614 UNO bus
1 April 2007
1,433 views
8 Comments
Recently I had a resident contact me regarding the 614 UNO Bus that is goes from Queensbury to Hatfield via High Barnet. Part of the route is along stapyleton Road which means that the bus has to navigate a particularly narrow stretch of road near the junction with Union Street. The resident had been involved in a minor accident with the bus at this pinch point.
This road is to narrow for a double decker bus. The obvious solution would be to re-route the bus down the High Street. This would then follow the same route as the London transport 263 bus when it travels from Potters Bar garage to Barnet hospital to start its route. I am currently waiting for a response from UNO and will post their reply when I receive it.
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...
It may be the obvious solution, but it’s probably not the most sensible. It seems to be working fine as far as I can see and does well to service the people who live along that stretch, diverting it along the High Street would only add another route servicing the high street, which we have several of already. The more important issue with UNO buses is that Oyster cards can’t be used on them, and any progress on this front would be much appreciated by the residents in all the borough’s it services. Thanks, Scott.
Scott
Thanks. The problem with the current route is that the bus cannot pass another vehicle where the road narrows. This has led to one minor accident already and could lead to a more serious one. The idea of being able to use Oyster on UNO is an interesting one although you could only do it for the part of the route that was within the travelcard zones.
Surely it would be better for all residents to concentrate on improving local bus services rather than diverting them (the 614 could benefit from increased frequency and reliability, as well as the acceptance of Oyster between Queensbury and St Albans Road). This bus could become a viable and more direct alternative to the 107 when travelling to Edgware. The 614 passes along Stapylton Road in order to serve the Spires terminus and in order to turn into Wood Street to continue the route (which would be impossible if this bus went down Barnet High Street). Stapylton Road is certainly wide enough for buses in my opinion. This sounds disturbingly like the Conservatives trying to divert the 384, which is also much needed along its present route. I personally have many ideas for improving and augmenting Barnet’s bus services which may or may not interest you, but I am sure diversions away from currently served roads would not be in the interests of passengers.
Also as a matter of clarification, when coming out of service the 263 buses do use Stapylton Road to travel between Barnet Hospital and Potters Bar Bus Garage; I see them often at night. It is impossible to turn from Wood Street into the northern section of Barnet High Street at Barnet Church, thus this is not a viable alternative for route 614.
Joshua
I am happy to hear your views. I’ve seen buses doing a right turn at Barnet church from the High St so I’m sure that it is possible. Whilst most of Stapyleton Rd is fine the area by Leather sellers is very tight and there has already been one minor accident that I am aware of at this point involving the UNO bus.
The 614 travels along Wood Street.
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&tab=wl&q=
clearly indicates traffic flow in the Barnet Church area using arrows. Whilst it is possible to turn from Wood Street into the northern part of the High Street, I cannot see how the reverse is possible. I understand that you are concerned about road accidents, as am I. However I don’t feel that it makes sense to talk about diverting buses because one has been involved in an accident. Many more car drivers are the causers of accidents, but no one seems to talk about banning cars from any of these roads. Bus routes are chosen for good reasons, because they will be used by passengers. I feel that there is an unhelpful NIMBY attitude propagated by some car drivers in the Barnet area who fail to recognise the needs of those who need/wish to travel by a more sustainable method. I am not accusing you of sharing these views, but talk of diverting important bus routes plays into the hands of the NIMBYs. (I see Tory Brian Coleman has recently pestered Ken Livingstone about removing the entire 384 route because he imagined buses cause damage to parked cars, which I have never seen. I wonder if Brian ever uses the bus himself?) I hope the Liberal Democrats are not attempting to appeal to traditional Tory voters by pushing an anti-bus /pro-car stance as well, because that is how it may appear. I have many suggestions for improving buses in the Barnet area, here are the main ones:
-Improved access from High Barnet Station to the northbound bus stop on Barnet Hill. At present to reach this bus stop requires a long walk involving back-tracking. Access could be improved by creating a step path from the station to directly opposite the bus stop, and then a new pelican crossing to cross Barnet Hill. I can’t count the number of buses I have missed trying to reach this stop at present.
- Extensions of route 34 and night bus N20 from Barnet Church to Barnet Hospital would improve access to the hospital and surrounding roads, and would reduce congestion in the Barnet Church area caused by terminating buses. One of the northbound Barnet Church bus stops could then take the place of the present terminus.
-Augmentation of route 384 to include the Wentworth and Byng Road circle would provide access to Foulds and Christchurch schools, and hopefully reduce 4×4 congestion in this area. Buses in both directions could operate a one-way circular service in this area. Route 384 could also benefit from an increase in frequency in evenings and Sundays, and better reliability towards Quinta Drive.
-An evening/sunday service on route 383 and a night service on route 307. Later buses on route 263.
-A direct route into central London as an alternative to the tube. This could be achieved by extending route 82 from North Finchley to Barnet, with a terminus possibly at Hadley Highstone to serve the northern end of Barnet High Street and Hadley Green (now only served by the infrequent 84). 82s already come out of service through Barnet to Potters Bar garage, and this fuel could be put to good use by picking up passengers on the way.
-Acceptance of Oyster on route 614 and increase in frequency/ introduction of Sunday service.
I have contacted TFL about these suggestions, but they cannot offer specific indications about whether any of them will be introduced. Please let me know if you would be willing to campaign for any of these improvements to buses. Thanks for reading!
I cannot see TfL doing anything. They have been very anti cross boundary services and have managed to kill most of them off.
I thing cross boundary services need to be taken out of TFL’s hands at present they have to get a permit to operate in London even on a commercial basis. With the Oyster card it has made it impossible for them to compete if they cannot operate as a part of the TFL network. The result has been the withdrawal of almost all these services. In North London the old 310 Hertford to Enfield route was axed back to Waltham Cross as a result of TFL.
As you note it results in poor services for those that live close to the county boundary.
One minor accident tends to indicate there is no problem. Are you suggesting that everytime there is an accident buses should be banned from a road ?
Leave your response!
Blogroll
Blogroll
Most Commented
Most Viewed