Dun Laoghaire Traffic & Commuting Chat

Cyrus wrote: »

thats a good point which i hadnt considered.

they have made a bags of this.

At least they are consistent in making a bags of things:D

Mav11 wrote: »

Yes, see post above.

It not only applies to new houses but all houses which are traded (bought/sold) are revalued to the price paid for LPT purposes.

thats a good point which i hadnt considered.

they have made a bags of this.

Cyrus wrote: »

you realise how someone who bought a new house will feel thats unfair right?

Mav11 wrote: »

Yes to point a) on charging new houses. On point b) its a political hot potato because they introduced an inherently unfair system in the first place.

Yes, see post above.

It not only applies to new houses but all houses which are traded (bought/sold) are revalued to the price paid for LPT purposes.

Mav11 wrote: »

You value it at the price paid for it.

you realise how someone who bought a new house will feel thats unfair right?

Cyrus wrote: »

the two points you make aren't really compatible, how do you value a house built in 2019 for example ? if everyone else is on a 2013 valuation.

You value it at the price paid for it.

loyatemu wrote: »

a) is not sustainable, they have to start charging those houses
b) is a political hot potato - expect to see it kicked down the road yet again.

the two points you make aren't really compatible, how do you value a house built in 2019 for example ? if everyone else is on a 2013 valuation.

loyatemu wrote: »

a) is not sustainable, they have to start charging those houses
b) is a political hot potato - expect to see it kicked down the road yet again.

Yes to point a) on charging new houses. On point b) its a political hot potato because they introduced an inherently unfair system in the first place.

loyatemu

Cyrus wrote: »

i didnt realise the split was 80/20, if thats the case its less of an issue as it means the majority of this 'increase' will stay in DLR.

itll be interesting to see how the government manage the issue of:

a) new builds that have so far been exempted LTP and
b) valuation of existing houses as it hasnt changed in 7 years now

a) is not sustainable, they have to start charging those houses
b) is a political hot potato - expect to see it kicked down the road yet again.

Mav11 wrote: »

Agree with you on the mismanagement of finances (€36m library) but transfers to weaker counties makes sense. Think of places like Leitrim with small populations and the same levels of infrastructure to maintain.

i didnt realise the split was 80/20, if thats the case its less of an issue as it means the majority of this 'increase' will stay in DLR.

itll be interesting to see how the government manage the issue of:

a) new builds that have so far been exempted LTP and
b) valuation of existing houses as it hasnt changed in 7 years now

Cyrus wrote: »

not sure on the votes, but if the finances are in such a dire state this redirection of funds is a bad joke.

Agree with you on the mismanagement of finances (€36m library) but transfers to weaker counties makes sense. Think of places like Leitrim with small populations and the same levels of infrastructure to maintain.

Cyrus wrote: »

not sure on the votes, but if the finances are in such a dire state this redirection of funds is a bad joke.

As councils have limited powers, they have few options to raise revenues.

They control just two taxes:

(1) comm rates
(2) LPT, and here they can just go up or down by 15%

They also have their fees and charges.

Mav11 wrote: »

AFAIK yes, transfers from "wealthier" to "poorer" CC's are still occurring.

Yes, most countries have a form of fiscal equalisation, as this is known.

In the Irish case, it is horizontal, i.e. the stronger councils redistribute to the weaker ones. Same in Germany.

In other countries, it is vertical, i.e. the central Govt redistributes to the weaker local govts.

https://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/default/files/publications/files/final_2020_lpt_allocations_after_local_variation.pdf

Cyrus wrote: »

are these funds still being partially sent outside DLR?

All councils keep 80% of LPT, the other 20% is put into a fund to redistribute to the weaker councils.

https://www.housing.gov.ie/sites/default/files/publications/files/final_2020_lpt_allocations_after_local_variation.pdf

RosieJoe wrote: »

Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown homeowners face 15% hike in property tax

Very bad maths by journalist.

LPT = 100

DLR vote to cut by max 15%, as allowed by central Govt

LPT = 85

COVID happens, DLR finances take a huge hit.

LPT back up to 100, means an increase of 15 on 85.

15/85 = 17.65% rise.

Mav11 wrote: »

AFAIK yes, transfers from "wealthier" to "poorer" CC's are still occurring. Can you look up anywhere which of the councillors voted against this?

not sure on the votes, but if the finances are in such a dire state this redirection of funds is a bad joke.

Cyrus wrote: »

are these funds still being partially sent outside DLR?

AFAIK yes, transfers from "wealthier" to "poorer" CC's are still occurring. Can you look up anywhere which of the councillors voted against this?

Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown homeowners face 15% hike in property tax

RosieJoe wrote: »

Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown homeowners face 15% hike in property tax

are these funds still being partially sent outside DLR?

RosieJoe

At a meeting on Monday night councillors failed to agree a now traditional discount of 15 per cent on Local Property Tax bills – the maximum allowed by the Government.

The result is that household bills in the area which encompasses some of the State’s most expensive housing valued in multi-millions of euro, will rise by 15 per cent.

fixXxer wrote: »

Press Photographers Association of Ireland Exhibition 2020 has been extended until Septemebr 30th in the Lexicon. Well worth a look, there are some astounding photographs on display.

Went down to the Lexicon for the first time ever today. Great exhibition, fine building, but can't see where the €36m went!!!

Gaspode

Guys, it is possible to discuss a subject without resorting to name-calling. Any more rubbish & bans will be dished out

Cyrus wrote: »

the resident intellectual? oh you flatter me

tell you what, why dont you get down off your high horse and lighten up, we had moved on from this and you come steaming in fishing for likes or for someone to admire your bike or something.

your sole contribution here was to have a dig at me, how would you expect me to react?

I pointed out that at the same time as traffic was chronically poor in Dun Laoighaire, I encountered the worst M50 congestion ever on a Sunday - (and google traffic showed this to be a repeated pattern over the entirety of Dublin/Wicklow/Louth near the coast)

As others had pointed out to you repeatedly, traffic was a) especially bad in general on Sunday & b) had been increasingly bad in Dun Laoighaire on a Sunday even before the change

You refused to acknowledge any of that and stood by your original point that "it must be the change due to cycling".

That's not having a dig at you, but I understand that some people view any attempt to correct their (repeated) fundamental misunderstandings as a personal attack.

I saved the 'dig' at you for when you made the fallacious argument that my having not posted before somehow rendered your posts immune to criticism.

If you want to post laughably anti-intellectual arguments without being called on it, why don't you go to twitter and set your account to private? You're not entitled to feel smart on the internet, especially not when your arguments quite clearly aren't.

Deleted User wrote: »

Can you refer me to any of your excellent contributions? Perhaps I missed them as I felt my neurons choosing suicide over the thought of reading yet more of your incessantly stupid 'points'.

"On a day where traffic was chronically bad all over Dublin, it must have all been caused by one small change in one small part of Dublin. Hi I'm Cyrus, the resident intellectual of the Dun Laoighaire thread. Don't ever dare challenge me because my contributions are amazing and I'm so smart"

the resident intellectual? oh you flatter me

tell you what, why dont you get down off your high horse and lighten up, we had moved on from this and you come steaming in fishing for likes or for someone to admire your bike or something.

your sole contribution here was to have a dig at me, how would you expect me to react?

Cyrus wrote: »

cool story bro.

it would be strange if an attack on vehicular infrastructure was an attack on my ego given how little i use it.

again i refer to your excellent contributions on the matter.

Can you refer me to any of your excellent contributions? Perhaps I missed them as I felt my neurons choosing suicide over the thought of reading yet more of your incessantly stupid 'points'.

"On a day where traffic was chronically bad all over Dublin, it must have all been caused by one small change in one small part of Dublin. Hi I'm Cyrus, the resident intellectual of the Dun Laoighaire thread. Don't ever dare challenge me because my contributions are amazing and I'm so smart"

helimachoptor

Awaaf wrote: »

On a separate note I have been watching the southbound queue for the Bakers Corner lights for the last while. The queue is no worse than usual but the amount of drivers doing U-turns to leave to queue is greatly increased. Make of it what you will!

yeah its been very bad, I'm not sure if its a recent bias thing, but its seems very bad over the last 1-2 weeks.

Deleted User wrote: »

See? Not even a hint of a coherent or cogent argument. Just more nonsense because you still can't explain why you are against any of this other than "An attack on vehicular infrastructure is an attack on my ego"

cool story bro.

it would be strange if an attack on vehicular infrastructure was an attack on my ego given how little i use it.

again i refer to your excellent contributions on the matter.

Cyrus wrote: »

why didnt you cycle?

and i take issue with rabbitting incessantly.

allow me to go and look up your stellar contributions because i don't remember them.

See? Not even a hint of a coherent or cogent argument. Just more nonsense because you still can't explain why you are against any of this other than "An attack on vehicular infrastructure is an attack on my ego"

Awaaf

On a separate note I have been watching the southbound queue for the Bakers Corner lights for the last while. The queue is no worse than usual but the amount of drivers doing U-turns to leave to queue is greatly increased. Make of it what you will!

Deleted User wrote: »

It took me an hour to get from J14 of the M50 to just past Bray South on the M11 yesterday afternoon. There was no crash/accident or any events. I have never experienced that before on a Sunday.

I also didn't notice a bike lane on the m50/m11.

You do understand that correlation /=/ causation right? You've been rabbiting on incessantly in this thread and the only point you've ever actually raised is "I have a visceral negative reaction to the loss of any vehicular infrastructure regardless of circumstances or evidence, but I don't know why".

why didnt you cycle?

and i take issue with rabbitting incessantly.

allow me to go and look up your stellar contributions because i don't remember them.

Cyrus wrote: »

The change in the traffic layout , she said countless people were driving down the road realising they could go no further and u turning into the car park and turning back around .

That coupled with the changes on the coast road I assume, I live the other side so not really sure she was coming from foxrock

It took me an hour to get from J14 of the M50 to just past Bray South on the M11 yesterday afternoon. There was no crash/accident or any events. I have never experienced that before on a Sunday.

I also didn't notice a bike lane on the m50/m11.

You do understand that correlation /=/ causation right? You've been rabbiting on incessantly in this thread and the only point you've ever actually raised is "I have a visceral negative reaction to the loss of any vehicular infrastructure regardless of circumstances or evidence, but I don't know why".