Confederation Line East LRT Extension (Stage 2) [Blair to Trim] | U/C - Page 6

RTWAP · #**101** Posted **Feb 4, 2015, 8:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

4 stations in Orleans up to Place d'Orleans and another possible 4 to Trim!!!

CAN I REPEAT? 8 STATIONS IN ORLEANS IS RIDICULOUS!!

I don't have a fundamental problem with it. The two negatives are cost and delay imposed on other passengers already on board. If there was ever a place to ignore the delay argument then near the periphery of the system is it. Very few riders would be affected.

And on the cost, I assume some of those would be fairly spartan suburban designs.

Uhuniau · #**102** Posted **Feb 4, 2015, 8:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTWAP

I don't have a fundamental problem with it. The two negatives are cost and delay imposed on other passengers already on board. If there was ever a place to ignore the delay argument then near the periphery of the system is it. Very few riders would be affected.

And on the cost, I assume some of those would be fairly spartan suburban designs.

I should hope so. And I wish we wouldn't build Taj Mastations in the first place.

DEWLine · #**103** Posted **Feb 6, 2015, 3:39 AM**

Doubtful that "Taj MaStations" will be going into spaces such as the median from Jeanne d'Arc Bridge to Trim Road. Not enough room to really play, unless your design team's headed up by the likes of Douglas Cardinal. In which case, you'll get your money's worth and then some, and if the contractors stick to his specs, the maintenance costs will be less problematic too.

Uhuniau · #**104** Posted **Feb 6, 2015, 2:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DEWLine

Doubtful that "Taj MaStations" will be going into spaces such as the median from Jeanne d'Arc Bridge to Trim Road. Not enough room to really play, unless your design team's headed up by the likes of Douglas Cardinal. In which case, you'll get your money's worth and then some, and if the contractors stick to his specs, the maintenance costs will be less problematic too.

They'll still find a way to overbuild them. They always do.

MoreTrains · #**105** Posted **Feb 6, 2015, 3:27 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

They'll still find a way to overbuild them. They always do.

True story.

Catenary · #**106** Posted **Feb 6, 2015, 6:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

They'll still find a way to overbuild them. They always do.

I don't know, have you seen the Trillium line stations lately? At Carleton, only half the width of the pathway to the platform is actually paved, the rest is just gravel.

silvergate · #**107** Posted **Feb 6, 2015, 7:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catenary

I don't know, have you seen the Trillium line stations lately? At Carleton, only half the width of the pathway to the platform is actually paved, the rest is just gravel.

Apparently, Carleton almost built a building over top of the current station. Then the 2006 light rail plan was cancelled, and Carleton built two new buildings elsewhere. We could have been warm in the winter

GoTrans · #**108** Posted **Feb 6, 2015, 8:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by silvergate

Apparently, Carleton almost built a building over top of the current station. Then the 2006 light rail plan was cancelled, and Carleton built two new buildings elsewhere. We could have been warm in the winter

I don't know where these grandiose stations are but as you point out the closest thing to an actual building was Carleton's previous plan. I haven't seen any OC Transport stop that you could consider grandiose. Even the Confederation line stations have insufficient roofing as indicated by the renderings.

c_speed3108 · #**109** Posted **Feb 6, 2015, 8:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoTrans

I don't know where these grandiose stations are but as you point out the closest thing to an actual building was Carleton's previous plan. I haven't seen any OC Transport stop that you could consider grandiose. Even the Confederation line stations have insufficient roofing as indicated by the renderings.

Several of the early Transitway stations were considerably over built...at least in size. I would say stations built more recently are pretty bare bones.

For instance:
Lees was overbuilt. (abandoned stops)
St. Laurent upper level was overbuilt (abandoned stops)
Blair was overbuilt. (abandoned stops)

hwy418 · #**110** Posted **Feb 7, 2015, 2:52 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

Several of the early Transitway stations were considerably over built...at least in size. I would say stations built more recently are pretty bare bones.

For instance:
Lees was overbuilt. (abandoned stops)
St. Laurent upper level was overbuilt (abandoned stops)
Blair was overbuilt. (abandoned stops)

Queensway Station - all of it.

DarkArconio · #**111** Posted **Feb 8, 2015, 1:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hwy418

Queensway Station - all of it.

Best part: it's about to be completely abandoned with LRT conversion!

1overcosc · #**112** Posted **Feb 9, 2015, 2:53 AM**

Lees is annoying because with all its overbuilding, there is no convenient way to get from platform to the other. If you want to make a cross-platform transfer at Lees you have to get out and walk down the street.

eltodesukane · #**113** Posted **Feb 9, 2015, 3:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Lees is annoying because with all its overbuilding, there is no convenient way to get from platform to the other. If you want to make a cross-platform transfer at Lees you have to get out and walk down the street.

same things at Walkley ...

GoTrans · #**114** Posted **Feb 10, 2015, 2:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Lees is annoying because with all its overbuilding, there is no convenient way to get from platform to the other. If you want to make a cross-platform transfer at Lees you have to get out and walk down the street.

You can only do this with centre platforms but a bus only has doors on one side. Most transit systems have side loading platforms because it offers better crowd control and public safety. You will be stuck with this unless you want to have transit users crossing the transitway or future railway at peril or want build additional bridges across the route. This will only lead to more of your overbuilding.

waterloowarrior · #**115** Posted **Feb 10, 2015, 7:35 PM**

Display boards up
http://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/public...3-4-and-5-2015

MoreTrains · #**116** Posted **Feb 10, 2015, 7:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Display boards up
http://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/public...3-4-and-5-2015

The 'Hybrid' network likely works best, but still WHY SO MANY STATIONS ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE SPACING, IT IS INSANE AND WILL COST MORE THAN IT IS WORTH!

Capital Shaun · #**117** Posted **Feb 10, 2015, 8:29 PM**

http://documents.ottawa.ca/sites/doc..._oh1_16_en.pdf
So under a hybrid alignment the LRT would run North of the 174 & then move into the median after Montreal rd. Under this scenario, including a station at Jasmine should be a no-brainer since it help the LRT provide "Better proximity to developed areas that can encourage Transit Oriented Development and ridership".

Capital Shaun · #**118** Posted **Feb 10, 2015, 8:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Lees is annoying because with all its overbuilding, there is no convenient way to get from platform to the other. If you want to make a cross-platform transfer at Lees you have to get out and walk down the street.

At Cyrville you have to cross the street (unsignalized of course) to switch platforms! (If you know where you're going you can cut through a private parking lot.) But LRT will have a center platform here so that won't be an issue anymore.

Uhuniau · #**119** Posted **Feb 10, 2015, 10:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by hwy418

Queensway Station - all of it.

What's the matter with Queensway?

Uhuniau · #**120** Posted **Feb 10, 2015, 10:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Capital Shaun

http://documents.ottawa.ca/sites/doc..._oh1_16_en.pdf
So under a hybrid alignment the LRT would run North of the 174 & then move into the median after Montreal rd. Under this scenario, including a station at Jasmine should be a no-brainer since it help the LRT provide "Better proximity to developed areas that can encourage Transit Oriented Development and ridership".

"No brainer" = It will be rejected by people with no brains, sadly.