Of course Greater Vancouver really needs a big city BRT network, but unless a proper series of bus and bike bridges are built, its all just a Half-A$$ED joke of an attempt.
https://www.pattullobridgereplacement.ca/about/projectoverview Of course the new bridge opened without any express bus lanes, especially no BRT corridor. Yet, Skytrain isn't a 24hr system, but a bus can be.
https://www.railforthevalley.com/tag/brt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH6Q8yWjYpM There are wider sections of freeways in the US, but the double deck GWB has the most lanes.
Wow, in backwards Vancouver, or almost anywhere in backwater BC, just having 2 lanes each way is tough enough. A consistent 3rd lane each way could be for busses and a 4th lane for HOVs. Given that Greater Vancouver is supposed to be a major port region, several of the bridges should also have a truck lane each way. However, there is only one bridge in backwards BC that has 5 lanes each way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Mann_Bridge#New_bridge Unfortunatly, it wasn't designed to have a lower deck. Such a lower deck could have had 2 freight train tracks, 2 commuter train tracks and even a provision for 2 BRT lanes.
Essentially, in any proper big urban area, the bridges should not only provide at least 3 general lanes each way, but a bus and HOV lane each way. That's 5 lanes each way, plus on some crossings that are closer to port activity, there should even be a 6th lane each way. That's the case with the Sir_Leo_Hielscher_Bridges. Unfortunately, unlike Queensland, BC has been very reluctant towards bridge duplication or twinning.
https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/bus-hov-lanes-different-2918490
https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1d3fixq/hov_and_bus_lanes_how_to_deter_abuse/
While Australia has Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane as its major Pacific Rim gateways, Canada just has provincial Vancouver, Victoria and Prince Rupert as port gateway cities.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Leo_Hielscher_Bridges#Design
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6e/Gateway_Bridge_aerial4.JPG
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Leo_Hielscher_Bridges#Duplication A 12 lane crossing.
The Port_of_Brisbane and the Brisbane_Airport are excellent port facilities in Queensland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Brisbane#Facilities
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brisbane_Airport#Rail Far away from the inept transportation planning in Greater Vancouver, Brisbane was able to do things correctly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_line,_Brisbane Unfortunatly, backwards BC just can't seem to properly plan big city type infrastructure.
The YVR-Canada_Line is a total embarrassment!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line#Stations Not 150 m, not 100 m, only a 50 m level clarence was allowed for the stations. Even the first 2 Skytrain lines only have 80 m stations, when they should have almost been twice as long.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line#Technology Aparently, the inept planning was due to cost saving measures. Thus, instead of designing the stations to be long enough to accommodate 5 car trains, they were only designed to ultimately have 2.5 car trains. Since 2009, the Canada_Line still only has 2 car joke trains.
The Tilikum_Crossing in Portland vs the North_Arm_Bridge between Vancouver and Richmond. The Tilikum_Crossing accommodates 2 bike lanes, 2 footpaths, 2 MAX-LRT tracks, 2 articulated_bus lanes and even streetcars can cross on it. Such a fine bridge just hasn't been allowed in BC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ2cYBoQXAw
https://transitapp.com/en/region/victoria-bc/bc-transit-victoria/blink-rapidbus-95
https://www.bctransit.com/blink Not simply a B-Link, its a Blink.
Several 4 lane roads and bridges in Greater Vancouver need a similar upgrade. Otherwise, just give up and only strive to have a Half-A$$ED express bus system.
Actual BRT requires its own fully separated lanes, bridges and tunnels. Unfortunately, that type of bus service in BC is still very much in the Half-A$$ED phase.
There was a time when Vancouver wasn't allowed to have any building taller than the Great_Pyramid_of_Giza, then Ulm_Minster and then the Philadelphia_City_Hall.
The Harbour_Centre had to be less than a 3rd of the CN_Tower.
The stations on the first 2 SkyTrain lines are barely 2 thirds of the length of a Montreal_Metro station.
The Canada_Line only has 50 m stations compared to the 152.5 m Montreal_Metro stations.
For too long, anything that is symbolic of a proper big city was watered down or scaled back in provincial Vancouver. Indeed, Vancouver was supposed to perpetually be a half-sized city, or even a third of what a proper size city should be. The mostly narrow bridges still have no parallel express bus bridge, or BRT bridge built next to them.
If the project actually gets built as envisioned it will be taller than First_Canadian_Place in Toronto, Columbia_Center in Seattle, and a little taller than the Sydney_Tower and the U.S._Bank_Tower_(Los_Angeles). It still won't quite be as tall as Australia_108 in Melbourne or especially the Salesforce_Tower in SF.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-solars-trolley-bus-enters-service-september-2026
Unless there is a regional plan to build proper bus-bridges, the bus system will have too many many bottlenecks and chokepoints on the mostly narrow bridges.
The 4 lane Cushing+Bridge in Calgary was too narrow and congested for efficient east-west fast buses. So, a parallel bus-bridge was constructed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/17_Avenue_SE_(Calgary)#17_Avenue_Transitway
Stubborn, backwards Vancouver refuses to follow what Calgary and several other normal cities have done. Fortunately, the Vancouver Mind Virus never reached Calgary.
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
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Victoria+Bridge
Of course a bus and bike bridge makes sense in Brisbane & Calgary. That's why they aren't allowed in backwards Vancouver.
https://www.reddit.com/r/brisbane/comments/1e98dkr/the_busway_victoria_bridge_living_up_to_its_name/
Vancouver is so lacking with bus and bike bridges. Its an ongoing part of the+missing+element in transportation planning in BC.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Eleanor+Schonell+Bridge
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Kurilpa+Bridge
https://www.google.com/maps/place/The+Neville+Bonner+Bridge
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Goodwill+Bridge
While Queensland is on the same planet as backwards BC, it might as well be on a different world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T2bL1YPEVY
In contrast, unless Greater Vancouver builds a regional network of BRT bridges, it will mostly just be another half-assed transportation joke in backwards BC.
https://www.translink.ca/plans-and-projects/projects/rapid-transit-projects/bus-rapid-transit
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The inadequate Knight+Street+Bridge is only 4 lanes wide in the middle, but has a traffic safety barrier. The KSB really needs a bike, bus and HOV bridge next to it.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Oak+Street+Bridge A traffic divider was eventually installed, but the narrow bridge was never designed to have 2 emergency lanes, or 2 wide shoulders. There especially was no consideration to have 2 bus lanes on the OSB. Since there is no 24 hour train service to the airport, there should be a parallel bus and bike bridge.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Arthur+Laing+Bridge While it does have a traffic divider, there are no wide emergency lanes or wide shoulders. There isn't even enough space for 2 bus lanes. Thus, a bus and bike bridge really should be built next to it.
https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/agriculture-shippers-call-for-replacement-of-north-shore-cn-rail-bridge-12291086 This BC bottleneck-chokepoint mentality is ridiculous!
Unfortunately, due to a lack of properly planning for future infrastructure needs, the Thornton_Tunnel and the Second_Narrows_Rail_Bridge weren't designed to be double tracked.
The New_Westminster_Bridge is also another single track, bottleneck-chokepoint.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Westminster_Bridge#Proposed_changes
https://www.nsnews.com/economy-law-politics/vancouver-council-calls-for-reopening-of-container-truck-entrance-to-port-clark-drive-11231559 More trouble and in efficient B$.
https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1t9pgs8/lions_gate_bridge_at_night_oc The classic 3 lane BC bottleneck-chokepoint. No need for a bus and commuter train tunnel around there, because that's what a proper city would do.
https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/1teae3s/another_beautiful_post
The Race To Fix The World's Most Isolated Mega-Port https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81CLKTJnw7I
In Melbourne, its just a matter of finally getting around to getting a huge port upgrade accomplished.
Unfortunately, in Vancouver things are more difficult to do. Key freight rail bridges are still only single tracked.
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.
