[Laker14]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Umm...Let's see: Take the exit gate at Liberty Park cited as an example. The residents of Liberty Park KNOW it's there. The landscapers working there KNOW it's there. Most other workers KNOW it's there. I would think that any visitor KNOWS it's there after their first time exiting. So we are left with the miniscule percentage of first time visitors on their first time through who are pretty much blind. So, tell us again how the argument is "silly and foolish"

I think you just did. There is a "minuscule" percentage who have not memorized the roadways because they are new to them. Traffic control devices aren't well designed if they have to rely on memory. They need to be highly visible and designed to be effective for those who have not traveled the road before.
To defend a system that is deficient in that regard by stating "You know it's there" is silly and foolish.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Laker14

I think you just did. There is a "minuscule" percentage who have not memorized the roadways because they are new to them. Traffic control devices aren't well designed if they have to rely on memory. They need to be highly visible and designed to be effective for those who have not traveled the road before.
To defend a system that is deficient in that regard by stating "You know it's there" is silly and foolish.

Sorry to disagree, but my expectation is that someone driving 70 mph on I-75 can avoid a dead animal or debris on the road that they DON'T KNOW is there. Yet we want to excuse those driving at 5 mph to a well-marked exit with a red and white gate arm at eye level? No sale.

[JRcorvette]

They are designed to pop off… I wish that I had that business of replacing or resetting them! It would be a good idea to attach small streamers at the bottom of the gate. People with poor eyesight could see the gate better!

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by JRcorvette

They are designed to pop off… I wish that I had that business of replacing or resetting them! It would be a good idea to attach small streamers at the bottom of the gate. People with poor eyesight could see the gate better!

Which brings us back to the larger issue: should people with poor eyesight be driving AT ALL?

[Laker14]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Sorry to disagree, but my expectation is that someone driving 70 mph on I-75 can avoid a dead animal or debris on the road that they DON'T KNOW is there. Yet we want to excuse those driving at 5 mph to a well-marked exit with a red and white gate arm at eye level? No sale.

You have misrepresented my position. I did not excuse the crashing of a gate. I supported the statement that they are, at times and in certain locations, difficult to see, and that the argument that "you know it's there" is a silly argument to make when designing traffic controls.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Laker14

You have misrepresented my position. I did not excuse the crashing of a gate. I supported the statement that they are, at times and in certain locations, difficult to see, and that the argument that "you know it's there" is a silly argument to make when designing traffic controls.

And my point was that 99+% of drivers know they’re there and poor vision should not be an excuse for hitting a gate; it’s a reason to not be driving

[fdpaq0580]

FYI to whom it matters. Not all drivers going 70 mph on I-75 can or do avoid dead animals or debris in the road. Possible reasons may include, but are not limited to, items being located in a shadow, blending in with surrounds, driver misjudged distance to object by being surrounded by distractions, moving or bright objects attracting driver attention away from stationary objects that drivers don't perceive as a threat, etc.
Also, has anyone ever hit the accelerator harder than intended, or gotten closer to the car or object in front, or had you foot slip off the brake pedal accidentally? You may not have had an accident, but you could have.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

And my point was that 99+% of drivers know they’re there and poor vision should not be an excuse for hitting a gate; it’s a reason to not be driving

Same with golf. 99+% of players know where they want their ball to go. Not hitting the spot dead on, you shouldn't be driving, or chipping, or putting. One error doesn't mean you shouldn't be playing.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

Same with golf. 99+% of players know where they want their ball to go. Not hitting the spot dead on, you shouldn't be driving, or chipping, or putting. One error doesn't mean you shouldn't be playing.

NOT EVEN CLOSE to the same thing, and you know it

[Laker14]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

And my point was that 99+% of drivers know they’re there and poor vision should not be an excuse for hitting a gate; it’s a reason to not be driving

You are conflating "poor vision" with "poor visibility". Two different things. I can see a golf ball in the fairway from 200 yards away (convenient for me since that's about as far as I can hit one), and I can make out the spin and the holes on a fast moving pickleball, yet, in certain lighting situations, I find certain gates to be difficult to see.

My vision (corrected with lenses) is fine. The visibility of the gates could be better.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Laker14

You are conflating "poor vision" with "poor visibility". Two different things. I can see a golf ball in the fairway from 200 yards away (convenient for me since that's about as far as I can hit one), and I can make out the spin and the holes on a fast moving pickleball, yet, in certain lighting situations, I find certain gates to be difficult to see.

My vision (corrected with lenses) is fine. The visibility of the gates could be better.

In your opinion 😀

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by RobinM

Just yesterday we approached (from inside) the Calumet gate. My husband was driving and he remarked that the gate was camouflaged by the vegetation across the street. I’ve been thinking that for a long time but thought it might just be my eyesight. Nope. You can hardly see that the gate is there until you’re practically up to it. I’m sure it’s not the only one.

But we know gate there and the inside gate open automatically.

[EdFNJ]

I've talked to the folks who work on the Mallory gates a few time over the last couple of years since we walk by them every morning and they claim that MANY (not all) of the non-working gates in TV are MECHANICAL issues not due to crashes but due to AGE. Lot's of the gate equipment is well over 15 years old. The crashed gates are obvious, but the last few at Mallory have been mechanical and they are often waiting for parts. Often (at Mallory can't speak for them all) gates are down on both sides and both directions at the same time so obviously that isn't a "crashing" problem.

[It's Hot There]

I see tailgaters all the time.......trying to sneak two vehicles through one opening.

Why?? What's the hurry??

Gate crashing is not the result of poor gate design or poor operation.

I love the gates.

No sympathy for gate crashers.

[asianthree]

The only time I have had an issue seeing a gate was Bright Sun, but even with difficulty seeing the gate I know it’s there.

However, anytime you come off a round about to enter into a Village, “There is a Gate” When you exit ‘There is a Gate”

If the Sun blinds you one still knows there is a gate. If you don’t see the gate, most likely you have no idea you have left the round about.