Laurelhurst public comments are a treasure trove of NIMBY irony

I read through this entire PUBLIC DOCUMENT to get an idea of who Seattle Children’s is up against, in this battle to save children’s lives, vs protect the wealthiest homeowners in Seattle from a little noise 3x per week. I went in expecting boring zoning complaints. What I got was a master class in “I support the hospital, BUT…” Pulled out the top 10. Page numbers included so you can verify I’m not making this up. Imagine going on the record against saving children’s lives…

Pick your favorite comments:

10. Kerala Cowart (p. 104) — explains that her 3-year-old son’s favorite walking route goes east on NE 47th and south on 44th Ave NE, and the construction would disrupt this. Submits this as grounds for a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. Somewhere a different 3-year-old is waiting on a surgery date but ok

9. Rose Buckingham (pp. 80-84) — forwarded by the LCC president as official evidence

opens with “I opened my front door and it was like being struck by lightning.” ma’am. it was the sun. reflecting off a window. she took pictures. they’re in the public record. they show… the sun.

but the line I cannot stop thinking about:

“I ate outside, on it, just once this summer”

“it” being her porch. one porch event. summer 2020. submitted to the city as environmental impact evidence with photos attached. the LCC president then forwarded the whole thing and formally requested it be entered as a public comment requiring a Supplemental EIS

8. Peter & Helen Andersen (p. 60) — get to the bottom of a long list of complaints and then ask, in writing, to a children’s hospital:

1. What compensation are you proposing to the immediate neighbors who will continue to be impacted by continued construction?

just straight up asking the children’s hospital to pay them. cash money. for the inconvenience of the children’s hospital existing near them. the audacity of putting that in numbered list format like it’s a reasonable bullet point

7. Evan Johnson (p. 58) — one sentence comment, no substance. The funny part is the signature: he’s a Windermere Real Estate branch manager and the email auto-appends the company tagline:

LIFE IS BETTER WHEN YOU LOVE WHERE YOU LIVE

complaining about a children’s hospital. with the realtor logo. you cannot make this up. I think

LIFE IS BETTER WHEN YOU ARE ALIVE

6. Constance Sidles, Laurelhurst Community Club (pp. 105-107) — cites the Science 2019 study about North America losing 3 billion birds in 49 years. As a reason to block a children’s hospital expansion. The birds-vs-pediatric-surgery framing was not on my bingo card

5. jan and grey snyder (p. 66) — opens with “we do support all the valuable work of Seattle Children’s. Have had grandchildren there many times, and appreciate the care they received.” Three paragraphs later: “obviously Children’s is paying someone and we the little guy has no say whatsoever.” The little guy. In Laurelhurst. Whose neighborhood association is represented by a law firm with a downtown office

4. Pat Chaney (pp. 56-57) — *”I have always been a huge fan of the hospital… Now I am questioning my loyalty.”*Questioning her loyalty. To a children’s hospital. Then the philosophical zinger:

Why must so much of the regions children’s hospital care happen on this campus??

I genuinely don’t know how to answer this. Where would you like it to happen Pat. The Whole Foods parking lot

3. Sarah Davis (p. 16) — writes in September 2020 that “we are past Covid” (ma’am we were six months in). Then argues that more surgery rooms are “outdated and unnecessary” because, and I quote, we are “meeting doctor’s via zoom.” yes let’s zoom the pediatric heart surgery.

2. Teresa Holland (pp. 78-79) — opens by establishing her bona fides: Children’s Hospital Guild member since 1985, helped raise “$1,000,000 and $1,000,000s of dollars” for the Uncompensated Care Program (so kids without insurance can get treated), nine years on the Guild board… “but this support stops today.”

then proceeds to write “ANOTHER PROMISE BROKEN BY THE HOSPITAL” in all caps approximately seven times. 35 years of fundraising for sick children, ended by a parking garage being slightly visible from her daughter’s house

1. Susan Murdoch (pp. 45-48) — the grand champion. spends a whole paragraph thanking the hospital. her son has autism. 14 years of weekly speech therapy at Children’s. sees an excellent neurologist at the Autism Center. learned to swim at the Therapy Pool because they helped him overcome his fear of water. her other kids have had surgery there. they’ve dashed there with fevers. they donate every year.

then, I swear to god, the next paragraph:

But none of this has anything to do with the need to compromise on the plans put forward by the hospital for the next stage of expansion

translation: the hospital was wonderful when it was saving MY kid. but please don’t expand it for the next one. got mine 👍

almost every single one of these letters opens with some version of “I support Seattle Children’s wonderful mission, BUT” before pivoting to why the children should be operated on somewhere else. the “BUT” is doing more work than the surgeons would be

These are all real PUBLIC comments, in the PUBLIC record here:

https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/Neighborhoods/MajorInstitutions/SeattleChildrens/Project_Copper_SDCI_MUP_Comments.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery