The label "transit city" is reasonable if you maintain context. Calgary's transit system is obviously small potatoes compared to that of New York, or even a lot of European cities around the 1 million mark. But, for a North American city of a bit over 1 million, Calgary's transit system is excellent. Arguably the best.
But, I do agree: In Calgary, a car could reasonably be labelled a luxury. It's nice to have, but you don't NEED it to get around the city. Outside of peak hours, a car is generally the fastest way to travel. Owning a car in Calgary still gets you something, even if you have to pay a lot more for it. Outside of rush hour, driving is generally the fastest way to get around in Calgary. In cities like New York, a car is arguably an inconvenience. Friends of the family in Berlin seem to think so (have a look at their S-Bahn and U-Bahn networks). They have one car (a Mercedes A Class) which they basically never use, because driving is just always a pain in the 🞵🞵🞵 (always takes longer, always requires battling with traffic, etc.) and it sounded like they were on the verge of getting rid of it. While you can find a similar attitude here, it's basically limited to inner-city dwelling urbanists who take pride in choosing to use transit.
Last edited by floobie; Dec 14, 2012 at 6:15 AM.
Reason: So many commas!
|