City pays for MICA parking | Letter

The facts from Mercer Island Center for the Art’s website: “The site (MICA) will support ADA compliant parking for disabled and drop off. Street parkingwill be created by re-striping 77th Avenue Southeast and Southeast 32nd Street. MICA is in close conversation with local businesses and others about shared after-hours parking.”

1. The ADA compliant parking will take away four regular parking spots on the city street (Southeast 32nd Street) that are currently used by park goers.

2. Re-striping 77th Avenue was never budgeted or planned for MICA and, in fact, was taken out of the city budget because the city did not have the funds to pay for this. Then, when MICA needed parking and didn’t want to provide it, the city suddenly found the funds and snuck it back into the budget. Dan Thompson found it when reviewing the new design regulations. Now, MICA uses the taxpayer-funded re-striping in all of its marketing materials as one of “their” solutions to parking (city/taxpayer funded parking) for a private business that has not provided one parking space in its plans.

With the new commuter nightmare, re-striping does not make any sense. Narrowing 77th (taking out the middle turn lane and bike lane) to provide parking for MICA while impacting the Island’s growing traffic issues is irresponsible and sneaky by the City Council; especially at the same time when Island traffic will be re-routed to surface streets due to Sound Transit.

3. City resources should be used for city uses — not to benefit a private enterprise (which is already getting the land for free) at the expense of the commuters, bikers and businesses that use this road.

3. Not one nearby business or “others” has agreed to provide “shared” after hours parking. Logically, MICA patrons will park in nearby parking lots anyway (Rite Aid, Swedish Clinic, Thrift Store, etc.) thereby limiting the use of these lots by legitimate customers.

MICA has not provided any parking solution, it doesn’t sound very community-minded and its proposed (and changing) plans continue to negatively impact our precious Mercerdale Park and surrounding area.

Robin Russell

Mercer Island

More in Letters to the Editor

Mercer Island structural imbalance: Meet productivity | Letter

Fred Jarrett, former Mercer Island mayor, is described as implementing “lean management” principles.

The Iran, Israel and U.S. dilemma | Letter

Some Iranian leaders, while supporting terrorism, say they don’t want the bomb.

A second request of the Mercer Island Center for the Arts | Letter

We ask again for the MICA leadership to reveal their intentions and tear up the MOU.

Vandals destroying Mercerdale Park garden | Letter

Twice some people have cut native plants to the ground, girdled native trees and pulled out new plants.

Sustainability Mercer Island, USA and Earth via Fusion | Letter

I am on the mailing list of Sustainability Mercer Island. We earthlings… Continue reading

Mercer Island Council should consider levy to fund MIYFS counseling | Letter

The Mercer Island School Board approved the following letter on March 22… Continue reading

Art reminds us what is possible within us | Letter

Some in our community have been discussing art. The thing about art… Continue reading

City should add retaining environment to Comprehensive Plan | Letter

Native habitat, wildlife “left out of the city’s Comprehensive Plan.”

Story should include MICA’s commitment to weighing other sites | Letter

“Mercerdale Park is ‘off the table’ as a site for the ‘foreseeable’ future.”

Vast majority of Islanders support MICA | Letter

“Islanders took sides over MICA’s desire of having a building in Mercerdale Park, not MICA itself.”

Blood on Mercer Island legislators’ hands | Letter

In regards to the Seattle Times’ Feb. 18 article “Guns, taxes on… Continue reading

Time for city of Mercer Island, MICA to cease playing cat and mouse | Letter

Giving away a portion of the park for $1 per year is poor judgement on the part of the City Council.