Thank you for your usual eagle-eye here!

CycleNet is a local cycleway network numbering protocol proposal.  I used to attend Bicycle Committee meetings of SCCRTC to watch if / whether CycleNet would be adopted, but it simply seems to languish in a sort of proposal limbo.

Apparently what happened here is that a "fake path" was asserted here by "somebody" (SCCRTC? my memory fails me) and I erroneously entered it into OSM.

The correction is to use the only other obvious path (part of Great Blue Heron Walkway), connecting otherwise disconnected segments of CycleNet 363, with a bicycle=dismount tag, as it is a pedestrian-only path.

Thank you!