Posted below are the beginning paragraphs of a column written by Dr. Ansemo Arthur a highly respected Aiken cardiologist. The Aiken Standard published the column today. Medical treatment everywhere is a highly subjective matter and most negative comments are either based on a single “bad” experience or hearsay.
City Council members are still receiving many comments from citizens who are either for or against the proposed new medical complex in Aiken. The Council unanimously rejected the University Hospital’s original request for a change in the concept plan based on the amount of traffic that the proposed 72,000 sf would create. What most citizens do not know is that the current concept plan for the land allows the University to build at least 30,000 sf. of office space so long as the building architecture is consistent with the original design.My understanding is that University Hospital might submit a new down-sized request for a change in concept plan that would permit them to build just one 17,000sf building. Any subsequent buildings would have to come to Council for approval.
"Local hospital care at risk if University comes to Aiken
2/23/2009 12:37 AM
By DR. ANSERMO ARTHUR
Guest columnist
As a current resident and practicing cardiologist in Aiken for the past 13 years, I, like many of you, have read with great interest the ongoing debate concerning University Hospital's foray into the Aiken medical community.
I will summarize what I believe to be the most salient points concerning this issue from a physician's point of view.
Everyone has a story. Whether it is about good or bad service, most everyone can remember and come up with at least one anecdote detailing some experience they may have had in the doctor's office.
I, as well as my partners, see patients from Augusta with similar stories detailing bad experiences they may have had with a doctor or hospital in Augusta. The fact is that all of this is irrelevant to the matter at hand. Just like those individuals who make a conscious decision to cross the river and choose me or any other doctor in Aiken, so too may a person living in Aiken make the choice to go to Augusta for the same purpose. It is about convenience and not choice! Competition notwithstanding, what price will we really be willing to pay in the long run for convenience?" more
I had been leaning toward the side of competition, but Dr. Arthur made several compelling points.
ReplyDeleteMy fear is that the University Hospital will sue if the City Council refuses to approve their request. Unfortunately, we don't seem to have provisions that would permit the Council to refuse an application based on what is best for the community.
Peach is correct
ReplyDeleteYes I agree with Dr. Arthur of vocalizing his part.
ReplyDeleteGreat article by the cardiologist. He is on target and I do believe you can control the community development based on need. Is there a need for duplicate services? Are there other services that would be more important to your community? Creating a more competitive market is not required when the end result will affect the traffic flow, appearance, or degradation of current services offered. A needs assessment regarding all services that would benefit the largest customer base seems more responsible since land space is finite. The health and welfare of the community seems like a more balanced approach to development. The needs of the many vice the greed of a few. What is Aiken lacking that they truly would benefit from?....politics aside, developer interests, employment, growth is not always better. It is the equivalent to CVS opening across the street from Walgreens. The community has a right to just say no.
ReplyDeleteThis is a land use issue, not a health care public policy issue. It's amazing that the same crowd that wanted and implemented "Planned Commercial" Zoning so that Council could have "control" of the site plan, now wants to throw all of that high minded rhetoric out the window in favor of protectionism of a favored business.
ReplyDeleteTo not treat this as a land use issue is a miscarriage of justice, a travesty and bad public policy. It is also illegal.