Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

buffalo · 24-06-2021 01:01PM

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Good point, has a woman ever posted in the cycling forum?! It's probably 90% men on this whole site anyway.

As long as we don't let a woman become a mod... :pac:

ARX · 24-06-2021 01:42PM

tomasrojo wrote: »

I seem to remember that people who habitually cycle are on average more likely to be middle class than people who habitually drive or habitually use public transport, and this was explained by middle class people being less encumbered by the fear of looking "poor". I can't remember where I saw it now though.

If you want to find a 1990 Toyota Corolla you should start looking in Monkstown or Dalkey. There's a lot of modest old cars parked around the most exclusive addresses in south county Dublin. I guess when your house is worth €3 million you're not concerned that people might think you're too poor to buy a new car.

magicbastarder · 24-06-2021 01:48PM

i went to a private school, and the people you knew were rich were the ones in the middle of the scale. the chap whose father was (is) eye wateringly rich, i did not know this until third year i think.

ted1 · 24-06-2021 05:06PM

Seth Brundle wrote: »

https://twitter.com/wwywwwgh/status/1407959695151796227

Any outcome?

Fighting Tao · 24-06-2021 05:15PM

Irish Times have this update.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/residents-were-excluded-from-sandymount-cycleway-plan-high-court-told-1.4602622

Podge_irl · 24-06-2021 05:26PM

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Irish Times have this update.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/residents-were-excluded-from-sandymount-cycleway-plan-high-court-told-1.4602622

There is also evidence that, far from just being a six-month trial, it is intended the cycleway should remain in place permanently if deemed successful by Dublin City Council, Neil Steen SC said.

eh....obviously?

24-06-2021 05:32PM

Some real chestnuts being argued. You'd swear this was GoD and Mr Waters

Fighting Tao · 24-06-2021 05:32PM

Podge_irl wrote: »

eh....obviously?

The apparent lack of understand of words in the English language from Carvills and Flynn’s SC has me seriously worried about the state of the legal profession in Ireland.

buffalo · 24-06-2021 06:05PM

Podge_irl wrote: »

eh....obviously?

"If this turns out to be good, then they'll do it again, the monsters!"

tomasrojo · 24-06-2021 07:48PM

I suppose the "deemed a success by Dublin City Council" is the sticking point. Maybe get the ECJ in to adjudicate?

magicbastarder · 24-06-2021 08:43PM

the European Cycling Jerkwads?

tomasrojo · 24-06-2021 08:50PM

I suspect they're middle class. Not going to let them get their (possibly cleated) boots on the neck of Sandymount.

AndrewJRenko · 24-06-2021 09:24PM

Seaswimmer wrote: »

I think the "voted against" are the people we need to thank. There are 10 names on there??

My mistake x 2

Thelonious Monk · 27-06-2021 02:25PM

Populist clown

https://mobile.twitter.com/ffclaireoconnor/status/1408871374974824449

28-06-2021 02:59PM

How much longer will they be in the courts until a decision is known?

Peregrine · 28-06-2021 03:03PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How much longer will they be in the courts until a decision is known?

Probably a few months. The judge should give a rough estimate after the hearing.

tomasrojo · 28-06-2021 07:14PM

Peregrine wrote: »

Probably a few months. The judge should give a rough estimate after the hearing.

I have no legal expertise at all, but I thought this hearing was to see whether DCC exceeded its authority in trying to start the trial? There isn't any need for months of delay, I assumed from that. Either they did, and the trial is substanatially changed or dropped, or they didn't and it goes ahead.

The hearing only had two days set aside for it, so I suppose it's already exceeded that.

yascaoimhin · 29-06-2021 07:08AM

tomasrojo wrote: »

I have no legal expertise at all, but I thought this hearing was to see whether DCC exceeded its authority in trying to start the trial? There isn't any need for months of delay, I assumed from that. Either they did, and the trial is substanatially changed or dropped, or they didn't and it goes ahead.

The hearing only had two days set aside for it, so I suppose it's already exceeded that.

The hearing was only two days, but the judge is in no rush. He can take many weeks reviewing the evidence

29-06-2021 08:25AM

tomasrojo wrote: »

I have no legal expertise at all, but I thought this hearing was to see whether DCC exceeded its authority in trying to start the trial? There isn't any need for months of delay, I assumed from that. Either they did, and the trial is substanatially changed or dropped, or they didn't and it goes ahead.

The hearing only had two days set aside for it, so I suppose it's already exceeded that.

It isn't unreasonable to assume the delay was the primary reason for taking this action!

Peregrine · 29-06-2021 09:58AM

tomasrojo wrote: »

I have no legal expertise at all, but I thought this hearing was to see whether DCC exceeded its authority in trying to start the trial? There isn't any need for months of delay, I assumed from that. Either they did, and the trial is substanatially changed or dropped, or they didn't and it goes ahead.

The hearing only had two days set aside for it, so I suppose it's already exceeded that.

The hearings are for each party to present their case but all evidence will already have been presented in written form at this stage. The judge can give an oral judgement after the hearing but I think it's more common to give written judgements addressing each of the parties' arguments in judicial review cases.

The hearing continues at 2pm today. It should be the last day.

Thelonious Monk · 29-06-2021 10:29AM

So we have the hearing concluding today, and then it can take months for a decision is that right?

Peregrine · 29-06-2021 10:49AM

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

So we have the hearing concluding today, and then it can take months for a decision is that right?

I believe so, yes.

I think the judge should give an approximate date for a written judgement. Like, say, 'October' before giving a more specific date later.

tomasrojo · 29-06-2021 12:37PM

Ok, I can't argue with any of the above as, as I said, it's not remotely one of my areas of competence.

Grassey · 29-06-2021 01:53PM

The possibility of over a year of half finished work to be given the eventual nod to proceed for a trial following it is such a collosal waste of time and effort.

Peregrine · 29-06-2021 02:05PM

tomasrojo wrote: »

Ok, I can't argue with any of the above as, as I said, it's not remotely one of my areas of competence.

I'm only basing it off following previous judicial reviews. Not an expert in any sense.

Who knows? We'll see what happens.

Fian · 30-06-2021 11:59AM

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Populist clown

https://mobile.twitter.com/ffclaireoconnor/status/1408871374974824449

Instead of calling for an "off the road cycle path" that would give everyone what they want at no cost / loss of space to motorists they should call for an "in the sky cycle track" which would also give cyclists the infrastructure they need without any cost to drivers, and would have the added bonus of giving the cyclists a nice view over the bay while they cycle along.

Maybe they could also call for it to operate as a travelator so that it could be more open to people who are too tired to pedal into the wind/uphill. And it should be invisible so it doesn't detract from anyone else view of the bay.

Duckjob · 30-06-2021 05:50PM

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Populist clown

https://mobile.twitter.com/ffclaireoconnor/status/1408871374974824449

FF in talking-out-of-both-sides-of-their-mouth shocker.

AndrewJRenko · 30-06-2021 07:18PM

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Populist clown

https://mobile.twitter.com/ffclaireoconnor/status/1408871374974824449

Duckjob wrote: »

FF in talking-out-of-both-sides-of-their-mouth shocker.

Why is a local Councillor setting out the position on an important policy issue, rather than the candidate herself?

Effects · 30-06-2021 07:23PM

What's the problem with just putting in the trial cycle path, and have it in place, until the magical path that most of the candidates are talking about gets built?

Duckjob · 30-06-2021 07:43PM

Effects wrote: »

What's the problem with just putting in the trial cycle path, and have it in place, until the magical path that most of the candidates are talking about gets built?

Because Road Tax- basically. FF pandering to the Road Tax wallies.

Cycle infrastructure planned for south Dublin

Comments