The Great SkyTrain upgrade (potential)

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

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

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

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

Some Canada Mega-projects Under Construction

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

All cables and final steel girders now installed for new Pattullo Bridge

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/pattullo-bridge-construction-milestone-cables-deck Unlike the old, inadequate bridge, which only has 4 narrow lanes and just 1 sidewalk, this will have 2 sidewalks and 2 bike lanes. Unfortunatly, there won't be any bus or HOV lanes. Thus, all the traffic will be funneled into just 2 lanes each way. Of course there won't be any emergency lanes or breakdown lanes, so this is another quintessential BC bottleneck by design. At least a provision for a lower deck would have provided some hope. While this bridge can eventually be widened to 6 lanes, there seems to be no serious consideration for there to be bus and HOV lanes. So it will end up like the overloaded 6 lane Iron Bridge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyBridge_(TransLink) No bike lanes and sidewalks and it wasn't built wide enough to eventually accomodate 3-4 tracks and 2 bus lanes. There is just something about backwards BC that makes it so obtuse and inept. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1d/SkyBridge_from_SkyTrain_%285770458210%29.jpg/500px-SkyBridge_from_SkyTrain_%285770458210%29.jpg At the very least, this bridge should have had 3 tracks and 2 bus lanes, a bike lane and a sidewalk on a lower deck. There is only a middle service track and apparently, no provision for a bike lane and a sidewalk.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Westminster_Bridge Still, only a single track bridge for freight and passenger trains. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/New_Westminster_Swing_Bridge.jpg/960px-New_Westminster_Swing_Bridge.jpg This old single track bridge should have been double tracked on a lower deck and have at least 4 lanes on an upper deck. Then when the first 4 lane Pattullo Bridge opened, it might not have been quite as overloaded in its later decades. 

In order for this joke of a river railway crossing to be properly upgraded and efficient is for there to be at least a new double track bridge.  

NW should have really had something like its own version of the Steel_Bridge in Portland. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/51/Amtrak_talgo_train_crossing_steel_bridge.jpg/960px-Amtrak_talgo_train_crossing_steel_bridge.jpg Fortunatly, Portland didn't have a provincial backwater mentality like NW. Thus, they could build a lot more bridges. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/80/SteelBridgePano1.jpg/960px-SteelBridgePano1.jpg MAX light rail on the upper deck and Amtrack and freight trains on the lower deck. Fortunately, Oregon is far enough away from ever catching the BC Mind Virus. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e3/Aerial_view_of_Willamette_River_crossings_in_Portland%2C_February_2018.JPG So many nice bridges in Portland.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/Fraser_River%2C_Surrey_-_panoramio_%281%29.jpg/960px-Fraser_River%2C_Surrey_-_panoramio_%281%29.jpg 

Look at the lack of bridges between NW and Surrey.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3d/Portland_OR_aerial.jpg/960px-Portland_OR_aerial.jpg Portland is a city that really exists on both sides of the river.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0a/New_Westminster_Aerial_view_2015.jpg/960px-New_Westminster_Aerial_view_2015.jpg For most of the history of NW, Surrey was just some farmland south of the river with not much going on, but its many times larger than little NW. 

There just didn't seem to be that much a big city vision for little provincial backwater NW. Back in the day, NW could have acquired what would become the Tri-Cities and perhaps, even Surrey. There just wasn't any desire to have a big river city in BC on the scale of Portland,_Oregon. So while NW is stuck as a tiny city, Surrey is on its way to becoming the biggest city in BC.

Unfortunately, the Iron Bridge and Granville Bridge were never designed to have a lower deck for trains and buses either. That's just how it is in backwards BC. 

Majority polled in Calgary and Edmonton are unhappy with the pace of population growth

 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/too-much-too-fast-majority-polled-in-calgary-edmonton-unhappy-with-pace-of-population-growth-9.6935121 

If you are visiting Vancouver or Victoria from Calgary or Edmonton, you will be shocked as to how narrow most of the bridges are in Greater Vancouver and Victoria. Edmonton was wise in the 1970s to have 125 m long underground LRT stations. Foolish Vancouver opted to only have 80 m stations on its first 2 lines and an absurd 50 m for the 3rd line. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Line_(Calgary) , https://www.calgary.ca/green-line.html 

https://www.calgarytransit.com/plans---projects/lrt/green-line.html

https://engage.calgary.ca/greenline/UndergroundStations Fortunatly, any underground stations in Calgary will be closer in length to that of the Edmonton LRT and not backwards Vancouver.

https://www.railjournal.com/regions/north-america/tunnel-preferred-for-calgary-lrt-green-line/

https://www.tunnelsandtunnelling.com/news/calgary-city-council-approves-green-line-lrt-construction/?cf-view

https://www.calgary.ca/green-line/stations.html

https://www.tunnelsandtunnelling.com/news/calgary-city-council-approves-green-line-lrt-construction/?cf-view 

The main roads and bridges in urban parts of Alberta are allowed to be wider than their counterparts in backwards BC. So while people in the urban parts of Alberta are concerned or even angry about rapid growth, at least Alberta can easily build more urban infrastructure. That's because Albertal isn't affect by the (unofficial) BC Mind Virus (BCMV). 

A timely example is a new bridge between Surrey & NW. Despite Surrey being expected to become the largest city in BC, the new bridge will only open with 4 lanes. No 3rd or 4th lane each way for busses, HOVs and trucks. Thus, all the road traffic at either end is funneled into just 2 lanes each way. Plus, there are no breakdown or emergency lane, just like the old bridge.   

While this new bridge can eventually be widened to 6 lanes, there is no provision for a lower deck for LRT, busses and trucks. Despite SW BC being a seaport area, trucks are funneled onto mostly narrow bridges. There has been a lack of interest to build bus bridges next to almost all of the bridges in Greater Vancouver. Yet, there is a Half-A$$ED attempt to have a better regional express bus network. This regional Rapid Bus attempt will always be a joke, unless a series of bus bridges are built. The Half-A$$ED approach is to try to have bus lanes on 4 to 6 lane bridges. Designating 2 bus lanes would reduce the narrow bridges to only 1 or 2 lanes each way for general traffic in what is suppose to be a major seaport and urban area.   

Most of the worlds population is non-white and for a big part of the history of BC, there has been a refusal to build up bigtime infrastructure for everyone. While some Albertains might wish that there was a wall built around their province or a force-field like out of Star Trek, BC is almost pretending like there is. Thus, the keep things small and backwards mentality. 

Several decades ago, BC implemented a symbolic slow-growth approach. Despite BC not having any control over immigration, or trying to establish an internal passport & checkpoint system, to KEEP PEOPLE OUT, it opted for the next best thing. Stunt or scale back the urban infrastructure to project a strong symbolic reluctance to growth and thinking big. 

When you realize how much larger things are allowed to be in Alberta, Washington State and even Western Australia & compare them to watered down BC, you see quite a difference. Despite BC & Canada in general, being multicultural, BCs cities keep finding ways to water the scale of things down. Canada has yet to have even 1% of the world's population, despite its size.  

While there are good arguments to occasionally slowdown immigration, that can eventually become problematic, just like too much immigration. Even in the 2020s, some people in the former White colonial parts of the world still wish that Canada & Australia, etc., could be a White Man's paradise. However, that seems so impractical on a planet that mostly has a non white population. 

https://humanrights.ca/story/chinese-head-tax-and-chinese-exclusion-act

https://thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chinese-head-tax-in-canada 

https://royalalbertamuseum.ca/blog/chinese-head-tax-george-yees-story 

https://www.musee-mccord-stewart.ca/en/blog/chinese-exclusion-act/

https://parks.canada.ca/culture/designation/evenement-event/exclusion-chinois-chinese

https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/campaigns/asian-heritage-month/important-events.html

https://stanleyparkvan.com/stanley-park-van-monument-komagata-maru.html

https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2022/10/05/vancouver-komagata-maru-memorial

https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2023/01/30/vancouver-komagata-maru-memorial-vandalism/

Even if Alberta were to eventually become its own country, it would be extremely unlikely that it could ever impose a White Man's Paradise Agenda. The same could be stated for backwards BC. However, something very peculiar has been happening in BC for several generations. 

Several BC cities and municipalities play off each other with various slow-growth agendas. Vancouver being one of the most restrictive & backwards on the the planet. Somehow the legitimate anti freeway fears of the 1960s & 70s didn't get the city & region to still build a series of bus & HOV bridges. Plus, a long-term, high capacity urban rail system.

While Montreal planned for 152.4 m stations to accomodate 9 car trains, backwards Vancouver only built 80 m Skytrain stations for the first 2 lines. Then to top that, was a plan to build a line to Richmond with only enough level clearance for 50 m stations. The 1st line only started to run 5 car trains in 2025. Eventually, the 2nd line will also have 5 car trains. However, the line to the airport was deliberately designed not to have 5 car trains. Just a Half-A$$ED 2.5 car train, someday. WTH?

For Greater Vancouver to mostly have narrow bridges, one would think the all the stations could ultimately be at least as long as a Montreal Metro train station. Indeed, Greater Vancouver should have built for 10 car trains, but will only have 5 car trains on the 1st  two lines & a 2.5 car joke of a train on the 3rd line. As of 2025, the 2nd & 3rd lines are still only running 2 car trains. Such a great way to symbolically show the resistance to eventually link YVR to both of the main BC ferry terminals. 

The inadequate 3 lane Lion Bridge still has no bus & HOV tunnels near it. Urban parts of Australia never seemed to have a similar reluctance to build tunnels as does backwards Vancouver. Tunnels for Montreal & Seattle aren't a problem either. At least BC is slated to have a new and improved tunnel by 2030, that's only a couple of generations late.   

Oh, if only people would stop moving to BC, especially Vancouver & Victoria. Well, that's not the case, its just that various BC cities want to only build urban infrastructure that is inadequate. Despite the frustrations that some people have in Alberta, at lest wider bridges, longer trains & taller buildings are allowed there. This watering things down in BC approach is symbolically indicative to refuse to properly build for a growing population. 

Surrey should have already had at least 1 hospital the size of VGH. At least Surrey like Burnaby, can build up taller in what is still mostly a mountain wilderness province. 

BC is a long way from New England & Southern Quebec. The restrictive urban planning measures in Greater Vancouver keep preventing it from becoming a proper big metropolitan area like Greater Boston and Montreal. 

Calgary and Edmonton each should have hand an airport+line by now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Line_(MBTA) Calgary will have its own version of a Green Line, eventually. https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Calgary+Green+Line

From the old and inadequate Fraser Street Bridge to the inadequate KSB

Somewhere in between 1950 & 1960, the old Fraser_Street_Bridge (FSB) should have been replaced with a new 4 lane bridge, with 2 very wide sidewalks for bikes & a future provision for 2 bus lanes. Vancouver needs a street and transit connection with No. 5 Rd. in Richmond. Unfortunatly, backwards Vancouver has always been a city without a proper big city transportation vision.

https://evelazarus.com/the-fraser-street-swing-span-bridge

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraser_Street_Bridge_(1894)#Provincial_government_headache

https://www.richmond-news.com/local-news/photos-and-video-was-this-the-unluckiest-bridge-between-richmond-and-vancouver-4475444

https://search.nbca.unbc.ca/index.php/fraser-st-road-bridge-in-vancouver-bc-1 In the late 1800s, just being able to have a bridge roadway width of 2 wagon-roads in backwater BC was amazing. Then, decades & even several generations later, any BC bridge that could provide 2 wagon-roads each way was even more amazing. 

https://structurae.net/en/structures/fraser-avenue-street-bridge

As usual, Vancouver & BC lost & messed up an opportunity to have 2 great new bridges.

https://structurae.net/en/structures/knight-street-bridge (KSB)

https://evelazarus.com/the-knight-street-bridge-part-2

Once again, the lack of a proper big city vision resulted in the inadequate design for the 4 lane Knight+Street+Bridge (KSB). However, it makes sense from a bottleneck congestive planing mentality. Despite Vancouver being part of what is suppose to be a major port region and in need of proper transportation corridors, the Knight_Street_Bridge is a classic chokepoint.

https://www.richmond-news.com/local-news/work-on-knight-street-bridge-in-richmond-below-deck-as-well-7319230

Just because the Knight_Street_Bridge started out as a 4 lane joke, there immediately should have been 2 wide shoulders, which could have eventually become 2 extra bus lanes. Plus, there should have been a future provision to add 2 HOV lanes. Two wide sidewalks & 2 wide bike lanes. However, that would go against the congestive planning mentality of Vancouver & BC.

Indeed, by deliberately planning the KSB to be a 4 lane chokepoint and not building a new Fraser+Street+Bridge, there clearly was no interest to have proper dedicated bus lanes in that part of the Greater Vancouver Region. With so many inadequate, narrow bridges, there should be bus & HOV lane bridges to help improve regional transportation.

A regional express bus system or a rapid bus network requires dedicated lanes. The LGB should have 2 bus lanes & 2 HOV lanes in a tunnel near it. The Iron Bridge, OSB & KSB, all should have a 4 lane bus & HOV bridge next to them. That would allow for a rapid bus lane each way & a HOV lane each way.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=old+and+new+narrow+bridges

The original Second Narrows Bridge and its replacement

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Narrows_Rail_Bridge#Original_bridge_(1925) This is a smaller bridge than what was originally planned. Of course, that's the backwards BC way.

 https://www.nsnews.com/in-the-community/time-traveller-the-first-second-narrows-bridge-1925-3118875

https://vancouversun.com/news/this-week-in-history-1930-the-first-second-narrows-bridge-was-a-disaster-magnet-for-ships

https://www.northshoreheritage.org/blog/2023/11/23/bridge-over-burrards-water

https://searcharchives.vancouver.ca/second-narrows-bridge-vancouver-b-c-opened-november-7th-1925-2

https://search.nbca.unbc.ca/index.php/second-narrows-bridge-in-vancouver-bc-6

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Narrows_Rail_Bridge (1969)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thornton_Tunnel#History Unfortunatly, the new tunnel & bridge weren't designed to be wide enough to eventually accommodate a parallel track. Thus, N. Vancouver & Vancouver are still in the single track crossing trap, just like NW & Surrey are. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=old+and+new+narrow+bridges 

Old and new narrow bridges in BC

The New_Westminster_Bridge opened in 1904 and in typical backwater BC style, it was too narrow to do the job, right from the start. Not only should the bridge have been double-tracked, there should have been at least a 2 lane upper deck. At least having a provision for 2 tracks and more than just a 1 lane wagon road. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/Fraser_River_Bridge%2C_New_Westminster%2C_BC.jpg

https://historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/?bridgebrowser=britishcolumbia/newwestminsterrailwaybridge/

http://archives.newwestcity.ca/Results.aspx Thats all you got back then, just a 1 lane wagon road.

http://archives.newwestcity.ca/Results.aspx? Despite the bridge being required to handle passenger trains as well as freight trains, everything is funneled into a single track, even well over a century later.

http://archives.newwestcity.ca/Results.aspx?AC Had there been some real forward planning, there should have been at least 4 wagon lanes on the upper deck & at leas 3 tracks on the lower deck.

Unfortunatly, NW only saw itself as a provincial capital backwater & that also became the case when the BC capital was relocated to Victoria. 

http://www.trainweb.org/oldtimetrains/photos/bridges/Vancouver_area.htm

https://www.newwestrecord.ca/local-news/looking-back-and-looking-forward-pattullo-bridge-opened-85-years-ago-today-6106270 It must have been amazing to finally have a bridge with 4 wagon roads. Unfortunatly, there was no provision for a lower deck to accommodate interurban tram-trains & trucks. https://historicbridges.org/bridges/browser/?bridgebrowser=britishcolumbia/pattullo

https://www.reddit.com/r/SurreyBC/comments/yhf6wg/pattullo_bridge_in_silver_grey_1957 Had there been a provision for a lower deck, then perhaps by 1960, both decks could have provided a wider 3 lanes each way.

Unlike the SHB in NSW, the Old-Pattullo-Bridge wasn't built with the same level of quality and wasn't designed to last that long.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/pattullo-bridge-new-replacement-construction-update-2024 Of course the new bridge is a year behind schedule and once again, doesn't seem to be designed with much that much future capacity in mind.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/pattullo-bridge-new-crossing-widening-six-lanes-surrey-board-of-trade Aparently, opening the new bridge with 6 lanes & a provision for a lower deck with 2 bus & HOV lanes & 2 truck lanes is too advanced thinking for BC infrastructure development. Just like the short Skytrain stations, having double deck bridges goes against the congestive planning agenda. So, the new bridge will open with only 2 lanes each way & no emergency lanes & especially no bus-HOV lanes or truck lanes for a seaport region. Thus, everything will be crammed into a 4 lane crossing. Why would such a bridge not open with enough width for 2 bus & HOV lanes? Most people in the Greater Vancouver Region know that the Skytrain isn't open 24 hours, so a good bus & HOV bridge between NW & Surrey would make sense, but this is the BC part of Canada where a lot of things don't make sense.

https://www.pattullobridgereplacement.ca/

https://www.pattullobridgereplacement.ca/about/projectoverview/

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

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=old+and+new+narrow+bridges

LRT, Semi-metro and Heavy Rail Rapid Transit...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_rail , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_rail#Types , 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_rail#Comparison_to_other_rail_transit_modes

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-metro 

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

Of course when Vancouver & the greater urban region became obsessed with keeping the roads & bridges narrow, it was as if there wasn't a proper concept of having express bus lanes & dedicated rapid bus lanes.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-funding-issues-impacts-traffic-congestion

The 1959 George_Massey_Tunnel should have opened with 3 lanes each way. Plus, 2 wide emergency lanes. Then over the course of its first 2 decades, it could have become a 6 lane crossing with 2 bus & HOV lanes. 

By the 1980s, the inept 4 lane George_Massey_Tunnel should have had a parallel higher & wider bus & HOV tunnel consisting of at least another 4 lanes & at least 2 emergency lanes. Thus making it more capable as an eventual replacement to the old tunnel. Then by around 2000, there should have been a bike, truck & train bridge or tunnel as well. 

A George_Massey_Tunnel#Replacement by 2030? The first phase of this really should have been started by the 1980s. Of course the new tunnel with 8 lanes & 2 bike lanes, won't have 2 truck lanes & there won't be 2 HOV lanes. Plus, in accordance with a perpetual congestive planning mentality, there is no provision for an extension of the Canada Line to Delta.

The new tunnel should not only have had 3 general lanes each way & 1 bus lane each way, there should be 1 truck lane each way as well. Plus, 2 wide emergency lanes which could eventually be repurpose for a north & southbound rapid bus transit corridor. That's because, even if there is ever a YVR-Canada-Line to the ferry terminal, it won't be open 24 hours.

Someday the YVR-Canada-Line should not only have 2.5 car trains, but an actual 5 car train consisting of five, 20m coaches. Selective_door_operation technology would make this possible. Of course it would have simply been much better to have designed all the stations to already be at least 100m, instead of the inept 50m. Unfortunately, backward BC thinking keeps getting in the way.

https://www.richmond-news.com/local-news/province-considering-filling-george-massey-tunnel-with-sand-8777369 Despite the old tunnels height restrictions, a slightly smaller version of the Road_Train could have been ideal for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_train#Trailer_arrangements

Keeping the old tunnel as a freight corridor between Delta & Richmond would be of tremendous benefit. Delta has the Roberts_Bank_Superport & the Tsawwassen_ferry_terminal.

Richmond has the Vancouver_International_Airport & the inept Canada_Line. 

Despite budget limits at the time, the Canada_Line should have been designed to eventually have 5 car trains & ultimately, 10 car trains. It should have been envisioned as a high capacity rail link between downtown Vancouver, YVR, Richmond & Delta. With an ultimate connection between the Tsawwassen_ferry_terminal and the Horseshoe_Bay_ferry_terminal. 

For some reason Vancouver & BC never seemed to really take off in the 1980s like Calgary, Seattle & Perth. Indeed, while Vancouver seemed to continue on its sleepwalking path after Expo_86, Brisbane really started to boom after its World_Expo_88. 

Unlike SW BC, the Brisbane Airport & seaport are much closer to each other. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org If you are from Brisbane & visiting Vancouver, you will be shocked to see such a short airport train. Being from Vancouver, its difficult to grasp how Brisbane was able to build such nice long trains. This is something to be very proud of, as it can move a lot of people in both directions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Airport_railway_station,_Brisbane This opened in 2001 & Vancouver's inept version had to be ready by 2010 with just 2 car trains. Yet, Brisbane designed their train to be high capacity capable as soon as it open for service. From a backwards BC perspective, it's amazing how Queensland is able to think & function on such a grand scale & to properly allocate the necessary funds. Who knows where so much of the funds went in BC? That's because not enough of it seems to have gone into the infrastructure. 

https:://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver_International_Airport#Rapid_transit_(SkyTrain) 

Unfortunately, this is an embarrassment line because, that's not a 4 car train, its only two, 2 car trains on a single track. How can Vancouver ever rank as a proper city & metropolitan area, when the trains are so short & most of the bridges are so narrow?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YVR-Airport_station Why have a double track station allowing for at least 155m - 200m long trains? Do it the backwards BC way with only a single track & a 50m station. This isn't just an example of extreme cost-cutting. Its not properly designing crucial transportation infrastructure for eventual high capacity. Fortunately, most proper big urban areas are able to think & build big right from the start. Case in point is Queensland.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sir+Leo+Hielscher+Bridges,+Queensland,+Australia

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/Gateway_Bridge This 6 lane & then a 12 lane crossing was possible, because Queensland isn't under anything like the backwater BC restrictions. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Leo_Hielscher_Bridges This has the potential to still have 4 lanes each way. Plus, 1 bus lane & 1 HOV lane each way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Brisbane , https://www.portbris.com.au , 

https://www.portbris.com.au/portbris-2060

Unlike backwater BC, Queensland is able to properly think, plan, invest & build for the future. Queensland just isn't hindered by anything like the BC Mind Virus (BCMV).

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=YVR-Canada+Line This is almost the worlds shortest train, because it only has 2 cars.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=old+and+new+narrow+bridges 

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

BC unveils-240-language-racism-reporting-helpline

 https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-unveils-240-language-racism-reporting-helpline-1.6906991 Too little too late?

So many restrictions were imposed in Vancouver (V-BC) during the 1960s & 70s, then also during the 1980s & 90s. This was a time in which there was still mostly White people imposing so many of the overlapping restrictions. Indeed, for most of Vancouver's history, there was a, keep it White & small mentality. That's because if enough key people could stunt & thwart the growth of Vancouver, the same would happen for BC in general. 

It is important to note that a slow growth initiative isn't necessarily of a racist nature. However, since most of the people on the planet are non-white, anything to slow down the growth of Vancouver, also slows down the growth of BC. Just look at Alberta & Washington State to see how much larger Seattle, Calgary & Edmonton have become.  

Of course over the past few decades, BC started to become more diversified. However, many of the restrictions from the days of the mostly White councils & governments, remain. There has been a multigenerational reluctance to build proper size infrastructure in BC, because that means building for non white people. It's an unfortunate & terrible echo from the old colonial days.  

Now that BC has had several years of growing diversity, there is still another agenda that could slow down the growth of Greater Vancouver & BC at large. Environmental restrictions could be used to hold BC & Canada back. It could be a clever way to continue the, KEEP THEM OUT agenda going. BC doesn't even have the population of 1 Switzerland. Canada is nowhere near containing even just 1% of the world's population. 

If Canada were to officially say that it's good to keep out most of the world, because it's good for the environment, there would be several challenges. How can so many countries with a smaller land area contain more people? Even if Canada had a dozen cities between the size of Montreal & Toronto, there would still be vast undeveloped areas.

Even if BC planned & properly built up half a dozen big cities, there would still be so much wilderness left. 

Why "Nobody" Lives In The VAST MAJORITY Of British Columbia https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdeZV_caT78

Certainly the housing shortage & the lack of building up a good level of infrastructure, has called for a reduction of immigration. While that might work for a while, at some point Canada might have to explain why its not even able to contain 1% of the world's population? Of course most of humanity happens to be non white, but that's not suppose to be an issue these days. 

Hot Singapore & dry Dubai have been able to build up big & tall, because they aren't bound by Canadian & especially, BC type restrictions. Those cities and many more, would collapse if they were somehow Vancouverized. Short trains, narrow bridges & stumpy buildings, would tremendously impede those modern, dynamic cities. 

Of course Mumbai & Lagos are HUGE 3rd world cities with major transportation issues. Yet, they have the Third_Mainland_Bridge & the Mumbai_Trans_Harbour_Link. 

Indeed, most real cities couldn't properly function with so much crammed into the 3 lane joke that is the Lions_Gate_Dridge. Bus & train tunnels should have been built there decades ago. Hower, the inept Lions-Gate-Bridge has become an enduring symbol of the reluctance of Vancouver & BC to properly plan & build for the future. Even a new or improved Iron_Bridge wont be enough.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transport_in_Mumbai#Rail

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mumbai#Cityscape Most cities around the world refuse to become  Vancouverized. Especially a modern place like Singapore, a big city in a small area. 

Switzerland is about a 23rd of the size of BC. Yet, BC doesn't even have the population of one Switzerland.

An immigration plan to attract the more wealthy people can really help to build wealth for a nation. Provided that the infrastructure is properly upgraded. Too many refugees can be a strain on a nation, thats why its imperative to mostly attract the more well off people. Unfortunately, a non-white wealthy person in Canada might cause some jealousy. So at one end of the spectrum are the wealthy immigrants & the refugees at the other. There is a middle area of migrants with general skills that can also expand the economy, but again, some people might become jealous of them.

At the end of the day, Canada still has hardly any of the worlds population & someone seems to like that. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=old+and+new+narrow+bridges

Five of Ontario's top 10 worst roads are located in the Greater Toronto Area

 https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/five-of-ontario-s-top-10-worst-roads-are-located-in-the-toronto-area-1.6903196 Of course its a good idea to make sure that the roads & streets are as smooth as possible.

The Greater_Toronto_Area is gradually becoming a vast urban region like the Chicago_metropolitan_area. So many more modes of transit must be provided for the GTA. IE, trains, HOV, bus & bike lanes. 

https://www.insauga.com/one-of-ontarios-worst-roads-is-among-the-busiest-streets-in-mississauga

Being from the BC Lower_Mainland, it's hard to believe that Canada's GTA is on its way to becoming like another Chicagoland. But then I always remember that Ontario, like Quebec & Alberta aren't under anything like the BC mentality & all of its restrictions.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/worst-roads-ontario-2024-1.7215979 

In effect, the Burlington_Bay_James_N._Allan_Skyway went from a BC like 4 lane bridge to an 8 lane Ontario crossing in the mid 1980s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burlington_Bay_James_N._Allan_Skyway#1985_twin_bridge

https://511on.ca/map/Cctv/loc06--3 Both bridges are safer than cramming everything into one crossing structure. 

https://burlingtontraffic.ca/qew-burlington-bay-james-n-allan-skyway The 4th lane each way could eventually become a bus & HOV_lane.

The 4 lane Burlington_Canal_Lift_Bridge is more like a narrow Vancouver bridge. Just 2 lanes each way with no space for an emergency lane or bus & HOV lane. That's why the Burlington_Bay_James_N._Allan_Skyway crossing is still better than any bridge within the Vancouver city limits. The skyway crossing combined with the lift bridge, provides 12 lanes, because the emergency lanes usually aren't counted. Just imagine if all that was funneled into a 4 lane Vancouver bridge. Fortunately, the backward BC bottleneck mentality has never taken over Ontario. 

While Oak Street in Vancouver has 6 lanes, the Oak_Street_Bridge was only designed to have 4 lanes. Thus, it's a fine example of the BC mentality and the multigenerational Vancouverization agenda. Vancouverization is all about watering things down & creating bottlenecks or chokepoints.

https://wikimedia.org/Oak_Street_Bridge.jpg

The narrow 4 lane bridge should have been designed with a provision to eventually be at least 8 lanes wide. 3 lanes each way, plus a bus & HOV lane each way, but that would conflict with the narrow mindedness of Vancouver. It's sad that at least a bus & bike bridge wasn't built next to it, but that would conflict with the BC bottleneck planning approach to things.

https://wikimedia.org/Oak_Street_Bridge_and_Fraser_River.jpg

https://images.drivebc.ca/bchighwaycam/pub/html/www/70.html A 6 lane street funneled into a 4 lane bridge. WTH?

The Oak_Street_Bridge really should have been opened as a 10 lane bridge. Yet, Oak_Street has only 6 lanes. A 10 lane OSB could have not only allowed for 3 lanes each way, but a bus & HOV_lane each way. Then the 5th lane each way could have been an emergency lane. 

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/driving-and-cycling/traveller-information/routes-and-driving-conditions/hov-lanes

At the very least, a HOV, bus & bike bridge should be built next to the OSB. However, the multi generational backward BC mentality just doesn't care.

The 4 lane joke that is the George_Massey_Tunnel, should have had a HOV, bus & bike bridge built next to it several decades ago. But that would have actually created better mobility & less congestion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Massey_Tunnel#Replacement Of course just like with the old tunnel, the new tunnel won't have a provision for LRT & emergency lanes. Thus, a LRT bridge would eventually have to be built next to it. Apparently, having a train from the Tsawwassen_ferry_terminal to the airport still doesn't make sense. That's just the backward BC way.

If you are from Ontario, Quebec, Alberta, the Pacific NW, Australia or just about anywhere, the watered down BC infrastructure will surprise you.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=old+and+new+narrow+bridges 

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

Much more home construction and infrastructure in Metro Vancouver is urgently needed

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/metro-vancouver-housing-starts-construction-statistics-2023

After Vancouver & the metropolitan region kept imposing so many restrictions for decades, BC is compelled to upgrade & build more infrastructure. 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/metro-vancouver-pre-sales-april-2024

The KEEP THEM OUT symbolism has been perpetuated for well over a lifetime. Especially with short trains & narrow bridges & only a half-assed bus lane network. The Cushing+Bridge in Calgary is a fine example of a new bus-bridge next to a narrow Vancouver type of bridge. The+Tilikum+Crossing+in+Portland is also a great example of the type of transit bridge that should be built next to almost all  of the narrow bridges in Metro Vancouver. Fortunately, the backward BC type of planning mentality never caught on in Calgary, Edmonton, Portland, Seattle & Montreal.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-development-permits-changes-2024 Speeding up the permits & rate of construction is a good slap in the face towards the KEEP THEM OUT agenda. It was hoped so many decades ago, that by gradually imposing so much municipal red tape & BC B$, that would help to stunt BC growth. It also helped the old colonial mentality to see less non-white people moving into BC. 

It's not that BC isn't multicultural, it's just that by slowing down the growth of the 10 largest BC municipalities, that becomes a perpetual excuse to not keep up with building more infrastructure.

The area of Switzerland or the Netherlands could fit into BC 23 times. Yet, BC doesn't even have half the population of the Netherlands. Indeed, BC doesn't even have the population of one Switzerland. 

If Metro Vancouver, Victoria, Kelowna & BC in general, would ever allow a proper scale of infrastructure, things would gradually improve. 

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

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=old+and+new+narrow+bridges

The sad joke that is Vancouver and BC, Canada

Talk about a city that continually refuses to live up to its potential. Vancouver is an incredibly small city in total area. [ 123.63 km² (47.73 sq mi) ]

The Metro_Vancouver_Regional_District_of_BC is more comparable to some of the larger cities on the planet. [ 2,878.93 km² (1,111.56 sq mi) ] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_Vancouver_Regional_District

The Lower_Mainland_of_BC is more comparable to some of the larger urban & suburban regions of the world. Thus, there is a lot of potential for growth. 

Area
• Total	36,303.31 km2 (14,016.79 sq mi)

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

Yet, somehow so many things are continually underbuilt, as if to signify & perpetuate a KEEP THEM OUT agenda. Indeed, if you can't build a wall or generate a Star Trek or Star Wars like forcefield around BC, then you build a symbolically stunted transportation infrastructure. This helps to create more congestion & frustration. Of course one has to wonder where all the money has gone over the past several decades? 

How did the KEEP THEM OUT agenda ever get started? How did the KEEP BC SMALL mentality become so firmly entrenched? That remains partially a mystery, but it's as if some kind of a vibe or energy has been continually been tapped into over the course of several generations. Somehow this thwarting force or mentality, never seemed to catch on with Alberta, Washington_(state), Ontario & Quebec... 

1886 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver#Incorporation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1886_Vancouver_anti-Chinese_riots (1886) A classic case of government & corporate mentality of the day, using one group of people over another. 

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/03/questions-and-answers-migrant-worker-abuses-uae-and-cop28#:~:text=Even%20though%20migrant%20workers%20primarily,Rights%20Watch%20has%20extensively%20documented. Unfortunately, this still happens all over the world.

Unlike so many big cities, Vancouver seemed to have a reoccuring backwater mentality right from the start. While Vancouver & Canada in general have become multicultural over the recent decades, a provincial backwater mentality was ideal for Vancouver, back in the day. The old White colonial mentality just didn't see indigenous & other non-white people as that important or even necessary.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Oriental_riots_(Vancouver) 1907 https://www.canadashistory.ca/explore/settlement-immigration/the-lessons-of-the-anti-asiatic-riot

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komagata_Maru_incident (1914)

Of course Canada, Australia & other White European colonies eventually had to accept that most of the world is non-white. Thus, maintaining a White Only Policy didn't fit in with the world's demographics.

https://www.canadashistory.ca/explore/settlement-immigration/not-just-immigrants

https://www.canadashistory.ca/explore/books/harriet-s-legacies

However, suppose that a  gordian knot of overlapping restrictions, red tape & other B$, could gradually be imposed throughout the White BC of the 1950s & 60s. Then even more Vancouver & BC restrictions in the 1970s & 80s, in spite of multicultural immigration. Of course Southern Ontario & Southern Quebec grew rapidly, because that's where most of the urbanization-and-industry is in Canada. Then by the 1990s, Vancouver should have been building things to the scale of Montreal in the 1970s & 80s. 

Instead, the first 2 Skytrain lines were built to only be about half the length of a Montreal Metro station & the 3rd line (the Canada+Line) with only 50 m stations. No bus bridges were ever built next to the existing narrow bridges. It's all about creating congestion, instead of properly planning to handle more capacity in BC. 

"One was that superhighways created new traffic as much as they relieved old bottlenecks; by 1972 bypass highways like the 401 were multi-laned traffic jams of bumper-to-bumper vehicles at first during rush hours and eventually for almost the entire day.

Improving connections between the city and its outskirts only prompted more people to move away or use the roads more frequently.

The other problem was that freeways constructed in populated areas could be built only by tearing down existing housing and devastating neighbourhoods. An extended period of Toronto opposition finally managed to stop construction of a projected expressway in 1971, which brought to a symbolic end the period of unrestricted and unplanned expansion in the city. In Vancouver at about the same time, proposals to extend the Trans-Canada Highway into the city’s centre, virtually demolishing many neighbourhoods — including the traditional Chinatown district — were fought to a standstill. https://www.canadashistory.ca/explore/arts-culture-society/home-sweet-suburb

 https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/real-estate-news/vancouver-one-of-the-most-resilient-cities-for-commercial-real-estate-8561663

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/800-granville-street-vancouver-proposal-office-cancelled Yet, once again, another project was cancelled, due to the slow planning & processing pace of the city.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=SkyTrain-Canada+Line

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=old+and+new+narrow+bridges

The new Île aux Tourtes Bridge in Montreal

"The new two-span bridge, with three lanes in each direction, a shoulder wide enough for buses and a multipurpose path for pedestrians and cyclists, will be built just to the north of the current bridge..." https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/construction-is-underway-on-the-new-ile-aux-tourtes-bridge

It's always nice to see when another city doesn't Vancouverize its bridges. 

https://globalnews.ca/news/10163545/construction-new-ile-aux-tourtes-bridge-ahead-of-schedule/

At least the old ...Tourtes_Bridge was designed to have 6 lanes, but the new bridge will be able to accomodate 8 lanes. Thus, the 4th lane each way will be for buses & potentially other HOV.  Unlike in Vancouver, no 4th lane each way is allowed, even though that would allow for better efficiency with express bus & BRT. Apparently in Vancouver, its better to cram everything into inept & narrow bridges. Indeed, Vancouver is the epitome of bottleneck planning.

https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/off-island-residents-fed-up-as-work-on-ile-aux-tourtes-continues-1.6681316

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal#Transportation

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=old+and+new+narrow+bridges

Congestive urban planning in backwards BC

Most bridges in Greater Vancouver are so narrow, because there was no provision to have bus and HOV lanes. The+Lion+Bridge+and+The+Iron+Bridge are 2 classic examples of not constructing additional infrastructure to accommodate bus lanes, HOV lanes and especially, rail rapid transit. That's because such improvements would actually go against the congestive urban planning agenda. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lacey_V._Murrow_Memorial_Bridge , https://www.historylink.org/file/21298 A narrow 4 lane BC type bridge was upgraded to an 8 lane crossing, plus 2 LRT tracks for WA. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrows_Bridge_(Perth) From a basic bridge to a nice 10 lane crossing with 2 train tracks for WA. https://structurae.net/en/structures/narrows-bridge Its great that the horrible backwards Vancouver mentality never made it to Perth. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-13/perth-narrows-bridge-60-years-since-construction/11697812 Unfortunately, Vancouver & BC have done their damndest to prevent a similar nice, wide crossing, which also includes 6_car_trains. While backwards Vancouver & BC didn't want to build wider infrastructure simply to accomodate more drivers, the funds didn't seem to go towards a regional rapid bus or at least an express bus & HOV network with its own set of bridges. The SkyTrain should have been designed with a provision to eventually have stations at least as long as those on the Montreal Metro, which can accomodate 9 car trains on a 500 ft platform or 152.5 m. https://heritage.engineersaustralia.org.au/wiki/Place:Constructing_Narrows_Bridges  

The old Champlain_Bridge_in Montreal just had 3 lanes each way & no provision for a train. Where as the new Samuel-De_Champlain_Bridge provides 4 lanes each way & has 2 REM train tracks. https://www.samueldechamplainbridge.ca Fortunately, Montreal, like Seattle & Perth was able to have a nice wide bridge with 2 train tracks in the middle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel-De_Champlain_Bridge#Construction_method 

Montreal, Seattle & Perth are allowed to exist on a larger scale than backwards Vancouver, because they don't have the same imposed restrictions. Urban Quebec and urban WA are able to do so much more, because they aren't hindered by anything like the backwards BC mentality. 

Risk assessment model of bottlenecks for urban expressways using survival analysis approach https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S235214651730474X 

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Bunbury+WA+6230,+Australia/@-33.3399232,115.6694676,430a,35y,44.83t/data=!3m1!1e3!4m15!1m8!3m7!1s0x2a39279b2423314b:0x500f638247a10a0!2sVancouver+Peninsula+WA+6330,+Australia!3b1!8m2!3d-35.0599149!4d117.9307564!16s%2Fg%2F11fmh3xt4l!3m5!1s0x2a2e1d48f5a47b23:0x500f638247a1470!8m2!3d-33.3270366!4d115.6408605!16zL20vMDEycTcx?entry=ttu

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Perth+and+Seattle

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

Canada Line is so under-built

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

50 m short SkyTrain-Canada+Line stations are so symbolic of the reluctance to have Montreal Metro & Toronto Subway length stations that are 152.5 m or 500 feet long. 

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

To allow Montreal & Toronto size stations in Greater Vancouver would be indicative of accepting & planning for big city type growth. Indeed, all the SkyTrain stations were deliberately built to be shorter than any underground stations in Edmonton, Seattle & Portland. Even the new underground stations in Calgary will be longer, that's because Calgary, like so many other proper cities, aren't under the control of a backwards Vancouver and backwater BC type agenda.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-2017-kevin-desmond-canada-line-built-skytrain

However, Vancouver & BC are all about congestive planning. Thus, building small & narrow provides great symbolism against building big. Of course who knows where all the decades of money went, because it didn't all go into the half-size infrastructure? It's quite a strange approach, have short trains & narrow bridges, but pay full price & hope that no one notices. This is terrible for people who would like to have proper size big city infrastructure.

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/transportation-old/canada-line-underbuilt-richmond-translink-ceo-1946514

Greater Vancouver should have had all of its Skytrain stations built to be at least 500 feet or 152.45 m. There should have been bus & HOV bridges built next to all of the narrow bridges, several decades ago. However, that would conflict with the madness of Vancouverization. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line#Canada_Line_Hyundai_Rotem_specifications

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line#Stations Wow, design & build a multibillion dollar train line that can only be expanded from an absurd 2 car train upto a 2.5 car train. No need to have a provision for a 6, 8 or 10 car trains. That's what a big city would do, but Vancouver & Richmond are all about taking a congestive planning approach. That's the backwater BC way.

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/translink-adds-more-trains-to-its-canada-line-fleet

Just because the YVR-Canada+Line uses a different technology, all of the stations should have been designed to even have longer stations than the 80m stations on the first 2 SkyTrain lines. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=SkyTrain-Canada+Line

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=YVR-Canada+Line

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

Vancouver, NW and BCER history

If only Vancouver wasn't too quick to get rid of its streetcars & tram,trains in the 1950s.

However, there was just too much of a mentality to make sure that Vancouver be a perpetually stunted or thwarted city, when compared to what Melbourne, SF & Toronto can do.

NW was a provincial capital backwater & then it just continued with its small city mentality. Despite Surrey eventually becoming the largest city in backward BC, NW hardly has any bridges connecting to it. 

http://buzzer.translink.ca/2009/07/the-central-park-line-the-very-first-interurban-in-greater-vancouver

http://buzzer.translink.ca/2009/03/a-short-history-of-interurbans-in-the-lower-mainland

http://www.vancouversun.com/Pete+McMartin+return+Interurban+rail+system+with+video/8673870/story.html

http://www.railforthevalley.com

https://www.google.ca/search?q=history+of+the+old+interurban+lines+in+vancouver+and+richmond+bc&es_sm=93&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=Kq_bVJ_8FpDWoATR5oC4CQ&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAw&biw=1600&bih=799

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland,_Oregon#Transportation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel_Bridge#/media/File:A2004-002-3630-steel-bridge-18901.jpg It was as if Portland first built this single track bridge to the provincial backwater NW standard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steel_Bridge#/media/File:Amtrak_talgo_train_crossing_steel_bridge.jpg Then by 1912, a double track bridge more appropriate to Portland's standards opened. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Westminster_Bridge#/media/File:New_Westminster_Swing_Bridge.jpg Of course NW was still stuck with its narrow backwarter single track bridge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Westminster_Bridge#/media/File:TRAIN_BRIDGE_FIRE_1979-80_1.tif

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Westminster#Transportation

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=New+Westminster

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=old+and+new+narrow+bridges