Concerned Citizens of East Cobb
  • Home
  • Email
  • Blog
  • More Topics
    • Cityhood Conversations
    • RAC 2020 Proposal
  • About Us
  • Our Vision
  • Contact

Concerned Citizens of East Cobb

Protecting Our Community's Residents, Seniors, Schools and Environment

Affordability Issues for Isakson Living East Cobb

1/28/2014

 
Picture10 Senior Living Communities within a 5-mile radius of the Tritt Property. (click for actual map)
The East Cobb community has been diligent and proactive in creating senior care communities at reasonable prices for seniors to age in place near family and friends.  Here is a map of 10 senior care communities just within a 5-mile radius of the Tritt property.  The many senior facilities in East Cobb are  examples of how developers worked within the existing land use and provided senior communities that fit within the East Cobb citizens have come to know and love. The Isakson Living East Cobb CCRC as planned is too large with 835 units, and it does not take into account the average retirees’ income. 

It is true that number of elderly in our community is growing, yet a very small percentage of them could receive care from the proposed Isakson Living CCRC due to affordability issues. The entrance fee based on information provided by Isakson Living is from $200,000 to more than $500,000.  Note that the entrance fee is only 90%, 50% or 0% refundable, unlike the cost of buying and then selling a house, where people generally receive more money than what they paid for it.  Monthly fees, which include rent and a stipend for food, range from $3,000 to $5,000 for couples, and that amount can increase with inflation.  Medical care is not included. 

As an example, for an average married couple, the entrance fee would be $350,000 and it would cost $48,000 a year for monthly fees, but those costs don’t include health care, a la carte fees or other items in a typical budget. Usually 25% of a budget is spent on housing, so that would mean the average retired couple would need around $192,000 per year to retire comfortably in this CCRC; over 10 years it would cost on average about $2,227,000 including the entrance fee.  Most retirees in Cobb County do not have that amount of income, and nationally the average median household income for seniors is $35,107 per year.  In other words this CCRC would not be an affordable option for the overwhelming majority of seniors.


CCRC Location and What a Real Compromise Would Look Like

1/22/2014

 
Picture
click for larger image
Note that Isakson Living Park Springs in Stone Mountain is located next to a golf course, wooded acreage and convenient shopping. Few traffic problem exist due to the location.  (Same Google Map scale as below.)

Picture
click for larger image
Note the East Cobb location would be 2x as dense as Park Springs (above) yet this property is surrounded by thousands of homes, many schools, and a new 220,000 square foot WellStar Health Park, which bypassed proper zoning channels.  The large-scale Isakson Living CCRC of 835 units would severely impact traffic with an additional 3,000+ cars a day!  (Same Google Map scale as above.)

Picture
click for larger image
Here is a larger Google map of this area, and you can see the Tritt property and how traffic in these small neighborhoods would be affected by such a large-scale project.  The Tritt property is partially in the flood plain, has 3 creeks running along the hills, is the ideal location for a park for the community.

Picture
The Tritt property is one of the last big parcels of green spaces left in East Cobb.  This property was listed at the top of the Parks Bond 2006 and Parks Bond 2008. The East Cobb Community hopes to have the chance to purchase it as the new Tritt Park.
The friends and family of Isakson Living East Cobb have created a website and Facebook page.  This new online presence presents their perspective, and while we respect their opinions, we know we have strong counterarguments to all their points, which you can read here.  They certainly have a right to their opinions, as do we.

This is not a popularity contest, however, it is a rezoning proposal, and the people that matter most in any rezoning case are the adjacent neighbors and those in the nearby neighborhoods. By large majorities, we all opposed the first Isakson Living proposal and remain opposed to what we know of the second proposal.  It is too big and has far too many units for this part of East Cobb, and the apartment complex architecture does not fit in with the area.  We look forward to seeing more details of the second proposal, but still no specifics have been given since Isakson Living refiled in November.

Also, we should point out that most CCRCs in the United States have less than 300 units. We question why the developer wants nearly 3 times that amount in East Cobb, and also why they would plan twice the number of units as in their Park Springs, Stone Mountain location, even though the acreage is similar. Park Springs has 474 units on 54 acres, while Isakson Living East Cobb has planned for 845 units on 53.7 areas, and up to a full third of the property cannot be built on because it is either in the flood plain, stream buffers or too steep.  So IL East Cobb would be more than twice as dense as IL Park Springs.

Furthermore, there are many ways to build a CCRC, such as cottage style or apartment style. Park Springs has both cottages and apartments, but East Cobb would only have apartments.  We do not want an apartment-style CCRC in East Cobb, not only because it doesn’t fit in with the character of this area, but also because of the risks involved if the CCRC fails.  This is not an abstraction; due to the tough economy in 2008, the planned Isakson Living Peachtree Hills was not built and an empty lot still remains on those 23 acres in Buckhead.

In a true compromise, nobody gets everything they want, but everybody gets something they want. Hopefully, Isakson Living is willing to join with the people in this part of East Cobb in a meaningful compromise that benefits all involved.  Any compromise will involve far fewer units, and an architectural style that fits East Cobb.

I
t's a few months before the zoning hearings, and please help us stay the course by contacting the Commissioners at some point and let them know in your own words how important this area is to us and why we need to protect this area from overdevelopment.

Realistic estimates of the traffic impact of an Isakson Living CCRC in East Cobb

1/6/2014

 
Picture
Here we compare the traffic numbers for a potential subdivision, the questionable Isakson Living traffic study numbers, and some more realistic estimates of the real traffic impact of an Isakson Living CCRC.  Traffic engineers figure the amount of traffic a development would generate by using the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, and we include a chart explaining all the numbers used in calculating the traffic impact.  Isakson Living used the absolute lowest category possible from the ITE manual, and this chart explains why other ITE categories would provide a more precise traffic prediction for this development.

It must be pointed out that Isakson Living's traffic study didn't use the ITE manual's "Continuing Care Retirement Community" or "senior housing attached" traffic numbers.  Rather, they used traffic numbers for "congregate care facility", and "units" rather than "occupied units", which of course use lower multipliers.  Still, even using their "congregate care facility" traffic numbers, the Isakson Living development would create more than twice the traffic of a reasonably sized subdivision would. 

Because of the unusually low number of assisted living units and nursing care units (11% combined) and the high number of independent care units (89%) in the latest Isakson Living CCRC proposal, it seems apparent that the proposed CCRC should be calculated as a "senior housing attached" (also known as senior apartments) development, and those ITE traffic numbers should be used.  Note that in using the "senior housing attached" Isakson Living's traffic impact of their first proposal would generate 3,289 car trips a day.  Why is 3,289 important?  Isakson Living was required to get a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) clearance from the state of Georgia, because the development's impact "is likely to have regional effects beyond the local government jurisdiction in which they are located." In particular, a DRI review was required because the proposal had more than 400 units in an established neighborhood (in fact, both proposals have had more than twice that number of units).  However, Isakson Living got an expedited DRI review because their traffic study showed fewer than 3,000 daily trips (DRI reviews for proposal with more than 3,000 daily trips take longer and are more thorough). The state of Georgia could have had the opportunity to conduct a more thorough review of the Isakson Living plans, had Isakson Living used the "senior housing attached" ITE traffic numbers.

We also wonder why Isakson Living didn't have an independent analysis of a real CCRC community for a more realistic traffic estimate.  Other potential CCRC developers often commission a study of an existing CCRC's traffic to anticipate and plan for a new CCRC's actual traffic impact, and these studies often find traffic is even higher than the ITE traffic numbers.  One example of this is used in the comparison chart. 

Note that the traffic impact for the 'alternative use traffic study' that Isakson Living asserted on page 34 of their first zoning proposal are all highly improbable if not impossible, and  the ITE multipliers used in the traffic analysis are incorrect.  At any rate, any commercial endeavor for the Tritt property would be contested and the zoning rules would be on the side of the surrounding residential neighborhoods based on the Cobb County future land use plan. 

    Picture

    The Concerned Citizens of East Cobb

    The Concerned Citizens of East Cobb represents thousands of East Cobbers who want the 54-acre Tritt property next to East Cobb Park to be fully conserved as a park.

    ​Read more blog posts from this website here,
    and read previous blogs posts from the first CCEastCobb website here.

    Archives

    May 2020
    January 2020
    May 2019
    November 2018
    June 2018
    January 2017
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    November 2015
    September 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    October 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    January 2014

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed