With only 2 lanes each way, you can pretend that you are in Vancouver, BC for a while.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_Canal_Bridge https://www.historylink.org/File/3312
https://mynorthwest.com/3931367/when-i-5-ship-canal-bridge-became-13-million-parking-lot/
The 1950s Granville+Street+Bridge (GSB) should have at least had a provision for a lower deck.
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/granville-bridge-north-end-reopens-vancouver-connector
A lower deck would have been great for extra bus lanes and potential LRT, but this is backwards BC.
https://vancouversun.com/news/traffic-alert-north-end-granville-street-bridge-reopen-monday
Since no bus & bike bridge was even built right next to it, the bridge is being scaled down to 6 lanes, from 8. That might not have been necessary if there was an Oak Street Bridge (OSB) over F. Creek, not just over the Fraser River. An OSB over F. Creek could have been a bus & bike bridge with wide sidewalks as well.
The 8 lane GSB becomes a revamped 6 lane bridge with 2 bike lanes & 2 sidewalks.
If the Granville+Bridge eventually has 2 express bus lanes, there will only be 4 general traffic lanes.
https://granvilleisland.com/news/transportation-updates-on-granville-bridge-city-of-vancouver
Unfortunately, the 8 lane Granville_Street_Bridge_(1954) wasn't designed to have a lower level. That wasn't the case with the 12 lane Ship+Canal+Bridge in Seattle. Fortunately, the Vancouver bridge was never connected to a city freeway, where as the Seattle bridge was. Vancouver should have opted for a better major street & bridge arrangement.
There was never any follow-up to have a new and improved Fraser+Street+Bridge (FSB). A modern FSB could be a nice bus and bike bridge with wide sidewalks & a potential for streetcars. Unfortunately, backwards Vancouver, BC seems uninterested in building something like the Tilikum+Crossing in Portland.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Oak+Street+and+Granville+Street
Fortunately, Seattle was never Vancouverized with narrow bridges, short trains and stumpy buildings.
https://bridgehunter.com/wa/king/85278000000000/
https://www.theurbanist.org/2020/04/16/west-seattle-bridge
https://seattlebusinessmag.com/economy/west-seattle-far-dead
https://www.theurbanist.org/2020/10/21/replace-dont-repair-the-west-seattle-bridge-and-add-rail
https://www.theurbanist.org/2020/11/23/new-west-seattle-and-ballard-link-open-house/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_Canal_Bridge
https://pauldorpat.com/2014/05/17/seattle-now-then-the-ship-canal-bridge/
https://i0.wp.com/pauldorpat.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/v-lk-s-now-on-express-lane-web.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_Bridge_(Seattle) WA
https://www.historylink.org/File/20389
The 2 level, 12 lane Ship_Canal_Bridge is right next to it.
The north end of the Montlake_Bridge is close to the University_of_Washington_station. The 380-foot-long (120 m) station_layout is almost as long as any underground LRT station in Edmonton. In contrast, the first 2 lines of the Vancouver Skytrain only have only 80 m stations. The 3rd line is a joke that is the Canada Line. It was only designed to have 50 m stations. The Montreal Metro & TTC Subway were designed to have 152 m. Unlike Seattle & Edmonton & especially Montreal & Toronto, building for longer trains isn't a problem. That's because they don't have anything like a backward BC mentality or a water it down, because its Vancouver, approach to things. Being from Vancouver, it's always amazing to see what other cities are able to do, simply because they don't take a backwater BC approach to things.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fremont_Bridge_(Seattle)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballard_Bridge (Seattle)
MONTREAL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Bizard_Bridge Even a backwater part of Montreal will get an upgrade from a 3 lane joke to a 4 lane bridge with wider sidewalks. https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/bridge-construction-causing-travel-nightmare-for-ile-bizard-residents-1.6564161
https://www.westislandtoday.com/post/the-construction-of-l-%C3%AEle-bizard-s-bridge-is-well-underway
https://montreal.ca/en/articles/building-new-bridge-pont-jacques-bizard-26379 Fortunatly, no one from Metro Vancouver was able to stop this Greater Montreal improvement. The backward BC mentality is terrible. It would be devastating if Quebec had ever started to emulate the BC approach to things.
https://globalnews.ca/news/10180724/new-jacques-bizard-bridge-west-island-traffic Unfortunatly, the new bridge won't have a couple of bus-lanes. https://www.ebcinc.com/en/2022/04/05/new-jacques-bizard-bridge A 6 lane bridge would have allowed for that. Perhaps a parallel bus-bridge might eventually be built there, someday. That's what Calgary eventually did with the the+Cushing+Bridge upgrade.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ironworkers_Memorial_Second_Narrows_Crossing#Collapse
After the collapse, there was a chance that the Iron_Bridge (IwB) could have been totally redesigned, but this is BC. Its very difficult in BC to design transportation infrastructure with significant future capacity. The Iron Bridge should have been built along the lines of the 12 lane Ship_Canal_Bridge (SCB) in Seattle. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_Canal_Bridge
Unlike Seattle and Washington State, so much in BC is built to a provincial backwater standard. Thus, nothing on the scale of the SCB has ever been allowed in BC. https://pauldorpat.com/2014/05/17/seattle-now-then-the-ship-canal-bridge Sunce an LRT line wasn't possible for the SCB, it runs sort of parallel in a tunnel to the UW. Of course LRT to UBC is still an incomplete BC pipe dream.
The IwB should have had at least 8 lanes on an upper deck and 4 lanes on a lower deck for extra bus and truck lanes. There should have also been a provision for 2 LRT tracks on a lower deck, but that would be properly planning for the future.
Unfortunately, the Vancouver Mind Virus (VMV) ruined the Burrard-Bridge. The Burrard_Street Bridge (BSB) opened with 6 lanes and a lower level provision for a double track streetcar crossing.
Foolishly, because the city didn't want to build a parallel bike bridge, 2 lanes were removed from the BSB. This has made it very unlikely that the BSB will be able to have 2 bus lanes. No lower level streetcar crossing was ever built. Yet, a streetcar line on both side of False Creek could have been a nice thing to have up and running. Ironically, Vancouver was one of the first cities to get rid of its streetcars and will likely be one of the last to bring them back. The VMV is such a horrible thing, yet it officially doesn't exist.
https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Second+Narrows+Bridge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POcg0oFvVf8
The larger Portland, Seattle and the Vancouver, BC (V-BC) region has a lot of growth potential. However, Seattle size buildings haven't been allowed in Portland and in Vancouver, BC. Nothing like a 12 lane Ship Canal Bridge has been allowed in Portland and Vancouver. While Oregon and backwater BC haven't been able to thwart the largest city in Washington State, Seattle might eventually become more of a magnet in pulling more people into the area between Portland and V-BC.
Right now, Vancouver, WA (V-WA) still has a wider bridge than V-BC. Most of the V-BC bridges are so damn narrow that its not possible to have an efficient regional express bus network. As long as there is a refusal to build proper BRT bridges as part of a regional system, it remains a sad joke.
The Skytrain (LRT) was built with shorter stations than what the underground stations in Seattle and Edmonton are at. Whenever possible, the Skytrain stations are shorter than the C Train stations in Calgary, DART stations in Dallas and even the Max in Portland.
The biggest mistake of the Skytrain was to not build all of the stations with a future level clearance to eventually have Montreal Metro size stations of 500 feet or 152.5 m. Instead, the first 2 lines only have 80 m stations and the line to YVR (The Canada embarrassment Line) is only 50 m. Backwater BC logic is that a 5 car Skytrain could run twice as frequent as a 9 car Montreal Metro train. Someday, a 2.5 car YVR-Canada Line train could also run much more frequently than a 9 car Montreal Metro train.
There is just one key problem with that type of BC logic. While initially constructing short stations and having short trains can save money, its not proper BIG city size infrastructure. In the long run, it costs more to try to lengthen stations for longer BIG city type trains.
