You are viewing an archived issue of the Eugene Weekly. To return to our current issue, please click here.
 |
  |
 |
|||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||||||||
|
RiverBending
The Rules
The Springfield City Council will decide Monday, March 31 whether or not to allow PeaceHealth to move its downtown Eugene hospital to a site along the McKenzie River in far north Springfield. "It may be one of the most significant land use decisions that you will make for many years to come," Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) planner Mark Radabaugh writes in a letter to Springfield. "The proposed amendments currently fall short of compliance with several statewide planning goals," DLCD warns the city in criticism of proposals to amend city development rules to accommodate PeaceHealth. "The future livability of the metropolitan area is clearly up for grabs," says Lauri Segel, of the land use watchdog 1000 Friends of Oregon. But PeaceHealth CEO Alan Yordy urges Springfield to not restrict the hospital's development plans. "Flexibility will provide the greatest opportunity for success." PeaceHealth Development Director Phillip Farrington says PeaceHealth's proposal to build a 1 million square foot hospital in a field and woods along the river "meets all the criteria for approval." PeaceHealth's Portland attorney Steven Pfeiffer, one of the most expensive development lawyers in the state, dismisses DLCD's concerns as not legal requirements but an "ill defined set of theories." An army of PeaceHealth consultants, employees and business associates has buried Springfield planners and councilors in a blizzard of documents and testimony supporting their hospital proposal. The public record for the decision is several feet thick. The Springfield planning staff agree with PeaceHealth that the hospital proposal is legal. The Springfield Planning Commission voted 4-2 to recommend approval of the hospital site with a 60-ft. height limit. But opponents of the hospital location haven't given up. "I don't think it's a done deal," says Jan Wilson of the Coalition for Health Options in Central Eugene-Springfield (CHOICES). "It could go either way." Wilson says Springfield isn't legally required to approve RiverBend but is legally required to reject it. The facts make a compelling case against moving the hospital to the edge of town, she says. "The public costs here are enormous — besides the loss of river views, costs include the change in character of the area, huge increases in traffic impacting both neighborhood residents and existing businesses in the Gateway area, the forced relocation of Springfield's community hospital, the loss of an opportunity to do real nodal development that could work, and, of course, the hundreds of millions of dollars in new roads that would be needed to support this." Based on thousands of pages of public records and testimony in the land use decision, here's a look at the hurdles PeaceHealth faces in building the largest development in local history at RiverBend.
'Sore Thumb' PeaceHealth CEO Yordy has balked at the Springfield Planning Commission recommendation to limit the height of RiverBend. "We cannot build a world-class facility within a 60-foot height limit," he says. But critics say a tall hospital would violate state and local planning rules and destroy scenic views of the river and Coburg Hills and the site's natural setting. "It's the height of arrogance," says Sue Wolling, a Sacred Heart intensive care nurse who supports an improved hospital, but not at RiverBend. PeaceHealth hasn't said exactly how tall it plans to build its riverside hospital. But documents indicate the hospital favors about nine stories at 15 to 20 feet per floor producing a building 135 to 180 feet tall. At that height, RiverBend would be one of the tallest buildings in the entire area. William Carpenter of Springfield says he supports PeaceHealth's proposal, but not it's height. The hospital would be one and a half times the height of the tallest UO building (PLC) and stick out even in an urban setting, he says. "This is not an appropriate way to site such a behemoth on the pristine setting of the McKenzie River." Robin Jaqua, whose family has farmed the area across the river for 50 years, says, "Many of us who live in the area of north Springfield are appalled at PeaceHealth's desire to have the zoning changed so they can build a high rise and three tremendous parking structures on the banks of the river." Jaqua says PeaceHealth's hospital threatens her family's plans to protect the beauty of the area. She says the Jaquas have written wills to protect the area as farmland and protect 1,200 acres of the hills including Mount Baldy. "This area is to be preserved in its natural state forever." Aaron Helfrich, president of the McKenzie River Guides Association, says the lower McKenzie is a largely undeveloped "gem" full of wildlife and scenery that should be protected. Many locals enjoy the close-by "great day float" from Hayden Bridge to Armitage Park, he says. The stretch "gives the sense of being in the wild. That forever will change with a huge building along the banks."
Former Register-Guard columnist Don Bishoff says he's one local that doesn't want to see the area ruined. "I object to the installation of such a huge structure — whether three stories or nine stories tall — at the proposed location and what it will do to the river environment." "Please don't sacrifice the beauty of the McKenzie River on the altar of PeaceHealth avarice," says Gail Campbell of Eugene. "You will open the door to creating another high-rise downtown right at the McKenzie River." Wilson of CHOICES says Yordy's claim that he can't build a less imposing hospital "simply verifies that PeaceHealth has selected the wrong site. High-rise buildings belong in the urban core." Wilson says it's ironic PeaceHealth left downtown Eugene after claiming that it couldn't build a taller hospital on less land. "They wouldn't do nine stories downtown, but they'll do a nine story building way out in nowhere's-ville." Concern about the scenic riverfront area goes beyond views. Anne Heinsoo of Springfield says the riparian area should be protected for its ecological value. "It should be protected and preserved rather than developed as a major health facility that will snarl traffic and stick out like a sore thumb." Jaqua says the noise and light pollution from the big development will "take away the present serenity of the starry night sky." Critics point to specific language in local and state planning documents calling for protection of such riverside natural areas. PeaceHealth says it plans to comply with any laws protecting the riparian area and any ecological threat is "based wholly on speculation." Building along the river could be hazardous to the hospital as well. PeaceHealth says its "exhaustive analysis" of river flooding in the area shows that the proposed facility won't violate state, local and federal rules against building in the floodplain. But Michael Hughes, a hydrologist consultant hired by CHOICES, says errors and potential errors in PeaceHealth's flood analysis "makes the subject property vulnerable to catastrophic flooding, even if flood protection or mitigation is provided." Hughes says efforts to elevate the hospital and other structures above anticipated floods are "likely to significantly" increase flooding on lower parts of the site and adjacent properties. The Endangered Species Act protection of fish in the river "is likely to make the dredge and fill activities needed for development difficult to permit."
Traffic Snarl PeaceHealth says its 2,200 employee hospital won't make traffic congestion worse in the area. PeaceHealth traffic consultant JRH Engineering analyzed the traffic impact of a proposed 1.8 million square feet of hospital and medical office buildings and 900 units of housing at RiverBend. "It works," says Jim Hanks of JRH. But critics say PeaceHealth's traffic analysis is deeply flawed. "That such a major development can be assessed to have such minimal impacts is incredulous and calls into question the assumptions of the analysis," says Rob Zako, a local transportation advocate working with CHOICES.
Even PeaceHealth's own traffic analysis includes hints at the massive amount of congestion the hospital will produce. Westbound rush-hour traffic at the already snarled Gateway/Beltline intersection will increase eight fold to almost 2,000 cars after the hospital is built. PeaceHealth will directly account for one-third of the increase or 505 cars. Traffic turning south on I-5 would almost double to 715 cars at rush hour. PeaceHealth would directly account for two-thirds of the new congestion. DLCD questions whether PeaceHealth's traffic impact complies with state and local planning rules. "It is not clear to the department how moving the major operations of PeaceHealth to an edge location will facilitate meeting community planning objectives," Radabaugh says. Nearby residents are concerned the area will choke with cars. "The traffic congestion in the Gateway area is bad now ... The hospital and associated development will make the situation much worse," say Ken and Barbara Cerotsky of Springfield. PeaceHealth's traffic analysis does not use the usual Institute of Transportation Engineers formula for estimating congestion impacts from development. PeaceHealth argues that it should use its own formula that produces lower traffic impacts because the hospital will be located next to medical office buildings. The Oregon Department of Transportation expressed concern that the PeaceHealth analysis didn't meet state legal requirements. To address the issue, ODOT negotiated a "trip cap" with PeaceHealth of 1,840 trips from the hospital at the peak afternoon rush hour. But Wilson, Zako and other critics say the trip cap won't protect the area from traffic snarl. The cap doesn't apply to the large amount of residential development PeaceHealth has to build at the site to comply with planning rules. "It's obvious that the housing plus the hospital plus the commercial plus the medical services would generate much more traffic," says Wilson. PeaceHealth can also easily remove the "cap" with a minor amendment process once the hospital has its approvals in hand, Wilson says. "The trip cap is, in fact, no cap at all." Another problem with the trip cap is that it's set to not cause gridlock by 2018 when major road projects in the area are scheduled for completion. But PeaceHealth plans to open the hospital in 2007, "leaving area roads struggling to catch up for a decade or more," Wilson says. "Real compliance would require almost $100 million in new roads on or before the date the hospital and associated commercial facilities become operational." Critics also question whether PeaceHealth's massive development will cause a development boom in the surrounding area that will further snarl roads. "Additional development could generate more traffic and greater impacts," DLCD warns. The hospital "exerts a pull on the development of the entire region," Zako says.
Drive-In Hospital DLCD and other critics question how moving so many jobs from downtown Eugene to the edge of Springfield will comply with the state and regional TransPlan goals to reduce car use. PeaceHealth will move 2,200 jobs to the fringe "without addressing how the proposed land use pattern helps to promote more non-automobile trips," DLCD writes. PeaceHealth must "assure that there will be adequate mode shift away from automobile reliance." DLCD says how Springfield handles PeaceHealth will be a "bellwether" to gauge the success of TransPlan's efforts in reducing reliance on cars. Kevin Matthews of Friends of Eugene says the massive hospital move will "drive such an increase in VMT [vehicle miles traveled] as to probably overwhelm all other ongoing positive efforts." DLCD says PeaceHealth's analysis should have included a comparison of the traffic impacts of locating the hospital in the urban core. "The department believes that the PeaceHealth application and review process would benefit from a wider presentation of alternatives." PeaceHealth says Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service to the area will mitigate traffic impacts. But critics say LTD doesn't have the money to build and run BRT to the distant location. "It seems like a really unreasonable long shot" to expect BRT to serve the hospital in north Springfield, Wilson says. "No funding is in sight" for the expensive BRT extension which could require taking residential front yards for right away along Harlow Road, Wilson says. While 500 buses a day serve the hospital's current location, there is no bus service to the proposed RiverBend site, she says. With no bus service, the new hospital would be very hard to reach for those who physically can't drive or can't afford a car, critics say. DLCD says Springfield should examine requiring a BRT line before the hospital can be built. But PeaceHealth balks at the requirement. "With no guarantee that BRT will be available [by] the proposed date of hospital opening, it is unreasonable to require a condition as suggested by Mr. Radabaugh," development director Farrington says. A key part of TransPlan's effort to reduce driving congestion is nodal development — compact, walkable areas of mixed use development served by frequent transit. DLCD and Springfield planning staff agree that the hospital should be a nodal development area. But PeaceHealth appears concerned that nodal requirements would restrict its ability to develop the site and have offered only to later "actively consider" nodal development for "a portion" of the larger area. Wilson says she fears the nodal area for RiverBend would be so large and car dependent that it's not really nodal at all. She says it's a "fallacy" to think a regional hospital drawing drivers from across the metro area could be a walkable, transit-oriented node. "Allowing the siting of a 1 million square foot regional medical center that would consume approximately 66 percent of a 'nodal site' is not nodal development," Segel of 1000 Friends agrees. Springfield staff argue that the scale of the hospital would make it inappropriate for siting in Springfield's downtown node because "it would detract from the pedestrian scale of the existing downtown." Zako says moving the hospital from downtown Eugene will hurt the struggling node there. He also doubts the RiverBend node will be served by frequent enough transit to make it viable. DLCD faults Springfield for not including a detailed nodal plan in the analysis of the hospital site. The agency warns that the trip cap for the site could prevent the dense, mixed use development required by nodes. "A critical component of success of a nodal development is its ability to demonstrate reduced reliance upon the automobile," DLCD says. "Urban form follows parking. More parking means less mode shift which means less transit which means more reliance on the automobile and more incentive to produce development which is non-nodal development." PeaceHealth's draft map of the RiverBend development shows at least six large surface parking lots covering much of the site plus two large parking garages.
Emergency Access The hospital location will make emergency access difficult, critics say. During a flood that inundates roads to the hospital or an earthquake that destroys bridges or freeway overpasses, getting to the RiverBend hospital would be very difficult. With the hospital separated from 80 percent of the region's population by the river access problems it "would be devastating in catastrophic events," environmentalist Tom Bowerman says. Traffic snarls would make access difficult even on good days, critics say. With the hospital closer to Coburg than many parts of south and west Eugene, RiverBend "would increase the emergency response time for most of Eugene residents," Sacred Heart intensive care nurse Randy Gicker says. PeaceHealth officials claim locating at RiverBend will have no impact on emergency response times. But County Commissioner Peter Sorenson says, "it appears neither staff nor the applicant conducted any studies to determine whether there will be any degradation of these [emergency] services."
Public Costs PeaceHealth says it will pay $10 million to cover the added costs of new roads to serve its development. "PeaceHealth does not require a subsidy. Quite the contrary, PeaceHealth is paying more than its fair share of future transportation improvements," says Hanks, the hospital's traffic consultant. But critics say the payment isn't fair at all and won't nearly cover the impact to taxpayers. "We cannot afford $15 million to upgrade the Pioneer Parkway-126 intersection when PeaceHealth will only bring $750,000 to the table," says Linda Shaver of one project on the list of needed improvements. ODOT says if the intersection isn't fixed by the time the hospital opens, the Highway 126 ramps will be choked with "extremely unsafe" back-ups. "A large part of the burden would fall to the area's taxpayers," Wilson says of the road projects needed to serve PeaceHealth. Wilson totals $130 million in area transportation projects that PeaceHealth will rely on that are mostly unfunded. The list includes $38 million for extending BRT to the development but doesn't include the $122 million estimated cost of upgrading the I-5 Beltline interchange. Wilson says the hospital should locate in an urban area already served by roads. "Plainly the community cannot afford these changes." Noting the high cost of the I-5 interchange, Commissioner Sorenson says the county is "concerned that our investment will be negated by the increased traffic" from PeaceHealth. Zako warns, with money tight, needed road projects in other parts of the area could be delayed to serve PeaceHealth with new roads. Civic activist Rob Handy of Eugene notes the region is already struggling to find money to repair cracked I-5 bridges.
Public Involvement PeaceHealth says it doesn't need permission from Lane County and Eugene to build at RiverBend. Hospital officials say they aren't legally required to offer public participation in the decision beyond allowing citizens to stand in line for three-minute comment periods at public hearings. But critics question whether such a limited process violates state and local land use goals and rules requiring public involvement in major decisions. DLCD says the big impact of the hospital relocation is a "community-wide event" and "major revision" of local plans that requires approval of Eugene and Lane County officials. Commissioner Sorenson says building all the roads needed for the hospital likely requires revisions to TransPlan and the Metro Plan that must be approved by the county and Eugene. "TransPlan must be amended," DLCD agrees. Sorenson suggests a regional citizen commission be formed to look into issues of hospital siting. "Hospital facility locations entail large public and private expenses and will impact community healthcare costs, health care accessibility, public infrastructure costs and our regional land use plans for many decades," he says. Such major decisions, "justify substantially greater public involvement." Unlike the County Commission, the pro-development majority on the Eugene City Council wants to leave the decision to Springfield. "I will do everything I can to oppose this," Eugene Mayor Jim Torrey e-mailed in response to Sorenson's letter asking for more intergovernmental cooperation. DLCD and other critics are also concerned that PeaceHealth has set up a process that conceals important information. Many questions about the hospital siting have been deferred to a later master planning and nodal planning process that will proceed after PeaceHealth wins permission to build the hospital on the site. "PeaceHealth wants to do it this way because they can avoid talking about what they want to do until it's too late to stop them," Wilson says. The process "makes it so hard to figure out what's going on," she says. Springfield planners are "basically just rubber stamping in advance without seeing the details," Wilson says. "No other development has ever been done this way," she says. "You're approving it before you even see what you're approving." If RiverBend is approved under this process, it will be too late to improve the project, Wilson says. Springfield will be giving away "all their power to say no." PeaceHealth has resisted public involvement from the beginning, Wilson says. "When the city of Eugene tried to force even minor public discussion, PeaceHealth stormed out of the city for the supposedly more 'development friendly' Springfield venue," she says. But state law still "requires adequate public participation in major decisions such as where to site the region's largest employer and hospital emergency service facilities." DLCD agrees. The process of deferring master plan and nodal development decisions and information, "may make full compliance with [state land use] Goal 1 most tedious, at best."
Land Misuse To avoid a more difficult Metro Plan amendment that could require permission from Eugene and Lane County, PeaceHealth is trying to use a loophole to avoid rezoning its land to commercial, critics charge. PeaceHealth says planning rules allow it to build a regional medical center on residential zoned land. DLCD says the land should be rezoned commercial because the loophole PeaceHealth wants to use allows small clinics in neighborhoods, but not major hospitals. "There is nothing in our records that indicate that this scope and scale of development was intended." PeaceHealth attorney Pfeiffer says DLCD's "allegations" are untrue and have no legal merit. But Wilson says, "PeaceHealth's assertions and attacks on DLCD are nothing more than red herrings." The use of the loophole is "egregious," she says. State and local planning rules require PeaceHealth to make up for the housing that will not be built on the residentially zoned hospital site. To mitigate, PeaceHealth says it will build about 800 housing units on the site in addition to the hospital and medical office buildings. Wilson and Segel say PeaceHealth plans to accomplish this by building housing in the floodplain. "The applicant offers no 'concrete' proposal for accommodating the loss of this residential inventory, but does indicate their intent to provide housing in the floodplain." Segel says. DLCD says the site is a "very important" component of the region's limited supply of residential land to meet housing needs. The agency says without the hospital, up to 3,200 housing units could be built on the site and questions whether PeaceHealth's proposed 800 units complies with land use rules. To balance jobs and housing in the nodal area and limit long-distance driving, DLCD says PeaceHealth should provide more housing. "The PeaceHealth application has provided the lowest possible denominator to each of its needed housing calculations," DLCD says.
Job Shuffle PeaceHealth says approval of its project will bring 2,200 new jobs to Springfield. But critics say the jobs aren't new at all but relocations that will hurt downtown Eugene. "Employment shifts are not new jobs, they are displaced jobs," Segel says. PeaceHealth emergency room nurse Cathy Ellis says the hospital could build a large efficient hospital downtown with garden spaces for a healing environment. "Do not take the heart out of Eugene." But PeaceHealth officials claim leaving a vacant Eugene Clinic building on Olive Street will help downtown Eugene by "provid[ing] an outstanding opportunity for in-fill and redevelopment." Wilson complains, "Nowhere in its narrative does PeaceHealth discuss the impact of lost jobs at its existing facilities, the impact of moving jobs from existing medical offices located near the existing hospital, the impact to the existing businesses in the Gateway area from the increased traffic, or the economic impact to Springfield of losing McKenzie-Willamette Hospital." Spending $300 million on a "resort style" hospital will also result in even more unaffordable local medical and health insurance costs, critics say. "Since their revenue ultimately comes from all of us, they can bleed us with costly charges," says Jan Nelson.
Integrity Many critics question whether Springfield officials have the integrity to turn down PeaceHealth. "The deal was done on the day it was announced," Carol James complained. PeaceHealth "will cost this community its very soul." "PeaceHealth is a big entity who's throwing its economic weight around, in essence strong arming Springfield to agree with whatever it wants," says Gail Campbell of Eugene. "PeaceHealth is notorious for its bad faith behavior and ruthless business tactics." Tom Bowerman points to a Springfield values statement supporting a "small town feel" for the city. "Does putting a nine story building on the McKenzie embody and fortify these values?" Wilson says the lines between developers and city officials are blurrier in Springfield. But "The [pro-sprawl] perception is mostly perception and not reality." Greg Shaver, a member of the Springfield Planning Commission, says he's "extremely pro-growth" but still opposes RiverBend as too much for Springfield. "I would love to have a Ferrari, it's a beautiful car, but it's just not going to fit in my garage for a while." If the Springfield Council does approve RiverBend, opponents or the DLCD could appeal to the courts and/or state Land Use Board. DLCD says "major compliance issues" still "remain unresolved" with the development. Wilson says CHOICES is preparing to go to court if necessary. "We'll see."
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
