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. 

A Fraser River boat tour takes you under five existing and future Metro Vancouver bridges

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/paddlewheeler-riverboat-tours-mv-native-new-westminster-fraser-river-cruises Unfortunatly, most bridges in BC are built to conform to a narrow-minded standard.

Had there been a proper urban vision between NW & Surrey 50-100 years ago, there would have been a lot more bridges by now. It seems that NW just wanted to be a provincial backwater. Eventually, Surrey kept growing & now its planning to become the largest city in BC. Back in the day, just like little NW, Surrey never saw it self as ever becoming a major river city like Portland, Calgary, Edmonton or Winnipeg. 

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:New_Westminster 

By the late 1800s and especially by 1910, Portland really started to see itself as a major river city. Just look at how many more bridges there are than what's in between NW & Surrey. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downtown_Portland,_Oregon#Bridges

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_crossings_of_the_Willamette_River Most of these bridges aren't freeway or expressway crossings. They are just for general street access.

There should have been something like the Tilikum_Crossing between NW and Surrey by now. There also should have been something like a Tilikum_Crossing between Vancouver and Richmond. 

Fortunately, the backwater BC mentality never made it down to Oregon.

https://www.travelportland.com/attractions/portland-bridges

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bridges_in_Portland,_Oregon

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

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

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

Port Moody and New Westminster

Port_Moody is very small in area at 25.85 km² (9.98 sq mi). New_Westminster is such a tini area at 15.62 km² (6.03 sq mi). PM only has around 40 thousand people & NW has around 90 thousand residents. 

There has never been a proper transportation corridor between Port+Moody and Deep+Cove. Certainly no ferry between PM, DC & Downtown_Vancouver. NW is also a transportation joke of a city, because there should have been at least 2 other bridges. One to Richmond and another bridge to Surrey.

Of course there is no direct Airport_rail_link between NW & Richmond. Even an express Airport_bus_link would be an improvement. However, a 24 hour Airport-ferry_connection between Mission, Maple_Ridge, Pitt_Meadows, Port_Coquitlam, Fraser-Mills, NW and Richmond.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermodal_passenger_transport#Train-ferry_connection

There is so much of a need for proper Intermodal_passenger_transport in BC. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermodal_passenger_transport#Bus_to_public_transport_nodes

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

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

History of New Westminster, BC

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

Considering how much smaller New_Westminster is than Vancouver, Burnaby & Surrey, NW permitted its first 40 & 50 story building before it even had 100,000 residents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queensborough,_New_Westminster#History

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_of_British_Columbia_(1866-1871)

Unfortunatly, by the 1860s NW didn't start to acquire much more of the Burrard_Peninsula. It should have also annexed more or all of Lulu_Island. However, as a provincial backwater, there just wasn't a long-range vision to be that big on the BC map.

Then by the mid & late 1860s, Victoria,_British_Columbia went through the process of becoming the new capital of BC. Unfortunatly by the 1960s & 1970s, NW was firmly entrenched into the small city mentality trap.

Since the 1980s, NW should have been promoted and developed as the link-city between Burnaby, Richmond, Surrey & especially the Tri-Cities.

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Tri-Cities

Metro Vancouver expected to grow by 50,000 people a year

 https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/metro-vancouver-expected-grow-50,000-people-year

Of course all the real big cities around the world are able to properly plan & build up an appropriate level of infrastructure, were as Greater Vancouver keeps taking a scaled back approach. Especially within the small city limits of  Vancouver.

Little backwater NW should have been properly planned as a gateway between Surrey, Burnaby & Coquitlam, decades ago. However, there has been a multi-generational resistance mentality & its quite apparent in the stunted infrastructure.

https://globalnews.ca/news/9489375/pattullo-replacement-six-lanes-debate Open the new P Bridge with only 4 lanes & no emergency lanes, because 2 extra bus & HOV lanes would be what a proper big city would do. Make sure that there is no provision for a LRT deck, because NW & Surrey only needs one rail transit line. A provision for a 2nd deck would ensure future truck capacity, but that would mean to properly plan for growth. This multi-generational congestive planning approach in BC is so absurd. 

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/pattullo-bridge-replacement-crossing-capacity-small

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skybridge_(TransLink) When the SkyBridge between NW & Surrey opened in 1990, there was no provision to have 2 bus & HOV lanes. Of course there were no bike lanes & footpaths on the bridge. Apparently, it was better to just squeeze all bike & foot traffic onto the very narrow Pattullo_Bridge, which only has 1 sidewalk no wider than a bathtub.

https://evelazarus.com/aborted-plans-a-third-crossing-for-the-north-shore While V-BC celebrated the cancelation of a series of freeway plans through the small city between the 1950s & into the early 70s, there was never a proper follow-up to a North Shore rapid-transit crossing.

https://www.nsnews.com/opinion/letters-lets-get-going-on-a-third-crossing-for-north-shore-6436538 It is pathetic & embarasing that a bike, bus & train bridge wasn't built across the North+Shore inlet at least by the mid 1980s.

https://www.nsnews.com/opinion/almost-two-thirds-of-north-shore-readers-say-a-new-bridge-is-needed-6423723 It is absurd that there wont be a train, bus & bike bridge crossing the inlet by 2025 or even 2030. https://council.vancouver.ca/010313/tt2.htm

The only hope seems to be an eventual replacement or some kind of upgrade to the Iron Bridge. Transportation_in_Vancouver has always been on a smaller scale than what it should be. 

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/a-look-at-six-possible-routes-for-rapid-transit-across-burrard-inlet

https://globalnews.ca/news/3765300/little-hope-of-third-crossing-to-north-shore-as-traffic-woes-worsen/

https://viewpointvancouver.ca/2016/08/26/first-rule-for-a-third-crossing

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/this-week-in-history-1967-wacky-bennett-and-tom-terrific-team-up-to-push-for-a-third-crossing Of course a new bus and train bridge should have still been built. Having a freeway system within the city limits of Vancouver would have been too damaging. People got so freaked out about it and didn't properly realize that there still should have been 2 bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes crossing the inlet. The plan should have also included 2 truck lanes and at least 2 train tracks in a bridge or tunnel, no freeway required, just a link to the surface streets of Vancouver & North Vancouver.

BC doesn't even have the population of one Switzerland. Yet, many local people already say that BC is too populated. WTH? Most of the worlds population is non-white. Keeping the infrastructure short, small & narrow is a strange way to symbolically refuse to build for more people on a mostly non-white world. 

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

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=V-BC

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

City of Surrey to plan for new waterfront entertainment district next to Pattullo Bridge

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surrey-waterfront-entertainment-district-fraser-river-study

A lot of potential, but there shouldn't be any scaling back of the riverport facilities.

Unfortunatly, for several generations, there wasn't a keen sense to properly develop the Surrey side of the river. NW never pushed for more bridges over the past few generations. 

No 10 car trains to Surrey, but at least there is a hope of 5 car trains. No 8-10 lane bridges, because it's better to just omit bus & HOV lanes on the new version of the narrow Pattullo+Bridge. So narrow that at only 4 lanes, there isn't enough width to accomodate 2 bus lanes & 2 HOV lanes & certainly no provision for a future lower LRT deck. 

Unfortunatly, the Queensborough_Bridge in NW has only 2 lanes each way & no emergency lanes. Had there been 2 wide emergency lanes, the bridge could have become a 6 lane crossing. A new parallel bridge with wider sidewalks & 2 bike lanes, could also provide 2 general traffic lanes, a bus lane & a HOV lane & the same for the old bridge, minus any bike lanes. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queensborough_Bridge Apparently, it's better to just keep funneling everything into one narrow 4 lane bridge. There is no direct train from NW to the airport, so a direct bus with its own lanes to YVR would be a good idea. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queensboro_Bridge The NYC version has 9 lanes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This is all part of a congestive planning mentality.

Another deadly crash on Pattullo Bridge

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/pattullo-bridge-fatal-crash-february-2025

When the narrow Pattullo+Bridge was built, NW was a provincial backwater & it was amazing to have plumbing & electricity in Surrey. Being in the BC part of Canada there was such a lack of vision that someday NW & Surrey might become mighty river cities. Such as Montreal, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Calgary & Portland, Oregon.

Despite being close to the Pacific Ocean, NW & BC weren't just half a world away from Sydney, NSW, they might as well have been on a different world, altogether. Thus, there was no need or vision to build a structure on the scale of the Sydney+Harbour+Bridge (SHB).

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/pattullo-bridge-history-built-in-1937-the-span-was-expected-to-last-50-years Only one narrow sidewalk on a very narrow bridge. Of course the SHB had the budget & the foresight to have a sidewalk on both sides.

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

NW and BC

http://www.newwestcity.ca/residents/residents_services/transportation/master_transportation_plan/articles1602.php

NW should really be a hub city between Surrey, Burnaby & Coquitlam, but there has been a multi-generational resistance pattern. BC can contain the area of Switzerland 23 times, yet BC has yet to reach the population of 1 Switzerland. Canada is nowhere close to containing 1% of the world's population.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=151877&page=22,
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=151877&page=8,
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=675322

http://www.surreyleader.com/news/209967591.html,
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=151877&page=3

http://www.translink.ca/en/Plans-and-Projects/Roads-Bridges-and-Goods-Movement/Pattullo-Bridge.aspx

http://buzzer.translink.ca/category/planning-for-the-future/united-boulevard-extension

https://www.google.ca/search?q=Pattullo+Bridge+replacement+options&espv=210&es_sm=93&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=tNvgUpOPIMrtoATXj4HgDw&ved=0CHQQsAQ&biw=1422&bih=776&dpr=0.9

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

The Pattullo Bridge replacement project

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/pattullo-bridge-new-indigenous-renaming-art

While it's great to have a new name for the new bridge, there should have been a few more bridges between Surrey, NW, Coquitlam & Port Coquitlam.

https://604now.com/pattullo-bridge-new-indigenous-name

Another lost opportunity for backwards BC. This new bridge should have opened with 6 lanes, plus have at least 2 wide shoulders for future capacity. Then there could have been 2 HOV lanes, as well as 4 general lanes. There also should have been a lower deck for something similar to what the Tilikum_Crossing has. https://trimet.org/tilikum

Such a lower deck not only could have provided 2 sidewalks & 2 bike paths, but a provision for 2 streetcar or tram-train tracks and even 2 separated SkyTrain tracks. Instead, all the traffic will be crammed into just 2 lanes each way with no bus & no HOV lanes & especially no breakdown lanes. In the future, the existing 2 track Skybridge between Surrey & NW might not be adequate. People from all over the world should study the BC bottleneck planning mentality & avoid such bad planning at all costs.

It is foolish for the most urban part of BC to not have wide or double deck bridges. Unfortunatly, this new 4 lane bridge wasn't designed to have 2 bus & 2 HOV lanes & no provision for at least 2 train tracks. At least it will have more than 1 sidewalk & 1 more lane than the LGB and even a safety divider. 

Despite Surrey eventually becoming the most populous city in backwater BC, no 2 track train bridge like the Tilikum has been allowed to be built in backwards BC. https://trimet.org/tilikum/#about

https://trimet.org/tilikum/#:~:text=Bus%20lines%20FX2%2DDivision%2C%209,both%20sides%20of%20the%20river.

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

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

NW buildings and towers

https://www.newwestcity.ca/database/images/Waterfront_aerial_cropped.png-

https://www.newwestcity.ca/waterfront-vision

Backwater NW ever so slowly & reluctantly, is being compelled to realize that it's part of an urban region with over a few million people.

http://bosaproperties.com/riversky/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/RS2_home_mainImg.jpg

https://www.newwestcity.ca/waterfront-vision/articles/3946.php

http://www.canada.com/business/commercial-real-estate/bosa+plans+major+project+westminster/12084645/story.html

https://www.google.ca/search?q=660+quayside+drive+new+westminster

https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/02/69/72/b3/arial-of-fraser-river.jpg

https://www.newwestcity.ca/database/files/library/Waterfront_Vision_info_booklet_2016_web.pdf  

Skybridge and The North Arm (Train) Bridge

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Pattullo Bridge replacement now delayed by 1 year

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/pattullo-bridge-construction-opening-delay-2025

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/pattullo-bridge-delays-1.7215198

https://www.pattullobridgereplacement.ca/construction/current-works/

The new PB should open with 6 lanes with a provision to have at least 8 lanes. A 4th lane each way could be a nice bus & HOV corridor. But once again, everything will be funneled into a 4 lane BC bottleneck.

https://www.surreynowleader.com/local-news/pattullo-bridge-replacement-delayed-again-now-projected-to-open-in-2025-7364978

https://globalnews.ca/news/10523439/broadway-subway-pattullo-bridge-delay/

Since the Skytrain isn't open 24hrs, 2 bus lanes should have been part of the bridge right from the start. Its sad that the multigenerational BC mentality never allowed for a much wider SkyBridge. Fortunately, Oregon was able to build their fantastic Tilikum_Crossing, because it doesn't have anything like the BC mentality to thwart it. 

Of course the Skybridge was never designed to have bus & bike lanes, but that's something Portland would eventually do. The extremely narrow SkyBridge should have been designed to not only have 2 bike lanes, but 2 bus & 2 HOV lanes to take some of the pressure off the old PB, as well as its replacement. But that would conflict with the narrow minded, multigenerational backward BC mentality.

After all these decades, backward BC still wants to make sure that there is no provision for a streetcar or a tram-train between Surrey & NW. That's despite Surrey eventually becoming the largest city in BC. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skybridge_(TransLink) The narrow minded BC joke of a transit bridge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilikum_Crossing Perhaps, the most amazing bridge in Oregon. https://trimet.org/tilikum

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

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

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

Vancouver, Burnaby and NW...

The Burrard_Peninsula should have been planned as one city well over a century ago. Then eventually adding the Eastern Tri-Cities.

Unlike most of the region, theses 6 little cities don't have wide rivers or an inlet to hinder them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tri-Cities_(British_Columbia)#Transportation

Thus, it's more relatively easier to get around.

Greater Vancouver has been reluctant to build a few more bridges in the region. Bottleneck planning is the name of the game. Of course for most major urban areas around the world, rivers just aren't as much of a hindrance. 

Old Vancouver
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKHVHG2VhZc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burrard_Peninsula#Municipalities

Vancouver, Burnaby & NW are essentially the main regional Tri-Cities, but there is still another set. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Shore_(Greater_Vancouver)

North_Vancouver_(city) is sort of in-between West_Vancouver and North_Vancouver_(district_municipality). They are like the Northern Tri-Cities of the Greater Vancouver Metropolitan Regional_District. 

So far, its been difficult or simply unpopular to merge all 3 sets of Tri-Cities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tri-Cities_(British_Columbia)#Transportation

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Tri-Cities

Pattullo Bridge fully closing to traffic for multiple days

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/pattullo-bridge-full-closure-long-weekend

Backwards BC has always had a problem with proper planning for future infrastructure capacity. In the 1930s, NW was the remnant of a small backwater provincial capital. In the late 1800s or the early 1900s, NW could have absorbed what is today known as the Tri-Cities. There could have been better cooperation with Surrey to become a proper river metropolis region. 

Unfortunatly, in the 1930s it was still amazing just to have plumbing & electricity in Surrey. So to have a Pattullo-Bridge (PB) with 4 wagon roads on it, was also amazing. Apparently, there was only enough funds to have one sidewalk. The PB should have been on a similar scale as the Burrard_St._Bridge, with 6 lanes & 2 sidewalks & even a provision for a lower tram-train deck. But in backwards BC such forward planning is difficult.

Of course the Burrard+Street+Bridge was reduced to 4 lanes and the replacement of the 4 lane Pattullo+Bridge will only open with 4 lanes. Of course there is no provision for a rail transit line on it.

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

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=the+BC+inter-urban+railway

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Tri-Cities

The O-Train Line 2 and 4 launch

"The lines will begin a five-day service on Jan. 6 (Monday through Friday) and will continue for a minimum of two weeks. Buses through routes B2 (formerly called Line 2 buses), 99 and 97 will run parallel seven days a week in case of any issues." https://ottawa.citynews.ca/2025/01/03/heres-what-to-know-before-o-train-line-2-and-4-launch

This makes a lot of sense & not just because Ottawa is far away from Vancouver & the backwards BC mentality. Trains & people can break down causing a disruption on the tracks. Plus, there is no urban rail or commuter rail line in Canada that's running 24hrs a day. This means that its a good idea to have an express bus route that closely follows each train line 24hrs a day.

Greater Vancouver seems to always be a sleep at the wheel, or just inept with proper urban planning. Once the public was informed that the Skytrain won't be a 24hr system. Therefore, it would be a good idea to have express busses running parallel to each line 24hrs a day. 

Unfortunatly, the backward BC planning mentality never allowed for the SkyBridge_linking_NW_and_Surrey_with_SkyTrain to have enough space for 2 bus-lanes, 2 bike-lanes & 2 footpaths. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skybridge_(TransLink) The bridge has none of that, as if to conform to a BC bottleneck agenda. 

The 4 lane Pattullo_Bridge and the 4 lane Queensborough_Bridge were never designed with wide sidewalks & 2 wide emergency lanes. For if they were, then a few decades ago both bridges could have provided 3 lanes each way & have adequate space for bike lanes. A 3rd lane each way would have been great for buses, but that might improve the congestion.

While the new Pattullo_Bridge will actually have wide sidewalks on each side, no serious consideration was given to having 2 bus-lanes, despite the Skytrain not being a 24hr system. So buses, trucks, ambulances & cars will all have to be funneled into only 2 lanes each way. Having 2 bus lanes & 2 wide emergency lanes would actually go against the BC bottleneck mentality.

Even considering budget limitations, the new Pattullo-Bridge should have been designed with a provision for a future lower deck & open with 3 lanes each way & have 2 wide emergency lanes. Apparently, having the Pattullo-Bridge-Replacement with only 2 lanes each way & no emergency lanes somehow will make it easier for emergency vehicles to cross. Of course its the opposite effect, but this is backwards BC.

Surrey, Delta & all of Langley, already have as many people, if not even more people than Ottawa, but the infrastructure is so lacking in BC. Thus, a new 4 lane bridge will be an instant chokepoint between NW & Surrey, Delta & Langley. A 10 lane bridge & a 10 car Skytrain is what a proper urban area of over 3 million people would plan for.  

While Vancouver has less people than Ottawa, the BC Lower_Mainland has more people than Calgary, Edmonton & Winnipeg, combined. Thus, its very strange that Vancouver & BC insist on a congestive planning approach.

The 4 lane Queensborough_Bridge in NW has enough space to accommodate a parallel 4 lane bridge. While some backwater BC types might freakout with an 8 lane crossing there, they don't realise that a 4 lane bridge is very limited. Thus, by having two 4 lane bridges, there could be a bus & a truck lane each way as well as 2 general lanes each way. Not having dedicated bus & truck lanes for what is supposed to be a major port is absurd, but its OK for backward BC. 

In backwards BC its desired to not have a rail transit component on any of the current road bridges. Indeed, most of the bridges are so narrow that there isn't enough room for either bus lanes or HOV lanes.

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

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

NW and BC

Unfortunately for most of its history, New_Westminster never saw it self as that much of a hub city in-between Burnaby & Coquitlam, Richmond & Surrey. Things have been slowly changing in recent decades.

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

Pattullo to partially close for three nights as 4 lane replacement bridge opening draws near

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/pattullo-bridge-closures-replacement-opening 

No matter how much NW wants to be one of the smallest cities in backwards BC, it can't stop Surrey from eventually being the biggest city in what should be bustling BC. The SkyBridge was deliberately designed to not have any HOV or truck lanes. The narrow SkyBridge wasn't even designed to eventually become a bus and bike bridge. Just a train bridge without even any sidewalks. It really should have been given an award for one of the worlds best examples of inept urban infrastructure. 

It's like the SkyBridge (1990) was designed to be the first part of the new inadequate crossings between NW and Surry.

Indeed, just like its 1937 predecessor, the Pattullo_Bridge_replacement will open with only for lanes, but at least it will have 2 bike lanes and 2 sidewalks. The Pattullo_Bridge_replacement should have opened with 6 lanes and 2 wide shoulders or emergency lanes, but that would go against funneling everything into just 2 lanes each way. No emergency lanes or wide shoulders helps to reduce emergency vehicle inefficiency. No bus & HOV lanes helps to increase transportation congestion. Despite being a seaport region, there aren't any truck lanes. Perhaps the best feature of all is than the bridge wasn't designed to eventually have a lower deck for trains and trucks. 

Multibillion dollar bridges can be designed with future widening capabilities, or at least having a provision for a lower deck. Unfortunatly, it's very difficult for BC to design prober big city size transportation infrastructure. 

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