(20 Jan 2026, 12:09 pm)Andreos1 wrote https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c205p2k47epo
First I've heard of this.
New P&R site for Durham.
Tim McGuiness??
Durham County Council
Durham County Council
RE: Durham County Council
(20 Jan 2026, 12:09 pm)Andreos1 wrote https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c205p2k47epo
First I've heard of this.
New P&R site for Durham.
A pop up one, presumably for all the events the council keep cancelling.
RE: Durham County Council
https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/2...m=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwdGRjcAP6poZjbGNrA_qmSmV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHluez7-rUHHPMznhnHBPIpJ-16FwN8S80A8N-EbApQt4UmJ7BbqZp7vbijOI_aem_rgNC-CELzNe8XQMhNQ2YFw
Cuts to Home to School Transport
Cuts to Home to School Transport
'Illegitimis non carborundum'
RE: Durham County Council
(12 Feb 2026, 12:28 pm)Andreos1 wrote https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/2...m=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwdGRjcAP6poZjbGNrA_qmSmV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHluez7-rUHHPMznhnHBPIpJ-16FwN8S80A8N-EbApQt4UmJ7BbqZp7vbijOI_aem_rgNC-CELzNe8XQMhNQ2YFw
Cuts to Home to School Transport
No surprise there, with Nigel Fromage’s party in control.
RE: Durham County Council
The article says that particular change has been in the offing for a few years.
Durham is one of the few remaining LAs that provides free school transport for young people over 16 with EHCP and particular needs (though it’s a pain as you have to reapply for it every single year, even on a 3 year course) but it’s clear they’re going after that, next.
Durham is one of the few remaining LAs that provides free school transport for young people over 16 with EHCP and particular needs (though it’s a pain as you have to reapply for it every single year, even on a 3 year course) but it’s clear they’re going after that, next.
RE: Durham County Council
The pre 0930 fare for County Durham concession bus pass holders will rise from 50p to £1, effective April 1st 2026
RE: Durham County Council
'Illegitimis non carborundum'
RE: Durham County Council
Burnhope hasn't had a Sunday bus service for 15 years, has it? And I think hasn't had a bus to Durham for something over 50 years.
Tough for them to be cut off, of course, but its quite a small place.
I wonder if franchising will change this sort of thing - wouldn't be easy, basically down to needing more public spending (plenty of other calls on that). But it will definitely mean the finger couldn't be pointed at bus operators.
Tough for them to be cut off, of course, but its quite a small place.
I wonder if franchising will change this sort of thing - wouldn't be easy, basically down to needing more public spending (plenty of other calls on that). But it will definitely mean the finger couldn't be pointed at bus operators.
RE: Durham County Council
(Yesterday, 9:39 pm)Busadvocate wrote Burnhope hasn't had a Sunday bus service for 15 years, has it? And I think hasn't had a bus to Durham for something over 50 years.
Tough for them to be cut off, of course, but its quite a small place.
I wonder if franchising will change this sort of thing - wouldn't be easy, basically down to needing more public spending (plenty of other calls on that). But it will definitely mean the finger couldn't be pointed at bus operators.
Burnhope had a bus service to Durham until atleast 2003 when Arriva withdrew the 768.
RE: Durham County Council
(Yesterday, 9:39 pm)Busadvocate wrote Burnhope hasn't had a Sunday bus service for 15 years, has it? And I think hasn't had a bus to Durham for something over 50 years.
Tough for them to be cut off, of course, but its quite a small place.
I wonder if franchising will change this sort of thing - wouldn't be easy, basically down to needing more public spending (plenty of other calls on that). But it will definitely mean the finger couldn't be pointed at bus operators.
I think the issue is more than the (lack of) Sunday service.
Theres also the issue of the hourly service not always turning up and the times it actually does run.
'Illegitimis non carborundum'
RE: Durham County Council
Ah, had forgotten 768. It was a DCC contract. Have found a 2001 timetable, when it was a mixture of Stanley Travel and Arriva. But in the rather fine DCC timetable book for summer 1986, there was no Durham service, and hadn't been fro some time. Just the Fulton's then Watson's 712 to Stanley (hourly all day M-Sat and hourly from late Sun AM). In summer 1986 Burnhope also had a Tues and Fri Lanchester - Chester le Street bus, one each way, seemingly a joint United/ Northern operation (did each do one joureny?). CleSt market was a big thing then, hard to imagine now.
The way the current Lanchester - Stanley contract with GNE was tendered as a freestanding service but operates as an extension of the (mainly) commercial service 6. That is a mixed blessing, IMO. It gives a through service to Metrocentre and Ncle (tho a long way round) but any traffic etc delays there affect the service. And GNE has had its share of big bus reliability issues in modern times, too. A frestanding, rock-solid, local service with connections into direct services at Stanley probably better (assuming appropriate fares and timetabling, too).
Ah, had forgotten 768. It was a DCC contract. Have found a 2001 timetable, when it was a mixture of Stanley Travel and Arriva. But in the rather fine DCC timetable book for summer 1986, there was no Durham service, and hadn't been fro some time. Just the Fulton's then Watson's 712 to Stanley (hourly all day M-Sat and hourly from late Sun AM). In summer 1986 Burnhope also had a Tues and Fri Lanchester - Chester le Street bus, one each way, seemingly a joint United/ Northern operation (did each do one joureny?). CleSt market was a big thing then, hard to imagine now.
The way the current Lanchester - Stanley contract with GNE was tendered as a freestanding service but operates as an extension of the (mainly) commercial service 6. That is a mixed blessing, IMO. It gives a through service to Metrocentre and Ncle (tho a long way round) but any traffic etc delays there affect the service. And GNE has had its share of big bus reliability issues in modern times, too. A frestanding, rock-solid, local service with connections into direct services at Stanley probably better (assuming appropriate fares and timetabling, too).
The way the current Lanchester - Stanley contract with GNE was tendered as a freestanding service but operates as an extension of the (mainly) commercial service 6. That is a mixed blessing, IMO. It gives a through service to Metrocentre and Ncle (tho a long way round) but any traffic etc delays there affect the service. And GNE has had its share of big bus reliability issues in modern times, too. A frestanding, rock-solid, local service with connections into direct services at Stanley probably better (assuming appropriate fares and timetabling, too).
Ah, had forgotten 768. It was a DCC contract. Have found a 2001 timetable, when it was a mixture of Stanley Travel and Arriva. But in the rather fine DCC timetable book for summer 1986, there was no Durham service, and hadn't been fro some time. Just the Fulton's then Watson's 712 to Stanley (hourly all day M-Sat and hourly from late Sun AM). In summer 1986 Burnhope also had a Tues and Fri Lanchester - Chester le Street bus, one each way, seemingly a joint United/ Northern operation (did each do one joureny?). CleSt market was a big thing then, hard to imagine now.
The way the current Lanchester - Stanley contract with GNE was tendered as a freestanding service but operates as an extension of the (mainly) commercial service 6. That is a mixed blessing, IMO. It gives a through service to Metrocentre and Ncle (tho a long way round) but any traffic etc delays there affect the service. And GNE has had its share of big bus reliability issues in modern times, too. A frestanding, rock-solid, local service with connections into direct services at Stanley probably better (assuming appropriate fares and timetabling, too).
RE: Durham County Council
(Today, 1:16 am)Busadvocate wrote Ah, had forgotten 768. It was a DCC contract. Have found a 2001 timetable, when it was a mixture of Stanley Travel and Arriva. But in the rather fine DCC timetable book for summer 1986, there was no Durham service, and hadn't been fro some time. Just the Fulton's then Watson's 712 to Stanley (hourly all day M-Sat and hourly from late Sun AM). In summer 1986 Burnhope also had a Tues and Fri Lanchester - Chester le Street bus, one each way, seemingly a joint United/ Northern operation (did each do one joureny?). CleSt market was a big thing then, hard to imagine now.
The way the current Lanchester - Stanley contract with GNE was tendered as a freestanding service but operates as an extension of the (mainly) commercial service 6. That is a mixed blessing, IMO. It gives a through service to Metrocentre and Ncle (tho a long way round) but any traffic etc delays there affect the service. And GNE has had its share of big bus reliability issues in modern times, too. A frestanding, rock-solid, local service with connections into direct services at Stanley probably better (assuming appropriate fares and timetabling, too).
Not sure I agree there, unless it was every 20 minutes or so.
An hourly service is completely unusable in terms of connecting, because the same issues with the 6 still affect you. The only difference is instead of the bus being 10 minutes late, you're now standing around for 50 minutes in Stanley because you missed your connection.
I know which I'd rather have. Hub and spoke only works if both services are extremely frequent, 15 minute+ imo.
RE: Durham County Council
I appreciate that having to change buses has disadvantages too, but anything more than an hourly service at somewhere like Burnhope is pretty unrealistic. In any case, I strongly suspect most Burnhope passengers don't travel across Stanley on the 6, so would be unaffected (ie they are just travelling locally or changing onto other services). The buses to Newcastle etc are obviously much more frequent than hourly, so it's essentially the return that is the potential problem if the incoming bus runs late. If we are dreaming of a more perfect world, there could be a system of a guaranteed taxi back-up for a failed connection, which seems more realistic. Or even better, more radical bus priority to avoid the delays. Or failing that, an operating regime with more back-up resources to allow a substitute bus to come into service when needed.
RE: Durham County Council
(2 hours ago)Busadvocate wrote I appreciate that having to change buses has disadvantages too, but anything more than an hourly service at somewhere like Burnhope is pretty unrealistic. In any case, I strongly suspect most Burnhope passengers don't travel across Stanley on the 6, so would be unaffected (ie they are just travelling locally or changing onto other services). The buses to Newcastle etc are obviously much more frequent than hourly, so it's essentially the return that is the potential problem if the incoming bus runs late. If we are dreaming of a more perfect world, there could be a system of a guaranteed taxi back-up for a failed connection, which seems more realistic. Or even better, more radical bus priority to avoid the delays. Or failing that, an operating regime with more back-up resources to allow a substitute bus to come into service when needed.
Aye can't disagree, not sure how feasible it would be but I'd always love to see connections with the trains rather than Stanley for connections. Like Chester Le Street is just down the road in the other direction.
Can we not create a little transport hub here and connect buses with the trains considering they go in both directions 5 minutes apart and are generally a hell of a lot more punctual.
If you gave them enough layover they could easily offer guaranteed connections and it's a connection I'd happily make - especially considering the train takes 9 minutes from CLS to Newcastle and 6 minutes to Durham. Even if it was only a couple of journeys a day as there's not probably not unlimited demand to Newcastle; with your local service doing that local links.
Similar discussion for the likes of 71 and 700's aswell. You could be home to Great Lumley in 25 minutes, if there was a connection and would make the 71 much more sustainable whereas the idea of trodding on the X21 for 40 minutes, then connecting isn't attractive imo.