be opening soon after 2 years of delay, which meant this service is going to shorten further as it goes by potong pasir – Woodleigh – Serangoon after exiting PIE.

        Anyways, some logical thinking summary:
        Svc 22 – Low ridership in recent times
        Svc 66 – Duplication of DTL/Save on deadhead distance & wise fuel usage
        Svc 506 – Prep for bidadari
        Svc 65 – Cover lost sectors of 22

        With these amendment comes reduction of fleet size, meaning those buses can then be used to replace SBST early retirement of a portion of KUBs, as that is the only reason I can think of not doing these amendments back in 2019.

        Reply
        • 28 November 2021 at 2:09 PM
          Permalink

          Agree that 22 has too many duplications. Eunos to Ubi/Macpherson is covered by 61,63 and 63M. Eunos to anywhere along the stretch of Upper Paya Lebar Road is covered by 76. Maybe a complete merge with 228 or withdrawn entirely?

          Also there is no point taking DTL all the way from west to east. Might as well transfer at Bugis to the EWL, then take a bus to your final destination.

          Reply
        • 28 November 2021 at 6:55 PM
          Permalink

          Actually, there is still demand for 22 between Bedok Reservoir Road and Tampines. I live in the area, so I know the ground here. The main issue residents here have is that we are worse off in terms of transport options if 22 is lost. Here is the rundown:
          – The MRT is not a popular choice here due to the poor locations of Kaki Bukit and Bedok Reservoir MRT stations. It’s a very long walk from our homes to the stations. I’m talking over 500m, and Bedok Reservoir is a mature estate, most people staying here are in their 40s and 50s.
          – Although 21 and 65 share the same routing, both services are prone to bus bunching due to their routing. 22 serves as a “stop gap” option in case traffic conditions prevent either bus from keeping to their frequencies. There are instances where residents have waited 20-30 minutes for either route because of traffic conditions along their respective routes.
          Without 22, us residents have to walk extremely long distances to the MRT, or if luck is not on our side, expect to wait 30 minutes for either 21 or 65 to travel towards Tampines. This is what we are upset about. At the very least, all I am asking for personally is a supplementary route not unlike 63M if LTA is adamant about cutting 22 (65M between Tampines and MacPherson Estate so buses can return back faster, and mitigate the bus bunching issues that 21 and 65 have over their routing).

          Reply
    • 22 November 2021 at 8:22 PM
      Permalink

      Not just Eunos side. Is the whole of Bedok Reservoir. If you all don’t mind, please help to sign on the following petition to see if there are any changes due to the large amount of people not happy with the amendments.

      Reply
      • 24 November 2021 at 6:14 PM
        Permalink

        I am the creator of the petition. I am begging you to spread this petition. I’ve sent to Pritam Singh and everyone. Please send this.

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *




Upcoming Events