Save Luther Burbank Park. No Park & Ride on park property.
270 Comments
B
Barbara Crawford
11 years ago
Please consider a Bellevue location to replace the South Bellevue P&R
C
Clementine Berlioz-Arthaud
11 years ago
A garden is always better than a parking lot.
M
Margaret E.Reid
11 years ago
No No No
G
Gregory Smith
11 years ago
This is far from the best soltuion for this current and impending parking problem, and a poor use of taxpayer funds. Let's seek to "do it right!"
C
Charles W. Whiteman
11 years ago
NO
C
Courtney Kinsman-Cordero
11 years ago
Horrible plan. Better to build up the current parknride
I
Ira B. Appelman
11 years ago
KIRO TV news reported the park v. parking lot issue with our own Sue Stewart leading the defense:
http://www.kirotv.com/videos/online/video-some-mercer-island-residents-say-no-to-sound/vC4Xjh/
W
Wolfgang O. Schunter
11 years ago
This belongs to the park and should remain so.
F
Frances T. Schunter
11 years ago
NO WAY! Let's keep the land as intended.
T
Thomas Donahue
11 years ago
This P&R does not belong blocks inside of a neighborhood of single family homes. It is not a solution to the proplem of getting Mercer Island residents to the Mercer Island bus stops or eventual light rail. Only more frequent shuttles will solve the problem.y.
L
Lisa Koper
11 years ago
It is very important to preserve all of the green space at Luther Burbank. Other options should be explored.
J
Jeanne Miller
11 years ago
On page four of the East Link extension update (http://www.soundtransit.org/Documents/pdf/projects/eastlink/20141121_EL_boardMI%20parking.pdf), it certainly does appear that they're talking about 442 stalls. (Community & Event Center Stalls: 229; Structured Parking: 213; Total Stalls:442) It also appears that they are proposing using the present parking lot for the community center. While page three indicates that they would provide "separate and distinct" entrances, it appears that drivers would have to drive through the existing parking lot to get to the P&R entrance. If this is true, I wouldn't call that separate and distinct. If it is not true, could you please clarify?
J
Jeanne Miller
11 years ago
As I understand it, this proposed parking lot would be under construction for three years, then be open to all for three years before becoming dedicated to MI residents? And does everyone remember the fiasco with the construction of the present P&R that delayed that opening by a year (or more)? With the anticipated disruptions caused by three years or more of construction, paving "paradise" and putting up a parking lot seems to be a very shortsighted and permanent solution to a temporary problem.
D
Dana Pruchno
11 years ago
Please don't take away this beautiful hill. It is pure enjoyment to sit there and see the water view. We love being there on race day to gather our groups of kids and watch them take off. Putting a park and ride in this location would only cause congestion and a small beautiful spot. It seems that sound transit did not plan well when they rebuilt the current park and ride. Why wasn't it built as an underground and a two story above ground? We live on the southend and rarely find parking space at the park and ride, but it seems that there could be a better more useful spot in the downtown core. Please don't jeopardize Luther Burbank and the surrounding area.
B
Bryan Mazza
11 years ago
The Mercer Island City Council should be focused on the needs and desires of islanders and not put the interests of eastside residents, politicans, and other outside groups first. If you are not able to put us first, please resign your position.
D
Dwight R. Schaeffer
11 years ago
The one location I would support is to lid the freeway between 77th and 80th with two levels of parking and the light rail station underneath. The ramps to the freeway are already there. Buses would use the top level and would not not need to use city roads and would be able save time. A car dropoff/pickup could also use the top level. an integrated bus station, light rail station, and parking lot could be had without needing to find new land.
D
Deborah Mazza
11 years ago
The City Council's focus should be towards supporting our local businesses with adequate parking and preserve the green space we have for all to enjoy.
E
Emma Johnston
11 years ago
Seems like a park and ride belongs next to the freeway and not a park blocking views to the lake for a neighborhood.
S
Sandi Tiffin
11 years ago
As a north MI resident, I want to see green space preserved over solving Bellevue's parking problems.
J
Jim Eanes
11 years ago
Whether or not the area being proposed is part of Luther Burbank Park is irrelevant. We don't need more commuter parking, just better access to transit buses.
Please consider a Bellevue location to replace the South Bellevue P&R
A garden is always better than a parking lot.
No No No
This is far from the best soltuion for this current and impending parking problem, and a poor use of taxpayer funds. Let's seek to "do it right!"
NO
Horrible plan. Better to build up the current parknride
KIRO TV news reported the park v. parking lot issue with our own Sue Stewart leading the defense: http://www.kirotv.com/videos/online/video-some-mercer-island-residents-say-no-to-sound/vC4Xjh/
This belongs to the park and should remain so.
NO WAY! Let's keep the land as intended.
This P&R does not belong blocks inside of a neighborhood of single family homes. It is not a solution to the proplem of getting Mercer Island residents to the Mercer Island bus stops or eventual light rail. Only more frequent shuttles will solve the problem.y.
It is very important to preserve all of the green space at Luther Burbank. Other options should be explored.
On page four of the East Link extension update (http://www.soundtransit.org/Documents/pdf/projects/eastlink/20141121_EL_boardMI%20parking.pdf), it certainly does appear that they're talking about 442 stalls. (Community & Event Center Stalls: 229; Structured Parking: 213; Total Stalls:442) It also appears that they are proposing using the present parking lot for the community center. While page three indicates that they would provide "separate and distinct" entrances, it appears that drivers would have to drive through the existing parking lot to get to the P&R entrance. If this is true, I wouldn't call that separate and distinct. If it is not true, could you please clarify?
As I understand it, this proposed parking lot would be under construction for three years, then be open to all for three years before becoming dedicated to MI residents? And does everyone remember the fiasco with the construction of the present P&R that delayed that opening by a year (or more)? With the anticipated disruptions caused by three years or more of construction, paving "paradise" and putting up a parking lot seems to be a very shortsighted and permanent solution to a temporary problem.
Please don't take away this beautiful hill. It is pure enjoyment to sit there and see the water view. We love being there on race day to gather our groups of kids and watch them take off. Putting a park and ride in this location would only cause congestion and a small beautiful spot. It seems that sound transit did not plan well when they rebuilt the current park and ride. Why wasn't it built as an underground and a two story above ground? We live on the southend and rarely find parking space at the park and ride, but it seems that there could be a better more useful spot in the downtown core. Please don't jeopardize Luther Burbank and the surrounding area.
The Mercer Island City Council should be focused on the needs and desires of islanders and not put the interests of eastside residents, politicans, and other outside groups first. If you are not able to put us first, please resign your position.
The one location I would support is to lid the freeway between 77th and 80th with two levels of parking and the light rail station underneath. The ramps to the freeway are already there. Buses would use the top level and would not not need to use city roads and would be able save time. A car dropoff/pickup could also use the top level. an integrated bus station, light rail station, and parking lot could be had without needing to find new land.
The City Council's focus should be towards supporting our local businesses with adequate parking and preserve the green space we have for all to enjoy.
Seems like a park and ride belongs next to the freeway and not a park blocking views to the lake for a neighborhood.
As a north MI resident, I want to see green space preserved over solving Bellevue's parking problems.
Whether or not the area being proposed is part of Luther Burbank Park is irrelevant. We don't need more commuter parking, just better access to transit buses.