Jump to content

Queensview


Recommended Posts

  • 10 months later...
  • Replies 15
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

And the connectivity enhancement study. For reference, uOttawa Station is 22.3 meters at its widest while the patch of grass where Queensview will be built is 27.5 meters. Neither the renderings or th

Though now, it seems the Feds will end up funding the Airport's contribution, which is understandable.  Developers are funding 50% of the extension from Bowesville to Limebank, with the Province

Posted Images

  • Moderator

I agree. It seems like it will be very large for the type of traffic it may see. With a highway pedestrian overpass as well as multiple station levels, it seems to compare to Blair but without the lower bus level, and adding extra above. 

Link to post
  • Moderator
Posted (edited)

This render might have created even more questions for me than answers:

  • The elevator is clearly outside of the fare-paid zone, but the platform is at a lower level: are we gonna have two sets of elevators, one to reach the concourse, pass the fare gate, then go down another set of elevator to reach the platform?
  • Same goes for those nto taking the elevator: from this side at least, one would have to go up, then go down...
  • Original renders showed Queensview as a island platform, however this one seems to indicate side platforms (same on the Railfans map). So we would actually be looking at 3 pairs of elevators? (entrance + concourse + bridge, fare-paid + east platform, fare-paid + west platform)
  • This shows (what I assume) to be the west side of the station, which seems to be a transit plaza (sigh) and a drop-off area: Where will it be? None of the original renders showed a westside entrance, nor the space to actually have such a setup. What happened to the east-side entrance?

Don't get me wrong, I like this render, seems massive and I like massive stations, but it's also a question of "but why?"? After all this is only the IKEA express station for me.

 

For the record, this is the spaced they have to work with .Seems too big for the actual space or massive changes compared to what was proposed. image.png.776a07e482be99352609aeeb1c3dc418.png

Edited by DavidBellerive
more details.
Link to post

I agree. Lots of unanswered questionswith this one. With a centre, it was easier to wrap my head around the circulation and fare-paid zone. 

If the fare gates are at platform level, similar to St. Laurent, then that could work relatively well. Still a lot of up and down if someone wants to use the stairs. 

 

Link to post

This is my rough drawing of what I think the station footprint will be, I expect that the new render is just another side of the station and will have enterances on both sides with the original render enterance still existing. In the new render above the trees you can see the roof appears to angle down the same way it does in the original render implying there are stairs on that side aswell. I expect due to the limitations on space that combined with what I believe is a higher trench than originally planed meaning the concourse needs to be higher they couldn't create a ramp that would be effective enough coming from the east so they instead put stairs and for accesiblity created the elevator enterance on the west side.

I'm not entirely sure how Leon's truck bays will work with this however.

queen.png.f8b90961bdff6b28992470432172f561.png

Link to post
  • Moderator
4 hours ago, Pat said:

This is my rough drawing of what I think the station footprint will be, I expect that the new render is just another side of the station and will have enterances on both sides with the original render enterance still existing. In the new render above the trees you can see the roof appears to angle down the same way it does in the original render implying there are stairs on that side aswell. I expect due to the limitations on space that combined with what I believe is a higher trench than originally planed meaning the concourse needs to be higher they couldn't create a ramp that would be effective enough coming from the east so they instead put stairs and for accesiblity created the elevator enterance on the west side.

 

I guess this is a possible explanation. I would assume the loading dock can work with such limited space, but my understanding might be wrong. Eitherway if the city decides to apply eminent domain they probably can get the additional space to "make it work".

Looking at this, the side platforms doesnt seem to make much sense but I assume for track geometry it could be easier than island platforms in this configuration. Curious to hear more from the city / OC regarding this specific station has there seems to be a lot of things that are not too clear, at least on the public side.

Link to post

And the connectivity enhancement study. For reference, uOttawa Station is 22.3 meters at its widest while the patch of grass where Queensview will be built is 27.5 meters. Neither the renderings or the connectivity study show a path going around the station on the north side, which explains the entrances on both sides. I think the City can build the station without expropriation. Some expropriation might be needed for the path between Leon's and ProSlide. 

Faregates at platform level seems to make the most sense in order to allow free-flowing (or as much as that's possible with the ups and downs) through the station to get on all three sides (east, west and across the Queensway). 

Queensview Station 

Queensview Station is a new station located to the north of Highway 417. The station is to be served by a minimum of one fare-controlled entrance and will be integrated with a new public access pedestrian bridge spanning Highway 417 and landing at Baxter Road, providing a significant new connection for communities north and south of the highway.

There will be a north entrance building and entry plaza with access from a new multi-use pathway and sidewalk system from the Queensview Drive and Connaught Avenue in Queensway Terrace North. This entrance will also serve the new pedestrian bridge spanning Highway 417.

The station and bridge will be accessed via a combination of sloped pathway, stairs and elevators on the north side of Highway 417 and by accessible stairs and elevators from Baxter Road on the south side of Highway 417. The public sidewalk will be extended along Baxter Road to the pedestrian bridge access point. Bicycle parking spaces will conveniently be provided at grade near both station access points, and passenger pick up and drop off spaces will be provided on Baxter Road and Queensview Drive.

Connectivity Summary

 

Thid image depicts connectivity features that are planned, proposed, and under further review as part of a feasibility assessment.

 

Planned 

A. Pedestrian bridge across Highway 417 to Baxter Road

B. Station plaza with six passenger pick up and drop off spaces and bike parking for 20 bikes with space allocated to double in future when required

C. Multi-use pathway along alignment, east of the station to Connaught Avenue, and Connaught Park multi-use pathways from Severn Avenue and Hanlon Avenue

D. Multi-use pathway on east side and sidewalk on west side of Leon's to Queensview Drive

E. Sidewalk on north-west side of Baxter Road

Proposed Enhancements 

F. Add cycling facility along Baxter Road from Iris Street to the station.

Feasibility Assessment 

G. Review request for lighting along path in Connaught Park with NCC

H. Cut through multi-use pathway to Queensway Terrace North community from Queensview Drive to Severn Avenue

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
  • Moderator

The connectivity study seems to be more useful in understanding the layout. So essentially a new ROW would be built next to Leon for a drop-off point. I still think it might be a bit overkill but if we look at it as building a bridge, then adding a LRT station, it's not too crazy assuming connectivity on either side is optimized for pedestrians.

Thanks @J.OT13 for looking into it further!

Link to post
On 2021-04-06 at 5:08 PM, DavidBellerive said:

This render might have created even more questions for me than answers:

  • The elevator is clearly outside of the fare-paid zone, but the platform is at a lower level: are we gonna have two sets of elevators, one to reach the concourse, pass the fare gate, then go down another set of elevator to reach the platform?
  • Same goes for those nto taking the elevator: from this side at least, one would have to go up, then go down...
  • Original renders showed Queensview as a island platform, however this one seems to indicate side platforms (same on the Railfans map). So we would actually be looking at 3 pairs of elevators? (entrance + concourse + bridge, fare-paid + east platform, fare-paid + west platform)
  • This shows (what I assume) to be the west side of the station, which seems to be a transit plaza (sigh) and a drop-off area: Where will it be? None of the original renders showed a westside entrance, nor the space to actually have such a setup. What happened to the east-side entrance?

Don't get me wrong, I like this render, seems massive and I like massive stations, but it's also a question of "but why?"? After all this is only the IKEA express station for me.

 

For the record, this is the spaced they have to work with .Seems too big for the actual space or massive changes compared to what was proposed. image.png.776a07e482be99352609aeeb1c3dc418.png

I think at the end of the day its inevitable. The bridge is clearly meant to be both a way of crossing the highway regardless if you're accessing the station, and a way to reach the LRT station from both sides. As such if your goal is to this bridge accessible, you really don't have a choice other than to build multiple elevators (unless you make platform level fare gates like St. Laurent, but frankly that doesn't sound like a good way to go).

Link to post

Why would platform level faregates not be a good way to go? I understand that in general, it's less than ideal, such is the case with St. Lauren, which can be disorienting (less now than as a bus station). In this case though, space is very constrained and placing the fare gates at platform level could save a significant amount of money and maintenance, along with reducing riders' need to go up to go down constantly. 

Link to post
  • Moderator

I think the point of platform level gates that makes them undesirable is that if you want to switch from eastbound to westbound (or vice versa) platforms, you have to exist one set of gates and re-enter the other ones. This isn't common and I know that a lot of people remark on this fact in Montreal at Bonaventure (although at Bonaventure, you can switch from one platform to another via a small narrow bridge between the platforms and concourse level, but it is stairs only).

Personally at Queensview, I don't think it will be much of an issue but definitely one of the odd-balls in the network on Lines 1 & 3.

Link to post

Queensview station will gain more traffic over time. Does anyone know if private developers are contributing to the cost of the ped overpass' construction or, possibly, contributing to the cost of the station itself? I ask because it seems to me that apart from IKEA shoppers (who will constitute a significant percentage of users from the get-go) the rationale here has to be that the industrial/commercial lands on the south side--both east and west of the ped bridge--will be redeveloped with much higher density. Somewhat like what's happening to Blair right now. IKEA owns the entire mall and I suspect parts of it will be redeveloped. There is also considerable redevelopment potential to the east around the Montana's/Bank of Nova Scotia area and toward the National Post. Easy enough to see several 20-30 story rental/condos within 10 years

Link to post
  • Moderator
19 hours ago, TransitDaddy said:

Does anyone know if private developers are contributing to the cost of the ped overpass' construction or, possibly, contributing to the cost of the station itself?

The whole station and overpass is paid by the city only, no private partners.

I think the only station that gets participation from someone else than the city is the airport (EY did not help fund Upland Station),

There is definitely potential for densification at Queensview, depends how willing the developers are and how the city is willing to accept proposals.

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

×
×
  • Create New...