Jump to content
LRT Big time

Stations - Stage 2 Trillium Line

Recommended Posts

Hey, love the beautiful new stations, real modern & BIG city style............but was wondering. The existing Trillium stations, they look really Micky Mouse compared to the new ones on Confederation line. Are any of the expansion stations(either Confederation or Trillium) going to be as cool as the new Confed. ones...or just plain old school?????? If they stay small & old school.........puts a real damper on the whole system & project, I feel. (WANT TO PLAY WITH THE BIG BOYS.........GO BIG OR GO HOME!!!)

Share this post


Link to post

I would expect any new stations to keep the same design language as Confederation Line for a consistent look and feel across the whole system. I would also expect the Trillium line stations to be significantly changed under Stage 2 LRT since the new trains being acquired are about double the length of the current ones which means the existing stations will need major expansions. You can sort of see the new architecture trickling out to the Trillium line already at Greenboro. When they added the fare gates they built a new awning that has the same look as the Confederation line and I would expect that to continue. Even some of the new bus shelters borrow some of the design language (grey metal, angled roofs, glass) so I imagine going forward that will be the look of OC Transpo stations.

Share this post


Link to post

I would say the same. Maybe the stations won’t be as architecturally impressive, but I am certain that they will look closer to the new station buildings that were constructed in 2017 for the new Fare gates. That said, I am sure some stations, like the future elevated station at the Airport will surely be something quite impressive.

-Charlie

Share this post


Link to post

I think the Trillium Line will always have more or less the same station designs they have now (like the difference between a TTC Subway station and a GO station).

They'll probably add glass canopies at platform level like the ones that they're using on the C-Line, but skip the big architectural roofs.

Share this post


Link to post

I tend to agree. The stations themselves are relatively simple, as most stations are single platform. A larger setup isn't required as crossing and changing platforms is not required.

What will be interesting is the stations that have two platforms, I believe Walkley and Gladstone, so they will probably have some sort of more elaborate station setup to allow for access to both platforms. Same for South Keys as it will have 3 platforms, two for the Trillium Line, as well as a separate platform for the Uplands (EY Centre) and Airport spur line.

If they continue every second station having passing tracks and therefore two platforms, Bowesville would probably have one as well. On the Airport spur, the geoOttawa map suggests the Uplands station would also be double platform.

Carleton already has two platforms and the underpass to cross from one to the other. I don't think that station would drastically change other than to expand the platforms, as an overhead walkway would not be very economic. You still need to maintain access to cross the tracks for students not taking transit.

So there we have it theoretically, Bowesville, South Keys, Walkley, Gladstone and Uplands with two platforms, and probably more elaborate stations. The rest should be single platforms and the current basic design should be more than sufficient. These stations usually only have one way to enter and exit anyways so building up something more complex to Confederation Line standards brings no tangible benefits. Perhaps larger shelters or a canopy but that's it.

No doubt the Airport will have a more interesting station setup. Originally they suggested it would connect to the parking garage but now the geoOttawa map shows it coming right to the Airport terminal but ending on the upper Departures road. Looking forward to the concept renderings to see how it will come together.

As far as length extension, the current Alstom Coradia LINT trains are 41.89 metres in length, while the Stadler FLIRT will be 81.1 metres. Based on the positioning of the doors, they can probably get away with platforms that are shorter than the actual train. I believe I remember the Bombardier Talents noses passing the end of the platforms, no doubt they would do that again.

Sorry... long answer on that one.

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, Shane said:

What will be interesting is the stations that have two platforms, I believe Walkley and Gladstone

Walkley will only have a single platform. It will be essentially identical to Mooney's Bay station.

 

25 minutes ago, Shane said:

As far as length extension, the current Alstom Coradia LINT trains are 41.89 metres in length, while the Stadler FLIRT will be 81.1 metres. Based on the positioning of the doors, they can probably get away with platforms that are shorter than the actual train.

Yes! The design report stated that the platforms will be doubled in length from 35m to 70m. The LINTs currently overhang too.

Share this post


Link to post

I stand corrected. Walkley will only have one platform. Letrim will have 2 platforms and the map also shows two platforms at Bowesville (but they aren't shown side by side so it could be a small garage or storage).

I was also mistaken, South Keys appears to only have 2 platforms, not 3. If that is the case it will be interesting to see how they handle arriving trains with just 2 platforms.

Also...

Bayview shows as two platforms, but currently there is only one platform being built at the new station. The opposite side is the multi use pathway and a faregate entrance, where the platform would go.

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, Shane said:

I stand corrected. Walkley will only have one platform. Letrim will have 2 platforms and the map also shows two platforms at Bowesville (but they aren't shown side by side so it could be a small garage or storage).

 I was also mistaken, South Keys appears to only have 2 platforms, not 3. If that is the case it will be interesting to see how they handle arriving trains with just 2 platforms.

 Also...

Bayview shows as two platforms, but currently there is only one platform being built at the new station. The opposite side is the multi use pathway and a faregate entrance, where the platform would go.

I think part of the original plan was to leave space for a new MSF near Bowesville which would explain the offset platforms. Since then, I think the plan has changed and they'll be building a new MSF in Walkley Yard directly adjacent to the existing one. I don't think they'll ever need to build a new one for the Trillium Line.

The east half of Bayview station will be completely redone (including MUPs and such) to make room for the second platform. New elevators, escalators, etc...

Share this post


Link to post

Just modified the title of the topic to be more descriptive of what is being discussed in this topic.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Shane said:

I stand corrected. Walkley will only have one platform. Letrim will have 2 platforms and the map also shows two platforms at Bowesville (but they aren't shown side by side so it could be a small garage or storage).

I was also mistaken, South Keys appears to only have 2 platforms, not 3. If that is the case it will be interesting to see how they handle arriving trains with just 2 platforms.

Also...

Bayview shows as two platforms, but currently there is only one platform being built at the new station. The opposite side is the multi use pathway and a faregate entrance, where the platform would go.

At South Keys, you will notice there is a centre siding (between the two tracks) just north of the station.  I believe the plan is for the train from the airport to arrive first and unload its passengers.  It will then pull into the centre siding to make room for the train from Limebank.  It will then wait for the southbound train (to Limebank) to depart and then pull into the other side of the platform to pick up passengers bound for the airport.  The idea is to time it so that all three trains arrive/depart at close to the same time, so there will be little wait for those transferring from one line to the other.

As for Bayview, Stage 1 only has one platform on the Trillium Line.  The second platform will be built during stage 2, which is why it is shown on GeoOttawa.

Share this post


Link to post

I think generally the type of operations being discussed above are not good in the long term. Vancouver had a really odd running pattern when the Evergreen Line first opened where train actually ran on the wrong track into the extensions first station to allow for an easier transfer at the Lougheed transfer station. They recently stopped doing that because of all the switch actuation and delays it was causing.

A question I have:

Are the tracks currently labeled or planned to be (i.e. platform 1/2 or track 1/2) its something Toronto doesn't really do but that I think is helpful in Vancouver with its branches.

Share this post


Link to post

I went to a few of the public consultations for the airport link and I found it very informative as they had the actual designers there to talk to people and there weren't that many normal citizens so I got some good one-on-one time with the people planning it.

In the first meeting where they showed the station on the departures level at the parking garage, the original plan was to have people exit the train on the terminal side and have them walk across the road into the terminal. When I spoke with the planners I pointed out that that would suck for people with suitcases in the winter, not to mention the danger and inconvenience of cross three lanes of traffic. They briefly toyed with the idea of putting some sort of roof structure over the road to mitigate the snow but asked me to write my comment and suggestions down. So I did! My main suggestion was that people should not have to go outside to get to the terminal because winter.

In the second open house I was happy to see that they changed the design entirely. Some of the same planners were there and told me that the new design was going to be cheaper and offered several benefits. From what I remember they now plan to have the station at the second-floor level to make it easier for both arrival and departure passengers and it will be on the north side of the terminal with a covered/heated walkway to connect it to the terminal. Once people get to the terminal they can take elevators up or down or walk directly to the parking garage since the walkways for that are on the same level. Furthermore it allowed the station to have platforms on both sides of the train so they can do simultaneous boarding from both sides which would be easier for those with suitcases and should speed up boarding.

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Mike said:

Furthermore it allowed the station to have platforms on both sides of the train so they can do simultaneous boarding from both sides which would be easier for those with suitcases and should speed up boarding.

GeoOttawa only shows a platform on one side of the train, so that might have changed.  We won't know for sure until the official plans are published.

Share this post


Link to post

On geoOttawa they also do not show the Likebank extension yet, so I believe that it might be a bit out of date, but not really sure.

Share this post


Link to post

At Toronto Pearson, the Union Pearson express is one platform per train. Same for the LINK train that travels between Terminal 1 and 3 and the Viscount Parking.

I think the one platform would be more than enough, but if they incorporate two, then all the better if ridership ever justifies it. But I think one is more than enough.

Share this post


Link to post

All depends, in Vancouver the airport trains have a relatively short turnaround so they are already considering the Spanish solution. At Pearson meanwhile, the trains tend to sit for quite a while.

Share this post


Link to post

In Ottawa our trains will dwell at the Airport for a while too. At the South Keys end, they'll pull into the pocket track to make room for the mainline trains before pulling back out and off to the Airport.

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, reecemartin said:

All depends, in Vancouver the airport trains have a relatively short turnaround so they are already considering the Spanish solution. At Pearson meanwhile, the trains tend to sit for quite a while.

For people unfamiliar, the Spanish Solution is essentially a station layout with two platforms, one on each side of the line. For example, if the Spanish Solution was used at the Ottawa Airport it would consist of a single track but platforms on both sides of the train. One for boarding and one for disembarking passengers. The doors on the train for disembarking passengers opens several seconds before the opposite doors open for boarding.

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, reecemartin said:

All depends, in Vancouver the airport trains have a relatively short turnaround so they are already considering the Spanish solution. At Pearson meanwhile, the trains tend to sit for quite a while.

I don't see the need to significantly increase frequencies to the Ottawa Airport (one train every 10-15 minutes should be more than adequate to it).  Ottawa's population is about 30 years behind Vancouver's and YOW won't ever be as busy as YVR, since  we are so close to both YUL and YYZ.  Once the Trillium line is eventually double tracked, and airport spur can be interlined, they can have 1 train in 3 or 4 go to the airport.

As for the Vancouver Airport, I am not convinced it needs more frequent service than its peak of one train every 6 minutes.  If the objective is to increase the frequency on the main part of the line, they could similarly have one train in 3 go to the airport.  As for Richmond–Brighouse, that is a different story and it is unfortunately equally constrained as the Airport station, so the priority should be to fix that somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/3/2018 at 1:12 AM, Roger1818 said:

I don't see the need to significantly increase frequencies to the Ottawa Airport (one train every 10-15 minutes should be more than adequate to it).  Ottawa's population is about 30 years behind Vancouver's and YOW won't ever be as busy as YVR, since  we are so close to both YUL and YYZ.  Once the Trillium line is eventually double tracked, and airport spur can be interlined, they can have 1 train in 3 or 4 go to the airport.

As for the Vancouver Airport, I am not convinced it needs more frequent service than its peak of one train every 6 minutes.  If the objective is to increase the frequency on the main part of the line, they could similarly have one train in 3 go to the airport.  As for Richmond–Brighouse, that is a different story and it is unfortunately equally constrained as the Airport station, so the priority should be to fix that somehow.

 

The YVR spur is more popular than most realize, 25% of people going to YVR are already taking the Canada Line, not to mention that Sea Island also has a big new Premium Outlet Mall etc., the issue at the terminus is that trains need to turnaround relatively quickly already as the track to the last station on each branch line is actually single tracked, hence the first train needs to get almost all the way to the second station from YVR/Richmond before the second can even start heading to the termini.

Share this post


Link to post
50 minutes ago, reecemartin said:

The YVR spur is more popular than most realize, 25% of people going to YVR are already taking the Canada Line, not to mention that Sea Island also has a big new Premium Outlet Mall etc.,

Certainly the YVR spur is popular, but while some times of day are more popular than other, it doesn't have the same level of crush demand that you see with commuters.  Similar with Outlet Mall at Sea Island (which uses a different station).  As a result, I remain to be convinced that a 6 minute frequency is inadequate for the spur.

 

50 minutes ago, reecemartin said:

the issue at the terminus is that trains need to turnaround relatively quickly already as the track to the last station on each branch line is actually single tracked, hence the first train needs to get almost all the way to the second station from YVR/Richmond before the second can even start heading to the termini.

The same is true for Richmond–Brighouse.  This is the bigger problem.  My guess is that there isn't a need to increase frequency on the YVR spur, but to increase the frequency on the Richmond spur, they need to increase the frequency on the Airport spur since the single track limits the maximum frequency on each spur.

As for YOW, I just don't see it being a problem.  It is a much smaller airport and won't ever be a major airport like YVR (it is Canada's second busiest airport).

Share this post


Link to post

I'm just happy there will be a more pleasant connection to the airport. I've always taken a taxi to go, but with the train, it might be an appealing option. Smoother and more reliable. I read it would be located on the second level, but it's not clear if it would connect to the parking garage and then people could take the walkway, or it would connect directly to the terminal. Or if the terminal would be expanded slightly to take in the train. Either way a structure would have to be built if it ends on the second level.

Any ideas?

Share this post


Link to post

The geoOttawa website shows it being built on top of the airport vehicles parking spots that you can see right before the terminal building on the right hand side if ou are driving to the arrivals area.

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, Rob said:

I'm just happy there will be a more pleasant connection to the airport. I've always taken a taxi to go, but with the train, it might be an appealing option. Smoother and more reliable. I read it would be located on the second level, but it's not clear if it would connect to the parking garage and then people could take the walkway, or it would connect directly to the terminal. Or if the terminal would be expanded slightly to take in the train. Either way a structure would have to be built if it ends on the second level.

Any ideas?

As per the Stage 2 Light Rail Transit Implementation Report – Project Definition and Procurement Plan – March 8, 2017 pg. 39.

Quote

Airport Station Shift
The functional design concept approved by Council in July 2015 located Airport Station between the Airport terminal and parking garage structures, at the top level of the parking garage – as agreed to by the Airport Authority at that time.
City staff, in consultation with the Ottawa Macdonald-Cartier International Airport Authority, are exploring opportunities to improve the location of Airport Station by shifting it closer and potentially connecting it with the airport passenger terminal building. Shifting the station will improve customers’ experience by providing a more direct connection.

I can't find anything official beyond that at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

O-Train Fans is not affiliated, nor connected to either OC Transpo or the City of Ottawa.
Any customer related inquiries should be directed to them and not this site by visiting the OC Transpo or the City of Ottawa websites.
×