All the cities you mention are prosperous and have relatively low crime rates. What works in Salt Lake City is not realistic for St. Louis. You think Philly or Baltimore or Cleveland would use the honor system? No way.addxb2 wrote:A very big league transit HEAVY RAIL system has them. Denver, Minneapolis, Seattle, and Salt Lake are also light rail systems run on the "honor system".stlgasm wrote: I'm all for turnstiles. Every big league transit system has them- they are there for a reason. It's kind of a joke that we're still on the "honor system"- I mean come on, let's get real. this is ST. LOUIS, not Cedar Rapids. Turnstiles may not have prevented this crime, but they do make it harder for just anyone to access the stations. I understand that turnstiles are expensive to install and maintain, but their value should not be measured from strictly a financial standpoint. I strongly believe they're worth the investment and essential to establish a sense of security, trust and order. I mean, let's be real- anyone who rides the train knows that the chances of being asked to show proof of purchase are slim to none. Any regular rider knows this. I can't even count the number of times over the years when I've arrived at the station just as the train was approaching and hopped on without paying so I wouldn't miss it. It's too easy to take advantage of the system. And if you get caught, who cares? The penalties (or lack thereof) are way too light.
- 1,291
Not that I disagree with turnstiles in principle, but there's plenty of examples where they just do absolutely nothing to stop fare evasion, like with Oakland's BART.
Fare evasion has been increasing on NYC's system recently due to public dissatisfaction with disinvestment and routine delays. Turnstiles have no had much if any impact.
Yes, but Baltimore’s light rail system operates on the streets, like a traditional light rail system which doesn’t make sense for turnstiles.. Baltimore’s Metro (heavy rail) uses turnstiles. MetroLink operates more like a heavy rail system, with a dedicated right-of-way and stations separated from the streets, making it much more conducive and adaptable to security barriers.quincunx wrote: Baltimore has the honor system on its light rail
I'm all for turnstiles but not for the purpose of reducing fare evasion or increasing revenue. I like them simply because they stop certain people from entering the system. People who don't pay their fare. Not that everyone who does that is dangerous, but I would bet that all the people doing the crimes on the system ALSO did not pay their fare. So if you prevent one group you prevent the other from entering. I think this is the approach being taken lately. There's just less chaos in general on the trains. Less drug dealing, gambling, yelling, etc. Granted, this is the blue line at rush hour, so there's a critical mass of buergerlich people on there, but still it's different from a couple years ago.
Also, I made the b-roll on the fox2now story!
Also, I made the b-roll on the fox2now story!
Turnstiles are great for a lot of reasons. Defines the space. Collects better data. Prevents racial profiling in fare enforcement. Allows Metro to update payment systems to be more modern. What they won't do is eliminate violent crimes, which are most often personal conflicts.
In the short-term follow the Cortex model. Cortex funds a full-time fare enforcement, therefore there is not fare evasion and its become well known by all riders that someone will ALWAYS be there. Is the customer service great? No, not in the slightest. Shrewsbury, Maplewood, Brentwood, Richmond Heights, St. Louis County, and St. Louis City are all very capable of hiring full-time fare enforcement.
In the short-term follow the Cortex model. Cortex funds a full-time fare enforcement, therefore there is not fare evasion and its become well known by all riders that someone will ALWAYS be there. Is the customer service great? No, not in the slightest. Shrewsbury, Maplewood, Brentwood, Richmond Heights, St. Louis County, and St. Louis City are all very capable of hiring full-time fare enforcement.
It feels like they're not even trying. I almost never see actual police (Metro/SLMPD) riding the trains. They sit in the parking lots all day or drive between stations. Literally the only time in the past few months I've seen officers on or near trains or platforms are the guys outside Cardinals games.addxb2 wrote: No it’s not as simple as that. A turnstile and police officer at every stop wouldn’t have prevented this. We have a crime problem in our region. PERIOD. It shows on our streets, in our businesses, on our highways, and even on our transit system.
Asking Metro to “stop” this problem is like asking the city to prevent every homicide. Impossible.
Just yesterday afternoon at rush hour, I saw no actual police at Grand, one of the more dangerous stops.
Meanwhile two obvious gang members, from what little I know about gangs (all red/red bandanas), hanging out drinking (alcohol, because they were talking about it) and smoking at the bus stop there, not catching any buses. Every line passed by, stopped and left. They were still there.
In addition many of the homeless down and out etc hang out/sleep the night below the Metro Link/Grand bridge. In the am and throughout the day the metro station and points near it are distribution/hang outs/hookups of those that have emerged in the am from under the bridge
Yep - you'd think that people would have read the consultants' report which echoes every other consultant's report ever written: Crime on transit is not committed by fare evaders, by and large. If you try to stop fare evasion by installing barriers (excuse me, "defining the space"), and you don't have adequate enforcement, it does nothing; the cost of entry onto an un-patrolled system is, at most, the cost of a ticket. Or a pilfered bus transfer. Or a hop over the unmonitored gate onto an un-secured train.Trololzilla wrote: Not that I disagree with turnstiles in principle, but there's plenty of examples where they just do absolutely nothing to stop fare evasion, like with Oakland's BART.
- 3,235
I used the number advertised on trains to report some issues on a train recently and it worked great. Officers enter the train at the next stop and resolved the issue.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have definitely noticed heavier police presence in the metro stations I use more frequently (Convention Center, Central West End).
- 3,429
I was just in Boston. The Green lines emerge from underground pretty close to downtown (between Symphony Hall and the Museum of Fine Arts in East Fenway here.) From there on to the end of the Green lines, there are no turnstiles. It has been like this for decades. Here are a couple of photos I snapped. The last one shows the last nine stops on the Heath green line where there are no turnstiles. Other green lines are similar and even longer with no turnstiles beyond downtown.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
The only turnstiles on San Francisco Muni are in the subway stations. All the street level stops are open boarding. BART has fare gates at every stop.
Regardless, I believe metro needs fare gates since there isn't the ridership density for a significant self-policing element.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Regardless, I believe metro needs fare gates since there isn't the ridership density for a significant self-policing element.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
^^Northeastern University! My old stomping grounds. And a great place for transit enthusiasts between the green line, orange line, Ruffles bus station and ever-reliable Mass Ave #1 bus.
The Symphony Station one stop toward Downtown is a study in simple, (seemingly) low-cost subterranean rail construction. No bells and whistles, no artwork, no soaring ceilings or columnless spaces, no attendant, just a concrete box a few steps under the road with a big metal fence and turnstiles. Perfectly utilitarian.
The Symphony Station one stop toward Downtown is a study in simple, (seemingly) low-cost subterranean rail construction. No bells and whistles, no artwork, no soaring ceilings or columnless spaces, no attendant, just a concrete box a few steps under the road with a big metal fence and turnstiles. Perfectly utilitarian.
"Violent crime on BART more than doubled since 2014, driven in part by a fare-evasion epidemic that is three times worse than the agency’s official estimates"
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/vi ... spartandhp
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/vi ... spartandhp
That article offers little in the way of proof that fare evasion and crime are connected.
I've only ridden BART a few times, but don't they have turnstiles? I think they're required so you get charged the correct amount (based on trip distance).
So it goes back to the point that many here make: Turnstiles without enforcement are pointless.
I've only ridden BART a few times, but don't they have turnstiles? I think they're required so you get charged the correct amount (based on trip distance).
So it goes back to the point that many here make: Turnstiles without enforcement are pointless.
- 1,291
How well they work:
Though, it'd be a bit better if the design for the gates themselves wasn't utterly moronic (Seriously? Leaving a person-sized space to squeeze through?).
Though, it'd be a bit better if the design for the gates themselves wasn't utterly moronic (Seriously? Leaving a person-sized space to squeeze through?).
- 2,419
Not sure where to put this, but it seems that MetroLink is considering a new logo.
I don't like the logo.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/col ... 42f15.html
I don't like the logo.
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/col ... 42f15.html
I like it. Not sure why the M isn’t bigger and centered. It’s cute being off center and all, but I’d think for a transportation system that scale, visibility and contrast would be priorities.
It just doesn’t really seem necessary or appropriate at a time when the system has more pressing priorities and issues to address.
It just doesn’t really seem necessary or appropriate at a time when the system has more pressing priorities and issues to address.
I think "STL" forming an M is actually pretty clever. Although nothing beats the '70s/'80s Bi-State logo and color scheme. Think how cool MetroLink trains would look in these blue and green stripes.
Images are courtesy of Mel Bernero, and can be viewed at http://gallery.bustalk.info/
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
And here's a better look at the '70s-era Bi-State logo on an old sign that was still hanging along the Hodiamont right-of-way as of about 10 years ago (I took this pic with a Fujifilm camera- remember those?). Love the arrows, the font, everything.
![]()
We need to start calling the bus "Bi-State" again. "I gotta catch the Bi-State!" We all gotta catch the Bi-State.
Images are courtesy of Mel Bernero, and can be viewed at http://gallery.bustalk.info/
And here's a better look at the '70s-era Bi-State logo on an old sign that was still hanging along the Hodiamont right-of-way as of about 10 years ago (I took this pic with a Fujifilm camera- remember those?). Love the arrows, the font, everything.
We need to start calling the bus "Bi-State" again. "I gotta catch the Bi-State!" We all gotta catch the Bi-State.