Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, February 10, 2010
City Children's Hospital Negotiates Limited Expansion With Rich Neighborhood Group
Posted by Dominic Holden on Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 1:12 PM
- Robert Ullman
Serving a four-state region of emergency pediatric services, Children's Hospital argues it needs to add 350 beds over the next two decades to accommodate a forecasted influx of ailing kids. Modern medicine is keeping alive more children who would have died in infancy, but they require more medical assistance through their youth, hospital officials say.
The hospital could still include those 350 beds, but would need to contain them on its central campus, not by putting some of them in a new building across Sand Point Way NE, as it planned. The deal, if accepted by the city council and mayor's office, would also cap building heights at 140 feet, down from 240 feet originally proposed by the hospital; however, this is similar to a compromise the hospital had already considered. The hospital would also be bound from expanding into residential areas to the north, south, or east for the next 50 years; this too is not a major setback for the hospital, which could expand to the west in areas that aren't zoned for single family homes.
While the hospital has ultimately come out with most of what it wanted, the LCC has reined in the hospital's plans considerably. But it's also come with the disdain from some neighborhood residents—and a city of onlookers—who believe that fighting a hospital expansion for sick kids is reprehensible. The group spent over $34,000 on legal fees (Update: the agreement notes that the LCC spent $150,000 on legal fees, but the hospital has agreed to pay them back), arguing the hospital overestimate the need for more beds and underestimated impacts on traffic.
The city holds authority over the expansion because it revamps the hospital's major institution master plan, requiring new zoning regulations. Unlike most other big institutions—such as hospitals and universities—Children's is located amidst a low-density residential neighborhood. The city council is acting in a "quasi-judicial" capacity on the matter, ruling on the legal merits of new building rules as they pertain to city land-use code. But the parties sought to compromise because, sources close to the deal say, the council would have likely tinkered with the design, potentially to the chagrin of both sides. One side would almost have certainly appealed in King County Superior Court, opening the door for further adjustments by a judge. It's widely assumed the council will approve this settlement, which must then be ratified by Mayor Mike McGinn.
1
Those of us who deal with major facilities elsewhere in our neighborhoods weren't happy to think Children's might serve to embolden other large facilities to cloak their own code-skirting with similar PR waves of sentimental appeal.
2
"...Modern medicine is keeping alive more children who would have died in infancy, but they require more medical assistance through their youth..."
Congratulations! We've saved your baby's life, but that life consists of regular stints in hospitals, surgeries, piles of medicines and healthcare-related bankruptcy.
3
8
@ 2 - And your point would be.... ?
9
11
14
That area isn't like First Hill - this hospital is right in the middle of a two-story residential neighborhood. Look at it..
Nobody in the neighborhood feared the hospital would spill out into the houses, so let's get that little hysterical notion straight right now.
The expansion has always included building on property already owned by the hospital, and it wasn't until this last year that the Laurelon condo owners proposed selling their property to the Hospital in order to help bring the height and bulk down.. (Laurelon approached the hospital, not the other way around, fyi).
I for one wish LCC would let Children's have the Hartmann property. It makes sense to build a clinic or other support facility there. Whatever Children's would do with it would be (and look) a heck of a lot better than what is likely to be done by a developer.
As for the $150k paid to the LCC, you can bet that covers SOME of the legal fees they incurred. LCC doesn't have access to lots of cash for this fight, they were running out and knew it.
But really, Seattle, we need to find a way to weed out these rogue neighborhood groups that can't see the forest for the trees, especially when the issue they fight has a huge effect on a regional population of SICK CHILDREN.
This hospital tends to the needs of EVERY CHILD, regardless of their ability to pay. Nobody is turned away unless there isn't a bed available.
Finally, let's get busy building a bigger hospital to meet the needs of these children.
Always thought of Children's incessant appeals as the "doctors uncompensated Porsche fund."
Children's as Seattle's civic religion, along with the Ring cycle and the Blue Angels...
18
If this were Starbucks' headquarters instead of a hospital for widdle sick kids, would your opinion about the rights of the residents be the same?
19
I hope the LCC takes a good long look at itself in the mirror.
Children's always has been a good neighbor and I'm pleased this will move forward, City Council willing.
btw, your Starbucks/Hospital comparison makes absolutely no sense.
21
I can't pretend to understand its niceties, but the hearing examiner's decision that was the spur for today's settlement firmly insisted that even considering the never-disputed-by-anyone public value of the expansion, Children's still had to give a little to avoid unnecessary intrusion into the surrounding neighborhoods. The hosptital wasn't privileged to ignore substantively backed concerns on the record, no matter who filed them.
Anybody who wants that privilege given to Children's or other hospitals, schools, etc. can agitate the Council to gut the "balance" provisions of the Major Institution Code. Go for it.
22
Jeannie Hale is a blight on this city and an evil evil woman. That whole neighborhood should be ashamed. I know this makes me embarrassed of my city.
@14 Except here the hospital is actually helping children and it was there long before these assholes moved in.
23
24
So evil, these rich people.
One good thing here is that they've agreed to work in collaboration with the hospital going forward. The neighborhood there needs to really hold those LCC Trustees accountable to that promise in the years ahead.
26
If you don't see this, I'd bet money that you've never succeeded in asking for a raise.
AND? Totally not the point.
If you had a kid that needed an ICU stay in the last 2 years, chances are likely that you would have been turned away, due to our ongoing high census - all rooms full. That shouldn't have had to happen.
Hopefully, you'll never need to use our services, but now, thanks to the expansion approval, we CAN be here if you ever do.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
Crowdsourcing Uncut Police Video from the Dec. 12 Occupy Protest at the Port of Seattle by Eli Sanders
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
The Onion Is on a Roll: "Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon" by Charles Mudede
-
Announcing The Stranger's Tournament of Dunces! Who's the Dumbest Representative in the State House? by Christopher Frizzelle
-
Survey Says: Cyclists Would Rather Give Up Sex Than Their Bikes by Bethany Jean Clement
-
Stranger Tournament of Dunces, Match 3: Rep. Mark Hargrove vs. Rep. Norma Smith by Eli Sanders
-
Jeremy Lin Saves the NBA by Charles Mudede
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (28) RSS