Renewed passenger rail service between Banff and Calgary?

[Roughneck]

Share CP track to Canmore, then convert 1A to a rail/multi-use path corridor. Build gondola from Lake Louise station to the ski area.

That’s my plan and I will fight anybody who disagrees with it!

[Flames0910]

Originally Posted by octothorp

Harbin-Dalian in China would probably be the closest example (actually significantly colder than Calgary in terms of average winter temperatures).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbin...-speed_railway

Pricetag of about $10 billion per 100km of track, with a lot of cost going to constructing above-ground viaducts to run the track on, to avoid frost-heaving.

Why are we talking about a high speed train? The proposal is for a normal speed train (potentially powered by hydrogen to make it attractive to the UCP).

Better examples would be Amtrak lines in the US...

Winter Park Express in Denver (has to go through way more tunnels, and Winter Park doesn't compare to the year-round tourism draw that is Banff).
California Zephyr to Squaw Valley Palisades Tahoe (full line is probably more comparable to the Rocky Mountaineer)
Snowbasin FrontRunner from Salt Lake City. (more of a commuter service, buses take skiers the last mile as would happen in Banff).

Also for the party people, Amtrak serves liquor on the train so the Winter Park Express is apparently great for the aprés ski crowd (I wouldn't expect much of a party on the Salt Lake train )

what are the plans once you get folks there. you will need to have good bus infrastructure to get them to other places and back to the train station.

Supply and demand baby. Pick your poison:

Walking
BYO bike/scooter
Rent a bike/scooter/ebike in Canmore or Banff
Taxis & Ride-sharing services
Hotel or other Tourism shuttles
Busses

Dump a bunch of affluent tourists in Banff and new businesses will develop to move them around.

[Amethyst]

The last several times I've gone to Banff or Canmore, I've taken the On-It bus. The road is busy and I'm not one of those people who drives for fun. I'd much rather read my book or look at the scenery. I absolutely HATE trying to find parking there. And I wander around the town, shopping, drinking, going out to eat and like to be able to drink as much as I want.

If I'm going hiking, I go with a group and we meet somewhere in Calgary to carpool. So I don't think I would be saving much time versus the train.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Flames0910

Why are we talking about a high speed train? The proposal is for a normal speed train (potentially powered by hydrogen to make it attractive to the UCP).

Sure, that's fine. Someone asked about examples of high speed trains in cold climates so I answered. It's fine for conversations to go in different directions.

[Northendzone]

maybe i am stretching a bit on some issues; however, I am trying to think of how i (as a local calgarian/albertan)use the park in relation to how could i use a train. Banff is potentially a somewhat pricy place to get stuck in if you have train connection issues.

it would be interesting to see if a train was approved, would the government allow more development of things in the park - like that gondola those people wanted to build? In addition, I feel like somehow canada's cell phone companies would need to improve coverage in the parks if you are going to look at having uber as an option to move people between the train station and trailheads (however, one could only imagine the "rush pricing factor" that would likely get into play in Banff and area.

in the end, i still see this as a nice thing, like a high speed train to edmonton; however, I also feel it will be a financial boondoggle.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

maybe i am stretching a bit on some issues; however, I am trying to think of how i (as a local calgarian/albertan)use the park in relation to how could i use a train. Banff is potentially a somewhat pricy place to get stuck in if you have train connection issues.

it would be interesting to see if a train was approved, would the government allow more development of things in the park - like that gondola those people wanted to build? In addition, I feel like somehow canada's cell phone companies would need to improve coverage in the parks if you are going to look at having uber as an option to move people between the train station and trailheads (however, one could only imagine the "rush pricing factor" that would likely get into play in Banff and area.

in the end, i still see this as a nice thing, like a high speed train to edmonton; however, I also feel it will be a financial boondoggle.

The gondola was already shot down while fully aware of this plan, it's not going to happen.


The point isn't to take a train, then an Uber to the trailhead. That's silly. There are already buses going most places you want to be. Look, clearly this isn't something you think will be useful to you, doesn't mean it wouldn't be useful to many others.

[surferguy]

I don’t understand why people keep speaking about getting to the trailhead. I’d wager 90% of the tourists that go to Banff never make it to a trailhead. They go to Banff and check out the town for a day or two. The train gets them from the airport to Banff relatively easy.

Having been to mountain towns in Europe, I’d never consider a car when arriving because the train takes me where I want to go.

Maybe the framing is different for me, I don’t see this as something that is needed for locals (it would be sweet as an option) but needed for tourists. Am I wrong for seeing it that way?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by surferguy

I don’t understand why people keep speaking about getting to the trailhead. I’d wager 90% of the tourists that go to Banff never make it to a trailhead. They go to Banff and check out the town for a day or two.

Yup, maybe Johnson Canyon, a loop on the bus up to Minnewanka, Sulphur Mountain, Banff Springs, Lake Louise...all bus accessible.

[Bigtime]

Speaking as a latte-sipping urbanist, I'd totally be using this to go to Banff for the day. I have only been to Banff twice in the last 20 years, latest was last year and I loved what they've done in the town to make it more friendly to walk around. Give us this option and I could see trips out there becoming much more common for us.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Speaking as a latte-sipping urbanist, I'd totally be using this to go to Banff for the day. I have only been to Banff twice in the last 20 years, latest was last year and I loved what they've done in the town to make it more friendly to walk around. Give us this option and I could see trips out there becoming much more common for us.

We went last in October 2020 and Bear Street was still pretty torn up, but I am totally on board with the pedestrian environment there. I am looking forward to getting there again and seeing the finished product.

Like many have said: if you're hitting a remote trail head? A car might suit you more. But to hit up the town for a few days and all of the main hotspots (if that's your thing), then you can do it just fine without a car already, and as demand increases, so too will the service levels and frequency.

The last few times I have done a weekend in Banff, the car has gone into the hotel parkade and remained there until we checked out. Plenty to do without a car and great walkability. Did I hike? No. But like many (most?) tourists, that was never my intention on those trips.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by surferguy

I don’t understand why people keep speaking about getting to the trailhead. I’d wager 90% of the tourists that go to Banff never make it to a trailhead. They go to Banff and check out the town for a day or two. The train gets them from the airport to Banff relatively easy.

Having been to mountain towns in Europe, I’d never consider a car when arriving because the train takes me where I want to go.

Maybe the framing is different for me, I don’t see this as something that is needed for locals (it would be sweet as an option) but needed for tourists. Am I wrong for seeing it that way?

Not wrong at all. I actually think that the biggest benefits to Calgarians would be economic. Calgary is bypassed by so many, and that's a missed opportunity for the city. Calgary is basically Banff's airport, but capturing a few of them for a day or two would be great. An easy link with good frequency between YYC, downtown, and Banff would be a much easier sell to travel companies, tour operators, and individual tourists. When they book the YYC-Banff ticket, have a little option for a day or two in Calgary with an associated hotel deal, and then continue on your way. Easy peasy.

A train to the the airport would also benefit locals somewhat. I actually don't think that LRT on its own should be a priority (way more benefit for LRT to be prioritized in other areas first), but a commuter train as part of the Banff project makes more sense.

On top of all of that, if I can hop on with the tourists and go to Banff without a car for a few days, or even as a day trip - bonus. If I want to drive instead? That's fine too. It is just about options.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by surferguy

I don’t understand why people keep speaking about getting to the trailhead. I’d wager 90% of the tourists that go to Banff never make it to a trailhead. They go to Banff and check out the town for a day or two. The train gets them from the airport to Banff relatively easy.

Having been to mountain towns in Europe, I’d never consider a car when arriving because the train takes me where I want to go.

Maybe the framing is different for me, I don’t see this as something that is needed for locals (it would be sweet as an option) but needed for tourists. Am I wrong for seeing it that way?

This, 100%.

When I went to Salzburg a few years ago, I took a train from Munich. I just kind of walked around, saw the sights went out for dinner and then back to Munich the next day. Not once did I think I needed a car or cab.

I imagine most tourists to Banff would do something similar.

[Sliver]

If this will invite more tourists to the area, it has to be a non-starter.

I'm in one of - or all of - Canmore, Banff and Lake Louise 75% of weekends all year long. They're all too full. If this will stimulate more tourism in the area we should not even want it.

In conjunction with building the train, we'd need to build another Banff in the corridor. In fact, we should have started doing that 20 years ago. If you can get past that hurdle then I'm all for the train. Town has to come first, though.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Sliver

If this will invite more tourists to the area, it has to be a non-starter.

I'm in one of - or all of - Canmore, Banff and Lake Louise 75% of weekends all year long. They're all too full. If this will stimulate more tourism in the area we should not even want it.

In conjunction with building the train, we'd need to build another Banff in the corridor. In fact, we should have started doing that 20 years ago. If you can get past that hurdle then I'm all for the train. Town has to come first, though.

I admire your dedication over the years (at least it feels like years at this point) to pitching the building of an entirely new town in the corridor.

Who knows, maybe one day you'll like the genius who was ahead of the curve.

[Roughneck]

Buy property in Exshaw now, get ahead of the boom!

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Sliver

If this will invite more tourists to the area, it has to be a non-starter.

I'm in one of - or all of - Canmore, Banff and Lake Louise 75% of weekends all year long. They're all too full. If this will stimulate more tourism in the area we should not even want it.

In conjunction with building the train, we'd need to build another Banff in the corridor. In fact, we should have started doing that 20 years ago. If you can get past that hurdle then I'm all for the train. Town has to come first, though.

Another town has been built, and its name is Canmore.

The benefit of Canmore is the fact that it's not inside the park, so development there should be easier.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Another town has been built, and its name is Canmore.

The benefit of Canmore is the fact that it's not inside the park, so development there should be easier.

Shut up already, Sheila Copps!

[Amethyst]

Not everyone has to ride the train, to benefit from the train. If you are going hiking on a remote trail, wouldn't it be nice not to have so many people on the road? Easier to find a place to park when you stop for a beer after the hike?

[Flames0910]

Originally Posted by Sliver

If this will invite more tourists to the area, it has to be a non-starter.

I'm in one of - or all of - Canmore, Banff and Lake Louise 75% of weekends all year long. They're all too full. If this will stimulate more tourism in the area we should not even want it.

The tourists are already here, except they arrive by plane and then rent SUVs without winter tires that clog the roads and always need room for parking.

In terms of growth I hate to break it to you but the government is aiming for a target of $20B in tourism revenue by 2030. That’s more people in Canmore, Banff, and Lake Louise but also places like Castle, Bighorn and Waterton. If we reach this growth without investing in the infrastructure to support it, we will love our mountain parks to death.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Share CP track to Canmore, then convert 1A to a rail/multi-use path corridor. Build gondola from Lake Louise station to the ski area.

That’s my plan and I will fight anybody who disagrees with it!

Speaking of building gondolas....

The same money behind this Calgary to Banff Rail service, Liricon Capital, also owns Norquay and the Banff Rail Station. Liricon is Banff locals Jan and Adam Waterous and their three children

https://www.rmotoday.com/banff/banff...on-arp-4333845

This past summer; the ToB again refused to remove the Gondola Terminus from the Banff Train Station. The ultimate goal, is to ferry people up to Norquay from the townsite. Parks though....

Originally Posted by _Q_

Another town has been built, and its name is Canmore.

The benefit of Canmore is the fact that it's not inside the park, so development there should be easier.

Should be yes. The first efforts through the ToC, were rejected. The Developer has since taken it to the Provincial Courts.

https://www.rmotoday.com/canmore/thr...t-plan-3878368

This has been done before;

If TSMV does appeal, it would be the second time the owner of those lands have taken the Town to the MGB.

In 1997, previous owners – Three Sisters Golf Resorts – won an appeal against the Town over a planning submission that was defeated in 1996. Following the appeal win, the Town filed its own appeal and the two sides eventually settled in 1998.

https://www.rmotoday.com/canmore/jud...e-plan-4186799