The 'blind' driveway at 39 Congress Street
Considering the dearth of emergency rooms (especially trauma centers) in the San Gabriel Valley, and the lack of residential neighborhoods on the Huntington Hospital campus, it's no surprise there was little opposition to the hospital's plans for a 66,000-square-foot, four-story emergency department addition presented at Monday night's council meeting.
Little opposition, that is, except from the owners of 39 Congress Street.
Representatives for the medical office building at that location claimed that the realignment of Fairmount Avenue (required by the hospital's plans) would leave the intersection of Fairmount and Congress dangerously close to the driveway leading out of the building's underground parking garage. Councilman Steve Madison took up the owners' complaints with zeal, arguing that the building has a "blind" driveway and that drivers exiting the building eastward on Congress could be in danger of being rear-ended by cars turning left onto Congress from Fairmount.
Take a look at this photo. It is a shot looking west on Congress taken from the medical building's driveway. Even though it is far away, you can clearly see the current intersection of Fairmount and Congress in the distance. There don't seem to be any obstructions in terms of walls, foliage or structure blocking the view of oncoming cars, unless there were large vehicles stopped along Congress, which would not be the case if Fairmount is moved closer east.
I would think that, with a closer intersection, it would be easier for drivers exiting out of the 39 Congress Street driveway to see cars preparing to turn onto Fairmount. In fact, as can be seen in the photo, there is already a driveway located immediately to the west of 39 Congress, so the possibility of two vehicles exiting from the two driveways at the same time already exists. But I didn't hear the owners of the medical building complaining about that one.
Could it be that the complaints from the building's owners might be motivated by something other than public safety and liability issues? In the words of Scott Jenkins, an attorney for Huntington Hospital:
"We have been trying to purchase that property and there have been many negotiations. From my perspective this is about changing the valuation (of the property)."
Are the property owners trying to play hardball in order to get more out of Huntington when it comes to selling the land adjacent to the planned addition? Does that kind of skullduggery ever happen in real estate deals? Say it ain't so!
Anyways, the only valid concern, in my eyes, that the 39 Congress folks have is that a stop sign planned for westbound Congress as it intersects the realigned Fairmount could lead to cars cueing up in front of the building's driveway. The city has already said it has the legal authority to have the stop sign relocated or removed. Jenkins said that the hospital would prefer to have the stop sign there.
My advice: get rid of the stop sign. That eliminates the issue.
Little opposition, that is, except from the owners of 39 Congress Street.
Representatives for the medical office building at that location claimed that the realignment of Fairmount Avenue (required by the hospital's plans) would leave the intersection of Fairmount and Congress dangerously close to the driveway leading out of the building's underground parking garage. Councilman Steve Madison took up the owners' complaints with zeal, arguing that the building has a "blind" driveway and that drivers exiting the building eastward on Congress could be in danger of being rear-ended by cars turning left onto Congress from Fairmount.
Take a look at this photo. It is a shot looking west on Congress taken from the medical building's driveway. Even though it is far away, you can clearly see the current intersection of Fairmount and Congress in the distance. There don't seem to be any obstructions in terms of walls, foliage or structure blocking the view of oncoming cars, unless there were large vehicles stopped along Congress, which would not be the case if Fairmount is moved closer east.I would think that, with a closer intersection, it would be easier for drivers exiting out of the 39 Congress Street driveway to see cars preparing to turn onto Fairmount. In fact, as can be seen in the photo, there is already a driveway located immediately to the west of 39 Congress, so the possibility of two vehicles exiting from the two driveways at the same time already exists. But I didn't hear the owners of the medical building complaining about that one.
Could it be that the complaints from the building's owners might be motivated by something other than public safety and liability issues? In the words of Scott Jenkins, an attorney for Huntington Hospital:
"We have been trying to purchase that property and there have been many negotiations. From my perspective this is about changing the valuation (of the property)."
Are the property owners trying to play hardball in order to get more out of Huntington when it comes to selling the land adjacent to the planned addition? Does that kind of skullduggery ever happen in real estate deals? Say it ain't so!
Anyways, the only valid concern, in my eyes, that the 39 Congress folks have is that a stop sign planned for westbound Congress as it intersects the realigned Fairmount could lead to cars cueing up in front of the building's driveway. The city has already said it has the legal authority to have the stop sign relocated or removed. Jenkins said that the hospital would prefer to have the stop sign there.
My advice: get rid of the stop sign. That eliminates the issue.