not much substance in the article, IMO, other than to point out an obvious problem.
where it gets murkier is that local governments generally make decisions about infrastructure based on their perception of the constituents' priorities and desires, as best balanced with cost and safety. in most parts of the country, most people drive, most people view bikes with distrust or disdain, and most people complain about traffic. so those places use their rights-of-way mostly for cars, with some bike lanes thrown in here and there, often poorly designed, rarely forming a complete network.
personally, i would not choose to live in such a place. but everyone votes with their own feet and bank accounts, and most choose to live in places which do not have pro-bicycle or pro-pedestrian or even pro-transit policies. so to some extent, we sleep in the beds we've made.