Bastyr University Master Plan Open House Comment Sheet available here.

Bastyr University proposes to adopt and implement a Master Plan for facilities and improvements on the Kenmore, Washington campus that support the University’s vision for growth over the next 20 years. An Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared under the direction of the City of Kenmore to analyze the potential impacts of the implementation of the Master Plan and Master Plan alternatives, and to identify mitigation measures. 

The Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice (available as a separate document) for the Bastyr Campus Master Plan EIS identifies the elements of the environment and alternatives to be addressed in the EIS. To solicit comments on the range of alternatives and impacts to be discussed in the EIS, the City initiated a comment period in the Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice. The comment period extended from June 24 to July 15, 2003, during which time written comments were accepted.  The City also held a public scoping meeting during this time period to obtain comments. 

On July 8, 2003, the City held a scoping meeting at the Bastyr University Campus to present the University’s proposal and to discuss the environmental review process.  The meeting progressed according to the following agenda:

I.          REVIEW INFORMATION AND MAPS

II.         WELCOME & OVERVIEW

III.       PROPOSED DRAFT MASTER PLAN

IV.       ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT & RELATED ITEMS

V.        AUDIENCE QUESTIONS/COMMENTS 

The attached summary lists oral comments and questions received during the July 8, 2003 scoping meeting.  The summary also briefly describes written comments received during the scoping period.  Once the range of alternatives and elements of the environment to be addressed in the EIS are confirmed through review of the scoping responses, a Draft EIS will be prepared and issued for agency and public comment. At this time, it is anticipated that the Draft EIS will be issued some time in the first half of 2004. The Draft EIS comment period is usually 30 days, after which a Final EIS will be prepared to respond to comments.

Questions regarding the Bastyr Master Plan proposal and EIS process may be directed to Bob Sokol, Kenmore Community Development Director, 425-398-8900.

Public Input by Oral Comments (received July 8, 2003)

Introduction 

The following bullets summarize the oral comments made by the Scoping Meeting attendees and responses made by the City of Kenmore or Bastyr University representatives at the Scoping Meeting or following the meeting. The bulleted list consolidates notes made on a meeting flip-chart and by City, University, and EIS Team representatives in the audience.  The notations below indicate the source of the text:

Comments marked with a solid bullet (“l”) were public comments. 

Comments marked with an open bullet (“ˇ”) were responses given by representatives of the City of Kenmore or Bastyr University at the Scoping Meeting.

(Parenthetical text consists of City responses provided for additional clarification after the Scoping Meeting as comments were reviewed.)

Comment Summary

·        Concern was expressed about ball fields being displaced; would like to be involved in the transition; wondered how much advance notice Kenmore Little League will receive.

·        How will organizations be informed of changes taking place on the Bastyr University campus, and the City’s process?

o       Via a mailing list. Opportunity to sign up at the July 8, 2003 meeting to be on the mailing list to receive future mailings. (Note:  Anyone can contact the City to be added to this list.)

·        Address transitions/timelines/phasing.

o       Bastyr is to exercise its option to purchase the property (or not) from the Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle by 2006. Just beginning to get into the phasing analysis now.

o       Advanced notice to community to be addressed

o       EIS completion: potentially by this time next year.

·        Peak hour traffic concerns were expressed by a resident who lives at the north end of Juanita Drive; concern specifically at the 68th Avenue NE intersection. Please review traffic impacts carefully, especially for the public clinic shown on Juanita Drive.

·        Concern about the number of bicycles on Juanita Drive – how many more as a result of the campus expansion? There are no provisions (i.e., bicycle lanes) for them. It is dangerous and they are difficult to see.

·        Where would satellite parking be placed?

o       Bastyr is assessing options, but will have to carefully review transit and positioning on satellite parking.

·        Sight distance is poor at the “Y” where the State Park road intersects NE 145th Street. Drivers bound for the University drive too fast, exceed the 25 mph speed limit.

·        Single entrance is a concern. A secondary or emergency entrance is necessary.  Could be used exclusively for emergencies.

·        Alignment of clinic entrance on Juanita Drive: if not aligned with an existing commercial development driveway, will be a problem.

·        Increase housing density to reduce footprint.

·        Perimeter road: keep it away from steep slopes; locate more internal to the site.

·        Alternative to internal circulation?

o       Options are limited due to steep slopes.

·        What kinds of opportunities will there be for community use of Bastyr facilities? Meeting rooms, trails, cafeteria?

o       Bastyr wants to continue to be a community resource: gardens, greenhouses, community classes, potential clinic and conference center. There are some constraints given the academic, non-profit nature of the institution. 

·        Concerned about loss of ball fields.  Can there be an alternative with ball fields?

o       There are slopes, wetlands, and forest constraints, which would appear to preclude the University from achieving its needs and objectives while retaining ball fields.

o       The City is having preliminary discussions with the school district re: creating/using ball fields on school sites, and with the City of Kirkland re: Finn Hill Park.

(Note: The discussion of ball fields in the Kenmore community will continue through a separate process with affected parties, consistent with the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan.  Please see transmittal memo above for additional information.)

·        There is a ball field at St. Edward Park. A user fee made it inaccessible to the Little League. There appears to be space to build another ball field on the St. Edward property. Can something be worked out between the City and Bastyr to eliminate the user fee?

(Note: The fee to park at St. Edward State Park was imposed by the State.  The City will be discussing the effects of this fee with the State Parks Department to determine if anything can be done to make the ball field more accessible to local residents.)

·        Can the City of Kenmore purchase the ball field on the St. Edward site? 

o       Federal law prohibits the sale of the State Park land. Perhaps some inquiries could be made about partnering with State Parks for public use of the ball field.

o       City planning includes developing more ball fields over the next 20 years.

·        Where would the healing center be?  Student help?  Would it bring in a profit?

o       Bastyr is reviewing a potential alternative for in-patient facilities.

·        Develop a restaurant onsite, like the Herbfarm Restaurant. Use it as a teaching facility for students. Provide a separate access – bridge across the wetlands. A restaurant would bring income to the University.

·        Also add a second dining facility, more casual, in addition to a more upscale and elegant restaurant.

o       Issues of traffic.

o       Bridge access across wetlands?

·        Consider the social impact of 1,300 additional students from diverse cultures and backgrounds, in the context of the nearby neighborhood character.

(Note: The social impacts of increasing enrollment will not be assessed through the EIS process, as the focus of an EIS is on environmental impacts. The University, however, is committed to maintaining a strong and healthy relationship with the community and is appreciative of suggestions as to how best to accomplish this.)

·        Has Bastyr considered using the St. Edward buildings for a conference center?

o       Bastyr studied this extensively, only to discover that the building is in need of seismic repairs that would cost millions of dollars.

o       Restrictions on the use of State-owned properties by private entities limit the availability of the building to a lease agreement; it could not be purchased. Therefore, a major capital investment by the University would be impractical.

·        Has Bastyr considered purchasing a piece of commercial property for a clinic?

·        Has Bastyr considered purchasing an apartment building for offsite student housing, in lieu of constructing housing onsite?

o       Yes, this was looked into. There are difficulties with suitable housing, suitably located, coming on the market when needed.

o       Offsite housing would not meet the objective to minimize trips to/from the site.

o       Offsite housing is incompatible with the objective to create a sense of community on campus.

·        How many housing units will be constructed?

o       350 housing units are proposed.

·        Is affordable housing required? What are the criteria?

o       No. The City’s affordable housing requirements do not apply to student housing or proposals outside of Downtown Kenmore.

o       The type of housing proposed will be less dorm-like, more like apartments. Family housing will be more like condominiums.

·        Review affordability of housing, financing constraints.

(Note:  Similar to social impacts, economic issues of this nature may be considered by the City through other means, but will not be addressed in the EIS as its focus will be upon environmental impacts.)

·        The public enjoys use of the chapel and ball fields now. It’s a nice amenity. Is there a requirement for community access to continue?

o       No, it is not part of Bastyr’s lease obligation, but it has been part of the University’s intention to balance making amenities available to the public while retaining adequate parking for students and employees.

·        What is the University’s position with respect to the religious symbols associated with the chapel and elsewhere on the campus? Could these symbols be relocated on the site; for example, in groves to create meditative areas for various religious groups (Christian, Buddhist, other spiritual practices)?

o       There are no plans for the sanctuary or other religious symbols on the site to be used in any manner different than they are at this point.

·        It’s a Christian sanctuary. The University uses it for lots of non-Christian purposes.

o       The chapel is used for lots of spiritual purposes. It’s part of how people heal.

o       Covenants imposed by the Catholic Archdiocese specify that the chapel cannot be used for Catholic ceremonies/sacraments.

·        Do you plan to remodel the existing building – interior, exterior – concurrent with other site development? The siding and windows really date the structure. It will really stand out in contrast to new development if left as-is.

o       Some remodeling is planned—e.g., upgrades to meet code; this is under review

o       Don’t anticipate radically changing the exterior. Have discussed replacing the windows.

o       The challenge to design and construct new buildings compatible with existing is acknowledged.

·        Would like to see a couple of sites identified for a hydrotherapy pool within the campus Master Plan. How can Bastyr be a leader in this field and not have a hydrotherapy pool onsite?

o       Didn’t think of it. The University sees the hydrotherapy pool as a function of the clinic. The University’s main clinic in Seattle is currently being relocated.

·        Public tour available to see the site and location for planned uses in-person?

·        Address access to Juanita Drive.

o       New traffic signal?  Turn lane?

·        Community transportation to pool, other on-site facilities?  Shuttle bus?

o       The City is working with Metro to provide more options (like a shuttle bus from downtown, the future LakePointe site, or the Park and Ride) that could provide this type of access in the future when levels of use increase.

·        Will there be an economic impact on services? Housing, shopping?

o       The University proposes slow growth over a long period of time.

o       It is a difficult task to quantify economic impacts in a meaningful way, and difficult to tie the effects of the University to the City of Kenmore alone.

(Note: Economic issues of this nature may be considered by the City through other means, but will not be addressed in the EIS, as its focus will be upon environmental impacts.)

Summary of Written Comments (received by July 15, 2003) 

Two written comments were received and are summarized below.  The City is providing written responses to the commentors directly.  It should be noted that the key issues raised by the commentors were generally raised at the public EIS Scoping meeting, and summary responses may be found above.

Request a hydrotherapy pool be added to Bastyr University Campus Master Plan. 

EIS must consider: