[merrymini]

Keep the gates to protect golf carts and lose the attendants.

[lawgolfer]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

Since we have owned a home off Morse, north of 466 for 10 years, I am as familiar with that gate as just about anyone. There is a good distance between the gate and 466, and I have never seen automobile traffic back up anywhere even close the 466. On the other, I have witnessed many dangerous encounters between automobiles and golf carts trying to cross over to the MMP because of the gate attendants not staggering automobile traffic enough to let carts through. The picture below occasionally happens when the gate attendant never bothers to turn around and check out how many golf carts are backed up behind them. In my opinion, that area would be much better served by not having a gate attendant.

The biggest flaw in the design at Morse and 466 is that the gatehouse/gates are a considerable distance from the cross-over for southbound carts. If the gatehouse/gates were moved to the north and abutted the cart cross-over(as they are at every other gate in The Villages), northbound vehicles would have to come to a stop and carts could proceed to cross-over. Of course, the best solution would be to eliminate the cross-over and install a tunnel for carts.

With the present design, N/B vehicles have a "running start" if the attendant waves them through and are at a high speed when they reach the cross-over. If they are not waved through and they do stop for the gate, the distance to the cross-over still provides a long distance during which the vehicles are accelerating.

An additional benefit of moving the gatehouse/gates so they abut the cart cross-over, is that it would create additional space between the gatehouse/gates and 466 and should eliminate any chance of a back-up of vehicles which could block traffic on 466.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by lawgolfer

The biggest flaw in the design at Morse and 466 is that the gatehouse/gates are a considerable distance from the cross-over for southbound carts. If the gatehouse/gates were moved to the north and abutted the cart cross-over(as they are at every other gate in The Villages), northbound vehicles would have to come to a stop and carts could proceed to cross-over. Of course, the best solution would be to eliminate the cross-over and install a tunnel for carts.

With the present design, N/B vehicles have a "running start" if the attendant waves them through and are at a high speed when they reach the cross-over. If they are not waved through and they do stop for the gate, the distance to the cross-over still provides a long distance during which the vehicles are accelerating.

An additional benefit of moving the gatehouse/gates so they abut the cart cross-over, is that it would create additional space between the gatehouse/gates and 466 and should eliminate any chance of a back-up of vehicles which could block traffic on 466.

This is the same problem with the location of the gate on Meggison just past Sawgrass Grove. Cars are almost up to full speed by the time they get to the MMP crossing---the gate needs to be moved about 200 feet east.

[judylovesflamingos]

I personally LIKE the attendants being there and hope they get to stay!

[DrHitch]

I do NOT agree with un-manned gates at the MAJOR intersections.

Your example of the Spanish Springs gate at Morse and Rt 466 is the #1 example of keeping a human (male or female) operator in the loop.

The golf cart crossing just North of the gate is a disaster. The southbound cart crossover is an accident just waiting to happen. And carts going North, but quickly turning left into Bazarra Ct is also dangerous.

The gate attendants there do need to look BACKWARDS (to the North) to check for cart backlog before letting cars through.

Better solution is to move the cart crossover much further North. There is space on the East side of Morse...

Now, unmanned gates for other specific villages is fine as long as there isn't a lot of car/truck traffic.

[LoriAnn]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

Apparently some of the CDD’s are considering possible changes to the current gate system utilized in the Villages.

From what I understand, there are three options being discussed.

1) Keep as is
2) Eliminate gates
3) Keep the gates, but get rid of the attendants

Perhaps there are other options being considered that I’m not aware of?

Based on the three options listed I’m curious what option others favor?

Personally, I would favor keeping the gates, but getting rid of the gate attendants. I feel the gates are necessary to slow automobile traffic so golf carts can safely get through gated intersections. However, I don’t really see any benefit of having the attendants. In fact, I think having a gate attendant at the 466/Morse gate is a detriment. The attendant typically just holds the gates open waving cars through as fast as possible, alternating between the two gates, leaving no openings for golf carts. Without the attendant, automobiles would have to stop and either waive their gate card or push the little red button, leaving openings for golf carts to cross. I suppose the only time I could see the gate attendant as being helpful would be if the gate was temporarily broken, so they could hold up a stop sign to slow down automobiles not being constrained by a gate.

For people without Villages ID, taking a photo of license plate and driver at gate is a better crime deterrent than gate attendants. Slowing traffic at gate long enough to push a button gives enough time for photo.

[AKKlein]

Originally Posted by Mrs S

I suggest keeping all of the gates, however, have the gates open as our vehicles approach them. This way we don’t get soaking wet when it’s pouring rain and we have to open our window to wave our card in front of it.

Keep the gates, just remove the need for cards and have them open when a car approaches, just like when exiting. Reduce but not eliminate Gate attendants to certain locations.

[Arctic Fox]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

Exactly my point as well. If the traffic never backs up even close to 466, why are the gate attendants too lazy to turn around and check for golf cart backups behind them. Since automobile traffic never backs up near 466, why not periodically hold up the cars for a few seconds and let a few carts safely crossover?

You are rather missing the point of your own argument.

The reason that you have never seen the traffic backed up is BECAUSE the attendant has left the gate open until the rush of traffic clears.

No attendant = more time for each car to clear = backed up traffic.

Once the traffic flow is back to normal, the attendant operates that gate for each vehicle.

[jsa]

Keep it as is.

Realistically, The Villages are not going to just scrap all the gate infrastructure. Not a serious option.

[Nevinator]

Ditch the gate attendants. Total waste of funds. I’m fully capable of pressing the little red button or waiving my proximity card.

[Maker]

Originally Posted by LoriAnn

For people without Villages ID, taking a photo of license plate and driver at gate is a better crime deterrent than gate attendants. Slowing traffic at gate long enough to push a button gives enough time for photo.

I hope you are aware there are cameras all over the country that are called ALPR. Stands for automatic license plate reader. They capture the plate from moving vehicles of any speed, day and night. No need to slow down or stop. Having a gate for that purpose is not needed, and is not a justification to keep gates.

They are everywhere. Stand alone systems nationwide that law enforcement uses to find people. Toll collection systems. Parking lot surveillance. etc

[Eagle06]

Eliminate the Gate Guards. They really serve no purpose, except to provide a friendly wave when they are on their feet and not sitting inside. Keep the gates to facilitate golf cart crossings.

[ByebyeMichigan]

Not necessarily……

[Risuli]

Originally Posted by Eagle06

Eliminate the Gate Guards. They really serve no purpose, except to provide a friendly wave when they are on their feet and not sitting inside. Keep the gates to facilitate golf cart crossings.

Late to the party here, but what is the objective of eliminating the attendants? Does anyone really believe that by doing so there will be a reduction in fees Villagers pay? I'd bet rates would remain the same and there would just be unattended gates. So, no benefit at all.

[DonH57]

Originally Posted by lawgolfer

The biggest flaw in the design at Morse and 466 is that the gatehouse/gates are a considerable distance from the cross-over for southbound carts. If the gatehouse/gates were moved to the north and abutted the cart cross-over(as they are at every other gate in The Villages), northbound vehicles would have to come to a stop and carts could proceed to cross-over. Of course, the best solution would be to eliminate the cross-over and install a tunnel for carts.

With the present design, N/B vehicles have a "running start" if the attendant waves them through and are at a high speed when they reach the cross-over. If they are not waved through and they do stop for the gate, the distance to the cross-over still provides a long distance during which the vehicles are accelerating.

An additional benefit of moving the gatehouse/gates so they abut the cart cross-over, is that it would create additional space between the gatehouse/gates and 466 and should eliminate any chance of a back-up of vehicles which could block traffic on 466.

Had the two way cart path that runs along Morse been continued past Soledad all the way down they wouldn't have to do the crossover. It's a mystery to me why they didn't. There was more than enough room and the utilities could have been underneath just like the BV MMP.