If the concern for building more stations is the cost, it seems to me that it would be cheaper to build more small stations to serve the same number of people closer to where they live than one large station, which requires more supporting infrastructure.
I've been to a number of cities around the world with LRT systems similar to what I assume they're aiming for with the Green Line. Amsterdam, Munich, and Boston all come to mind.
The Green Line in Boston is probably a good example of what the C-Train Green Line should be. Through the City Centre, the stations are underground and are typical big-city subway stations. As the trains move into the inner-suburbs, they move above ground and run alongside the roads. They have frequent stops at small platforms, serving a local population within a walkable distance and no parking. As they move further out of the city, the stations become less frequent and have more infrastructure, like parking lots.
Here's what it looks like as it move through Brookline, which is just outside the City Centre:
https://goo.gl/maps/fpY7mdv9vWE2 That's the "station". It's basically just a long bus stop.
Because each stop serves a smaller number of people, they don't need large platforms. Because each stop is close enough for people to walk to, they don't need large parking lots or other infrastructure.