If a bridge or tunnel is too narrow to accommodate bus and bike lanes, then a separate crossing should be built near it. Many bridges and highway tunnels don't have a provision for LRT or commuter rail, so then a rail crossing should be built near it.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=the+missing+element
Unfortunately, due to inept regional transportation planning, the SkyBridge (1990) wasn't built with any extra width for bus lanes, bike lanes and sidewalks. Everything was just expected to be crammed onto the inadequate, 4 lane Pattullo_Bridge, which only had 1 narrow sidewalk. Back in the day, there was no concept of allowing additional future space for 2 wide truck lanes, 2 car lanes and 2 bus lanes on the Pattullo_Bridge_in_1937.
It was as if someone really didn't want to ever have any bus lanes on the Patullo Bridge and the SkyTrain Bridge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyBridge_(TransLink)#Details
Then, it was as if someone still didn't want to have any bus lanes on the Stalewasem_Bridge as well. Since the train isnt running 24hrs, a BRT crossing is important.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalewasen_Bridge This new bridge should have opened with at least 3 lanes each way, plus a bus lane each way. However, an 8 lane bridge with 2 wide emergency lanes and 2 wide shoulders would look too much like big city infrastructure. Big city scale infrastructure is difficult to establish in backwards BC.
Decades ago, there should have already been a North Boundary Road bus and bike bridge beside the Iron-Bridge. Since the Iron Bridge wasn't widened to accommodate 2 express bus or 2 rapid bus lanes, a North Boundary Road bus and bike bridge would have been a huge improvement.
Canada is on the same planet as Australia, but seems to be on a different world. Asia, Europe and the US just don't seem to have the same overlapping restrictions as Canada and especially, BC.
Greater Vancouver should be on a similar city and port level as Brisbane, but the provincial backwater BC mindset keeps holding things back.
If Burrard Inlet isn't a suitable location for the tankers, then another location must be found. BC remains as a provincial backwater on the Pacific Rim and Canada has less than 1% of the worlds population. If it were possible, there are those in Canada who would like to just shut out the world and even shut Canada down.
Australia hasn't been able to do so much more than Canada simply because it doesn't have half of the year stuck in cold, crappy weather.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Story_Bridge 3 lanes each way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clem_Jones_Tunnel (CJT) 2 lanes each way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clem_Jones_Tunnel#Public_transport
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Story+Bridge
The+Missing+Element in backwards BC.
In contrast, Vancouver is stuck with a 3 lane LGB, with no parallel bus, truck and train tunnels. If visiting Vancouver from Brisbane, or almost any Australian city or town, you will be shocked. While Australia is allowed to have 3 big port cities on the Pacific Rim (Mel Syd & Bris), Canada has taken a Half-A$$ED approach.
While the Port_of_Prince_Rupert has a lot of potential, most of it remains as a watered down front.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Prince_Rupert#Conversion_to_an_intermodal_terminal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Harbour_(British_Columbia)#Facilities
https://gvha.ca/deep-water-terminal/terminal-information/ V-BC has potential, but its also so scaled back or watered down.
Despite Victoria wanting to remain as a quaint provincial backwater, it should eventually become a proper port city like Wellington. https://www.centreport.co.nz/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentrePort_Wellington#Containers
Port of Vancouver, BC.
https://vancouver.ca/streets-transportation/metrotown-to-north-shore-rapid-transit.aspx
Unfortunately, the Second Narrows Crossing wasn't designed to have a lower deck for BRT, or express busses and LRT. The bridge was never widened to 10 lanes, so there isn't enough space to have 2 proper BRT or express bus lanes and no HOV lanes. There was no proper planning to even have 2 emergency lanes or 2 wide shoulders.
https://www.translink.ca/plans-and-projects/projects/bus-projects/rapidbus-projects
https://vancouver.ca/streets-transportation/transportation-2040.aspx
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/george-massey-tunnel-new-replacement-cost-timeline-update
Of course with all the extra delays costs, there still won't be an LRT tube and no HOV lanes. While the new tunnel will be 4 lanes each way, there should have been an extra section for 2 LRT tracks and 2 rapid bus lanes. BC has a problem providing 24hr rapid rail transportation, so 24hr BRT is essential.
A 10 lane version of an Alex_Fraser_Bridge with a provision for LRT, could have been completed a few years ago. However, just because some people didn't want a bridge crossing that part of the river, the plan was scrapped. The result is more cost and delay in what should have been completed a few decades ago.
If ever a proper LRT and rapid bus crossing can be built parallel to the new tunnel, then that 8 lane tunnel could still have 3 general lanes each way, plus the 4th being an HOV lane. A parallel LRT and rapid bus needs to be built between Richmond and Delta so that there can be an efficient connection between YVR and the 2 ferry terminals.
Something like a Tilikum_Crossing between Richmond and Delta should have already been built decades ago, but there just isn't proper transportation planning in backwards BC.
Either an extension of an improved YVR-Canada Line, or an LRT like the C Train or MAX_Train. Since such a train won't be running 24 hours a day, there would need to be a Rapid bus_crossing as well. Such redundancy is important, especially if there is an occasional problem with the train. A Streetcar_Crossing would also be nice, because the Skytrain, LRT and BRT can't go everywhere. Where as express and local buses and streetcars can fill in the gaps.
Of course more bicycle and footpaths can be a great improvement.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Richmond-Delta+Tunnel
https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1uhkaiq/why_would_craftsman_collision_depict_the_lions/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lions_Gate_Bridge Too narrow for proper bus and HOV lanes. Not strong enough for an LRT train and express bus deck.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin_Bridge 7 lanes and 2 train tracks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_Harbour_Bridge 8 lanes and 2 train tracks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironworkers_Memorial_Second_Narrows_Crossing#Collapse
After the collapse, there was a chance that the Iron_Bridge (IwB) could have been totally redesigned, but this is BC. Its very difficult in BC to design transportation infrastructure with significant future capacity. The Iron Bridge should have been built along the lines of the 12 lane Ship_Canal_Bridge (SCB) in Seattle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_Canal_Bridge
Unlike Seattle and Washington State, so much in BC is built to a provincial backwater standard. Thus, nothing on the scale of the SCB has ever been allowed in BC. https://pauldorpat.com/2014/05/17/seattle-now-then-the-ship-canal-bridge Sunce an LRT line wasn't possible for the SCB, it runs sort of parallel in a tunnel to the UW. Of course LRT to UBC is still an incomplete BC pipe dream.
The IwB should have had at least 8 lanes on an upper deck and 4 lanes on a lower deck for extra bus and truck lanes. There should have also been a provision for 2 LRT tracks on a lower deck, but that would be properly planning for the future.
Unfortunately, the Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV) ruined the Burrard-Bridge. The Burrard_Street Bridge (BSB) opened with 6 lanes and a lower level provision for a double track streetcar crossing.
Foolishly, because the city didn't want to build a parallel bike bridge, 2 lanes were removed from the BSB. This has made it very unlikely that the BSB will be able to have 2 bus lanes. No lower level streetcar crossing was ever built. Yet, a streetcar line on both side of False Creek could have been a nice thing to have up and running. Ironically, Vancouver was one of the first cities to get rid of its streetcars and will likely be one of the last to bring them back. The VMV is such a horrible thing, yet it officially doesn't exist.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Second+Narrows+Bridge
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/future-vision-green-line-9.7230961
A bus bridge or bus link can be used whenever an LRT line is truncated, or yet to be completed. However, BRT is also used before the potential of putting in an LRT line.
Then there is an actual bus-bridge. When an existing bridge is too narrow for proper bus lanes, especially BRT, then a bus-bridge can be a big improvement.
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.
Apparently, 2 of the 3 Skytrain bridges were never designed to also accommodate bikes.
Unfortunately, all 3 Skytrain bridges weren't designed to have any express bus lanes, never mind any for a proper rapid bus network.
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.
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.
Unfortunately, due to the decades of inept regional transportation planning, no bus bridge or BRT tunnel was ever built next to the D Island Tunnel. While the new tunnel is supposed to have 2 bus lanes, there won't be any HOV lanes and especially no provision for LRT.
Ultimately, the YVR-Canada Line should be extended to Ladner and the Tsawwassen Ferry terminal. A special train bridge or tunnel should be built with a provision for 2 BRT lanes, since BC doesn't seem to want a 24hr Skytrain.
Was a 450 foot height restriction just by chance, or was it intentionally made to be very close to 451 Fahrenheit? Despite being around the same size as Paris, Boston & SF, Vancouver remains as a very restrictive city.
Any tall building in SL City is under 450 feet. Honolulu is still stuck around the 450 foot maximum, while San Diego is stuck at 500 feet. Even Rio DeGennaro still has shorter buildings than Vancouver, BC. Washington, DC has strict height limitations like Paris. However, W,DC could eventually set up their own equivalent of La_Defense. Its a fine example of allowing tall buildings just beyond the city limits.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451 (1953) By the 1950s, so many things were already banned, watered down or scaled back in provincial backwater Vancouver. Generations later, there was the No Fun City mind virus that further tried to cancel out things in such a small city with so much red tape and other ridiculous obstacles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451_(1966_film) By the mid and late1960s, the city made sure that its first office tower to have more than 29 floors wouldn't be until the 1970s. Its highly doubtful that Vancouver will have an office tower at, or over 40 stories by 2030. However, Burnaby and Surrey could, because they aren't under the extreme restrictions of the Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV).
It wasn't until 1973 when Vancouver allowed its first building to be taller than the Los_Angeles_City_Hall. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_City_Hall
The Scotia_Tower (stump) is a good reference point to visualize the small scale of backwater Vancouver, as its about the same height as the Los_Angeles_City_Hall at 453'.
https://www.skyscrapercenter.com/building/scotia-tower/4396 453'
https://skyscraperpage.com/b65/vancouver/the-scotia-tower 452'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Wall_Centre It opened in 2001 at 157.8 m (518 ft). Its 49 feet shorter than the Philadelphia_City_Hall.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_City_Hall Opened in 1901 at 548 ft (167 m).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit_451_(2018_film) By 2018 it was quite apparent that Vancouver was in the process of allowing for more buildings over 450 feet. However, nothing has been permitted to reach 700 feet, so far. A tower over 1000 feet would help to water down its provincial mindset.
_(cropped).jpg/3840px-Vancouver_panorama_(49988799796)_(cropped).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.
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.
.jpg/3840px-Vancouver_sunset_(J).jpg)
Australia like the USA, has some big & tall cities on the Pacific Rim. However, Vancouver symbolically kept watering down its size, because that's how you demonstrate a reluctance towards proper urban planning & growth.
Oddly enough, the imposed small scale Vancouver mentality & agenda wasn't adopted by most cities around the world. Officially, there is no Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV), but somehow something like it keeps manifesting, just like the BCMV.
Despite its size, Canada has less than 1% of the worlds population. Its been difficult enough just for Canada to even have half of 1% of the worlds population.
One expects Melbourne and Sydney to be proper big cities. However, Australia has big stuff at both ends of the country.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Leo_Hielscher_Bridges#Design Its a 12 lane crossing in Brisbane.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrows_Bridge_(Perth) 10 lanes with 2 commuter train tracks in the middle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brisbane_Skytower It has 90 floors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q1_(building) Almost has 80 floors.
Perth Central_Park_(skyscraper) at 51 floors and 108_St_Georges_Terrace at 50. Very restrictive Vancouver still won't permit any office tower to have a 40th floor. Calgary and Seattle each have a few over 50 stories.
So far, provincial Halifax hasn't been allowed to be on a similar scale as Boston and Montreal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_L._Macdonald_Bridge 3 lanes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._Murray_MacKay_Bridge 4 lanes.
The scale of Vancouver is kept below that of Calgary & Seattle or even Auckland, in some ways.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lions_Gate_Bridge A classic 3 lane BC bottleneck-chokepoint. No parallel bus and truck tunnels and especially, no LRT tunnel.
Provincial backwater Victoria isn't allowed to be on a similar scale of Wellington, NZ.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_Street_Bridge Another BC 3 lane wonder.
BC bottleneck-chokepoint planning is out of control. This new bridge not only should have had 2 wide emergency lanes, 2 wide shoulders and especially 2 bus lanes, since the Skytrain isn't a 24 hour system. Congestive transportation planning is absurd and of no benefit to anyone. However, as a symbolic demonstration of a reluctance towards proper big-city infrastructure, its right on the mark for backwards BC. Of course the bridge wasn't designed for a future lower deck, because properly planning for the future is very difficult in backwater BC.
https://www.pattullobridgereplacement.ca/about/projectoverview/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stal%CC%95%C9%99w%CC%93as%C9%99m_Bridge
https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2026/05/24/vancouver-school-set-to-open-is-already-over-capacity/
Almost any big & medium size building in Vancouver should be designed with the possibility of adding more floors in the future. But that would be a little like designing bridges to eventually accommodate a couple of bus lanes, or even LRT. Thinking big and applying big-city planning in backwards BC is always difficult.
Time in backwater BC doesn't matter, the old bridge just had 4 lanes and the new bridge will only have two lanes each way for quite a while. Of course no bus and HOV lanes, no wide emergency lanes and no wide shoulders. That would go against the BC bottleneck-chokepoint planning mentality. Just like an absurd 2 car train for the Canada Line and a 3 lane Lion Bridge with no bus and train tunnels to help it.
Apparently, narrow bridges and short trains are better for backwards BC.
That's the BC Mind Virus (BCMV) at work once again.
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://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z64SisMwIuY
Another illogical lane reduction project. Broadway was for the most part, always 6 lanes, 7, if you count the turning lane at major intersections. The train isn't a 24 hour service, so its important to always have 1 bus lane each way, especially if the train is shut down for an occasional emergency. Then there still should be 2 general lanes each way, because this isn't supposed to be a small town street or avenue.
This, combined with so many 4 lane bridges, ensures that BC bottleneck-chokepoint planning remains firmly entrenched.
A 5 car Vancouver train is expected to do the job of a 9 car Montreal Metro train. That's because a short Vancouver train can run a little more frequently than a 9 car Montreal Metro train, during even the most busy times of the day. Of course many proper cities have long big-city trains, because they aren't under anything like small thinking Vancouver, or a backwater BC mentality.
The standard short trains, narrow bridges & narrow streets and short buildings, are all part of holding the scale of Vancouver back. Apparently, if you can't build a wall around Vancouver, the next best thing is to continually plan and build symbolically for a provincial backwater of a city.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Selective+Door+Operation
https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2026/05/14/granville-bridge-death-was-preventable-say-advocates/
While the Granville+Bridge needs to have a higher fence like the Burrard+Bridge, there is another remaining pending danger.
There is no central safety barrier to prevent head-on collisions. Whether a person becomes disoriented, or actually wants to crash into traffic from the opposite direction, there is no traffic divider.
The sidewalks could have been made a little wider in a way that there still could have been enough space for a traffic divider.
https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1td85mt/iio_investigates_womans_death_after_ninehour/
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Granville+Bridge Was 8 lanes, now 6, but with 2 bike lanes and wider sidewalks.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Burrard+Bridge Was 6 lanes, now 4, but with 2 bike lanes & already good sidewalks.
Unfortunately, both bridges have no middle safety barrier to prevent head-on collisions, despite their recent modifications.
The Pattullo+Bridge was too narrow to ever have a traffic divider. Fortunately, its 4 lane replacement does have a central divider.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Knight+Street+Bridge Only 4 lanes in the middle, but has a traffic safety barrier. The KSB really needs a bus and bike bridge next to it.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Oak+Street+Bridge A traffic divider was eventually installed, but the narrow bridge was never designed to have 2 emergency lanes, or 2 wide shoulders. There especially was no consideration to have 2 bus lanes on the OSB. Since there is no 24 hour train service to the airport, there should be a parallel bus and bike bridge.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Arthur+Laing+Bridge While it does have a traffic divider, there are no wide emergency lanes or wide shoulders. There isn't even enough space for 2 bus lanes. Thus, a bus and bike bridge really should be built next to it.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-mayor-city-climate-bylaws
So, after all threes years, no money went towards a city and a regional bus bridge network. The existing bridges are too narrow to accommodate 2 express bus lanes, so there should have been parallel bus bridges built by now.
The Canada Line wasn't designed to have at least 5 car trains, only a 2.5 car joke of a train, someday. Since 2009, only 2 car trains have been running, when there should have been 3. Despite the ridiculously short stations, there should have been modifications to have at least 3 full-size cars by now. Its as if not enough funds still haven't been put towards such a short train , since 2009.
