[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

There may even be a signifiant upside to untethering cycling infrastructure spending from other, more expensive infrastructure projects like road reconstruction. Projects like Elgin's quick-build protected lane retrofit or Laurier Street were able to be put in quickly, cheaply, and effectively. Montreal shows many improvements on this approach, spending a bit extra on resurfacing and higher-quality materials, but still without digging up the entire substrate and underground infrastructure like we wait to do here.

The benefit of the approach, as I see it, is that it allows the City to be targeted in its investments. Put up the lane first, then you'll have a better sense of what additional interventions are necessary. If you put up a quick-build protected lane, you'll be able to see which parts of it could really benefit from resurfacing, geometry adjustments, etc. The City can target its interventions, whereas right now, it waits to have 100% of the money to upgrade 100% of the project, regardless of the level of necessity. Moreover, because it's spreading a small amount of money thin, it's more that it upgrades everything to 60%, leaving some parts over-improved, and others uselessly under-improved.

I wouldn't be surprised if the quick-build version of the 25-year cycling master plan ended up costing less than the status-quo plan.

The it's going to be cheaper argument is ridiculous. It's like saying my house needs a new kitchen bathrooms and I should finish the basement so it's cheaper to get a HELOC now and do it rather than wait. Yes I know many have taken that path. They are understanding the power of compound interest works both ways.

I do agree though quick and dirty will be the result and we don't always need to wait for it to be perfect. As annoying as it is to have to drive over speed bumps in Montreal's bike lines sometimes it's enough to have the line and plastic divider especially on one ways streets.