[dkazzed]

Vancouver also took 3 years. Toronto took 16 years, just like Eglinton-Crosstown LRT.

 

[David A]

Vancouver also took 3 years. Toronto took 16 years, just like Eglinton-Crosstown LRT.

Now that others have done it and likely technology has also progressed, you would think we wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel.

 

[Whatup]

I have lived in several big cities in Asia and Europe and had the good fortune to experience effective, clean, safe, affordable mass transit (although Paris and London were hit and miss). I can't figure out why implementing a simple and effective payment system is such a monumental task for ETS. However, I notice other technology aspects of daily life that are lagging in Edmonton. For example, in Kuala Lumpur Malaysia (a city with a gdp per capita of 28 000 USD - compared to about 45 000 USD gdp per capita for Edmonton) the technology used for parking, consumer purchases, tolls, public transit etc seems much better, more efficient and much more integrated into daily life. And this is Malaysia - a UMIC developing country. When I visit Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore or South Korea it make the discrepancy even more apparent.

 

[degrandprix]

Could it be that places like Kuala Lumpur became industrialized more recently, so they never did things the "old way" and thus started right out of the gate with more modern payment systems and whatnot? Cities like Edmonton had to transition away from coin-operated parking meters, both in terms of physical infrastructure and societal norms.

 

[Edmcowboy11]

Well overall I think we are too used to some things and it's hard for most to transition to something that should be much better.

 

[thommyjo]

Could it be that places like Kuala Lumpur became industrialized more recently, so they never did things the "old way" and thus started right out of the gate with more modern payment systems and whatnot? Cities like Edmonton had to transition away from coin-operated parking meters, both in terms of physical infrastructure and societal norms.

This ^

It’s common for many developing nations to “leapfrog” developed nation’s timelines or steps of progress thanks to new tech and not having to transition off old systems.

It’s like greenfield development vs infill on a contaminated site.

 

[Whatup]

This ^

It’s common for many developing nations to “leapfrog” developed nation’s timelines or steps of progress thanks to new tech and not having to transition off old systems.

It’s like greenfield development vs infill on a contaminated site.

Seoul started its subway system 7 years before Edmonton opened its LRT. The mass transit systems I've been on in Japan are older than Edmonton's. Many of the mass transit systems I've been on in Europe are obviously not in developing countries. Edmonton's LRT payment system has always been subpar. Maybe the people who work for the city who make these decisions need to go to places to see how its done effectively - its not rocket science (for most places apparently)

 

[thommyjo]

Seoul started its subway system 7 years before Edmonton opened its LRT. The mass transit systems I've been on in Japan are older than Edmonton's. Many of the mass transit systems I've been on in Europe are obviously not in developing countries. Edmonton's LRT payment system has always been subpar. Maybe the people who work for the city who make these decisions need to go to places to see how its done effectively - its not rocket science (for most places apparently)

Sorry, not so much defending Edmonton’s lacking. I agree 100% with you on stuff in Korea, Japan, etc.

Was just speaking to how nations that industrialized in the last 30-50 years often feel like they’ve leapfrogged or skipped steps, because they have as they’ve caught up in tech.

I mean, in a small way, Edmonton is doing that by getting open payment just a few years after ARC when many other cities waited a decade or longer for CCs to work vs just transit passes. Our delay made it possible to essentially do it all at once. Just way too long delayed still

 

[Barnaby]

If cars relied on ARC and mobile payments it would have been implemented years ago. It's just priorities.

 

[constance_chlore]

The densest parts of Seoul have 2-3 times the density of Wîhkwêntôwin and 7-8+ times the density of neighborhoods like Ritchie or Queen Alexandra. It's no secret why a city like Seoul has both more political willpower for improving transit and more tax money allocated to it. (In fact, all but two districts of Seoul have greater average density than Wîhkwêntôwin.)

 

[Kosy123]

Asian countries have an emphasis on building public transit, and having large effective public transit systems due to several factors (as someone who's from there):
- Population Density: The megacities of Asia just make sense to have strong robust networks based on the population and geography of the areas. The RoI is much stronger there.
- Technological Leapfrogging: This point has been made already.
- Traffic Bottlenecks: If you've ever been stuck in a traffic jam in Manila or Jakarta, this is self explanatory lol. The losses from traffic bottlenecks are in the billions, requiring mass transit solutions
- Ideology: For the case of China and other self-proclaimed Marxist-Leninist states, they've inherited the Soviet legacy of public transportation as "palaces for the people", which makes the focus on this reasonable.
- Cost: Cost of labour is less in these regions.
- Prestige: Strong metro systems are seen as prestigious achievements, especially for rapidly industrializing nations. India did this recently, while also neglecting other facets of public transportation.
- Sino-Japanese rivalry: Both countries are throwing money at infrastructure projects, especially in SE Asia as a way to curry influence.
- Priority: These countries' prioritize metro and public transport for funding and political capital. Simple as.

That's not to say it's perfect. Ho Chi Minh City's metro took 13 years of construction due to delays and issues, kinda like Eglinton Crosstown.