Visit our news blogs at blog.nctimes.com.
Few speakers discuss need for Temecula hospital TEMECULA -- The city is beyond having a conversation on whether a hospital should be built. But discussions on how to build a medical facility within the city and what environmental issues should be addressed are still on the table. The city's planning department hosted a public hearing Thursday night to seek suggestions from residents on how to remedy a flawed environmental impact report that could interfere with the construction of a proposed six-story medical complex on Highway 79 South near De Portola Road.
A Riverside Superior Court judge ruled in May that the city needed to further analyze siren and construction noise, traffic impacts and the potential threat of a gasoline leak near the site for the Temecula Regional Hospital proposed by Universal Health Services Inc. Emery Papp, a senior planner for the city, said that for the City Council to sign off on a supplemental environmental impact report by December, the document needs to be completed and ready for public review by Aug. While only four people chose to speak at the meeting, their topics of concern ranged from basic human rights to siren noise to vehicle gridlock.
1 thing that affects this city is the right to have a hospital," said longtime Temecula resident Wayne Hall. "We have a right to survive and not have to go all the way to San Bernardino, Redlands or Riverside for medical services." Hall, a construction worker, said that if, as some have asserted, there is a plume of methyl tertiary-butyl ether coming from leaking underground fuel tanks at nearby gas stations, it can be addressed by using a combination of liners and cement around the base of the hospital structure.
Two lawsuits were filed in March 2006 against the city after it approved the hospital project. The California Nurses Association focused on the MTBE concentration adjacent to the hospital property, claiming the chemicals could pose a threat to workers and patients. The judge sided with the nurses union, saying the city should review the plume that is allegedly migrating toward the hospital site.
The second lawsuit filed by a community group, Citizens Against Noise and Traffic, argued that ambulances and other traffic to and from the hospital would disturb the rural neighborhood behind it. The two suits were combined together. Their allegations led to the judge's ruling requiring more environmental inquiry.
Kenneth Ray, whose home is near the hospital site, said he also was concerned about construction noise as well as operating noises -- such as sirens, elevators, air conditioning and trash pickup -- once the hospital is opened. "We need a hospital, no one contends otherwise," Ray said. "But let's do this right so there are no more legal challenges.
Let's make sure we build this hospital in a way that makes it neighbor friendly and keep it that way." He also raised concerns about the dangers of gridlock if the city did not address the traffic woes of the area. "It's not going to do you a bit of good to go to the ER if you get stuck in traffic on Highway 79 South or Margarita Road," Ray said.
Evan Harbottle, who also spoke at the public hearing, said his only problem with the hospital project was the way it was designed and how, in his opinion, it is being "rammed down" the throats of residents. He said the city had not considered whether the proposed foundation of the hospital would be adequate for withstanding an earthquake and that seismic faults under the city have been ignored. Harbottle also said the number of beds of the hospital have been misrepresented by hospital representatives and city officials.
The hospital has been touted as a 320-bed facility, however, he argued that only 178 beds were identified in the building plans. Scott Crane, director of business development in Riverside County for Universal Health Services, said the hospital will be built in two phases with 178 beds being installed first and the remaining beds coming in a second phase when the need arises. One of the suggestions at the public hearing was that the hospital might be better suited if it were located on a 32-acre property on Diaz Road, once slated to be the site of a higher education center.
"First of all, we bought the land (on Highway 79 South) in 2000," he said. "The other site that was suggested tonight is not as large and doesn't allow us to do the things we want to do. It's in a centralized location for the growing areas of the city.
And if you want to talk about traffic, we've all seen what Winchester Road looks like." Crane said the supplemental environmental report, for which Universal will pay, should not hinder the construction of the hospital as the state has not yet signed off on the project. He said once those approvals are granted it would take a year to construct the first phase of the hospital.
-- Contact staff writer Nicole Sack at (951) 676-4315, Ext. 2616, or nsack@californian.com.
Next Story: At 91, Murrieta artist Florence Unkeless defies old age Visit our news blogs at blog.nctimes.com.
News RSS