West Gatineau Tramway & Downtown Loop | Proposed

[Acajack]

I may be proven wrong but my gut feeling is that the STO is not too keen on taking on the operation of a rail system. City council is more divided on the issue I'd say.

Also, what the hell do words like "precautious" or "depose" mean in the context of this article?

These are either mistakes made by a francophone speaking English, or sentences said in French poorly translated into English by the reporter.

Either way the reporter should be reflecting them in understandable English in her article.

[OtrainUser]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I may be proven wrong but my gut feeling is that the STO is not too keen on taking on the operation of a rail system. City council is more divided on the issue I'd say.

Also, what the hell do words like "precautious" or "depose" mean in the context of this article?

These are either mistakes made by a francophone speaking English, or sentences said in French poorly translated into English by the reporter.

Either way the reporter should be reflecting them in understandable English in her article.

The Mayor and his party want light rail in Gatineau to connect to Alymer so he has to convince the other members of city council who are not in his party that light rail is the solution.

Yeah the reporter should have translated better.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Also, what the hell do words like "precautious" or "depose" mean in the context of this article?

I was thinking the same thing.

Precautious is an action where as cautious is using forethought, so given the context, cautious would have been a better word.

As for depose, according to the Oxford dictionary, it has 2 meanings:

1. Remove from office suddenly and forcefully.
2. Law
   Testify to or give (evidence) under oath, typically in a written statement.

I somehow don't think they plan to remove the project "suddenly and forcefully" nor is the project going under oath, so it definitely isn't the correct word.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by roger1818

I was thinking the same thing.

Precautious is an action where as cautious is using forethought, so given the context, cautious would have been a better word.

As for depose, according to the Oxford dictionary, it has 2 meanings:



I somehow don't think they plan to remove the project "suddenly and forcefully" nor is the project going under oath, so it definitely isn't the correct word.

If I think about French, maybe "precaucious" was used as a false friend of "précoce" which officially means "premature" but is often used these days to refer to "early adoption" or "moving full steam ahead".

As for "depose", as a false friend from French it might come from "déposer" which has many meanings but one of them is to "table" a report, a plan, a bill, etc. in some type of assembly.

My theories...

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Acajack

If I think about French, maybe "precaucious" was used as a false friend of "précoce" which officially means "premature" but is often used these days to refer to "early adoption" or "moving full steam ahead".

As for "depose", as a false friend from French it might come from "déposer" which has many meanings but one of them is to "table" a report, a plan, a bill, etc. in some type of assembly.

My theories...

Your depose theory is right on, if you've ever been shut in sick and watched Routine Proceedings in the House of Commons on CPAC.

[lrt's friend]

I still think that the best solution is offered by a two way tramway loop between Hull and Ottawa that makes use of the Interprovincial and Chaudiere bridges. This provides the best service for Gatineau residents to both downtowns and eliminates unnecessary and unwelcome additional transfers at Bayview, which will eventually create a service bottleneck. The two way loop would allow LRT to run from Aylmer and/or old Gatineau to provide continuous and transfer free service. The two way loop would also provide transit service for Ottawans working in Hull government offices.

[J.OT13]

Bureau probably meant "précaution" as in be cautious not to sell the City short and get a weaker valuation on the project (like Ottawa has done over and over again, requesting funds from upper tier governments based on under-estimations, resulting in the City paying a bigger chunk in the end) and "déposer" as in "present" a rail project.

So my estimation, francophone anglicising French words and the reporter taking it to the bank as is.

[Horus]

My gut feeling is that council will approve the idea of investigating an LRT option since:
1) it's non-committal, meaning they will just continue to keep the LRT option open for the time being, and
2) the Aylmer Rapibus/Transit study released earlier this year was flawed and has only resulted in the commissioning of a second study.

Since Action Gatineau campaigned on a platform of Light Rail in the Western sectors of the city, it would seem logical that they would at least make this token effort to keep the file "open", whether there will be any real action out of it or not.

[McC]

It could also be a typo. "Precocious" is a perfectly cromulent word.

[Aylmer]

Gatineau fait le choix du train léger
LeDroit

Gatineau fait officiellement le choix du train léger. Réunis en conseil municipal, mardi, les élus gatinois se sont rangés, à l’unanimité, derrière un système sur rails pour le futur lien rapide de transport en commun dans l’ouest de la ville.

Les élus ont adopté une résolution demandant au gouvernement du Québec d’«inscrire comme priorité aux programmes fédéraux d’aide financière l’implantation d’un système sur rails comme solution pour répondre aux besoins de mobilité des résidents de l’ouest de la Ville de Gatineau». Pour le maire Maxime Pedneaud-Jobin, il s’agit d’une victoire politique. Il martèle la nécessité d’un système sur rails dans l’ouest de la Ville depuis la fondation de son parti Action Gatineau.

Ce dernier s’attend maintenant à ce que «tous les partis politiques» appuient le projet qui sera bientôt présenté par la Ville de Gatineau et qu’ils s’engagent, avant les prochaines élections, à le financer. «Il y a une fenêtre politique, a-t-il rappelé. Le fédéral arrive avec de l’argent comme jamais auparavant pour le transport en commun. Les villes se positionnent et nous devons le faire aussi pour avoir notre part.»

Une première étude récemment rendue publique par la Société de transport de l’Outaouais (STO) favorisait l’aménagement d’un système rapide par bus, mais le conseil rappelle, dans sa résolution, qu’un tel mode de déplacement ne tient pas compte de la nécessité d’arrimer le réseau gatinois avec celui de la Ville d’Ottawa qui migrera vers le train léger dans les prochains mois.

«Un système rapide par bus serait saturé dans un horizon de 10 à 15 ans», poursuit la résolution adoptée mardi.

La conseillère du secteur Aylmer, Audrey Bureau, a salué la position prise par le conseil municipal. Selon elle, il s’agit du meilleur moyen d’attirer plus de gens vers le transport en commun. Il y avait urgence d’agir dans ce dossier, a-t-elle ajouté, notamment en raison de la signature imminente pour l’entente fédérale-provinciale sur les infrastructures de transport en commun et du positionnement clair des villes de Montréal et Québec pour le prolongement du métro et l’aménagement d’un tramway.

Google translation:

Gatineau officially chooses light rail

Meeting on city council on Tuesday, Gatineau's elected officials unanimously voted for a rail system for the future rapid transit link in the west end of the city.

Elected officials passed a resolution calling on the Quebec government to "make rail a priority in federal funding as a solution to meet the mobility needs of residents in the west end of the City of Gatineau ". For Mayor Maxime Pedneaud-Jobin, this is a political victory. He hammered out the need for a rail system in the west end of the city since the founding of his Action Gatineau party.

The latter now expects "all political parties" to support the project that will soon be presented by the City of Gatineau and that they commit, before the next election, to fund it. "There is a political window," he said. The federal government arrives with money like never before for public transit. Cities are positioning themselves and we have to do it too to get our share. "

A first study recently released by the Outaouais Transport Corporation (STO) favored the development of a rapid bus system, but the council reminds, in its resolution, that such a mode of travel does not take into account the need to link the Gatineau network with that of the City of Ottawa, which will migrate to light rail in the coming months.

"A rapid system by bus would be saturated within a horizon of 10 to 15 years," continues the resolution adopted Tuesday.

Aylmer Sector Councilor, Audrey Bureau, welcomed the position taken by City Council. According to her, this is the best way to attract more people to public transit. It was urgent to act on this issue, she added, particularly because of the imminent signing of the federal-provincial agreement on public transit infrastructure and the clear positioning of the cities of Montreal and Quebec for the extension of the metro and the development of a tramway.

[Acajack]

Not too surprised by the decision, but surprised by the unanimity.

[Horus]

It is all well and good that the entire council supports an LRT proposal. I think that there have been compelling cases made that this could be a viable, long-term solution to the transit issues in Aylmer and Hull.

However, I am curious if there will be any action by Council and/or STO to address the current difficulties experienced by west-end transit users in the short-term. If, as the article posted by Aylmer indicates, the plan for Council is to get a committed, funded project in place by the end of the current Council term, how much longer will it take to construct and effect service on this LRT system? What will they do in the interim, since it could still be close to a decade before the first train even rolls?

I am appreciative of the positive step and long-term vision, but there is still much pain to overcome.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Horus

It is all well and good that the entire council supports an LRT proposal. I think that there have been compelling cases made that this could be a viable, long-term solution to the transit issues in Aylmer and Hull.

However, I am curious if there will be any action by Council and/or STO to address the current difficulties experienced by west-end transit users in the short-term. If, as the article posted by Aylmer indicates, the plan for Council is to get a committed, funded project in place by the end of the current Council term, how much longer will it take to construct and effect service on this LRT system? What will they do in the interim, since it could still be close to a decade before the first train even rolls?

I am appreciative of the positive step and long-term vision, but there is still much pain to overcome.

My initial reaction to this was exactly that - "you guys over there are gonna have to be patient..."

[c_speed3108]

Originally Posted by Acajack

My initial reaction to this was exactly that - "you guys over there are gonna have to be patient..."

I remember the CFRA headline (with respect to Ottawa) in the late 90's "Region considers the light rail option"

That was pre-amalgamation!

These things take time....

[Aylmer]

But unlike Ontario/Canada in the 90s, there is actual infrastructure money now.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

But unlike Ontario/Canada in the 90s, there is actual infrastructure money now.

Until we elect Conservatives again, whose only vision is republican style tax cuts. This window of infrastructure money will be limited. Then everything will come to standstill for a decade or two.

[Vixx]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Until we elect Conservatives again, whose only vision is republican style tax cuts. This window of infrastructure money will be limited. Then everything will come to standstill for a decade or two.

That's not true. Harper pumped a lot of $ into infrastructure.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Vixx

That's not true. Harper pumped a lot of $ into infrastructure.

He was coerced into it because the economy was so threatened. But as soon as the immediate threat passed, it was all about cutting. He was also spending the surplus that he had inherited from the previous government.

So much of that infrastructure investment was shortsighted while the best projects require several years of planning. I still drive by a traffic signal that was funded by the Conservative infrastructure program that is never used. Small bananas but still a waste of my tax money.

When the Conservatives talk about tax cuts, we are permanently cutting our ability to fund infrastructure renewal.

Now listen to Doug Ford. Isn't he talking about tax cuts? How does this allow for ongoing infrastructure funding? He may allow current projects to continue but future projects will come to a grinding halt.

It is a whole political debate whether tax cuts or government spending is more effective at stimulating the economy. Has there ever been a study on this? Regardless, at some point, government has to spend money on public infrastructure. At that point, the political debate is irrelevant. The money needs to be found and that is tax money. If the government has given it all back to the public to make purchases at the dollar store or Walmart, were those tax cuts money well spent? Walmart is not going to fix our potholes or invest in a subway line. Instead, they would rather spend money in Bangladesh to increase their profits, while demanding lower corporate tax rates.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Now listen to Doug Ford. Isn't he talking about tax cuts? How does this allow for ongoing infrastructure funding? He may allow current projects to continue but future projects will come to a grinding halt.

Although he is running in Ontario, not Quebec (I doubt if any Ontario government would fund Gatineau's LRT system ).

I think Trudeau has a good shot at another mandate, which would give enough time to have the project far enough along to make it hard for a new government to axe the project. The fact that it is in Quebec will make it even harder.

[Vixx]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

He was coerced into it because the economy was so threatened. But as soon as the immediate threat passed, it was all about cutting. He was also spending the surplus that he had inherited from the previous government.

So much of that infrastructure investment was shortsighted while the best projects require several years of planning. I still drive by a traffic signal that was funded by the Conservative infrastructure program that is never used. Small bananas but still a waste of my tax money.

When the Conservatives talk about tax cuts, we are permanently cutting our ability to fund infrastructure renewal.

Now listen to Doug Ford. Isn't he talking about tax cuts? How does this allow for ongoing infrastructure funding? He may allow current projects to continue but future projects will come to a grinding halt.

It is a whole political debate whether tax cuts or government spending is more effective at stimulating the economy. Has there ever been a study on this? Regardless, at some point, government has to spend money on public infrastructure. At that point, the political debate is irrelevant. The money needs to be found and that is tax money. If the government has given it all back to the public to make purchases at the dollar store or Walmart, were those tax cuts money well spent? Walmart is not going to fix our potholes or invest in a subway line. Instead, they would rather spend money in Bangladesh to increase their profits, while demanding lower corporate tax rates.

Point being that he still spent the money, doesn't really matter if he was "coerced" or not. And at least the nation's finances were in half decent shape (not saying perfect, but a hell of a lot better then now); I can also come up with ways this government has wasted tax dollars in ways that go far beyond small bananas.

I don't mean to derail the thread as there are threads discussing politics, just wanted to point this out.