HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-27-2019 Nelson-Selby (French Hospital)
Purrington, Teresa
From:Carol Selby <slo2oz2@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, September 27, 2019 10:08 AM
To:Advisory Bodies
Subject:Johnson Street - French Hospital - Possible mitigation of issues
To Planning Commission members and members of the Architectural Review Commission,
Members of the ARC may recall that on September 16, 2019 I and several neighbors attended your meeting regarding the
planned expansion of French Hospital. We were somewhat agitated after hearing from French’s representative, both
because we first became aware of the plans on September 11, and because his presentation seemed more focused on
increasing market share and glamor than on patient care or community needs. Since the project will affect us not only as
neighbors but as patients of the hospital, this attitude felt cavalier and affected our ability to organize cogent comments
in the three minutes we were given to discuss something that matters deeply to us and to San Luis Obispo. Having now
been able to review the drawings and research a bit about the plans, I personally feel a responsibility to point out a number
of deficiencies in the design not directly related to the proximity of the proposed additions to neighbors, ALL of which
could be mitigated through a more person-friendly and care-oriented design.
First of these issues touched upon in your meeting is the poor or non-existent planning for all the cars, trucks, ambulances,
deliveries entering at Johnson and Lizzie only to have to navigate the entire northern edge of the site past many obstacles
(including the new entrance) and then down to the bottom of the site. Without a doubt, this would severely impact the
already heavy morning and afternoon traffic on Johnson. Any delay along the way (fender bender, elderly person slow to
get out because the drop-off area is full, etc.) would impact traffic on Johnson for blocks each way. I also did not see any
exit plan other than either having everyone either exit at Ella (across the easement with the condos to the uncontrolled
intersection with Johnson) or directing them back up the serpentine route of entry. Perhaps there is another plan not
evident from the illustrations? In any event, this part of the plan needs to be clear, safety-first oriented and transparent
to the public.
Second: the positioning of the helipad on top of a parking structure at the farthest and least accessible point from the E.R.
makes no sense. Helicopters are used when time is of the essence, so it seems wrong to choose to have critical patients
required to be brought down 4 stories in a gurney then hustled (by ambulance? Bus?) hundreds of feet up a grade from
the backlot, across a congested lot or through a busy hospital before they reach the E.R. I don’t think this is what
supporters of that helipad service had in mind. Wouldn’t it make more sense to place the helipad on top of, or at least
close to the E.R.? (Irrespective of the parking structure’s location). Or if that isn’t possible, to do as they have at Marian,
land the helicopter a block or so away at ground level and transport patients by ambulance? Perhaps working
collaboratively with the City and County, it would be possible to lease the use of land across Johnson, or share use with
emergency services?
Third: Unnecessary long walks for nurses, slowing care. The current plan is to place nurses’ stations at both ends of a very
long hallway (on each floor) and have them serve patients in rooms up to the midpoint. This is ridiculous, when, by placing
the nurses’ stations and ancillary storage in the middle of each stations’ half of the hall the length of each trip (and the
time it would take to reach patients in need) would be HALF of that currently proposed (i.e., no more than a quarter of
the length of the hall).
Fourth: As noted by several ARC members, the horizontal lines of the body of the new “Patient Tower” is kind of
monotonous (a long box punctuated with lines of little square windows) and doesn’t especially complement the strong
vertical lines of the lobby/entrance as planned. While the architect insisted this is inevitable with a hospital, that is not
true. It would easily be remedied by the changes in the location of nurses’ stations suggested above and additionally
bumping them out, creating two robust vertical columns along the side of the building (of any depth needed). Additional
windows on the sides of the columns would provide additional natural light.
1
This “tweak” to the existing design would add space, efficiency, reduce congestion near the stations, and provide better
and faster patient care. The columns would also complement the entryway’s strong vertical lines rather than fighting or
ignoring them, a feature which could be enhanced by repeating colors or materials used in the entryway. Overall, it would
free designers and staff to use the extra space gained to enhance patient care as well as aesthetic values.
Fifth: Not considering undergrounding several floors of the parking structure. Because the proposed site for the garage is
VERY close to the edge of the bluff on two sides significant excavation is inevitable just to meet earthquake safety
standards. How much harder would it be, then, to use that excavation to lower two to three floors of the structure, thus
preventing noise, artificial light and obstruction of daylight and views? The proposed lab could be moved to the ground
floor and would appear as it is shown in the illustrations. This would leave only one (or possibly two) floors of above-
ground parking, which could also provide the base for a solar array. (Yes, I have been informed that solar can’t yet be used
as emergency power, but it could certainly result in lower costs for lighting and other ancillary uses and would show a
commitment by French to the environment and the future.)
The neighborhood objections can be mitigated! The current design is opposed because it guarantees that both neighbors
and patients will suffer maximum negative impact from the echoing noise, headlights and safety lights associated with a
24/7 hospital parking structure. However, lowering the profile of the structure and skillfully redesigning just that one west-
facing wall (seen only from the west), closing it to light and noise and making it more neutral in appearance, would go a
long way toward lessening the intrusive feeling of the current plan, as would planting mature trees as a barrier.
I sincerely ask that you consider these suggestions. Having only three minutes and no familiarity with the plan, community
members could only hit upon one of our concerns: neighborhood disruption. Now that we are more informed, we can see
possible mitigations for our issues and others which should concern the Planning Commission because you are the only
people who can represent everyone who uses Johnson Street, uses French Hospital, San Luis Obispo High School, or any
of the medical and agency offices along Johnson.
Yours is a complex challenge: trying to determine how to allow a medical center to expand so as to compete in a changing
medical market by styling themselves as a Regional Medical Center, while permanently confined to a comparatively small,
steep, hillside site bounded by residential neighborhoods. Your commission’s goal must be to ensure that this hospital
will represent a true asset to this community and a haven for those who are sick, injured or dying for well into the future.
Sincerely yours,
Carol Nelson-Selby 1201 Leff Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(805) 593-0187
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
2