Major mixed-use residential, commercial, and industrial expansion of Marine Gateway

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/marine-gateway-phase-2-vancouver-pci-rezoning-application-proposal

Marine+Gateway area has the Marine_Drive_station, which all links with Bridgeport+Station , Capstan+Station , Aberdeen Station , Lansdowne+Station and Richmond-Brighouse. 

Unfortunately, being backwards BC and not Oregon, there was no vision to design the North_Arm_Bridge to be as good as something like the Tilikum_Crossing in Portland.

https://structurae.net/en/structures/north-arm-bridge

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/de/North_Arm_Bridge_shot_from_SkyTrain_3622.JPG It should have been designed in a way that it could be widened to accomodate 2 bus & 2 HOV lanes, especially since the train isnt a 24hr service. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/35/NorthArmBridge.jpg A train & bike bridge, but no provision for bus & HOV lanes. WTH? There should have been 2 bike lanes & 2 sidewalks, but this is watered down Vancouver.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6e/Tilikum_Crossing_-_bicycles_4.jpg

The Tilikum_Crossing isn't just a bus and bike bridge, it's a MAX-LRT and streetcar bridge. 

Of course the Middle_Arm_Bridge between YVR and the main part of Richmond has no bike or bus lanes. 

Skybridge and The North Arm (Train) Bridge

Officially, there isn't suppose to be a backwards BC agenda. However, the Skybridge between NW & Surrey and the North_Arm_Bridge between Vancouver & Richmond, were designed too narrow. Unfortunatly, both of these SkyTrain+bridges weren't designed to have 2 bus lanes, or even HOV lanes. Key people knew that the SkyTrain wasn't going to be running 24hrs a day. Thus, there would have to be late-night busses when the trains shut down for the night. The 4 lane Pattullo+Bridge and the 4 lane Oak+Street+Bridge don't have enough space for 2 bus lanes, not even 1, let alone any HOV lanes. Therefore, if there is any traffic disruption on such narrow bridges, a bus will be blocked.

Both the Skybridge and The North Arm (Train) Bridge should have at least had a provision for 2 bike lanes & 2 sidewalks. But BC continually lacks having a proper transportation infrastructure vision. 

It's amazing that there wasn't enough interested people to make sure that the Skybridge between NW & Surrey would have at least 1 bike lane & 1 sidewalk. It has neither, because the public was expected to just take their bikes on a single sidewalk that is narrower than some people's bathtubs on the old, inept Pattullo Bridge.

https://www.alltrails.com/trail/canada/british-columbia/north-arm-bridge-bikeway There should have been a sidewalk & a bikepath on both sides of this bridge. Plus, 2 bus lanes & 2 HOV lanes, since the SkyTrain doesn't run 24 hours a day.

https://www.canadianconsultingengineer.com/features/north-arm-bridge There just doesn't seem to be a proper level of input from the public to make sure that both rapid transit bridges & others, are designed for future capacity.

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

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=The+North+Arm+Bridge

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

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Bike+Lanes

The Erasmus Bridge (1996)

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

It carries 2 tramway tracks, 4 traffic lanes, 2 cycle tracks & 2 sidewalks. It's such a nice wide bridge.

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erasmusbrug#Gallery

https://structurae.net/en/structures/erasmus-bridge

The Tilikum+Crossing is an equally well designed bridge. Unfortunatly, such good multimodal bridges don't seem to be allowed in BC. 

If only the Cambie+Bridge and The+North+Arm+Bridge could have been built to a similar standard...

Unfortunatly, Vancouver & BC seems to be afraid to build bridges of a similar quality to the Erasmus Bridge.

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

Frigid nights in the BC Lower Mainland, but still not usually as cold as the rest of Canada

 https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/local-news/vancouver-forecast-frigid-nights-coming-as-cold-air-mass-headed-to-lower-mainland-10065523

A few freezing nights during each winter month is still pretty mild when compared to the rest of Canada. SW BC is usually the only part of Canada that can avoid weeks of horrible 24hr freezing days that most of the country has to endure. Thus, over the years, more & more people want to move to this part of Canada.

However, it seems that some people over the course of several decades really wanted to establish antigrowth symbolism in backwards BC. Indeed, there seems to have been a multigenerational agenda to keep people out of BC, or at least slow down the influx of people. Canada it self is no where from containing even just 1% of the world's population. 

The Lions+Gate+Bridge is so narrow that there should be bus & train tunnels to relieve it. 

With so many narrow bridges in BC, its as if some multigenerational power-structure didn't want to allow space for a proper regional network of express bus lanes on wider bridges. A fine example is the new Pattullo+Bridge between NW & Surrey. A bridge so narrow that there isn't enough room for 2 express bus lanes & 2 emergency lanes, let alone 2 truck lanes. 

Instead of Vancouver building an abundance of bike-bridges, lanes were removed from the existing bridges. It was almost like NW wanted to have its own symbolic version. But instead of taking 2 lanes away like on the Burrard Bridge or the Granville Bridge, the lanes on the new Pattullo+Bridge just weren't built in the first place. Thus, cars, trucks & buses will still be funneled into only 2 lanes each way.

The very narrow NW-Surrey Skybridge wasn't designed to have 2 bus lanes & 2 bike lanes & sidewalks. The same mistakes or omissions were made with the North_Arm_Bridge, but at least there is one shared bike and foot path on the narrow North-Arm-Bridge. Perhaps some day another path could be added on the east side of the bridge.

Worst of all, most of the Skytrain lines were built with only half-length stations of 80m. The Canadian embarsement Line was designed to only have 50m stations when the Montreal Metro has 152.5m long stations. Despite a provision for the new Pattullo+Bridge to eventually provide 3 lanes each way, it wasn't designed for a future lower deck. That means no provision for another Skytrain crossing or even a future LRT component.

This is all part of a congestive planning mentality.

Capstan Station on YVR-Canada Line in Richmond

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/highlights/capstan-canada-line-station-in-richmond-to-open-friday-9984359 Why design the old & new stations to eventually accomodate 8-10 car trains? The Catheter Line wasn't even designed to officially accommodate enough space for 5 car trains. Thus, in accordance with the BC antigrowth mentality or slow growth agenda, the stations were only designed to eventually just have 2.5 car trains. However, even in 2025, the Catheter Line will still only be using 2 car trains. All the SkyTrain stations should have been designed to eventually be 150.5 meters long, just like the Montreal Metro stations, with even more long-term provisions. Unfortunatly, the first 2 lines only have 80m stations & the C+Line only has a clearance for 50m stations.

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

The Vancouver_City_Centre_station is diagonally across the street from The+Bay+Building+in+Vancouver. However, despite being what is supposed to be a major underground station, its noticeably smaller than the underground train stations in Edmonton & Seattle.

It's been very difficult to get urban planners in BC to properly plan for future transportation demands. The main excuse is governmental budgetary constraints. Even if that's usually the case, at least build half the length of a proper size urban station, with a provision to eventually double or triple its length, for future demand. However, that would go against the Greater Vancouver congestion planning mentality. Thus, even if you have the skills, once you get to BC, you realize that several things are watered down & you must think small or backwards.

 https://bc.ctvnews.ca/video/c3050886-metro-vancouver-facing-population-boom With the Metro-Vancouver-population-expected-to-reach-4-million-by-2045, BC is so unprepared & inept, as usual. https://www.kelownacapnews.com/news/metro-vancouver-expected-to-push-past-4-million-by-2045-as-growth-accelerates-7717888

There seems to be an outright refusal in the Metro Vancouver Region to avoid building up to the same level of infrastructure as when Greater Toronto, Greater Montreal, Greater Seattle, Greater Sydney, Greater Melbourn & the SF Bay Area, all exceeded 4 million people.

Going into 2025, the SkyTran will still only have 2-4 car trains, not counting the old Mark 1 rolling stock. By 2025, every SkyTrain should have consisted of 6-8 car trains, not the two-car & four car congested joke that it is. 

There is no valid reason as to why the Greater_Vancouver Region can't eventually have an urban train system on par with the Montreal Metro & a regional train system that's as good & frequent as the GO Trains or the Caltrain.

The refusal to build proper bus & truck bridges to help the mostly narrow bridges, still seems to be a half-assed pipedream. Yet, the GV Region pretends that it will eventually have a good Rapid Bus Network without bus-bridges.

While the GV Region is supposed to be a major seaport, there is still a false_front approach to things. How can this false-front & half-ass approach still be the norm in backwater BC? Not only should all the freight-train bridges be at least double tracked, there should also be truck port bridges. 

The Oak_Street_Bridge, Knight_Street_Bridge & the Queensborough_Bridge are all so narrow, there is no room for truck & bus lanes. Therefore, a truck & bus bridge should be built next to all of them. Otherwise, everything can just continue to be funneled into only 2 lanes each way.

Of course the Arthur_Laing_Bridge wasn't designed to have 2 bus lanes & 2 truck lanes. Yet, a lot of trucks have to be able to get in & out of YVR. Why have any bus lanes when busses & trucks can all be funneled into only 2 lanes each way? Even though the C-Line doesn't run 24hr a day, the North_Arm_Bridge should have had two 24hr bus lanes & 2 bike lanes & a provision for a middle track. Instead, the narrow North-Arm-Bridge only has 2 tracks & just 1 bike lane.

Fortunately, watered down Greater Vancouver & backwards BC hasn't been able to get most place around the world to adopt such a ridiculously reduced infrastructure approach to things. 

The 3rd line should really be called the YVR-Canada+Line.

Officially, there is no A Line, B Line or C+Line, but that seems OK for backwards BC.  

A North Shore Skytrain on a new Ironworkers Memorial Bridge?

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/bc-united-north-shore-skytrain-ironworkers-memorial-bridge

Either a rapid-bus crossing first, or a train crossing with 2 buss lanes for whenever the train is shut down. The NW Skybridge wasn't designed to have 2 bus & 2 bike lanes & 2 footpaths. Thus, the SkyBridge to Surrey remains as a fine inept example of backward BC planning. 

The North-Arm-Bridge to Richmond was also not designed to have 2 bus lanes, 2 bike lanes & 2 footpaths. Just one combined bike & footpath. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Arm_Bridge

Unfortunately, Greater Vancouver doesn't want to provide 24hr trains. Yet, there seems to be a reluctance to have a series of regional bus-bridges, because most of the existing bridges are too narrow to have 2 extra bus lanes.

https://canada.constructconnect.com/joc/news/infrastructure/2023/07/province-planning-study-on-future-of-ironworkers-bridge

https://vancouvertraces.weebly.com/the-first-and-second-narrows-crossings.html

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Ironworkers+Memorial+Bridge

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=North+Shore+of+Greater+Vancouver