O-Train Line 1/3 [ Stage 2 | East Extension | Blair to Trim] | U/C

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Although I would not see its primary benefit as a special events station but as a station to serve the park itself (the campground, sports fields, etc.) A huge number of the attractions in the Ottawa area are car-only (or primarily car-only).

First of all, if it is to serve the park itself, that would mean having all trains stop there (there are no stop request buttons on the train to make it optional). For a stop that would be lucky to have maybe 5 people per day use it, that seems a bit ridiculous.

Secondly, there are no sports fields (only equestrian fields).

Thirdly, the equestrian park is over a kilometre from the campground, so there really wouldn't be a good stop to serve both well. I don't even think many people would use transit to go camping. If they have a car, then they would most likely drive to where they are going (or drive to a park and ride). If they have bikes (or a golf cart), they could just ride them to Moodie station easily enough. If there really was demand, the campground could offer a shuttle to the LRT station.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

i find this conversation ironic. We are talking about building a station that will seldom be used while not building a station that will be used all the time. Shakes head in amazement.

+1

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by roger1818

First of all, if it is to serve the park itself, that would mean having all trains stop there (there are no stop request buttons on the train to make it optional). For a stop that would be lucky to have maybe 5 people per day use it, that seems a bit ridiculous.

Secondly, there are no sports fields (only equestrian fields).

Thirdly, the equestrian park is over a kilometre from the campground, so there really wouldn't be a good stop to serve both well. I don't even think many people would use transit to go camping. If they have a car, then they would most likely drive to where they are going (or drive to a park and ride). If they have bikes (or a golf cart), they could just ride them to Moodie station easily enough. If there really was demand, the campground could offer a shuttle to the LRT station.

I would see no reason why every train needs to stop there.

In 2015, Wesley Clover Parks became the beneficiary of a state-of-the-art artificial turf soccer field thanks to the Canadian hosted FIFA Women’s World Cup. Since then we have built and seeded four new sports fields which will be ready for use in the 2017 season. In partnership with both the West Ottawa Soccer Club and the Ottawa Sports and Social Club these new fields will host a variety of sports including soccer, flag football, ultimate frisbee and more in 2017. With the addition of lighting around our turf field, this area is quickly becoming a soccer and sports center of excellence!

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I would see no reason why every train needs to stop there.

True, but it would add to the confusion that in addition to the split, you have to identify if the train will stop at Wesley Clover. Can it be done? Yes. Could it create confusion? Yes.

In 2015, Wesley Clover Parks became the beneficiary of a state-of-the-art artificial turf soccer field thanks to the Canadian hosted FIFA Women’s World Cup. Since then we have built and seeded four new sports fields which will be ready for use in the 2017 season. In partnership with both the West Ottawa Soccer Club and the Ottawa Sports and Social Club these new fields will host a variety of sports including soccer, flag football, ultimate frisbee and more in 2017. With the addition of lighting around our turf field, this area is quickly becoming a soccer and sports center of excellence!

Interesting. I was not aware of that. How much usage did the fields get last summer?

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by roger1818

i find this conversation ironic. We are talking about building a station that will seldom be used while not building a station that will be used all the time. Shakes head in amazement.

+1

There's nothing really to say or discuss... it seems everyone agrees that Jasmine should be built. The other station gives something to debate

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

There's nothing really to say or discuss... it seems everyone agrees that Jasmine should be built. The other station gives something to debate

but won't be built.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by acottawa

It seems to me part of the problem here is that the stations are too elaborate (and therefore too expensive). Surely they could find some money for some bare-bones stations.

But transit riders want grand architectural statements and lots of art!*









* No, they don't.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Why all the Wesley Clover haters?

It isn't my thing (I think I have been there once) but that sort of rural attraction is exactly the kind of thing many visitors to Ottawa would dig. What's wrong with making it available by transit when the transit line goes right through the park anyway?

Yes, when I visit a new city, the first thing I like to do is take its transit system to a field.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I find this conversation ironic. We are talking about building a station that will seldom be used while not building a station that will be used all the time. Shakes head in amazement.

Welcome to Ottawa.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Yes, when I visit a new city, the first thing I like to do is take its transit system to a field.

Hey, hey, take the Trillium Line when Phase 2 opens. There will be lots of fields to visit. Just get your thumb out and hitch-hike if you actually want to get to your destination.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

There's nothing really to say or discuss... it seems everyone agrees that Jasmine should be built. The other station gives something to debate

Everyone except those with the power to make such decisions, who are all fixated on extending LRT to the outer suburbs as quickly and cheaply as possible, regardless of the cost, including missed opportunities, to "inner suburbs" and the inner core.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Hey, hey, take the Trillium Line when Phase 2 opens. There will be lots of fields to visit. Just get your thumb out and hitch-hike if you actually want to get to your destination.

such vibrant

many train

so transit

amaze!

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Yes, when I visit a new city, the first thing I like to do is take its transit system to a field.

The federal government spends big bucks maintaining all sorts of Nationally Significant Fields. Somebody must dig it.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The federal government spends big bucks maintaining all sorts of Nationally Significant Fields. Somebody must dig it.

Yes, I know. They even installed a traffic light to serve those fields and forests. I am just so frustrated with the lines of people pushing the cross walk button and changing the light, once every year or two. But, we can't finish a missing half block of sidewalk on a very busy street because it is not a priority (until a pedestrian is killed).

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Interesting. Your description of the location of the flyover matches what is shown in geoottawa.



The issues I see with this station location are:

• The median is very narrow here and I don't even think there would be room for a centre platform, which could potentially be narrower than two side platforms. As a result they will likely plan for two side platforms and not move the highway when they build the station (ya right).
• The highway starts to curve east of the flyover. It is highly desirable for stations to be on a straight section of track to allow a smaller gap between platform and train.

They could put it just west of the flyover with paths to Jasmine, Gloucester High School and the Wave Pool. Side platforms would likely be necessary as it looks like they are planning for a third centre track for trains to layover there.

Good Day.

yup. I am not yet familiar with the GeoOttawa maps; I am using the LRT documents as issued in the past. The description I supplied is based on (I finally found where it is stashed these days - City of Ottawa keeps moving and deleting things) the ELRT TPAP EA report from Aecom - download only unfortunately - pick Part 2 (48MB). { http://aecomviz.com/epr/ } Herein are all the meter-by-meter profiles and alignments (2016-03-22). It incorporates all the, Blair, flyover, and Montreal Road station, plan improvements. EnJoy!

(I automatically download all this stuff so that I am relatively immune to boffins moving this stuff around (to hide it ? ), but it results in frequently having to either refer-by-title, search-and-find, memory, or belief that my readers will simply believe that I know what the walla I'm talking about. And yup, that goes back to the old 2004-6 N-S plans too. Those JPEGs were huge - for that time ! )

As for the station position - I agree with an earlier comment that west of the flyover puts it way too close to Blair station - highly ineffective and IMO inappropriate and bad planning thinking. East - somewhere between the High School and Jasmine Park, depending on -proper- cachement analytics for one side or the other for access roads / paths / etc., is far more appropriate. We similarly do not want too far east so as to get too close to Montreal Road station (whatever your views on that station). So, to me, the TPAP 'protection' location seems about best, subject to being (properly) convinced otherwise.

Thx. EnJoy!

[kmcamp]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

Good Day.

yup. I am not yet familiar with the GeoOttawa maps; I am using the LRT documents as issued in the past. The description I supplied is based on (I finally found where it is stashed these days - City of Ottawa keeps moving and deleting things) the ELRT TPAP EA report from Aecom - download only unfortunately - pick Part 2 (48MB). { http://aecomviz.com/epr/ } Herein are all the meter-by-meter profiles and alignments (2016-03-22). It incorporates all the, Blair, flyover, and Montreal Road station, plan improvements. EnJoy!

(I automatically download all this stuff so that I am relatively immune to boffins moving this stuff around (to hide it ? ), but it results in frequently having to either refer-by-title, search-and-find, memory, or belief that my readers will simply believe that I know what the walla I'm talking about. And yup, that goes back to the old 2004-6 N-S plans too. Those JPEGs were huge - for that time ! )

As for the station position - I agree with an earlier comment that west of the flyover puts it way too close to Blair station - highly ineffective and IMO inappropriate and bad planning thinking. East - somewhere between the High School and Jasmine Park, depending on -proper- cachement analytics for one side or the other for access roads / paths / etc., is far more appropriate. We similarly do not want too far east so as to get too close to Montreal Road station (whatever your views on that station). So, to me, the TPAP 'protection' location seems about best, subject to being (properly) convinced otherwise.

Thx. EnJoy!

Forget Jasmine... What the hell were they smoking when they came up with Place D'Orleans station. So, a person who goes into the park and ride walks all the way across the existing bridge over the queensway, mocking them by letting them look down in a glass atrium into the lrt station below, then back out across a second bridge that's just as high as the existing one and then down. The frequent commuters will learn to go out and walk down Champlain to that entrance instead.

If there is a way down from the existing bridge, which there doesn't seem to be, then why are we building a second bridge?

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by kmcamp

Forget Jasmine... What the hell were they smoking when they came up with Place D'Orleans station. So, a person who goes into the park and ride walks all the way across the existing bridge over the queensway, mocking them by letting them look down in a glass atrium into the lrt station below, then back out across a second bridge that's just as high as the existing one and then down. The frequent commuters will learn to go out and walk down Champlain to that entrance instead.

If there is a way down from the existing bridge, which there doesn't seem to be, then why are we building a second bridge?

This is the first I have heard of this second bridge. Where did you hear about it? Could they be replacing the exiting bridge with two bridges?

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

The description I supplied is based on (I finally found where it is stashed these days - City of Ottawa keeps moving and deleting things) the ELRT TPAP EA report from Aecom - download only unfortunately - pick Part 2 (48MB). { http://aecomviz.com/epr/ } Herein are all the meter-by-meter profiles and alignments (2016-03-22). It incorporates all the, Blair, flyover, and Montreal Road station, plan improvements. EnJoy!

Thanks for the link. I hadn't seen the eastern plans.

So as I speculated above, the planned location for the Jasmine station puts it on a stretch of curved track (meaning a larger gap between platform and train) and outside platforms that extend onto highway 174 (on the shoulder of eastbound lane and covering 3/4 of the left most westbound lane).

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by roger1818

This is the first I have heard of this second bridge. Where did you hear about it? Could they be replacing the exiting bridge with two bridges?

It is in the document PHrenetic posted. Station designs are near the bottom of part 2. I believe that you will be able to access the station from both bridges. However, the new bridge will be a fair paid zone between the bus station and the train station.

I have a feeling building a completely new bridge just for the benefit of a fair paid zone will be removed when looking for cost savings.

What I don't understand is why they put the flyover where they did? Why not move it 400m further east so you could have the protected Jasmine station before the flyover on the north side of the highway. You could even build the station at elevation before the flyover - like a skytrain station (or a simpler Hurdman). This way you don't need to build a pedestrian bridge to the centre of the highway or even to the other side of the tracks, and you also put the station closer the people on the north side of the highway. But I digress, we've already established they aren't designing for the future station anyway.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Multi-modal

It is in the document PHrenetic posted. Station designs are near the bottom of part 2. I believe that you will be able to access the station from both bridges. However, the new bridge will be a fair paid zone between the bus station and the train station.

Ahh, thanks. I didn't get that far down the document.

I have a feeling building a completely new bridge just for the benefit of a fair paid zone will be removed when looking for cost savings.

That makes sense but it sure seems like a huge expense to allow people to stay in a fare paid zone.

What I don't understand is why they put the flyover where they did? Why not move it 400m further east so you could have the protected Jasmine station before the flyover on the north side of the highway. You could even build the station at elevation before the flyover - like a skytrain station (or a simpler Hurdman). This way you don't need to build a pedestrian bridge to the centre of the highway or even to the other side of the tracks, and you also put the station closer the people on the north side of the highway.

Fear that by having the track closer to the buildings on Jasmine will result in noise complaints? Having the tracks elevated will only make the noise worse and harder to mitigate. A vocal minority will drown out a supportive majority.