http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/new-city-bridge-inglewood-9th-avenue-1.4653634
According to the article, the new bridge will have 4 lanes, but Councillor Carra states that 9th Ave will be redesigned to be 3 lanes only. I have heard something similar about 9th ave as well, through The City's Main Streets program. If so, this seems like a bad case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. Especially when you consider the closure of 8th Street at the rail crossing.
This sounds like another chapter of the transportation department v. everyone else (including Main Streets program and the local Councillor). Current configuration is only 3 lanes and the future design of 9th Ave SE will likely be 3 lanes to allow for better pedestrian infrastructure, curb bump outs, plazas and patios as the area densifies. Transportation car-centric models don't like that kind of thing; all roads get bigger all the time according to their models because growth in people = growth in cars. Especially when you are looking at 100 year designs. The problem is they their actions are not happening in a vacuum. Building a bigger road doesn't prepare you for more vehicles, it encourages more vehicles. It's causal. So if you want the same or less vehicles, building a bigger bridge is in contradiction to the walkable, urban and dense neighbourhood of the future that the locals and Councillor are envisioning.
The result: a weird hybrid. The bridge is designed for 4 lanes of width at highway lane-width standards, crash barriers and shoulders (e.g. overbuilt for inner city needs but future-proofed in the sense that anything we can conceive of can drive on this road for the foreseeable future). To appease the decision-makers of today, it may only be built to 3 lanes to placate the push by local neighbourhoods and councillor and has extra-wide sidewalks.
Funny that there is no mention of an on-street bike lane/cycle-track given that their is currently one that ends at the bridge. This should be a no-brainer for inclusion, especially given the width being proposed where no one will lose any capacity and bicycles will gain a better direct connection between some of Calgary's most urban areas (which will only increasingly be true over the next 100 years). Also peculiar, as it would be contradictory to existing complete street policy to not include bicycle infrastructure.
If we are designing a bridge for 100 years to support any possible future semi-trucks travelling at high speeds on 9th Ave SE with wide lanes, shoulders and crash barriers, surely we can imagine one that a bicycle commuter might be using the bridge? Only one of these things happens currently (bicycles), and only one of these things happened 100 years ago (bicycles). IMO the omission of on-street bicycle infrastructure supports the argument from some that there is still a heavy car-centric bias underlying the planning of this bridge and that transportation decision-makers still don't take active transportation as seriously in this city as they could have.