Laurelhurst - Children's Hospital and Medical Center

Next Hearing Examiner Hearing on DPD's recommendation for Children's expansion scheduled to begin July 14 at 9 a.m.
Plan to attend or submit written comments. Click here for information.

Seattle Hearing Examiner Upholds Laurelhurst Community Club Appeal of Children’s Hospital Expansion Environmental Impact Statement
April 20, 2009

SUMMARY: In a decision dated April 20, 2009, Seattle Hearing Examiner Sue Tanner reversed the Director of the Seattle Department of Planning and Development’s (DPD) determination of adequacy and ruled that the Seattle Children’s Hospital final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) is inadequate. The decision came in response to an appeal by the Laurelhurst Community Club (LCC). In her decision, the Hearing Examiner stated that “the FEIS fails to present a reasonably thorough discussion of probable significant housing and land use impacts…” The Hearing Examiner has remanded the matter back to DPD.

THE APPEAL: State law requires that an environmental impact statement (EIS) be prepared before a decision is made on a major project impacting the environment. By law, an EIS must be a “hard look” at environmental issues and impacts. The EIS requirement was readily triggered by Children’s proposal to virtually triple development on its Laurelhurst campus, adding 1.5 million square feet in buildings up to 160 feet high and at the same time expanding the campus by leapfrogging across Sand Point Way.

Throughout the EIS process, LCC protested that the Children’s EIS avoided rather than acknowledged important land use issues, including the inconsistency of the proposal with the City’s Growth Management Act Comprehensive Plan. LCC also pointed out that the EIS lacked basic data and analysis concerning Children’s proposal to acquire and then demolish 136 affordable, garden style homes, an important housing resource for the City and the neighborhood. When the City and Children’s rejected LCC’s requests that the EIS be brought up to standard, LCC appealed. The appeal, filed in November 2008, was heard by the Hearing Examiner as part of the open public hearing on the Children’s application, commencing on March 2, 2009.

THE DECISION: In her decision dated April 20, 2009, the Hearing Examiner agreed with LCC that: “The FEIS must include an analysis of land use impacts that will enable the decision-makers to make the requisite balancing judgments and reach an informed decision on the proposed MIMP [major institution master plan].”

She then concluded: “Instead, much of the discussion of the land use section of the FEIS reads as an advocacy piece for the proposal.”

The Hearing Examiner also ruled that the FEIS failed “to provide necessary information on the scope and details of the impact of demolishing 136 units of moderate-income housing [the Laurelon Terrace garden condominium complex]….”

LCC REACTION: In responding to the Hearing Examiner’s ruling, LCC President Jeannie Hale, stated: "It is not often that a community group can succeed on an EIS appeal especially when both the City itself and a major Seattle institution are lined up against it. LCC appreciates that the Hearing Examiner took the time to review the volumes of information about Children’s proposed expansion and to validate key LCC concerns about the shortcomings in the EIS. Preparation of new EIS analysis that does not shrink from acknowledging the problems in Children’s proposal is just the first step toward a more appropriate Children’s expansion, consistent with the City’s Code and Comprehensive Plan, and neighborhood concerns."

LCC attorney Peter Eglick, who has handled several other cases involving area major institution expansions, commented: "All Seattle citizens and communities benefit from this decision. What is telling about the Hearing Examiner’s decision is her adoption of LCC’s argument that the EIS improperly “…avoids responding to a potentially unfavorable policy by using a canned statement that appears to presume that approval of the [Children’s Master Plan] is a foregone conclusion.” When the City’s own hearing examiner condemns in such terms a lengthy City EIS, it is a wake-up call that the City cannot just go through the motions."

Ruling calls review of Children's Hospital expansion impacts inadequate

Tuesday, April 21, 2009
By AUBREY COHEN
SEATTLEPI.COM STAFF

Seattle Children's Proposed Expansion - View the Master Plan, Transporation Plan, EIS and more

Seattle Children's (formerly Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Center) is located near the intersection of Sand Point Way and NE 45th Street in Seattle. It is a widely recognized regional center for pediatric care, research and education.

Children's Proposed Master Plan Hearing, March 2009

Statement presented by LCC president Jeannie Hale (PDF)
Statement presented by LCC vice president Liz Ogden (PDF)
LCC March 10, 2009, letter to the Hearing Examiner regarding Children's Proposed Master Plan and Response to David Miller (PDF)
Master Plan Hearing Testimony from Carol Eychaner, Land Use and Community Planner, presented and submitted March 3, 2009. (PDF)

Download the PDFs to read the full documents.

LCC Proposed Master Plan Conditions, March 2009

Laurelhurst Community Club Proposed Master Plan Conditions (PDF)

(Additional conditions may be suggested at hearing.)

LCC supports Recommendations 2 through 12* of the Citizens Advisory Committee’s February 3, 2009, Final Report and Recommendations regarding Children’s Hospital proposed expansion and master plan, with modifications, including those as indicated from CAC Minority Reports. Download the PDF to read the full document.

LCC supports the mission of Seattle Children’s, its important work, and reasonable expansion on its current site consistent with laws and state standards for hospital expansion.

An expansion of 1.5 million square feet with an additional 350 beds raises questions not only about the impacts of the massive expansion upon the surrounding communities but also calls in to question how Children’s has calculated its bed need for the future.

LCC hired independent hospital, land use, and transportation consultants to analyze and assess the plans. LCC’s consultants’ work demonstrates that a much more modest expansion plan – one where the proposed bed expansion complies with the state board of health methodology regarding bed need – could meet Children's proposed needs. A successful plan also would allow for mitigation of expansion impacts.

Public Hearing on Children’s Begins March 2, 2009

In November, LCC appealed the adequacy of Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Children’s to the Seattle Hearing Examiner. The Public Hearing to consider Seattle Children’s application for approval of its Major Institution Master Plan is scheduled for the week of March 2 to 6; it begins Monday at 9 a.m. LCC's appeal hearing on the adequacy of the EIS is March 4. Hearing Examiner’s Office, 700 Fifth Ave., Suite 4000.

The SEATTLE CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL MAJOR INSTITUTIONS MASTER PLAN CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Final Report and Recommendations was submitted on February 3, 2009, to Seattle City Council and the Hearing Examiner for the City of Seattle.
It is available at http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/pubs/ChildrensAdvisoryRpt.pdf.

From the February 2009 Laurelhurst Letter:

Children’s Plans Clear Advisory Committee

After 19 months of work, the committee finalized its recommendations on February 2 approving Children’s request to allow 1.5 million square feet of new development, expansion of the hospital’s boundaries to include Laurelon Terrace and the Hartmann property across Sand Point Way, and building heights up to 140 feet.

As of February 4, 13 minority reports were filed by individual CAC members or coalitions of members. Minority reports addressed such issues as limiting building heights to 105 feet; not expanding institution boundaries across Sand Point Way; restricting vehicle access from residential streets to service and fire access; prohibiting vehicle access along 40th Avenue NE; building the SW Parking Garage below grade; increasing setbacks along NE 45th and 50th Streets to 75 feet; changing the phasing of when the Hartmann property would be rebuilt should it be included in Children’s boundaries; and preparation of a new alternative with less than 1.5 million square feet. A separate minority report recommended that square foot expansion be limited to 704,000 square feet. Other reports addressed committee operations and procedures.

After the CAC finalized its reports, it was learned that, in its master plan, Children’s had excluded “circulation” and “below grade” square footage in the maximum 2.4 million square feet of total campus development. This could add hundreds of thousands of square feet to the expansion. There was no clarification or correction from Children’s over the last year and a half and this point did not come to DPD’s attention until Carol Eychaner, LCC land use consultant, discovered it February 3. This impacts the CAC’s final recommendations. The City agrees that the Committee was operating without correct information.

Read CAC member Mike Wayte's minority report, which provides a very candid overview of the process and challenges that CAC faced.

From the December 2008 Laurelhurst Letter:

LCC Appeals Children’s Expansion EIS

LCC has appealed to the Seattle Hearing Examiner the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Children’s Hospital Expansion. Children’s proposes to virtually triple the size of its Laurelhurst campus, leapfrogging its current boundaries and crossing Sand Point Way. LCC’s appeal, filed on November 24, charges that the Children’s EIS understates the expansion’s harmful impacts, including gridlock, and refuses to study any compromise alternatives that would help prevent them. The LCC appeal asks that the Hearing Examiner send the EIS back to the drawing board.

The Laurelhurst neighborhood’s residences and businesses are the major community stakeholders in the City’s review process for Children’s proposed expansion. During the past year, throughout the Children’s Advisory Committee process of public meetings and comment, Children’s has refused to compromise on its demand that the City allow it to add 1.5 million square feet of new development at building heights of up to 160 feet – heights never before allowed in Seattle’s low-density, single-family areas such as Laurelhurst. At the same time, Children’s has demanded approval for its institution boundary to leapfrog adjacent private property and spill over across Sand Point Way – a major arterial. Both are strongly discouraged by City regulations.

LCC supports Children’s core mission; however, LCC filed its appeal because Children’s has refused to compromise on the scope and scale of their proposed expansion. Traffic gridlock and infrastructure have not been addressed; reasoning for a 140-bed psychiatric hospital on its campus has not be explained; and plans include unneeded beds and services. In filing the appeal, LCC also notes support for the City’s regulations that call for a balance between hospital demands and Seattle’s need for viable in-City neighborhoods.
LCC attorney Peter Eglick, who has handled several other cases involving area hospital expansions, explained: “Unfortunately, hospitals are now businesses in cutthroat competition with each other as much as they are community institutions. Children’s latest plan is a product of this competition to grab as many health care dollars as they can in as many fields as possible, regardless of specific need or costs to the health care system as a whole.”

The City’s EIS on the Children’s expansion was prepared by outside consultants ultimately paid by the hospital. While it is supposed to reflect a balanced City perspective, the EIS instead presents as an advocacy piece for Children’s. Even Children’s proposed new psychiatric hospital, which is unprecedented in Washington and contrary to established public policy for de-institutionalization, is given no critical scrutiny. As a result, LCC has asked that the Hearing Examiner send the EIS back to the City and the hospital for correction and reissuance. n

At the September 9, 2008, CAC meeting, Children’s introduced two new alternatives in response to comments on the DEIS; both, however, still are based on an increase of 1.5 million square feet -- representing an unprecedented rezone and expansion in a low-density, single-family area.

Read the formal appeal.

Children's Action -- a community group that "encourages Children's to grow in a manner compatible with family-friendly neighborhoods" -- supports an "expansion of first-class care throughout Children's state-wide service area (including Laurelhurst) while discouraging excessive concentration of services at a single, congested site." Find current information about meetings, consultants' reports, summary of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), analysis, and more at this site.

From the September 2008 Laurelhurst Letter:

Partnerships Needed to Tackle Tough Issues Surrounding Expansion

The proposed 1.5 million square-foot expansion presents a particularly challenging and complex issue for Laurelhurst neighbors and nearby Northeast Seattle residents. What constitutes an acceptable balance between the public benefit from the proposed expansion and the legal requirement to protect the livability and vitality of the surrounding neighborhoods?

The August Laurelhurst Letter provided facts from independent consultants that questioned how Children’s has calculated its bed need for the future – the entire basis for the size of any expansion. Children’s has not revealed the formulas used for arriving at their projections. However, an over-projection of bed need and excess capacity likely will result in increased health care costs, adverse impacts on other health care providers, and fewer services in areas closer to home where children’s inpatient health care is needed.

The expansion of the scope proposed for the Laurelhurst campus requires collaborative, critical thinking on issues of regional infrastructure, transportation, land use, growth management, and more. Compromises surely must be made. But, how can the size of any expansion exceed the ability of the infrastructure to support it and still serve the needs of Children’s patients and their families?

At the September 9 CAC meeting, Children’s planned to introduce an alternative in response to the City’s comments on the DEIS. Children’s CEO Tom Hansen, vice president Ruth Benfield, and Peter Steinbrueck were invited to attend the September 8 LCC Board of Trustees meeting to present the plan; however, they declined.

Children’s has proposed to add 350 beds to its current capacity of 250 beds; but, inpatient demand at Children’s has declined since adding beds in 2004. Swedish Hospital’s inpatient pediatric services care for more King County children than Children’s does.
The proposed expansion is more than one and one half times the size of the current hospital – a complex one-third the size of the Pentagon. There is no conceivable way to mitigate the significant height, bulk and scale impacts.
The current City restrictions and prohibitions on boundary expansion are intended to prevent institutional sprawl. Leap-frogging over Sand Point Way to annex the Hartmann property is contrary to the City’s urban village growth strategy, as are Children’s continuing purchases of residential and commercial properties sprawling around the perimeter of the campus.
An increase of 8,400 vehicle trips per day to Children’s campus, as projected in the DEIS analysis of Alternative 7, will result in major congestion along Sand Point Way and in the vicinity. The level of service at five locations under Alternative 7 would be at “E” or “F.” These include: Five Corners, Montlake Boulevard and NE 45th, Montlake Boulevard and the SR 520 eastbound ramps, 40th Avenue NE and NE 55th Street (by the Metropolitan Market) and 40th Avenue NE and NE 65th. Using the standard Institute of Transportation Engineers formula, the number of trips per day would be 42,000 – five times more vehicles than the DEIS projects. What explains the discrepancy?

LCC looks forward to working with Children’s in partnership as discussions on how best to address these complex issues move forward and plans evolve for Children’s expansion.

From the August 2008 Laurelhurst Letter:

Just How Big Should Children’s Grow?

LCC supports the mission of Children’s Hospital, its important work, and reasonable expansion on its current site consistent with laws and the state standards for hospital expansion. But an expansion of 1.5 million square feet with an additional 350 beds raises questions not only about the impacts of the massive expansion upon the surrounding communities, but also calls in to question how Children’s has calculated its bed need for the future.

Children’s has proposed ten times the number of beds that it will need in the next 20 years according to one independent study.* According to this study, using the state Department of Health’s 12-step methodology, 40 beds may be needed by 2026 – nowhere close to the 350 proposed by Children’s. And, why has Children’s proposed nearly 200 of these beds for psychiatric needs when that specialty is not listed as a priority in its strategic plan?

With its current capacity of 250 beds, and using a 75% average occupancy, Children’s can provide 68,437 patient days of care in any given year and will not need any new beds until after 2015. This contrasts with Children’s estimate that it will need 228 additional beds by 2015 and 350 by 2026.*

In Seattle, Swedish Hospital’s inpatient pediatric services now care for more King County children than does Children’s. *

In 2005, Children’s appealed to the Department of Health to block Swedish Hospital from building a new hospital on the growing Eastside, claiming it would concentrate “too many beds” in one place and that “The need for Swedish’s pediatric beds is essentially nonexistent.” Former president and CEO Treuman Katz wrote: “Children’s is strongly opposed to Swedish’s proposal to establish a dedicated 8 bed inpatient pediatric unit. All available data suggests that the demand does not exist for such a unit, and that rates for inpatient pediatric care continue to decline within the service area....” The appeal is still pending. And now, just a couple of years later, Children’s insists that it must build 350 additional beds on its own site, for a grand total of 600 beds in one place.

Patients often require transfer to Children’s from area hospitals because of the scarcity of pediatric beds in the area. Why not add inpatient beds to the fast-growing Eastside and South Snohomish county regions?

Children’s proposal to add 350 beds would create an imbalance in the distribution of hospital beds among the institutions that provide inpatient pediatric care for Washington’s children and considerable economic burden on patients, health insurance purchasers, carriers, and taxpayers.*

Children’s projects its number of psychiatry beds will need to increase from its current capacity of 20 beds to 194 by 2026. The Field study projected approximately 13 beds for 2026 using the Department of Health method. It has been recommended that Children’s explore locating the psychiatric beds at a different facility as this type of care typically does not require the same medical equipment and staffing as acute care.

In the last master planning process, the City authorized Children’s to expand by 250,000 square feet. This plan appropriately addressed health care needs, provided open space, and mitigated the impacts of the expansion as required under the applicable laws.

Despite evidence to date, Children’s has refused to compromise and alter its plan to more than double its Laurelhurst campus. The result likely could mean excess bed capacity resulting in increased in health care costs, adverse impacts on other health care providers, fewer services in areas closer to home where children’s inpatient health services are needed. Children’s plan also does not address the estimated 42,000 trips per day to the hospital, as determined under the standard Institute of Transportation Engineers formula, and other environmental impacts associated with the proposed expansion.

Study of Bed Projections for Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Center, Based on Department of Health 12-Step Method (PDF)
Field Associates, January 2008

Legislature Paves Way for Demolition of Laurelon Terrace

SHB 3071 permits a vote of 80 percent of Laurelon owners to terminate their 136-unit Laurelon Terrace garden condominium. Prior to passage of the bill, 100 percent agreement was required. Children?s Hospital has made an offer to purchase the property. Their offer to owners -- nearly three-times market value -- is contingent on multiple terms including approval of Children?s proposed Major Institution Master Plan. A sale will result in the loss of 21 percent of the moderate income housing in the Laurelhurst/Sand Point area.

From the February 2008 Laurelhurst Letter:

Children's Acquires Neighborhood Properties Valuing More Than $9.4 Million in Eight Months

The information, researched by LCC's land-use consultant Carol Eychaner, reflects King County records pertaining to property acquisitions near Children's Laurelhurst Campus as of January 24, 2008.

CHRMC has purchased five single-family houses around the perimeter of its campus. All purchases were made since June 2007. The total cost of these acquisitions is more than $4.1 million.

CHRMC has purchased 20 units in Laurelon Terrace, representing 15.2% of the total ownership. All purchases were made since October 2007. The total cost of the Laurelon Terrace acquisitions is more than $5.3 million.

The total acquisition cost of the single-family and Laurelon Terrace properties, since June 2007, is $9.4+ million.

Downtown Property Acquisitions

In three separate transactions, CHRMC acquired two adjacent city blocks in the underdeveloped, Denny Triangle urban center (downtown) -- one full block plus all except for the corner parcels of another block. The acquisitions were an 11-story biotech building with lab space (October 2006), a surface parking lot with a small, one-story retail building (May 2007), and a 7-story building (December 2007)

The underlying zoning of the two blocks is DMC 340/290-400 (340' height limit). Development of these properties would more than fulfill Children's long-term goal for a research center with a total of 1 million gross square feet, or 600,000 net square feet. The total acquisition cost of the downtown properties is approximately $188.5 million.

How Many Beds? An Independent Analysis

Using Washington state's standard methodology for calculating hospital's bed needs, Field Associates, specialists in healthcare and hospital planning, prepared "Study of Bed Projections for Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Center Based on Department of Health 12-Step Method." This independent study on Children's need for beds, reported findings quite different from those proposed by Children's.

Two of the most surprising findings are:

CHRMC proposes ten times more new capacity than this study finds is warranted through application of the Department [of Health]'s method.

In Seattle, Swedish Hospital's inpatient pediatric services now care for more King County children than does CHRMC.

Further excerpts from the study:

Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Center (CHRMC) is proposing ... approximately 350 new inpatient beds. ... Based on the Department's published method of distributing hospital beds across the state, this study finds no support for the addition of inpatient beds to CHRMC's current capacity of 250 beds until after the the year 2015. A small increase in beds -- up to 40 -- may be warranted by the year 2026. (This is at the very end of CHRMC's 15- to 20-year master plan planning horizon).

Under the Department of Health's projection method and using the data currently available, CHRMC's addition of any more than 40 pediatric inpatient beds before 2026 would create an oversupply of such beds in Washington. The CHRMC proposal to add 350 beds would create an imbalance in the distribution of hospital beds among the institutions that provide inpatient pediatric care for Washington's children. ...

In light of such an oversupply... the CHRMC Master Plan can be expected to have unwanted impacts on the financial and program viability of other hospitals and to unnecessarily increase the cost of health care both locally and in the state. ...?

A January 14, 2008, Seattle PI editorial cast doubt on the hospital's projected need to expand and raised questions about the wisdom of building heights that are only allowed in urban centers. The piece concluded that the hospital should be working with the Laurelhurst community to resolve differences.

Press Articles and Neighborhood Groups regarding the proposed Children's Expansion:

Letter from Carol Eychaner to DPD dated 07/25/08

EKW letter to DPD re: DEIS Comments: 07/25/08

Letter from LCC to Dept. of Planning re: Public Hearing - 07/09/08

LCC's comments at Public Hearing - 07/10/08

Field Associates comments on Children's DEIS: 07/28/08

Letter from Northeast District Council re: Comments on DEIS - 07/24/08

Northeast District Council comments on DEIS - 07/24/08

Final Traffic Comments on CDEIS from GTC - 07/15/08

Gibson's Traffic Consultants comments on Children's DEIS: 07/15/08

LCC Comments on the DEIS - 07/10/08

Study of Bed Projections Summary of Findings - June 2008

Letter to Fabiola Greenawalt re: Follow Up on Public Records Request - 05/27/08

Letter to Stella Chao, Director of the Department of Neighborhoods - 05/07/08

Letter to Ethics division re: Ethics Inquiry re Theresa Doherty - 05/06/08

Letter to City Council re: April 21 Briefings Meeting - 04/22/08

Letter to City Council re: Amendment to Resolution 31002 - 04/21/08

Letter to City Council re: Filling Vacancies on the Children?s Citizens Advisory Committee - 04/15/08

Letter to Stella Chao re: Filling Vacancies on the Children?s Citizens Advisory Committee - 04/10/08

Letter to Dept. of Neighborhoods re: March 18^th CAC Meeting - 03/17/08

Letter to Senator Weinstein re: Yes SHB 3071 is about Property Rights ? Vote No - 02/27/08.

Letter to Senator Weinstein re: SHB 3071 -02/26/08

Letter to Stella Chao re: Filling Vacancies on the Children?s Citizens Advisory Committee - 02/25/08

Preliminary Review of Children's Offer - 02/21/08

Further letter to Ethic's Commission regarding Steinbrueck's Employment at Children's - 02/08/08

Letter to Ethic's Commission regarding Steinbrueck's Employment at Children's - 02/08/08

Memo to House Representatives further opposing HB 3071 - 02/07/08

Letter to Children's regarding Steinbrueck Employment at Children?s - 02/07/08

Memo to House Representatives opposing HB 3071 - 02/06/08

Memo from Carol Eychaner re: CHRMC Property Acquisitions - 01/29/08

Table of Property Acquisitions relating to Master Plan - 01/29/08

Field Associates Bed Study Report 01/22/08

Letter to Dept of Neighborhoods re: CAC Process Issues - 01/15/08

Hospital Consultant Report - Study of Bed Projections - 01/22/08

Cover Letter from Carol Eychaner: Handouts from January 8, 2008 CHRMC Meeting - 01/08/08

Seattle Major Institutions - Zoning Comparison Chart - 01/08/08

CHRMC Property Information - 01/08/08

CHMC Height Comparison Chart - 01/08/08

CHMC Properties Map - 01/08/08

Children's Bed Need Chart Analysis - 11/13/07

Memo from Children's to the CAC re: Status of Transportation Planning - 11/28/07 (Word document)

Letter to Dept of Neighborhoods re: Potential Violation of the City?s Ethics Code - 11/14/07

Letter to Mayor re: Neighbor Exclusion from Children?s Media Event - 10/30/07

Memo from Carol Eychaner re: Comments on DPD's EIS Scoping Letter - 10/22/07 (Word document)

Letter to Ruth Benfield (Children's) re: Children's Rejection of LCC's Alternatives - 10/22/07

Letter to Dept of Planning re: Study of LCC Alternatives in the Children?s EIS - 10/22/07

Letter from Dept of Planning to Children's re: the inclusion of LCC's Alternatives be included in EIS - 10/12/07 (Word document)

Letter to EnviroIssues re: Children's Expansion - 10/20/07

Letter to Children's requesting information about Survey - 10/09/07

Schedule of Upcoming Meetings - Progress and Prelim Draft Review Phases - added 10/21/07 (Word document)

List of Formal Document and/or Review Items in the Major Institutions Program - added 10/21/07 (Word document)

DPD Letter to Children's about inclusion of LCC's Alternatives - 10/05/07 (Word document)

Letter to Dept. of Neighborhoods regarding Open Public Meeting Law - 10/01/07

Letter to Children's on Follow Up of Availability of Model for Neighbors - 09/27/07

Flyer from LCC about Sept 26 Community Meeting.

Letter to Children's Citizen's Advisory Committee Chair Karen Wolf - 09/19/07

Comments from Carol Eychaner regarding EIS scoping - 09/05/07

Letter to Children's Hospital re: Misrepresentations in Children's Plan - 09/05/07

Letter to Children's Hospital re: Availability of Model for neighbors (second letter) - 08/28/07

Letter to Children's Hospital re: Availability of Model for neighbors - 08/24/07

LCC's Preliminary comments re: Concept Plan - 08/23/07

Letter to Dept. of Planning and Development about extension of comment period - 08/07/07

Letter to Scott Ringgold about extension of comment period - 08/07/07

Resolution before the Urban Development and Planning Committee - 07/25/07

Letter to Councilmember Peter Steinbrueck re: Planning Process - 07/23/07

Letter to Planning Committee re: CHMC's comments on resolution - 07/20/07

Children?s Master Plan Advisory Committee Draft Resolution (Word document)t

Letter to Dept of Neighborhoods regarding Request for Information about committee applicants - 05/20/07

Letter to Dept of Neighborhoods regarding composition of Master Planning Advisory Committee - 05/16/07

Letter to Dept. of Neighborhoods about Master Planning Advisory Committee - 05/05/07

Letter to Children's Hospital about LCC concerns over expansion plan - 03/29/07

Letter to Children's Hospital regarding the new expansion - 04/23/07

Letter to Dept. of Neighborhoods regarding educating neighbors about master planning - 04/04/07

Flyer about serving on the Children's Master Plan Advisory Committee (Word document)

Responsibilities of the Children's Hospital Citizens Advisory Committee - 02/22/07 (Word document)