An online search of “PRMC Renovation” on www.pratttribune.com finds a story dated Feb. 5, 2009 titled “PRMC pursing renovation plan”. This article is about renovating PRMC with no mention of new construction other than a boiler building. It points out that the original Pratt Hospital building opened its doors in 1950 and is almost 60 years old. The article quotes Susan Page, Pratt Regional Medical Center President and CEO, “The infrastructure of the main building is worn out.” The article then cites, “A rough estimate for the renovation is between $8 million and $12 million.” The article explained, “New construction codes prevent putting new boilers in the old boiler space so the cost for three new boilers and a separate building is estimated at $750,000 to $1 million.”
Also in the article, “PRMC Facts:
• In 1978 original hospital receives a major update to plumbing and heating.
• Two new medical office buildings, one in 1994 and one in 2000, added at a total cost of $12.4 million. Both projects completed with hospital revenues.”
Nowhere in the article are the additions completed in 1961 and 1981 mentioned. The 1961 addition contains private rooms, each with a private bath, all handicap-accessible. The 1981 addition houses the ER, ICU, operating and recovery rooms, central service, pharmacy, respiratory care, radiology, PT, maintenance, administration, and admitting areas. This building is 29 years old. More later.
Now fast forwarding to The Pratt Tribune dated March 1, 2010, or searching “PRMC forum” online on www.pratttribune.com, finds an article titled “Forum explains PRMC’s options”. This story states, “The mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) systems in the 60-year-old structure are wearing out. A $22 million upgrade is required to replace those systems. The Hospital Board estimates that it will take a total of $68 million to update the MEP systems, remodel patient rooms, and expand the emergency department.” That’s quite a difference from the $8 million to $12 million reported in Feb. 2009. The article explains “why PRMC needs to build a major new addition.” It includes moving the cafeteria into the area being vacated by Maydew-Thibault Optometry in the South Central Medical Clinic. It also reports, “Bed space would be reduced from 69 to 38.” Again, no mention of the 1961 or 1981 additions.
Before the forum on Feb. 27, I asked Ms. Page, one-on-one, if the plan is to tear down the 29-year-old addition. She responded that it is part of the plan, and that the forum would explain why it is necessary.
During the forum, only an age of 60 years was mentioned until I brought up the 29 years in the question and answer session, which followed the presentation. The semi-private rooms with shared toilets with only 24” doors in the 1950 building were pointed out, but never the private rooms with private toilets with 36” doors already in the 1961 addition. Upon further questioning, we were told that under the current preliminary plan, the new building will have 63,700 square feet. And, that a total of 109,000 square feet, which includes the 1961 addition and all 50,000 square feet of the 1981 addition, will be demolished.
Clicking on Patient Information, then Facilities Map on www.prmc.org takes you to Floor Plan links. My count (yellow rooms) is 27 private rooms with private handicap-accessible bathrooms in the 1961 addition, and 18 semi-private rooms sharing 1 bathroom between up to 4 patients in the 1950 building. Why not convert the 18 semi-private rooms to 9 semi-private with one larger bathroom with shower per room, thus eliminating the 24” bathroom doors in the 1950 section? During low census, these can be private rooms. This alone will provide 36 rooms and house up to 45 beds, not counting the isolation ward rooms. The forum’s Power Point presentation, also on the www.prmc.org website, shows an average census of 16.5 patients a day and plans for 38 in-patient beds in the new building.
Cosmetically, I feel we have a very attractive and clean hospital - nothing to be ashamed of for sure. While I don’t have quite as much of a problem replacing a 60-year-old building, I do have a problem with destroying a 29-year-old building! We should demand a legitimate bid for remodeling the complex. There’s certainly plenty of floor space available and areas that probably don‘t need remodeling.
If it’s too expensive to remodel, how is moving the cafeteria into the Optometry department feasible? Isn’t that a huge difference in plumbing and ventilation? But seriously, it’s not that big of a deal. Here’s another question: How much asbestos is in the 1950 building and will we be able to afford to demolish it? This could be a very big deal! It’s generally cheaper to work around asbestos and cover it than to remove it. As long as it’s left undisturbed and covered, it’s legal and safe. I have reason to believe the asbestos was removed during the 1978 renovation, but the issue must be addressed.
Architects working on a percentage prefer to suggest new construction - they make less on remodeling. Electrical updates have been made throughout the years. The 1961 and 1981 portions have had updates. The 1950 portion had a major update to plumbing and heating in 1978. Can it be done again? Made to look like new? At a cost considerably less than new? Can some of the areas do without remodeling? Can remodeling be done without loss of services? Will it be inconvenient for a while, but manageable? Will an unbiased Structural Engineer find the complex sound? Can Architects be hired for a flat rate, as so they are not inclined to inflate the bid? Can we set the maximum dollar amount that’s available? I feel certain that the answer is YES to all of these questions!
If a new facility is deemed a must, building upwards is cheaper than spread out - Basic Building Design 101 - less footings & less roof. Depending on soil structure, standard basement footings alone often support multiple stories. The 1981 addition’s foundations do. The basement is the cheapest part of a building. How about a smaller three story addition adjacent to it?
Could the ER be moved to the soon vacated Optometry Department area? Could it be expanded out under the canopy to the South side? Let’s include EMS’s opinion, since they are the ones that often make the transport to and from the ER. Are three new boilers necessary, or just two? At the forum, we were told the complex can run on one, and my understanding is that it generally does.
There are many options, even though inconvenient for a couple years. How about starting within the 2009 $8 million to $12 million figure. Should not PRMC be able to finance that amount without a tax increase? Set tiers of 8, 10, and a maximum of 12 million dollars for the Architects to work with as to establish the order of the most needed updates. Budget the need. Personally, I’d like to see, an expanded ER, boilers and chillers brought into compliance, and a reasonable remodeling of the utilities and areas of true need. Having built additions on both sides of the original building makes this the most logical.
Who am I to be writing a letter to the Editor? A Pittsburg State University graduate with a major in Building Design and Construction, a Field Engineer (surveying, layout, over-site, quality control, daily reports, etc) on three Wesley Hospital projects (plus others) in the mid ’70s, worker on the 1981 project, and taxpayer. I don’t want to lose or compromise services provided by PRMC, but I also want taxes to be kept in check. It’s my hope that the public will demand a legitimate look at remodeling what we have.
There are more forums at 7 p.m. on March 16 in Iuka, and at 6 p.m. March 22 at PRMC.
Pro or Con, please vote on April 6, 2010 - It is going to be your tax money.
|
|
|
An online search of “PRMC Renovation” on www.pratttribune.com finds a story dated Feb. 5, 2009 titled “PRMC pursing renovation plan”. This article is about renovating PRMC with no mention of new construction other than a boiler building. It points out that the original Pratt Hospital building opened its doors in 1950 and is almost 60 years old. The article quotes Susan Page, Pratt Regional Medical Center President and CEO, “The infrastructure of the main building is worn out.” The article then cites, “A rough estimate for the renovation is between $8 million and $12 million.” The article explained, “New construction codes prevent putting new boilers in the old boiler space so the cost for three new boilers and a separate building is estimated at $750,000 to $1 million.”
Also in the article, “PRMC Facts:
• In 1978 original hospital receives a major update to plumbing and heating.
• Two new medical office buildings, one in 1994 and one in 2000, added at a total cost of $12.4 million. Both projects completed with hospital revenues.”
Nowhere in the article are the additions completed in 1961 and 1981 mentioned. The 1961 addition contains private rooms, each with a private bath, all handicap-accessible. The 1981 addition houses the ER, ICU, operating and recovery rooms, central service, pharmacy, respiratory care, radiology, PT, maintenance, administration, and admitting areas. This building is 29 years old. More later.
Now fast forwarding to The Pratt Tribune dated March 1, 2010, or searching “PRMC forum” online on www.pratttribune.com, finds an article titled “Forum explains PRMC’s options”. This story states, “The mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) systems in the 60-year-old structure are wearing out. A $22 million upgrade is required to replace those systems. The Hospital Board estimates that it will take a total of $68 million to update the MEP systems, remodel patient rooms, and expand the emergency department.” That’s quite a difference from the $8 million to $12 million reported in Feb. 2009. The article explains “why PRMC needs to build a major new addition.” It includes moving the cafeteria into the area being vacated by Maydew-Thibault Optometry in the South Central Medical Clinic. It also reports, “Bed space would be reduced from 69 to 38.” Again, no mention of the 1961 or 1981 additions.
Before the forum on Feb. 27, I asked Ms. Page, one-on-one, if the plan is to tear down the 29-year-old addition. She responded that it is part of the plan, and that the forum would explain why it is necessary.
During the forum, only an age of 60 years was mentioned until I brought up the 29 years in the question and answer session, which followed the presentation. The semi-private rooms with shared toilets with only 24” doors in the 1950 building were pointed out, but never the private rooms with private toilets with 36” doors already in the 1961 addition. Upon further questioning, we were told that under the current preliminary plan, the new building will have 63,700 square feet. And, that a total of 109,000 square feet, which includes the 1961 addition and all 50,000 square feet of the 1981 addition, will be demolished.
Clicking on Patient Information, then Facilities Map on www.prmc.org takes you to Floor Plan links. My count (yellow rooms) is 27 private rooms with private handicap-accessible bathrooms in the 1961 addition, and 18 semi-private rooms sharing 1 bathroom between up to 4 patients in the 1950 building. Why not convert the 18 semi-private rooms to 9 semi-private with one larger bathroom with shower per room, thus eliminating the 24” bathroom doors in the 1950 section? During low census, these can be private rooms. This alone will provide 36 rooms and house up to 45 beds, not counting the isolation ward rooms. The forum’s Power Point presentation, also on the www.prmc.org website, shows an average census of 16.5 patients a day and plans for 38 in-patient beds in the new building.
Cosmetically, I feel we have a very attractive and clean hospital - nothing to be ashamed of for sure. While I don’t have quite as much of a problem replacing a 60-year-old building, I do have a problem with destroying a 29-year-old building! We should demand a legitimate bid for remodeling the complex. There’s certainly plenty of floor space available and areas that probably don‘t need remodeling.
If it’s too expensive to remodel, how is moving the cafeteria into the Optometry department feasible? Isn’t that a huge difference in plumbing and ventilation? But seriously, it’s not that big of a deal. Here’s another question: How much asbestos is in the 1950 building and will we be able to afford to demolish it? This could be a very big deal! It’s generally cheaper to work around asbestos and cover it than to remove it. As long as it’s left undisturbed and covered, it’s legal and safe. I have reason to believe the asbestos was removed during the 1978 renovation, but the issue must be addressed.
Architects working on a percentage prefer to suggest new construction - they make less on remodeling. Electrical updates have been made throughout the years. The 1961 and 1981 portions have had updates. The 1950 portion had a major update to plumbing and heating in 1978. Can it be done again? Made to look like new? At a cost considerably less than new? Can some of the areas do without remodeling? Can remodeling be done without loss of services? Will it be inconvenient for a while, but manageable? Will an unbiased Structural Engineer find the complex sound? Can Architects be hired for a flat rate, as so they are not inclined to inflate the bid? Can we set the maximum dollar amount that’s available? I feel certain that the answer is YES to all of these questions!
If a new facility is deemed a must, building upwards is cheaper than spread out - Basic Building Design 101 - less footings & less roof. Depending on soil structure, standard basement footings alone often support multiple stories. The 1981 addition’s foundations do. The basement is the cheapest part of a building. How about a smaller three story addition adjacent to it?
Could the ER be moved to the soon vacated Optometry Department area? Could it be expanded out under the canopy to the South side? Let’s include EMS’s opinion, since they are the ones that often make the transport to and from the ER. Are three new boilers necessary, or just two? At the forum, we were told the complex can run on one, and my understanding is that it generally does.
There are many options, even though inconvenient for a couple years. How about starting within the 2009 $8 million to $12 million figure. Should not PRMC be able to finance that amount without a tax increase? Set tiers of 8, 10, and a maximum of 12 million dollars for the Architects to work with as to establish the order of the most needed updates. Budget the need. Personally, I’d like to see, an expanded ER, boilers and chillers brought into compliance, and a reasonable remodeling of the utilities and areas of true need. Having built additions on both sides of the original building makes this the most logical.
Who am I to be writing a letter to the Editor? A Pittsburg State University graduate with a major in Building Design and Construction, a Field Engineer (surveying, layout, over-site, quality control, daily reports, etc) on three Wesley Hospital projects (plus others) in the mid ’70s, worker on the 1981 project, and taxpayer. I don’t want to lose or compromise services provided by PRMC, but I also want taxes to be kept in check. It’s my hope that the public will demand a legitimate look at remodeling what we have.
There are more forums at 7 p.m. on March 16 in Iuka, and at 6 p.m. March 22 at PRMC.
Pro or Con, please vote on April 6, 2010 - It is going to be your tax money.
