Attachment 2 Launceston CBD Bus Interchange Study (Total Pages=58)
Launceston CBD Bus Interchange Study
transport | community | industrial & mining | carbon & energy
Prepared for:
Client representative: Date: Launceston City Council Nigel Coates 24 September 2014 Rev01 Table of Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................... i 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Study Objectives .................................................................................................................................... 1 3. Tasks Undertaken .................................................................................................................................. 1 4. Background Reports .............................................................................................................................. 2 5. Behaviour of People .............................................................................................................................. 6 6. Launceston Revitalisation Project ......................................................................................................... 7 7. Transport Network in the CBD .............................................................................................................. 7 8. Existing Bus Stops and Bus Services in the CBD .................................................................................... 8 8.1 St John Street Bus Interchange – Metro and Tiger Bus ............................................................. 8 8.2 Cimitiere Street Transits Centre – Regional and Intra City Bus Service ................................... 12 8.3 Other Bus Stops and Facilities in the CBD ................................................................................ 12 9. Initial Stakeholder Consultation .......................................................................................................... 13 9.1 City Prom Survey ...................................................................................................................... 13 9.2 Bus Passenger Interviews ........................................................................................................ 14 9.3 Summary of Stakeholder Needs and Issues ............................................................................. 14 10. Published Bus Interchange Standards ................................................................................................. 16 11. Launceston CBD Bus Interchange ‐ Options Assessment .................................................................... 17 11.1 Options ..................................................................................................................................... 17 11.2 Multi Criteria Analysis .............................................................................................................. 18 12. Consultation of 4 Options ................................................................................................................... 21 12.1 Bus Passenger Interviews ........................................................................................................ 22 12.2 Shopfront Consultation ............................................................................................................ 22 12.3 Commercial Real Estate in the CBD ......................................................................................... 23 12.4 Councils Website ...................................................................................................................... 23 12.5 Launceston City Heart Project – planning workshop ............................................................... 25 12.6 Launceston Transport Futures Workshop ............................................................................... 25 13. Discussion ............................................................................................................................................ 26 14. Conclusion and Recommendation ...................................................................................................... 33 List of figures Figure 1: Location of CBD bus interchange .................................................................................................... 9 Figure 2: Tiger Bus route .............................................................................................................................. 10 Figure 3: Launceston Bus Network map ....................................................................................................... 11 List of tables Table 1: Bus route numbers .......................................................................................................................... 9 Table 2: Patronage boardings and transfer boardings for week commencing 18 May 2014 ..................... 10 Table 3: Summary of bus passenger interviews .......................................................................................... 14 Table 4: Criteria weighting .......................................................................................................................... 19 Table 5: MCA Score and Ranking ................................................................................................................. 20 Table 6: Options for consultation ................................................................................................................ 21 Table 7: Bus passenger option preference – from bus passenger interviews and shopfront consultation 22 Table 8: Results of survey questions – from the shopfront consultation and website ............................... 24 Table 9: Benefits of Bus Interchange Options ............................................................................................. 32 pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D City Prom Survey
Bus Stop Options Assessed
Multi‐Criteria Assessment Results
Bus Stop Options for Consultation
Prepared by: Reviewed by: Authorised by: …………………………………………………. David Hugo Date: 24 September 2014 …………………………………………………. Ross Mannering Date: 24 September 2014 …………………………………………………. Ross Mannering Date: 24 September 2014 Report Revision History Rev No. Description Prepared by Reviewed by Authorised by Date 00 Original issue David Hugo David Hugo Ross Mannering 22/09/2014 © 2014 pitt&sherry This document is and shall remain the property of pitt&sherry. The document may only be used for the purposes for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. Unauthorised use of this document in any form is prohibited. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as Executive Summary The bus interchange in Launceston is located in front of shops in the Central Business District. There is anecdotal evidence that anti social behaviour at the bus interchange is detrimental to the prosperity of businesses in this area. Businesses have expressed a preference for the bus stops to be relocated. The Launceston City Council (Council) is planning to revitalise the central business district (CBD) through the Launceston City Heart Project. This project will provide an opportunity to make changes to the CBD and the bus interchange to ensure that the future needs of Launceston and its communities are met. With the introduction of the City Heart Project and concerns raised about the impact of behaviour on businesses near the bus interchange, Council engaged pitt&sherry to conduct a study into options for the bus interchange in Launceston and make recommendations for a preferred option. The study considered the following objectives: 
That the location of the bus interchange should provide convenient and practical access for bus passengers to reach known destinations in the CBD 
Bus stop waiting areas have sufficient space for waiting bus passengers and should not unduly congest the access to nearby businesses  The affects of inappropriate behaviour should be minimised. The study included the following: 
Review of previous reports on public transport, behaviour in the CBD and Launceston in the future 
Consultation with stakeholders through a variety of methods 
Consideration and development of options for the bus interchange 
Assessment of bus interchange options through a Multi Criteria Assessment (MCA) 
Consideration of the information and data collected  Recommendation of a preferred option Seven options for the bus interchange were assessed through a MCA. In the MCA each option was considered and scored against a set of criteria. A key message from the MCA conducted for this study is that the bus interchange should be centrally located. The highest scoring option for this MCA was to leave the bus interchange in its current location. Each option considered was assumed to have new seating, shelters and lighting. From the study it was established that: 
Anti social behaviour has been occurring in the Launceston CBD for many years and it is reported that this behaviour is having a detrimental effect on businesses located near the bus interchange. Anti social behaviour appears to be perpetrated mostly by youths in the afternoon after school has finished for the day. 
While waiting for buses, people sometimes lean up against shop windows, congest shop entrances and display other forms of anti social behaviour. 
Anti social behaviour has been investigated and reported in the past. Wide ranging recommendations have been put forward to address the behaviour problems. Implementation of one recommendation alone will not solve the behaviour problem. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as i 
A public transport system is essential for providing access to destinations in the CBD for people who do not use other transport methods. It is also a vital part of the future sustainability of Launceston. 
A bus interchange in Launceston needs to be centrally located and connecting buses must be close by and access between them not impeded. 
Bus passengers need sufficient space to wait in all weather conditions. 
Regional bus passengers transfer to Metro buses and the two services need to be reasonably close to each other 
One of the intentions of the City Heart Project is to improve safety and amenity for pedestrians and cyclists After consideration of all the information and data collected it is recommended that the bus interchange stay where it is now and, the following changes are incorporated: 
Include barriers to divert sound and noise 
Include barriers to separate bus waiting areas from footpaths and shop fronts 
Provide sufficient space for waiting bus passengers 
Include shelters, seating and lighting that encourages people to use the bus waiting area in all weather conditions  Improve the amenity of footpaths at shop fronts It is also recommended that the feasibility of further improvements be investigated during development of the design and these include: 
Reducing the number of private vehicles entering St John Street 
Increasing the width of bus waiting areas. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as ii 1.
Introduction The bus interchange for public transport buses in Launceston is located in St John Street and York Street in the CBD. The bus stops are located in front of retail shops. Anecdotally, the behaviour of people waiting at bus stops is at times anti social and business owners in the vicinity of the bus stops have expressed concern about the impact of this behaviour on their businesses. The business owners have expressed a preference for the bus stops to be relocated. Launceston City Council (Council) is planning to revitalise the central business district (CBD) through the Launceston City Heart Project (LCHP). With the introduction of this project, and concerns raised about behaviour at bus stops, the Council has engaged pitt&sherry to undertake a study of bus stops in the CBD to ensure that the needs of the community are met, the best arrangements for bus stops are in place and that the objectives of the Greater Launceston Plan are also met. The study is to consider alternative bus stop and interchange options in the CBD, (including no changes) and make recommendations for a preferred option. 2.
Study Objectives In indentifying and assessing options for the bus interchange Council’s brief required the study to consider the following objectives: 
That the location of the bus interchange should provide convenient and practical access for bus passengers to reach known destinations in the CBD 
Bus stop waiting areas have sufficient area for waiting bus passengers and should not unduly congest the access to nearby businesses; and 
The affects of inappropriate behaviour should be minimised. The study was also to consider: 
Reducing the congestion and pollution from heavy vehicles in the CBD 
Balancing the needs of pedestrians and traffic in the CBD 
To consider improved amenity for pedestrians and social needs given this is one of the underlying objectives of the GLP. 
Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) guidelines 3.
Tasks Undertaken The following tasks were undertaken during the study. Information Collection and Review 
Read background reports 
Familiarisation of bus routes and bus operations in the CBD 
Review bus patronage data 
Visit the bus stops in the CBD 
Consult with stakeholders and understand their needs and issues pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 1 
Familiarisation with Councils City Heart Project 
Interview bus passengers at bus stops in the CBD Options Assessment 
Review options nominated by Council and identify two additional feasible options 
Facilitate an evaluation process and assess options against a set of criteria Consultation 
Undertake community consultation for selected options. Reporting 
4.
Present the findings of the study in a report. Background Reports Background reports have been reviewed and the relevant points are described below. Tasmanian Urban Passenger Transport Framework – 2010, The Department of State Growth The Tasmanian Urban Passenger Transport Framework provides a vision and a direction in relation to Tasmania’s urban passenger transport system. The framework is focused on improving challenges in relation to the following implications 
Climate change 
Rising transport costs 
Integrated transport and land use planning 
Reliance on cars 
Improving health and accessibility of individuals and communities  Developing liveable urban communities The framework outlines actions and a new vision to address the above challenges. Greater Launceston Metropolitan Passenger Transport Plan – 2011, Department of State Growth Background Paper The Tasmanian Urban Passenger Transport Framework’s key initiative is to implement Metropolitan Transport Plans to ensure that investment in passenger transport systems are encouraged and supported by the land use planning choices. The Greater Launceston area covers Launceston, Meander Valley and West Tamar Councils. This report provides an overview of the demographic and population data, historic and current land use patterns and infrastructure provision to identify current utilisation of the network and likely future trends. The report also provides specific information on current bus demand, trip attractors and defined routes. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 2 Metro bus and private bus operators, Redline Tasmania and Tassie Link were consolidated at The Transit Centre in 2002. In 2007, Metro relocated to St John Street while Redline and Tassie Link remained at the Transit Centre. The Launceston passenger transport system aim is to provide services to direction trips (such as students/commuters and non‐directed trips (shopping, recreation and social). The report suggests 68.9% of patronage during weekday commuter peak time is predominately students for Metro and private services. Outside commuter peak hours adult patronage is dominant. Problem Identification Paper There is an over reliance on private cars for everyday trips within Launceston which has encouraged the planning of the city ‐ low density and dispersed development patterns. The key demographic characteristics that helped shape the current transport networks and behaviours are: 
Population growth in outer urban areas 
Low levels of population density 
An ageing population 
Areas of social exclusion  Low levels of physical activity. This paper identifies passenger transport problems for active transport and public transport. The main problems associated with public transport are listed below. 
Negative perception of public transport as a viable mode of daily trips 
Some areas of transport not well services by public transport 
High demand during peak times due to student patronage travelling to outer areas 
Low frequency and slow travel times on public transport 
Lack of integration between public, private and community service providers 
Short hours of operation of bus services 
Lack of strategic direction on public transport network development. The Greater Launceston Plan‐ 2014 The Greater Launceston Plan sets out a strategic framework to achieve Launceston City Council’s vision. “Sustainable prosperity for greater Launceston will be achieved by consolidating and building nationally and internationally recognized strategic advantages for the region through a focus on creativity and innovation, maintaining exceptional environmental and liveability qualities and ensuring a diverse, connected and inclusive region.” The plan identifies key planning development and investment initiatives for Launceston and its surrounds for the next 20 years. An initiative is to add community amenity and value to established public transport corridors. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 3 Get on Board Core Passenger Services Review‐ 2005 This review summarises outcomes from the regional seminar in Launceston held at the Inveresk tram sheds to review core passenger services. The present trends and issues identified from the seminar that are relevant to this study are listed below. 
safety, hard stands on bus stops, improve design of pick up and drop off areas, standard of gravel roads, attitudes of other road users 
Access to buses 
Overloading particularly during peak hours  Safety publicity – more publicity of school bus safety The seminar also covered a review of the future directions and values of Core Passenger Services Systems. The direction that the seminar member considered important were Sustainable funding, meeting community needs, better buses, safety and security. The high rated values that were considered important were profitability, safety, equity and sustainability. The Gehl Report – Launceston Public Spaces and Public Life 2011 The Gehl Report focuses on the Launceston Central Area and highlights the effects of car dominated space and benefits for increasing alternative transport routes. Gehl Architects have also provided a similar report for Hobart City Council. The report recommends reducing traffic volumes and speeds in the centre, improving the attractiveness of cycling and walking links. Launceston Safer Community Partnership ‐ LCC Internal Report 2009 In 2009 the Launceston Safer Community Partnership (LSCP) received complaints from shop owners located around the St John street bus stops. The complaints related to anti social behaviour, congregations of young people after 3pm, disruptions to business and feeling unsafe around the bus stops. The LSCP made enquiries and found that: 
City Prom reported that behaviour issues at the St John Street bus stops have been occurring for some years. Anti social behaviour included loud noise, bad language, spitting, skateboarding, standing on seats, and crowding of footpaths and shop entrances 
There was one case of criminal assault at the newsagent across from the bus stop. 
Business owners were adamant that the bus stops located outside the shops was a conflicting function 
Only one real and tangible risk resulting from the complaints was identified and that is an injury to a pedestrian due to congestion on the footpaths 
The business community wants the bus stops located outside the CBD. In September 2009 Metro staff attended the bus stop on a daily basis and found that no anti social behaviour was observed and that children dispersed very quickly while they were present. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 4 Council staff reviewed the findings of the LSCP and concluded the following: 
Buses are welcome into the CBD as they provide an alternative to sustainable transport options. 
There were insufficient incidents reported during the winter 2009 to warrant moving bus tops to a transit centre.  Moving bus stops to a transit centre was not supported Council staff made the following recommendations: 
Organise surveillance during the periods when anti social behaviour is most prevalent 
Create bag zones so that footpaths and shop entrances are not congested 
Undertake further consultation with business owners and promote public transport and vibrant retailing 
Conduct surveys to establish passenger origins and destinations and determine the reasons why passengers are held up at the bus tops 
Change time tables to reduce waiting times LCC Report on Antisocial Behaviour in the CBD ‐ 3P Consulting Report, 2011 This report was commissioned by Council in response to tensions between retailers and youth in the CBD. The report is based on the findings of consultation between business owners and youth, and also Government, Tasmanian Police, City Prom, youth organisations and the Chamber of Commerce. The report found that: 
Businesses and Youth were surveyed. Youth were engaged through formal approaches to high schools. A total of 85 responses were received from businesses and 128 responses from students. 
Antisocial behaviour has been reported by all businesses in the mall, 80% in other areas and only 29% in the Quadrant Mall. 
The most common time for anti social behaviour was 3pm to 6pm on Monday to Friday. 
The most prevalent age group perpetrating anti social behaviour was 13 to 18 year olds followed by 19 to 25 year olds. 
Business owners suggested moving bus stops, creating youth environments away from the CBD. 
For business owners in the vicinity of the bus stops between the Brisbane Street Mall and York Street the bus stops were particularly an issue from 2:30pm onwards. 
Youth reported that they too had witnessed anti social behaviour. 
Youth had reported feeling unsafe at times. 
Youth come to the CBD after finishing school at Launceston College or transiting through the CBD. Youth also come to the CBD to meet with friends and hang out. 
Youth identified options for reducing the incidence of anti social behaviour: more police supervision, create more dedicated places for young people, create their own bus stops that they could be proud of, music, dance crews, a young person cafe where they can hang out, more shops and gyms 
Shoppers were also approached and reiterated the information provided by businesses and youth 
University research suggests that a CBD is first and foremost a commercial space and generally not a place for non commercial activity. The young are welcome in the CBD by businesses when they are able to spend money in shops. For those who are not able to spend money in shops the options are limited. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 5 
There is an under utilisation of Civic Square and there are opportunities to create a space that is attractive to youth. 
The cinema is a strong attraction for youth. 
Police can ask people who are being a nuisance to move on but have limitations when an offence is not being committed. 
The report included statistics from Tasmania Police but this was for the Launceston Division and was not specific to a particular area of the CBD. 
There are few cities, shopping complexes or malls anywhere in the developed world that does not experience tensions as experienced in Launceston. 
Identified that social issues are multi facetted and will not be addressed by a single solution 
Social issues have been investigated in other cities around Australia and solutions have been proposed and included actions such as; provision of community facilities and programs suitable for youth, public education, engagement across all sectors of the community, establishing behaviour standards. The report identified 17 short and long term recommendations including: provide a dedicated general purpose youth centre in central Launceston, stakeholders across the community working together and relocating the bus stops from St John Street. 5.
Behaviour of People Anti social behaviour in the CBD has been present for many years and it is reported to be perpetrated mostly by youths after 3pm on weekdays. This is not unique to Launceston. The behaviour issue has been investigated previously and recommendations have been put forward to solve the issue. The recommendations put forward previously include numerous actions but generally include; engagement with government, schools and the community, provision of youth specific facilities and changes to bus stops. Relocation of the bus stops alone will not solve the behaviour problem. The behaviour issues have not yet been resolved. The behaviour displayed by a person is subjective and can be considered anti social by one person but considered acceptable by another. Anti social behaviour in the CBD has been reported to Police includes; loud noise, offensive language, spitting, skylarking and standing on seats. Most of these behaviours are not considered an offense under the law. Police have in the past used the provisions of the Police Offenses Act 1935 to request youth to “move on”. The 3P Consulting report described how Police have experienced tension when asking someone to move on when they are not committing an offense. Anecdotally it is reported that anti social behaviour has increased in recent years. Police have statistics for offenses in the Launceston area but the statistics do not include data specific to bus stops in the CBD. Moving bus stops without addressing other social issues could result in moving the behaviour issue from one site to another. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 6 6.
Launceston Revitalisation Project The Launceston City Heat Project (LCHP) is a project to revitalise the CBD. The project, identified in the Greater Launceston Plan focuses on seven zones within the CBD including three major areas: The Mall, The Avenue and Civic Square. The project will provide a vision for Launceston and define the role of its CBD well into the future. It will ensure that the heart of Launceston is an inviting place for the whole community; one where business wants to invest, people want to come and shop, meet each other and a place that everyone wants to go to. The whole community has been offered a key role in the development of this project with opportunities provided to contribute to shaping their city's future role. The projects focus on renewing the CBD, making and improving spaces for people, improving safety and amenity for pedestrians and cyclists linking to and within the CBD improving connections to all central and major areas will have a major impact on the improving investment, tourism, liveability and urban design for the city. Council is planning for improvements to Cameron Street and Civic Square in the first instance. The Greater Launceston Plan also recommended improving the amenity and value of the public transport corridor. 7.
Transport Network in the CBD The central part of the CBD includes St John Street, the Avenue, and Brisbane Street Mall. These areas have wide footpaths and it is estimated that there is more pedestrian traffic in this area than other areas. The CBD in Launceston has a combination of one way and two way streets made up of a grid like network. Traffic travelling through the CBD generally utilise Charles Street, Paterson Street, George Street and York Street. St John Street and the Avenue are in the heart of the CBD and these streets are not normal routes for travelling through the CBD. There is currently a restriction on private vehicles making a right turn movement from Paterson Street to St John Street. This movement is not allowed on weekdays between the hours of 8am and 5:30pm. As a result St John Street and the Avenue have much lower traffic volumes. Vehicle speeds are also lower. Apart from buses and delivery vehicles, heavy vehicles generally do not travel frequently through the CBD. There are dedicated bicycle lanes on selected roads around the CBD but there are no dedicated cycle lanes in the heart of the CBD. There are bicycle racks at various locations around the CBD including at bus stops. There are taxi ranks at various locations in the CBD. One of the taxi ranks is located outside Myer in St John Street. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 7 8.
Existing Bus Stops and Bus Services in the CBD 8.1
St John Street Bus Interchange – Metro and Tiger Bus Metro The St John Street bus interchange is located between York Street and Paterson Street. In this area there are 5 bus stops known as bus stops A, B, C, E and F. Bus stop G is located with bus stops E and F but Metro no longer uses it. These bus stops service 29 bus routes. Bus stops A, B and C are located between Paterson Street and the Avenue and bus stops E and F are located between York Street and the Avenue. There is an additional bus stop in York Street outside Allgoods and this is known as bus stop H. The footpaths between the kerb and shop fronts at bus stops A, B, C E and F are up to 6m wide. The Tasmanian Government’s Metro bus service uses the St John Street bus interchange and York Street bus stop. The Metro buses service the suburbs of Launceston. Metro provide regular school bus services that deliver students to the CBD. School services operate during the morning before school starts and after school finishes in the afternoon. There is one bus for each school that picks school children up from the bus interchange and drops them off at the school during the morning period. In the afternoon period there are more frequent school bus trips from the school to the bus interchange. Each bus stop is provided with seating and shelters. The seats are metal and the shelters have a glass roof. At bus stops A, B and C the shelters have a glass wall and at bus stops E and F the glass wall has been removed. The bus stops have security cameras which were installed by Council following previous complaints of anti social behaviour but these are not in operation. There is no lighting at the shelters apart from street lighting. This lighting is not sufficient for reading timetables or a newspaper while waiting at the bus stop. Smoking is not allowed within the bus stop area and signs are in place describing this rule. Outside the Cotton On shop at bus stop A, B and C there is a wall where people (mainly bus passengers) congregate behind. The wall is part of the building facade. The area behind the wall is partly out of view of most passing pedestrians. The area does however provide shelter in inclement weather. Next to this site, there is also a lane connecting St John Street with the Centreway Arcade. Other than the wall and the lane the remainder of the bus stop is highly visible in a busy street. At bus stops E and F there is the Tatler Arcade and this is an area where people are able to congregate and smoking is allowed. Tatler Arcade is partly out of view of people in St John Street. Apart from this, remainder of the bus stop is highly visible in a busy street. The location of Metro bus stops in the CBD and bus route numbers is shown in Figure 1. From the map it can be seen that the bus stops are located within walking distance of each other enabling passengers to conveniently walk from one bus stop to the other. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 8 Bus stops at the interchange are associated with the regular bus routes outlined in Table 1. Bus stop Bus route number Suburbs A 48, 58, 66, 76 & 78 Kings Meadows, Youngtown, Prospect, Blackstone Heights, Hadspen B 60, 64, 70 & 74 Summerhill & Prospect C 40 & 50 Norwood, Youngtown and Kingsmeadows D Tiger bus City E 2, 6, 7 & 10 Invermay, Mowbray, University, Mayfield, Alanvale, & Rocherlea F 20, 25, 28, 30, 32, Ravenswood, Mowbray, Invermay, Newstead, Norwood, Waverley, 35, 38, 45 & 55 Ravenswood & Punchbowl H 80, 90 & 95 Trevallyn and Riverside Table 1: Bus route numbers A map of Launceston Metro bus network is provided in Figure 1. Figure 1: Location of CBD bus interchange Tiger Bus – City and Commuter Bus Service The Council owned Tiger bus uses a bus stop in St John Street opposite St Andrews Church (between Paterson and Cameron Street). This is known as bus stop D. The Tiger bus provides transport for the public and tourists to key destinations in and around the CBD. It also provides transport for commuters who park at the Inveresk carparks. The Tiger bus routes are shown in Figure 2. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 9 Figure 2: Tiger Bus route Metro Passenger Data Metro provided information on the number of passengers boarding at each terminal and the number of passengers that transfer from one bus to another at the bus interchange (transfer boardings). Table 2 indicates the number of boardings and transfer boardings for week commencing 18 May 2014. Metro advised that there will be an average of 10,000 to 11,000 boarding in a week. Patronage Terminals / Bus Stops All Boardings Transfer Boardings Only % of Transfer Boardings Only Non Transfer Boardings Stop A: 692 91 13.15 601 Stop B: 1389 252 18.14 1137 Stop C: 2364 511 21.62 1853 Stop E: 3676 723 19.67 2953 Stop F: 1406 274 19.49 1132 Stop H: 864 116 13.43 748 Terminus (Tiger Bus) 548 ‐ ‐ ‐ 10939 1967 17.98 8972 Total Table 2: Patronage boardings and transfer boardings for week commencing 18 May 2014 pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 10 As can be seen from Table 2 the total number of boardings at the interchange is 10,939 and approximately 18% (1,967 transfer boardings only) of all boardings are transferring to another bus and utilising the interchange. Figure 3: Launceston Bus Network map pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 11 8.2
Cimitiere Street Transits Centre – Regional and Intra City Bus Service The Transit Centre is located in Cimitiere Street opposite the Council and Police buildings. The Transit Centre is privately owned. The Transit Centre is used by regional bus operators Redline coaches and Tassie Link. These operators pay rent for the transit facilities. The Transit Centre features include: 
Five bus bays (forward in reverse out) and one drive through bay 
An indoor ticket counter and waiting area  Access to public toilets Tassie Link bus routes service the following areas: 
Perth, Cressy, Evandale and Longford 
Scottsdale, Bridport and the north east (operated by Sainty Bus Service) 
St Helens, Bicheno and the Fingal Valley (operated by Callows Bus Service)  Devonport and Hobart via Launceston. Redline coaches also operate a bus service between Hobart, Launceston and Smithton, and also from the Deloraine area to Launceston on school days. Metro have access to a bus bay but they no longer use it. 8.3
Other Bus Stops and Facilities in the CBD Launceston College Metro and some regional bus services deliver and collect school children from bus stops in Brisbane Street outside Launceston College. Brisbane Street outside Target – West Tamar and East Tamar Bus Services The West Tamar area is serviced by the Manion bus service and the East Tamar area is serviced by the Lee bus service. Both of these bus services drop off and collect passengers from bus stops outside Target in Brisbane Street. Bus Layby in Paterson Street, Princes Square, Cameron Street Metro have bus laybys around the city and they are used by buses for waiting before moving to the designated bus stops at the interchange. This reduces congestion and queuing at the bus e interchange. Bus laybys are located in Paterson Street, Cameron Street and at the Princes square. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 12 9.
Initial Stakeholder Consultation In June 2014 a meeting was held with representatives from the Launceston City Council, Metro and City Prom. At the meeting each stakeholder provided information on the issues and needs that were important to them. City Prom described the results of the survey it conducted in February 2014. Council also described its plans for the revitalization of the CBD: the Launceston City Heart Project. Following the meeting the bus stops in the CBD were inspected and the issues around the businesses and bus stops were discussed. A separate meeting was held with the Tasmanian Bus Association. Later in June bus passengers waiting at bus stops were interviewed and asked questions about bus stop locations. From these meetings, the site visit and interviews a greater understanding was gained of the current needs and issues in and around the CBD bus interchange. 9.1
City Prom Survey City Prom is an organisation that promotes the central business district in Launceston and represents the interests of businesses. In February 2014 City Prom surveyed 73 businesses in St John Street between Paterson and Elizabeth streets. The businesses were asked 8 questions and the responses are summarised below: 
58% believed the bus stops had an impact on their business and 37% thought it was a negative impact while 32% thought it was both positive and negative 
79% supported relocating bus stops to an alternative area with 73% supporting moving it to the Transit Centre 
78% thought the relocation would not impact on their business and 77% thought the relocation would not impact on the city  75% did not support upgrading the existing bus stops Suggestions were put forward for alternative locations for the bus interchange and this included: 
Princes Square 
Elizabeth Street  St John Street near the Church and library Other comments included: 
Relocate afternoon school bus stops 
Provide a shuttle bus between the Transit Centre and the CBD to assist with elderly and people with disabilities 
Consider moving the bus stops outside the Factorie shop (bus stops E and F) 
Increase the presence of police 
Replace bus stops with car parking and parking meters  Buses create noise and pollution in the city A copy of the survey results are attached at Appendix A. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 13 9.2
Bus Passenger Interviews pitt&sherry conducted a short interview with 43 bus passengers at the CBD bus interchange on three separate occasions in June 2014. The separate occasions included a morning, middle of the day and after school. Questions that were asked during the interview and responses are summarised in Table 3. Question Response Where do you travel from and to? Do you use connecting buses? 
Most passengers were travelling from suburbs to the city. 
9 passengers transferred from one bus route to another 
2 passengers transferred from a regional service to the Metro service Are the bus stops in St John Street at a convenient 
location? What do you like and don’t like about bus stops 

What do you think about moving the bus stops to 
another location in the CBD? Likes: bus timetable frequency, location of bus stops, smoking is banned, shelters Don’t likes: congestion at peak hour, aged bus stop areas, behaviour, seating and shelters. 13 people prefer the bus stops to be centrally located 
13 people prefer there is no change 
2 people think the transit centre is a good choice 
6 don’t mind change What do you think about comfort, seating, 
lighting and shelter at the bus stops? Do you feel safe at the bus stops? 
Have you noticed inappropriate behaviour? 42 people thought the bus stops were convenient 
13 people complained about the standard of seating, shelters, lighting and smoking. Only 1 person felt unsafe during the day and 5 people felt unsafe in the dark 13 people had noticed inappropriate behaviour Table 3: Summary of bus passenger interviews 9.3
Summary of Stakeholder Needs and Issues The relevant information learned from the initial stakeholder consultation is summarised below: Behaviour 
The anti social behaviour issues are not a recent occurrence, it has been occurring for many years 
Most behavioural issues are predominantly related to school aged children in the afternoon and sometimes related to other young people not at school 
Most behaviour issues occur at bus stops E and F (between York Street and the Brisbane St Mall) pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 14 
People congregate in Tatler Arcade at bus stop E and F 
People congregate and smoke behind the building facade (directly outside Cotton On) at bus stops A, B and C. Businesses 
There are 5 vacant shops between York Street and Tatler Arcade. One of the vacancies is on the opposite side of the road to the bus stops. 
There are 3 vacant shops between Paterson Street and the Brisbane Street Mall. One of the vacancies is on the opposite side of the road to the bus stops. 
City Prom advises that businesses prefer for bus stops to be moved. 
Businesses report that inappropriate behaviour is sometimes directed at staff 
Customers are less likely to visit a shop, particularly after 3pm, due to behaviour and congestion on footpaths outside shops. The behaviour is offensive to some and it makes some people feel unsafe. Bus Waiting Areas 
While there is seating at bus stops, people waiting for buses lean up against shop windows, sometimes with the sole of their shoe against the window. In busy periods people waiting on the footpath creates congestion. 
At bus stops A, B and C there are glass backs on the shelters and at bus stops E and F the glass backs have been removed. The shelters with glass backs provide increased security for waiting passengers compared to the shelters which are open to the footpath behind. 
People waiting for buses use the seating but many people also stand on the footpath in front of shops and during busy periods the footpaths become congested. Sometimes shop entrances are blocked by bus passengers. There is space at bus stop G that is underutilised. 
The shelters do not provide shade in the summer. 
Water ponds on the footpath under the shelters when it rains. Bus Operations 
Some shop owners have reported to City Prom that diesel fumes from buses sometimes waft into shops. 
Some shop owners have reported to City Prom that the noise from buses engines and exhaust are loud and a nuisance. 
When buses are waiting at bus stops for more than 5 minutes they are required to turn the engine off. Regional Bus Operations 
When Metro bus drivers were on strike the number of passengers catching the regional bus service was reported to have reduced by an estimated 20%. This is anecdotal evidence of the number of regional bus passengers transferring to the Metro service. 
Regional bus services need to be reasonably close to the Metro service. 
The needs of regional bus passengers is different to Metro passengers. Regional passengers need a ticket counter, seating and sufficient room and area to store luggage. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 15 
Due to the cost of renting bays space at the Transit Centre, bus operators are considering alternative locations. Metro bus operations 
Feedback from Metro customers is that the current location for bus stops in the CBD is satisfactory and that relocation to the Transit centre is not preferred. 
The slight uphill grade outside the Town Hall is too steep for some elderly passengers to walk. Passenger Needs 
Bus passengers prefer for the bus interchange to be centrally located. 
Bus passengers prefer for the bus stops to within a short distance to enable easy and quick transfer to connecting buses. 
Bus passengers expressed a desire for the seating, shelter and facilities to be upgraded. 
Lighting is inadequate and requires upgrading. 10. Published Bus Interchange Standards There are no specific Australian Standards which outline requirements for bus interchanges. However, there are several that are applicable such as AS1428.4 Design for Access and Mobility – Tactile indicators which are applicable to elements which would normally be associated with bus stop infrastructure. There are no specific Austroads Guidelines that relate to the design of bus stops or bus infrastructure. The most useful guidelines for the design of bus stops and interchanges are those which have been developed by organisations responsible for managing public transport and associated facilities. Documents which provide useful guidance include: 
TransLink Transit Authority, Public Transport Infrastructure Manual 
Department of Transport Victoria, Public Transport Guidelines for Land Use and Development 
Public Transport Authority of Western Australia, Public Transport Bus Stop Site Layout Guidelines  NSW Government, State Transport Infrastructure Guide. The documents all contain useful information regarding the design of bus stop and interchange facilities so that they operate efficiently and provide an environment which encourages bus patronage. There are various publications for Crime Prevention through Environmental Design. These publications provide guidance for urban design that reduces the likelihood of crime and creates safe places in our communities. These are particularly relevant for bus interchanges. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 16 11. Launceston CBD Bus Interchange ‐ Options Assessment 11.1 Options The Launceston City Council nominated five bus interchange options to be considered in this study. Following the initial consultation with stakeholders and site inspections further options were considered and from these an additional 2 options were put forward for further assessment. Seven options were to be considered and these included: Option 1 The bus stops and interchange will stay at the current location in St John Street. While the kerbs and footpaths will stay the same the bus stops will be renewed and improved. Option 2 The bus stops and interchange will be relocated to the Transit Centre in Cimitiere Street. The site will need to be redeveloped to accommodate all the bus stops and associated facilities. Option 3 The bus stops and interchange will stay in St John Street between York and Paterson Street. St John Street will become a one way street. The road width will be narrower, the footpaths will be wider and new and improved bus stops facilities will be located further away from shop fronts. Option 4 The bus stops will remain in St John Street and the bus routes will terminate at a new interchange elsewhere in the CBD. The site for the interchange has not been identified. The bus stops will be renewed and improved. Option 5 Bus stops E and F (between York and Brisbane Street) will be relocated to a new site in St John Street at the Princes Square. All other bus stops in St John Street will stay in the same location. The bus stops will be renewed and improved. Option 6 Bus stops E and F (between York and Brisbane Street) will be relocated outside the church in St John Street between Cameron Street and Paterson Street. In this section of St John Street the parking bays will be removed, the footpath will be made wider and the junction with Cameron Street will need to be modified. The Tiger bus stop opposite the church will be relocated to Bus stops A, B and C (between Paterson Street and Brisbane Street). The bus stops will be renewed and improved. Option 7 Paterson Street between Charles Street and Brisbane Street will be changed to two way traffic and all the bus stops in St John Street will be relocated to the new two way section of Paterson Street. All bus stops will be new and improved. Plans for each of these options are included at Appendix B. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 17 11.2 Multi Criteria Analysis In August 2014 representatives from Launceston City Council, City Prom, the Tasmanian Bus Association, Metro and pitt&sherry participated in Multi Criteria Assessment (MCA) workshop for the Launceston bus interchange project. Representatives from the Department of State Growth were invited to the workshop but were unable to attend. A MCA is an analytical decision tool used to evaluate options against a set of agreed criteria. During the MCA options are scored between 1 and 5 against each of the criteria. A score of 1 would indicate the option does not meet the criteria at all and a score of 5 indicates the option fully meets the criteria. Each criteria is weighted differently to reflect the importance of that criteria to the overall desired project outcomes. The option with the highest score at the end of the MCA is the option that fulfils all the criteria the most. The purpose of the MCA workshop was to determine the preferred option for the location of the bus interchange. The MCA assessment was undertaken in accordance with the methodology outlined in the Austroads Guide to Project Evaluation. At commencement of the workshop the assessment criteria, scoring and weighting was discussed and adjusted amongst the workshop participants. The adjustments were made to reflect the importance of specific criteria to the group. The criteria, scoring and weighting is shown in Table 4. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 18 Theme Theme Weighting (%) Criteria Influence on social behaviour and safety Convenience of access to destinations in the CBD Availability of facilities Social 30 close to bus stops (coffee, toilets, etc) Quality of facilities ‐ seating, shelters, toilets SUBTOTAL Pollution ‐ improvement/reduction Environmental 10 Noise ‐ improvement/reduction SUBTOTAL Implementation cost Economic 30 Operating costs SUBTOTAL Proximity between service connections (including Tassielink and Tiger) Transport Efficiency impacts Ease of implementation Transport 30 Ability to provide adequate waiting space for bus patrons, efficient thoroughfare for pedestrians and adequate width for buses TOTAL 100 *For the purpose of presenting this table weightings have been rounded. Criteria Internal Weighting (%) Global Weighting (%) 30 9 30 9 30 9 10 3 100 30 50 5 50 5 100 30 70 100 10 9 21 30 25 8 25 8 25 8 25 8 100 30* Table 4: Criteria weighting During the MCA it was decided that Option 4 would not be assessed because buses would still need to travel through the CBD to drop and collect passengers and provision of the interchange outside of the CBD would then require a shuttle bus and this will increase travel times, increase operational costs and inconvenience bus passengers. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 19 The score and ranking for each of the options at the end of the MCA is presented in Table 5. Option Description Social Environmental Economic Transport Score Ranking Option 1 Bus stops stay where they are with new shelters, seats and lighting. Bus stops E and F are relocated to outside St Andrews Church. Bus stops stay in St Johns Street, change street to one way and move bus stops closer to the middle of the road. Relocate bus interchange to Paterson Street and change it to two way traffic Relocate bus interchange to the Transit Centre Relocate bus stops E and F to a new site in St John Street at Princes Square Provide a new interchange outside of the CBD. 21.6 2 26 19.5 69 1 24 4 18 21 67 2 24 2 12 19.5 58 3 25.8 2 14 13.5 56 4 21 8 6 18 53 5 11.4 4 18 18 51 6 Option 6 Option 3 Option 7 Option 2 Option 5 Option 4 Not assessed 7 Table 5: MCA Score and Ranking pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 20 The detailed results of the MCA are provided in Appendix C. Option 1 was ranked the highest. Key points from the assessment are: 
Option 1 did not score the highest in all individual categories but scored strongly in all individual categories, except environmental. 
The top four ranked options are all options where the bus interchange is centrally located. 
Options 3, 6 and 7 scored the highest for the social criteria because they have the highest potential to improve behaviour, provide convenient access for passengers and are close to facilities. 
Option 2 scored the highest for the environmental criteria because relocating buses to the transit centre would have the highest potential to reduce noise and diesel pollution in the CBD. 
Option 1 scored the highest because it will be the cheapest to implement and have the lowest impact on ongoing operating costs. 
All options, except option 7 scored well in the transport criteria. Option 7 did not score well because it will be a significant undertaking to change Paterson Street to two way and it will have wider traffic impacts. The results of the MCA could be used to guide further development of options and it is considered that a centrally located bus interchange will likely provide a good outcome in the criteria used. 12. Consultation of 4 Options Council decided to take the top 4 ranking options to public consultation. These are: Option Description 1 Bus stops stay where they are. New shelters, seats and lighting 6 Bus stops E & F move to St Andrews Church 3 Bus stops E & F move to stops A, B & C 7 All bus stops in St John St move to Paterson Street Table 6: Options for consultation Consultation included the following methods: 
Bus passenger interviews 
Shop front consultation 
Provision of information on Councils website: www.yourvoiceyourlaunceston.com.au 
Discussions at the Launceston City Hear Project planning workshop held in August 2014. 
Discussions and surveys at the Transport Futures forum held in August 2014. Plans of the options taken to public consultation are attached at Appendix D. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 21 12.1 Bus Passenger Interviews Interviews with bus passengers were conducted on: 
Thursday 7 August 2014 between 9 and 10am 
Friday 8 August 2014 between 12noon and 1pm 
Tuesday 12 August 2014 between 3 and 4pm The total number of people interviewed was 50. Bus passengers were approached at the bus stops in St John Street. The four options were described to passengers. Schematic plans were on hand to assist describing the options as required. Passengers were asked which option was their preference. Preference for the four options is shown in Table 7. Some general comments received during the interviews included: 
Need police to control behaviour 
Provide glass backs on shelters – people will lean against these instead of shops windows 
Need more seats 12.2 Shopfront Consultation On 13 August 2014 a shop in St John Street directly behind bus stops E and F was used for consultation with the public. The consultation was held between 2 and 5pm. The opportunity to have input into the consultation was advertised in the local media. Inside the shop there were displays of the four bus interchange options. Representatives from pitt&sherry and Council were present to describe the options and answer questions. The public were asked which option was their preference and to fill in a short survey. The preference for the four options from bus passenger interviews and shop front consultation is shown in Table 7 and the results of the survey are shown in Table 8. Approximately 100 people came into the shop to view the options. Number of people choosing the option as their preference Option Description 1 Bus stops stay where they are. New shelters, seats and lighting. 59 6 Bus stops E & F move to St Andrews Church 12 3 Bus stops E & F move to stops A, B & C. 5 7 All bus stops in St John St move to Paterson Street 21 Table 7: Bus passenger option preference – from bus passenger interviews and shopfront consultation pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 22 Comments received are summarised below: Option 6 – Relocate bus stops E and F to outside St Andrews Church 
Connecting passengers will have to cross the lights to get between the two bus stop areas. The lights could cause delays, or people cross against the lights because they are late for a bus. Option 3 – relocate bus tops E and F to bus stops A, B and C. 
Create congestion at bus stops A, B and C 
More people congregating in one area Option 7 – Relocate all bus stops to Paterson Street 
Not located near shops 
Need to change the street to two way and this has wider implications 
Need to change bus routes 12.3 Commercial Real Estate in the CBD At the shopfront consultation a Commercial Property Consultant provided useful information on another aspect of the impact that the location of bus stops are having on commercial properties in the CBD. The Consultant has also provided a written submission to Council. A summary of the comments are as follows: 
The Brisbane Street Mall has in the past and continues to be the first choice for prospective tenants 
The Avenue (in Brisbane Street) is historically the second choice for prospective tenants. The western end is more popular because it is closer to the Mall. The western end currently has vacant shops. 
St John Street between York and Paterson Street was historically the third choice for prospective tenants. St John Street is currently experiencing a high level of vacant shops and tenants are choosing to relocate due to anti social behaviour at bus stops. The asking rent for shops in this area in some cases is the same as that which was being asked for in 2004. 
Charles Street between York and Paterson Street was historically the fourth choice for prospective tenants. The street is gaining in popularity and rental prices are rising. There are no bus stops in Charles Street. 
The vacancies currently being experienced in St John Street is attributed to people congregating at bus stops while waiting to catch buses. 12.4 Councils Website On Councils website www.yourvoiceyour launceston.com.au plans and information for the options were presented. The web site included on line surveys, forums and online maps where comments can be pinned onto the online map. Approximately 100 people viewed the information on the web site. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 23 The results of the survey from the shop front consultation and from the website are shown at Table 8. Do you catch a bus? Is it important that your trip starts and finishes in the CBD? Yes No 75 85 Yes No 15 3 Yes No 77 72 How far would you walk to a bus stop? 1 Block 2‐3 Blocks More than 3 Blocks 35 16 3 Have you experienced bad behaviour at the stop? How often? Weekly Monthly Sometimes 25 6 39 Do you think bus stops add vibrancy to the city? Yes No 101 48 Do you support this comment? Strongly support this Somewhat support this Neutral 51 34 14 Table 8: Results of survey questions – from the shopfront consultation and website Six people made comments on the forum and the key points raised in the online forum include: 
One person preferred option 1 because it is central. 
One person preferred option 1 and thought that option 7 would detract from the potential of this area for future development, and tenants in St John Street should have been aware of the issues 
One person preferred option 7 because it is underutilised but still close to Brisbane Street 
Bus stops should be located in a moderately busy place for safety in numbers, and not in a quiet Street (Paterson Street) 
If Paterson Street is chosen cycle lanes should be included 
Moving bus stops further away from the CBD makes it especially hard for people with disabilities. Eleven comments were pinned onto the online map and the key points included: 
3 comments were supportive of moving bus stops to Paterson Street 
2 comments raised concerns about moving the bus stop to Paterson Street 
1 comment was supportive of north bound buses leaving from the St Andrews Church bus stop but raised concern about the east bound bus routes leaving from this stop 
2 comments were supportive of retaining bus stops in St John Street and moving the stops towards the centre of the street or making a bus mall 
3 comments were supportive of moving bus stops out of the CBD. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 24 12.5 Launceston City Heart Project – Community Consultation Workshop In August 2014 Council and invited key stakeholders participated in a community consultation workshop for the City Heart Project. While the workshop was primarily aimed at the City Heart Project, the four bus stop options were also discussed. The comments and opinions of participants were recorded and are summarised below: Comments made specifically about the four bus stops options included: 
3 comments are supportive of the bus interchange staying the same – option 1 
1 comment is supportive of the bus interchange being moved to bus stops A, B and C – option 3 
4 comments are supportive of moving the bus interchange to Paterson Street – option 7 Twelve comments were made specifically about other bus interchange options and these included: 
Building a bus interchange at the carpark behind Myer and Birchalls 
Removing buses out of the CBD 
Move the bus interchange to the Kingsway 
Provide an off street bus interchange Three comments were received specifically about behaviour and these included: 
Moving the bus interchange will move the behaviour problem from one site to another 
Bus malls attract loitering people Three comments were received regarding operational aspects of bus stops and these included: 
The bus stops E and F are dirty 
Bus stops should have electronic displays advertising the timetables Three comments were received regarding the safety and amenity of bus interchanges and these included: 
Bus stops at St Andrews Church will impact on its amenity 
Safety of cyclists has to be considered 
Bus stops should be relocated due to air and noise pollution Three comments were received regarding the design of bus stops and included: 
Provide glass backs to the shelters 
Improve lighting and security One comment was received and suggested opening a McDonalds Restaurant at Tatler Arcade. 12.6 Launceston Transport Futures Workshop In August 2014 Council held a workshop for the future of transport in Launceston. The workshop covered a range of transport topics and included discussion on the bus interchange in the CBD. The opinions of workshop participants were recorded in three key areas. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 25 The comments received are summarised as follows: Is it important that suburban buses start and finish in the CBD? 
Yes, strongly supported by the workshop 
Yes, for the benefit of the elderly, people with children and people with disabilities 
Moving bus interchange out of the CBD will increase behaviour issues Have you experienced bad behaviour at the CBD bus stops? 
Yes, supported by most participants 
The observed behaviour is no worse than that observed at Civic Square 
The perception of what is bad behaviour varied Do you think bus stops add vibrancy to the city? 
Yes, strongly supported 
Widening the footpath in St John Street to allow cafe seating on the footpath is supported 13. Discussion City Heart Project The Greater Launceston plan identified a range of initiatives for Launceston and its surrounds. Two of the initiatives are to improve the amenity and value of the public transport corridor and revitalisation of the CBD – The City Heart Project. The City Heart Project is in its planning stages and will aim to renew the CBD, provide a place where everyone wants to go, provide improved spaces for people, and improved safety and amenity for pedestrians and cyclists. This project will provide an excellent opportunity to implement changes to the bus interchange (whether that is major or minor) which can satisfy the needs of the community for many years to come. It is also an opportunity to ensure the design of the bus interchange is incorporated into the thinking and design of the City Heart Project. Behaviour Anti social behaviour in Launceston has been present for many years and it has been suggested that it has become worse in recent years. Anti social behaviour is reported to be perpetrated mostly by youth particularly after 3pm on weekdays. It should be noted that it has also been reported that anti social behaviour is perpetrated by a minority and is not perpetrated by all youths in the CBD. There is a significant number of youth entering the CBD from Launceston College and local high schools. There is a smaller number of youth entering the CBD who do not attend school. Youth come into the CBD to travel home from school on buses, to meet with friends, to hang out, and also for shopping. The CBD provides less opportunity for entertainment and engagement for youth whose purpose to enter the CBD is for hanging out only. Anti social behaviour can be offensive to one person and not for another. Police can use powers to ask people to “move on” but they are limited when the there is no offence being committed. The behaviour of people in the CBD has been the subject of previous reports and numerous recommendations have been put forward to solve the problem. It is considered that revitalising the CBD through the City Heart Project and making changes to the bus interchange, whether it be minor or major, will be only one step in many required to address the behaviour issue. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 26 Businesses Some of the factors that contribute to the success and prosperity of businesses is that customers can enter the shop unimpeded and enjoy the experience, the shop can display its wares and the shop provides a pleasant place for customers to shop. Business owners and City Prom have raised concerns that anti social behaviour and the bus stops are impacting on the factors that contribute to the success and prosperity of their shops. The major issues that have been raised include: 
Customers are less likely to visit a shop, particularly after 3pm, due to behaviour and congestion on footpaths outside shops. The behaviour is offensive to some and it makes some people feel unsafe. 
Bus passengers waiting on bus stops congest the footpaths and entrances to shops  Buses are noisy and emit diesel fumes which make it unpleasant inside a shop There are currently vacant shops and declining rents in the vicinity of the bus stops. This is reported by an experienced Commercial Property Consultant to be caused by bus operations and anti social behaviour at bus stops. Most of the issues raised by businesses can be addressed by moving the bus stops elsewhere. This does however have the potential to move the problem from one site to another. If wider ranging actions for addressing behavioural issues are not implemented, then moving the bus stops is unlikely to change the anti social behaviour experienced in the wider CBD area. Moving bus stops to new sites will require public safety to be considered especially where the number of pedestrians passing by is less. Moving bus stops to a site with fewer pedestrians could introduce new challenges. Other measures could be implemented to reduce the affects of the concerns raised by businesses and City Prom. These could include: 
Implement wider ranging actions for solving the behaviour issues in the CBD 
Increasing the separation between shop fronts and bus waiting areas. This could be achieved by moving the bus bay and waiting area closer to the centre of the road. 
Provide barriers to separate bus waiting areas from footpaths. This could be achieved with glass walls or other suitable materials. 
Improve the amenity of bus waiting areas to attract people to the waiting area rather than waiting on the footpath in front of shops. This could be achieved with improved seating, shelters casting shade and landscaping. 
Improve the amenity and vibrancy of footpaths outside shops 
Encourage youth oriented shops to the bus stops areas 
Reduce the affects of noise and diesel fume pollution by installing barriers that direct noise and fumes above the awning over the footpath and away from shops Public Transport Some previous reports suggest that in Launceston: 
There is an over reliance on cars 
The vibrancy of the city centre can be improved by limiting access to the CBD for cars and reducing the speed environment 
Investment and improvement in public transport should be supported by land use planning pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 27 Providing people with convenient and practical access to the CBD through public transport is essential for members of the community such as youth and students, people who do not have access to private vehicles and those who choose public transport over other means of transport. The vibrancy and prosperity of the CBD is dependent on people coming to the CBD and public transport contributes to this need. Data obtained during consultation also suggests that bus passengers prefer that the bus interchange is located in the CBD. It is well known by transport planners that the success of public transport systems relies on many factors including: 
Routes and stops must provide convenient and close access to destinations 
Connecting buses and access to other transport methods (walking, taxis, cycling) must be convenient and close 
Passengers won’t walk more than 300m and prefer flat or gentle slopes 
The level of service in terms of convenience, comfort and reliability must be high Based on this, a centrally located bus interchange is suited to Launceston. From this study it has been established that: 
The bus interchange needs sufficient space for passengers waiting 
There are passengers who transfer from regional bus routes to metro routes 
The needs of a regional bus terminal are different to the metro service. The regional bus service needs ticket counters and waiting areas suitable for passengers with luggage. It has also been established that the existing bus interchange facilities such as seating, lighting, security cameras, and shelters should be renewed and improved. It is noted that the preference of business owners is clearly different to that of bus passengers. Options Assessment Council nominated 5 possible bus interchange options and during the study other options were explored. An additional two options were selected and a total of seven options were put forward for further assessment. A MCA was conducted to evaluate the options. The MCA considered social, environmental, economic and transport criteria. Stakeholders including Council, City Prom, Metro and the Tasmanian Bus Association participated in the MCA workshop. From the MCA it was established that: 
Option 1 – where the bus interchange stays at the same location but with new seating, shelter and lighting was ranked highest and therefore on average satisfied the criteria the most 
The top four ranked options are all options where the bus interchange is centrally located From this it can be said that in principle a centrally located bus interchange will provide the best outcome for the criteria assessed. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 28 Consultation Consultation was conducted with stakeholders before options were put forward and then after the options were assessed. The stakeholders engaged during consultation included: 
Bus passengers 
City Prom 
A Commercial Property Consultant 
The general public (through the shop front) 
Metro 
Tasmanian Bus Association Surveys and interviews were utilised in the consultation process: 93 bus passengers were interviewed and nearly 160 people were surveyed through the shopfront and online methods. The statistics established from the interviews and surveys were: 
Approximately 47% of people surveyed catch a bus 
Approximately 72% of people surveyed support the buses starting and finishing routes in the CBD 
Approximately 60% of bus passengers interviewed prefer that the bus interchange is centrally located or not changed 
More than 80% of people surveyed prefer to walk only one block to the bus stop 
Approximately 50% of people surveyed have experienced bad behaviour at bus stops as frequently as weekly  Approximately 68% of people surveyed think that bus stops add vibrancy to the city Feedback from stakeholders has reiterated a difference of views on the location of bus stops. Business has a preference for them to be moved out of the CBD while Metro and bus and passengers have a preference for them to stay the same and/or be centrally located. Bus Interchange Options Of the seven options put forward, there were four that were considered by Council to be feasible and were taken to public consultation. One option involves relocating the bus stops entirely to Paterson Street, two options involve relocating bus stops E and F to other locations in St John Street and one option involves the bus stops remaining where they are now. All these options provide benefits and have the potential for meeting the study objectives but they also have issues that need to be considered further if adopted as the preferred option. The benefits and issues for the four options taken to consultation are summarised in Table 8. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 29 Option No 1 6 Description Benefits Bus stops stay where they are. 
Provides convenient and practical 
access to CBD Difficult to convince businesses that this is a credible option 
Lowest cost solution 
The impact of bus stops on shops and footpath congestion can be reduced with careful design of the bus waiting area, but it could be challenging to encourage people to use the bus waiting area in preference to the footpath or shop fronts. 
Barriers separating the bus waiting area and the footpath may be needed to assist with encouraging passengers to wait on the bus area Bus stops E & F move to St Andrews Church 
 New shelters, seats and lighting Provides convenient and practical 
access to CBD Locating bus stops outside a church could introduce new issues 
Wider footpath outside St Andrews 
Church The impact of bus stops on businesses 
at bus stops E and F is addressed 
No change to footpaths at bus stops A, 
B and C. 
Bus stops are still close to the CBD The impact of bus stops on businesses at bus stops A, B and C has not been addressed 
New shelters, seats and lighting. 
No change to footpath width 
No change to bus routes 
Relocate Tiger Bus to bus stops A, B and C 
No change to bus routes pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as Medium cost solution Issues 
Bus passengers needing to catch a connecting bus outside St Andrews Church will need to cross a busy CBD street, and this could lead to traffic incidents when people are in a hurry to catch a connecting bus. 
Bus stop H (outside Allgoods) is now further away from bus stops E and F and less convenient for connecting 30 passengers. 3 7 Bus stops E & F move to stops A, B & C. 
5 bus stops located at one site 
New shelters, seats and lighting 
Change to one way street 
Widen footpath 
Change to bus routes required 
Provides convenient and practical 
access to CBD 
The impact of bus stops on businesses at bus stops E and F is addressed 
Medium cost solution All bus stops in St John St move to Paterson 
Street 
New shelters, seats and lighting 
Change to two way street 
Widen footpath 
Change to bus routes required 
Impact on streets in the CBD The increased number of buses and bus passengers at bus stops A, B and C could cause increased congestion and impact on business in this area 
Encouraging passengers to not wait outside shop fronts and in designated waiting areas could be challenging. 
Implications of changes to bus routes requires further thought 
Bus stop H will not be located at this site as there is insufficient room. This is not as convenient for connecting passengers. 
Implication of change to one way street on general traffic requires further investigation The site is slightly further away from 
the Mall, but still provides convenient and practical access to CBD Passengers likely to take short cut through shops to access the mall 
The impact of bus stops on businesses in St John Street is addressed 
High cost solution 
Paterson Street has fewer pedestrians and will reduce passive safety for passengers 
The Paterson Street site has sufficient room for 5 bus bays (A, B, C, E and F). Incorporation of bus stop H at Paterson Street will require further investigation and possibly changes to timetables to enable it to be included. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 31 
Changing Paterson Street to two way traffic will have broad impacts on traffic movements in the CBD and will require considerable thought 
Implications of changes to bus routes requires further thought 
May need to be implemented as part of a larger project 
Council may need to purchase land to enable new infrastructure to be installed. Table 9: Benefits of Bus Interchange Options pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 32 14. Conclusion and Recommendation The bus interchange is located in front of shops in St John Street, Launceston. There is anecdotal evidence that anti social behaviour, particularly at the bus interchange is detrimental to the prosperity of businesses in this area. This study has investigated and considered: 
Previous reports on public transport and behaviour issues in the CBD 
Metro and regional bus operations 
The issues raised by business 
Bus passenger needs 
Options for changes to the bus interchange. From this study it has been established that: 
The anti social behaviour issue in Launceston has been occurring for many years and is yet to be resolved 
Previous reports into anti social behaviour have recommended wide ranging actions for solving the issue. Implementing one action alone will not solve the issue. 
There is sometimes congestion at bus stops and on the footpaths in front of shops 
Businesses have advised that anti social behaviour and congestion occurring at bus stops is detrimental to their business 
The number of vacant shops particularly around the St John street bus stops has increased in recent years and the asking rent has reduced 
A public transport system is essential for providing access to destinations in the CBD for people who do not use other transport methods. It is also a vital part of the future sustainability of Launceston. 
A bus interchange in Launceston needs to be centrally located and connecting buses must be close by and access between them not impeded 
Regional bus passengers transfer to Metro buses and the two services need to be reasonably close to each other 
One of the intentions of the City Heart Project is to improve safety and amenity for pedestrians and cyclists During this study the options for changes to the bus interchange have been considered. From the MCA Option 1 was the highest ranking option. The results of the MCA can be used to provide guidance on the development of the preferred option. A clear message from the MCA is that a centrally located bus interchange will provide a good outcome. In indentifying and assessing options for the bus interchange Council’s brief required the study to consider the following objectives: 
That the location of the bus interchange should provide convenient and practical access for bus passengers to reach known destinations in the CBD 
Bus stop waiting areas have sufficient space for waiting bus passengers and should not unduly congest the access to nearby businesses; and 
The affects of inappropriate behaviour should be minimised. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 33 Having considered the information collected during this study, it is concluded that: 
The bus interchange should be centrally located 
The bus stops should be close to each other to ensure that transfer to connecting buses is efficient and not impeded 
The amenity and safety of pedestrians and cyclists could be improved by reducing the number of private vehicles using St John Street. 
The bus interchange should be designed to provide sufficient space for waiting passengers, and incorporate seating, shelter and lighting that makes it attractive to wait in the bus waiting area in all weather conditions rather than in front of shops 
The bus stop design should incorporate barriers in soft or hard form that will separate bus waiting areas from shop fronts 
The bus stop design should Incorporate security cameras into the design 
The design should incorporate provision to prevent diesel exhaust fumes from wafting into shops and reduce the affects of noise on shops. This could include sound barriers or window glazing treatment. 
The bus stop design should be undertaken using the principles of crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) 
The wide ranging recommendations put forward for solving the anti social behaviour in the CBD should be reviewed and implemented. Changes to bus stops alone will not solve the anti social behaviour issue. The preferred bus interchange Options is option 1. It is recommended that the bus interchange stay where it is now and, the following changes are incorporated: 
Include barriers to divert sound and noise 
Include barriers to separate bus waiting areas from footpaths and shop fronts 
Provide sufficient space for waiting bus passengers 
Include shelters, seating and lightin that encourages people to use the bus waiting area in all weather conditions 
Improve the amenity of footpaths at shop fronts It is also recommended that the feasibility of further improvements be investigated during development of the design and these include: 
Reducing the number of private vehicles entering St John Street by further restricting through movements or turning movements, or discouraging private vehicles entering the street through design of traffic calming and traffic management methods. 
Increasing the width of bus waiting areas. This will require the width allocated to the traffic lanes to be reduced and would result in there only being sufficient room for one lane. In this situation the street could be changed to one way only (north bound). Bus stops A, B and C could be moved to the opposite side of the road and commence their journey by turning right into Paterson Street. pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as 34 Appendix A City Prom Survey pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as ST JOHN ST BUS STOP SURVEY RESULTS FEBRUARY 2014 Respondents‐73 businesses between corner of Paterson/St John St and Elizabeth/St John St. Q1 Do you believe that the location of a city bus stop in close proximity to your business has an impact? Yes 58% No 34% Unsure 8% Q2 Would you describe that impact as positive or negative? Positive 14% Negative 37% Both 32% Unsure 18% Q3 Would you support the relocation of St John Street bus stops to an alternative area? Yes 79% No 14% Unsure 7% Q4 One of the proposed sites for the relocation of the St John Street bus stops is the Transit Centre, would you support this? Yes 73% No 25% Unsure 3% Q5 Do you think the relocation would have a negative impact on your business? Yes 21% No 78% Q6 Do you think the relocation of the bus stops would have a negative impact on the city? Yes 23% No 77% Q7 Would you support an upgrade of the current city bus stops rather than a relocation of St John St stops? Yes 18% No 75% Unsure 7% Q8 Do you have any suggestions on where the St John St bus stops could be relocated to? General Comments: 


Princes Square area Elizabeth Street St John St‐near Church and library Other comments 

Change collection/drop off points between 3pm – 5pm on school days Investigate a shuttle to run from Transit Centre in to city to assist elderly and disabled 



, Consider moving just the Northern suburbs bus stop (near Factorie) Needs to be an increased presence from police Remove bus stops from St John St and put in parking metres Buses create noise and pollution in the city Appendix B Bus Stop Options Assessed pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as ON
ERS
PAT
CIM
ST
RE
ITIE
ST
NE
ST
BA
BRIS
S
RLE
CHA
ST
CIVIC SQUARE
BRIS
BAN
ALL
TM
E S
H
C
ST JO
F
B
A
HN ST
E
ST
MA
LL
ON
ST
T
K S
YOR
AN
T
ERS
AD
R
RON
CAME
PAT
QU
GE ST
GEOR
OPTION 1
RETENTION IN THE CURRENT LOCATION (WITH OR
WITHOUT MINOR ADJUSTMENTS OR MODIFICATIONS)
ERS
PAT
ON
ST
B
BRIS
IT
CIM
ANE
CIMITIERE STREET
TRANSIT CENTRE
ST
S ST
IERE
RLE
CHA
ST
CIVIC
SQUARE
BAN
BRIS
ALL
TM
E S
HN ST
ST JO
NT
MA
L
L
OPTION 2
T
ON S
RA
R
CAME
AD
ST
ON
ERS
PAT
QU
WHOLLY CONTAINED WITHIN CIMITIERE STREET TRANSIT CENTRE
(SHARING WITH THE REGIONAL AND INTER-REGIONAL BUS SERVICES)
BA
BRIS
CIM
ST
NE
T
RE
ITIE
ES S
RL
CHA
ST
ERS
PAT
CIVIC SQUARE
ON
ST
BAN
BRIS
E ST
L
MAL
ST JO
HN ST
RON
CAME
QU
NT
LL
ST
MA
SON
T
K S
YOR
RA
ER
PAT
AD
ST
GE ST
GEOR
OPTION 3
LOCATED ALONG ST JOHN STREET
(ONE-WAY, SHELTERS ARE CENTRALLY LOCATED, LOW SPEED ENVIRONMENT)
BA
BRIS
LES
RE
ITIE
CI M
ST
NE
R
CHA
ST
ST
PAT
ERS
CIVIC
SQUARE
ON
ST
E
BAN
BRIS
ALL
ST M
H
HN ST
C
B
A
ST JO
F
E
RON
CAME
QU
A
ST
AL
L
SON
T
K S
YOR
AN
TM
ER
PAT
DR
ST
GE ST
GEOR
OPTION 4
RETAINING BUS STOPS IN ST JOHN STREET AND
RELOCATING THE INTERCHANGE ELSEWHERE.
E
PAT
N
RSO
ST
BRIS
T
E S
BAN
ITIE
CI M
T
ES S
RE
RL
CHA
ST
CIVIC SQUARE
B
BRIS
ANE
ALL
ST M
H
F
HN ST
ST JO
E
B
A
CAME
QU
C
L
ON
ST
MA
L
ERS
PAT
NT
ST
T
ETH S
ELIZAB
T
K S
YOR
RA
RON
AD
GE ST
GEOR
OPTION 5
RELOCATE STOPS E AND F TO PRINCES SQUARE.
ALL OTHER STOPS STAY THE SAME
CIM
E
BAN
BRIS
RE
ITIE
T
PAT
ST
ES S
ST
ON
ERS
RL
CHA
CIVIC SQUARE
ST
B
BRIS
ANE
ALL
ST M
H
HN ST
C
B
TIGER
A
STOP
ST JO
F
E
MA
LL
T
K S
YOR
AN
T
T
ON S
AD
R
R
CAME
ST
ON
ERS
PAT
QU
OPTION 6
RELOCATE E & F TO ST JOHN STREET BETWEEN PATERSON ST AND CAMERON ST.
RELOCATE TIGER BUS STOP TO A, B, C.
BRIS
CIM
T
E S
BAN
R
ITIE
T
E S
ON
ERS
PAT
T
ES S
RL
CHA
CIVIC SQUARE
ST
E
BAN
BRIS
ALL
ST M
H
N ST
C
B
A
H
ST JO
F
E
ST
RA
N
AL
L
T
K S
YOR
TM
T
ON S
R
CAME
SON
ER
PAT
QU
AD
OPTION 7
RELOCATE BUS STOPS A, B, C, E, F AND H TO PATERSON ST BETWEEN
CHARLES ST AND ST JOHN ST (ASSUMING TWO WAY TRAFFIC.)
Appendix C Multi‐Criteria Assessment Results pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as LAUNCESTON CBD BUS INTERCHANGE STUDY BUS MULTI CRITERIA ANALYSIS
Criteria weighting is required to add up to 100
Options to be scored out of 5 against each criteria
SUMMARY
Social
Environmental
Economic
Transport
Total
Internal Weight (%)
Weight
30
10
30
30
100
Weighted Score
Weighted Score
Weighted Score
Weighted Score
Weighted Score
Rank
Option 1
21.6
2
26
19.5
69
1
Option 2
21
8
6
18
53
5
Option 3
24
2
12
19.5
58
3
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Global Weight(%)
Option 4
0
0
0
0
0
7
Option Scores (1 to 5)
Option 4
Option 5
11.4
4
18
18
51
6
Option 6
24
4
18
21
67
2
Option 7
25.8
2
14
13.5
56
4
Option 5
Option 6
Option 7
A. SOCIAL
Influence on social behaviour and safety
Convenience of access to destinations in the CBD
30
30
9
9
Raw
Raw
3
5
3
2
4
5
1
2
4
4
3
5
Availability of facilities close to bus stops (coffee, toilets, etc)
Quality of facilities - seating, shelters, toilets
30
10
9
3
Raw
Raw
3
3
5
5
3
4
2
4
4
4
5
4
100
30
Weighted
21.6
21
24
11.4
24
25.8
50
50
5.0
5.0
Raw
Raw
1
1
4
4
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
100
10
Weighted
2
8
2
0
It was decided
that this option
was not feasible.
4
4
2
30
70
9
21
Raw
Raw
5
4
1
1
2
2
As a result it was
not assessed.
3
3
3
3
1
3
100
30
Weighted
26
6
12
0
18
18
14
D. Transport
Proximity between service connections (including Tassielink and
Tiger)
Transport Efficiency impacts
Ease of implementation
25
25
25
8
8
8
Raw
Raw
Raw
3
3
5
5
2
1
5
2
2
2
3
4
4
3
4
4
2
1
Ability to provide adequate waiting space for bus patrons, efficient
thoroughfare for pedestrians and adequate width for buses
25
8
Raw
2
4
4
3
3
2
SUBTOTAL ECONOMIC
100
30
Weighted
19.5
18
19.5
0
18
21
13.5
70
Weighted
69
53
58
0
51
67
56
SUBTOTAL SOCIAL
B. ENVIRONMENTAL
Pollution - improvement/reduction
Noise - improvement/reduction
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL
C. ECONOMIC
Implementation cost
Operating costs
SUBTOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL
GRAND TOTAL (Global)
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Option 4
Option 5
Option 6
Option 7
pitt&sherry Ref: LN14151H001 MCA spreadsheet 12P Rev00
0
Retention in the current location (with or without minor adjustments or modifications)
Wholly contained within Cimitiere Street Transit Centre (sharing with the regional and inter-regional bus services)
Located in St John Street - one-way traffic, shelters are centrally located, low-speed environment.
Retaining bus stops in St John Street and relocating the interchange elsewhere
Relocate stops E and F to a new site in St John Street at the Princess Square. Other stops in St John Street remain the same.
Relocate bus stop E & F to a new site in St John Street between Paterson & Cameron. Relocate the Tiger Bus stop in St John St and north of Patterson St to bus stop to A, B or C.
Relocate the 'bus mall' to Paterson Street between Charles & St John (assuming two way traffic).
Page 1 of 1
Appendix D Bus Stop Options for Consultation pitt&sherry ref: LN14151L001 Interchange Study Rep 31P Rev01.docx/DH/as LEGEND
BRISBANE
STREET
YORK
PATERSON
STREET
STREET
STREET
ST JOHN
ST ANDREW'S CHURCH
MALL
Carpark
Carpark
Notes:
x No Change to bus stop locations
x New seating, shelters & lighting
x Streetscape improvements
CONCEPT FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION
C
2014
This drawing and the
information it contains is,
and remains the property
of Launceston City
Council, and may only be
used for the purpose of
which it was intended.
Any scales shown on this
drawing are correct at A1
sheet size only. DO NOT
scale a drawing plotted at
any other size.
CBD BUS INTERCHANGE STUDY
MINOR IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING BUS STOPS
CONCEPT PLAN
Town Hall St John Street, Launceston Tasmania 7250
T: 03 6323 3000 F: 03 6323 3001 Email: council@launceston.tas.gov.au
24 July 2014
LEGEND
WAY LANE
UE
THE AVEN REET
ST
BRISBANE
CENTRE
PATERSON
STREET
ST JOHN
STREET
MALL
PLAN
Notes:
x All bus stops located together
x St John Street changed to one way traffic
(between Paterson & Brisbane Streets)
x Wider Footpaths
x New seating, shelters & lighting
x Streetscape improvements
CONCEPT FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION
C
2014
This drawing and the
information it contains is,
and remains the property
of Launceston City
Council, and may only be
used for the purpose of
which it was intended.
Any scales shown on this
drawing are correct at A1
sheet size only. DO NOT
scale a drawing plotted at
any other size.
CBD BUS INTERCHANGE STUDY
ST JOHN STREET BUS STOPS
CONCEPT PLAN
Town Hall St John Street, Launceston Tasmania 7250
T: 03 6323 3000 F: 03 6323 3001 Email: council@launceston.tas.gov.au
24 July 2014
LEGEND
PATERSON
STREET
ST JOHN
STREET
ST ANDREW'S CHURCH
PLAN
Notes:
x All bus stops south of the Mall moved to
outside St Andrew's Church.
x Wider Footpaths
x New seating, shelters & lighting
x Streetscape improvements
CONCEPT FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION
C
2014
This drawing and the
information it contains is,
and remains the property
of Launceston City
Council, and may only be
used for the purpose of
which it was intended.
Any scales shown on this
drawing are correct at A1
sheet size only. DO NOT
scale a drawing plotted at
any other size.
CBD BUS INTERCHANGE STUDY
ST JOHN STREET BUS STOPS
CONCEPT PLAN
Town Hall St John Street, Launceston Tasmania 7250
T: 03 6323 3000 F: 03 6323 3001 Email: council@launceston.tas.gov.au
24 July 2014
LEGEND
ST ANDREW'S CHURCH
CHARLES
STREET
PILGRIM HALL
STREET
ST JOHN
PATERSON STREET
CAR PARK
(behind Myers)
PLAN
Notes:
x All bus stops located in Paterson Street
x Wider Footpaths
x New seating, shelters & lighting
x Streetscape improvements
CONCEPT FOR PUBLIC CONSULTATION
C
2014
This drawing and the
information it contains is,
and remains the property
of Launceston City
Council, and may only be
used for the purpose of
which it was intended.
Any scales shown on this
drawing are correct at A1
sheet size only. DO NOT
scale a drawing plotted at
any other size.
CBD BUS INTERCHANGE STUDY
PATERSON STREET BUS STOPS
CONCEPT PLAN
Town Hall St John Street, Launceston Tasmania 7250
T: 03 6323 3000 F: 03 6323 3001 Email: council@launceston.tas.gov.au
24 July 2014
Contact David Hugo 0419 109 354 dhugo@pittsh.com.au transport | community | industrial & mining | carbon & energy
Brisbane Level 2 276 Edward Street Brisbane QLD 4000 T: (07) 3221 0080 F: (07) 3221 0083 Canberra LGF, Ethos House 28‐36 Ainslie Place Canberra City ACT 2601 PO Box 122 Civic Square Canberra ACT 2608 T: (02) 6295 2100 Devonport Level 1 35 Oldaker Street PO Box 836 Devonport TAS 7310 T: (03) 6424 1641 F: (03) 6424 9215 Hobart 199 Macquarie Street GPO Box 94 Hobart TAS 7001 T: (03) 6210 1400 F: (03) 6223 1299 Launceston Level 4 113 Cimitiere Street PO Box 1409 Launceston TAS 7250 T: (03) 6323 1900 F: (03) 6334 4651 Melbourne
Level 1, HWT Tower 40 City Road, Southbank VIC 3006 PO Box 259 South Melbourne VIC 3205 T: (03) 9682 5290 F: (03) 9682 5292 Sydney Level 1 56 Clarence Street Sydney NSW 2000 T: (02) 8216 4700 F: (02) 8216 4747 E: info@pittsh.com.au
W: www.pittsh.com.au incorporated as Pitt & Sherry (Operations) Pty Ltd ABN 67 140 184 309