How much will Vancouver change by 2036?

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJtotvMq2ls 

The Lion+Bridge will likely still not have an express bus and LRT tunnel near it. The+Iron+Bridge still might not have a proper BRT and LRT bridge next to it. The OSB and the KSB will likely not have a bus and bike bridge built beside them. There will still likely be no new Fraser Street Bridge for bikes and buses. No Boundary Road bridges to provide a direct link between the North Shore and Richmond for buses, trucks and bikes.

While the first 2 Skytrain lines will have 5 car trains, the stunted YVR-Canada Line will only have 2.5 car trains. Vancouver still might not permit any office tower to have a 40th floor, but might allow some residential towers to be on a Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane & Toronto scale. 

However, BIG city thinking and planning in Vancouver has always been so difficult. Boston, SF and the City of Paris are ridiculously small cities like Vancouver with all 3 having a land area of less than 50 sq. mi. or 129.5 sq. km. Yet, Boston, SF and especially the City of Paris, have all been able to fit so much more into the same general space. That's because they aren't bound by anything like the inept and extreme Vancouver type restrictions. 

How the Seattle to Vancouver area could become a megaregion

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POcg0oFvVf8 

The larger Portland, Seattle and the Vancouver, BC (V-BC) region has a lot of growth potential. However, Seattle size buildings haven't been allowed in Portland and in Vancouver, BC. Nothing like a 12 lane Ship Canal Bridge has been allowed in Portland and Vancouver. While Oregon and backwater BC haven't been able to thwart the largest city in Washington State, Seattle might eventually become more of a magnet in pulling more people into the area between Portland and V-BC. 

Right now, Vancouver, WA (V-WA) still has a wider bridge than V-BC. Most of the V-BC bridges are so damn narrow that its not possible to have an efficient regional express bus network. As long as there is a refusal to build proper BRT bridges as part of a regional system, it remains a sad joke. 

The Skytrain (LRT) was built with shorter stations than what the underground stations in Seattle and Edmonton are at. Whenever possible, the Skytrain stations are shorter than the C Train stations in Calgary, DART stations in Dallas and even the Max in Portland. 

The biggest mistake of the Skytrain was to not build all of the stations with a future level clearance to eventually have Montreal Metro size stations of 500 feet or 152.5 m. Instead, the first 2 lines only have 80 m stations and the line to YVR (The Canada embarrassment Line) is only 50 m. Backwater BC logic is that a 5 car Skytrain could run twice as frequent as a 9 car Montreal Metro train. Someday, a 2.5 car YVR-Canada Line train could also run much more frequently than a 9 car Montreal Metro train. 

There is just one key problem with that type of BC logic. While initially constructing short stations and having short trains can save money, its not proper BIG city size infrastructure. In the long run, it costs more to try to lengthen stations for longer BIG city type trains. 

The Unusual transportation approaches used in Vancouver

 https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/history/5-of-a-kind-unusual-modes-of-transportation-used-or-nearly-used-in-vancouver-12388220 

Vancouver is such an unusual and backwards city with its inefficient and congestive approach towards transportation infrastructure.

Getting rid of the streetcars and interurban trams was utterly foolish! Fortunately, such MADNE$$ wasn't adopted in Melbourne, SF, Toronto, Boston, Philadelphia and New Orleans. 

Just because a no freeways mandate was chosen for Vancouver, the streets should have been kept wide enough for busses as well as other vehicles. 

https://movementyvr.ca/the-case-of-vancouvers-nine-missing-bus-lanes

Despite most of the Vancouver bridges being too narrow, some bridge lanes were removed, because the city wasn't interested in building parallel bike bridges. 

Since most of the bridges are so narrow, there isn't enough room for proper express bus lanes. Of course the city isn't interested in building parallel bus bridges next to the narrow bridges. 

Since Vancouver is supposed to be a major, properly functioning city in Western Canada, the city should have pressed the designers of the first 2 Skytrain lines to make sure that all of the 80 m stations could gradually be extended to 152.5 m, the same as the 500 foot long Montreal Metro stations and trains.

Unlike the first 2 Skytrain lines, the Canada Line was only designed to ultimately have 50 m stations and trains. A 2 billion dollar line to YVR could have been designed in such a way that would have allowed it to look and function like a proper big-city passenger train. 

A commuter train to the North Shore keeps taking a long time to be finalized.

https://northshoreconnects.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/BIRT-Benefits-Assessment_Final.pdf

Think small and build backwards, or not at all. 

2 out of 3 is bad, but 4 bridges?

 Apparently, 2 of the 3 Skytrain bridges were never designed to also accommodate bikes.

1 https://www.google.ca/maps/place/North+Arm+Bridge/@49.2028331,-123.1189681,1005m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m14!1m7!3m6!1s0x548675f84f6c0721:0xbea3ccce242f45a8!2sMarpole+Bridge!8m2!3d49.1995219!4d-123.1268811!16zL20vMGZqMjYx!3m5!1s0x548675e222b072f3:0x1f4afd8a052e9fba!8m2!3d49.2030206!4d-123.1176091!16zL20vMGc1anZj?hl=en&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDYwMy4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D 

Unfortunately, all 3 Skytrain bridges weren't designed to have any express bus lanes, never mind any for a proper rapid bus network.

2 https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Middle+Arm+Bridge/@49.1956263,-123.1347899,597m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x548675e70cc6d0d1:0x203a51fa759dab7e!8m2!3d49.1957207!4d-123.1351442!16zL20vMGdna3px?hl=en&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDYwMy4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D   

In the 1980s, once it was revealed that Skytrain wouldn't be providing a 24 hour service, there wasn't a serious effort to convince the public of the importance of having a 24 hour regional express bus network. Transportation redundancy is difficult to grasp in backwards BC.

3 https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Marpole+Bridge/@49.2048651,-122.8949547,729m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m7!3m6!1s0x548675f84f6c0721:0xbea3ccce242f45a8!4b1!8m2!3d49.1995219!4d-123.1268811!16zL20vMGZqMjYx?hl=en&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDYwMy4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D 

All 3 of there's transportation bridges should have had enough future space for at least a 3rd track. Upon opening, each bridge should have had 2 bus lanes that also could be for emergency vehicles. Each bridge should have had 2 bike lanes and 2 sidewalks. 

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Marpole+Bridge/@49.1996678,-123.1276435,848m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x548675f84f6c0721:0xbea3ccce242f45a8!8m2!3d49.1995219!4d-123.1268811!16zL20vMGZqMjYx?hl=en&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDYwMy4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D This was allowed to fall apart and eventually catch fire. It was never doubletracked and the interurban trams were phased out by the 1950s. Yet, most of the highways and general road system in SW BC cities are just 2 lanes each way. It was as if there was no need to have a 3rd lane for trucks and a 4th or 5th lane for buses & HOVs. 

https://stevestonheritage.ca/2024/06/21/marpole-cp-rail-bridge

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

The transportation infrastructure was set up for congestion, right from the start. Having a short Skytrain & small stations might have made economic sense in its initial phase. However, there was a failure to not design it to eventually become a proper big-city size train with much longer stations.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Stubborn+BC

Vancouver 450 ft and Fahrenheit 451

Was a 450 foot height restriction just a chance, or was it intentionally made to be very close to 451 Fahrenheit? Honolulu is still stuck around that maximum, while San Diego is at 500 feet.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451 (1953) By the 1950s, so many things were already banned, watered down or scaled back in provincial Vancouver. Generations later, there was the No Fun Vancouver 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 over 40 stories by 2030. However, Burnaby and Surrey could, because they aren't under the extreme restrictions of Vancouver. 

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

Despite its size, Canada has less than 1% of the worlds population.

Long lost traffic lanes of Greater Vancouver

 https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1tfsdxg/long_lost_days One of the few major streets within Vancouver to be at least 6 lanes wide. However, with curb lane parking it just becomes another 4 lane corridor in BC.

https://www.vancouverarchives.ca/wp-content/uploads/cropped-a9b22bf7-d985-4372-9650-7a51afbe5f94-2010-006.161-2-3.jpg This part of Granville used to have 6 lanes. The 1970s mall reduced it to just 2 lanes, causing an instant bus bottleneck-chokepoint. A 4 lane compromise still would have allowed for wider sidewalks. A 4 lane transit mall could have allowed for a constant passing lane when another bus has stopped. It was as if someone didn't want to have an efficient bus corridor for express buses, as well as local busses. When a local bus stops on a 2 lane street, its impossible for an express bus to pass, especially when there is a stopped bus on the other lane, also preventing any express bus to pass.

Several cities around the world still have wide streets, boulevards and avenues with 8-10 lanes. If Vancouver had allowed some 8 lane wide streets, 2 curb parking lanes would still provide 6 traffic lanes. Then, if 2 lanes were for buses, there would still be 2 lanes each way for general traffic.

The public and then the planning department (after being pressured) were firmly against having freeways within the city limits during the 1960s and 70s. However, there still should have been enough logic to allow for wider streets so that it would be easier and more efficient to have a bus lane each way. 

As of 2026, no bridge within the Vancouver city limits has 8 lanes and only two bridges have 6 lanes. One has 5 lanes and then there are four 4 lane bridges and the 3 lane Lion Bridge joke. 

All of the Vancouver bridges are so narrow that there was no provision for any future bus lanes. Plus, 2 bridges each had 2 lanes removed that could have been used for buses. Congestive transportation planning is the name of the game for backwards Vancouver. If there ever was a city that needs a series of bus bridges, it would be stubborn Vancouver. 

Even the Greater Vancouver region is lacking in having a series of bus bridges, especially since the Skytrain isn't a 24 hour system.

https://www.vancouverarchives.ca/2011/04/18/how-did-harland-bartholomews-ideas-shape-vancouver

https://archive.org/details/vancplanincgen00vanc The Bartholomew Plan published in 1928.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/vancouver-archives/albums/72157626484421302/ 

https://globalcivic.org/harland-bartholomew/

https://www.urbanstudio.sala.ubc.ca/2010/lectures/Sept21_presentations/2_TheBasics.pdf 

https://samsullivan.ca/taking-a-closer-look-at-the-legacy-of-harland-bartholomew-and-his-plan-for-vancouver-2 , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIuAk1TIKHo

https://archive.org/details/planforcityofvan00vanc 1930

Just mostly more stumps or some real Towers in Vancouver?

 https://cityhallwatch.wordpress.com/2026/05/02/opinion-the-yiyby-critique-bilsker 

https://www.skyscrapercenter.com/building/the-stack/35667 Only 38 floors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Centre_(Vancouver) Just 37 stories. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_Center Seattle's tallest has 76 stories. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_Canal_Bridge 12 lanes consisting of three 4 lane sections.

Mostly short buildings, short trains and narrow bridges are all part of the imposed symbolism to keep Vancouver small and backwards. 

While Seattle had its first 50 story office tower in 1969 and Calgary in 1984, stubborn Vancouver still won't permit any office tower to have a 40th floor. 

A 30-35 story office tower would be impressive if it was in Victoria, Kelowna, Kamloops and Prince George. However, what's impressive in backwards Vancouver & backwater BC isn't impressive in Alberta, Ontario, Quebec, Washington State, Victoria State, NSW, Queensland & WA... 

Stumpy buildings, short trains and narrow bridges makes for the Vancouver trifecta of B$ city planning.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Fort+McMurray,+AB 10 lanes. Only the TCH bridge between Surrey and Coquitlam in BC has been allowed to have as many lanes as this. Some people still wish that everything could have remained funneled into just 2 or 3 lanes each way.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Quesnell+Bridge 8 lanes in Edmonton. 

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Hwy.+2A+Red+Deer+City+Centre+Bridge 6 lanes.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Calgary,+AB 10 lanes.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Calgary,+AB 8 lanes.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Lethbridge,+AB It has 6 lanes. Being from backwards Vancouver, its amazing that this 6 lane bridge wasn't funneled into just 2 lanes each way. That's what happened with the Knight_Street_Bridge.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Hwy.+2A+Red+Deer+City+Centre+Bridge As a 5 lane TCH crossing, it only has 1 less lane than the 6 lane Iron Bridge in congested, backwards Vancouver. Since Alberta isn't under anything like the imposed BC restrictions, this crossing will likely be eventually upgraded to have 6 lanes, plus 2 wide emergency lanes & 2 wide shoulders that could provide 4 lanes each way, some day. 

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Winnipeg,+MB A TCH bridge with 9 lanes, because no one from narrow-minded Vancouver was able to get them to narrow this crossing. The TCH Iron Bridge in Vancouver just has 6 lanes. No bus and LRT bridge has ever been built next to it, so far.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Winnipeg,+MB A 6 lane crossing. 

As of 2026, congested Vancouver only allows 2 bridges to have 6 lanes. A total of 5 lanes were removed from 3 Vancouver bridges. Had Vancouver built a series of proper bus and bike bridges, no lanes would have been removed. 

Despite NW trying to be one of the smallest cities in BC, Surrey is set to become the biggest city in BC. Fortunately, small NW & backwards Vancouver can't stop that from happening. However, narrowminded NW was able to force a narrower new bridge to Surrey. 

This bridge-replacement is one of the best examples of BC bottleneck-chokepoint planning today.

McBride_Blvd. and Royal_Ave_in_New_Westminster are mostly 4 lane corridors.

King_George_Boulevard and Scott_Road both are at least 4 lanes wide. One might think that the new bridge should have had 10 lanes, or at least 8 lanes, because two 4 lane boulevards, a 4 lane avenue and a 4 lane road, are all funneled into a bridge that opened with only 2 lanes each way. The old bridge that it replaced was also a 4 lane crossing. A congestive approach to transportation planning is the name of the game in backwards B.C.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d7/Stalewasem_Bridge_%282026-03%29.jpg/960px-Stalewasem_Bridge_%282026-03%29.jpg 

At the very least, this new 4 lane bridge should have had enough room for 2 wide emergency lanes, 2 wide shoulders and especially, 2 bus lanes. There should have been a provision for a lower deck for LRT, bus and truck lanes, given that this is supposed to be a seaport region.

The narrowmindedness planning by Greater Vancouver to still have mostly narrow crossings, has made it very difficult to implement a proper regional express bus network, let alone BRT. 

The first 2 Skytrain lines only have station lengths that can barely accommodate the new 5 car trains. The YVR Line or the C Line, has stations than can only accommodate a 2.5 car train, some day. Given that the Skytrain network is a multibillion dollar transit system, all of the stations should have been designed to gradually accommodate 8-10 car trains, but that's what a proper big city would do. 

https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2026/05/02/expo-86-40-years-later-the-memories-live-on 

Four decades later and Greater Vancouver remains so far behind with the scale of its infrastructure.

Link 2 Line Cabview POV Seattle to Redmond Eastbound

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlJHHuLdOj0 

Unlike backwards Vancouver, Seattle, WA has longer underground stations, just like Edmonton has. Longer stations make it easier to have longer trains. 

The Narrows Bridge in Perth, WA, Australia https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6mVXcX-4h4 It has 5 lanes each way and 2 commuter train tracks. The Homer_M._Hadley_Memorial_Bridge is part of an 8 lane I-5 crossing with 2 LRT tracks. The Samuel-De_Champlain_Bridge has 8 lanes, plus 2 REM commuter train tracks. These 3 fantastic bridges were all possible, because they aren't in heavily restrictive Vancouver. Plus, WA and Que. never wanted to adopt the BC-B$ approach to things.

Unfortunately, in backwards BC, the 1st two Skytrain lines only have 80m stations and the YVR-Canada Line has 50m joke stations. Some of the stations on the first 2 lines might have enough level clearance to only have an extra car at either end of a lengthened platform. 

However, the shortsighted Canada Line wasn't designed to eventually accommodate 5 car trains, just a 2.5 car joke of a train, someday. It was as if someone thought that there was no need to have enough level clearance so that the very short stations could be double or tripled in length eventually.

At least by 2025, the first SkyTrain line was running some 5 car trains. Unfortunately in 2026, the 2nd Line and the 3rd Line are still only running 2 car joke trains. Every Skytrain line should have had stations designed to eventually accommodate 8-10 cars trains, but that's what a proper big city would do. Backwards Vancouver wants to hold out for as long as possible, by symbolically building small.

Eight more Mark V trains are now in service on SkyTrain's Expo Line

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-mark-v-trains-incoming-arrivals-april-2026 

While the Montreal Metro can run 9 car trains and Auckland is planning to eventually have 9 car trains, the 1st Skytrain line can only run 5 car trains. The 2nd and 3rd Skytrain lines are still only running 2 car joke trains.

Combine that with mostly narrow regional bridges, and BC is clearly maintaining its congestive transportation agenda.

Vancouverites have some of the longest commutes in Canada

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-longest-commute-canada 

With most of the regional bridges being too narrow, there isn't enough space for proper express bus+lanes or BRT lanes. Plus, the first 2 Skytrain lines only have the potential to accommodate 5 car trains. The Canada (Embarrassment) Line wasn't designed to eventually have 5 car trains, only 2.5 car trains. Narrow bridges and short trains are all part of the symbolic reluctance towards having proper big city size infrastructure.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=bus+and+bike+bridge

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=bike+bridges

YVR-Canada Line and REM Train

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1ouk0VifwM&t=42s Even if the YVR-Canada Line had to initially be built as a symbolically small city train, 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 BC with significant future capacity in mind.

Ultimately, the YVR-Canada Line should have had level station clearances to eventually be able to accommodate 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. 

The 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 much is watered down in 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 and even 8 car trains. 

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 (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 such 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. 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

Vancouver 1960s vs Today: The Shocking Difference

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnMLMp_gf1w 

Unlike Toronto, SF and Melbourne, Vancouver was one of the first cities to get rid of streetcars and tram-trains or interurbans. Backwards Vancouver will likely be one of the last cities to ever bring them back. 

No office tower in Vancouver was allowed to have a 30th floor before the 1970s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TD_Tower_(Vancouver) The first 30 story office tower in backwater BC opened in 1972. As of 2026, no office tower in Vancouver, or anywhere in BC has been permitted to have a 40th floor. 

As of 2026, no Skytrain stations are even close to the length of the Montreal Metro, TTC subway and underground Edmonton LRT stations. 

Unfortunately, almost every city around the world is expensive. Its just that you get less of things in Vancouver. Short trains, short buildings, narrow bridges and mostly narrow streets. 

Thus, its no surprise that there isn't a regional network of bus-bridges. Congestive transportation planning is what Vancouver does best. 

Vancouver seems to be reluctant in constructing a network of bike-bridges. The city would rather remove a total of 5 lanes from 3 bridges for bike lanes. 

Broadway will eventually be reduced from 6 lanes to 4 lanes so that even some small towns will have wider major streets.  

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

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

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

The narrow Pattullo Bridge Replacement

https://www.pattullobridgereplacement.ca/construction/current-works Its a nice 4 lane bottleneck choakpoint. There should have been a provision for a lower deck for bus lanes, HOV lanes and LRT, but that would help to alleviate some transportation congestion.

It wasn't designed with that much future capacity in mind, just like the absurd Canada+Line. The SkyTrain-Canada+Line is still only running 2 car trains. The New stal̕əw̓asəm Bridge is only 2 lanes each way. This is congestive urban planning in BC at its best. Narrow bridges and short trains are some of the best ways to symbolically demonstrate a reluctance to accommodate future growth capacity. 

People aren't suppose to wonder where all the money went over the past several generations, because it seems that not enough funds have gone towards proper big city infrastructure.

 

Why Greater Toronto Has Several Skylines

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI9WJa9Q8dA 

Of course many large urban areas around the world have more than 1 or 2 skylines or tower clusters. 

For the longest time, no building in Vancouver or BC, was allowed to be as tall as the 1930s CIBC tower, which is now a stump.

https://www.blogto.com/city/2017/05/toronto-lost-observation-deck-commerce-court-north/

https://www.torontojourney416.com/canadian-bank-of-commerce-building/ 

https://www.25king.ca/the-history 

It wasn't until the early 1970s when stumpy, Vancouver allowed a building to be taller than the L.A. City Hall, or the Smith Tower in Seattle. 

The 1930s CIBC tower, the L.A. City Hall and the Smith Tower, would still be prominent towers in Vancouver, but stumps in their own cities. 

Despite Vancouver being divided by an inlet and a river, the city wasn't able to build a huge wall along Boundary Road. Thus, the KEEP THEM OUT agenda was a little thwarted. The various White city councils tried to do the next best thing. That was to symbolically impose various restrictions as a reluctance to think, plan and build on a BIG city scale. The time especially from 1960 to 2000 had predominantly White City Hall and its councils continually impose several overlapping restrictions. 

Since Vancouver can't control immigration or the movements of non-white people, keeping things small and backwards, means that less people will move there than to Toronto, Montreal, Calgary and Edmonton. However, with a mild winter climate, more and more people want to move to backwards BC, especially small-minded Vancouver and provincial Victoria. 

In spite of immigration and Multiculturalism, Vancouver was to perpetually promote its small scale agenda. 

While the first Skytrain line can finally run 5 car trains, the stations weren't designed to become long enough to eventually accomodate 9 car trains like the big city Montreal Metro has. 

The 2nd and 3rd Skytrain lines are still only running 2 car joke trains. Running 8-10 car trains is what a proper big city would do, but not backwards Vancouver. 

Narrow bridges provides strong symbolism of the cities narrow-mindedness. When bridges are too narrow, its difficult to have a proper express or rapid bus system. The reluctance to build parallel bus and HOV bridges helps to maintain the congestive planning approach that is vancouver and the Greater Region. 

Vancouver's refusal to build parallel bike bridges has meant that 2 lanes were removed from the Burrard Bridge, 1 lane from the Cambie Bridge and 2 lanes from the Granville Bridge. 

Keeping buildings symbolically short when compared to what scenic Sydney, Auckland, SF and Seattle allow, also helps to maintain Vancouver's reluctance to enter the big and tall urban scale. In fact, the scenic setting that Vancouver is in has been used as the main excuse to continually scale the city down. Yet, several scenic cities around the world are either able to have wider bridges, wider roads, longer trains or taller buildings. 

The world is mostly composed of non-white people. Canada has less than 1% of the world's population and stubborn Vancouver symbolically remains as a small provincial backwater on the Pacific Rim. 

https://centralparktower.com.au Unlike Perth, Vancouver forbids 50 story office towers and Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne size residential towers. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/108_St_Georges_Terrace In fact, no office building in Vancouver has been permitted to have a 40th floor. However, since Burnaby and Surrey aren't under the restrictive controls of Vancouver, they will eventually allow office towers over 40 stories. 

Despite Australia having less people than Canada, Perth is allowed to have taller buildings, wider bridges and longer trains than Vancouver. Taller buildings, wider bridges and longer trains are even less likely in Halifax than whats in Brisbane or Queensland.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q1_(building) To see buildings on a similar scale of what Brisbane allows, one has to get to Greater Toronto. Brisbane is allowed to have some buildings that would even be impressive in Melbourne and Sydney. 

While Montreal is allowed to have taller buildings than Vancouver, Montreal isn't allowed to have Sydney size towers. Especially not on the scale of what Melbourne and Toronto permit. 

The Great SkyTrain upgrade (potential)

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D2CXdZ_4Ro 

Unfortunatly, the first 2 Skytrain lines were designed to only have 80m stations and trains. The 3rd line to YVR and Richmond was only designed to have 50m stations. In contrast, the Montreal Metro has stations long enough to accomodate 152.4m long trains. Thus, the greatest mistake was to not enable the Skytrain to eventually become a very high capacity train system. Combine that with mostly narrow bridges and roads in Greater Vancouver and you have the epitome of congestive urban planning. 

At least by late 2025 some of the new 5 car trains were out, along with some of the old 6 car little box trains on the 1st line. The 2nd and 3rd lines are still running 2 car joke trains, but that symbolically fits right in with the, KEEP BC SMALL AND BACKWARDS mentality. 

A proper big city long-term plan would have been to allow for 10 car trains, with at least 5-6 car trains at the start when each line opened.

A Six-hour SkyTrain shutdown caps chaotic pre-Christmas morning in Metro Vancouver

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/bridges-skytrain-shutdown-chaos-december-23-2025 

There is nothing like short trains that stop running and mostly narrow bridges which prevents a proper and efficient regional rapid bus network.

Some Canada Mega-projects Under Construction

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwsOVZ-j7hg 

Oakridge_Park is on a much smaller scale than Metrotown, Brentwood and Lougheed. It will especially be on a much smaller scale than Parramatta in NSW. 

Unfortunatly, the Oakridge-41st_Avenue_station was only designed to have 50m platforms, when it should have been at least 100m. Thus, the utter foolishness has meant that instead of allowing for a future level station clearance to accomodate 5 car trains, the Canada (embassament) Line was only designed to just have 2.5 car trains. While its extremely short stations might have been disguised as a cost saving measurer, there didn't seem to be any key people onboard to make sure that it could eventually become a proper big city train line. Its sad that a line which opened in 2009 is still only running 2 car trains. While the 2.5 car configuration is still a joke of a train, at least half of an extra coach-length is better than nothing. Plus, there should have been extra cars ordered by now so at least during the very busy times the trains could be operating at 1 minute headways. Unfortunatly, this goes against the Vancouver & BC congestion planning mentality.

Despite being built several years after the Sydney_Harbour_Bridge, the joke that is the Pattullo_Bridge was designed to only have 4 narrow lanes & only 1 sidewalk. Of course the replacement_bridge will only open with 2 lanes each way. It was as if someone really wanted to make sure that there won't be 2 bus lanes and no HOV lanes when the bridge opens. While the new bridge is designed to be expanded from a 4 lane joke to eventually having 6 lanes, it still won't be wide enough to accomodate 2 HOV lanes as well as 2 bus lanes. Of course the new bridge won't have any emergency lanes, just like the old bridge. However, it will have 2 bike lanes and 2 sidewalks. https://www.globalhighways.com/news/pattullo-bridge-completion-end-year Its only fitting that in backwards BC this new bridge wouldn't be designed to eventually have a lower deck to accomodate 2 bus lanes and 2 LRT tracks. 

If the planners were afraid to symbolically have a wide bridge between NW and Surrey, the old Pattullo_Bridge should have been designed to eventually have a lower deck for trams, trucks and busses. Even when the SkyBridge between NW and Surrey opened in 1990, it wasn't designed to have any bus lanes or emergency vehicle lanes and especially, no bike and footpaths. 

Is Vancouver the best city in North America? (2019) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8dmVUrNt38

 One of the biggest mistakes in Vancouver & SW BC is to have short trains combined with mostly narrow bridges. Thus, the region doesn't get to have long, high capacity trains and there isn't a proper regional network of bus-bridges. The refusal to twin most of the bridges means that it's almost impossible to have a proper and efficient regional network of rapid-bus and HOV lanes.  

While Montreal built the REM to augment their long-train Metro system, Vancouver should have allowed for enough clearance to eventually have 500 foot long trains. 80m-50m Skytrain stations are going to become inadequate, when there should have been a 152.4m provision so that the trains could eventually become as long as the ones on the Montreal Metro. 

Is Regional Rail in the Future of British Columbia? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PeIOVy6fFc

Vancouver's Next Generation Streetcar Network Plan

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqDGu8Elysg 

Ironically, Vancouver should have been one of the first cities in the 1950s to state that streetcars & tram trains will still be essential in the far future. Especially, when most of the roads & bridges are so damn narrow, now it's difficult to have proper bus lanes. 

Canada Line SkyTrain Ride Richmond–Brighouse to Waterfront Station https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNQxWYtyoQY

Honolulu’s Skyline Rail Expands to West Honolulu, and to a New Airport Station

 https://www.travelandtourworld.com/news/article/honolulus-skyline-rail-expands-to-west-honolulu-bringing-faster-more-sustainable-public-transit-to-oahu-with-a-new-airport-station 

Even if the widest parts of the H-1 could be 10 or 12 lanes, it would still get plugged up. Nevertheless, being from Vancouver, it's quite impressive to see such a wide H-1 by the airport. If you visit Vancouver from Hawaii, you might think that Vancouver is a big city like Sydney, SF or Seattle. Then you discover that the roads & bridges are much narrower than what's in those cities. The real big surprise is that Vancouver not only has shorter trains than Sydney, SF & Seattle, but even Edmonton. Fortunately, the Skyline to the airport isn't a 2 car joke of a train like Vancouver's airport line is.

https://honolulutransit.org/about/route-map , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_(Honolulu)#Route

https://www.honolulu.gov/dts/skyline

The Airport Segment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_(Honolulu)#Segment_2:_Airport 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lelepaua_station If only Vancouver's line to the airport could have opened with 4 car trains, then with Selective_door_operation, eventually 6 car trains. Unfortunatly, backwards Vancouver has been stuck with a 2 car YVR train since 2009, but it has the potential to become a 2.5 car joke of a train, someday.  

Downtown Honolulu.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_(Honolulu)#Segment_3:_City_Center 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_(Honolulu)#Ala_Moana_extension 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_(Honolulu)#Rolling_stock "The line uses 256 ft (78 m) four-car train sets, each with the capacity to carry nearly 800 passengers..."  "Each car is 64 ft (20 m) long, weighs 72,000 lb (33,000 kg), and has 36 seats with a listed total capacity of 195 people, and sits on standard-gauge (1,435 mm) rails." 

While the Skyline cars are similar in length to the YVR-Canada-Line cars, they are of a heavier construction. Plus, the trains are twice as long as any on the embarrassingly short Canada+Line trains.

While it took a long time to get the Skyline to the airport, at least the stations were all initially built to accommodate 4 car trains. Unfortunatly, the joke that is the SkyTrain-Canada+Line is still only running 2 car trains and wasn't designed to eventually have 5 car trains. Its difficult to understand why the joke-line stations are only designed to accommodate a 2.5 car train, someday.

Honolulu like Brisbane, are very far away from the Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV) and much warmer. Thus, they are able to have longer trains to the airport, because they can build on a proper big city scale.  

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Brisbane+Airport+Railway+Line 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=the+airport+train