Readers Write (April 30): 'A farewell to skyways'

Eric Dayton ("A farewell to skyways," April 23) suggests it's time to remove downtown Minneapolis' skyways. Why? Because they're popular, that's why — more popular than sidewalks — leading to some undesirable outcomes.

Dayton's solution is to remove the skyways so as to force pedestrians to walk outdoors. Or, as seems likely, to not walk anywhere, an alternative outcome Dayton doesn't appear to have considered.

Dayton is proposing an intriguing political and economic philosophy: When you can't compete, don't improve your product. Instead, pass laws that forcibly eliminate your competitor.

Allow me to offer a simpler alternative for Mr. Dayton, and for the city of Minneapolis: If you think sidewalk traffic is important, develop and implement strategies that make outdoor pedestrianism more appealing than the skyways.

If you can't come up with anything, apply your creative energy and political capital to fixing the flaws in the environment we have while leaving in place what people demonstrably prefer.

• • •

So ask senior citizens (the fastest-growing segment of the population, by the way), disabled people, and individuals interested in personal safety, convenience and an ideal environment, enjoying the energy and activity of walking the skyways, how we feel about closing skyways. Next, ask the hotel management teams, condo associations, apartment renters — all who advertise "located on/near the skyway system" and see how they feel about it. After that, Eric Dayton, ask if we haven't figured out your personal reasons for suggesting the closings, with your investments in certain properties involved. Give us the names and addresses of the formed advisory committee so we can write letters with our opinions. Last, ask us why we would vote for City Council members who are encouraging the closing of the skyways. Then we will ask which council members support this. Votes are very powerful.

One cannot contest the geographic bona fides of a great-great-grandchild of George Dayton. Thankfully, Eric Dayton also follows the great Minnesota traditions of looking to the future, working hard and engaging in political life. Unfortunately, those opposed to skyways also possess the Minneapolis penchant for demolition.

There are many examples that illustrate our sordid history with the wrecking ball, and I fear we have learned little. Just the mention of the Metropolitan Building or Gateway District can bring grown women and men to tears with regret.

There is an enviable tradition of adaptive use in our great urban centers. Let us implement a few bold ideas before we drag down more of our infrastructure in the name of progress. Progress never rises from a clean slate. Progress builds on success.

• • •

Mr. Dayton didn't mention the cost of parking. I quit going downtown to shop when Knollwood opened because I could park for free. I've also become aware that when there is an event downtown, parking prices go way up. My choice to go downtown or not did not involve the skyways.

Skyways played a role in emptying downtown streets, but they're not the sole cause, nor is taking them down a reasonable solution. Skyways just moved pedestrian activity — most of it noontime — up one story, pleasantly out of bad weather. The Nicollet Mall Macy's and Barnes and Noble had both street and skyway entrances, yet both have closed.

Like many college students, I worked in a downtown store in the early 1960s, when Nicollet Avenue was lined with stores and, if I recall correctly, had two-way traffic and on-street metered parking. Streets were busy as people came downtown to buy clothing and household goods at Dayton's, Donaldson's, Powers and Penney's. But that was before Southdale and its siblings and the spread of Target — both creations of the Dayton brothers — and the growth of outer-ring suburbs.

Downtown retail is great for people who work and live there, but the overwhelming majority of metro-area residents don't; why would they drive miles to get there, hassle with traffic and pay for parking just to buy goods readily available closer and with less aggravation and ancillary expense?

Getting rid of skyways would, indeed, put more people on the streets. But perhaps not so many in July and especially January, when they'd be miserable.

The writer is a former Star Tribune reporter.

Reading Dayton's thoughts about the skyways reminded me of an experience I had when I was a member of the Guthrie Theater acting company in 1974. We were being visited by the distinguished artistic director of Teatro Nacional Cervantes in Buenos Aires, and I was asked to give him a driving tour of the city, which he had requested. I proudly took him around the lakes and past the Minneapolis Institute of Arts, enjoying his lively conversation, then headed downtown. As we drove through the streets, I noticed that he had become very quiet for several blocks, and at last he loudly blurted out, "Where are all the people!?" His question took me by surprise, but I explained that the people were on the second floor, walking through the skyways. With great emotion in his voice, he said, "But without people on the streets, where is the vitality of the city?" I had no good answer. As we drove out of the downtown area, he remained silent as he gazed out the window, occasionally murmuring, "No people … no people."

• • •

We find the skyway system daunting. People working downtown can run lunchtime errands in their shirtsleeves but as day-trippers, we find it difficult to access. A lack of access signs repels, and when we finally find our way in, we're easily lost. Afraid of being locked in after the theater performance, we brave dark, cold streets instead.

We recommend that a line be painted on the sidewalk leading from the light rail to the nearest entrance. Perhaps a purple score honoring Prince's songs or a purple yard line for the Vikings. Each block should have a bright, clearly identifiable door that lets people know where to access the skyway.

While the discussion continues, let's make both skyway and street level access inviting and efficient.

I don't use the skywalks, so I cannot comment on much of what Dayton said about them, but he is correct in stating that busy sidewalks are safe sidewalks. My wife and I lived in Cairo for three years, where the sidewalks teem with activity, day and night, and where there is very little street crime. We felt much safer walking the streets in Cairo than we do in Minneapolis. My wife felt safe even walking them alone.

• • •

As a longtime resident of Minneapolis, I am a devoted patron of our skyways. I am 90 and must use a walker. As the population of the city gets older, the walker, wheelchair population gets larger. Because of the skyways I am able to walk several miles everyday, I maintain my independence, because I can walk to my dentist appointments and doctor appointments. If I require physical therapy, I am able to walk. When I need groceries, I walk to Target. Someone who is not handicapped does not appreciate the dangers involved in just crossing winter streets. Please don't take away our independence by closing the skyways. Just walk through the skyways on a weekday noon hour, and you will see that business is not affected in any way, as the restaurant chairs are filled and the lines are long.