You could get a large gate that can unlock for those who are unable to use a turnstile, just like MTA.
Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk
Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk
Exactly. Some stations will need massive retrofits to accommodate turnstiles. Those closed systems have large multi-level stations with mezzanine levels with dozens of turnstiles to feed passengers through. I wonder if some members here have ever even used the small subway stations in this town. They DO NOT lend themselves well to turnstiles.quincunx wrote: ↑Aug 05, 2021Some stations are going to be difficult to add them. It's going to be an expensive mess. And a whole other thing that needs maintenance.
Take the Stadium station here for example. Unless they significantly retrofit the station and widen the stairs and switchback ramps you’re not getting more than couple turnstiles at that station. Imagine the bottlenecks after a Cardinal game.
^ The only thing STL needs to emulate from NYC is a separate transit PD. Metro is not the MTA and doesn’t need to be designed as such.
- 340
By some members, you mean me. And I have used the Metrolink occasionally, but I can't say I've had the chance to analyze every station.
Yes, it might take a little creativity and money to add turnstiles to each station, but it's not impossible.
Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk
Yes, it might take a little creativity and money to add turnstiles to each station, but it's not impossible.
Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk
^ You're far from the only person calling for turnstiles here, so no, that wasn't just for you.
I also didn't say it was impossible, as I've detailed already in previous comments, I just think it's a huge waste of money for the nearly no benefits it will provide. As soon as KMOV runs their first turnstile jumping story (or someone gets assaulted or shot inside the "secure area"...and that will eventually happen) all these suburbanites that people want to lure to the system with a false sense of security will disappear. Efficient and more visible policing and expansions into denser neighborhoods to get more riders on the buses and trains will do more for the system than an expensive retrofit. Aiming to coddle the folks that might ride to a Cardinal game once or twice a year is NOT how you build an efficient and safe transit system.
I also didn't say it was impossible, as I've detailed already in previous comments, I just think it's a huge waste of money for the nearly no benefits it will provide. As soon as KMOV runs their first turnstile jumping story (or someone gets assaulted or shot inside the "secure area"...and that will eventually happen) all these suburbanites that people want to lure to the system with a false sense of security will disappear. Efficient and more visible policing and expansions into denser neighborhoods to get more riders on the buses and trains will do more for the system than an expensive retrofit. Aiming to coddle the folks that might ride to a Cardinal game once or twice a year is NOT how you build an efficient and safe transit system.
^ exactly.
Every station is about to be a gated mess costing $50m-100m across the system. Entire platforms are going to be wrapped in 8ft fences.
It’s not just a turnstile in the sidewalk. They’ll need to create enough space for multiple turnstiles. Including an ADA option that’ll be the equivalent of a low track hurdle without a guard.
I expect they’ll find it easier to just close off access points at many stations (see Delmar).
This isn’t a win for accessibility or the $300k WSP security study completed last year.
Every station is about to be a gated mess costing $50m-100m across the system. Entire platforms are going to be wrapped in 8ft fences.
It’s not just a turnstile in the sidewalk. They’ll need to create enough space for multiple turnstiles. Including an ADA option that’ll be the equivalent of a low track hurdle without a guard.
I expect they’ll find it easier to just close off access points at many stations (see Delmar).
This isn’t a win for accessibility or the $300k WSP security study completed last year.
I'm upset wasting brain cells thinking about how they might be implemented at each station. It'll be an ugly, expansive, annoying, mess.
I don't want anyone to pay for this! Just a distraction, waste of capacity, effort, expertise, resources. Just the prolonged discussion comes at a wasteful opportunity cost.
With someone there to open it for those individuals. And when you have someone staffing the station and watching the gates.... then you don't need gates for fare enforcement anymore. Not on our system, which is single fare and low volume.Miss Shell wrote: ↑Aug 05, 2021You could get a large gate that can unlock for those who are unable to use a turnstile, just like MTA.
Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk
The two subway lines here in Philly have turnstiles and there's no shortage of complaints of "sketchy people". As for news stories, there's been at least three high profile local TV news stories of shootings at major subway stops in the year I've lived here. All three of these shootings happened outside the station.
One of the major stories of MetroLink security in recent years was a shooting at Rock Road station. The proximity of which was likely a complete coincidence.
Turnstiles don't solve the U.S.'s gun problem and they definitely don't solve the problem of humans fearing people that don't look and act like them.
I'm curious what $100m would do to pay for more bus drivers and increase those frequencies.
One of the major stories of MetroLink security in recent years was a shooting at Rock Road station. The proximity of which was likely a complete coincidence.
Turnstiles don't solve the U.S.'s gun problem and they definitely don't solve the problem of humans fearing people that don't look and act like them.
I'm curious what $100m would do to pay for more bus drivers and increase those frequencies.
- 2,419
I rode Metrolink not too long ago, and I had a really pleasant experience; my ticket was checked, the guards on the train were enforcing the mask policy and handing out masks to those that didn't have them, and there were no incidents that made me regret my decision to board.
I personally agree with everyone here that is saying turnstiles aren't necessary, but, if they're going to be forced on us by our corporate community, I would prefer it if our corporate community would pay for them.
I personally agree with everyone here that is saying turnstiles aren't necessary, but, if they're going to be forced on us by our corporate community, I would prefer it if our corporate community would pay for them.
Increasing bus frequency would enhance safety since you wouldn't have to wait as long. So would lights at bus stops. Bus shelters would encourage more use. Wish we could talk about and implement that, but we're fixated on turnstiles.
- 2,631
Just make Metrolink free
If Metro is ever going to be a system that isn't primarily used by the working poor and actually takes cars off the road it needs to be a better value. St. Louis isn't Chicago or NYC, we have been building to accommodate the automobile at the expense of transit for 70 years and it shows in the 95%+ of people who own a car. The sooner these systems figure out that the era of the fare is ending the better for their cities.
- Move ticket taking security to watch train and stations (or save money on their salaries altogether)
- More people ride it because better value than uber or even driving
- More people riding = more eyes on the train = safer
If Metro is ever going to be a system that isn't primarily used by the working poor and actually takes cars off the road it needs to be a better value. St. Louis isn't Chicago or NYC, we have been building to accommodate the automobile at the expense of transit for 70 years and it shows in the 95%+ of people who own a car. The sooner these systems figure out that the era of the fare is ending the better for their cities.
- 1,609
We all know it will be KSDK that runs this story. Gotta scare the soccer moms to keep them tuning in!sc4mayor wrote: ↑Aug 05, 2021^ You're far from the only person calling for turnstiles here, so no, that wasn't just for you.
I also didn't say it was impossible, as I've detailed already in previous comments, I just think it's a huge waste of money for the nearly no benefits it will provide. As soon as KMOV runs their first turnstile jumping story (or someone gets assaulted or shot inside the "secure area"...and that will eventually happen) all these suburbanites that people want to lure to the system with a false sense of security will disappear. Efficient and more visible policing and expansions into denser neighborhoods to get more riders on the buses and trains will do more for the system than an expensive retrofit. Aiming to coddle the folks that might ride to a Cardinal game once or twice a year is NOT how you build an efficient and safe transit system.
- 6,120
This! They have more money. They want it. Let them pay for it.KansasCitian wrote: ↑Aug 05, 2021I rode Metrolink not too long ago, and I had a really pleasant experience; my ticket was checked, the guards on the train were enforcing the mask policy and handing out masks to those that didn't have them, and there were no incidents that made me regret my decision to board.
I personally agree with everyone here that is saying turnstiles aren't necessary, but, if they're going to be forced on us by our corporate community, I would prefer it if our corporate community would pay for them.
Hear hear!quincunx wrote:Increasing bus frequency would enhance safety since you wouldn't have to wait as long. So would lights at bus stops. Bus shelters would encourage more use. Wish we could talk about and implement that, but we're fixated on turnstiles.
Yes! This! All of this! Metrolink is a pretty solid little system. But what it needs to build ridership isn't security theatre: it needs to make itself easier for occasional riders who have access to other modes (like most of us, say.) Add frequency. Advertise the bus routes and make them plain as day and comfortable to all and sundry. And blinking eliminate the fares. It should make everything else so much easier it's not even funny. How's it working in KC? I heard lots of good reports at first.GoHarvOrGoHome wrote:Just make Metrolink freeFares only account for 18% of Metrolink operations, and all they do is discourage people who have more comfortable means (IE a car) to take that instead of the train. Unless you are parking at the baseball game (by yourself) the cost of driving is almost always lower than taking the train.
- Move ticket taking security to watch train and stations (or save money on their salaries altogether)
- More people ride it because better value than uber or even driving
- More people riding = more eyes on the train = safer
If Metro is ever going to be a system that isn't primarily used by the working poor and actually takes cars off the road it needs to be a better value. St. Louis isn't Chicago or NYC, we have been building to accommodate the automobile at the expense of transit for 70 years and it shows in the 95%+ of people who own a car. The sooner these systems figure out that the era of the fare is ending the better for their cities.
Neidorff's offer of seven figures would probably just be a drop in the bucket for something that will end up costing closer to 8 or 9 figures...
I'd be all for free MetroLink and MetroBus but I just don't get how it would be funded. Most of the US cities doing it are quite small or have small transit systems. I believe it only cost Kansas City $8 million to do free buses within KCMO. If MetroLink was just a little two mile long mixed traffic streetcar, then go for it. But St. Louis has a grade separated system with portions running in (historic and new) subways, elevated viaducts, open cuts, and across a giant historic bridge. The overhead is significantly greater on a system this size and of this type. Metro St. Louis has over 87 train cars to maintain...KC has 6 lol. I saw an estimate that eliminating fares on St. Louis transit would cost the agency close to $60 million in revenue per year (this was pre-pandemic). How do we backfill that?
Again, I'm all for it in theory as I do believe it will drive more people to the system...more than turnstiles. I just see no logical way to pay for it year in and year out and then still find money to expand the system which in my humble opinion should be priority one. Free trains and buses will bring people back but not as much as building new service into densely populated neighborhoods currently without it.
I'd be all for free MetroLink and MetroBus but I just don't get how it would be funded. Most of the US cities doing it are quite small or have small transit systems. I believe it only cost Kansas City $8 million to do free buses within KCMO. If MetroLink was just a little two mile long mixed traffic streetcar, then go for it. But St. Louis has a grade separated system with portions running in (historic and new) subways, elevated viaducts, open cuts, and across a giant historic bridge. The overhead is significantly greater on a system this size and of this type. Metro St. Louis has over 87 train cars to maintain...KC has 6 lol. I saw an estimate that eliminating fares on St. Louis transit would cost the agency close to $60 million in revenue per year (this was pre-pandemic). How do we backfill that?
Again, I'm all for it in theory as I do believe it will drive more people to the system...more than turnstiles. I just see no logical way to pay for it year in and year out and then still find money to expand the system which in my humble opinion should be priority one. Free trains and buses will bring people back but not as much as building new service into densely populated neighborhoods currently without it.
- 6,120
^The plan appears to be to make every bus inside Kansas City free for everyone. I guess they're implementing it slowly, but that $8 million figure you cite seems to be the estimate for free busses everywhere within city limits. If KC can do it in a sprawling monster of a city St. Louis should be able to do it in a much more compact city for even less. Or for the same amount but with remarkably good service. Somehow I'd read it to be the whole system, which does not appear to be the case, but Metrolink used to do fare free zones at the airport and downtown. No reason they couldn't do it again inside of city limits. (So long as the money was there to support it.) I will gladly grant that it wouild cost money, but we've already discussed the percentage of Metrolink's revenue that comes from fares.
Looking at a the last pre-pandemic budget that incldues summaries from 2011 to 2020 I'm skeptical of the $60M estimate. In its best year I'm seeing, 2014, passenger revenue was only $51.7M and it had fallen to under $40M even before the pandemic. (Last year it was barely more than $20M.) So you're really only looking at about a 12-15% hole in the budget, even before the plague. Another half cent sales tax increase in the city and county and the deed is done. Free fares within a certain district could encourage people to shop and stay in that district.
Since KC is rolling this out gradually on some lines but not others, they really will make a good case study. We can watch and see if fare free zones see improved sales tax revenue. If this pays for itself it's a winner. And if not . . . we can toss the idea under the no. 70 bus. Or at least send it over to solid waste.
Looking at a the last pre-pandemic budget that incldues summaries from 2011 to 2020 I'm skeptical of the $60M estimate. In its best year I'm seeing, 2014, passenger revenue was only $51.7M and it had fallen to under $40M even before the pandemic. (Last year it was barely more than $20M.) So you're really only looking at about a 12-15% hole in the budget, even before the plague. Another half cent sales tax increase in the city and county and the deed is done. Free fares within a certain district could encourage people to shop and stay in that district.
Since KC is rolling this out gradually on some lines but not others, they really will make a good case study. We can watch and see if fare free zones see improved sales tax revenue. If this pays for itself it's a winner. And if not . . . we can toss the idea under the no. 70 bus. Or at least send it over to solid waste.
I'm sure the State AG would file a lawsuit alleging that free transportation is unconstitutional because we aren't all handcuffed to our cars.
I don’t see the point in offering free transportation to city residents but not the rest of the metro area. The City covers only 10% and a lot of transit users are commuting across state and county lines. Making it free in the city but then making them pay in the county/Illinois doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me.
I also don’t see the point in just going free on MetroLink but not buses. Many users are using both modes for their trips.
I do not support additional sales tax increases with no further expansion. The County’s Prop A in 2010 and the City MetroLink tax that passed in 2016(? whenever the first soccer stadium failed)…both were sold to us as ways to get additional expansion. I’m tired of supporting additional tax increases without the corresponding increase in service.
I also don’t see the point in just going free on MetroLink but not buses. Many users are using both modes for their trips.
I do not support additional sales tax increases with no further expansion. The County’s Prop A in 2010 and the City MetroLink tax that passed in 2016(? whenever the first soccer stadium failed)…both were sold to us as ways to get additional expansion. I’m tired of supporting additional tax increases without the corresponding increase in service.
First, County Council would claim they’re overpaying for transit if the city can just give it away. Ernie would throw a fit and do the only thing Republicans do effectively, fear monger.bwcrow1s wrote:I'm sure the State AG would file a lawsuit alleging that free transportation is unconstitutional because we aren't all handcuffed to our cars.
He’d do that until the AG sees a political opportunity and sue.
Then a St. Charles representative would propose legislation requiring 100% of transit funds come from fare revenue.
I bet Bob Onder is already drawing up the legislation…addxb2 wrote: ↑Aug 07, 2021Then a St. Charles representative would propose legislation requiring 100% of transit funds come from fare revenue.bwcrow1s wrote:I'm sure the State AG would file a lawsuit alleging that free transportation is unconstitutional because we aren't all handcuffed to our cars.
Having worked in the Senate, Bob Onder is just as much an a**hole in person as he comes across on the local news/twitter.
Stltoday - MetroLink progress on safety improvements downgraded in latest report
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... e00dd.html
https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... e00dd.html
^ Interesting how they keep coming back to the separate agencies that don’t like talking to each other…
If only there were an easier solution…
If only there were an easier solution…
- 443
I had a great experience on the metro link today. Had to get a suit tailored in Clayton and do some shopping at the galleria. So, I parked at the Shrewsbury stop road the train to my destinations. Then I found out there was a game this afternoon, and with nothing left to do I decided to ride DT on a whim. How lucky we are to have such an asset in our community.
Interestingly, I overheard a cool conversation between three “Karens” aged between 55-65 at the ball game. All three took the metrolink to the game and remarked at how “nice” the experience was. How “safe” they felt on the train because security was always present and checked tickets. And how metro link has done a good job of clearing the “riff-raff.”
Interestingly, I overheard a cool conversation between three “Karens” aged between 55-65 at the ball game. All three took the metrolink to the game and remarked at how “nice” the experience was. How “safe” they felt on the train because security was always present and checked tickets. And how metro link has done a good job of clearing the “riff-raff.”