> So if [bike] commuting were the only purpose of the road, you would essentially never need to replace a road again. You're assuming that use is the only thin

> So if [bike] commuting were the only purpose of the road, you would essentially never need to replace a road again. You're assuming that use is the only thing that harms roads, and that's clearly wrong. I mentioned tearing up the roads for utility changes. Another factor is weather, which amplifies the problems caused by utility "tear ups". It's fairly easy to see these effects; pedestrian-only and bike-and-pedestrian-only "roads" deteriorate. However, we know also know that (as you mentioned), these roads won't be bike only. In short, there will be some maintenance savings, but not a lot.