Hospital Site Selection in the Western Galilee
A regional health authority must site a new hospital for a town of 18,000 people and seven villages with 7,000 people in the western Galilee. Three sites are described on a 1:50,000 topographic map. Site A lies 2 km from the main road, on a 12% slope, 6 km from the town, and on land classified as agricultural. Site B lies 0.8 km from the main road, on a 5% slope, 3 km from the town, and 300 m from a seasonal stream that floods in winter. Site C lies 1.5 km from the main road, on a 7% slope, 8 km from the town, and 2 km from an existing clinic; it is on rocky land with no current use. The map shows a 6 cm distance between the town and Site B. Prevailing winter winds are from the west. The authority wants a site that is accessible within 15 minutes for 80% of residents, avoids flood risk and farmland, and can be expanded by 40%. The planning team must rank the sites and justify the choice.
1. Using the map scale, calculate the real distance from the town to Site B. Does Site B meet the 15-minute access criterion at an average road speed of 40 km/h?
Read the worked answer
Scale 1:50,000 means 1 cm on the map = 50,000 cm = 500 m on the ground. A map distance of 6 cm therefore represents:
6 cm × 500 m/cm = 3,000 m = 3 km.
At an average road speed of 40 km/h, travel time = distance ÷ speed = 3 km ÷ 40 km/h = 0.075 hours = 4.5 minutes. Even allowing for junctions, parking and slower village roads, Site B is well within the 15-minute criterion.
However, the calculation is only a first filter. The 15-minute target applies to 80% of residents, not only the town. The seven villages may be farther from Site B, so the team should calculate weighted travel times from each settlement. Site B is the strongest on raw distance, but accessibility also depends on road quality and public transport. The scale calculation confirms that distance is not Site B's weakness; flood risk and expansion space are the constraints to examine.
2. Evaluate Sites A, B and C against slope, land use, flood risk and expansion space.
Read the worked answer
Site A: 12% slope exceeds the usual 8% threshold for hospital construction, increasing earthworks, access and drainage costs. It is on agricultural land, so it takes productive land out of use and may face planning objections. It is 6 km from the town - about 9 minutes at 40 km/h - so access is acceptable but weaker than B. Expansion is possible but costly on a steep site.
Site B: 5% slope is the best for construction. It is 0.8 km from the main road and 3 km from the town, giving the best accessibility. But it is only 300 m from a seasonal stream that floods in winter. A hospital cannot be placed in a floodplain without mitigation. Expansion may also be constrained by the stream corridor. Flood risk is a potential hard constraint, not a minor issue.
Site C: 7% slope is acceptable, and it is on rocky land with no current use, so it avoids farmland. It is 8 km from the town - about 12 minutes at 40 km/h - and 2 km from an existing clinic, which could support services. Expansion space is likely good. But it is the farthest from the main population, and access for villages may be poorer.
The trade-off is clear: B wins on access and slope but loses on flood risk; C wins on land use and expansion but loses on distance; A is weak on slope and farmland.
3. Rank the three sites and recommend a choice with conditions. What additional data would you require before final approval?
Read the worked answer
Ranking: B first, C second, A third - but B only conditionally.
Site B is the best on accessibility and slope, which are central to a hospital. However, the 300 m distance from a seasonal stream is not enough to judge flood risk. The team must obtain a floodplain map and the historical flood extent. If B lies outside the 100-year floodplain, or can be protected by elevating the building, a detention basin and a stream buffer, it should be chosen. If B is within the floodplain, it should be rejected and Site C chosen.
Site C is the safer fallback: rocky land, no farmland loss, acceptable slope, and room for 40% expansion. Its weakness is distance, but 8 km is about 12 minutes at 40 km/h, so it may still meet the 15-minute target for the town; village access needs a weighted travel-time check. Site A should not be preferred because the 12% slope raises costs and the agricultural land is a real loss.
Additional data required: a detailed flood-risk map, geotechnical survey for foundations and seismic risk, traffic and public-transport study for all settlements, land-ownership and planning status, and an environmental assessment of the stream corridor. Approval should be conditional on these studies, not on the map alone.