Distance versus Time

Q: "How far is this place from here?"
A: "It will take you about 40 minutes to reach there."

Q: "How far is this place from here?"
A: "About 12 kilometres."

Same question. Two different answers. And not just that, the answers use two different measures altogether. One tells us the distance. Other tells us the time it will take to travel.

They surprised me the first time. But the more I think about them, the more information they reveal. The first answer is something I get in Mumbai. The second is what I got in Kolkata and in Udaipur, a small town in Rajasthan.

My interpretation goes thus. In Mumbai, more people use public transport as compared to those in Udaipur or Kolkata. So they wouldn't care much or even know about the exact distances between two places. All they care is the time taken. As compared to Mumbai, since more people in Udaipur and Kolkata would ride/drive themselves, they have a good idea of the distance and hence, that measure provides a clear answer.

Another possibility is that, with traffic jams all day round and one or the other road under repair or construction, time becomes more critical as compared to the actual distance, in a fast paced city like Mumbai. For example, my office is only 8 kilometres away, but it takes anywhere between 25 and 45 minutes for me to travel. In this sense, if someone asked me, "how far is your office?", an answer of "8 kilometres" indicates nothing.

On a personal basis, it also might give some info about the answerer's priorities. If he does answer with time as a measure in stead of distance, it just shows he is pressed for it. How would you answer this question?