Galway traffic

You’d want a high level of confidence to cycle on stretches of that road. I really think the the cycle lanes should have been added on stretches like this first before even considering the most iconic stretch of road in Galway

“they couldn’t care less how it impacts anyone but themselves”

Unfortunately that’s already proven to be the case in Galway. They closed off access (except for bikes) to a local school and gloat online about it as if it’s a success. Their boast is that up to 60 bikes sometimes cycle to the school out of a school of approximately 600 pupils. This is touted as a great success as it’s an increase of 100% or some such crap. They couldn’t care less about the other 90% of pupils who don’t or can’t cycle. And realistically, you’ll usually see about 20 to 30 bikes outside the school on most days.

These are mostly the same people pushing to ruin the Prom.

Which would mean Dr Mannix would be a runner linked to Millars lane... It would have cost more but it would link Barna Woods to the schools and town... It would have had a major cycle rout going through the heart of Salthill Residential linked to Knocknacarra...

Very little needs to be done with Dr Mannix in my opinion, its the linkage to get from Millars Lane onto Threadneedle Road that you mention here alright that is missing and is crucial. It is a major barrier - lots of examples of this all over the City - many estates especially those built last 30yrs or so just need minor changes to create a walking and cycling network within the local area's.

Surely a lane could go through the back of St. Enda's secondary or the Golf Club. Create a bike crossing (is there such a thing, and if not why not?), across Kingston Road to link with it. Seems like a logical and great idea to me.

The cycleway is being discussed on pat kenny in a few minutes

Pat just said turning Salthill into a one-way carway will result in 50% retail business losses!

It's not a cycling initiative. It's a car free initiative.

You've a weird paranoia about cyclists. Might be time to talk to someone. Maybe also bring up these imaginary groups of suffering people you're seeing everywhere

"...mommys (sic) darlings now having to walk a bit" - what about the parents who have small children who can't yet walk; 

Pushchairs and prams have been around for a couple of centuries. Infant car seats that clip out of a base in the car and slot into a buggy frame in a matter of seconds have been around for a quarter century and are now the norm.

or the parents who have to get on to a job by a certain time and haven't the luxury of parking away from the school

Everyone needs to plan their journeys according to the actual conditions. You could easily flip that to say what about the parents who have to get to a job by a certain time but instead of hopping onto a bike and cycling the 20 minutes to their place of work, and seeing their kids hop on their own bikes and travelling the 10 minutes to school independently, they have to spend twice as long on their journey as it takes 40 minutes to first drop the kids off and then siti n traffic on their way to work. If a school street means a slightly longer journey time for some parents it can also mean a shorter journey time for many others, including those who drive. While those who still opt to drive may have to park a bit further away for younger kids, and walk them all the way to school, for kids who are a bit older the parents can drop them at the top of the street to walk the last stretch by themselves, saving the parents the time previously sent battling their way on the last few yards to the school gate.

A separate real life example: I drive my daughter to training every Saturday morning and collect her 90 minutes later. It takes me about 35 minutes each time for the round trip. In theory she could cycle there by herself in 20 minutes but experience has taught us it is unsafe for her to do so. Should not your concern about a few minutes possibly being added to the journey times of some parents not also apply to parents who find that they still have to chauffeur around teenagers who would be better off exercising their own independence if only they didn't have drivers actively endangering their lives on a daily basis?

or the parents who have to get to more than one school

Same applies as above. My own kids go to two separate schools. None are driven to the door. If I do have to or want to drive my kids to separate schools then I need to allow enough time for the journey, same as any journey.

or the parents who don't want their kids soaked if it's raining?

We live on the west coast of Ireland. Sometimes it rains. When it does we wear suitable coats. Were you really driven to the school door everyday when you were growing up? I certainly wasn't and it definitely wasn't the norm.

As for the "risk" of getting hit. How many were actually hit? Were any? Have a look at the accident report statistics for the area.

It's not about how many kids have been hit, although it happens more often than you might think. It's about how many kids are being driven, not because that is the parents' preference, but because all the other cars make parents afraid that their kids are at risk from drivers parking on pavements, reversing into/out of school gates, close passing etc. Once you significantly reduce that risk you give people back a choice on how they want to travel. Those who want to still drive can. I see this every day in my own local area. Families where the parents lived locally, and would always have walked to school, now feel they have to drive their own kids 500m to school. It's a straight line and would be 2 minute cycle or 6 minute walk, but the combination of drivers using part of the road as a rat run, and driver mayhem approaching the school gates, means those kids are given no choice but to be driven.

Why are you talking about a choice between Dr Mannix and Salthill - why not both?

The width of Dr Mannix encourages speed, I haven't cycled it at rush-hour/school hours but whilst you might think nothing needs doing to it - do you not think that parents might feel their kids would be safer if it was properly segregated? Dr Mannix would probably be fine for me and other confident cyclists but we're not the target for these measures - it's parents feeling confident their kids will be safe using it to allow them to cycle to school on their own or with them - it's for people who aren't currently cycling because they had a scare years ago or people who've never cycled and are put off by all the stories (many from cycling advocates) stating how dangerous cycling is.

I've already given my views on cycling, walking, PT and driving in this thread but you're still imagining cycling boogey men because that's what fits your narrative. I'll try again. I've problems with the cycling groups in this city because I think PT and walking should be the main focus, despite the fact that I like cycling. If you talk to them they agree on the benefits of the above, but they become embattled in an us-vs-them mentality and focus solely on cycling infrastructure and I can see why. You have the walkers and cyclists looking for safety and then the likes of yourself worried about being inconvenienced. It's a similar story with PT and traffic improvements. Can't encourage alternatives to driving absolutely everywhere because some people are worried they might be inconvenienced.

And just to reiterate. It's a car free initiative, not some cycling conspiracy. The school and parents initiated it because of concerns "about the interactions between children and cars in front of the school", not because of some outside group. There's also a whole report on the trial if you want to give your imagination a rest and see why they decided to keep it running.