TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
I suppose reducing the PVR from 3 to 1 is good but to be honest I just don't get it.
And when I said isolated, I meant in terms of the route number, as you have the Bristol city routes, then the 319, 376, 379, 520 and then the 902/3/4. Seems very backwards!!
If there's a perceived need but funds are tight, then what else can you do but do the best in the circumstances. On 28th Aug, I posted....
"A replacement? Tender a one car service from Centre to Westbury off peak based around schools. Use either a commercial operator such as Abus (don't think it's massively out of their area) or use a welfare vehicle. Fund by axing Eve/Sun service
It's for BCC to sort!!!"
Glad they've sorted it but it shouldn't have taken so long

As for numbering, the other posters are right that it fits in exactly in numbering rationale. It's only the fact that the 309/10, 319, 376, 379 are the reminders of the traditional BOC scheme (and they're probably not long for this world). There's also the new 901 but perhaps the most "out of sequence" might be the once daily 224!!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And you've also got the 501/2, 505/6, 508 and 511-14 which are also BCC supported routes. It's been like that since Avon CC days, 'services numbered 500-599 are council supported routes' or whatever the red stickers used to say!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Especially during the period when Eurotaxis had a stint at operating the evening and Sunday services.
Thanks for reminding us of the low point in tendered services with Eurotaxis. When people (rightly or wrongly) complain about First or Wessex, this should always be cited as "it can always be worse"

If you pop into Stockwood, you'd be forgiven for thinking that Avon CC is still supporting services......
Last edited: