Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis
I was raised in Montreal and spent a lot of time in Vancouver when I was living in Victoria. They just have better service, more service (i.e, they serve a greater area) and less issues. The CTrain's problem is it isn't a fully segregated system, so when you have many areas where trains and pedestrians/vehicles can get involved, it's going to effect the service. Also used transit in Seattle, San Francisco, Toronto and Amsterdam and they all have a much smoother transit experience than Calgary does. Outside Montreal and Toronto they all have direct commuter access to the airport via train, a major plus. Part of it is they all invested a lot in transit early on, whereas Calgary is doing heavy investing now when the network is more difficult to integrate with the city.
That's why things like the North-Central/SE line has to be built ASAP or it'll be more difficult and costly as the areas where the line could be built become more populated and built in. People talk about an arena and how it relates to a "world class city", but all the cities I listed for great transit are considered or close to being considered world class cities and they all have excellent transit. I think excellent transit is a much better indicator of a world class city than an arena, otherwise Edmonton will be considered more world class in a few years just by erecting a building, which is preposterous.
|
Fair enough, didn't have enough personal experience to comment myself, but statistics did not seem to support an anecdotal evidence.
I do agree with you that public transit in general needs to be more central to our transportation needs, easier and more comfortable to use. But I have always doubted that is a Calgary issue, and always assumed that was a North America issue.