Yes, that cyclists belong and to take things even further have a right to travel unmolested on the public right of ways (including roads) where as driving a dangerous automobile is a privilege not a right and comes with equivalent responsibilities, specifically like not hitting thing due to driving too aggressive and fast for conditions and treating other people, especially peds. and cyclists not as trespassers on motorists sovereign turf but rather vulnerable users with more right to be there then them and have this infused both in the cultural norm and the written laws and court precedents as much as possible is an important step forward.

And not just for VC on roadway access but also for semi-separate infrastructure users wherever contact and interaction takes place (usually at intersections). In fact it may actually be more important in that later case then the former. Mandated separate infrastructure use goes completely against this and is a symptom of the deeper problem.

As I have said before and I will say again if you build the infrastructure right the vast majority of cyclists will use it, if you don't then some of them, sometimes even the majority won't use them. Also, if cycle infrastructure use is not mandatory but rather optional and left up to the choice of the cyclist then the designers and builders are far more concerned about getting it right because they know they have to in order to get people to use it.

Same applies to maintenance and, yes, also plowing and de-icing of such once its built.