Renewed passenger rail service between Banff and Calgary?

[surferguy]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

$600 million which is for track only.

Is there a spot in downtown that could be used for a station?

I thought the city or province perhaps had some land set aside downtown for a high speed rail terminal. It's possible that could work if it is indeed true.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Banff is also nice enough by itself that I don’t see it being overly necessary to have to access x number of places. A train would certainly be popular in tourist seasons as well. More tourists off the roads? Ok!

Do people really visit Banff without leaving Banff?

I suspect the money would be better spent adding a third lane to Canmore if your goal is reduced congestion.

Why is a train better than a bus?

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by GGG

Do people really visit Banff without leaving Banff?

I suspect the money would be better spent adding a third lane to Canmore if your goal is reduced congestion.

Why is a train better than a bus?

Rail preference is probably part of it.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/618...a4567cae3a.pdf

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GGG

Do people really visit Banff without leaving Banff?

I suspect the money would be better spent adding a third lane to Canmore if your goal is reduced congestion.

Why is a train better than a bus?

I feel like your goal posts are caught in a tornado.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Rail preference is probably part of it.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/618...a4567cae3a.pdf

I'm replying to my own post here, but that would be part of it for me. I can totally see taking my kids on the train to Banff and going on a walk/hike. That feels like an adventure. It would be more expensive and less convenient than driving using the park pass I already have, but I'd still do it once in awhile.

Taking the bus not so much, and I would never do so.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I feel like your goal posts are caught in a tornado.

My goalposts are firmly set as there is no case for rail to make sense as a public investment from Calgary to Banff.

There is no case for spending public money on rail becuase of transportation requirements that exist when you get to the destination so the last mile becomes a significant hurdle. (The last mile in this case being more like 100 miles given the tourist sites that people want to see)

If you do solve the last mile problem a perfectly suitable alternative of busing exists and is more flexible once at the spread out destination.

So given the above when allocating 300 million of public capital plus xx million for trains and stations you need to show that you are better than the alternative technology. If we want to be green just spend some of that capital on battery powered buses.

Further to this at a $30 round trip this only makes sense for people who don't have vehicles or are going alone. As soon as you add in a second person it's cheaper to drive. So this is for airport visitors and those without cars. So how many airport visitors who aren't renting cars and aren't on a Brewster bus tour are there out of the 4 million visitors to Banff each year?

There is no goalpost moving here. It's a bad idea

[Fire]

Waste of money. It will lose money guaranteed.

[Northendzone]

Also a problem of dealing with 200 or whatever number of passengers getting off the train at once in Banff. How do u move them efficiently? Some will want to go to tunnel mtn, others may want to hike around sunshine.

Romantic idea to take the train to cam ore, Banff and lake Louise - not overly practical

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GGG

My goalposts are firmly set as there is no case for rail to make sense as a public investment from Calgary to Banff.

There is no case for spending public money on rail becuase of transportation requirements that exist when you get to the destination so the last mile becomes a significant hurdle. (The last mile in this case being more like 100 miles given the tourist sites that people want to see)

If you do solve the last mile problem a perfectly suitable alternative of busing exists and is more flexible once at the spread out destination.

So given the above when allocating 300 million of public capital plus xx million for trains and stations you need to show that you are better than the alternative technology. If we want to be green just spend some of that capital on battery powered buses.

Further to this at a $30 round trip this only makes sense for people who don't have vehicles or are going alone. As soon as you add in a second person it's cheaper to drive. So this is for airport visitors and those without cars. So how many airport visitors who aren't renting cars and aren't on a Brewster bus tour are there out of the 4 million visitors to Banff each year?

There is no goalpost moving here. It's a bad idea

The last mile problem last already been solved, and will be bolstered if there is rail, as I already pointed out. Where do you imagine a tourist wants to go that they can't get to once they hit Banff?



It feels like you are imagining this for day trips from Calgary. That's not where many of the trips will come from though. You get people to Banff, they get to their hotel and spend a week in the town. Busing form the airport to Lake Louise, or Johnson Canyon, or wherever else doesn't mean anything for a tourist from Europe. They want to get to Banff first, and do day trips from there.



Have you traveled much? I've been all over the world, and the key is getting from the airport to where you want to be as comfortable and conveniently as possible. Knowing there is a train over a bus inspires more confidence the connection, it is more comfortable and more predictable. This stuff means things to tourists. Sure, Calgarians will use it too, but I'd argue that's less of the primary target market here, since most Calgarians have cars. $30 CAD round trip is a bargain, BTW, as far as international comparisons go. Even for locals, gas alone is $20 for that trip.



I'm not saying financially this makes sense, as I know little about that part of the equation. But arguing that it's a bad idea because you can't get to where you want to go just means you haven't looked at the reality of the situation.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

Also a problem of dealing with 200 or whatever number of passengers getting off the train at once in Banff. How do u move them efficiently? Some will want to go to tunnel mtn, others may want to hike around sunshine.

Romantic idea to take the train to cam ore, Banff and lake Louise - not overly practical

Most will probably want to go to their hotel, and I'm sure they will hop on a complimentary shuttle to get there. Anyone visiting for the day will walk or hop on local transit. Anyone wanting to go to Lake Louise or Sunshine or wherever will hop on the Brewster bus to get them there. This isn't complicated. It's entirely practical.

[Peanut]

I thought part of the train idea was specifically to reduce the number of vehicles in Banff too. The traffic and parking during the high season is nuts. More tourists and locals (by which I mean Albertans/Calgarians) taking mass transit to visit the beautiful park would be better for the town overall.

[Peanut]

Originally Posted by Fire

Waste of money. It will lose money guaranteed.

Most mass transit is government-run for a reason.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

The last mile problem last already been solved, and will be bolstered if there is rail, as I already pointed out. Where do you imagine a tourist wants to go that they can't get to once they hit Banff?



It feels like you are imagining this for day trips from Calgary. That's not where many of the trips will come from though. You get people to Banff, they get to their hotel and spend a week in the town. Busing form the airport to Lake Louise, or Johnson Canyon, or wherever else doesn't mean anything for a tourist from Europe. They want to get to Banff first, and do day trips from there.

Have you traveled much? I've been all over the world, and the key is getting from the airport to where you want to be as comfortable and conveniently as possible. Knowing there is a train over a bus inspires more confidence the connection, it is more comfortable and more predictable. This stuff means things to tourists. Sure, Calgarians will use it too, but I'd argue that's less of the primary target market here, since most Calgarians have cars. $30 CAD round trip is a bargain, BTW, as far as international comparisons go. Even for locals, gas alone is $20 for that trip.

I'm not saying financially this makes sense, as I know little about that part of the equation. But arguing that it's a bad idea because you can't get to where you want to go just means you haven't looked at the reality of the situation.

No one decides where they travel based on the reliability of an airport connection in a first world country. Adding a train will not increase visitation by inspiring more confidence.

I also disagree with you that a significant portion of foreign visitors come to Banff via Bus then take day trips from there. I would argue you have car renters and brewsters bus tours that package the hotels and stops. The market of self put together excursions from Banff without personal transportation is quite limited.

For 600 million when can purchase about 1200 busses to ferry tourists

[nik-]

ehh ... I'm not sold on this mass transit experiment.

[KevanGuy]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

Also a problem of dealing with 200 or whatever number of passengers getting off the train at once in Banff. How do u move them efficiently? Some will want to go to tunnel mtn, others may want to hike around sunshine.

Romantic idea to take the train to cam ore, Banff and lake Louise - not overly practical

There is legit mass transit in Banff now, including ROAM to Canmore. They could make the trainstation a hub; it's kind of perfect in that it's a bit out of town and they've been trying to push people more to the perifery as they enter town ie park outside town and take a bus in.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by PostandIn

Re-building the Frank Lloyd Wright pavilion should be part of this project.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banf..._Park_Pavilion

Huh, had no idea about this. Shame that it's no longer around.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Huh, had no idea about this. Shame that it's no longer around.

I think in the news last year they were making plans to rebuild it. I don’t know where it is in the process, but it wasn’t connected to this rail idea.

[bizaro86]

I still think if we're spending money on rail for visitors, the airport is a better choice than Banff. I suspect business travellers are way more likely to take a train downtown than tourists to Banff, because the last mile doesn't matter as much.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by GGG

Why is a train better than a bus?

Because taking highway 1 on a weekend in the summer is like playing the lottery. One accident or some construction and you are in for a very long trip.

[Locke]

This is what we need ideally.