Flowers for Laurelon.

For those who aren’t following this project, here’s a quick recap, Laurelon Terrace is a 20-building, 6.7-acre condo development in Laurelhurst that Children’s Hospital has proposed acquiring for $93 million in order to expand the hospital facilities to a level it wants. The Laurelhurst neighborhood feels that Children’s development plans are too intensive for the neighborhood, and wants those development plans reduced.  Depending on which side you’re on, Laurelon Terrace is either in the way, the bulkhead against development, or your home -

Hi, let me start off by talking about my personal interest in your condo development. I don’t live in Laurelhurst. I don’t work for the city. I don’t work for Children’s. I’m not a lawyer. And my life is pretty much going to stay the same regardless of whatever decision you make. But I am interested in the process and find a few things about it pretty interesting, namely…

• Why city and state law (ed note: only state law was changed) is being changed for this project? In Seattle, it meant creating a Special Citizens Advisory Committee (with members handpicked by Children’s) to run the community engagement process, and in Olympia, it meant modifying a condo ownership law?
• Why Peter Steinbreuck “served as the Chair of the City Council Urban Planning Committee. The Council and the Urban Planning Committee hold a variety of trump cards in the Hospital issue” the changes to Seattle’s code on Children’s behalf, and now less than a year after leaving the council, is working for Children’s to help mediate an agreement? (ed note: I was wrong on the item I crossed out)
• Is the relationship between Children’s Hospital and Laurelhurst so bad that both felt the need to dive into this process ‘loaded for bear’?

But anyway, I was mentioned in a letter that was sent to your group, so I’ll take that as an opportunity to talk to you like we’re acquainted. So…what I thought I would give you are some things to consider that I’d give a friend. Some of them optimistic, some of them cautious…

• You were offered $93 million for your property, which I believe is equivalent to 2.8x each units value. I would take that deal. Was this the result of negotiating a higher price?
• Your legal fees are being paid for by the buyer. Did you get to choose the law firm? Do you think you might have more leverage to negotiate if you were paying for your own attorney?
• As part of the transaction you are responsible to, ‘…publically support Children’s MIMP and development of the Laurelon Terrace site as positive for Children’s and the community.’ Is it fair that you should be compelled to support anything more than saying you’re happy with the sale? Do you really think this is the best solution for the community? Do you really expect others who disagree with this project to treat your comments objectively?
• Is anyone asking what will happen to you, and how you feel about this?

Thanks,

Greg