Highway 99 Tunnel Program Update

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvaPpt2R69Y 

A parallel bridge or tunnel should have been built decades ago.

There should have been 3 + 1 express bus lane each way, but also a temporary HOV lane each way. Then eventually, becoming 4 general lanes each way with the 5th becoming a totally separate BRT line each way. 

Unfortunately, no 10 lane tunnel, just like no 10 lane bridge. Thus, whenever the 8 lane tunnel finally opens, there should be serious planning for a parallel BRT and LRT bridge or tunnel. 

An extension of the YVR-Canada Line to the mall and ferry terminal would be of great benefit. However, since BC doesn't have 24hr train service, 24hr BRT can fill in the gaps.

HOV Lanes vs Bus Lanes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-occupancy_vehicle_lane

 https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/driving-and-cycling/traveller-information/routes-and-driving-conditions/hov-lanes 

https://vtpi.org/tdm/tdm19.htm

A bus lane will always have more potential to move more people than a HOV lane.

https://www.drivesmartbc.ca/lanes/qa-bus-and-hov-lanes 

Even if a vehicle is carrying 4-5 people in a HOV lane, a bus carrying 40-50 people is still much more efficient transportation.

https://roadsafetystrategy.ca/en/listing-directory/roadsafetystrategy/bus_and_high_occupancy_vehicle_lanes 

https://www.liveabout.com/high-capacity-articulated-or-double-decker-2798841

https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/w9zja7/whenever_im_riding_the_bus_this_question_keeps/

Reykjavík, Iceland

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reykjav%C3%ADk

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Reykjavik 

The BC part of Canada has more than 10 times the population of Iceland. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_Region_(Iceland) 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reykjav%C3%ADk#Roads Once an urban area is busy enough, there should be a 3rd or 4th lane each way, so that there can be a bus lane or express bus lane each way. Of course, a proper BRT system requires its own right of way. Thus, its usually separated from the general traffic lanes.

Reykjavík has some overpasses and a bridge that are at least 6 lanes wide. 

A key overpass with four lanes each way. This already has enough space for eight lanes.

This already has the space for three lanes each way. Nine lanes with enough space for 10. 

In contrast, the Knight+Street+Bridge between Vancouver and Richmond becomes a classic 2 lane each way BC bottleneck-chokepoint. Unless a parallel bus and bike bridge is built, it will remain as an inefficient crossing. A parallel bridge could have 2 express bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes, plus 2 wide bike lanes and 2 footpaths. Two truck lanes would also be good, since Greater Vancouver is supposed to be a major port region.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keflav%C3%ADk_International_Airport 

There is enough space for this to be a big airport, someday.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Keflav%C3%ADk+International+Airport/@63.9799068,-22.6378612,4682m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x4929fdfce2ab799f:0x27f88d0a15c328cd!8m2!3d63.9814869!4d-22.6281862!16zL20vMDRkMTlz!5m1!1e2?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDgxOS4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

The 14 lane George Washington bridge vs...

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH6Q8yWjYpM There are wider sections of freeways in the US, but the double deck GWB has the most lanes. 

Wow, in backwards Vancouver, or almost anywhere in backwater BC, just having 2 lanes each way is tough enough. A consistent 3rd lane each way could be for busses and a 4th lane for HOVs. Given that Greater Vancouver is supposed to be a major port region, several of the bridges should also have a truck lane each way. However, there is only one bridge in backwards BC that has 5 lanes each way. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Mann_Bridge#New_bridge Unfortunatly, it wasn't designed to have a lower deck. Such a lower deck could have had 2 freight train tracks, 2 commuter train tracks and even a provision for 2 BRT lanes. 

Essentially, in any proper big urban area, the bridges should not only provide at least 3 general lanes each way, but a bus and HOV lane each way. That's 5 lanes each way, plus on some crossings that are closer to port activity, there should even be a 6th lane each way. That's the case with the Sir_Leo_Hielscher_Bridges. Unfortunately, unlike Queensland, BC has been very reluctant towards bridge duplication or twinning. 

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/driving-and-cycling/traveller-information/routes-and-driving-conditions/hov-lanes 

https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/bus-hov-lanes-different-2918490

https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1d3fixq/hov_and_bus_lanes_how_to_deter_abuse/ 

While Australia has Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane as its major Pacific Rim gateways, Canada just has provincial Vancouver, Victoria and Prince Rupert as port gateway cities. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Leo_Hielscher_Bridges#Design

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6e/Gateway_Bridge_aerial4.JPG

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Leo_Hielscher_Bridges#Duplication A 12 lane crossing.

The Port_of_Brisbane and the Brisbane_Airport are excellent port facilities in Queensland. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Brisbane#Facilities

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brisbane_Airport#Rail Far away from the inept transportation planning in Greater Vancouver, Brisbane was able to do things correctly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_line,_Brisbane Unfortunatly, backwards BC just can't seem to properly plan big city type infrastructure.

The YVR-Canada_Line is a total embarrassment! 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line#Stations Not 150 m, not 100 m, only a 50 m level clarence was allowed for the stations. Even the first 2 Skytrain lines only have 80 m stations, when they should have almost been twice as long. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line#Technology Aparently, the inept planning was due to cost saving measures. Thus, instead of designing the stations to be long enough to accommodate 5 car trains, they were only designed to ultimately have 2.5 car trains. Since 2009, the Canada_Line still only has 2 car joke trains. 

The Tilikum_Crossing in Portland vs the North_Arm_Bridge between Vancouver and Richmond. The Tilikum_Crossing accommodates 2 bike lanes, 2 footpaths, 2 MAX-LRT tracks, 2 articulated_bus lanes and even streetcars can cross on it. Such a fine bridge just hasn't been allowed in BC.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/35/NorthArmBridge.jpg 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Arm_Bridge#Details This bridge should have been wide enough to eventually accommodate 2 bike lanes, 2 footpaths and especially, 2 BRT lanes, the the Skytrain doesn't run on a 24hr schedule. 

Given that most of the bridges in BC are so narrow, there needs to be proper bus, bike & HOV bridges built.

Transportation infrastructure doesn't have to be such a sad joke in backwards BC. 

Chemtrade and North Vancouver

 https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/district-of-north-vancouver-resident-sues-to-overturn-chemtrade-chlorine-vote-12659710 

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Chemtrade+Electrochem+Inc.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/chemtrade-district-north-vancouver-bc-take-2-9.7276829 

https://www.askchemtrade.ca/ 

By now, there should have been a North Boundary Road bus & bike bridge. Such a bus & bike bridge could be built in a way that isn't too disruptive to Orcas+Snow+Removal and Chemtrade+Electrochem+Inc., or any other businesses. 

There should have also been a Willingdon Avenue bus & bike bride over the inlet by now. Instead, a 3 lane each way Iron Bridge is supposed to handle not only the TCH traffic, but regional traffic & truck traffic in what is supposed to be a major port region. 

The Iron Bridge is so narrow, because there wasn't any serious consideration to have 2 emergency lanes, 2 wide shoulders and especially no bus or HOV lanes. Of course there should have been a parallel LRT bridge built there several decades ago, as well.

Greater Seattle’s Most Frustrating Freeway (I-405) Is Getting a $3 Billion Fix

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpFi4wBgCvw A freeway with BRT & HOV lanes can certainly move a lot more people. 

In Chicago, a CTA train in the middle of the freeway always offers another option. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Seattle

The Gateway Bridges in Brisbane vs the SCB in Seattle

The Sir_Leo_Hielscher_Bridges provide a 12 lane Gateway crossing. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Leo_Hielscher_Bridges#Duplication

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6e/Gateway_Bridge_aerial4.JPG No problem in Queensland. 

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Gateway+Bridge Its tough enough just to get a 6 lane bridge built in BC, let alone a 12 lane crossing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_Canal_Bridge (SCB) Its a 12 lane crossing.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/Ship_canal_bridge_and_downtown_skyline%2C_2000.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5c/University_District_Seattle%2C_May_2024.jpg/960px-University_District_Seattle%2C_May_2024.jpg The SCB has 8 lanes on the upper deck and 4 lanes on the lower deck.

While Brisbane and Seattle are both on the Pacific Rim, backwards Vancouver, BC might as well be on another world. Brisbane and Seattle are allowed to function like proper big port cities, because they aren't hindered by anything like the VMV, or the Backwards BC Mentality. 

If such a 12 lane crossing was allowed in Greater Vancouver it would mean that there could be 2 BRT lanes, 2 HOV lanes, 2 truck lanes and at least 6 general traffic lanes. However, the backwards BC approach is to funnel everything into just 2 or 3 lanes each way.

Major changes to Highway 1 traffic in Metro Vancouver to last for months

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/highway-1-metro-vancouver-traffic-pattern-changes 

Ultimately, this should be a 10 lane corridor between Horseshoe Bay and Hope. Plus, 2 BRT lanes, 2 LRT tracks, 2 HOV lanes and even the provision for a double track commuter rail line.

Metrotown to North Shore Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

 https://vancouver.ca/streets-transportation/metrotown-to-north-shore-rapid-transit.aspx 

Unfortunately, the Second Narrows Crossing wasn't designed to have a lower deck for BRT, or express busses and LRT. The bridge was never widened to 10 lanes, so there isn't enough space to have 2 proper BRT or express bus lanes and no HOV lanes. There was no proper planning to even have 2 emergency lanes or 2 wide shoulders.  

https://www.translink.ca/plans-and-projects/projects/bus-projects/rapidbus-projects 

https://vancouver.ca/streets-transportation/transportation-2040.aspx 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RapidBus_(TransLink)  

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=BRT

New replacement George Massey Tunnel to cost $8.5 billion and opening in September 2031

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/george-massey-tunnel-new-replacement-cost-timeline-update 

Of course with all the extra delays costs, there still won't be an LRT tube and no HOV lanes. While the new tunnel will be 4 lanes each way, there should have been an extra section for 2 LRT tracks and 2 rapid bus lanes. BC has a problem providing 24hr rapid rail transportation, so 24hr BRT is essential. 

A 10 lane version of an Alex_Fraser_Bridge with a provision for LRT, could have been completed a few years ago. However, just because some people didn't want a bridge crossing that part of the river, the plan was scrapped. The result is more cost and delay in what should have been completed a few decades ago. 

If ever a proper LRT and rapid bus crossing can be built parallel to the new tunnel, then that 8 lane tunnel could still have 3 general lanes each way, plus the 4th being an HOV lane. A parallel LRT and rapid bus needs to be built between Richmond and Delta so that there can be an efficient connection between YVR and the 2 ferry terminals.

Something like a Tilikum_Crossing between Richmond and Delta should have already been built decades ago, but there just isn't proper transportation planning in backwards BC.

Either an extension of an improved YVR-Canada Line, or an LRT like the C Train or MAX_Train. Since such a train won't be running 24 hours a day, there would need to be a Rapid bus_crossing as well. Such redundancy is important, especially if there is an occasional problem with the train. A Streetcar_Crossing would also be nice, because the Skytrain, LRT and BRT can't go everywhere. Where as express and local buses and streetcars can fill in the gaps. 

Of course more bicycle and footpaths can be a great improvement.  

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Richmond-Delta+Tunnel

Second Narrows dredging

 https://www.portvancouver.com/project/second-narrows-dredging-works 

A shipping bottleneck that needs to be dredged. An Iron Bridge that needs duplication or twinning, so that it can become a proper big city crossing with 2 truck lanes, 2 BRT lanes, 2 HOV lanes and 2 LRT tracks. A single track freight train bridge and tunnel that wasn't designed to be double width. Another example of a city, province and nation that can't seem to properly plan and build BIG for the future. 

The LGB only has 3 lanes

 https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1uhkaiq/why_would_craftsman_collision_depict_the_lions/ 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lions_Gate_Bridge Too narrow for proper bus and HOV lanes. Not strong enough for an LRT train and express bus deck.

https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1uhkaiq/why_would_craftsman_collision_depict_the_lions/#lightbox 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin_Bridge 7 lanes and 2 train tracks. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Harbour_Bridge 8 lanes and 2 train tracks.

TransLink offers cyclists a lift to BC Ferries, but on weekends only

 https://www.nsnews.com/2026-world-cup/translink-offers-cyclists-a-lift-to-bc-ferries-weekends-only-12332483 

Unfortunately, due to the decades of inept regional transportation planning, no bus bridge or BRT tunnel was ever built next to the D Island Tunnel. While the new tunnel is supposed to have 2 bus lanes, there won't be any HOV lanes and especially no provision for LRT. 

Ultimately, the YVR-Canada Line should be extended to Ladner and the Tsawwassen Ferry terminal. A special train bridge or tunnel should be built with a provision for 2 BRT lanes, since BC doesn't seem to want a 24hr Skytrain. 

Vancouver 450 ft and Fahrenheit 451

Was a 450 foot height restriction just by chance, or was it intentionally made to be very close to 451 Fahrenheit? Despite being around the same size as Paris, Boston & SF, Vancouver remains as a very restrictive city. 

Any tall building in SL City is under 450 feet. Honolulu is still stuck around the 450 foot maximum, while San Diego is stuck at 500 feet. Even Rio DeGennaro still has shorter buildings than Vancouver, BC. Washington, DC has strict height limitations like Paris. However, W,DC could eventually set up their own equivalent of La_Defense. Its a fine example of allowing tall buildings just beyond the city limits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451 (1953) By the 1950s, so many things were already banned, watered down or scaled back in provincial backwater Vancouver. Generations later, there was the No Fun City mind virus that further tried to cancel out things in such a small city with so much red tape and other ridiculous obstacles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451_(1966_film) By the mid and late1960s, the city made sure that its first office tower to have more than 29 floors wouldn't be until the 1970s. Its highly doubtful that Vancouver will have an office tower at, or over 40 stories by 2030. However, Burnaby and Surrey could, because they aren't under the extreme restrictions of the Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV). 

It wasn't until 1973 when Vancouver allowed its first building to be taller than the Los_Angeles_City_Hall. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_City_Hall 

The Scotia_Tower (stump) is a good reference point to visualize the small scale of backwater Vancouver, as its about the same height as the Los_Angeles_City_Hall at 453'. 

https://www.skyscrapercenter.com/building/scotia-tower/4396 453'

https://skyscraperpage.com/b65/vancouver/the-scotia-tower 452' 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Wall_Centre It opened in 2001 at 157.8 m (518 ft). Its 49 feet shorter than the Philadelphia_City_Hall.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_City_Hall Opened in 1901 at 548 ft (167 m).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451_(2018_film) By 2018 it was quite apparent that Vancouver was in the process of allowing for more buildings over 450 feet. However, nothing has been permitted to reach 700 feet, so far. A tower over 1000 feet would help to water down its provincial mindset. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/14/Vancouver_panorama_%2849988799796%29_%28cropped%29.jpg/3840px-Vancouver_panorama_%2849988799796%29_%28cropped%29.jpg

SF, Sydney & Auckland are just as scenic as Vancouver & warmer throughout the year. They all have taller building than what Vancouver currently permits. Seattle is just as scenic as Vancouver, but its allowed to function like a proper big city, because it doesn't have the imposed restrictions like Vancouver has. While its cold, damp & depressing like Vancouver during the fall & winter, Seattle usually gets noticeably hotter summers than Vancouver, BC. The tallest building in Seattle is the 76 story B of A office tower. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/LA_Skyline_Mountains2.jpg/1280px-LA_Skyline_Mountains2.jpg While the L.A. City Hall looks like a stump there, in Vancouver it would still be one of the prominent buildings.

Everything is so small or scaled back in Vancouver. Even the Greater Vancouver mountains aren't allowed to be as tall as the ones in L.A. While the San_Francisco_Bay & Port_Phillip Bay by Melbourne are big next to their cities, English_Bay in_Vancouver is so much smaller. Its even smaller than Elliott_Bay by Seattle. 

Vancouver really needs to have bus and HOV bridges built next to its mostly narrow & congested bridges. Only a 5 car Skytrain is the max on the first 2 lines and ultimately, just a 2.5 car joke of a train on the YVR-Canada Line. 

Selective+Door+Operation can allow a short train to have an extra car at each end, despite a shorter platform. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/Vancouver_sunset_%28J%29.jpg/3840px-Vancouver_sunset_%28J%29.jpg 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/Los_Angeles_with_Mount_Baldy.jpg/3840px-Los_Angeles_with_Mount_Baldy.jpg

Australia like the USA, has some big & tall cities on the Pacific Rim. However, Vancouver symbolically kept watering down its size, because that's how you demonstrate a reluctance towards proper urban planning & growth. 

Oddly enough, the imposed small scale Vancouver mentality & agenda wasn't adopted by most cities around the world. Officially, there is no Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV), but somehow something like it keeps manifesting, just like the BCMV. 

Despite its size, Canada has less than 1% of the worlds population. Its been difficult enough just for Canada to even have half of 1% of the worlds population. 

One expects Melbourne and Sydney to be proper big cities. However, Australia has big stuff at both ends of the country. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Leo_Hielscher_Bridges#Design Its a 12 lane crossing in Brisbane. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrows_Bridge_(Perth) 10 lanes with 2 commuter train tracks in the middle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brisbane_Skytower It has 90 floors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q1_(building) Almost has 80 floors.

Perth Central_Park_(skyscraper) at 51 floors and 108_St_Georges_Terrace at 50. Very restrictive Vancouver still won't permit any office tower to have a 40th floor. Calgary and Seattle each have a few over 50 stories.

So far, provincial Halifax hasn't been allowed to be on a similar scale as Boston and Montreal. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_L._Macdonald_Bridge 3 lanes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._Murray_MacKay_Bridge 4 lanes. 

The scale of Vancouver is kept below that of Calgary & Seattle or even Auckland, in some ways.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lions_Gate_Bridge A classic 3 lane BC bottleneck-chokepoint. No parallel bus and truck tunnels and especially, no LRT tunnel. 

Provincial backwater Victoria isn't allowed to be on a similar scale of Wellington, NZ.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_Street_Bridge Another BC 3 lane wonder.

Construction means stal̕əw̓asəm Bridge closures this weekend and next

 https://www.ctvnews.ca/vancouver/article/construction-means-stalwasm-bridge-closures-this-weekend-and-next/ 

Time in backwater BC doesn't matter, the old bridge just had 4 lanes and the new bridge will only have two lanes each way for quite a while. Of course no bus and HOV lanes, no wide emergency lanes and no wide shoulders. That would go against the BC bottleneck-chokepoint planning mentality. Just like an absurd 2 car train for the Canada Line and a 3 lane Lion Bridge with no bus and train tunnels to help it.

Apparently, narrow bridges and short trains are better for backwards BC.

That's the BC Mind Virus (BCMV) at work once again.

Granville Bridge death was preventable, advocates say

 https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2026/05/14/granville-bridge-death-was-preventable-say-advocates/ 

While the Granville+Bridge needs to have a higher fence like the Burrard+Bridge, there is another remaining pending danger. 

https://vancouversun.com/news/iio-investigates-womans-death-after-9-hour-incident-on-granville-street-bridge 

There is no central safety barrier to prevent head-on collisions. Whether a person becomes disoriented, or actually wants to crash into traffic from the opposite direction, there is no traffic divider.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/vancouver/article/barrier-needed-on-vancouver-bridge-after-another-suicide-death-advocates-say/

The sidewalks could have been made a little wider in a way that there still could have been enough space for a traffic divider. 

https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1td85mt/iio_investigates_womans_death_after_ninehour/ 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Granville+Bridge Was 8 lanes, now 6, but with 2 bike lanes and wider sidewalks.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Burrard+Bridge Was 6 lanes, now 4, but with 2 bike lanes & already good sidewalks. 

Unfortunately, both bridges have no middle safety barrier to prevent head-on collisions, despite their recent modifications. 

The Pattullo+Bridge was too narrow to ever have a traffic divider. Fortunately, its 4 lane replacement does have a central divider. 

The inadequate Knight+Street+Bridge is only 4 lanes wide in the middle, but has a traffic safety barrier. The KSB really needs a bike, bus and HOV bridge next to it.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Oak+Street+Bridge A traffic divider was eventually installed, but the narrow bridge was never designed to have 2 emergency lanes, or 2 wide shoulders. There especially was no consideration to have 2 bus lanes on the OSB. Since there is no 24 hour train service to the airport, there should be a parallel bus and bike bridge. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Arthur+Laing+Bridge While it does have a traffic divider, there are no wide emergency lanes or wide shoulders. There isn't even enough space for 2 bus lanes. Thus, a bus and bike bridge really should be built next to it.

Old Pattullo Bridge and its Still Narrow Replacement

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_mNfn4zjcI 

Even in the 1930s there should have been some type of a big city vision, but with NW being so small and Surrey being so out of the way, this part of BC was on the urban periphery. Apparently, there was no concept of an emergency lane on the Pattullo Bridge. Still, in addition to the 2 narrow lanes each way, there should have been 2 lane for horses and wagons. Then, by the 1950s the PB could have had 3 wide lanes each way, pulse a strong traffic divider. Instead, the narrow PB was stuck with only two lanes each way, no safety divider and only 1 narrow sidewalk.

For most of its history, NW just saw it self as a provincial backwater. The lack of a big city vision in the early 1900s meant that it never bothered to absorb what would become the Tri-Cities. For most of its history, Surrey never considered that it could eventually become the largest city in BC. Of course now that has changed.

Despite being so small, NW has become a Metro Vancouver regional transit hub, because of the New_Westminster_station. 

Scott_Road_station is a transit hub for the South_Westminster area.

Surrey and NW really should have had a proper big city size bridge.

This is how the new road configuration could have gone for what should have been a 10 lane bridge, not another 4 lane BC joke. Even if it can eventually have 6 lanes, there is no provision for a lower deck for trains and busses.

This shows how existing key roads could have linked into a 10 lane bridge, all without having to widen the surrounding roads. Thus, no need for any major land expropriation.

2 lanes from Royal Avenue onto the new bridge and 2 lanes from the bridge onto Royal Avenue in New+Westminster.   

One lane onto and one lane off linking the bridge to the South_Fraser_Perimeter_Road in Surrey.

2 lanes onto McBride boulevard and 2 lanes onto the bridge from McBride in New+Westminster.  

From Columbia_Street_in New_Westminster, 1 lane onto the bridge, as well as 1 lane off the bridge. 

2 lanes from King_George_Boulevard onto the new bridge and 2 lanes from the bridge onto KGB in Surrey. 

2 lanes from Scott Road onto the new bridge and 2 lanes from the bridge onto Scott_Rd in Surrey.  

Things weren't properly explained to the public as to how important a wide big city bridge could have been possible and without having to widen the roads connecting to it.

Unfortunately, all of this is being funneled into just 2 lanes each way. Its as if someone symbolically wanted the new bridge to open without any bus and HOV lanes. That's how BC bottleneck and chokepoint planning works. 

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

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

Some day, the BC Lower_Mainland should be planned and developed to function more like a proper big urban area. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Pattullo+Bridge+replacement

Temporary stal̕əw̓asəm Bridge closure will impact all traffic this weekend for construction

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/bridge-temporary-closure-surrey-new-westminster 

Lets open a bridge without 2 wide emergency lanes or 2 wide shoulders. Especially make sure that it didn't open with enough space for 2 bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes. Of course don't design the Bridge to have a potential lower deck for trucks and trains. Its an instant classic BC bottleneck chokepoint! 

https://www.pattullobridgereplacement.ca/about/projectoverview Just like the SkyBridge, apparently, there was no need to open it with 2 bus lanes, despite the train not running 24/7.

Unfortunately, the Bridges_over_the_Fraser_River in the BC Lower_Mainland just weren't designed to have proper bus lanes. Its so strange that the narrow SkyBridge was_for_SkyTrain only. 

Just like the new tunnel between Richmond and delta, there is no provision for 2 train tracks. While there are 2 bus lanes, there won't be any exclusive HOV lanes. Eventually, there will have to be a proper train and rapid bus bridge or another tunnel beside it. 

https://www.highway99tunnel.ca/project-overview-frt "The Fraser River Tunnel Project includes a new, eight-lane immersed tube tunnel that will replace the existing George Massey Tunnel on Highway 99. The new tunnel will have three vehicle lanes and a dedicated transit lane in each direction, with a separated active transportation corridor for cyclists and pedestrians." 

Given that this is supposed to be a major port region, a train and rapid bus crossing needs to eventually be there. A train connecting YVR to the Tsawwassen Ferry terminal and 2 rapid bus lanes. Then the main tunnel could still provide 3 general lanes each way, plus a HOV lane each way. https://www.infrastructurebc.com/project/fraser-river-tunnel-project/  

Unfortunately, proper big city size infrastructure is a difficult thing to achieve in backwards BC. Since the decision was made to not have a rail component in the new highway99tunnel, the middle 2 bike lanes should have been wide enough to eventually become 2 rapid bus lanes. Then a new bridge or parallel tunnel could have a YVR to ferry terminal train, plus 2 truck lanes, 2 bike lanes an 2 sidewalks. 

This is what a proper big regional port crossing should be like, but for backwater BC, its a different set of priorities. 

Its Not Just About Bus and Bike Bridges

Bike bridges might not be able to totally solve the transportation mess that is Vancouver. However, its quite odd how Vancouver Cycling_Infrastructure is missing a crucial bit of transportation infrastructure. Indeed, many cities will build least 1 proper bike bridge. The Vancouver approach is to take traffic lanes away from existing bridges, or not even bother to build a bike bridge next to a congested bridge. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_crossings_of_the_Fraser_River#North_Arm There should have been several bus and bike bridges in just this section alone. 

 https://bicyclenetwork.com.au/newsroom/2024/08/08/striking-perth-bridge-crosses-key-construction-milestone Unfortunatly, such a nice bike bridge in Perth isn't allowed in backwards Vancouver. 

https://www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/projects-initiatives/all-projects/metropolitan/causeway-path/

https://www.wsp.com/en-ca/projects/perths-boorloo-bridge If you are visiting Perth from Vancouver, you might cry when you realize what WA can do, simply because its not influenced or limited by the backwards BC mentality or mind virus.

https://www.destinationperth.com.au/listing/boorloo-bridge/3706 Unlike in backwards Vancouver, many cities build bike bridges so that they don't have to remove traffic lanes.

https://dissingweitling.com/en/project/swan-river-causeway-bridge 

https://www.buildingfortomorrow.wa.gov.au/projects/boorloo-bridge Unfortunatly, properly building-for-tomorrow is much more difficult in backwards BC than it is in WA. 

A bike+bridge in the right spot can make a huge difference. A bus+and+bike+bridge can be a huge improvement, especially in the case of Vancouver and the Greater Vancouver Region. 

The Arthur_Laing_Bridge, Oak_Street_Bridge, Knight_Street_Bridge and the Queensborough_Bridge all could be improved simply by building a bus+and+bike+bridge next to them. These bridges are simply too narrow to accommodate 2 bus lanes, 2 wide bike lanes and 2 wide footpaths.

The narrow North_Arm_Bridge for the very short Canada Line trains, is another lost opportunity. There should have been 2 express bus lanes, since the little train doesn't run 24 hours. There should have been 2 wide bike lanes as well as 2 sidewalks. 

Perhaps it was designed to be in the tradition of the narrow SkyBridge between NW and Surrey. Unfortunately, the SkyBridge wasn't designed to help the old Pattullo Bridge by accommodating 2 bus lanes, 2 bike lanes and 2 sidewalks.

While the Pattullo_Bridge_replacement opened with 2 nice bike lanes and 2 footpaths, there was a deliberate decision not to open it with 2 bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes. Especially, no wide emergency lanes or wide shoulders. Its another instant classic BC bottleneck-chokepoint. 

Somehow the Metro_Vancouver_Regional_District still hasn't realized that a regional network of bus and bike bridges can really help the region's mostly narrow bridges. Plus, proper big city long trains. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expo_Line_(SkyTrain) Only started to run some 5 car trains in 2025.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Line Still usually only 2 car train with the option to run 4 and the potential to eventually run 5 car trains.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_(Vancouver)#Canada_Line Despite a building cost cutting measure, this joke of a train and its short stations still could have been designed with enough level clearance to allow for 5 car trains eventually. Unfortunately, this line was designed to ultimately just have 2.5 car, 50m trains. Since 2009, this line is still only running 2 car trains. 

Multigenerational congestion planning is all by design in backwards BC.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=the+missing+element

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=bus-bridge

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=bike+bridges

YVR-Canada Line and REM Train in Montreal

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1ouk0VifwM&t=42s Its as if the YVR-Canada Line had to be built as a symbolically small city train for provincial Vancouver. Urban transportation infrastructure can be designed in ways that can double or even triple capacity to meet future demand. Unfortunately, its very difficult to build anything in backwards BC with significant future capacity in mind.

Ultimately, the YVR-Canada Line should have had level station clearances to eventually be able to accommodate 5-10 car trains. Unfortunately, in typical backwards BC planning the stations weren't even designed with enough level clearance to accommodate 5 car trains. The joke that is the Canada Line only has a level station clearance of 50m to eventually accommodate just a 2.5 car train. 

Most other cities actually build long stations to accommodate long trains, right in the first place. Or, at least allow for enough level clearance so that the stations can eventually be doubled or tripled in length. 

The YVR-Canada Line should have started with the Vancouver & Richmond segment, then the Vancouver and Horseshoe+Bay+ferry+terminal segment. Then finally, the YVR to Delta and the Tsawwassen+ferry+terminal through a proper Richmond-Delta+Tunnel or bridge crossing. 

The short SkyTrain Stations in Greater Vancouver https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Qg78Bmf1fk

Unfortunately, proper big city transportation planning is very difficult to achieve in backwards BC. So many things are watered down in small-scale Vancouver.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Montreal’s Biggest REM Expansion Yet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G1oeIAfxDU&t=106s 

The Montreal REM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9O6RzsXIqQ 

While the REM was designed to help the Metro, it should have the capability to be gradually expanded. Eventually, REM trains should be lengthened from 4 car trains to 6 car trains, perhaps even 8. 

In contrast, every Skytrain line should have been designed with enough level future station clearance to eventually accommodate a train as long as a 152.5 m (500 ft.) long Montreal Metro train. The first 2 Skytrain lines have 80m stations and the joke that is the Canada Line only has 50m stations. 

While the first 2 lines can accommodate 5 car trains, the C Line wasn't designed to accommodate 5 car trains. Just 2.5 car trains, someday. 

Despite there being such a symbolic push for Vancouver to keep having short trains, narrow bridges and stumpy buildings, things are gradually changing in backwards BC. The Vancouver or BC Mind Virus should have been challenged decades ago, but too many loud people wanted to perpetuate the, KEEP THINGS SMALL AND INDEQUATE agenda.

Given how most of the bridges in Greater Vancouver are so narrow, there isn't enough room for proper bus and HOV lanes, or even wide emergency lanes. One would think that at least the trains & stations would have been designed to eventually be doubled or tripled in length. But that would go against the mutigenerational congestive planning agenda. That's why there still is only a 3 lane LGB when there should have been at least a parallel bus, HOV and train tunnel. The Pattullo+Bridge replacement didn't open with 2 bus and 2 HOV lanes, not even wide shoulders or emergency lanes. NW really likes the congestive planning approach. Of course the new tunnel between Richmond and Delta won't have an additional provision for a train tube. This will also help to perpetuate the congestive transportation mandate. 

Fortunately, Selective_door_operation technology can eventually allow more sensible transportation planners to enable longer trains. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_door_operation#International_variations , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdH5d1ZthmM 

This means that a 5 car Skytrain (85m) could eventually become a 7 car train, despite the 80m stations. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_(Vancouver)_rolling_stock#Alstom_Mark_V Thus, an 80m train can become a 117m train.

A two car and 2.5 car (50m) train on the multibillion dollar Canada Line is so absurd and inept! With some slight station modifications, there could be a potential to eventually accommodate three, 20m cars at the very short platforms. Then, once 3 car trains could become possible, its just a matter of having an extra 20m car at both ends of each train. Thus, a 5 car train of 100m is so much better than a 50m joke of a train. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_(Vancouver)#Alstom_Mark_V_fleet 

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

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