A bulletin from Children’s Action, September 15, 2007
Large-scale growth at the Hospital’s current location would be site-inappropriate. The hospital has a history of growing too big for its sites and seeking additional facilities where its growth can be accommodated (See here for history).
The hospital needs to consider a range of alternative growth plans, not two nearly-identical proposals.
The hospital does not meet the distributed needs of its four-state service area with either of its plans. These plans concentrate in-patient services at a single location whose access routes are gridlocked.
The scope of growth (nearly tripling in size) would permanently change the character of quiet, single-family neighborhoods. Specifically, it would impact:
The safety of kids walking to two nearby schools, past two planned hospital access points on residential streets.
The peace and quiet of a neighborhood packed with young children. 13 years of construction, not to mention the resulting towers, would project noise (and air pollutants) into the neighborhood.
The viability of the 2-story condo community in the shadow of the new hospital. This community is built around green open spaces that would be shaded for much of the day by the new, 240-foot towers.
The ability of all NE Seattle residents, workers and visitors to navigate city streets.
City transportation infrastructure cannot currently accommodate major hospital growth at this location. Specific issues:
The hospital plans to add 2000 parking spaces. This adds 2000 cars to the hours of backups on Montlake Blvd and in the U-district, the two major routes from this area to freeways.
Hospital construction from 2009-2022 will coincide with decades of road/transit construction on 520, the Husky Lightrail station and the 45th Street viaduct.
Hospital growth and construction will make it even harder for hospital workers, patients and NE Seattle residents to reach their workplaces.
The Hospital’s proposal is contrary to City policies and inconsistent with height limits for other major institutions. No other institution has proposed an expansion of this magnitude in a single-family zone.
The hospital has not matched the neighborhood’s good-faith efforts to communicate and negotiate constructively as part of the growth planning process.
Neighbors support an increase pediatric in-patient services across the hospital’s 4-state service area. Neighbors have long supported the hospital’s mission by serving as board members, volunteers and donors.
