Report criticizes hospital planning.

Byline: MATT COOPER and CHRISTIAN WIHTOL The Register-Guard

SPRINGFIELD - In an unusual move, the state Department of Land Conservation and Development has entered the fray over PeaceHealth's push to build a regional medical center in the Gateway area, strongly criticizing the hospital group's plan and suggesting it fails to meet numerous state legal requirements.

The agency, which oversees compliance with the state's land use goals, issued a stinging 19-page report this week in response to PeaceHealth's request for land use amendments needed in building Sacred Heart Medical Center at RiverBend and surrounding offices and housing on 164 acres next to the McKenzie River.

The Springfield Planning Commission and the City Council will hold public hearings soon and the council may vote on the proposed amendments as early as January.

The state report suggested that officials not vote on any PeaceHealth proposals until the hospital has produced a far more comprehensive plan detailing use of the entire site and the broad impact the project would have on Springfield, Eugene and Lane County.

The report also said that once PeaceHealth prepares a thorough plan, citizens need ample time to review it. It said PeaceHealth's proposal will have such a huge impact that elected officials from Eugene and Lane County should have a say in the project's review.

In his report, Mark Radabaugh, the department's urban representative to the Willamette Valley, criticized the step-by-step approach PeaceHealth is using to win city approval.

The state agency can't stop the city from approving the $350 million project, but it could appeal local decisions to the state Land Use Board of Appeals.

"This is a very major, complex proposal and it needs to have a lot of questions answered," said Anna Russo, a Willamette Valley field coordinator for the land development agency. "There are significant issues."

The agency reviews all proposed changes to major land use plans in the state. In this case, the agency evaluated PeaceHealth's proposed changes to Springfield's Gateway Refinement Plan, which is a supplement to the area's main growth blueprint, the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan.

In the great majority of cases, the state agency doesn't comment on or criticize local land use actions. And even when the agency does speak out, it rarely does so with the critical force of Radabaugh's report.

Radabaugh raised numerous concerns, many of which already have been voiced by PeaceHealth's critics. Among them:

PeaceHealth's proposal does not include a comprehensive plan for development of the entire site. In failing to provide many details, PeaceHealth could run afoul of a statewide goal that requires ample opportunity for citizen review.

All three local governments - not just Springfield - should weigh the effects of PeaceHealth's planned move from downtown Eugene to the urban fringe in Springfield.

By taking land currently designated for medium-density housing and using much of it for a hospital and offices, PeaceHealth would drain the supply of residential land in the Eugene-Springfield area. PeaceHealth has failed to adequately address this issue, Radabaugh wrote.

PeaceHealth and elected officials need to formally evaluate different alternatives to PeaceHealth building a huge new hospital on the urban fringe. These might include building a smaller medical center at the Gateway site in northwest Springfield and looking elsewhere in the Eugene-Springfield area for a spot to accommodate PeaceHealth's growth needs, Radabaugh said.

After buying the land for about $35 million, PeaceHealth earlier this fall applied to the city to redesignate 33 acres to community commercial and to change language in the Gateway Refinement Plan to allow a hospital there. PeaceHealth has said it would later provide more details about exactly how it would develop that spot and the rest of the 164 acres.

Conclusions contested

A public hearing on the rezoning request is scheduled for Dec. 3 before the Planning Commission, and PeaceHealth planning director Philip Farrington said Thursday that the time line remains unaltered by the state report.

Farrington contested Radabaugh's interpretations and arguments.

The agency "has a vastly different opinion of the process we need to go through," said Farrington, who plans to submit a point-by-point response.

Radabaugh argued that PeaceHealth needs to seek a major amendment to the Metropolitan Plan, but Farrington disagreed.

"We're operating under the auspices that we have to fit our project within the Metro Plan parameters, and we're trying to do so," he said.

In his report, Radabaugh disagreed with PeaceHealth's assertion that the project would produce no regional shock waves - and, therefore, does not need approval by Eugene. Although the department won't yet intervene in either city's deliberations, Radabaugh wrote, "the matter ... needs to be carefully weighted (sic) by all local jurisdictions."

Eugene city councilors have split on this issue. Eugene Mayor Jim Torrey has said he won't intervene in the Springfield land use debate, but Eugene Councilors David Kelly and Betty Taylor have said the scope of the project warrants their city's input.

Springfield city planner Colin Stephens, who has been handling the PeaceHealth application, also took issue with Radabaugh's report.

"If the area where the amendment is taking place is within the city limits, it is the sole discretion of the home city to make that decision," Stephens said.

It would be nonsensical for PeaceHealth to submit a comprehensive plan at this point because the zoning doesn't allow such a project, Stephens said - staff would be forced to summarily dismiss the application.

Traffic issues raised

In his report, Radabaugh also faulted PeaceHealth for failing to explain how a project on the urban edge will further the traffic-reducing goals in TransPlan, the area's 20-year guide to transportation.

PeaceHealth needs to demonstrate that the project will not increase automobile traffic or run afoul of requirements for building in a floodplain, Radabaugh said.

He also raised the issue of public access to the PeaceHealth property's McKenzie River waterfront.

In public statements, PeaceHealth Oregon CEO Alan Yordy has said PeaceHealth would have public walkways and open spaces along the riverfront.

But a recommendation by city staff could have the effect of enticing PeaceHealth to prohibit public access to the McKenzie River waterfront, "a significant change to the Metro Plan," Radabaugh wrote.

Stephens said that's not the city's intent and the Planning Commission can address that concern.

Radabaugh also said all regional partners should review PeaceHealth's plan for commercial development on the site, which is "open ended, with no supporting analysis or limits."

"We do not understand how such 'floating' ... of the amount of commercial land is consistent with state law," he added.

Stephens countered that the Springfield City Council will still be able to limit commercial development on the site once PeaceHealth produces a master plan.

Two groups opposed to the Gateway-area site for the 500-bed hospital hope the state report prompts local officials to overhaul the review process for the project.

Lauri Segel, Lane County spokeswoman for 1000 Friends of Oregon, a land-use advocacy group, said the report exposed PeaceHealth's failure to explain how its plans for housing affect the need across the region.

Jan Wilson, coordinator of the citizen-led Coalition for Health Options In Central Eugene-Springfield, said the agency has confirmed the citizen-group's argument that Eugene and Lane County elected officials - and the broader community - should join the discussion of an appropriate place to build the regional medical center.

Wilson said she was also encouraged by the agency's assertion that PeaceHealth should submit a comprehensive development plan for public review before a vote on the amendments.

The move of the region's medical hub from Hilyard Street in downtown Eugene to Springfield's urban edge "is not just a little Springfield development decision," Wilson said. "This involves the whole statewide land-use planning system because of the significant impacts - transportation, infrastructure, employment - that are regionwide."

WHAT'S NEXT

The City Council will review,

and ultimately vote on, land use amendments that PeaceHealth needs to build a $350 million medical center in Gateway.

Dec. 3: 7 p.m. public hearing, Planning Commission, Council Chamber, City Hall, 225 Fifth St.

Jan. 21: 7 p.m. public hearing, City Council, Council Chamber.