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

[Kitchissippi]

If they're shifting the highway lanes anyway, the option of keeping the line on the north side until after Montreal Road where there's a natural grade change should have been considered. This would make an extra station at Jasmine Park easier, and the Montreal Road station closer to the industrial park.

[MalcolmTucker]

From Calgary here: One, Calgary's LRT platforms are a bit higher than Ottawa's, so that could make things different, but probably not. Two, there are stations where only a chain link fence separate the LRT from a 80 kph freeway and they work fine. (Street View) Three, stations in medians don't provide a nice little streetcar suburb TOD, but they are inducing redevelopment. (Streetview) Four, I don't think a station like this (Streetview) really would work with the number of transfers they are trying to facilitate. Five, where Calgary is not bound by past decisions, we don't build median stations anymore if there is another option. See these: (Streetview) (Streetview)


Important to remember that in the Calgary context, we aren't building a 30,000 ppdph trunk line. The lines' capacities are expandable for sure (with a downtown tunnel), but we are designing a system with substantial manual operation and many at grade crossings for pedestrians and vehicles.

[Truenorth00]

I'm still hoping for infill eventually at Jasmine Park and Tenth Line.

[Gat-Train]

IMO, they should just downgrade the 174 to an urban boulevard, with limited intersections. Have the LRT run in the median of said boulevard.

[CanadaGoose]

Originally Posted by Gat-Train

IMO, they should just downgrade the 174 to an urban boulevard, with limited intersections. Have the LRT run in the median of said boulevard.

There would be way too much opposition. Never mind, the fact that it would reduce the capacity of the system.

[Orleans123]

You got that right. Obviously Gat-Train does not live in Orleans.

[J.OT13]

Found an update on Councillor Matthew Luloff's Twitter and O-Train Fans. I was unable to find it on any official City website.

Construction Summary (June to December 2019) : East Extension - Stage 2 LRT





https://www.otrainfans.ca/news/construction-summary-east-extension-stage-2-lrt

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I'm still hoping for infill eventually at Jasmine Park and Tenth Line.

You mean to add residential and commercial there, or to add stations there?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Acajack

You mean to add residential and commercial there, or to add stations there?

Stations.

The development will come.....

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I'm still hoping for infill eventually at Jasmine Park and Tenth Line.

Good Day.

Yeah, well, I can easily see Tenth Line coming in sometime along the way, and the chaps at GeoOttawa would seem to agree - they have mapped a separation of the rails at that location to allow for a future station. And the distances say that it just makes sense, eventually.

But Jasmine Crescent seems to be way off the radar...... few mentions in the last two rounds of plans and reports, and GeoOttawa agrees with me in that there is just no space in the present configuration there for a station or reserved space for a station. IIRC, this was part of what the bundling attempt on reconfiguring and rebuilding the 174 was to have been about (along with the reconfiguration of the intersection and end-of-line at 174/Trim) , but QueensPark of the time basically said NO. Politely, they said to wait until we all see what effect the LRT has on commuters and traffic before scheduling a rebuild of the 174. ( I also believe this was part and parcel of the total FUBAR of attempting to re-upload the 174 to provincial MoT responsibility. )

So.......We Shall See (I hope..... eventually.....; we have not seen poop yet of what is to be).

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I'm still hoping for infill eventually at Jasmine Park and Tenth Line.

Jasmine would serve a largely lower-income, transit-underserved, market.

Not suburban or middle class enough for this council to care.

[Acajack]

I was thinking that the station at Orleans Blvd. could be swapped for Tenth Line. Orleans Blvd. is quite close to both Jeanne-d'Arc and Place d'Orléans but Tenth is quite a bit further from the closest stations (Place and Trim).

That said even if it is low density there is still more population within walking distance of Orleans Blvd. than Tenth Line. I guess the area around Tenth Line might be developed eventually but not sure what the zoning/plans are in that area.

Jasmine is a no-brainer for a station in my book, but it looks like it probably won't happen.

I am not up on the process but from what I am seeing (public notices, construction prep work) the decisions have already been made and are cast in stone, in terms of stations, which side of the highway has been chosen, use of the median, etc.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Jasmine would serve a largely lower-income, transit-underserved, market.

Not suburban or middle class enough for this council to care.

And transient. In other words, not as likely to vote for the councilor in the next election and therefore not as important constituent.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I was thinking that the station at Orleans Blvd. could be swapped for Tenth Line. Orleans Blvd. is quite close to both Jeanne-d'Arc and Place d'Orléans but Tenth is quite a bit further from the closest stations (Place and Trim).

That said even if it is low density there is still more population within walking distance of Orleans Blvd. than Tenth Line. I guess the area around Tenth Line might be developed eventually but not sure what the zoning/plans are in that area.

Jasmine is a no-brainer for a station in my book, but it looks like it probably won't happen.

I am not up on the process but from what I am seeing (public notices, construction prep work) the decisions have already been made and are cast in stone, in terms of stations, which side of the highway has been chosen, use of the median, etc.

The Confederation Line is not designed for walk in passengers who happen to be current residents. It is for people moving into future high rises that will make the city's developer class even richer. Even though existing residents are paying the freight for this project, stations will be inconveniently located for most of us and will require the use of the same lousy bus network that will continue to operate with frequencies that have been deliberately degraded during the planning and construction of this project.

[J.OT13]

I think (and hope) the idea behind Orléans Boulevard Station is an easy transfer station for local buses. The Tenth Line location doesn't achieve that in any way as it is not under the Tenth Line overpass, but further east requiring pedestrian bridges.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

And transient. In other words, not as likely to vote for the councilor in the next election and therefore not as important constituent.

Yup. Renters are really ignored in anything to do with public policy in this town.

[J.OT13]

We drove by Olréans Boulevard station last night around 9:50 p.m. They seem to be drilling bore holes on the 174's left, eastbound lane.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by PHrenetic

But Jasmine Crescent seems to be way off the radar...... few mentions in the last two rounds of plans and reports, and GeoOttawa agrees with me in that there is just no space in the present configuration there for a station or reserved space for a station.

How is there no space? They have a baseball diamond with extra land left over. They could build something as large as Cyrville there.

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Jasmine would serve a largely lower-income, transit-underserved, market.

Not suburban or middle class enough for this council to care.

Admittedly, Jasmine/Sutton Place is in this awkward zone where stop spacing would be lower than average if they added the stop. And they seem to have issues in this city with having stop spacing less than 2 km for the rail lines, unless there was an existing station (Cyrville?). I am still rooting for it. It's not just what's already there. There's a ton of re-development potential there too.

[Multi-modal]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

How is there no space? They have a baseball diamond with extra land left over. They could build something as large as Cyrville there.

There is no space because they are not leaving any space for a station in their rail alignment. To add the station they would have to widen the highway again, which is the perfect excuse to never add a station in the future.

Plus there is a 280m flyover structure adjacent to Gloucester High School and the first Jasmine Park tower, so that rules out anything in that stretch.

[PHrenetic]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

How is there no space? They have a baseball diamond with extra land left over. They could build something as large as Cyrville there.



Admittedly, Jasmine/Sutton Place is in this awkward zone where stop spacing would be lower than average if they added the stop. And they seem to have issues in this city with having stop spacing less than 2 km for the rail lines, unless there was an existing station (Cyrville?). I am still rooting for it. It's not just what's already there. There's a ton of re-development potential there too.

Good Day.

Please be clear.... I / was / am / always have been / in favour of a Jasmine station.
The distance east of Blair is sufficient to rate a stop, and as you note, other existing, or to be, stations have less catchment.

As for future TOD or growth potential, absolutely positive.

TenthLine has TOD and growth potential.

If OrleansBlvd rates a station, then IMO Jasmine rates a station.

And if the rails had remained on the north side of the 174, then yep, plenty of space for a station.

BUT.... they went and moved the transfer from north side to median farther to the west, not far east of the present BRT flyover.
And so.... at that point opposite JasmineCresent area, the median just has minimal or no space for a station.
This is what I was referring to when I spoke of the 174 rebuild bundling.
They explicitly stated in one of the minor paragraphs in earlier reports that it was to provide sufficient space for stations, and road-to-rail safety separation.

So - it's a NoJoy!