News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 4.7K     0 

goodcitywhenfinished said:
I never really picked up on it, but is this Calgary-Banff train being proposed also being planned for use by commuters? Because it would be a huge mistake to not add stops in Bowness, Cochrane, Morley, and Canmore with peak hour service into and out of Calgary.
Click to expand...
Could definitely see Canmore in Cochrane as stops. Maybe some of the trains can be milk run stops that do Bowness and Marley as well
 
Tangentially related, but new mgmt plans for National Parks were just released. Liricon's other desired project - the gondola from townsite to Norquay - appears to be dead.

https://www.rmotoday.com/banff/park...rce=Email&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Email

The long-awaited new management plan that sets direction for Banff National Park over the next 10 to 15 years has been approved.


The 2022 management plan, which was tabled in parliament on Aug. 17 and officially released on Aug. 22, is silent on Liricon Capital’s proposed aerial gondola between the Banff townsite and Mount Norquay ski area.


Parks Canada officials say that means it is off the table.
Click to expand...

The gondola is a relatively simpler project with only 2 big stakeholders (PC and townsite). A common refrain is that PC prevents all possible development, but LLSR and Brewsters contradict that, not to mention PC's own idea to build a 100km+ bike path from Jasper to Brewster's attractions.

IMO struggling to navigate an 'easier' project doesn't inspire a lot of confidence for the train.
 
It's ridiculous to me that the general theme of this management plan is that traffic congestion is negatively impacting the parks experience and yet all the Parks Canada guy can talk about is traffic and parking management. Introducing paid parking and parking time limits will do little to ease congestion when Parks Canada isn't talking about any traffic alternatives. The gondola, bike lanes and a train link to Calgary should be the basic offering of any plan that genuinely wants to reduce traffic congestion in Banff.
 
From the article:

However, Rasheed said new intercept lots near the Banff townsite – which the Town of Banff has been lobbying for many years to help ease congestion in the tourist town – are off the table.
“I think there are some hard lines. Certainly we are constrained by commercial development and also the boundary of the town, those are fixed in legislation. Parks Canada really isn’t interested to open those discussions up again because it would stray away from our core mandate,” he said.
“We’ve been fairly consistent on that, that we’re not interested in talking about that, but I think everything else is on the table, whether it be paid parking, or shuttle services from nodes – all those tools are fair game.”

I am surprised that Parks Canada seems pretty adamantly opposed to intercept lots for the town of Banff. It is not clear why that is, but it seems like that is an option that should be further considered to reduce the congestion in town. I get not wanting to expand the town boundaries, but could a site be found and funded within the existing boundaries? Or, perhaps relax a little on the boundary and a few acres going to a parkign lot for a dramatic improvement to town quality be viewed as an acceptable trade off?

While they have a lot of goals and weight riding on this 2024 transportation study, it seems like the people working on that study have some pretty big handcuffs on them, preventing a lot of practical solutions already.
 
This guy and Parks Canada seem worried about precedent but Banff National Park and maybe a couple other National Parks have to be treated different than other parks. Simply because of the fact a renowned tourist-town exists within their boundary that can't expand but is overflowing. Its already past being a problem. I'm sure some want to see even more people come to Banff but if the capacity isn't there to handle them, can you effectively grow your tourism base? I don't think Banff has an international reputation of being crowded and difficult to get to and get around, but you'd hate to get that reputation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AJX
It's almost sounds like there's an implicit assumption that a Banff visitor and a Banff visitor in a car have the same ecological footprint and impact to how the Park works.

I totally get the resistance to intercept parking within the park (it's a tough trade-off against the strict mandate) - but the solution is to intercept more visitors back in Calgary, not do nothing.

Here's a link to the actual management plan:
https://www.pc.gc.ca/en/pn-np/ab/banff/info/gestion-management/involved/plan/plan-2022

Reading the transportation section (which mentions transit a bunch but trains zero times), it's kind of hard to imagine how a train wouldn't be supported as it satisfies all of their goals. What's not clear is the current proposal has the strength and quality to achieve anything within that framework.
 
Last edited:
I just toured a group through Banff NP last week, and on a bloody Wednesday of all days our bud couldn’t even find a spot at Johnston Canyon and we caught the very last bus bay at the Gondola. Like wtf is Parks thinking?


Banff is really the only NP that would ever need a train to it, as it’s the only one with a large town in it, and is the largest tourist attraction in the federation. Plus, if our government is gonna keep their bilge pump going about the sustainable development goals, then they need to start making sustainable f*cking choices. A hydrogen-powered train to the most vehicle-overburdened town in Canada is a no brainer.
 
I would feel so much better about this project if I actually believed they could pull it off. I understand it might not initially make the most fiscal sense but I hope long term people can see how great a project like this could finally push us as a region and really province to seriously look at rail as an option. Its about planting the seed and eating the costs of long term benefit, but the province and I'm sure other investors can't look past this one project.

I thought about going up to Edmonton for the day numerous times this summer, but didn't because I don't want to do a 6-hour there and back in a car. If I could hop on a train I likely would've gone. I'm sure its the same for people coming to Calgary from Edmonton or any of the other stops a train would make along the way.
 
While I get that it isn't the same, did you ever consider buying a ticket on the Red Arrow bus?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AJX
MichaelS said:
While I get that it isn't the same, did you ever consider buying a ticket on the Red Arrow bus?
Click to expand...
No, it never crossed my mind. Maybe that's part of the problem. I also don't really have an interest in a bus ride and I can tell you my girlfriend would shut that down right away.

My train to Edmonton daydream included taking a night train back to Calgary and sleeping on the train for a couple hours. I can never sleep on planes but when I rode trains in Europe, I never had a problem sleeping.
 
I don't see a ton of value from intercept lots...they would very slightly move the needle on the pedestrian experience in the townsite, and that's about it. It's also only a really big problem for 3-4 months, but new surface lots would have downsides all 365 days.

They recently added about 350 spots along the train tracks, which looks like an ideal location.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top