(08 May 2019, 6:25 pm)Michael wrote I always thought the H1 was funded by GNE.

(08 May 2019, 8:33 pm)Dan wrote It is currently operated by Go North East commercially but has proven not to be commercially viable.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

(17 May 2019, 7:24 am)GuyParkRoyal wrote Nexus have issued an invitation to tender for secured journeys on service 50 with a contract start date of 1/9/19.

(01 May 2019, 6:28 pm)GuyParkRoyal wrote Invitation to tender has been issued for the H1 service with a contract start date of 21/7/2019 on a 12 month contract.

(17 May 2019, 7:24 am)GuyParkRoyal wrote Nexus have issued an invitation to tender for secured journeys on service 50 with a contract start date of 1/9/19.

(27 Mar 2019, 4:45 pm)GuyParkRoyal wrote Nexus have issued the invitation to tender for Miscellaneous and Schools Contracts for the period starting 1st September 2019. Requirements are low foor, easy access, PSVAR, Euro 4 or above with a capacity of 44, 60, 84 & 90.

Contracts have been awarded to:

A Line Coaches, Arriva, Go North East, Henry Cooper, JH Coaches, L&G Coaches, Stagecoach & Weardale.

(20 Jul 2019, 9:47 am)GuyParkRoyal wrote

Contracts have been awarded to:

A Line Coaches, Arriva, Go North East, Henry Cooper, JH Coaches, L&G Coaches, Stagecoach & Weardale.

(25 Jun 2019, 2:54 pm)GuyParkRoyal wrote Invitation to tender has been issued for Sunderland Connect 701 with a contract start date of 16/9/19.

(20 Jul 2019, 8:45 pm)Wybus wrote Why do they tender school buses every year, as it doesn’t give operators time or incentive to operate smart looking vehicles. If you draft in buses for new tenders, why bother repainting and refurbishing when you could lose it all 11 months later. It can’t be great for the schools dealing with new operators every year or the drivers either.

Where I’m from it’s normal for school tenders to be 3 years, and public services will be tendered for 3-5 years to enable some element of stablility.

Normally because Nexus can’t be sure that they have enough money to operate them for more than one year

(20 Jul 2019, 10:41 pm)OrangeArrow49 wrote Any news on who has been awarded the 792 contract starting in September?

A-Line

(20 Jul 2019, 10:03 pm)busmanT wrote

Normally because Nexus can’t be sure that they have enough money to operate them for more than one year

(21 Jul 2019, 1:17 am)Jordan2104 wrote

A-Line

Thanks. Is that from 1st September? I haven't managed to ride on the GNE one yet. I guess only single tickets and Day Rovers will be valid on the A-line 792?

I haven't used A-line, only pictured one doing Metro replacement once. They any good?

(21 Jul 2019, 7:20 pm)OrangeArrow49 wrote Does A-line currently operate any services?

Only the Mecca Bingo Gateshead services I believe currently.

(21 Jul 2019, 7:23 pm)ifm001 wrote

Only the Mecca Bingo Gateshead services I believe currently.

Thanks. Hopefully they will make a good job of the 792. Hopefully they have been/will be awarded other contracts. I look forward to using A-line.

(20 Jul 2019, 9:47 am)GuyParkRoyal wrote

Contracts have been awarded to:

A Line Coaches, Arriva, Go North East, Henry Cooper, JH Coaches, L&G Coaches, Stagecoach & Weardale.

Who has been awarded what? Is there somewhere to find the information?

(31 Jul 2019, 11:42 am)GuyParkRoyal wrote Durham County Council have issued an invitation to tender for a new Shotley Bridge local service. The service will include a minimum of 11 journeys per day to Consett Bus Station between the hours of 08:00 and 18:30. The contract duration is 24/11/19 to 26/10/24 and is subject to the contract sum being within a budget funded by a (planning) section 106 agreement.

(31 Jul 2019, 6:30 pm)2bagstew wrote Is this replacing a service ?


Sent from my iPhone 8+ using Tapatalk

Must admit to thinking it had something to do with a potential re-routing of the Consett - Newcastle 'expresses', until I re-read it myself.

A section 106 is in relation to a new housing development and the local authority.

When planning permission was given (to whatever estate is being built), the LA can insist on a section 106 and this can include things like a bus service, paid for (or heavily subsidised) by the developer.

(31 Jul 2019, 6:30 pm)2bagstew wrote Is this replacing a service ?


Sent from my iPhone 8+ using Tapatalk

It will not be replacing a service as it is planned to serve a new development. It is planned as an enhancement to Shotley Bridge bus services and as the proposal is to be priced on a net subsidy basis a possible outcome is an add on to existing commercial services.

Here is some information in relation to the section 106 that will fund the proposal:

The provision of a bus route through the site is an essential factor in any future
development of the site. This is because existing bus routes would be located
an unacceptable distance from much of the new housing area (this is normally
taken to be 400m). Given that the development could take 5 – 6 years to
complete, it is unlikely that the bus operator would run this route on a
commercial basis during the years that the development was under
construction. It would therefore be essential to secure the provision of this
service for at least the first five years of the development through an annual
contribution from the developers towards the running of the service. This
would be the subject of a Section 106 Planning Obligation so that it would be
binding upon future developers that might be selected by English Partnerships
to carry forward the detailed applications for elements of the development.

(01 Aug 2019, 9:10 am)GuyParkRoyal wrote

It will not be replacing a service as it is planned to serve a new development. It is planned as an enhancement to Shotley Bridge bus services and as the proposal is to be priced on a net subsidy basis a possible outcome is an add on to existing commercial services.

Here is some information in relation to the section 106 that will fund the proposal:

The provision of a bus route through the site is an essential factor in any future
development of the site. This is because existing bus routes would be located
an unacceptable distance from much of the new housing area (this is normally
taken to be 400m). Given that the development could take 5 – 6 years to
complete, it is unlikely that the bus operator would run this route on a
commercial basis during the years that the development was under
construction. It would therefore be essential to secure the provision of this
service for at least the first five years of the development through an annual
contribution from the developers towards the running of the service. This
would be the subject of a Section 106 Planning Obligation so that it would be
binding upon future developers that might be selected by English Partnerships
to carry forward the detailed applications for elements of the development.

(01 Aug 2019, 9:10 am)GuyParkRoyal wrote

It will not be replacing a service as it is planned to serve a new development. It is planned as an enhancement to Shotley Bridge bus services and as the proposal is to be priced on a net subsidy basis a possible outcome is an add on to existing commercial services.

Here is some information in relation to the section 106 that will fund the proposal:

The provision of a bus route through the site is an essential factor in any future
development of the site. This is because existing bus routes would be located
an unacceptable distance from much of the new housing area (this is normally
taken to be 400m). Given that the development could take 5 – 6 years to
complete, it is unlikely that the bus operator would run this route on a
commercial basis during the years that the development was under
construction. It would therefore be essential to secure the provision of this
service for at least the first five years of the development through an annual
contribution from the developers towards the running of the service. This
would be the subject of a Section 106 Planning Obligation so that it would be
binding upon future developers that might be selected by English Partnerships
to carry forward the detailed applications for elements of the development.

Done some digging and it appears to be the site of the old Shotley Bridge hospital in question.

Story Homes are the builder in this case.

(01 Aug 2019, 5:41 pm)Andreos1 wrote

Done some digging and it appears to be the site of the old Shotley Bridge hospital in question.

Story Homes are the builder in this case.

Didn’t think this estate has a through road, unless there’s to be a link road built into it. Wouldn’t attract me to a housing estate that would possibly have a bus running through for 11 hours.

(01 Aug 2019, 5:45 pm)Stanleyone wrote

Didn’t think this estate has a through road, unless there’s to be a link road built into it. Wouldn’t attract me to a housing estate that would possibly have a bus running through for 11 hours.

No idea, haven't been over that way for years. From what I can remember, there is scope to connect north - south alongside the GP surgery. Whether that's been done, I'm not sure.

Either way, the breakdown of the Section 106 for that estate is:

* Affordable Housing

* £163,579 bus service

* £25,000 improvements to Derwent Walk

* £83,700 play provision

* £125,000 public realm works to Shotley Bridge Village