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. 

Can the SkyTrain in BC, Canada ever become a very high capacity system?

 Why BC, Canada Got it Right With its New SkyTrain https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqo_KAEF81k 

The argument is that a mostly elevated train can move more people than an 8-10 lane elevated freeway, at much less the cost. However, any major urban grade-separated LRT system should be designed to eventually become a very high capacity conduit.

The first 2 lines only have 80 m stations, which are just a little more than half the length of a 152.5 m Montreal Metro station. Unfortunately, the line to Richmond only has a designed level clearance for 50 m stations, not even quite a 3rd of the length of a Montreal Metro station platform. 

While it might seem economical to opt for short trains and stations, the Skytrain stations should have still been designed to eventually become more like a proper big city train station allowing for much higher capacity. 

The first 2 lines can run the newest 5 car trains, but the 3rd line can only run 2.5 car trains, some day.

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. 

SkyTrain YVR-Canada Line

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_(Vancouver)#Canada_Line , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxTEBfxYH0g

https://buzzer.translink.ca/2010/08/canada-line-and-the-olympics "For the 17-day Games period, the Canada Line carried over 3,881,986 passengers, with the most ever riding on Friday, February 19: 287,000 riders!" 

https://www.bcaviationcouncil.org/canada-line-continues-to-break-records-translink/

TransLink's Hyundai Rotem EMU cars have been operating since 2009 and have played a massive role for the City of Richmond, Vancouver and YVR. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1ouk0VifwM   

https://archive.news.gov.bc.ca/releases/news_releases_2005-2009/2009tran0002-000047.htm "During the Olympic Games, there were approximately 230,000 daily trips on the Canada Line." 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/short-platforms-and-trains-is-the-skytrain-canada-line-under-built-and-nearing-capacity

https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1eu70hl/skytrains_canada_line_marks_15th_anniversary/ 

https://francesbula.com/uncategorized/is-the-canada-line-at-maximum-capacity-no-will-it-be-in-a-decade-depends-on/ 

https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/5t97h9/this_is_why_the_canada_line_has_been_far_less/ 

https://globalnews.ca/news/90468/canada-line-races-toward-capacity/

https://www.reddit.com/r/askvan/comments/1fsfptv/why_are_the_current_canada_line_cars_designed_the/ 

Yaletown–Roundhouse station's fare gate capacity increased by 66%

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-yaletown-roundhouse-station-additional-fare-gates-completed 

The Canada line is such a watered down version of what should have been a proper big city airport and ferry rapid transit link. Just because this infrastructure project had to be scaled down during its first phase, the stations still could have been designed to eventually accommodate 5-6 car trains. Unfortunately, the stations were only designed to accommodate a 2.5 car train. While this perfectly fits in with the inept urban transportation mentality and especially fits in with the BC congestive transportation agenda, this is another sad result. 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-yaletown-roundhouse-station-fare-gate-expansion

Despite being downtown with several condominiums around, the Yaletown-Roundhouse_station is too small for an inner-city station.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaletown-Roundhouse_station#Station_information 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f4/Yaletown_Roundhouse_Stn.jpg/1280px-Yaletown_Roundhouse_Stn.jpg 

There is barely enough level clarence beyond the short platform for another car. To remedy this inadequate situation, this line needs to have three full-size cars, not just some eventual 2.5 car joke of a train. 

https://www.eke-electronics.com/automatic-selective-door-operation-asdo 

Then eventually, once people got used to a 3 car train, an extra car could be added at each end, resulting in a 5 car train. Its a workaround that can eventually enable the 3rd line or the C Line to run 3-5 cars trains to meet demand. 

Then the Exp. Line and Mil. Line, or what could become A & B lines with standard 5 car trains. However, during the busy times, a 7 car train could be possible with selective-door-operation technology. 

It would have been better to have just built all of the Skytrain stations long enough for 5 car trains in the first place, with enough level track clearance for 10 car trains eventually.

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.

Canada Line station platforms being extended for interchange hub with Broadway Subway

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-line-broadway-city-hall-station-platform-extension-millennium-line-interchange Fortunatly, the planning for the TTC Subway, Montreal Metro & Edmonton LRT, all have much longer stations than what backwards Vancouver settled for. 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-canada-line-rebuilding

Once all of the YVR-Canada Line stations have 50-metre-long platforms, it will become quite apparent that the long-range planning for 5 car trains wasn't seriously considered. The 50 m stations will only be long enough for a 2.5 car joke of a train. 

However, there is a potential to work around this particular manifestation of the Vancouver Mind Virus. Selective_door_operation can allow for longer trains, despite the ridiculous short Vancouver stations. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_door_operation#International_variations

There is such a problem with Vancouver and BC in general of not properly planning for future transportation infrastructure expansion. 

https://www.railforthevalley.com/latest-news/zweisystem/the-skytrain-lobby-get-over-it/

The new Capstan Station recorded SkyTrain's fourth-lowest ridership after one year

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-capstan-station-ridership-canada-line 

Wow, this picture almost makes it look like its a big-city train station and not just a 2 car train joke. The CLine should have opened with 5-6 car trains, or at least 3 car trains. Any station can have the potential of becoming more popular, especially when there are more residential and business structures close to it. 

The Can-Line could really benefit from Selective+Door+Operation, which would allow for longer trains.

How Copenhagen built a metro for free https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzamwVH3CXU&t=8s At least this could run 3 car trains right from when it started.

Is the SkyTrain (YVR) Canada Line under-built and nearing capacity, because of Short platforms and trains?

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/short-platforms-and-trains-is-the-skytrain-canada-line-under-built-and-nearing-capacity

Its one thing to build a line with stations that are only a 3rd of the length of a Montreal Metro station, but to no not properly allow for enough future level clearance is so inept. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_door_operation#International_variations

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-canada-line-rebuilding 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-line-skytrain This and the 3 lane Lion Bridge should get an award for the blatant symbolism of not wanting to build proper big-city infrastructure in backwards BC.

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.

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

K Line (Los Angeles Metro)

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_Line_(Los_Angeles_Metro) 

https://la.urbanize.city/post/metro-seeks-state-funds-extend-green-line-platforms 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_Line_(Los_Angeles_Metro)#Rolling_stock 

Car length	89 ft (27.13 m)
Width	8 ft 8+3⁄4 in (2.66 m)
Height	12 ft 6 in (3.81 m)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinki_Sharyo_P3010 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/07/LA_Metro_Rail_Expo_Line_Kinki_Sharyo_P3010_17th_St_Santa_Monica_College_Station_%2848943282587%29.jpg/960px-LA_Metro_Rail_Expo_Line_Kinki_Sharyo_P3010_17th_St_Santa_Monica_College_Station_%2848943282587%29.jpg  

https://www.metro.net/projects/kline-northern-extension Just like in SD, Seattle, Calgary and Edmonton, their LRT trains are longer than the ones on the first 2 Skytrain lines. Especially, the embarrassing Canada Line. 

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2026-03-24/this-rail-line-would-get-you-to-grove-beverly-center-cedars-sinai-is-it-l-a-s-missing-link In backwards BC its like it takes 2 or 3 people to turn a lightbulb than someone in Quebec. An 80m Skytrain on the first 2 lines would have to be about twice as frequent as a 152.5m Montreal Metro train to match capacity. The ridicules 50m maximum allowance for Canada Line trains would have to run 3 times as frequently as a Montreal Metro train. 

https://la.streetsblog.org/2026/03/18/metro-committee-again-sides-with-nimbys-postpones-key-north-k-line-rail-decision Unfortunatly, the Vancouver Mind Virus is all about holding back the scale of the city. Thus, anytime that a bridge or street can be narrower, a building kept shorter and especially a train kept short, is all part of the imposed symbolism of refusing to build on a BIG city scale. 

Sunny L.A. has been thinking, planning and building like a BIG city for over a century. In contrast, rainy Vancouver has been refusing to think on a big city scale throughout its history. For several decades, all White city counsels kept imposing various restrictions to keep Vancouver on a small scale. 

The Dunsmuir Tunnel in Downtown Vancouver, SkyTrain service to be reduced on weekends until June

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/downtown-vancouver-skytrain-service-delays-weekends Had the old railway tunnel been originally designed to be double tracked, it could have been converted into a double level, 4 track LRT tunnel, instead of a 2 track LRT tunnel.

Ideally, if a subway or metro line doesn't have 4 tracks, 3 would be the next best thing. Then, 2 tracks could always remain operational while the 3rd is being repaired. For the most part, Skytrain is just a double track system. Unfortunately, the YVR-Canada Line is even single tracked at the end of the line in YVR and in downtown Richmond. 

The Canada Line should have been the 1st phase of an eventual south extension to Delta and the BC ferry terminal. Plus, a north extension from Waterfront_station_in Vancouver to Lonsdale_Quay and the ferry terminal. This would be a vital link between Canada_Line and the two regional ferry terminals. Unfortunately, Vancouver and BC are about maintaining congestion and transportation inefficiency.

Perhaps someday, if Vancouver is ever allowed to function like a proper big city, the Dunsmuir_Tunnel could be extended under Stanley Park and the 1st Narrows to Park Royal and to the ferry terminal. However, what's more likely to happen is that after the Dunsmuir_Tunnel reaches Waterfront_station, the line will continue east. 

https://evelazarus.com/the-dunsmuir-tunnel 

https://buzzer.translink.ca/2022/04/new-tunnel-technology-will-transform-your-skytrain-trip/ 

https://searcharchives.vancouver.ca/construction-progress-photo-of-cpr-dunsmuir-tunnel-10 

https://searcharchives.vancouver.ca/construction-progress-photo-of-cpr-dunsmuir-tunnel-9

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.

 

Repairs on the Ironworkers Bridge

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/ironworkers-memorial-bridge-lane-closures-vancouver 

Unfortunatly, when this bridge was designed, there was no serious consideration to have 2 wide emergency lanes and 2 wide shoulders. Then, the Iron Bridge could have gradually been adapted to accommodate 2 bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes. At the very least, a bus, HOV and commuter train bridge should have been built next to the inadequate Iron Bridge back in the 20th century.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironworkers_Memorial_Second_Narrows_Crossing Opened August 25, 1960  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granville_Street_Bridge Opened February 4, 1954 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0c/View_of_downtown_Vancouver_from_the_Granville_Street_Bridge.JPG/960px-View_of_downtown_Vancouver_from_the_Granville_Street_Bridge.JPG

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oak_Street_Bridge Opened June 29, 1957 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Oak_Street_Bridge.jpg/960px-Oak_Street_Bridge.jpg  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight_Street_Bridge Opened January 15, 1974 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/Knight_Street_Bridge.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Laing_Bridge Opened 27 August 1975 

https://evelazarus.com/third-crossing-here-we-go-again Somehow, Vancouver just never got around to building a bus and train tunnel or bridge in between the Lion Bridge and the Iron Bridge. Since Skytrain doesn't run 24 hours, there needs to be 24 hour bus lanes. 

https://www.pc.gc.ca/apps/dfhd/page_nhs_eng.aspx?id=11273 Some day, the Lion Bridge could become a nice bus and bike bridge, if a highway tunnel could ever be built under the park and beside the LGB. 

Unfortunately, the Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV) keeps getting in the way of progress. Just look at how short the Canada Line trains are.

Delays out of North Shore continue after truck stalls for hour on Lions Gate Bridge

 https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2026/02/24/stall-on-lions-gate-bridge-causing-massive-delays-out-of-north-shore/ 

The LGB bottleneck is indicative of how some people don't want Vancouver to become a properly planned functioning big city.

https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1mehud6/theres_a_single_car_stopped_in_the_only/

Unfortunatly, Vancouver still isn't allowed to function like a real proper big city. For several decades, so many key people, especially urban planners don't want to have a wider structural crossing to at least match what Prince George and Kamloops have. Or, to match what Kelowna has and especially don't want to have what Ft. McMurray has. 

Indeed, most proper major cities by now would have had a 6-8 lane tunnel right under the park and close to the LGB. Georgia Street is already 7 lanes wide in the first few bloks closest to the park, so the potential for a 7-8 lane tunnel should be possible.

An 8 lane tunnel would be best in that the 3 & 4 lane counterflow on Georgia could easily feed into an 8 lane tunnel. Then once in the tunnel there world be 3 standard lanes each way, plus a bus lane each way. 

A commuter train tunnel or an extension of the YVR-Canada Line should also run close to where the LGB is. Unfortunatly, some key people for several decades don't seem to want or understand the benefits of having a train connecting YVR with both of the regional bc-ferries terminals. That's because it could actually help to relieve transportation congestion. https://www.bcferries.com/current-conditions/TSA-SWB

It's always amazing to see what other cities around the world can do, simply because they aren't trapped within the backwards Vancouver mindset or don't have a backwater BC mentality to thwart them. 

https://www.th.gov.bc.ca/atis/lgcws/index.html 

This has to be one of the worlds best examples of bottleneck-chokepoint planning around. 

https://www.translink.ca/schedules-and-maps/skytrain A rail rapid transit connection to both ferry terminals and YVR would be a huge improvement, but it's still not likely in the foreseeable future.

Timelapse of the Skytrain-Canada Line from Richmond to the Vancouver Waterfront

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

How this new railway will reshape Auckland https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpcMBDeZo7Y Of course Auckland can eventually have 9 car trains, because they aren't like backwards Vancouver is.