STLPR0%

Gravois is one of St. Louis’ deadliest streets. A safety overhaul is in the works  for 2029 27%

By Emily Woodbury44%

7/1/2026, 5:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Post Hoc (False Cause), and Anecdotal, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 18% saturation with 129 hits. Analysis detected 988 faulty-reasoning hits from 716 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 38.5% and a BS Rank of 27% (15,988 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 73.00% of the article peer group.

Gravois Avenue continues to be one of the most dangerous streets in St. 
Louis. 
Last year, there were 23 crashes, 19 injuries and four fatalities on the route. 
There have been nearly 1,000 injuries and 22 deaths on Gravois since 2020, according to the Missouri Department of Transportation. 
“It's pretty dangerous,” said Boris Neely as he navigated the intersection of Gravois, Arsenal Street and Pennsylvania Avenue in south St. 
Louis on May 27. 
“I cross in the middle of the street when I can because [drivers] will run that red light in a heartbeat, and there's been a lot of accidents right there.” 
For the fifth consecutive year, Trailnet identified Gravois as one of the top crash corridors for people walking, biking or using wheelchairs in St. 
Louis. 
The nonprofit’s 2025 State of Our Streets report said the most serious crashes on the arterial road are a result of poor street design and high speeds. 
Running diagonally across the region, Gravois is infamous for its sprawling, six-way intersections that span five lanes  seven, if you include parking lanes. 
The speed limit along much of the route is 35 mph within city limits. 
“Thirty five to 45 miles per hour doesn't seem that fast, but the effect on a pedestrian is deadly when you go from 25 to 35 miles per hour,” said Trailnet CEO Cindy Mense. 
“There's less reaction time for sure when you're driving that fast. 
The other thing is, [arterial streets like Gravois] lack the crossings [and] additional amenities for people walking and [biking].” 
As a member and co-lead of the Coalition to Protect Cyclists and Pedestrians, Julie Vomund is familiar with crossing Gravois’ intersections on foot. 
She said that the pedestrian crossing buttons are frequently out of order. 
“Sometimes I'll know that I've pressed the button, but I don't hear a sound,” she said. 
“Sometimes they just never let me cross. 
At Gravois and Cherokee Street, if you press the button, it never gives you a pedestrian crossing signal. 
 People are left with a number of bad choices.” 
Vomund has reported these malfunctions to MoDOT. 
She said the department told her they are trying to work on it. 
Missouri and the City of St. 
Louis share responsibility for Gravois because the road, also known as Route 30, is a state highway. 
They are in the early stages of planning a major resurfacing and safety overhaul of the avenue. 
MoDOT has outlined several options to improve roadway safety, including reducing lanes and reconfiguring complex intersections. 
The city plans to improve sidewalks, lighting and intersection access. 
Major construction is slated to begin in late 2029. 
For St. 
Louis Ward 8 Alderwoman Jami Cox Antwi, the issue of roadway safety is a matter of how the city developed over time  and the changing needs of residents. 
“St. 
Louis is a very old, legacy city. 
Gravois, Missouri Route 30, is actually a historic portion of Missouri Route 66. 
At the time it was established, we needed these broad, wide streets because they were the only way for people to travel quickly across large distances,” she said. 
“We have cars and large vehicles now, so these streets that once functioned as a primary crossway are no longer needed to be that primary crossway for people. 
We have very old street infrastructure in our city that, unfortunately, hasn't evolved with the times.” 
Other dangerous city corridors identified in Trailnet’s report include Grand Boulevard, Kingshighway, Route 100/Manchester Road/Chouteau Avenue and Broadway Street. 
In St. 
Louis County, the most dangerous roadways in 2025 include Lindbergh Boulevard/U.S 61/67, Chambers Road, Manchester Road/Missouri 100, New Halls Ferry Road and West Florissant Road. 
To learn more about the deadliest corridors in St. 
Louis, data-backed solutions that can make our streets less perilous, and recent traffic calming wins in the region, listen to “St. 
Louis on the Air” on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or click the play button below. 
“St. 
Louis on the Air” brings you the stories of St. 
Louis and the people who live, work and create in our region. 
The show is produced by Miya Norfleet, Emily Woodbury, Danny Wicentowski, Elaine Cha and Alex Heuer. 
The audio engineer is Aaron Doerr. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.7%Emily Woodbury: 1.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Confirmation Bias6.7%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 3.5%Emily Woodbury: 3.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.7%Availability Heuristic3.5%This article: 0.4%Emily Woodbury: 0.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.4%This article: 3.9%Emily Woodbury: 0.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Hindsight Bias3.9%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 5.7%Emily Woodbury: 3.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.3%Framing Effect5.7%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.1%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 4.1%Emily Woodbury: 0.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Status Quo Bias4.1%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 5.2%Emily Woodbury: 1.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 4.8%Optimism Bias5.2%This article: 4.1%Emily Woodbury: 1.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.9%Pessimism Bias4.1%This article: 16.8%Emily Woodbury: 8.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 7.1%Negativity Bias16.8%This article: 2.7%Emily Woodbury: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.1%Self-Serving Bias2.7%This article: 2.4%Emily Woodbury: 0.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error2.4%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 1.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.6%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 1.4%Emily Woodbury: 2.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.4%Halo Effect1.4%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.8%Emily Woodbury: 1.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.0%Recency Bias1.8%This article: 3.4%Emily Woodbury: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Primacy Effect3.4%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 18.0%Emily Woodbury: 2.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.6%Appeal to Authority18.0%This article: 3.9%Emily Woodbury: 1.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%False Dilemma3.9%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.2%Emily Woodbury: 4.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 3.7%Hasty Generalization5.2%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 2.9%Emily Woodbury: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Bandwagon2.9%This article: 1.4%Emily Woodbury: 4.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 6.6%Appeal to Emotion1.4%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 10.1%Emily Woodbury: 1.7%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.1%Post Hoc (False Cause)10.1%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.4%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 9.4%Emily Woodbury: 3.4%Belleville News-Democrat: 2.6%Anecdotal9.4%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 5.4%Emily Woodbury: 0.9%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)5.4%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.8%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 7.7%Emily Woodbury: 1.3%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection7.7%This article: 4.1%Emily Woodbury: 3.1%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.8%Biased Writer Voice4.1%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 1.5%Belleville News-Democrat: 1.1%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 1.2%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily Woodbury: 0.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 8.1%Emily Woodbury: 3.0%Belleville News-Democrat: 0.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…8.1%

716 words analyzed.

Speakers

7speakers59%attributed speech292writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageMissouri Department of Transportation • 20 words • 0.0% coverageBoris Neely • 21 words • 100.0% coverageBoris Neely • 4 words • 0.0% coverageBoris Neely • 30 words • 0.0% coverageTrailnet • 24 words • 0.0% coverageTrailnet • 1 words • 0.0% coverageTrailnet • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageCindy Mense • 34 words • 100.0% coverageCindy Mense • 11 words • 0.0% coverageCindy Mense • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageJulie Vomund • 12 words • 0.0% coverageJulie Vomund • 16 words • 0.0% coverageJulie Vomund • 7 words • 0.0% coverageJulie Vomund • 18 words • 0.0% coverageJulie Vomund • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageJulie Vomund • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageMoDOT • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageJami Cox Antwi • 29 words • 100.0% coverageJami Cox Antwi • 1 words • 0.0% coverageJami Cox Antwi • 7 words • 0.0% coverageJami Cox Antwi • 13 words • 0.0% coverageJami Cox Antwi • 28 words • 0.0% coverageJami Cox Antwi • 28 words • 0.0% coverageJami Cox Antwi • 16 words • 0.0% coverageTrailnet • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Boris Neely

93%flagged-word coverage
55 attributed words13% of attributed speech68% writer coverage
0%20.0%40.0%Quote-first Misdirection+38.2 ptsWriter: 0.0%Boris Neely: 38.2%38.2%Attempt to Sell a Product -19.9 ptsWriter: 19.9%Boris Neely: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.