Broadlands Hospital

Sorry Silence you are the one that looks stupid with your attack Dog posts and character assassinations. You most likely have never built or developed anything thing in you life. You sound like one of those know it all homeowners..

I do do apologize to the nice homeowners I am not putting you all in the same category as the attack dog .

As far as what you call doom and gloom well in the building development business we don't call it doom and gloom we call it plan for the worse and hope for the best.

If we would of done that with Iraq perhaps we would not have lost so many soldiers lives and innocent civilians. Only brining it up Silence so maybe I can put it into terms you might understand. Well that applies to real estate and development, plan for thew worst and hope for the best and that includes every single facet no stone unturned no matter how outrageous it might seem. . Talk to than building inspector or planners and especially our emergency personnel fire and rescue and police.

Lee j

 

What does any of this have to do with anything in this thread? Honestly?

Whuh? I think you're trying to minimize what we're calling "outrageous" here. I would wager good money when you apply for a building permit and work with fire marshall and all those nice folks, that you do not have to account in your plans for:
1. Helicopters crashing into residential neighborhoods
2. Criminals coming into the neighborhoods and committing random acts of violence
3. Mentally ill, psychopathic patients escaping and terrorizing the neighborhoods in their robes
4. Teenagers skating in the parking lots and cracking their skulls open
5. Ambulances running over little children playing in the neighborhoods as they speed recklessly through neighborhoods

THESE are just a handful of the outrageous claims you and your anti-hospital compatriots have made against the BRMC. These are the things you all have said WILL happen if the hospital gets built with the weight of certainty.

Silence is right -- these kinds of scare tactic arguments can hurt your cause. You're best off sticking to what's relevant, and factual, and of VALID concern:

1. The helicopters will be noisy, even if they only come once or twice a week and even if they come during the day. But come on, they're not going to be crashing into nearby houses, not under controlled situations such as a standard landing on a helipad. The real danger is when they have to touch down on a highway or in a rural wooded area to pick patients up.
2. All kinds of people come to the ED, new hospitals generally don't come with a HUGE increase in local crimes because of it.
3. It's uncommon for even a regular patient to elope from a hospital, it would be VERY rare for a mental patient to get out. And, the mental health patients at this facility will be children, mostly suffering things like depression, personality disorders, and body image issues. Not dangerous psychopaths. And even so, hospitals have close ties with local law enforcement for such situations. But usually when mental patients make it off their unit, they're stopped before they even leave the hospital.
4. Well, at least there would be an ED nearby. Skaters break their heads and arms and legs no matter where they skate. Blaming the hospital for this is... well, outrageous.
5. FUD deserves no response.

 

Wrong what I brought up was the proper way to study such an large scale project with this much controversy and take much of the guess work out. First by doing an animated visual study with sound so we can identify the problems with this project from traffic to sight lines to noise to lights at night. Seeing if it is properly buffered and and screened as well as noise and lighting . AN animation with sound would go a longs ways to identifying many unknowns or right now just guesses.

People need be able to see and hear what they are getting. site plans and construction documents are very hard for the lay person to understand fully. But we all can understand and identify with movies. I bring up the outrageous because I design for a living and these scenarios as outrageous it may seem to the average person does and will happen. And calling people names in those that get caught up in these outrageous scenarios is very sad. Nobody knows how one would react under stress and unfamiliar condidtions including anyone of us. Go ask the fire and rescue and police they see it every day people making outrageous decisions when they are under stress.

As far as the hospital losing money and time if they would of not underestimated the controversy and problems of this site they perhaps would not be in this situation. They did not think of the doom and gloom as many call what I think is smart business. Well if the hospital would of done their home work they possibly would not be in this situation of being voted down and fighting a very up hill battle. They should of put more thought into the downside of decision of going with this site. Now look at the mess they have created for everyone because they did not think it out fully and want to live in la la land like some of you want to.

Bottom line they were voted down and denied the go ahead for this hospital.

Lee j

 

There was sound study done for the Clyde's when it went in. The Clyde's study was very impressive, It was one of the elements that was a positive promotion of the site plan.

Lee, your last statement is evidence you really don't understand the politics that has delayed this hospital. The last study I saw, showed that 88 special exceptions were presented to the last Board of Supervisors, 87 passed. The only one that was not approved was the HCA special exception request. This project has been rot with politics and has had very little to do with the healthcare needs of Loudoun County.

The way HCA was handled by the last board is also part of the FBI investigation. This ain't about location, sound, design, or anything else. It's about corporate greed and a multi-million dollar campaign by non tax paying Inova to keep 100% control over healthcare in Loudoun.

 

Not wrong: you do not post a balanced view on this hospital project. You are demostrably against it, and make allegations well into the ludicrous to that end. These things - helicopters crashing, insane people in the streets and criminals shaking up the place on weekends, children being killed by parking lots and ambulances - are just spreading false fear. And when reasonable counterarguments are made to your outlandish arguments, you dismiss them because you "designed a doctor's office building on top of Loudoun Hospital" and therefore know what happens with no uncertainty to a neighborhood when a hospital is built. Please.

Bottom line: HCA was asked by the Board of Supervisors years ago to build a hospital, then got voted down by the next board of supervisors. A borad of supervisors that, it has been alleged, were in INOVA's service when they voted against it.

Here's a question: if the board of supervisors had not voted it down, would you still be against it? If the new BoS approves the exception, will you still be against it?

If so, then it doesn't matter whether or not they voted it down. It's not the bottom line at all but just an incidental fact, one that if it works against your argument is invalid for you, b/c the BoS would then be "Bad neighbor BoS" to you.

To every day, spin, spin, spin....

 

Right AGFM -- and I think someone else made this point ---

Not-for-profit institutions are not in ANY WAY more "community-oriented" or "community-friendly" by virtue of being non-profit organizations. They are still businesses with stakeholders to please, even if not to pay dividends... and still need to earn enough money to meet their bottom line. They are every bit as corporate as a for-profit organization, because they need the money every bit as much. And in the healthcare field, they will be every bit as cut-throat as a for-profit in trying to defend their monopolies over services in an area, because any successful challenge to that means money lost to them. But -- it means more choices and better options for the consumers. And that's always a good thing, in healthcare.

 

You know Afgm and I will say it again I do respect your opinions big time

I have mainly entered this argument from an location point of view. I just sometimes get caught up in the politics because they make the final decision.

Personally an hospital might work from an design point of view and be a good neighbor. The intrusive nature the present design and I see it very a very different point of view then most. An animated study should be done. And an complete redesign to make it more residential in character to so it blends in better, Perhaps not as tall the parking put more in the ground or some kind of landscaping on the parking garages itself. The actual hospital should be designed more campous style to bend into the residential character of the neighborhood.

The resevered land needs to be used to widen the buffer. And there needs to be some kind of resolve for the expansion even way into the future, lets not kid ourselves they will not wat to expand beyond the final build out or try to put the heliport back in someday. We have an Lawyer on the board now actually several lawyers are on the BOS With their expertise and guidance perhaps this hospital could be doable. But right now the hospital people are certainly not going in that direction and are in the beginning of starting another fire storm. If this is re-designed as ansmall residential style hospital so rt 50 can get their future hospital in an reasonable time and make the adjoining residents happy. Yes go for it.

Two the two major problems

Will this hospital interfere with the future of the rt 50 hospital??????

Will the design of this hospital fit the character of this residential neighborhood and be a good neighbor??????

And can this hospital be kept small enough to stay in the original vision of what they are saying to us today and to accomplish this they must redesign to give it a small town residential character type of hospital. And all the future expansion needs to be on the table once and for all.

Also an video and sound animation should be required before any decision is made.

Lee j

 

I believe that is exactly how our HOA acts. Several residents voiced strong opposition to Clyde's. However, there was strong support for Clyde's as well. The HOA looked at the issues and supported Clyde's.
Now that it has been built, I have heard from a few who were very much opposed to it. They have stated that it is not the issue they thought it would be.


About the hospital, it is true that slightly more that expressed an opinion were opposed to it. But there were many who were undecided or felt they needed more information. The HOA took all the information in and chose to support BRMC. Overall, the county said support/opposition was about 50/50.

I conducted numerous meetings with residents, both individually and in groups, to discuss the hospital and issues. I read every single one of the more tham 1000 responses we got to the survey.

 

Thanks for your balance and objectivity, Techno.

 

Lee, you know what they say about people who make "ASSumptions" about other people, don't you?!

If you wish, I will spout off about what I have built like you have. I will gladly share with you and Mr. Rogers my definition of compassion if that is what you would like.

 

COPN's are tied to addresses.
HCA already owns land on Rte 50 for a hospital. They will be competing with Inova on Rte 50 for a hospital approval.

 

sorry Cliff - Nova Native's cheap shots where aimed at me this time. Next time you get dibs on her snarky comments.

 

People like Clydes Cliff, because it is not intrusive it looks like an farm house, it is basically one story does not look like an restaurant it blends very nicely with the residential it is not an 24 hour an day operation. helicopters do not land there and it's potential for future expansion is minimal.

 

They are talking about individual compassion for people, holy cow! We, individual people, along with churches and synagogues, are supposed to love our neighbors, reach out a hand when they fall, heal them when they are sick. Government by nature cannot be compassionate--it was not designed to be so. You are asking government to do something beyond its means. I want to personally help people and lift them up, not send people off to some government agency.

 

You missed my point. Many people opposed it before it was built. You know, noise, reducing property values, doesn't belong there, etc.
Now according to your definition, since a person said it would lower their property value, it should not have been built.
My point is that even some of those who feared Clyde's no longer feel that way.

 

Lee, you should be thankful that I am the only one who actually reads your posts all the way through! I have for good reason attacked your ludicrous ideas and complimented your valid points. I have said repeatedly there are valid reasons to oppose the hospital. All things considered, I would oppose the hospital for purely selfish, personal reasons. In fact, those of who oppose the hospital could be labeled selfish--we don't want the traffic, helicopter noise or supposed depression of home prices even though the hospital could benefit those who need something more important--medical care for their families. Why should we deprive people of medical care and competition (always good for consumers, EVEN in health care) because of our comparatively petty concerns?

There is no right answer to this question--it's purely personal opinion. I respect the private property rights of HCA. Though you are correct, if they want approval, they should be proactive in addressing community concerns upfront and be a good neighbor. That's just smart business.

I have played devil's advocate on both sides of the fence. You have marginalized those who disagree with you and because they are not builders or experts, have said we should not listen to them. So in case you didn't notice, I am against the hospital all things considered. I just don't want to be lumped in with you, Donna and others who make ludicrous claims and fear monger, that's all.

 

Cliff you are making my point when it was all said in done it was the design and landscaping that made Clydes the good neighbor. If you would of put an wendy's or fast food there people would still be complaining and they are both restaurants. It is all a matter of your scope and design and type of operation with in it's time place and moment.

 

I would more thankful if you did not read them at all!! ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha Oh by the way the Washington Post has an article about someone that studies laughter. ha ha

And they use the ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha in the article.

Lee j

 

Right. Because what really has you upset is that I call you on your more ridiculous posts, Lee ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha