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

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

Some Urban Trains

Fortunately, Toronto & Montreal had enough vision to plan & build 152.45m or 500 foot long subway & metro stations. Even Edmonton & Seattle have much longer underground train stations than the Vancouver-Richmond train or the YVR Canada+Line. The Vancouver C-Line is a fine example of congestive & inept planning and should be studied all around the world as a warning. It could be called the, FINANCIAL DRAINAGE LINE, or the, CATHETER LINE. That's because the ridiculous 50m stations aren't even quite a 3rd of the length of the 152.5m Montreal Metro trains & stations. Thus, it will be difficult to lengthen these very short stations.   

It's one thing if the C+Line was started off with absurdly, short 2.5 car trains, but at least the stations were already built to gradually accomodate 5 car trains, plus still have extra clearance for even 5 more coaches. That would have been a reasonable attempt of planning for future capacity, but that's something BC just isn't that good at. The stations should have been designed to be ultimately accomodate 10 car trains, not some quarter-length joke. 

Eventually, three 20m coaches could be linked together. Then an extra 20m coach at both ends of each 3 car, 60m train. While a five car, 100m train would seem too long for 50m, inadequate BC stations, a walkthrough train makes it a possibility. That and Selective_door_operation makes a 5 car train quite possible. 

It is very sad that the backward BC mentality never properly envisioned a 10 car train to provide a high capacity link between the Tsawwassen_ferry_terminal, Bridgeport_station & the YVR-Airport_station, Downtown_Vancouver, Park_Royal_Exchange and the Horseshoe_Bay_ferry_terminal. Only a properly functioning metropolitan region can do something like that. The Greater Vancouver Region just isn't at that level yet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-train

"The operation of the Central Circle is similar to the S-Train systems in Germany and other countries."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Central_Circle#Opening_and_operation

http://mkmzd.ru , 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Moscow_metro_ring_railway_map_en_sb_future.svg ,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Central_Circle#Stations ,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siemens_Desiro#Desiro_RUS

"The line is operated by 33 Siemens ES2G Lastochka trains..."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Central_Circle#Rolling_stock

Russians aren't afraid to use good German technology.

http://www.rzd-expo.ru/innovation/stock/railcar_rolling_stock/Desiro%20RUS.pdf

I wish that they would allow some of that German tech in BC but BC still strives to maintain and keep things at a smaller scale. 

The Moscow Circle Line is a much more recent development than the one in London. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle_line_(London_Underground)#Map

"Since the beginning, platforms have been at least 155 metres (509 ft) long to accommodate eight-car trains. The only exceptions are on the Filyovskaya Line: Vystavochnaya, Mezhdunarodnaya, Studencheskaya, Kutuzovskaya, Fili, Bagrationovskaya, Filyovsky Park and Pionerskaya, which only allows six-car trains..."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Metro#Rolling_stock 

There is suppose to be secret deeper level subway around Moscow.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro-2#.22Underground_City.22_in_Ramenki

Of course when severe flooding occurs, the subways are among the first things to be affected.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_European_floods#Germany

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siemens_Desiro#United_Kingdom 

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

How in the hell is the 3rd SkyTrain line constructed to have such small stations, in-spite of increasing future demand? 

http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-line-seating-configuration

No city has spent billions of dollars just to have 2 car trains, except Vancouver & Richmond.

http://www.railforthevalley.com/latest-news/zweisystem/is-the-canada-line-a-classic-white-elephant

Apparently, the 50 m platforms are only long enough to accommodate 2.5 car trains as capacity demand increases. http://www.railforthevalley.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Canada-Rail-213-e14082980653651.jpg

Sure, in the early years, Montreal could run a little 3 car train, but their Metro stations were designed to accommodate a 9 car train during the very busy times & 6 car trains for intermediate demand. 

So the BC inept planning process never allowed for a future demand of at least 152.5 m or 500 foot long stations & platforms. Instead, they designed the max potential to be only 50m or 164 feet. That's pathetic & only adds to the deliberate bottleneck planning approach that backwards BC aspires to. 

30-100 year plans http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/ubc-tunnel-subway-transit-bc-mauro-chiesa-1.4050842 

As long as a line above ground & especially underground, has level sections of 500, 600 or 700 feet, then full length stations can be constructed.

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

When BC planers only allowed for a 50m or 164 foot level section for each Catheter Line, 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/ubc-broadway-subway-line-not-the-greenest-idea-says-professor-1.3426082 ,

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/broadway-ubc-subway-the-best-option-says-vancouver-mayor-1.1410711 , 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_(Vancouver)#Future_expansion ,

http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and-Projects/Rapid-Transit-Projects/Broadway-SkyTrain-Extension.aspx ,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_(Vancouver)#/media/File:Vancouver_SkyTrain_track_diagram_v3.svg

If a system starts out with little trains but has designed the ability to triple or quadruple the length of the station platforms, then its just a matter of building that future extension right from the start or at some point later on. 

http://www.railforthevalley.com/latest-news/zweisystem/the-subway-panacea-myth/

Chicago & BART can still run ridiculous 4 car trains but the capacity to run 10 car trains was built in right from the start.

SYDNEY and its metro

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

Not only does Sydney have much longer trains & platforms, they are double level trains! Its like BC has made sure that it must never match the capacity that NSW & New_England has allowed for.

TOP 10 of the most beautiful trains in Japan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45btZp_tFYE

V-BC strives to perpetually be one of the most stunted or underbuilt major cities on the planet. 

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

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

SkyTrain-Canada Line rebuilding

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

The YVR Canada+Line should have been called, the Financial Drainage Line. However, the Catheter Line seems more appropriate. That's because it would cost a lot just to attempt to bring the C+Line up to a proper big city airport+line standard.

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

Never mind designing it to ultimately have 8-10 car trains, starting out with at least 5 car trains. A 2 car train is such a sad joke, but it all fits in with the reluctance to think & build big in BC. 

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

Wow, someday the YVR-Canada-Line will be able to accommodate a 2.5 car train, but not a 5 car train. Apparently, a full length 3 car train & especially a 4 car train might actually look like an attempt to have a proper urban train. Even with all the construction budget cuts, the stations could have been built with at least a 152.5 m provision, instead of a 40-50 m, 2 car train of a joke.

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

This approach goes so well with the regions narrow bridges & its reluctance to build a network of bus & HOV bridges. 

The+Missing+Element

Unfortunately, it's not possible to take a train from the YVR-Airport_station to the Tsawwassen_ferry_terminal or the Horseshoe_Bay_ferry_terminal. There doesn't even seem to be any official long-range plan to link them to the YVR-Canada-Line.

https://www.yvr.ca/en/passengers/transportation/public-transportation

https://thecanadaline.com/station-guides/yvr-airport

https://www.translink.ca/schedules-and-maps/station/yvr-airport/schedule

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  

. 

The SkyTrain - Canada Line in Richmond to close early for seven weeks due to construction

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-canada-line-capstan-station-spring-2024-service

An entire section of the line has to close early, due to a new station being added. If or whenever all the stations are lengthened, the entire system might have to close early. 

Fortunately, all the underground stations in Toronto & Montreal & even Edmonton, were built to be much longer, in the first place. Fortunately, any new underground C-Train stations in Calgary won't be Vancouverized. They will be as long as any underground LRT station in Edmonton.

The biggest mistake for the Skytrain was not building 152 m or 500 ft long stations. Then as longer trains are required, the longer stations would already exist.

The 3rd line or the Canada+Line, is such a fine example of BC congestive planning. Why bother to have long big city trains? https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-line-skytrain

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

Aparenty, short trains help to match the many narrow bridges in BC. Of course narrow bridges make it tougher to have bus & HOV lanes. 

"The five busiest stations have platforms 50 metres (160 ft) long, while the rest of the stations have 40-metre (130 ft) platforms that can be easily extended to 50 metres." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line#Stations

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

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/north-shore-burrard-innlet-rapid-transit-brt-translink

Greater_Vancouver has been stunted or thwarted for several decades, in so many ways. 

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

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=C+Line

Such short platforms and trains for the SkyTrain-Canada Line

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

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

Unfortunately the multibillion dollar Canada+Line was designed to have very short stations. Much shorter than any underground stations in Edmonton & Seattle, especially Montreal & Toronto. Planning & building proper big city size infrastructure in BC has mostly been difficult through the decades. There has been a multi-generational mindset & agenda to hold BC back. 

http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-line-skytrain-richmond-tsawwassen

How could such a backwater BC agenda be so powerful since the 1800s? Well, if you can't build a wall around BC or generate a Star Trek like force field around Greater Vancouver, you can at least continually demonstrate a reluctance to build proper size infrastructure. Originally, BC was supposed to be a Whiteman's paradise. Thus, there was a strong resentment to build anything for nonwhites. Somehow, since BC was starting to be more multicultural since the 1960s & 70s, then even morso by the 1990s, one would think that there would be proper big city infrastructure built-up. 

Instead, it was like the White British Colonial mentality continued right into modern times. Hospitals & schools weren't being properly expanded. Most bridges or crossing were kept narrow. Unfortunatly, such narrow-mindedness also went towards the planning & building of short trains. It was as if there was such a resentment to plan & build big for nonwhites, so almost everything has been kept small or backwards in BC.   

http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surrey-light-rail-skytrain-mistakes-underbuilt

BC has had such a slow growth agenda for several decades. Thus, by symbolically building inadequate infrastructure, it is hope that frustrated people will go elsewhere, or don't even show up. WTH? Fortunately, this agenda hasn't taken over Edmonton & Calgary or Seattle WA & Perth WA. 

Most of the world is nonwhite & in most of the world the major cities are allowed to think & build big. Despite the size of Canada, it has less than 1% of the world's population. During the colonial times there was a strong KEEP THEM OUT mentality. However, while Canada has embrace multiculturalism for several decades, Canada has yet to contain 1% of the worlds population, let alone 2%. So much infrastructure, especially in backwards BC has been heled back or thwarted. Yet, the Pacific Rim has a big portion of the worlds population. 

Pacific cities like Auckland, Melbourne, Sydney & Brisbane, Seattle, Portland, SF, LA & SD, just don't have the same impose restrictions & inept planning like Vancouver & Victoria have.

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

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=C+Line

Short Trains

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/Canada_Line_Train_201807.jpg/960px-Canada_Line_Train_201807.jpg , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Line#Route An airport+line connecting Vancouver & Richmond to YVR should have started out with at least 5-6 car trains, then eventually, 8-10 car trains after eventually connecting to the 2 main BC Ferry terminals. However that's a problem, because backwards BC can't seem to allow for proper long-range, bigcity infrastructure planning & development.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_777 Train length 64.98 m (213 ft 2 in)  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merseyrail#Fleet 

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SL_C30 Train length 70 m (229 ft 7+29⁄32 in)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SL_C20  46.5 m (152 ft 6+45⁄64 in) Unlike Vancouver, Stockholm can run double-length trains. This is possible whenever longer stations are built, or at least have enough level clearance for future expansion.

The Montreal Metro in the 1960s could run ridiculous 3 car trains, but eventually realized that 6 car trains & especially 9 car trains can efficiently more more people. Thus, its a good thing that they planned to have 152.4 m stations right from the start.

While short trains and stations can initially be a cost saving measure, allowing for future level clearance can be more economically efficient, in the long run. Thus, even a tram premetro can eventually be turned into a tram-train.

Unfortunatly, in typical Vancouver fashion, the Canada+Line wasn't designed to have 10 car trains, not even 5 car trains. The 2 billion dollar joke of a train was only designed with a level clearance for 50 m stations that only can accommodate a 2.5 car train. For a line that had to be open by 2009, it's still only running 2 car trains, with no 2.5 car trains in sight as 2025 is winding down.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/35/NorthArmBridge.jpg/960px-NorthArmBridge.jpg A pathetic 2 car train on a bridge that should have 2 bike lanes & 2 sidewalks. 

Indeed, just because the Canada Line was designed as if it was only to start out with short premetro train stations, there should have been a long-term plan to eventually have proper big city trains. One of the biggest mistakes for what should be a proper big city metro train, is to design short stations that are almost impossible to double, let alone tripple in length. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Canada+Line+is+so+under-built

Some Vancouver ‘view cones’ could be scrapped under proposed review

 https://globalnews.ca/news/9990941/vancouver-view-cone-review

Toronto, Calgary & Edmonton are allowed to build taller than what's in Montreal. Of course stubborn watered down Vancouver is an exception.

Vancouver & BC was unable to build a wall or generate a forcefield around it like something out of STAR TREK. Thus, a stunted approach was implemented, which was all about slowing down the influx of people. Vancouver doesn't have the authority to restrict Canadian immigration or restrict people from moving into the region from other parts of Canada.  

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-view-cones-review-housing-impacts-motion

At a certain point, the BC part of Canada will be forced to put more money into proper size infrastructure.

https://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/protecting-vancouvers-views.aspx This has been such an ingenious way to hold the city back. So much of BC is mountainous wilderness that will never be blocked out.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-view-cone-restrictions-policies

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouvers-shrinking-skyline Fortunatly, Vancouver doesn't have control over the entire region, so the demand for taller buildings is still possible in the surrounding area.

So many urban restrictions were put into Vancouver during the 1970s, 80s and 90s by a mostly White power structure. In theory, if a city & urban area is continually stunted like Greater Vancouver, then less people will be likely to move there. Calgary & Seattle were never under anything like the extreme Vancouver limitations. Thus, those cities have much taller buildings, wider roads & bridges & any of their underground train stations are much longer than what Vancouver has ever built. The Toronto Subway & the Montreal Metro have stations that are at least 152m or about 500 feet, when stunted Vancouver only built 50m to 80m Skytrain stations.

If Vancouver was ever allowed to become a big city & region like Sydney, San_Francisco & Montreal, that would mean accommodating more people of color. It's not that the predominantly White power structure of the 1970s, 80s and 90s officially had a, KEEP THEM OUT agenda, but any slow growth initiative can certainly slow down the influx of people & the local economy. 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-tower-building-shadowing-solar-access

Indeed, by continually promoting a half size approach to such stunted infrastructure, it shows a reluctance towards accommodating more people. As it so happens, most of the people on the planet aren't of European descent. Thus, anly slow growth initiative is a very clever way to, KEEP PEOPLE OUT. Unfortunately, even if there is finally enough people that want Vancouver & other parts of BC to have big cities, there is quite a tangled mess of laws, ordinances & restrictions that would have to be changed.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/larwill-park-office-towers-vancouver-concept

One would think that especially for a region such as Greater Vancouver with so many narrow roads & streets, there should have been a metro on the scale of what Montreal has. But so much about Vancouver & BC is about congestive planning.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-2017-kevin-desmond-canada-line-built-skytrain Why build 152m long stations linke in Montreal & Toronto when you can build absurd 50m stations? This is a fine example of the reluctance to build without allowing for future expansion. Don't think like a big city or urban region where a train could eventually reach the ferry terminals. It's much better to take the congestion approach.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=building+shadowing+policies

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Canada's population and its lacking infrastructure

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/71-607-x/71-607-x2018005-eng.htm

Despite being the 2nd largest nation in overall area, Canada is far off from housing just 1% of the world's population. 

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/mandate/corporate-initiatives/levels/population-growth-2014-2027.html 

There aren't enough big cities in the vastness of Canada.

It's strange that Halifax hasn't become a big city like Boston or Montreal. Since the 2020s, a lot more people work from home and there isn't always an industrial base in major urban areas. More people are retiring and like people working from home, might like living in a town of 1000-10,000 people just as easily as a city with over a 1,000,000 people. The point being, that the top 30 towns in Canada could be built up to at least a million people each. Winnipeg has yet to have a million people. Then the top 10 cities could be built up to 5-10 population regions. Greater Montreal has yet to reach the 5 million point and the Greater Toronto Area has yet to reach 10 million people like Greater Chicago or, CHICAGOLAND. The San_Francisco_Bay_Area is getting close to having 10 million people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_municipalities_in_Canada_by_population Vancouver is only the 8th most populated city.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_census_metropolitan_areas_and_agglomerations_in_Canada#List However, the Greater Vancouver Region is still the 3rd largest urban area in Canada. Yet, it's so far behind with the necessary infrastructure. Indeed, When Greater Toronto & Greater Montreal each exceeded the 3 million point, they had longer trains & wider roads. It seems that Vancouver & BC in general, have perpetually opted for a congestive planning approach.

Will Canada's Next Prime Minister be Pierre Poilievre? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dck8eZCpglc

Why is anti-immigration sentiment on the rise in Canada? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txyjmNXcWiU

https://www.norden.org/en/information/population-nordic-region

https://www.nordicstatistics.org/news/population-growth-in-the-nordics Whether its Canada or the Nordic_Countries, places with cold winters can accommodate a lot of people. However, without setting up the proper amount of infrastructure first, its utterly foolish.

Canada hasn't kept up with building enough school & hospital facilities, as well as the overall necessary  infrastructure. 

https://www.definitivehc.com/resources/healthcare-insights/top-largest-canadian-hospitals

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

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver_Hospital_and_Health_Sciences_Centre#Facilities

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Paul's_Hospital_(Vancouver) , https://helpstpauls.com/why-give/new-st-pauls-hospital

https://www.infrastructurebc.com/projects/announced-in-procurement/richmond-hospital-redevelopment-project-phase-2-3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraser_Health#Regional_hospitals 

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

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

https://www.infrastructurebc.com/projects/projects-under-construction/burnaby-hospital-phase-2-and-bc-cancer-centre-project/

Unlike the Montreal Metro which can accommodate 9 car trains, the strained Skytrain is only running 4 new-car trains & the inept Canada Line only runs 2 car trains. The Skytrain stations should have been designed to gradually accomodate 8-10 car trains. The Montreal Metro was built with 500 foot long or 152.5m stations right from the start. Apparently, to save money, the first 2 Skytrain lines only have 80m stations & the line to Richmond only has 50m stations, not 152.5m like Montreal. 

The inadequate new Pattullo-Bridge was designed to be so narrow that there won't be any emergency lanes. There won't be any bus lanes, even though the Skytrain doesn't run 24 hours. There won't be any truck lanes, despite the region being a major port. Thus, everything is supposed to be funneled into just 2 lanes each way. https://www.pattullobridgereplacement.ca/about/projectoverview Apparently, the bridge can eventually be upgraded, but to only 3 lanes each way. Of course there is no provision for a lower train & truck deck. This is another fine example of backward BC planning. Even if small-thinking NW only wanted 2 lanes each way for cars, there still should have been an extra 2 lanes each way so that there is a dedicated bus lane & a truck lane each way. 

2 lanes were removed from the Burrard Bridge, 1 removed from the Cambie Bridge & 2 lanes removed from the Granville Bridge. Many other cities can actually build bike bridges so they don't have to take away any traffic lanes from their bridges. 

Even the new Highway-99-Tunnel is designed to become just another BC bottleneck. There will only be 3 lanes each way & a bus-lane each way. However, there won't be any truck lanes & no emergency lanes. https://www.highway99tunnel.ca/project-overview-frt Of course there won't be any provision for a train tunnel, because the government doesn't see a good reason to connect the Delta ferry terminal with Richmond & the airport. They never bothered to have a train from Horseshoe Bay to Park Royal & downtown Vancouver either.

So while the Federal Government charges a carbon tax, Greater Vancouver is left with short trains & mostly narrow bridges. It's utterly foolish to not properly upgrade the infrastructure & build a lot of affordable housing, yet encourage a bunch of people to move into a country that hasn't kept up with building more housing stock. I thought that some of the carbon tax would help to properly upgrade the BC infrastructure, because backward BC just can't seem to even catch up to what Calgary & Seattle have. The trains in Montreal, Toronto, Edmonton, Calgary & Seattle are all longer than the short Skytrains. Yet, there is more demand in Vancouver to have longer trains, due to the narrow roads & bridges. Frequent short trains arent enough, there has to be proper big city long trains. 

'Insufficient evidence' to conclude city building inspectors taking bribes in Vancouver

 https://www.biv.com/news/entertainment-media-sports/vpd-insufficient-evidence-to-conclude-city-building-inspectors-taking-bribes-vancouver-11383302 

Allegations remain as allegations. 

However, in an unrelated matter, there was a case of total $HIT-BOX mismanagement and excrement.  Billions of dollars wasted in a $HIT-PIPE DREAM. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/metro-vancouver-board-votes-to-pause-nswwtp-review-until-legal-dispute-settled-1.7594512 

https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/metro-vancouver-halts-view-into-wastewater-plant-boondoggle-10994469

Then there is the case as to why the Canada+Line+is+so+under-built. Apparently, as a rushed and inept cost saving measure, the Canada+Line wouldn't have 152.4m long stations like the Montreal Metro or even the Edmonton LRT stations, which range from 125m to 130m. Despite its 2 billion dollar cost the Canada-Line wasn't designed with that much future capacity in mind. The ridiculously short 50m stations should have been roughed out or level for at least 100m, if not even 160m. That would have allowed for future 5-8 car trains. 

Ultimately, as a long-term, high capacity link between YVR and the 2 main ferry terminals, the stations should have had a 200m level clearance. That would have allowed for ten, 20m car trains. Unfortunatly, no provision for a 10 car train, not even a 5 car train, just an absurd 2.5 car short train, someday. 

$HIT-BOX mismanagement and opting for short trains is such careless urban infrastructure planning. 

https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/metro-vancouvers-pledge-for-reforms-insufficient-district-of-north-van-councillor-says-10716480

https://www.biv.com/news/economy-law-politics/metro-vancouver-slashes-sewage-plant-cost-by-39b-but-risks-long-term-bill-11303969

The BC Mind Virus is such a horrible thing, but it officially doesn't exist. Yet, the crappy approach to things endures.

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. Short trains is just another example of the congestive transportation approach to things in BC.

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 the 2030s? 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 Richmond-Delta+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 (SDO) 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. Being from Vancouver, its hard to fathom how the Brisbane Airport train can be like a proper big city train an station. In backwards BC, its so difficult to get proper big city size infrastructure built. 

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

The YVR-Canada+Line is almost the worlds shortest train, because it only has 2 cars on a 2 billion dollar line of B$.

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

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

A Richmond encampment under the Oak Street bridge

 https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2025/11/19/growing-calls-to-clear-richmond-encampment 

Of course any neighborhood will be concerned when a bunch of people are living under a bridge and wandering around. 

Living under a bridge is hardly affordable housing. There needs to be proper secure housing with plenty of security and staff to help people who are stuck living outside. 

That bridge is so narrow and inadequate. 

SW-Vancouver needs a proper transportation upgrade. Granville Street should be extended across the Fraser River on a parallel bridge to the Oak Street Bridge (OSB). Then, the 2 bridges could provide 4 general lanes each way. Plus, another 4-lane parallel bridge to accommodate 2 BRT lanes and 2 HOV lanes. 

Or, a totally built a new version of the Oak+St+Bridge that could provide 6 lanes northbound. Then, a Granville Street extension could provide 6 southbound lanes onto a new OSB. Four general lanes each way, plus a rapid bus lane each way & 1 HOV lane each way. 

For the most part, the Oak+Street-Granville+Street+Corridor has 12 lanes. A yellow paint strip designates 3 lanes each way. Instead, Oak could have 6 northbound lanes and Granville could have 6 southbound lanes. The 5th & 6th lanes could be for the Oak & Granville BRT lane & HOV lane on complete one way streets.

Unfortunately, the OSB remains as a 4 lane traffic bottleneck or chokepoint. 

The 2009 era Canada (embarrassment) Line is still only using 2 car trains in 2025. A proper big city YVR-Canada Line should have been started with 5 car trains. Unfortunately, this joke of a train is only designed to ultimately run a 2.5 car train, someday. 

This stunted infrastructure approach is so absurd. Transportation planning in the most populated parts of BC is so inadequate, but its all part of backwards BC symbolism. The symbolism is all about showing a thwarted or watered down a city can be. Narrow bridges and short trains are some of the best ways to increase congestion and inefficiency in backwater BC. 

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

Vancouver 450 ft and Fahrenheit 451

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. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/14/Vancouver_panorama_%2849988799796%29_%28cropped%29.jpg/3840px-Vancouver_panorama_%2849988799796%29_%28cropped%29.jpg

SF, Sydney & Auckland are just as scenic as Vancouver & warmer throughout the year. They all have taller building than what Vancouver currently permits. Seattle is just as scenic as Vancouver, but its allowed to function like a proper big city, because it doesn't have the imposed restrictions like Vancouver has. While its cold, damp & depressing like Vancouver during the fall & winter, Seattle usually gets noticeably hotter summers than Vancouver, BC. The tallest building in Seattle is the 76 story B of A office tower. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/LA_Skyline_Mountains2.jpg/1280px-LA_Skyline_Mountains2.jpg While the L.A. City Hall looks like a stump there, in Vancouver it would still be one of the prominent buildings.

Everything is so small or scaled back in Vancouver. Even the Greater Vancouver mountains aren't allowed to be as tall as the ones in L.A. While the San_Francisco_Bay & Port_Phillip Bay by Melbourne are big next to their cities, English_Bay in_Vancouver is so much smaller. Its even smaller than Elliott_Bay by Seattle. 

Vancouver really needs to have bus and HOV bridges built next to its mostly narrow & congested bridges. Only a 5 car Skytrain is the max on the first 2 lines and ultimately, just a 2.5 car joke of a train on the YVR-Canada Line. 

Selective+Door+Operation can allow a short train to have an extra car at each end, despite a shorter platform. 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5e/Vancouver_sunset_%28J%29.jpg/3840px-Vancouver_sunset_%28J%29.jpg 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/69/Los_Angeles_with_Mount_Baldy.jpg/3840px-Los_Angeles_with_Mount_Baldy.jpg

Australia like the USA, has some big & tall cities on the Pacific Rim. However, Vancouver symbolically kept watering down its size, because that's how you demonstrate a reluctance towards proper urban planning & growth. 

Oddly enough, the 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.