Infrastructure plan and bikes and pedestrians and connecting "islands"
 

A big problem in the US is the disjointed nature of communities as it relates to travelling them on foot or by bicycle. You might have an "island" of low speed limit and pretty safe streets or roads in an area, just to be funneled to a very busy very dangerous area. Then you risk life and limb navigating that area to get to the next "island".

With specific claimed provisions in the infrastructure bill to "reconnect communities split up" in the past, how might this play out for this kind of issue?

I'm sure there's more knowledgeable folks in here who could shed light on that. But I'm always left thinking when planning local routes "if only there was 1/4 mi connector right there".

https://transportationtodaynews.com/...d-communities/

Very vague...just how politicians like it.

I believe it refers to neighborhoods, cities and towns divided by highway construction in the past and it wasn't vague to me.

There are plenty of towns in developing countries that have communties destroyed by the introduction of the highway. Historically, it was the same in the US when highways were built and cut through coloured neighbourhoods.

Towns can certainly be reconnected with not only bicycle infrastrure but also pedestrian and family-friendly walkways and light rail tracks.

It might make some construction projects feasible with money from the federal level. However, when there was a similar provision in the stimulus package Obama signed, the GOP legislature in Wisconsin put a moratorium on municipalities in the state seeking federal money for pedestrian and bicycling infrastructure.

In order for there to be tangible improvements to the people-powered transportation network, there needs to be stringent walkability requirements for the entire interstate system if even just for new construction. Every freeway project in my area during my lifetime has made pedestrian crossings fewer and farther between. A lot of suburbs deliberately oppose increased accessibility with the city and use the interstate system as a barrier.

I picked that up when I was in the Atlanta area for work - they were explicitly happy that the transit system didn't go to their neighbourhood, and that expansion in their direction had been fought against. I found it bizarre, as here the most expensive developments are around the transit nodes - I'd rather sit on transit than drive if it isn't significantly longer. I ride my bike far more than either, and when I do use my car for commute it's usually because I need to do something in the trip beyond getting myself to work and back.