Cities, the BIG and the small of it

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CN_Tower 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9c/CN_Tower_1976.jpg/330px-CN_Tower_1976.jpg , https://www.britannica.com/topic/CN-Tower Standing at a height of 1,815 feet (553 meters)  

1815' divided by 581' is almost 3.13 times the height of a stump in Vancouver.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbour_Centre "Skyscraperpage lists the buildings height to the roof as being only 139.6 m (458 ft). This is stated to be the height from the Hastings Street entrance while the height from the back entrance on Cordova Street is 146 m (479 ft). It also lists the buildings pinnacle height to the tip of the antenna as being 177.1 m (581 ft)." STUMP!

This Vancouver stump is only 32% of the CN Towers height. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/A_look_downtown_%28759827996%29.jpg/960px-A_look_downtown_%28759827996%29.jpg The Harbour_Centre building should have been on the scale of something like the Hopewell_Centre_(Hong_Kong). 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Canadian_Place The BMO. Unlike Chicago, Toronto has no 100 story office towers.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/First_Canadian_Place_August_2017_01.jpg/500px-First_Canadian_Place_August_2017_01.jpg Its a 72 story HQ tower in Toronto.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bentall_Centre_(Vancouver)#Three_Bentall_Centre A 32 story BC office stump.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/Bentall_3.jpg/330px-Bentall_3.jpg

Being from small Vancouver, its amazing that Canada even has one megacity. Toronto is certainly a big city on a lakeshore like Chicago is. Montreal isn't allowed to have buildings as tall as Melbourne, let alone NYC. Montreal has allowed only one office tower to be over 50 floors and a few residential towers in the 60s. 

Calgary has more 50+ story office towers than Denver and Perth. No 40 story office tower exists in BC. The office section of the Harbour_Centre doesn't even have a 30th floor and the revolving restaurant is closer to being like 35 floors up. However, with the overall building being 481 feet, it would be equivalent to 40 floors, if the windows went right up to the top. The flagpole has no windows, but the flag would be like the equivalent of being 48 floors up.

Not just Toronto & Montreal, but Edmonton and Seattle have longer underground train stations than backwards, congested Vancouver. 

The Iron+Bridge, Oak+Street+Bridge, Knight+Street+Bridge & the Arthur+Laing+Bridge should all have a bus+and+bike bridge built next to them. The extremely inadequate Lion+Bridge should have already had a bus and train tunnel close to it. 

The Milizie Bridge in Italy and the Windan Bridge in W, Australia and The Cushing Bridge in Calgary, Alberta

 https://www.lombardiabeniculturali.it/fotografie/schede/IMM-5w050-0000107/

It used to be like a narrow 4 lane Vancouver bridge.

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhdL1nsrfQlu2fehTGEprH7FGBsYGcr_TPyqucsA-EWRJdwwHCROFB-V_oTimMt3jA863q25r8g5pY83s0yOUppOM1EuVsBaGO4kc846blp-xCt8G3xQs7Srg2Ro9nPKPom-V5YOdCRm1bM/s1600/PontiMilizie-NotizAtmMarApr74-ridotto.jpg

https://milanoneisecoli.blogspot.com/2014/10/lo-scomparso-torrione-fascista-di.html

Eventually, the Ponte+Delle+Milizie was rebuilt to have 2 bus lanes as well as 4 general lanes.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ponte+Delle+Milizie

Something like the 6 lane Windan_Bridge and the double track Goongoongup_Bridge, just aren't allowed in Vancouver. The city should do something similar like the Cushing+Bridge+in+Calgary.

Unfortunatly, the backwards Vancouver approach is to take lanes away, while pretending to be building an efficient regional rapid bus network. 

The Arthur+Laing+Bridge, Oak+Street+Bridge and Knight+Street+Bridge only have 2 lanes each way in the middle and there was no provision to have 2 bus lanes. Thus, unless a 2 lane bus-bridge is built next to each of them, the regional express bus network will remain a sad BC joke.

There should also be a 6 lane Boundary+Road+Bridge crossing Burrard_Inlet and another one crossing the Fraser_River. 

TransLink buys Fraser River waterfront property for Vancouver bus depot use

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-vancouver-transit-centre-bus-depot-acquisition-expansion

Of course there still seems to be no plan to build a bus and bike bridge next to the Arthur+Laing+Bridge. 

Unfortunatly, the embarrassment that is the Canada+Line wasn't designed to eventually have 10 car trains, not even 5. It's stations can only accommodate a ridiculous 2.5 car train, some day. Thus, any bridge to and near the airport should be augmented with a bus and bike bridge. Especially since the C Line isn't open 24 hours. Apparently, it's better to just cram everything into the ridiculously narrow 4 lane bridges. 

The narrow bridges of Vancouver, Canada

https://montecristomagazine.com/community/forgotten-bridges-vancouver

The LGB just wasn't designed with any future capacity in mind. 

History of the Lions Gate Bridge https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHqi7Kijedw 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lions_Gate_Bridge#History

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Lions_Gate.jpg 

The inadequate 3 lane LGB is currently the most narrow road bridge in backwards & stubborn Vancouver. It's been in that category since the removal of the 2 lane Fraser Street Bridge in the 1970s. There was a refusal to twin the absurdly narrow LGB between the 1950s & 1970s. By the 1980s there should have been a subway tunnel and an 8 lane tunnel. Then two of the lanes could have been for buses. Georgia+Street is 7 lanes wide as it gets closer to Stanley Park. Thus, the main part of a tunnel through the park could have provided 3 general lanes each way & a bus lane each way. Instead, the 7 lanes of the westernmost part of Georgia Street are funneled into a 3 lane causeway & a 3 lane bridge. The LGB would be fantastic as just a bike & foot crossing, with train, bus & road tunnels well beneath & beside it.    

The Burrard_Bridge, BB or  BSB opened with 6 lanes, but now it only has 4 lanes. There are 2 bike lanes & 2 sidewalks. Had a parallel bike-bridge been built, the BB could have still had 6 lanes. While the BB has a lower level provision for streetcars or tram-trains, Vancouver did its damndest to phase out streetcars well before the 1960s. 

The Ironworkers_Memorial_Bridge has 6 lanes, but should also have had 2 wide shoulders & 2 very wide sidewalks. Unfortunatly, there was no provision for a lower deck, as is also the case with all of the other Vancouver  bridges. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironworkers_Memorial_Second_Narrows_Crossing

Any replacement of the inadequate Ironworkers+Memorial+Bridge should be on the scale of what Perth, Seattle and Montreal have done.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granville_Street_Bridge#Third_bridge_(1954)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=vPSdF0jRTC4 The Granville-Bridge or GSB is the widest bridge in the city limits. It opened with 8 lanes, but is being transformed into a 6 lane bridge with 2 bike lanes & 2 sidewalks. Had there been a paralel bike & foot bride, the GSB could have still been 8 lanes wide. Then there could have been 2 exclusive bus lanes.

https://vancouver.ca/streets-transportation/granville-bridge-connector.aspx

The Oak Street Bridge should have been 8 lanes wide, with 2 wide sidewalks.

The Knight+Street+Bridge should have been 8 lanes with 2 wide sidewalks. Instead, its a 4 lane chokepoint.

The Arthur+Laing+Bridge should have been at least 6 lanes with 2 proper bike lanes & 2 sidewalks.

If the Cambie_Street_Bridge had 2 very wide sidewalks, then its likely that it would still have 6 lanes instead of 5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambie_Bridge#The_present_bridge

Unfortunatly, bottleneck or chokepoint planning is part of the Vancouver & BC mentality.

Of course BC & the Metro+Vancouver Region just hasn't put enough funds and effort towards proper big-city planning & infrastructure development. 

If Perth+and+Seattle had to conform to the extremely restrictive Vancouver approach to things, those cities would be in a perpetual state of chaos. Fortunately, nothing like the BC Mind Virus has ever reached WA.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Oak+Street+and+Granville+Street

The inadequate Arthur Laing Bridge

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Laing_Bridge Another fine example of how Vancouver doesn't allow for proper big city infrastructure planning. The ALB has no sidewalks, no proper bike lanes, & especially, no bus lanes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Laing_Bridge#Since_opening

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/Arther_Lang_Bridge_and_Fraser_River%2C_Vancouver_%28504734%29_%2823678427633%29.jpg The 4 lane BC bottlenek mentality is so firmy entreched. There just wasn't any proper concept to have 2 bus lanes, in addition to 4 general lanes. There is no good reason as to why the Arthur+Laing+Bridge wasn't designed to have 2 sidewalks & 2 bike lanes. 

Unless the bridge can slightly be widened on each side, safe & properly separated bike lanes will be unlikely. 

https://bikehub.ca/about-us/news/arthur-laing-bridge-bike-lane-widening

• Arthur Laing Bridge (Richmond-Vancouver): As there are no sidewalks on the bridge, cyclists ride on the shoulders of the roadway. Northbound cyclists can get to the bridge via Russ Baker Way or an off-street pathway that can be accessed from the Airport Station bus loop or from the Airport Connector bridge.

https://www.richmond.ca/parks-recreation/parks-trails-cycling/cycling/cycling_maps.htm

https://www.yvr.ca/en/passengers/transportation/bicycles-and-cycling

https://evelazarus.com/?s=the+Arthur+Laing+Bridge

This bridge & the Knight+Street+Bridge & the Queensborough_Bridge are so narrow, that there should be bus & bike bridges built next to each of them. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Arthur+Laing+Bridge

Arthur Laing Bridge

The Arthur_Laing_Bridge should have been 6 lanes wide to easily accomodate 2 bus lanes. There should have also been 2 very wide sidewalks. Of course that never happened. By now, there should have been at least a bus & bike bridge built next to it. 

The Canada Line wasn't designed to have 10 car trains, not even 5 car trains. Its maximum design only allows for a 2.5 car train, someday. All the 50m underground stations should have had a level clearance of 50m at each end, so that eventually the stations could be about as long as the 152.5m Montreal Metro stations. Its another fine example of backwards Vancouver planning & backwater BC planning. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Arthur+Laing+Bridge

Car fire on Arthur Laing Bridge

 https://www.richmond-news.com/local-news/car-on-fire-on-arthur-laing-bridge-early-wednesday-10046790

Nothing like a narrow bridge with narrow emegency lanes. https://x.com/LucasGates92/status/1877021160992321586

So many Greater Vancouver bridges need to be twinned or duplicated in order to provide bus & emergency lanes or even truck lanes. This cramming everything into only 2 lanes each way is nuts!

https://www.theage.com.au/national/no-freeways-puts-vancouver-on-top-20060911-ge33wv.html

While not running a freeway through a dense urban area such as Vancouver has its benefits, the bridge crossings still need to be widened. Otherwise, why even bother to pretend to have a proper express or rapid bus network?

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Arthur+Laing+Bridge

Vancouver's narrow bridges over the Fraser River

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-knight-street-video-concern

The Knight_Street_Bridge (KSB) was deliberately designed to not have a couple of emergency lanes. No truck lanes and especially no bus and HOV lanes. No proper bike lanes, just 2 narrow sidewalks. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight_Street_Bridge#Infrastructure

Thus, the Knight_Street_Bridge is one of the best examples of BC bottleneck planning.

https://images.drivebc.ca/bchighwaycam/pub/html/www/695.html

The Knight_Street_Bridge is so narrow and inept, that a new HOV, bus and bike bridge should be built right next to it. The Knight+Street+Bridge is only 4 lanes wide in the middle, so a parallel 4 lane bridge would greatly improve things. One lane on and one lane off between the twin bridge crossing and Marine-Drive. Then the main 3 lanes each way onto the 6 lanes of Knight+Street up to Kingsway. 

The incredibly narrow Fraser_Street_Bridge (FSB) was torn down and should have been rebuilt or replaced by the 1970s, especially by the 1990s. The city and the Provincial_government didn't seem to understand that a new bridge there would be great as a HOV, bus and bike bridge. A couple of wide emergency lanes would have made it a lot easier for emergency vehicles to go between Vancouver & Richmond.

Despite Oak Street being 6 lanes wide, the BC bottleneck mentality wanted to force everything into a 4 lane Oak_Street_Bridge (OSB). Even if there was no concept to have bus lanes in the late 1950s, the OSB should have had 6 lanes, plus 2 wide emergency lanes and 2 wide sidewalks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oak_Street_Bridge#Infrastructure

By now, there should have been a HOV, bus & bike bridge built next to the narrow & inept Oak_Street_Bridge. 

The Arthur-Laing-Bridge (ALB) is only 2 lanes each way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Laing_Bridge

The multigenerational inept Vancouver & BC planning agenda is all about creating more congestion. 

Fortunately, the 8 lane Champlain+Bridge also has 2 passenger train tracks. This was possible, because Montreal and Quebec don't have anything like the Vancouver & BC mentality to hinder them.

Why have a provision for 10 car SkyTrains, when a 2-4 car joke of a train can enable more congestion? That's the backward BC way.

It's amazing that the Montreal+Metro was designed to have 9 car trains, even back in the 1960s. Montreal and Quebec in general, just don't have anything like a backwater BC mentally to contend with. Quebec isn't just able to do more because it has more people than BC, Quebec has been able to accomplish more because it isn't BC.

https://vancouver.ca/streets-transportation/bridges-and-structures.aspx

Despite being a newer crossing, the Arthur+Laing+Bridge was only designed to have 4 lanes, just like the older Oak+Street+Bridge. Both bridges should have been built with very wide shoulders, so that they eventually could have provided 6 lanes. Plus, both bridges should have had very wide sidewalks. However, that goes against the chokepoint planning mentality.

Why is the Canada (embarrassment) Line built the way it is?

Despite its high cost, the C+Line or YVR-Line was designed to have shorter stations than the underground stations in Edmonton & Seattle. Even shorter than the ground level stations in Calgary & Portland. Considering that a Montreal Metro station is 152.5m or 500 feet in length, the absurd C Line stations are only 50m. 

A one third size train still could have been designed for proper future capacity expansion. Unfortunatly, this joke of a train was only designed to have 2 coaches & eventually 2.5 car trains, not 5 & certainly not 10. Because that's what a proper big city would do.

The light rail train bridge to Richmond wasn't designed to have any bus lanes, just 1 bike lane. No proper bus & HOV lane bridge has been built next to the narrow Knight+Street+Bridge , Oak+Street+Bridge , or Arthur+Laing+Bridge. By now, all 3 road bridges should have had 4 lane bus & HOV bridges next to them. Indeed, each bridge should have had 2 bus & 2 HOV lanes beside them by now. But why do that when everything can be crammed into just 2 lanes each way. Combine that with no breakdown lanes or wide shoulders & you have classic BC bottleneck planning. Since the C Line isn't running 24 hours, there should have been a 24 hour express bus to the airport on 2 dedicated lanes on the C Line bridge. That would have made it possible to always have an airport express bus, especially when the C Line is only running 2 car trains.

It's all such a sad joke that should be laughed at all over the world. It's also symbolic of the refusal to properly think & build big in backwards BC. Its like a whole lot of money was never efficiently or properly put into the regional infrastructure over the course of several generations. Any serious big city airport+line should be designed for significant future capacity. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=SkyTrain-Canada+Line 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Calgary+C+Train 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Edmonton+LRT