Wednesday Hospital Meeting With SAC On North Laurelhurst Upcoming New Surgery Building And Parking Garage

Wednesday from 6-8pm, the community is invited to attend the next in the series of Children Hospital Meetings with the SAC (Standing Advisory Committee) to hear about upcoming plans for "Copper Project" - a new surgery pavilion and parking garage at the north end of Laurelhurst, in the area of 45th Avenue NE and NE 50th Street.

The proposed height is 37 feet and according to images prepared by the architect,  neighbors on 44th Avenue NE will be able to see the top of both of the proposed buildings.

Meeting materials:

• Here is the WebEx Meeting Link.  Dial-in/Access Code: 408-418-9388 / 146 466 7386
• Here is where public comments are poste
• Here is the 2020 Annual Report
• MUP Public Comment 

The two new proposed tall buildings will be viewable by those living in that area, according to images prepared by the Hospital's contracted design firm. The buildings will also be situated close to the perimeter of the Hospital and residential boundaries. As neighbors have expressed in over 100 pages of comments submitted to the City, there will be significant  and permanent impacts affecting the livability of the neighborhood.

Here is the agenda:

• Welcome /Introductions of SAC members Membership update
• Meeting #27 Context  
• 2020 Annual Report Review  
• Project Schedule Updates
• 7:05 Public Comment 
• Committee Deliberation Committee
• Adjournment and scheduling of next meeting 

Master Use Permit 3036201-LU states, as well as the signs around the perimeter:

Land use application to allow a 3-story building addition to existing institution (Children’s Hospital, Surgery Pavilion & Garage (2 buildings connected by a bridge span). Parking for 1,138 vehicles proposed. Portion of existing garage to be demolished. Addendum to Final Environmental impact Statement for Seattle Children’s Hospital Major Institution Master Plan dated November 2008, has been prepared.

The SAC meeting scheduled for December 2020 was cancelled due to several reasons reportedly. One of them was that Children’s is not complying with one of the legal requirements of Council Condition 15 of the Seattle City Council, which states that the SAC must review and comment on Children’s potential project before Children’s submits its MUP application to the City. SAC members' role is to advise the City and Children’s Hospital on the development that is occurring under the provisions of the Children’s Hospital Major Institution Master Plan.

The sequence should be that the major institution formulates ideas and then presents those plans including the designs to the SAC, who review and make changes and then they sent that plan to Seattle Department of Construction & Inspections (SDCI ) who reviews it and sends it back again to the SAC for refinements.

Instead it was reported that in July, Children's Hospital went directly to SDCI and submitted their  permit that was quite different than what was approved in the Major Institution Master Plan.. Then Hospital then scheduled a meeting in August. However during this time, it was reported the project was in the hands of SDCI who started to work on it. 

Then the Hospital put the big boards up around the perimeter of the Hospital stating the comment deadline. But neighbors reported that the documents regarding the proposed development were not accessible on-line so they could not review them in order to submit comments. 

And the SAC was given the documents for the first time at their meeting and thus were not able to properly review and analyze them prior to the meeting to formulate opinions and input in preparation for their meeting. It was reported that some SAC members even brought this concern up at the meeting that as well as that the process was out of order but Colin Vasquez, the City representative did not comment. 

Many neighbors also submitted comments on the Hospital's non-compliance stating that the Hospital is not following the approved standard process and that that the Hospital was trying to get approval from the City when they were supposed to first have the SAC's input whose role it is to review the development plans and makes changes. Thus the Hospital appeared to be moving through the process in the incorrect order.

Several SAC members expressed concern after reviewing a letter from neighbor David Yuan to the Director of the Department of Constructionand Inspection, Nathan Torgelson. The letter stated in part that the process appeared to be faulty because the SAC had not been given the opportunity to review and comment on Children’s potential project before Children’s submitted its Major Institution Master Plan. (MUP) application to the City. This is the legal requirement of Condition 15 of the Seattle City Council decision that has not been followed.

Some SAC members also expressed concern that at the meeting the City said that the SAC does not carry very much weight in the review and decision making process. Members expressed concern that their role needed to be clarified and adhered to.

It is also reported that the Hospital's proposed development different is very different that what was approved in 2010 in the MIMP, in which the Seattle City Council approved the 20-year growth Master Plan for Children’s Hospital. 

The process to come to the approval was quite lengthy - 2 years of Citizen Advisory Committee Meetings as well as multiple meetings between the hospital and the Laurelhurst Community Club both working to come to a compromise on the proposed expansion.  The City Council adopted the two parties Settlement Agreement submitted in February 2010.  Some of the provisions in the agreement set forth are: reduced square footage, no expansion of Hospital boundaries across Sand Point Way, 50 year restriction on expansion into residential areas,  height restrictions of no more than 20 percent of the campus land area over 90 feet and no more than 10 percent over 125 feet and no structure above 140 feet in height. The full Settlement Agreement is here.

Currently, the City website says that the Permit is under a "correction notice" - which one neighbor said means that the permit can't be considered until the proper process is followed as detailed above - the SAC first has an opportunity to review the plans. 

The lawyer's letter below addresses that issue.

MCCULLOUGH HILL LEARY, ps

February 11, 2021

VIA EI.ECTRONIC MAII


Colin Vasquez

Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2000

Seattle, Washington 98104



Re: Project No. 3036201-LU

4800 Sand Point Wray NE



Dear Colin:


We are writing on behalf of Seattle Children’s (“Children’s”), which submitted the above-referenced Master Use Permit (MUP) application pursuant to its Major Institution Master Plan (MIMP) for development of a new surgery building at its campus on Sand Point Way (the “Project”). The Project MUP application has been subject to two separate public comments periods and the Project has has been reviewed on three separate occasions by the MIMP Standing Advisory Committee (SAC). Under SMC 23.69.034, the Project MUP will continue to be reviewed by the SAC. This extensive public review process has elicited multiple comments from the public and has led to modifications in the Project design. Obviously, the Project has been subject to a robust public review process.


Some public comments have suggested that the requirement for SAC review under Condition 15 of the City Council conditions on the MIMP have not been satisfied. Condition 15 reads:

15. Children’s shall create and maintain a Standing Advisor Committee (SAC) to review and comment or all proposed and potential projects prior to submission of their respective Master Use Permit applications. The SAC shall use the Design Guidelines for their evaluation.

The City Council’s emergency ordinance suspended meetings of City advisory boards during the early days of COVID-19. Therefore, Children’s worked with the Seattle Department of Construction and Inspections (SDCI) and the Seattle Department of Neighborhoods (DON) to develop an outreach process to address Condition 15 under these unexpected limitations. Based on this collaboration, a video presentation of the new project was distributed to SAC members on July 1, 2020, so that they could review it and provide any comments at that time. Comments were directed to DON, and the MUP application was submitted thereafter. As noted, Children’s confirmed the scheduling and planning for this process with both SDCI and DON.

Since the submittal of the Project MUP application, Children’s, again working with SDCI and DON, has conducted two additional meetings of the SAC to obtain additional comments on the Project. That process remains underway.

As noted, Children’s worked carefully with SDCI and DON to ensure that the pre-application meeting with the SAC would satisfy Condition 15 under the COVID-19 restrictions then in place, and Children’s believes that this pre-submittal process did indeed conform to the requirements of Condition 15 under the circumstances. Children’s has always been committed to an open and inclusive process with the public and the community regarding its projects, and in this spirit — even though additional steps to address Condition 15 are not required — Children’s is prepared to withdraw and resubmit its MUP application so that additional pre-application SAC review of the Project can occur.

Children’s is prepared to take this step with the understanding that this additional opportunity for review and comment should not unduly delay the Project. There has already been a substantial amount of public and SAC review of the Project to date, and this review process will commence again following submittal of the MUP application. The new surgery building is a critical project for Children’s and the populations it serves and so it is important that the MUP process resume expeditiously. Given the many hours already devoted to SAC review of the Project, we believe two additional meetings would allow the SAC ample opportunity to provide “pre-submitta1” comments. More hours of SAC review and comment will ensue following MUP application submittal.


For these reasons and under these conditions, Children's hereby withdraws its Project MUP application. We look forward to scheduling a SAC meeting for pre-submittal review as soon as possible and we will work with the co-chairs of the SAC toward this end.

Sincerely,

John C. McCullough



cc: Maureen Sheehan

Seattle Children’s

701 Fifth Avenue  •  Suite 6600  •  Seattle, Washington 9- 8104

206.812.3388 • Fax 206.812.3389 • www.mhseatt1e.com

 

The Laurelhurst Community Club published this information in their December Newsletter: 

SCH Non-compliant in Application Process 

LCC has requested that the City correct the non-compliant application process for Seattle Children’s Hospital Phase 3 development. At the November 18 Standing Advisory Committee (SAC) meeting of Seattle Children’s Hospital (SCH), there was confusion about the role and opportunity of SAC members to give meaningful input to the design review process. LCC, and neighbors who attended virtually, realized that something was out of order in the way the process has been conducted to date. 

When the original plans to develop the SCH site were approved in 2010 by Seattle City Council (after they were denied by the Hearing Examiner), the City Council placed certain “Conditions” (rules) upon the process as Seattle Children’s Hospital would develop its approved phases over the life of their Major Institution Master Plan (MIMP). One of them is Condition 15, which requires that SCH have a Standing Advisory Committee to examine and recommend its comments BEFORE SCH applies to build any phase through the City’s SDCI application process. This sequence is identical to many other Major Institutions, such as Seattle University, to allow the SAC to weigh in with comments for early design guidance for phases developed by the institution. 

LCC discovered that SCH did not present its plans to the SAC for this early comment opportunity before filing for permits. Instead, SCH filed with SDCI for a MUP application in early July without a meeting or any real comment opportunity from the SAC or LCC, as required by the LCC/ SCH Settlement Agreement. In fact, the first official SAC meeting was on August 31, almost two months after the plans were filed at SDCI. In addition, hundreds of pages of EIS Addendum technical materials about the Phase 3 plans were unavailable to SAC members until just seven hours before they met, which severely limited their opportunity to examine them and provide meaningful comments.

On November 25, LCC wrote a letter to the head of SDCI requesting him to rectify the process, which would allow the SAC to submit its comments first, after which SCH could incorporate them into its plans. After that, SCH would re-apply for the MUP permits to SDCI. 

The goal of LCC is to allow SCH to build out what they medically need, but also protect the livability of surrounding residential neighborhoods and maintain the vitality of nearby small businesses and medical practices. 

The next SAC meeting is scheduled for December 8, 2020, at 6 p.m. Its members look forward to a meaningful opportunity to comment on the SCH Phase 3 plans at that time to achieve the goals under the Conditions set forth by the City when the MIMP was approved

The SAC meeting scheduled for December was also cancelled reportedly because at  the  previous  SAC meeting, the SAC was presented with surprising information  that the Seattle Department of Construction & Inspections (SDC(I) Director, Nathan Torgelson, had already made a decision to deem the large development as "exempt."  It has been reported that some SAC members did not understand why they were not given the opportunity to weigh in on the decision and why they had not been properly informed prior to the meeting about the Director's very important decision.

It is reported that SAC members also were not informed that the Laurelhurst Community Club (LCC) and David Yuan, an adjacent resident to the Hospital, submitted a request to the City for a Code Interpretation regarding SCDI's preliminary decision to label the Phase 3 SCH project as an "exempt." The SAC was told the City would have a decision after reviewing the letter at the end of the month.

After hearing the Director's decision on "exempt" status, it is reported that several SAC members expressed that they did not believe the meeting should continue with the presentation. Some members stated that the meeting should be postponed until SDCI made a decision on LCC's Request for Interpretation, as how the presentation is viewed is impacted by the role the SAC will have in the design review process. A vote was taken and won by a small margin to continue the meeting and hear  the presentation.  

Today, David Graves, Senior Land Use Planner,  told the Laurelhurst Blog staff about the status of the LCC and David Yuan's request to the City for a Code Interpretation:

At the request of David Yuan and the Laurelhurst Community Club, who submitted and paid for the original requested interpretation, we paused the review, analysis, and drafting of the interpretation. The attached letter from Mr. Yuan describes their reason for requesting a pause. We respected his request and placed a pause on the interpretation. This does not result in a correction letter.

David Yuan's December letter says in part:

We now formally request a pause in SDCI’s review due to the fact that: 1) there is no valid Master Use Permit (“MUP”) application in place for Project Copper since the Proposal did not follow the procedure outlined in Council Condition 15; and 2) after SCH initiates and completes the Condition 15 process with the Standing Advisory Committee (“SAC”), there is the potential for changes. 

Explanation for Actions Taken by SDCI Staff: As noted in the two earlier letters, Colin Vasquez of SDCI and Maureen Sheehan of the Department of Neighborhoods are the same two individuals who staffed Forest B for SCH. Ms. Sheehan also staffed the Seattle University SAC and assisted SAC members in preparing comments on the Center for Science Innovation before the applicant submitted the MUP application to the City. This is consistent with Seattle University’s version of Condition 15. As we understand it, SCDI frequently relies on checklists for land use applications. Therefore, it is not clear why SDCI accepted SCH’s Proposal for Project Copper on August 6, 2020, without requiring SCH to first go through the Condition 15 process. A checklist, including Council Conditions that apply to all SCH MIMP applications, should have flagged the need to comply with Condition 15 first. Furthermore, Mr. Vasquez appeared to have provided the correct direction three years ago to SCH’s SAC members for the Forest B project. Because his actions in 2017 demonstrated an understanding of the role that the SAC plays in the Condition 15 process, it is a mystery why Mr. Vasquez acted as if Condition 15 did not apply to Project Copper and we hope there is a rational explanation for this behavior.

Now that these issues have come to light, SDCI must comply with the Council Condition 15 requirements for Project Copper. We look forward to hearing from you regarding next steps.

LCC told the Laurelhurst Blog at the time:

SDCI is not considering the Phase 3 changes as a Major, nor a Minor Amendment to the originally approved MIMP (Major Institution Master Plan. If they ruled it Major or Minor, it triggers a Supplemental EIS requirement to study any potential impacts from the project.

LCC understands from SDCI, that the SAC does not have input about this decision. The SAC design review process would make more sense after a decision on the Request for Interpretation is issued, perhaps by year end. 

A slide from the last SAC meeting stated about exempt changes: 

A proposed change to an adopted master plan shall be reviewed by the Director and determined to be an exempt change, a minor amendment, or a major amendment. The Director's decision that a proposed amendment is minor or major shall be made in the form of an interpretation subject to the procedures of Chapter 23.88, Rules; Interpretation. If the Director and the Major Institution agree that a major amendment is required based on subsection E of this section, the interpretation process may be waived, and the amendment and environmental review process shall be subject to the provisions of subsection G of this section. After the Director makes a decision on whether an amendment is minor or major, the Advisory Committee shall be notified.

A slide in the evening's presentation said:

The Advisory Committee shall be given the opportunity to review a proposed minor or major amendment and submit comments on whether it should be considered minor or major, and what conditions (if any) should be imposed if it is minor. 

Here is a slide from the SDCI website explaining an exempt change:

Criteria for Exempt Changes to MIMP 23.69.34.B 

Exempt Changes. An exempt change shall be a change to the design and/or location of a planned structure or other improvement from that shown in the master plan, which the Director shall approve without publishing an interpretation. Any new gross floor area or parking space(s) must be accompanied by a decrease in gross floor area or parking space(s) elsewhere if the total gross floor area or parking spaces permitted for the entire MIO District or, if applicable, the subarea would be exceeded. Each exempt change must meet the development standards for the MIO District. Exempt changes shall be: 

1. Any new structure or addition to an existing structure not approved in the master plan that is twelve thousand (12,000) square feet of gross floor area or less; or 

2. Twenty (20) or fewer parking spaces not approved in the master plan or

3. An addition to a structure not yet constructed but approved in the master plan that is no greater than twenty percent (20%) of the approved gross floor area of that structure or twenty thousand (20,000) square feet, whichever is less; or 

4. Any change in the phasing of construction, if not tied to a master plan condition imposed under approval by the Council; or 5. Any increase in gross floor area below grade.

Explanations for major and minor amendments can be found here. 

The City website explains a Code Interpretation: 

A code interpretation is a formal decision on the meaning, application, or intent of any development regulation in our Land Use or Environmentally Critical Area codes. Interpretations are site-specific. They do not address how a standard applies in general, but rather how it applies to a specific site or development proposal. You can request an interpretation that is not related to a pending project, that is related to a pending project, or that is related to a pending project that is subject to appeal. 

The Code Interpretation letter, submitted by LCC's attorney states (in part):

This RFI is submitted because the categorization of the SCH Proposal as a Major or Minor Amendment will have significant impacts on how the interests of the surrounding community will be recognized and protected during the City’s review. To date, this critical question has not been sufficiently explored for the SCH Proposal, which will significantly burden the community.

The SCH Proposal must be classified as a Major, not Minor Amendment. To fit in the Minor Amendment category, a proposal must be “consistent with the original intent of the adopted master plan.” SMC 23.69.035 D. As explained below, the SCH proposal is not consistent with this original intent, and in several respects undermines the MIMP’s protective and mitigative purposes. First, SCH proposes an entirely new road network within its campus. In the 2010 MIMP, currently in effect, Penny Drive was shown in a SE orientation and provided access directly to the Ocean garage, south of the corner of 44th Ave NE and NE 47th St. Separately, the 2010 MIMP included a small access road, designed for service and fire access, in the 75’ buffer behind the North Garage. SCH specifically labeled the road as “Service and Fire Access” in the map in the adopted 2010 MIMP.

The current SCH Proposal entirely redesigns and changes the function of the road network inside the SCH campus, to the detriment of the adjacent community. SCH would build a brand-new perimeter road that is parallel to 44th Ave. NE. All visitors parking at the Ocean Garage (608 parking spaces) will be diverted to this perimeter road sited on the outside edge of SCH property and immediately adjacent to single family homes. 

Penny Drive will now run SE, and then east and south. The former low use fire access and service road in the 75’ buffer will be lengthened substantially and transformed into an I-5-like corridor, serving as the major roadway providing ingress and egress to the existing 600 plus stall Ocean garage right next to the residential homes along 44th Ave NE. Further, unlike I-5, which experiences substantial reductions in activity depending on time of day, hospitals function 24/7 with multiple shift changes – intensifying impacts on residents. The Proposal’s new road network is far more and much worse than a mere “realignment” of Penny Drive. It bears no resemblance to the configuration of Penny Drive from the 2010 MIMP.

SCH is proposing to create an entirely new road network. That network will needlessly -- and contrary to the mitigative and protective intent of the MIMP – impose the impacts of adjacency to heavy traffic on the surrounding residential community.  

Additional MIMP and City Council statements, including the following, make unmistakable the fundamental 2010 MIMP premise that, to protect the neighboring community from its impacts, hospital expansion would occur at the bottom of the campus and adjacent to Sand Point Way NE: A. “Children’s revised its proposed MIMP to include early expansion onto Laurelon (Alternative 7R)… The change also allowed Children’s to… place increased height and bulk at a lower elevation where it is removed from most single-family neighborhoods to the east and south…. “ Seattle City Council Findings, No. 52, Page 10 (emphasis added) B. … “Children’s Master Plan… carefully balances the urgent need for additional capacity at the hospital with innovative programs and plans that respond to community concerns. Children’s commitment to purchase Laurelon Terrace, thus moving the bulk of its expansion “downhill” and adjacent to the Sand Point Way NE arterial and refining the proposed development through transitional heights and building setbacks, represented an extraordinary mitigation measure to reduce the impact of the expansion on neighbors.” 2010 MIMP, page 9 (emphasis added) C. “The Master Plan allows Children’s to… place the majority of new development on the Laurelon Terrace site…2010 MIMP, page 9. D. “The Master Plan will primarily utilize the lower elevations of the expanded campus for new development…. The majority of the new buildings will be located on the lowest areas of the expanded hospital campus and closest to Sand Point Way NE and 40th Avenue NE on Laurelon Terrace. 2010 MIMP, page 42.

To avoid impacts on the neighboring community, City Council approved -- against public policy for preservation of housing -- SCH acquisition of Laurelon Terrace, displacement of its residents, and redevelopment of the downhill Laurelon Terrace site. The Proposal, by constructing a hospital building at the top of the hill instead of downhill near Sand Point Way NE, would abandon a core principle of the 2010 MIMP.

As noted above, the Proposal must be categorized as a Major, not Minor, Amendment because, to fit in the Minor Amendment category, a proposal must be “consistent with the original intent of the adopted master plan” and the SCH proposal is not consistent with the 2010 MIMP. SMC 23.69.035 D. If the Proposal is nonetheless deemed MIMP consistent, it is then within the Minor Amendment category because: 1) the construction of the new perimeter road will “be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the Major Institution is located;….” SMC 23.69.035(D)(2); and 2) The construction of the surgery pavilion on the eastern edge of the site and at the highest point of the Hospital’s property will “result in significantly greater impacts than those contemplated in the adopted master plan.” SMC 23.69.035(D)(1). 

Here is the presentation from the November meeting.

Here is where all public comments are posted.

This comment was received regarding the development: 

The Hospital is at it again, doing what is best for them, rather than taking into consideration the livability needs of neighbors.  The two very tall structures will be visible by those living on the east side of the Hospital on 44th Avenue NE. There will also be glare, excessive noise from the mechanicals on the tops of the buildings. 

And on top of that, Children's is opening an entrance to employee parking on NE 45th Street! That very busy street has constant traffic, sometimes at high rates of speed. So an accident is waiting to happen. Why does the Hospital get to just open a parking garage as they deem necessary and destroy the flow of traffic for the residents? Because it benefits them and their employees, period. Oh and they will have flaggers but they will let employees in while neighbors wait.  

And let's not forget added to this new parking entrance will be an even bigger back-up at the light at NE 45th Street and Sand Point Way. The back-up which includes Children's Hospital shuttles (mostly always empty!) sometimes can be 10 cars long. And the timing of the light is horrible. Long waits on the week-ends when there is no -line before the light finally switches. And then short lights during heavy traffic times. How does that make sense? 

Added to this to completely benefit Children's employees, will be about 70 construction trucks per day making a continuous route through the neighborhood, bothering neighbors from early morning to evening. Some streets on the route of the numerous enormous trucks are quite narrow with cars on both sides. Oh and children playing outside. But that doesn't matter, let's do whatever the Hospital needs, not the neighborhood. 

Neighbors, read the information, take it in and then send in your comments asap.  This construction period is going to last FOUR years, FOUR YEARS. 

Another neighbor wrote:

It is hugely concerning that neighbors living near “ground zero” for this new Phase 3, will be greatly impacted.  The 2 1/2 year project is very close to neighbors along 44th Avenue NE and it really seems as if the Hospital needs to be open to some mitigation especially for those neighbors who will endure that intense, noisy and dusty construction for such a lengthy period of time.  

It's also unclear why the Hospital cannot dig below grade for the parking garage, rather than building up. It has been reported that the Hospital says it is too expensive!  That seems irrelevant with them buying a row of houses on NE 45th at one time, along with their latest construction projects and now this one. 

Putting the garage lower would not impact surrounding neighbors  and would be below sight line.  If course the Hospital can do this.  They just don't want to and pretend they don't have enough money. They want what they want, not what works for the neighborhood.  Both need to work together. Of course Children's can afford doing this; it's just their excuse to say they can't.  Children's appears to always have plenty of money for their many, many capital projects as well as the many large donations they received who in turn get their names put on the buildings and the pocket parks.  

Information has also been circulated to neighbors that employees will use a parking garage on NE 45th Street during the almost 3 year phase. Isn't this dangerous with so many cars zooming down NE 45th Street and employees turning left into the garage? It's an accident waiting to happen...multiple accidents, all for this next phase and employees getting the right of way into a parking garage jeopordizing safety of the neighborhood drivers. 

The City also received these comments from a nearby neighbor:

I am writing to express concern about Copper Project Phase 3 at Children’s Hospital and Medical Center. I live across the street on the east side of Children’s site. 

For the last twenty years we have been protected from impact from the hospital by a 75’ landscaped buffer that has been quite effective. A low level of lighting on the surface of the Ocean Parking Structure has preserved the residential feel of the neighborhood and protected wildlife during the nighttime from light pollution. 

Parking restrictions on 45th Ave NE for Children’s employees have been generally effective, though I have noticed in recent years that the no parking signage along the periphery of the hospital has gotten run down and overgrown so that the supposed fire lanes around the hospital are often no longer clear of parked cars. 

I am concerned that the proposed Copper Project Phase 3 takes away these effective buffers along 44th Ave NE, exposing my neighbors not only to very significant construction noise, but also to long-term traffic impact of noise and pollution. 

My concerns are: 

• The proposal realigns Penny Drive so that it takes away about one third of the landscaped buffer along 44th Avenue NE, and routes all traffic for the Ocean garage parallel and next to 44th Ave NE. This exposes the residents of 44th Ave NE to unnecessary noise and traffic pollution and deprives them of part of their buffer. Since the surgery pavilion is supposed to be connected to the existing hospital by a bridge (as will the parking structure), it seems to me that Penny Lane should retain its existing alignment and the Surgery Pavilion be connected to the rest of the hospital by a bridge (that will be there anyway). That would require the Surgery Pavilion to be sited somewhat north from where it is in the proposal, but by doing so not only will the residents of 44th Ave NE be protected from noise and pollution, but it may be that the existing view of the Olympics along NE 47th Street could be preserved. 
• The height of the north parking garage, while within the height overlay, is unnecessarily tall. It could be reduced considerably by excavating at least some of it underground. 
• While the height of the surgery pavilion is within the height overlay, it goes above the buffer tree canopy. If it cannot be reduced, the plan must be very careful to protect the neighborhood from nighttime light pollution and daytime glare from the building. We don’t want the neighborhood lighted up 24-7 as if it is a downtown office park. 

I have a second set of concerns having to do with construction impacts. The construction of the Ocean parking lot across from my house some twenty years ago made work at home impossible for me. I am a professor at the University of Washington. Luckily, I had an office then to flee to during the day, but now no more. I am retired and work primarily at home writing for publication. My wife is also retired and at home during the day. I know that many of my neighbors are working at home because of the Covid-19 pandemic. 

All of this means that disruption of our lives during the day by construction noise is not a trivial issue. The town houses on NE 50th street will be very seriously affected. I have also heard complaints from residents along Sand Point Way (which is scheduled to get a new high-rise apartment, and a retirement community over the next couple of year). The hours during which heavy traffic can be allowed must be strictly limited. The proposed construction entrance on NE 50th street negotiates a very steep gradient. Construction vehicles grinding up that hill will seriously disrupt the high-density residential district north of Children’s. Perhaps reversing the flow of vehicles so that they exit rather than enter on NE 50th street would ameliorate that problem. 

In addition, entrance and egress to the Ocean garage is slated to be at approximately the corner of NE 45th Street and 45th Street Northeast during construction. This has happened before. When this exit was last used a traffic jam from Sandpoint Way up NE 45th Street almost as far as the Ocean Garage itself occurred every afternoon making it almost impossible for residents to exit the neighborhood at that time. Perhaps Children’s should consider parking even more employees at the UW Montlake lots and bringing them in by shuttle as they already do.  

Finally, traffic has gotten heavy enough that it is time for a traffic light at Sandpoint Way and NE 50th Street. This is a major point of entry and exist for Laurelhurst residents, yet getting across Sandpoint Way (either to go south or cross to 40th Ave NE) has gotten very dangerous. I know that Sandpoint Way keeps getting more traffic lights, but that is mainly due to growth at Children’s Hospital. I wonder if the lights could not be coordinated so that traffic can run down Sandpoint Way smoothly while still allowing those needing to cross the highway to do so safely.

A north Laurelhurst neighbor submitted these comments:

In the 2010 MIMP there is strong language regarding Children's commitment to move the bulk of there expansion "downhill" and the "extraordinary mitigation measures" that were incorporated into the MIMP.  building a surgery pavilion at the top of the hill on Children's property is not consistent with a number of the statements that Children's made in the adopted MIMP.   

The eastern edge1 of Children’s property is at the highest elevation of the entire property. The proposed Surgery Pavilion would be sited on the eastern edge. In other words, the Pavilion is proposed to be sited as high “uphill” as Children’s site allows. This is opposite of the development conditions indicating that new hospital additions to the existing campus should be sited “downhill.”   

The Master Plan will primarily utilize the lower elevations of the expanded campus for new development.  The majority of the new buildings will be located on the lowest areas of the expanded hospital campus and closest to Sand Point Way NE and 40th Avenue NE on Laurelon Terrace. 2010 MIMP, page 42. 

While the 2010 MIMP did show a potential parking garage near the corner of 44th Ave. NE and NE 50th Street, a garage is not a hospital facility.

Other neighbors submitted these comments to the City:

I am concerned about the level of landscape screening present along 44th Ave NE. As it is now, there are several bare spots along the west side of the street that do not sufficiently hide the parking lot. As many of the homes on 44th Ave NE, including mine, are perched up from the street, I am also concerned about sight lines from first and second story windows of the residential houses on 44th Ave NE onto the new parking and surgery structure. This concern becomes more pronounced during dark hours as light from the buildings and parking surfaces reflect back at the houses. Maintaining the screening level at the current height will not be sufficient to block the view of the parking structure as well as shield the street from noise from the building's mechanical systems. Given that about half of the 75' setback is used for a road, I hope there is sufficient room for screening. If this screening does prove to be sufficient, please consider planting more and taller trees into the landscaping area. 

I live in North Laurelhurst. With all the development that has gone on, and continues, the details revealed for the development on the NW corner of the campus are extraordinarily out of sync with all that has been going on. What on earth is the idea of using a 75 ft. buffer (along 44th Ave NE) to become a two lane road? In this case, how does it then ever meet the definition of "buffer"? Why is the parking garage not to be sunk into the property? This would be one step in lowering the impact on North Laurelhurst which is supposed to always be paramount.

LCC submitted these concerns and comments:

In accordance with the City Council bill from April 5th, 2010, and the Settlement Agreement  (Feb 2010) that was agreed upon which allowed the hospital to add 2.1 million square feet of new buildings and parking, the role of LCC continues to be the compliance with "rules" that govern their Major Institution Master Plan, the MIMP. The overarching goal of both of these documents is to provide a balance of liveability for neighbors and allow growth for the needs of SCH. 

To date, LCC and the public have had real "process" problems with getting the information needed for analysis. SCH also had the "comment deadline" before the public viewed these plans at the SAC meeting! 

The EIS addendum is still in a format on their permit website that is locked out to the public as well as their document about proof of "Need" for the added surgery rooms and parking.  LCC has requested it 3 times, but they claim they cannot get "the Applicant" to fix it.   

The location of the development, the additional exit lane on Penny Drive and the large massing of the added buildings and parking , plus 17 feet of height for mechanical equipment will have visual and noise, and glare impacts on surrounding residences.  On this mechanical roof of the surgery what is the noise level predicted? Can it be mitigated? 

Neighbors want to ensure that it respects the promised 75 foot "setback" around the campus where it is adjacent to residences. One question that the City should answer is what is the purpose of a setback, and what is allowed in it by code? 

There is more hardscape added in the NW campus for new buildings and an added access road and a new turnaround along the NE corner of the site for "access" vehicles. Residences are located along 44th Avenue NE and 45th Avenue NE and NE 50th Street and a new two lane road is planned to be located in the 75 foot buffer, a requirement in the Conditions of the MIMP for its approval. Cannot the new buildings be made in a smaller footprint to comply with the green buffer along residential borders, and add the road , outside of the 75 foot green buffer?    

Since the original operating rooms have had issues with Aspergillums mold, what air quality emission controls will protect neighbors whose residences are located below the new surgery pavilion , albeit at a height 75 feet away from the buffer? How will toxic waste be removed? 

The elevations show a tall "wall " of structure along these residential streets when completed. What mitigation will reduce this visual barrier? What is the composition of trees. 

There will be over 390,000 square feet of new development, and the majority of the demo and construction will occur nearby the residences on NE 50th Street, 44th Avenue and 45th Avenue NE on a temporary road. How will the impacts from construction dust and noise and emission be controlled and mitigated for neighbors?   

Noise. tall lights, and seeing tall walls are something for neighbors to question, and better to do it now than after it is approved.

LCC sent out this information at the end of last year to neighbors:

Neighbors near Children’s along 45th Avenue NE and 44th Avenue NE between 45th Street NE and 50th Street NE will want to pay particular attention to Phase 3 plans. The additions will be highly visible on the northeast side of the Laurelhurst Children’s complex.

Some of key elements of the MIMP’s Phase 3 project include:

1. Plans now show five phases instead of four, which were originally approved for the MIMP.
2. A new surgery center called The Copper Surgery Pavilion is proposed at a height of 37 feet+ 15 feet for a mechanical penthouse along 44th Ave. NE with a service road in the setback area.
3. One of the existing parking garages off Penny Drive will be demolished and three above-ground stories of parking will be added at the corner of NE 50th St. and 44th Ave NE for a total of 8 floors of parking. The project adds 500 parking spaces.
4. An elevated sky bridge is proposed to connect the new parking garage with the Copper Surgery Pavilion at the eastern boundary.
5. A drop off tunnel is planned in the new parking garage.
6. The total amount of new development is 621,324 square feet of building and “moving dirt” in Phase 3. However, much of it is exempt from being counted in the 2.1 million campus limits because it is counted as parking, underground (below grade) location, or is rooftop mechanical, allowed on 40 percent of the roof, over the allowable height. So the height is 37 feet for the two new buildings, plus 15 feet for added height for mechanical, which totals 52 feet height visible along 44th Ave. NE and NE 50th St. but also very visible from many other nearby locations.
7. Penny Drive, the main road entrance off Sand Point Way NE, will be changed to connect the campus with the new buildings with a drop off in front of the Surgery Pavilion. In addition, with a special “No Protest” agreement with the City of Seattle, a second left-turn lane will be built into Penny Lane to ease exiting congestion.
8. Also the new temporary exit for the Ocean garage for the clinics, etc will be re-routed onto NE 45th Street from 2021-2024. SCH is planning to hire professional flaggers to help the exit the Seattle Children’s users onto this very busy street.
9. A temporary construction road is planned to be built from Sand Point Way NE through NE 50th St. and 44th Ave NE.
10. A paved permanent access road in the 75-foot mandatory buffer is planned along 44th Ave. NE and NE 50th St. with a hard surface turnaround.

Phase 3 is governed in accordance with the Seattle City Council Clerk File #308884, dated April 5th, 2010, and the Laurelhurst Community Club (LCC) and SCH Settlement Agreement, recorded with the City on February 3, 2010. After the original expansion plans were denied by the Hearing Examiner, the Settlement Agreement was negotiated and agreed upon by both parties which allowed the hospital to add 2.1 million square feet of new buildings and parking for the duration of 20 years, (to 2030), in four phases. 

In addition, to the physical development, the Seattle City Council bill includes a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) that established a requirement that SCH must meet before each phase of its development is approved, established the maximum single occupancy vehicles (SOV) allowed on campus, commuting goals, and regulates on-site and off-site parking to reduce the impacts on the surrounding, mostly residential, neighborhoods. The approved MIMP also established development standards, added a 75-foot setback around three sides of the SCH campus next to the neighbors’ homes, changed the existing allowable heights, required an increase in on-campus parking and authorized the demolition of the Laurelon condominiums for their new and taller buildings along NE 45th St .and Sand Point Way NE. 

LCC supports the mission of SCH to provide growth in its excellent pediatric health care. LCC also must review the proposed plans at each development phase to ensure that it is in compliance with the requirements governing both the Settlement Agreement and Major Institution Master Plan.

For more information on the project go here.

The Hospital Master Plan information can be found here on the hospital website.