urbanSTL

Totally agree on the unified police force.

The stations I have used in Chicago and New York are not completely enclosed though. They have waist high gates that you can easily hop over. I’ve seen people do it.

I mean there isn’t really a way for someone to get through this proposed system without paying and going through legally. And most of the problematic riders are the ones not paying fares right?

I don't want to speak for anyone, but I think the point being made is that you may see an increase early on, but the moment there's an incident, there will be several local stories and we're back to square one.  And then of course there are some people who will never ride no matter what is done or true.

Sure, that’s a risk. But reframing the narrative is the way to attract new riders, though not everyone will be open to trying.

This is a unique opportunity to reframe the narrative. I hope it works and understand there is a risk it doesn’t have much an impact.

I am not talking about fare evasion in the sense that we will benefit financially from collecting more fares. I agree that is irrelevant.

I’m talking about having only people on the train who have boarded legally with a fare as a benefit because I believe the people that currently cause issues on the train wouldn’t be on the train in the first place if they had to board legally and pay a fare.

The NYC Mass Shooting example is a one off and not indicative of the type of crime or the perception of the type of crime we are dealing with here.

You keep saying it won’t work but you don’t back that up with any evidence.

I am neither for or against ugly turnstiles. Here are my two cents regarding security:

1. Start using single cars if possible.
2. Increase security presence in the rear cars. Have security ride rear cars at all times. Isn't it cost effective and viable?
    I am seeing more than 2 security guards at Forest Park. Why do we need more than two in stations?
3. Increase lighting especially in stations like 8th and Pine and Convention Center where we are likely to make first and best impressions.
4. Enforce strict no smoking policies in all stations. Another perception thingy.
5. Maintain clean station platforms - another perception thingy.

What other suggestions do you have?

If making MetroLink stations look like prisons doesn't make them feel safe and inviting, I don't know what will!

Dollars to donuts they only end up in selected stations anyway. I bet never get built at Shrewsbury, but they never get removed (or maintained) at Washington Park,.

That’s encouraging that it’s working for KC and I’m glad to see them expanding. I’m not sure how that relates to our situation in St Louis, though.

How exactly is KC having a free MetroLink evidence that the gates being built in St Louis isn’t going to effectively improve the perception of a safe MetroLink here?

sc4mayor wrote: ↑

May 26, 2023

Yes, because a 2 mile streetcar line is an apples to apples comparison of a light rail system that crosses three counties and two states.

If MetroLink only ran in one little gentrified/yuppie area there might not be as many issues as a much larger, multi-county system that traverses vastly different types of neighborhoods.

^ Because as soon a serious crime is committed in the secure area, the “perception of safety” you keep talking about is destroyed. Then what? I feel like a broken record at this point lol.

St. Louis is a generation ahead of KC when it comes to rail transit, it will be two generations ahead when N-S is complete. St. Louis is only behind Chicago and probably neck in neck with Minneapolis when it comes to rail transit in the Midwest.

Well it seems fairly straight forward but I'll be a little more explicit

KC doesn't have gates & they don't as far as i know have an overall perception problem.  They are also growing their system.  (FWIW I would argue our demographics and local culture are fairly similar to KC) This is evidence that such things are not "necessary" for a system to be successful.

Meanwhile Chicago & NY have limited access at every stop and I would NOT say that they have eliminated public perception problems.   This is evidence that gates don't "necessarily" solve public perception problems.

While there is no smoking gun that i can think other than drop a few mil on some gates and see what happens, Most likely this will have limited if any impact and there will be an argument that we need more walls and better gates ad infinitum.  Even if we get wise and opt to not continue bleeding ourselves to fund fence projects, that's a lot of money spent on a maybe it'll help.  Optionally we could commit to supporting the system fully fare free with local taxes.

So i would submit to you a counter question...  What evidence do you have that installing gates will improve public perceptions of safety?

Here is a weird kind of stupid idea but what the heck its a thought experiment that plays to human nature.  How about a premium "pay car"  with seats.  Rest of cars are standing only and free.  My money is standing cars will be full.  Seated cars almost always empty.  What would that tell you about perceptions of safety driving ridership.

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

May 19, 2023

I am not talking about fare evasion in the sense that we will benefit financially from collecting more fares. I agree that is irrelevant.

I’m talking about having only people on the train who have boarded legally with a fare as a benefit because I believe the people that currently cause issues on the train wouldn’t be on the train in the first place if they had to board legally and pay a fare.

The NYC Mass Shooting example is a one off and not indicative of the type of crime or the perception of the type of crime we are dealing with here.

You keep saying it won’t work but you don’t back that up with any evidence.

Rather than comparing to KC, we should do a survey of murderers to find out if enforcing a $2 fee would've dissuaded them from homicide.

Glen Carbon couple, friends attacked at St. Louis MetroLink stop
https://www.thetelegraph.com/news/article/suspects-sought-attack-glen-carbon-couple-18130511.php

hebeters wrote: ↑

Jun 02, 2023

Glen Carbon couple, friends attacked at St. Louis MetroLink stop
https://www.thetelegraph.com/news/article/suspects-sought-attack-glen-carbon-couple-18130511.php

I am confident that this could have easily been prevented by having security personnel (just a single unit) ride the rear car in all trains. I just don't get it why these units are deployed on station platforms like Forest Park and CWE during day time (night time is understandable). I have very rarely seen security personnel on 8th and pine platforms which is not well ventilated and lighted. Utterly disappointing..

Rear cars are where all the incidents are happening. Train operator can easily prevent any major incidents in front car.