MAHC task force rules out Port Sydney as super hospital site

MUSKOKA — Ten days before Doug Ford and Norm Miller were elected as a one-two punch all but securing SMMH and HDMH in Muskoka — and weeks after Huntsville Mayor Scott Aitchison leaked it — the MAHC group tasked with the future of hospitals in the district ruled out Port Sydney as possible single site super facility.

The MAHC hospitals task force has dismissed Port Sydney as a possible super hospital site.

Port Sydney was long rumoured to be a compromise site between Bracebridge and Huntsville.

It was said property had even been purchased near the Port Sydney/Utterson interchange on Hwy. 11.

The Muskoka Algonquine Healthcare Capital Plan Development Task Force met on May 28.

And, according to a MAHC task force, members reviewed a draft land use and community planning analysis.

It says they studied the viability of potential general locations for hospitals in the District of Muskoka based on the requirements of a future site(s).

The analysis considered provincial, regional and municipal planning frameworks, required approvals and potential risks.

The draft report incorporates feedback from the District of Muskoka, and the Towns of Bracebridge and Huntsville, which all concurred with the report’s findings and recommendations: that Urban Centres are the best location for large-scale public facilities.

The report indicates that locations outside of the limits of the urban centres, such as Port Sydney and rural and waterfront areas, are not recommended.

Aitchison, a committee member, leaked the same thing last month.

The release says the report’s findings will be used by the task force as a component of its model evaluation as the task force acknowledged that criteria around land-use planning are important to evaluating the three potential models. Siting work of this nature and in more detail is not required until subsequent stages of the Ministry’s capital planning process.

Also in May, the task force considered the capital cost estimates of the three models.

The key findings identified that the estimated capital building costs of the three models at this time are within approximately 10% of each other.

They say the estimated costs are based on a new build approach and do not include potential costs associated with land and servicing.

The task force will study capital costs in greater detail in their Part B work where redevelopment options (ie: renovation, phased approach, etc.) are further explored for the preferred model.

The task force also reviewed a draft report on human resource considerations. The report outlined MAHC workforce projections with respect to anticipated future retirement implications based on current staff levels. The report also highlighted the impacts, opportunities and challenges associated with human resources in each of the three potential models.

The task force also discussed how it will present its preferred model recommendation to the MAHC board of directors, with further discussion to occur at the next task force meeting on June 18.