Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

Peregrine

Larbre34 wrote: »

€1,990 has been donated to the opposition legal fund since the announcement of the court action this morning.

Donations have been suspended at €21,345.

How many is that? Like three donations?

Larbre34

ted1 wrote: »

Is this the for the challenge that was lodged today?
Who or what entity is it going to ?

To answer the second question first, according to their own site, the crowd fund is controlled by the STC Community group (Serpentine Avenue, Tritonville Road, Claremont) with "support of of SAMRA (Sandymount and Merrion) and other residents associations"

To answer the first question, I have no idea whatsoever.

To answer Peregrine's question, it consisted of 15 donations, ranging from €15 to €400.

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

To answer the second question first, according to their own site, the crowd fund is controlled by the STC Community group (Serpentine Avenue, Tritonville Road, Claremont) with "support of of SAMRA (Sandymount and Merrion) and other residents associations"

To answer the first question, I have no idea whatsoever.

To answer Peregrine's question, it consisted of 15 donations, ranging from €15 to €400.

Just wondering as there more than likely tax implications for the receiving person / entity.

Cosmos7

Do you need planning/ part 8 for all temporary road 'realignment' over more than 100m. Is EIA screening done for all coned off repairs or pavement screening etc ?

Seth Brundle

:rolleyes:

https://twitter.com/HanneyDP/status/1362526379259154432?s=19

Weepsie

magicbastarder wrote: »

he's certainly pro for cycle emptiness.

All he wants is Dead trees and traffic islands*

* Obscure b-side

Larbre34

Cosmos7 wrote: »

Do you need planning/ part 8 for all temporary road 'realignment' over more than 100m. Is EIA screening done for all coned off repairs or pavement screening etc ?

Planning law doesn't particularly consider temporary civil and public works, works are just works. But you do need the Part 8 procedure, which includes an environment assessment, if it is estimated that the project will cost >€126,000. The estimate for this job is €250,000.

Larbre34

ted1 wrote: »

Just wondering as there more than likely tax implications for the receiving person / entity.

I'm sure there are plenty of precedents out there for the tax treatment of crowd funding/ gofundmes, but I have no idea what they are. You'd have to take it up with Revenue.

Fighting Tao

Yeah, it looks dodgy as fook when random people collect money on the likes of go fund me for things like this. I really hope revenue follow the money trail to ensure that peoples pockets aren’t being lined on the back of crankiness and lies.

tomasrojo

ted1 wrote: »

Not a Windy day, when you need it. Believe me I have tried it. !!! And over several kilometres. The Netherlands is very flat. No hills that contend with and safe segregated routes.

I carried this garden slide on a windy day back from Carrickmines. Principle is about the same, except the slide was more exposed to wind than the windsurfing equipment would be on the trailer my friend had, as that's a lower trailer.



It's certainly a more eccentric and less attractive prospect here than in the Netherlands, so I don't honestly expect people to do it. I was just being pedantic.

tomasrojo

This is neither my friend nor his rig, but it was a bit like this:

p15574

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Yeah, it looks dodgy as fook when random people collect money on the likes of go fund me for things like this. I really hope revenue follow the money trail to ensure that peoples pockets aren’t being lined on the back of crankiness and lies.

Has anyone from the fund addressed the apparent fact that that crowd funded legal actions are against the law?

Grassey

tomasrojo wrote: »

This is neither my friend nor his rig, but it was a bit like this:

I'd a mate years back who had something along these lines for bringing a Kayak from Blanch to the sluice in Lucan.

Peregrine

p15574 wrote: »

Has anyone from the fund addressed the apparent fact that that crowd funded legal actions are against the law?

Shhh.. :P Wait for them to incriminate themselves first!

magicbastarder

p15574 wrote: »

Has anyone from the fund addressed the apparent fact that that crowd funded legal actions are against the law?

really?

AndrewJRenko

magicbastarder wrote: »

really?

I guess he's talking about champerty

https://www.mhc.ie/latest/insights/dispute-resolution-update-third-party-litigation-funding-in-ireland

magicbastarder

doesn't seem to apply in this instance though? there's no profit-seeking here.

Weepsie

Grassey wrote: »

I'd a mate years back who had something along these lines for bringing a Kayak from Blanch to the sluice in Lucan.

Wonder if we know the same guy, as I know someone from Blanch, a keen cyclist, but a top class kayaker

Weepsie

I would argue that some of the donors have no legitimate interest beyond being contrarians

Larbre34

p15574 wrote: »

Has anyone from the fund addressed the apparent fact that that crowd funded legal actions are against the law?

Meh, it is and it isn't. There is case law around maintenance and champerty, which mainly covers financial benefit to third parties by funding a case in which they are not a participant, nor in a case where the funder does not have a direct interest. That doesn't arise here.

Besides, the case has been taken by two individuals, not the organisation(s) who raised the 21k. I have no knowledge directly, but that funding could be paying planning consultants or other indirect costs around the issue and make no direct impact on legal costs.

I'd be shocked if out of the Sandymount residents there wasn't at least one lawyer who had made sure they had their ducks in a row in this regard anyway.

Peregrine

magicbastarder wrote: »

really?

Yes. Maintenance (funding litigation with no direct interest) and champerty (funding litigation in return for profit) have been illegal in Ireland for hundreds of years. Funding litigation isn't illegal if you have a legitimate interest in the case but what constitutes legitimate interest, I don't know. People like company shareholders could claim to have a legitimate interest in a case but I don't know if local agitator is a legitimate interest. We'll find out, I suppose.

At the very least, they should have to demonstrate the interest of all 150 of their funders including the anonymous ones and the fivers.

Weepsie

So are they giving the donations to the individuals and are they declaring it for tax purposes?

Weepsie

Larbre34 wrote: »

I'd be shocked if out of the Sandymount residents there wasn't at least one lawyer who had made sure they had their ducks in a row in this regard anyway.

This is a really elitist, classist nonsense comment and tells me everything about the people objecting.

Only the best, most educated, well paid and wealthy it seems are in Sandymount.

ted1

Larbre34 wrote: »

I'd be shocked if out of the Sandymount residents there wasn't at least one lawyer who had made sure they had their ducks in a row in this regard anyway.

Reminds me of this : https://vlipsy.com/vlip/the-simpsons-sir-theres-an-unruly-mob-to-see-you-0jAEAgxe

magicbastarder

sure 'tis a pity that the people of sandymount don't have decent public transport infrastructure in their area.

Larbre34

Weepsie wrote: »

This is a really elitist, classist nonsense comment and tells me everything about the people objecting.

Only the best, most educated, well paid and wealthy it seems are in Sandymount.

No, it isn't. You've made it that way because its what you chose to see.

The opposition to the cycleway comes from Sandymount, Merrion, Irishtown, Ringsend, Bath Avenue, Beggars Bush, Ballsbridge and beyond.

Take a look at the Ringsend community facebook pages if you want to see the most unvarnished and vitriolic opprobrium.

I'm saying, that out of the huge number of opponents, there are no doubt a few lawyers giving guidance on what is and isn't possible.

You're the one who made it, wrongly, into being about elitism, and frankly its just lazy and weak.

silverharp

I thought originally there was going to be traffic control measures/new cycle lane on Park Avenue , one of my neighbours was saying thats not happening and that buses will be using it now?? anyone confirm. That would make my kids cycling experience worse going to school if the road becomes the main rat run in the area. There are also possible implications for the sustainability of the 2 clubs on that road , Railway Union and Pembroke if general parking is taken out to facilitate buses

PaulieC

Larbre34 wrote: »

Take a look at the Ringsend community facebook pages if you want to see the most unvarnished and vitriolic opprobrium.

Please don't. It's infinitely worse than any journal comments section.

magicbastarder

Larbre34 wrote: »

Take a look at the Ringsend community facebook pages if you want to see the most unvarnished and vitriolic opprobrium.

opposition is always - always - more vocal than support, regardless of actual numbers. i see it where i grew up, over the plans for the greenway. the people in support of it don't want to voice their support because those leading the opposition are so strident.

magicbastarder

anyway, i suspect the outcome of this will be similar to what happened with the luas and dunville avenue. a bunch of well connected people will use their proximity to those in power to pull strings to deny facilities to those more in need of those facilities. plus ca change.