KCC roads insanity

L1011

As an aside, at least the snow stopped people following (by stopping them seeing) the old road markings at the 67 terminus and then swerving when they realised they were about to kerb their wheels... even if a new surface is going on those should have been burnt or milled off as soon as the "lane" was too narrow; but as with the blocked exits and no pedestrian lights etc it seems there is no oversight of that construction at all

Orion

HonalD wrote: »

Wow, that's a big leap, connecting timing of surveys with gritting.....and then coming out with a statement like that. Your opinion is obviously very low. You really should complain more.

It's actually based on 16 years of witnessing poor decision making from the road engineering department.

And to go back to a previous comment this thread had been about maynooth and L1011 is clearly in maynooth so stating that it could have been about all of kildare is the leap.

lucernarian

HonalD wrote: »

That's not correct for 6pm yesterday and that's my point. It may be true for 3am last night (you've seen the empirical data) and maybe they were gritted but there is no evidence to say that the surface temperature at 6pm in Maynooth was cold enough that the roads needed gritting.

I'm also not sure that there is an obligation to treat roads at all but I'm open to correction. Factual correction as opposed to opinion based commentary.

No evidence because I didn't screenshot the NRA weather table yesterday late afternoon and evening?

That is extraordinarily convenient. You indeed appear to have literally no proof as to how the roads in Maynooth were.

Notwithstanding that, perhaps you can enlighten us with what the criteria are, and whether KCC apply some ISO standard or similar SOPs in how they manage road weather issues. Or would that be saying too much?

bduffy

lucernarian wrote: »

Notwithstanding that, perhaps you can enlighten us with what the criteria are, and whether KCC apply some ISO standard or similar SOPs in how they manage road weather issues. Or would that be saying too much?

Here are a few examples to look at.....
http://www.saltassociation.co.uk/de-icing-roads/best-practices/

HonalD

lucernarian wrote: »

Notwithstanding that, perhaps you can enlighten us with what the criteria are, and whether KCC apply some ISO standard or similar SOPs in how they manage road weather issues. Or would that be saying too much?

If all @L1011, @Orion and yourself are sure the road was icy at 6pm last night and should have been treated then one out of the 3 of you should be able to support that with some facts. As you can't, then you cannot agree that what you believe is true.

The limit of my "enlightenment" is that the original post by @L1011 was speculative and sensationalist. It hasn't (and appears cannot) be substantiated by any facts so if you all want to continue to deny the obvious then feel free to boost your number of posts on boards.ie.

Perhaps one of you can ask KCC what their procedure is - I honestly don't know what it is but it is based on road temperature. Even request it under foi?

HonalD

L1011 wrote: »

Considering KCC don't appear to know them (gritting whenever it suits them, traffic or not), I don't see how putting research in to it is going to help



I drove on them. You didn't.

You argue a lot on here - its actually nearly all your posts on this subforum - about roads and traffic in North Kildare constantly showing absolutely zero knowledge of the actual situation here. Why?



If I get an actual person, are they going to bother sending gritters out when the road is already screwed or just wait until the presumably scheduled one for that night? I'd wager the latter.

You seem to have a basis against KCC. If you don't know what the policy and procedures are then how can you say they don't adhere to them, that is nonsensical.

With regard to the "icy roads" at 6pm that you drove on, which ones were they? You still haven't narrowed it down to a street or road or two or three...and please don't make assumptions about me, I've never said I wasn't driving in Maynooth yesterday evening and have acknowledged that there was light snow so I must have been in the area........

What I post about, and how articulate I am are not a concern for another poster. Play the ball not the player. And whether I know more about roads or Maynooth or politics is irrelevant - but your deprecating comment is noted and the next one will be reported as I don't comment the poster, just the posts.

HonalD

L1011 wrote: »

My opinion is based on over a decade of complaining to them before I gave up. You get responses so bad a child can see through the "logic" in them and most importantly - nothing done.

Have you ever tried complaining to KCC about roads?

Yes, along with thousands of others. I've experience of observations and comments in many county councils around Ireland and it is clear that queries are answered. One may not like or agree with the answers given but they are.

An alternative is to ask a local councillor to submit a question. They also are required.

Based on the constant replies to anything I post in this forum, I cannot imagine that some posters would accept some answers, even if they were written in blood.

If you've given up complaining then my point about complaining here is accurate. What you write here will fall, on deaf ears if you don't send it to the council. How else will they know of your complaint.

HonalD

Orion wrote: »

It's actually based on 16 years of witnessing poor decision making from the road engineering department.

And to go back to a previous comment this thread had been about maynooth and L1011 is clearly in maynooth so stating that it could have been about all of kildare is the leap.

Sorry but this type of post is exactly what has annoyed the southerners on the forum. @L1011 set this thread up as a KCC bashing thread so it is logical that if someone refers to something (roads) then it refers to County Kildare.

Just because he lives in Maynooth does not mean he is referring to a road in Maynooth (Apologies if you are female).

L1011

HonalD wrote: »

Yes, along with thousands of others. I've experience of observations and comments in many county councils around Ireland and it is clear that queries are answered. One may not like or agree with the answers given but they are.

An alternative is to ask a local councillor to submit a question. They also are required.

Based on the constant replies to anything I post in this forum, I cannot imagine that some posters would accept some answers, even if they were written in blood.

If you've given up complaining then my point about complaining here is accurate. What you write here will fall, on deaf ears if you don't send it to the council. How else will they know of your complaint.

I've seen responses given to councillors. They are as ridiculous. Complaints are dismissed and ignored. Better to embarrass in public than waste time in private.

Why are you so defensive of KCC and their obvious failings in relations to roads? Nobody else attempts to defend the indefensible here.

Straffan Road and Celbridge Road by the way. Major regionals.

HonalD

L1011 wrote: »

I've seen responses given to councillors. They are as ridiculous. Complaints are dismissed and ignored. Better to embarrass in public than waste time in private.

Why are you so defensive of KCC and their obvious failings in relations to roads? Nobody else attempts to defend the indefensible here.

Straffan Road and Celbridge Road by the way. Major regionals.

I'm not defending anyone. If you've given up on our political system then so be it, that's your decision and I've no problem with that at all.

My problem is that Your post was without factual foundation and you haven't fessed up to that. But if you don't want to do that then that's ok with me too, just saying.

L1011

HonalD wrote: »

I'm not defending anyone. If you've given up on our political system then so be it, that's your decision and I've no problem with that at all.

My problem is that Your post was without factual foundation and you haven't fessed up to that. But if you don't want to do that then that's ok with me too, just saying.

Can you prove the roads weren't icy? Or that that were treated?

If not, you have no basis in claiming it wasn't factual.

I've given up on KCC's roads department until they get new staff - that is all.

Orion

Just as an FYI the roads are iced right now. But that's probably not fact.

Orion

HonalD wrote: »

I'm not defending anyone. If you've given up on our political system then so be it, that's your decision and I've no problem with that at all.

My problem is that Your post was without factual foundation and you haven't fessed up to that. But if you don't want to do that then that's ok with me too, just saying.

Are roads engineers politicians now? I thought they were staff.

HonalD

L1011 wrote: »

Can you prove the roads weren't icy? Or that that were treated?

If not, you have no basis in claiming it wasn't factual.

I've given up on KCC's roads department until they get new staff - that is all.

Is there something wrong with the concept that when someone posts something on a public forum, is then challenged about the factual nature of the post, continues to avoid providing or admitting that it was observational data only and is given the option of Fessing up (or dropping the issue)?

Because why are you continuing to avoid admitting your post was only an opinion?

You are obviously a skilled contributor to boards.ie but to say that I have no basis to call you out is wrong.

You said something, it's been challenged, you prove it or withdraw it. If it was true, you could easily do that but you can't and won't admit it. That's frustrating.

HonalD

Orion wrote: »

Just as an FYI the roads are iced right now. But that's probably not fact.

Posting at 3am is never a good idea. Posting sarcastic comments at 3am is also not a good idea.

Based on the Met Eireann forecast, the time of day and the preceding hours of very low surface temperature, I'd have no reason to disbelieve that. So I can accept your observation as factual in this instance.

HonalD

Orion wrote: »

Are roads engineers politicians now? I thought they were staff.

Why do you keep answering post to @L1011 like you are the same person? That's weird.

I haven't said anything about staff members or different grades/professions and wouldn't of any organisation or profession as that's not fair comment in a anonymous forum.

If you really care about change and changing how any public body works then get the legislation, work out the structure and put a case forward for change. There are mechanisms there and I'm not an expert in this field so someone in Public Authority Management could assist. I'm sure if your case has merit then it will be considered.

If you don't want to do that, how can anything change, except for your number of posts counter on boards.ie.

L1011

HonalD wrote: »

Is there something wrong with the concept that when someone posts something on a public forum, is then challenged about the factual nature of the post, continues to avoid providing or admitting that it was observational data only and is given the option of Fessing up (or dropping the issue)?

Because why are you continuing to avoid admitting your post was only an opinion?

You are obviously a skilled contributor to boards.ie but to say that I have no basis to call you out is wrong.

You said something, it's been challenged, you prove it or withdraw it. If it was true, you could easily do that but you can't and won't admit it. That's frustrating.

The onus is on you to disprove it as you are the one insisting it's untrue; particularly when there is second party confirmation of the case. You seem certain that you can, but don't.

I'm not the same person as Orion - Maynooth is a big town and its not hard for people to notice obvious things

Orion

HonalD wrote: »

So I can accept your observation as factual in this instance.

That's very good of you thanks. You can also accept that I do know ice when I see it and it was there yesterday morning too. All I really need are eyes to see it.

Can I ask what qualification you have to refuse to accept empirical observations as fact? Are you a meteorologist? Or an expert on road conditions? You definitely seem to have very strong opinions for someone who doesn't live in maynooth that are contrary to the observations of those who do.

Fwiw I'm not L1011. To my knowledge we've never met but it is possible we've had pints in the same pub and not known it.

lucernarian

My observations match with L1011's in this instance, though I don't know him or her in the slightest. Do you think anyone would be bothered to make up a story like that, about such a specific time?

It's such a pointless discussion, your word against multiple posters. I've been active on the Weather forum for 12 years besides, I'm no meteorologist but I know a forecast for black ice in an inland location when I see it.

BuffyBot

Folks, take a deep, deep breath before posting things you know better than to say

HonalD

L1011 wrote: »

HonalD wrote: »

Is there something wrong with the concept that when someone posts something on a public forum, is then challenged about the factual nature of the post, continues to avoid providing or admitting that it was observational data only and is given the option of Fessing up (or dropping the issue)?

Because why are you continuing to avoid admitting your post was only an opinion?

You are obviously a skilled contributor to boards.ie but to say that I have no basis to call you out is wrong.

You said something, it's been challenged, you prove it or withdraw it. If it was true, you could easily do that but you can't and won't admit it. That's frustrating.

The onus is on you to disprove it as you are the one insisting it's untrue; particularly when there is second party confirmation of the case. You seem certain that you can, but don't.

I'm not the same person as Orion - Maynooth is a big town and its not hard for people to notice obvious things

There is no onus on me to do anything. I've queried a post that I claim to be sensationalist and not based on facts. 
We've been round the houses (with plenty of diversions) and you've ignored every request to prove that what you said was true. You believe it to be true and you have another poster (or two) believing that too. 
If you have no proof then how can I believe you?

HonalD

Orion wrote: »

HonalD wrote: »

So I can accept your observation as factual in this instance.

to refuse to accept empirical observations as fact? Are you a meteorologist? Or an expert on road conditions? You definitely seem to have very strong opinions for someone who doesn't live in maynooth that are contrary to the observations of those who do.

I'm not accepting observations as empirical proof - you've said something completely different there. 
I've not claimed to have any relevant qualifications.
Did I say that I didn't live in Maynooth and what has that got to do with the discussion? Is the opinion of a resident of Maynooth in some way superior?

HonalD

lucernarian wrote: »

My observations match with L1011's in this instance, though I don't know him or her in the slightest. Do you think anyone would be bothered to make up a story like that, about such a specific time?

It's such a pointless discussion, your word against multiple posters. I've been active on the Weather forum for 12 years besides, I'm no meteorologist but I know a forecast for black ice in an inland location when I see it.

My beef is not with anyone on the board but with one post.

Orion

HonalD wrote: »

I'm not accepting observations as empirical proof - you've said something completely different there. 
I've not claimed to have any relevant qualifications.
Did I say that I didn't live in Maynooth and what has that got to do with the discussion? Is the opinion of a resident of Maynooth in some way superior?

So you have no qualifications in the area but you refuse to accept that multiple people have witnessed ice. That does not compute.

You said much earlier in this thread that you're not in Maynooth. It's not that Maynooth residents are superior. It's that we live here and know what we saw but you seem to know better than us. That also does not compute.

L1011

HonalD wrote: »

There is no onus on me to do anything. I've queried a post that I claim to be sensationalist and not based on facts. 
We've been round the houses (with plenty of diversions) and you've ignored every request to prove that what you said was true. You believe it to be true and you have another poster (or two) believing that too. 
If you have no proof then how can I believe you?

You made very specific claims denying it was true, as if you had evidence to the contrary. Do you or do you not?

The diversions and round the houses comes from you avoiding this point.

If you can prove the roads weren't icy or were treated, you would have some basis of claiming the post is inaccurate and justifying your repeated demands to "fess up" - precisely what this means outside of a 1940s US based kids novel I'm not sure though. As it stands you can't, and we have multiple independent witnesses to the fact that the roads were icy and untreated.

Why are you so agitated about trying to claim they weren't icy?

lucernarian

HonalD wrote: »

My beef is not with anyone on the board but with one post.

There comes a point where nothing more can be added to the discussion, a forum is going to have claims made about any manner of things in life. I'm sure the roads dept in KCC would view this thread a bit differently to the posters too - to what most people have been saying here tbh! But the unwashed masses won't know any better.

L1011

lucernarian wrote: »

There comes a point where nothing more can be added to the discussion, a forum is going to have claims made about any manner of things in life. I'm sure the roads dept in KCC would view this thread a bit differently to the posters too.

Probably not, the inability to admit to anything being wrong that we're seeing here is rather like KCCs.

ghostdancer

i drove through Maynooth (and surrounding areas) on Thursday at 6:30pm, and again around 9pm, and there were no issues with ice at all IMO.
at 6:30pm there was so much traffic that there was no chance of dangerous conditions setting in.
9pm was fine too as it had subsequently rained and not frozen.

the Dublin Rd. was gritted the next morning at 7am, so presumably they chose to prioritise gritting overnight, rather than sending out teams in the middle of the afternoon for little benefit.

Flibble

Sign gone up in Maynooth at the junction by Esso saying the Straffan Road will be closed off this Saturday & Sunday. I THINK it said in the evening but can't be sure, did anyone see the times displayed?

L1011

You'd think they might have this on their website; but the most recent road closure is from April 2016.

http://kildare.ie/CountyCouncil/RoadsandTransportation/TemporaryRoadClosures/