116 3rd St SE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401
Home / Opinion / Guest Columnists
Is council truly studying medical mall alternatives?
The Gazette Opinion Staff
Oct. 24, 2010 12:54 am
By Thomas Kopecky
The Cedar Rapids City Council's second vote (Sept. 14) to close two blocks of Second Avenue SE for the Physicians' Clinic of Iowa medical mall was not only disappointing, but raised the nagging question: Why, with an alternative concept for the mall that would keep Second Avenue open, is a majority of the City Council rushing to spend millions of dollars to cover collateral construction costs, so the medical mall can be built in its proposed location and configuration?
Possible modifications to the proposed concept, for which PCA has requested closing two blocks of Second Avenue between 10th and 12 streets, have been discussed before. But in light of the council's latest decision to move the final vote up from next April to Tuesday, they bear reiterating now.
A better concept for all parties concerned would be:
l Raise the ground level “main street” of the mall to the second level.
l Move the proposed parking from the west side of 10th Street to the east side, on both sides of Second Avenue, under the elevated clinic (like the free-standing ambulatory surgery center on First Avenue).
Spanning Second Avenue (80-foot right of way) eliminates connecting skywalks, and provides the desired adjacency of clinics to each other, which is acknowledged to be a better functional relationship.
Spanning Second Avenue should not be a structural challenge. An in-town example is the Crowne Plaza Hotel, spanning Third Street NE, which coincidentally, also has an 80-foot right of way.
Another example, more closely related by function, is the recently completed medical clinic in Springfield, Ill., where a multilevel addition spans a major street deemed too important to close.
With the parking, provide vertical circulation elements on both sides, with integrated patient drop-off/pickup areas, making the issue of patient safety - having to negotiate Second Avenue traffic - a moot point.
Patient convenience for many would be further enhanced with one elevator ride from parking below directly to the desired clinic level above.
Placing the parking facilities under the clinics would also provide the opportunity to develop a coordinated structural system that might serve both and result in shared cost savings.
Other benefits:
1) No cost for a skywalk over 10th Street.
2) No rerouting costs for utilities located under Second Avenue, and the related demolition of those streets to which the utilities would be relocated
3) No “enhancement” costs of First and Third avenues, now deemed to be necessary to handle traffic flow changes that would be caused by closing two blocks of Second Avenue
4) Saving land proposed for parking on the west side of 10th Street for some other property tax paying entity.
PCI's repeated assertions that public moneys won't be used to pay for these collateral construction costs, because the new property tax generated by the medical mall would be used to pay for same, is fallacious! The same medical mall without many of these upfront costs would still generate the same property tax dollars, which would then be available for other needs. And indeed, these collateral construction costs are very much a part of the greater project.
The generic concept of a medical mall is valid; the specific concept on the table for this mall is not. With due consideration and sensitivity, this medical mall can be a superior project for the city, with the goodwill of a majority of the citizens of Cedar Rapids.
All of which brings me back to the initial question: Why is a majority of the City Council in such a hurry and so willing to capitulate without challenge? Are there other reasons?
Thomas J. Kopecky of Cedar Rapids is retired from a 48-year career in architecture, including 22 years with HLM, an Iowa City architecture/engineering firm recognized nationally for its expertise in planning and design of health care and medical research facilities.
Projects he worked on included several for the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics.
Comments: SLK1025@aol.com
Thomas Kopecky
Opinion content represents the viewpoint of the author or The Gazette editorial board. You can join the conversation by submitting a letter to the editor or guest column or by suggesting a topic for an editorial to editorial@thegazette.com

Daily Newsletters