Latest Skyway News...And A Few Thoughts

The Saint Paul City Council has approved the updates to the skyway ordinance proposed by Councilmember Noecker after months of discussion and debate by various parties, including the Skyway Governance Advisory Committee (SGAC) and the Skyway Vitality Work Group (SVWG).

When the updates take effect in late October, skyways will be open from 6am to midnight, building owners will be required to meet minimum standards for security, a new code of conduct will be clearly posted throughout the system, and police will be freer to take action against those behaving badly. While no one expects these changes to solve every problem, they should be a good first step.

The SVWG has turned its attention to several new initiatives, including wayfinding improvements, availability of public restrooms, and introducing positive decor and activities in the skyways to promote vitality and discourage negative behavior. There is much concern over where to send the homeless if we are no longer going to tolerate sleeping in the skyway system, and solutions are being sought. Efforts continue to steer youth toward positive activities when downtown for school, transportation, etc.

Building owners, led by the Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA), have hired a consultant to study the best ways to make downtown safe and comfortable for residents, businesses, workers and visitors alike. While much remains to be determined regarding funding, having a vision for securing downtown, including the skyway system, will be a big step forward.

There is a significant difference of opinion as to who should provide security in the skyways. Some building owners feel that police should have a primary role instead of past practice whereby private building security personnel were expected to handle all but the most serious issues. City representatives claim police presence has been greatly increased in recent years and that building owners need to step up to their responsibilities as specified in the skyway ordinance and their easement agreements (which gave the owners skyway connections in exchange for right-of-way through their properties and agreement to provide security and maintenance). For now, it appears the city intends to hold building owners to their agreements while shortening skyway hours to lighten the burden on owners.

It's unlikely that much will change until BOMA completes its security study and we see how the ordinance changes affect behavior over the coming winter. This gives us some breathing room to consider other important issues such as wayfinding, vitality and emergency shelter for the homeless. I expect the SVWG and others to revisit the ordinance changes in the spring to review their effect and consider further modifications. Until then, our efforts continue to make our skyway system something of which we can be justly proud.

Suggestions For Improving Council Changes To Skyway Ordinance

Here is the email I sent to City Council members on 9/7 stating my support for proposed ordinance changes, plus a few suggestions for improvement. These are my views, not necessarily the official position of the Skyway Governance Advisory Committee.

Honorable City Council Members,

I attended and spoke at the public hearing last night regarding the proposed skyway ordinance changes. Here is a quick summary of my views after listening to what others said at the hearing.

Skyway Hours: The current 2AM closing time works well as many bars and restaurants are open until that time. Especially in the winter, patrons of downtown businesses really appreciate having skyway access, as do those with disabilities. Certainly closing earlier saves money for building owners, but it also reduces the value of the skyway system to users, and business owners would be hurt when fewer patrons come downtown and stay late.

I think a better solution is to keep the 2AM closing time for the system as a whole while considering shorter hours for segments that truly do not benefit many users late at night. Give the other ordinance changes and the various efforts to improve skyway vitality a chance to work before reducing skyway hours, and keep in mind that skyways which do not get much late-night usage now could be getting a lot more as downtown vitality improves.

Sitting: Building owners have a legitimate concern about dropping the No Sitting rule. If sitting is permitted in easements, people will also sit in other areas despite buildings having rules against it. Furthermore, do we really want to encourage sitting in skyways and easements? A better idea would be to ban sitting except in designated areas and put a time limit of 15 minutes where permitted. Skyways are for getting around, not hanging around.

I will also point out that some of the worst places for people hanging out are in the Metro Transit controlled skyway and elevator at Central Station. Metro Transit can and should post their own conduct code, including a no sitting rule, and it should enforce those rules, just as any other private building owner should.

Enforcement: I agree with Pat Wolf that there should be a dedicated Skyway Beat to patrol the system and focus on trouble spots. If jointly funded by SPPD and Metro Transit Police, this could be less costly and more effective than what is being done now. I also agree with building owners that, as times have changed, expectations of what private security guards should do exceeds the reality of what they can do. While building owners should not get off the hook for their share of security funding, we need a more effective police presence in the skyways.

In conclusion, I recommend adoption of the proposed ordinance changes, but without the hours change and with a prohibition on sitting except in designated areas for limited periods of time. I also suggest reorganizing how policing is done in the skyway system, although that need not be a part of this proposal.

Thank you for your consideration. Please feel free to contact me should you wish to discuss any of these ideas.

Sincerely,

----

Andy Flamm, Chair, Skyway Governance Advisory Committee​

Owner and General Manager / Cedar Printing

651-293-3904 / www.​CedarPrinting.com

Securian Center, Skyway Level / 401 Robert Street N, Suite 211 / Saint Paul, MN 55101

Diverse Opinions Expressed at City Council Hearing

The Saint Paul City Council held a public hearing last night on the proposed changes to skyway rules and regulations (as mentioned in my previous post). Several areas of disagreement became evident as stakeholders, including myself, spoke before the Council.

The most contentious issue was the proposed change in skyway closing hours from the current 2AM to midnight. Numerous individuals, including some in wheelchairs, advocated for keeping the 2AM closing time so patrons of bars, restaurants and entertainment venues could use the skyways after midnight. I stated that most attendees at Skyway Governance Advisory Committee meetings prefer the 2AM closing time, although many feel midnight would also be ok. None, however, want the skyways to close earlier than midnight.

Others, mainly building owners or their representatives, argued for a closing time as early as 8PM, saying that times have changed and building security guards can no longer be expected to maintain safety late at night with limited police presence. Longtime building manager Pat Wolf mentioned that there once was a dedicated Skyway Beat police patrol, something I have wished for as I've considered security issues over the past few years. It was also suggested that some segments of the skyway should have more limited hours than others.

My preference is for the Council to hold off on the hours change until improvements in security are given a chance to work. However, the midnight closing appears to be an important bargaining chip for building owners, so we may need to accept the earlier closing time to get security upgrades owners are expected to fund such as better video surveillance and cooperative patrols. Whatever the Council decides, it can always be changed in the future.

Another matter of contention was the proposed removal of the prohibition against "sitting" in the skyway system. The intent of this change was to clarify that some sitting is permitted (in seats provided by buildings, for example), but building owners feel the change would encourage loiterers to sit anywhere they wish with impunity. While buildings can make their own no-sitting rules, they would not apply to the easements through their buildings, which could confuse those inclined to sit wherever they feel like sitting. 

I agree that the proposal should be modified to allow sitting only in designated areas and for a limited length of time. Skyways are for getting from one place to another, not for sitting on the floor or for long periods.

My takeaway from the hearing is that there are differing perspectives and ideas when it comes to skyway issues, and all of the people who spoke made good points. This will require compromise in order to succeed, and I think the proposed changes, with an amendment regarding the sitting issue, is a good compromise.