so if incidents occur gates can be cut back? and how much are these new gates costing....gn

I thought the AAC only had jurisdiction for amenities North of 466 and that final decisions on amenity changes are made by the central districts. VCCDD for north of 466 (although the cdd board does seem to abide by AAC direction. But, then, the SLCDD (south of 466) has to agree to any Villages wide changes. The SLCDD is controlled by the developer appointed board. Did they go along with the VCCDD/AAC decision?


I can see applying the uniform reflective striping but I don't see the benefit of extending the arms so that all carts, bicycles, scooters, etc have to stop at the gate. I think it will slow traffic flow. And then there is the cost.

Oh well.....

At Tuesday's POA meeting, someone asked the question about the timeline for upgrading all 63 gates in TV to comply with federal guidelines. Janet Tutt, District Mgr of the Villages responded that while the changes are effective 1/2011. TV plans to upgrade indivual gates on a necessary basis rather than a total gate replacement. I don't recall the specific amount, but total gate upgrades for TV was in the multi-million dollar range. All new gates will of course meet the new standard. Janet defended TV adoption of federal gate standards by saying that people observing a closed gate have a reaonable expection that it's safe to cross. How can you argue with this logic?

George

Six seconds to cross the road?
 

That makes me wonder if Janet Tutt ever uses the multi-modal paths. Carts, bikes and pedestrians never have and should not rely on the gates to let them know if cars are coming. As soon as cars/trucks activate the gate they come charging through, with no regard for what is on the path. It takes a lot more than six seconds to get across the roadways. We always look to make sure there are no cars APPROACHING the gate before we cross.

:a040: :1rotfl: :clap2:

As a North of Boston suburban native, LOVE IT!!! So true.....b

Most of those of those crossings have a Stop sign and a Yield to vehicles sign, for the carts. A lot of carts disregard both!

I have seen cars, motorcycles, bicycles and golf carts go around the end of the gate while it is in the down position.

When that gate is down, it signals to those who are waiting to cross that it is safe to cross. (even after stopping at the stop sign) If they legally and safety begin to cross and suddenly someone flies around the gate, it is an extreme danger. No less than someone crashing a stop sign or red light.

I don't understand the need to go around the gate rather than waiting for it to lift. It takes all of 5 seconds.

access cards
 

Guess this change will require us to carry access cards in our carts and cars, unless there is a plan to make passes (like the SUNPASS) available?

Anyone know the answer?

C'mon the new gates will provide as much protection from the unwanted element
 

of society as the old gates. All that is required is the ability to push the red button.

The most cost effective mode is to remove the gates.

The traffic will sort itself out.

But that would not give the appearance to those shopping for a home here of a gated community.

The gate system here affords as much security from the unwanted as the intersection of 301 and 44!!!

If your amenity fees were going up to pay for the new gates...maybe....MAYBE...THE SILENT MAJORITY WOULD WAKE UP!

BTK

btk

While your point is well taken, it does not consider certain unique problems at many gates including this observation whereby gate extensions without complete design changes, significantly compromise traffic safety and will create even greater hazards for multi-modal users as well as autos, motorcycles (like you...I ride) and cyclists.

"Implementation of new gate regulations without sufficient research and input would create a bigger problem than whatever it is proponents are trying to solve. The Bridgeport Lake Sumter gate comes to mind. Because of the design of the gate, a poor one at that, Bridgeport entering golf cart traffic would have to exit the cart path, go out toward Buena Vista where operators without street legal status could be breaking the law, make a sharp u-turn and re-enter through the access on the island which extends toward Buena Vista. You see, the gate access reader is between the cart path and Buena Vista while the gate is between the path and the village. This maneuver or any shortcut to circumvent it, would be extremely dangerous as two way cart and bicycle traffic co-mingles with fast exit traffic coming off Buena Vista and would compete to enter the same access and gate. I can hear the crunching of metal on fiberglass and bicycles already. I know that there must be other gates with similar design issues."

I believe it would ultimately be necessary to redesign the gate, access and traffic pattern at Bridgeport Lake Sumter at considerable expense to create safe ingress and egress to that Village. I am certain there are other Villages with similar issues attributable to the original design that did not anticipate the extraordinary volume of multi-modal traffic patterns growth created.

Security considerations with extended gates realistically are non-starters and need to defer to safety issues. They are for all intents and purposes mute as long as anyone can press a button and get access in 5 seconds as you correctly point out.

It would be crazy to count on a closed gate to signal that it is OK to cross the road. On a bicycle, we use both the multi-modal paths and the roads. We ALWAYS look to see if any cars/trucks are approaching the card reader. It takes only seconds for a gate to be activated and then the cars/trucks charge through. A closed gate offers no protection whatever to carts/bikes/pedestrians crossing the road, no matter what its length.

This new explanation that the longer gates are for the safety of multi-modal path traffic makes no sense. Are they are going to add stop signs, stop lights, crossing signals or a person directing traffic to let everyone know who has the right of way? And what's the explanation for longer gates on the exits (which come after the paths?)

We have no problem with stopping. We do have a problem with starting up again fast enough to get through the gate before it closes. Six seconds may be enough for a motorcycle, but it is not enough for a bike or group of bikes.
We need a space to get by the gate as it closes on us.

I don't understand the need either. It seems like a big waste of our money. What a shame.

Bikes will not be allowed to go through gates in groups
 

This is in today's Sun (page A8, 12/9/10):

"AAC members were in agreement that they do not want a system that allows multiple bicycles to proceed through a gate without stopping."

What do you think will happen when a group of 20 bicycles lines up at a gate and each one has to open the gate individually? Traffic will be backed up onto the main roads. Cars will be furious and will take their anger out on the bicycles. This is crazy.

Blocking traffic on the main roads. Is that the excuse given by multiple bicyclists, blowing thru a stop sign or a traffic light?

This oughta be interesting...........:popcorn: