The URL can be used to link to this page

exparteFrom:LynchDiane To:jlw9358@gmail.com Cc:LauraDeJohnVEN; FrenchJames; GrecoSherry; GuitardDonna; CallahanSean; BellowsRay; JenkinsAnita Subject:FW: Senior Housing Development (PL20200001294 - Hacienda Lakes PDI) Date:Thursday, May 13, 2021 3:08:57 PM Attachments:Ord. 13-64.pdf Ord. 08-24.pdf image002.png Mr. Walrath, Thank you for your patience. I understand that you spoke with Jamie French concerning the last part of your email that you were waiting for. Laura DeJohn provided the response below and after I spoke with Jamie French and included the additional information below. My contact information is below if I can be of assistance. Mr. Walrath, There has not been a waiver or an insubstantial change granted for the senior housing operational characteristics within the Hacienda Lakes PUD, to date. As for other examples in the County, Vanderbilt Trust PUD (Ordinance 08-24) was the first to include operational characteristics as part of the zoning approval. Therefore, any senior living facility approved prior to 2008 doesn’t include operational characteristics as part of the zoning approval. You’ll see attached and below that the characteristics applied to Vanderbilt Trust PUD (aka Sandalwood Village) and the Bradford Square PUD (Bradford Square Retirement Community) are like those in the Hacienda Lakes PUD. If operators of these facilities are not following these standards, it would be a Code violation issue. Additional Information There is no restriction to requesting an Amendment to an Ordinance. The request would be reviewed and evaluated by staff before being heard by The Board of County Commissioners. Ordinance 08-24 amended Ordinance of 04-41, which, if you read further, amended older Ordinances. The link below will bring you to the Collier County Clerk site where you can find recorded Ordinances going back to 1969. https://app.collierclerk.com/records-search/bmr-records-search Laura DeJohn, AICP Collier County Growth Management Department Zoning Services (Vendor) 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Desk: (239) 252-5587 laura.dejohn@colliercountyfl.gov Respectfully, Diane Lynch, CSM, CPM Operations Analyst Diane.lynch@colliercountyfl.gov Operations and Regulatory Management Division “We’re committed to your success!” Note: Email Address Has Changed 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Telephone (239) 252-4283 Fax (239) 252-6528 Visit our website at: www.colliercountyfl.gov Upcoming out of office dates: How are we doing? The Operations & Regulatory Management Division wants to hear from you! Please take our online SURVEY. We appreciate your feedback! Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Information contained in this email is subject to verification by the Zoning Manager and/or Planning Director; if this information is being used as a basis for the purchase/lease of a property or as a guide for the design of a project, it is recommended that a Zoning Verification Letter or Zoning Certificate Application is submitted to zoning services. Applications for a Zoning Verification Letter can be found here: http://www.colliergov.net/index.aspx?page=3384. Zoning Certificate applications can be found here: http://www.colliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=50797. From: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Monday, May 10, 2021 12:44 PM To: LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Subject: RE: Senior Housing Development Laura See below. Can you answer Mr. Walrath's question? Thank you… …Rick RICK LOCASTRO Collier County Commissioner District 1 SIGN UP FOR MY NEWSLETTER HERE ! Rick.LoCastro@CollierCountyFL.gov 3299 Tamiami Trl E, Suite 303, Naples FL 34112 Office: (239) 252-8601 Mobile:(239) 777-2452 From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, May 9, 2021 12:56 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development Dear Commissioners In preparation of a NIM on 5/17/2021 I have two questions [below]. For background information: Collier County Ordinance 11-41 mandates Senior Housing Developments to include, among other requirements, the following: 1. The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2. Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3. Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The developer of Allegro at Hacienda Lakes PDI (PL20200001294) has requested the removal of the three requirements noted above. My question is : In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:GrecoSherry To:FrenchJames Cc:GuitardDonna Subject:FW: Senior Housing Development Date:Wednesday, May 12, 2021 9:17:00 AM Jamie, Can you please help Mr. Walrath in preparation of the NIM next week see below? If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 6:34 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Thanks, but as I noted in my request I was seeking the answer to my questions so that I can prepare for the NIM on 5/17/2021. If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for your assistance. Jerry L. Walrath (239) 732-1356 On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 3:38 PM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good afternoon, I spoke with Jamie French and I believe he will address most of your questions at the NIM. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 12:24 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Sherry Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good morning, We have contacted senior staff and received some information on your concerns/questions: “Please know that the underlying zoning and use was approved for this type of facility within the PUD in 2011. As stated below, the petitioner is seeking an insubstantial change to eliminate the requirement for an emergency call button in each room, providing and supporting in house dining areas, and transportation services (shuttle). The developer did not seek, nor was granted any additional incentives or density for affordable housing and they have elected to move up their age restriction from the 55 years or older that they were originally approved for in 2011 to 62 years or older. Staff attended a neighborhood meeting in Hacienda Lakes with Commissioner LoCastro last Tuesday where it was explained to the residents that this would appear before the hearing examiner at a public meeting for consideration and that the senior housing use had already been approved in 2011 before the Hacienda Lakes Community was developed. We spoke with the petitioners design professional about setback and landscaping buffer comments from the community meeting after the meeting. The official neighborhood information meeting (NIM) by the portioner is scheduled for Monday evening (5/17) and staff will be in attendance at that meeting.” I hope this helps answer your questions or concerns. Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 6:47 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Collier County Commissioners It is my understanding that the developer of the proposed senior residential facility to be constructed on Rattlesnake-Hammock has requested the removal of certain mandatory requirements for said construction. The purpose of this communication is to note my opposition to removal of 50% of mandatory requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41, Exhibit A. The minimum requirements are[1]: 1) The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2) Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3) There shall be an onsite manager /activities coordinator to assist residents, who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; 4) An on -site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents. 5) Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The requirements are clear, unambiguous, and do not lend themselves to arbitrary interpretation. In each case the word SHALL is the operative word. SHALL is obligatory, mandatory, and compulsory. It does not mean MAYBE; Not PERHAPS; nor does it include IF CONVENIENT. The very word SHALL excludes the notion or idea of discretion. The Applicant is committed to providing a senior housing development that caters to the concept of aging in place.[2] The concept of aging in place is not compatible with the Applicant’s present request to gut the minimum requirements as set forth in the Ordinance for senior housing care. It is my understanding that the developer/applicant of the senior housing development has requested 3 of the 6 mandatory requirements be removed; that they are insubstantial changes[3] The Applicant’s request for removal of mandatory requirements as being insubstantial is troubling. In fact, said removal lowers the bar for future senior development. It may well be the first step in a slippery slope; a precedent, if you will. Will the next request go further and eliminate on site wellness facility to reduce costs and increase affordability?[4] OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF REQUIREMENTS Remove: There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on-site, or catered.” Resident centered dining makes it more likely that residents will have more healthy lives[5]. Moreover it provides and maintains social contact. Socializing is important mental well being as we age. Resident-centered food service is an essential part of the culture change movement. Even though independent in many ways, for various medical reasons, not all seniors are capable of driving. Neither are all able to walk to the nearest restaurant. Depending on the distance from the residence to Rattlesnake-Hammock, the distance to the nearest grocery, including return may be more than 1 mile. Remove: “Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits.” Group transportation services are essential for seniors. By 2030, it is projected that 8.7 million Americans will be age 85 and over, and a substantial portion of them will no longer drive.[6] Ground transportation is particularly important in a senior residential setting. Next to health, transportation is the most important issue for seniors.[7] In areas where public transportation is less efficient, it can end up taking much longer to reach the destination than it would by car. Also, depending on the level of mobility, making it to the nearest bus stop in the first place may be difficult to impossible. Imagine just one resident, able to ambulate without the aid of a walker, walking to Publix for groceries. Further, consider the following vision and driving facts:[8] Vision provides about 85% of information we need to make safe decisions when driving. A 60-year-old requires 10 times as much light to drive as a 19- year-old. A 55-year-old takes eight times longer to recover from glare than a 16-year-old. Older drivers can take twice as long to distinguish the flash of brake lights as younger drivers. Remove: “Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency.” The developer or its agent is requesting removal of minimum standards to achieve affordability of the project. In the case of removal of devices to notify emergency service, the applicant asserts “The Applicant can provide cost-effective safety measures that will uphold the intent of this condition, but without the associated cost.” However, the applicant has failed to produce details as to how or what those safety measures are. CONCLUSION Throughout the applicant’s request to eliminate 50% of the minimum requirements of Ordinance 11-41 as it pertains to senior housing, much of its argument is based on cost and affordability. What is the Applicant’s concern? Is it the cost of development by the Applicant or the affordability for the proposed senior residents? May I suggest that market forces determine what seniors are willing to pay for retirement living. For the reasons set forth above, I respectfully urge you to deny the applicant’s request to remove the mandatory requirements. Respectfully, Jerry L. Walrath, Esq. 8905 Redonda Dr. Naples, 34114 [1] Exhibit A, Ordinance 11-41 [2] 9/15/2020 correspondence from Waldrop Engineering to James Sabo page 4 of 8 [3] ibid [4] Submittal 2 - Revised Request Narrative, pages 2,3,&8 [5] https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com [6] https://www.aarp.org › transportation › info-06-2011 [7] https://www.seniorliving.org/ [8] ibid Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:GrecoSherry To:FrenchJames Subject:FW: Senior Housing Development Date:Monday, May 10, 2021 2:49:00 PM Good afternoon, Jamie for your review and please respond to our office. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Monday, May 10, 2021 10:09 AM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Fwd: Senior Housing Development Please forward to Jamie for his review and response. Penny Taylor Board of Collier County Commissioners Commissioner, District 4 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL. 34112 Office (239) 252-8604 Fax (239) 252-6393 Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov Begin forwarded message: From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Date: May 9, 2021 at 12:56:36 PM EDT To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>, SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>, SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>, TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>, McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Dear Commissioners In preparation of a NIM on 5/17/2021 I have two questions [below]. For background information: Collier County Ordinance 11-41 mandates Senior Housing Developments to include, among other requirements, the following: 1. The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2. Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3. Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The developer of Allegro at Hacienda Lakes PDI (PL20200001294) has requested the removal of the three requirements noted above. My question is : In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:TaylorPenny To:GrecoSherry Subject:Fwd: Senior Housing Development Date:Monday, May 10, 2021 10:08:43 AM Please forward to Jamie for his review and response. Penny Taylor Board of Collier County Commissioners Commissioner, District 4 3299 Tamiami Trail East, Suite 303 Naples, FL. 34112 Office (239) 252-8604 Fax (239) 252-6393 Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov Begin forwarded message: From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Date: May 9, 2021 at 12:56:36 PM EDT To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>, SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>, SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>, TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>, McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Dear Commissioners In preparation of a NIM on 5/17/2021 I have two questions [below]. For background information: Collier County Ordinance 11-41 mandates Senior Housing Developments to include, among other requirements, the following: 1. The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2. Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3. Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The developer of Allegro at Hacienda Lakes PDI (PL20200001294) has requested the removal of the three requirements noted above. My question is : In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:Daniel Katz To:LoCastroRick; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Subject:Hacienda Lakes Senior Housing Development Date:Monday, May 10, 2021 10:30:08 AM EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Dear Collier County Commissioners, My name is Dan Katz. I recently semi-retired after a 37 year career in senior living which included independent housing, assisted living and long term care. I moved to Azure at Hacienda Lakes two years ago. I understand that an application has been submitted by a developer to construct a residential senior housing project within the Hacienda Lakes Development District. The purpose of my communication is to express my opposition to the removal of many of the mandatory service requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41. The mandatory requirements which are requested to be removed include on- site dining facilities, group transportation and an emergency call system within each apartment. In my many years of experience with developing and managing senior living communities, I’ve learned that creating an attractive living residence is just part of the elements of success with senior living. The other part, which is equally important, are the services provided within the senior housing which enable elders to have the support they need to live with dignity. While the minimum age requirement may be 62 years, my experience with the likely move-in age is much older as seniors are living much longer and prefer to stay in their own homes for as long as possible. The average age of residents in senior housing nationwide is currently in the 80’s. Successful aging after move-in requires many supportive services. On-site dining enables residents to maintain a healthy diet and to socialize with other residents. Transportation services provides residents with the means to take care of many of the activities of daily living which we take for granted as they give up driving due to sight and other physical limitations. Also, medical and physical conditions frequently result in accidents in the apartment, so the ability to summon help to assess the situation and call emergency services is mandatory. I have found that successful and affordable senior housing are usually sponsored by non-profit organizations which have substantial senior living development and management experience. These organizations also have the ability to access tax exempt financing which lowers borrowing costs so operating funds can be a larger part of the pie. Generally, very few for-profit developers are able to achieve the ROI required by investors due to higher financing costs. Non-profit organizations also have the ability to fundraise and access grants which can support the higher operating costs of senor housing. Finally, it’s not difficult to conclude that the request to remove critical services is an attempt by the developer to lower building and operating costs at the expense of the quality of life of its future residents. For the reasons as stated above, I respectfully urge you to deny the developer’s request to remove these services. Sincerely, Daniel Katz 8888 Redonda Drive Naples, FL 34114 From:GrecoSherry To:TrochessettAimee Subject:Highlighted May 11, 2021 Agenda Date:Monday, May 10, 2021 3:17:00 PM Attachments:May 11 2021 BCC Agenda Index.docx Updated as of 3:01 pm. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From:LoCastroRick To:jw; LynchDiane Cc:LauraDeJohnVEN; FrenchJames; GrecoSherry; GuitardDonna; CallahanSean; BellowsRay; JenkinsAnita Subject:RE: FW: Senior Housing Development (PL20200001294 - Hacienda Lakes PDI) Date:Friday, May 14, 2021 11:19:59 AM Attachments:image015.png image019.png Thank you Diane, Laura & All! …Rick RICK LOCASTRO Collier County Commissioner District 1 SIGN UP FOR MY NEWSLETTER HERE ! Rick.LoCastro@CollierCountyFL.gov 3299 Tamiami Trl E, Suite 303, Naples FL 34112 Office: (239) 252-8601 Mobile:(239) 777-2452 From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2021 3:46 PM To: LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov>; FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov>; GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov>; GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov>; CallahanSean <Sean.Callahan@colliercountyfl.gov>; BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; JenkinsAnita <Anita.Jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov>; LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: FW: Senior Housing Development (PL20200001294 - Hacienda Lakes PDI) EXTERNAL EMAIL:This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. To each of you who have taken the time to either answer my questions or directed them to others. The responses I have received have been extremely helpful as well as educational. Thank you so much. Sincerely, Jerry L. Walrath On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 3:09 PM LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Mr. Walrath, Thank you for your patience. I understand that you spoke with Jamie French concerning the last part of your email that you were waiting for. Laura DeJohn provided the response below and after I spoke with Jamie French and included the additional information below. My contact information is below if I can be of assistance. Mr. Walrath, There has not been a waiver or an insubstantial change granted for the senior housing operational characteristics within the Hacienda Lakes PUD, to date. As for other examples in the County, Vanderbilt Trust PUD (Ordinance 08-24) was the first to include operational characteristics as part of the zoning approval. Therefore, any senior living facility approved prior to 2008 doesn’t include operational characteristics as part of the zoning approval. You’ll see attached and below that the characteristics applied to Vanderbilt Trust PUD (aka Sandalwood Village) and the Bradford Square PUD (Bradford Square Retirement Community) are like those in the Hacienda Lakes PUD. If operators of these facilities are not following these standards, it would be a Code violation issue. Additional Information There is no restriction to requesting an Amendment to an Ordinance. The request would be reviewed and evaluated by staff before being heard by The Board of County Commissioners. Ordinance 08-24 amended Ordinance of 04-41, which, if you read further, amended older Ordinances. The link below will bring you to the Collier County Clerk site where you can find recorded Ordinances going back to 1969. https://app.collierclerk.com/records-search/bmr-records-search Laura DeJohn, AICP Collier County Growth Management Department Zoning Services (Vendor) 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Desk: (239) 252-5587 laura.dejohn@colliercountyfl.gov Respectfully, Diane Lynch, CSM, CPM Operations Analyst Diane.lynch@colliercountyfl.gov Operations and Regulatory Management Division “We’re committed to your success!” Note: Email Address Has Changed 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Telephone (239) 252-4283 Fax (239) 252-6528 Visit our website at: www.colliercountyfl.gov Upcoming out of office dates: How are we doing? The Operations & Regulatory Management Division wants to hear from you! Please take our online SURVEY. We appreciate your feedback! Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Information contained in this email is subject to verification by the Zoning Manager and/or Planning Director; if this information is being used as a basis for the purchase/lease of a property or as a guide for the design of a project, it is recommended that a Zoning Verification Letter or Zoning Certificate Application is submitted to zoning services. Applications for a Zoning Verification Letter can be found here:http://www.colliergov.net/index.aspx?page=3384. Zoning Certificate applications can be found here: http://www.colliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=50797. From: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Monday, May 10, 2021 12:44 PM To: LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Subject: RE: Senior Housing Development Laura See below. Can you answer Mr. Walrath's question? Thank you… …Rick RICK LOCASTRO Collier County Commissioner District 1 SIGN UP FOR MY NEWSLETTER HERE ! Rick.LoCastro@CollierCountyFL.gov 3299 Tamiami Trl E, Suite 303, Naples FL 34112 Office: (239) 252-8601 Mobile:(239) 777-2452 From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, May 9, 2021 12:56 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development Dear Commissioners In preparation of a NIM on 5/17/2021 I have two questions [below]. For background information: Collier County Ordinance 11-41 mandates Senior Housing Developments to include, among other requirements, the following: 1. The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2. Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3. Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The developer of Allegro at Hacienda Lakes PDI (PL20200001294) has requested the removal of the three requirements noted above. My question is : In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:GrecoSherry To:"jw" Subject:RE: FW: Senior Housing Development (PL20200001294 - Hacienda Lakes PDI) Date:Friday, May 14, 2021 8:43:00 AM Attachments:image005.png Your welcome. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2021 3:46 PM To: LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov>; FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov>; GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov>; GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov>; CallahanSean <Sean.Callahan@colliercountyfl.gov>; BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; JenkinsAnita <Anita.Jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov>; LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: FW: Senior Housing Development (PL20200001294 - Hacienda Lakes PDI) EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. To each of you who have taken the time to either answer my questions or directed them to others. The responses I have received have been extremely helpful as well as educational. Thank you so much. Sincerely, Jerry L. Walrath On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 3:09 PM LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Mr. Walrath, Thank you for your patience. I understand that you spoke with Jamie French concerning the last part of your email that you were waiting for. Laura DeJohn provided the response below and after I spoke with Jamie French and included the additional information below. My contact information is below if I can be of assistance. Mr. Walrath, There has not been a waiver or an insubstantial change granted for the senior housing operational characteristics within the Hacienda Lakes PUD, to date. As for other examples in the County, Vanderbilt Trust PUD (Ordinance 08-24) was the first to include operational characteristics as part of the zoning approval. Therefore, any senior living facility approved prior to 2008 doesn’t include operational characteristics as part of the zoning approval. You’ll see attached and below that the characteristics applied to Vanderbilt Trust PUD (aka Sandalwood Village) and the Bradford Square PUD (Bradford Square Retirement Community) are like those in the Hacienda Lakes PUD. If operators of these facilities are not following these standards, it would be a Code violation issue. Additional Information There is no restriction to requesting an Amendment to an Ordinance. The request would be reviewed and evaluated by staff before being heard by The Board of County Commissioners. Ordinance 08-24 amended Ordinance of 04-41, which, if you read further, amended older Ordinances. The link below will bring you to the Collier County Clerk site where you can find recorded Ordinances going back to 1969. https://app.collierclerk.com/records-search/bmr-records-search Laura DeJohn, AICP Collier County Growth Management Department Zoning Services (Vendor) 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Desk: (239) 252-5587 laura.dejohn@colliercountyfl.gov Respectfully, Diane Lynch, CSM, CPM Operations Analyst Diane.lynch@colliercountyfl.gov Operations and Regulatory Management Division “We’re committed to your success!” Note: Email Address Has Changed 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Telephone (239) 252-4283 Fax (239) 252-6528 Visit our website at: www.colliercountyfl.gov Upcoming out of office dates: How are we doing? The Operations & Regulatory Management Division wants to hear from you! Please take our online SURVEY. We appreciate your feedback! Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Information contained in this email is subject to verification by the Zoning Manager and/or Planning Director; if this information is being used as a basis for the purchase/lease of a property or as a guide for the design of a project, it is recommended that a Zoning Verification Letter or Zoning Certificate Application is submitted to zoning services. Applications for a Zoning Verification Letter can be found here:http://www.colliergov.net/index.aspx?page=3384. Zoning Certificate applications can be found here: http://www.colliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=50797. From: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Monday, May 10, 2021 12:44 PM To: LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Subject: RE: Senior Housing Development Laura See below. Can you answer Mr. Walrath's question? Thank you… …Rick RICK LOCASTRO Collier County Commissioner District 1 SIGN UP FOR MY NEWSLETTER HERE ! Rick.LoCastro@CollierCountyFL.gov 3299 Tamiami Trl E, Suite 303, Naples FL 34112 Office: (239) 252-8601 Mobile:(239) 777-2452 From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, May 9, 2021 12:56 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development Dear Commissioners In preparation of a NIM on 5/17/2021 I have two questions [below]. For background information: Collier County Ordinance 11-41 mandates Senior Housing Developments to include, among other requirements, the following: 1. The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2. Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3. Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The developer of Allegro at Hacienda Lakes PDI (PL20200001294) has requested the removal of the three requirements noted above. My question is : In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:LoCastroRick To:jw; LynchDiane Cc:LauraDeJohnVEN; FrenchJames; GrecoSherry; GuitardDonna; CallahanSean; BellowsRay; JenkinsAnita Subject:RE: FW: Senior Housing Development (PL20200001294 - Hacienda Lakes PDI) Date:Friday, May 14, 2021 11:19:59 AM Attachments:image015.png image019.png Thank you Diane, Laura & All! …Rick RICK LOCASTRO Collier County Commissioner District 1 SIGN UP FOR MY NEWSLETTER HERE ! Rick.LoCastro@CollierCountyFL.gov 3299 Tamiami Trl E, Suite 303, Naples FL 34112 Office: (239) 252-8601 Mobile:(239) 777-2452 From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2021 3:46 PM To: LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov>; FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov>; GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov>; GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov>; CallahanSean <Sean.Callahan@colliercountyfl.gov>; BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; JenkinsAnita <Anita.Jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov>; LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: FW: Senior Housing Development (PL20200001294 - Hacienda Lakes PDI) EXTERNAL EMAIL:This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. To each of you who have taken the time to either answer my questions or directed them to others. The responses I have received have been extremely helpful as well as educational. Thank you so much. Sincerely, Jerry L. Walrath On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 3:09 PM LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Mr. Walrath, Thank you for your patience. I understand that you spoke with Jamie French concerning the last part of your email that you were waiting for. Laura DeJohn provided the response below and after I spoke with Jamie French and included the additional information below. My contact information is below if I can be of assistance. Mr. Walrath, There has not been a waiver or an insubstantial change granted for the senior housing operational characteristics within the Hacienda Lakes PUD, to date. As for other examples in the County, Vanderbilt Trust PUD (Ordinance 08-24) was the first to include operational characteristics as part of the zoning approval. Therefore, any senior living facility approved prior to 2008 doesn’t include operational characteristics as part of the zoning approval. You’ll see attached and below that the characteristics applied to Vanderbilt Trust PUD (aka Sandalwood Village) and the Bradford Square PUD (Bradford Square Retirement Community) are like those in the Hacienda Lakes PUD. If operators of these facilities are not following these standards, it would be a Code violation issue. Additional Information There is no restriction to requesting an Amendment to an Ordinance. The request would be reviewed and evaluated by staff before being heard by The Board of County Commissioners. Ordinance 08-24 amended Ordinance of 04-41, which, if you read further, amended older Ordinances. The link below will bring you to the Collier County Clerk site where you can find recorded Ordinances going back to 1969. https://app.collierclerk.com/records-search/bmr-records-search Laura DeJohn, AICP Collier County Growth Management Department Zoning Services (Vendor) 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Desk: (239) 252-5587 laura.dejohn@colliercountyfl.gov Respectfully, Diane Lynch, CSM, CPM Operations Analyst Diane.lynch@colliercountyfl.gov Operations and Regulatory Management Division “We’re committed to your success!” Note: Email Address Has Changed 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Telephone (239) 252-4283 Fax (239) 252-6528 Visit our website at: www.colliercountyfl.gov Upcoming out of office dates: How are we doing? The Operations & Regulatory Management Division wants to hear from you! Please take our online SURVEY. We appreciate your feedback! Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. Information contained in this email is subject to verification by the Zoning Manager and/or Planning Director; if this information is being used as a basis for the purchase/lease of a property or as a guide for the design of a project, it is recommended that a Zoning Verification Letter or Zoning Certificate Application is submitted to zoning services. Applications for a Zoning Verification Letter can be found here:http://www.colliergov.net/index.aspx?page=3384. Zoning Certificate applications can be found here: http://www.colliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=50797. From: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Monday, May 10, 2021 12:44 PM To: LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Subject: RE: Senior Housing Development Laura See below. Can you answer Mr. Walrath's question? Thank you… …Rick RICK LOCASTRO Collier County Commissioner District 1 SIGN UP FOR MY NEWSLETTER HERE ! Rick.LoCastro@CollierCountyFL.gov 3299 Tamiami Trl E, Suite 303, Naples FL 34112 Office: (239) 252-8601 Mobile:(239) 777-2452 From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, May 9, 2021 12:56 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development Dear Commissioners In preparation of a NIM on 5/17/2021 I have two questions [below]. For background information: Collier County Ordinance 11-41 mandates Senior Housing Developments to include, among other requirements, the following: 1. The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2. Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3. Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The developer of Allegro at Hacienda Lakes PDI (PL20200001294) has requested the removal of the three requirements noted above. My question is : In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:Daniel Katz To:LoCastroRick Cc:SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Subject:Re: Hacienda Lakes Senior Housing Development Date:Thursday, May 20, 2021 12:40:47 PM Attachments:Senior Housing Haciernda Lakes May 2021.pdf ATT00001.htm EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Commissioner Locastro: Thank you for your response to my May 10th email. On May 17th I attended the NIM hosted by the applicant. After the applicant (McDowell) presentation, I provided the enclosed testimony. Some highlights are as follows: "In my many years of experience with developing and managing senior living communities, I’ve learned that creating an attractive living residence is just part of the elements of success with senior living. The other part, which is equally important, are the services provided within the senior housing which enable elders to have the support they need to live with dignity." "While the minimum age requirement may be 62 years, my experience with the likely move- in age is much older as seniors are living much longer and prefer to stay in their own homes for as long as possible. The average age of residents in senior housing nationwide is currently in the 80’s”. "What happens to some elders in their 80’s is they have more challenges with activities of daily living. For example, eyesight may not be as good so they could stop driving. It might become harder to stand for long periods of time, so shopping & cooking becomes more challenging. Balance while walking can be challenging, so falls may be more frequent”. "So successful aging after move-in requires many supportive services. On-site dining enables residents to obtain at least one nutritious meal a day and to socialize with other residents. Transportation services provides residents with the means to take care of many of the activities of daily living which we take for granted as they give up driving due to sight and other physical limitations. Also, medical, physical and cognitive conditions frequently result in accidents in the apartment, so the ability to summon help to assess the situation and call emergency services is mandatory”. "I have found that successful and affordable senior housing are usually sponsored by non- profit organizations which have substantial senior living development and management experience. These organizations also have the ability to access tax exempt financing which lowers borrowing costs so operating funds can be a larger part of the pie”. "If I’ve read your development application correctly, it looks like McDowell Acquisitions LLC is to develop and build the building for about 4 million, which is extremely high.” (Almost one quarter of the building cost) "Then it becomes the role of CORE MRP of Collier to provide permanent financing with tax exempt bonds and then provide management services after opening. CORE stands for National Community Renaissance of California”. "McDowell lists 7 apartment buildings in California as their development experience which are now managed by CORE. Of the 7, only one is exclusively for seniors. The rest are just low income housing”. "CORE is a very large non-profit affordable housing company with many low income affordable housing apartments across the country. Very few are exclusively for Senior Housing. The rest are low income housing for low income people”. During McDowell's presentation, they never mentioned that they will not be managing the senior housing after opening. They also never mentioned the role of CORE as providing long- term, tax exempt financing and managing the project after opening. These two facts are very important when evaluating the competence of the developer and future management for senior housing. Here’s the bottom line: 1. Removal of requested mandatory service requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41 will result in harm to the future residents of proposed senior housing. 2. Neither McDowell nor CORE have substantial experience developing and/or managing senior housing which adds further risk of harm to it’s future residents. it’s not difficult to conclude that the request to remove critical services is an attempt by the developer to lower building and operating costs at the expense of the quality of life of its future residents. For the reasons as stated above, I respectfully urge you to deny the developer’s request to remove these services. Sincerely, Daniel Katz 8888 Redonda Drive Naples, Florida From:GrecoSherry To:LynchDiane Subject:Re: Senior Housing Development Date:Thursday, May 13, 2021 3:43:40 PM Thank you. Sherry Greco Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor (239) 252-8604 On May 13, 2021, at 2:27 PM, LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Based on the conversation I had with Jamie yesterday, I believe the part of his email that Mr Walrath is waiting for is the information that Laura provided. It’s with Jamie and I’m just waiting for Jamie to get back to me. Diane From: LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2021 2:22 PM To: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov>; GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov>; LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov>; CallahanSean <Sean.Callahan@colliercountyfl.gov>; BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; JenkinsAnita <Anita.Jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE: Senior Housing Development Mr. Walrath noted he did not receive an answer to his original question. The system of me crafting and response, sending it to Diane for “AIMS” purposes, does not seem to be working. Should I be answering these inquiries directly to keep communication more efficient? Laura DeJohn, AICP Collier County Growth Management Department Zoning Services (Vendor) 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Desk: (239) 252-5587 laura.dejohn@colliercountyfl.gov From: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 3:23 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov>; LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov>; CallahanSean <Sean.Callahan@colliercountyfl.gov>; BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; JenkinsAnita <Anita.Jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov>; LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE: Senior Housing Development Hi Sherry, I spoke with Mr. Walrath today, he was appreciative of the call. Diane Lynch will be providing him with some additional research information but I was able to answer his questions during our conversation. Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns. Thank you Respectfully, Jamie James C. French, Deputy Department Head Growth Management Department, Collier County Government Main (239) 252-2400 Office (239) 252-5717 Email james.french@colliercountyfl.gov 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 colliercountyfl.gov From: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 9:18 AM To: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: FW: Senior Housing Development Jamie, Can you please help Mr. Walrath in preparation of the NIM next week see below? If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 6:34 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Thanks, but as I noted in my request I was seeking the answer to my questions so that I can prepare for the NIM on 5/17/2021. If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for your assistance. Jerry L. Walrath (239) 732-1356 On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 3:38 PM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good afternoon, I spoke with Jamie French and I believe he will address most of your questions at the NIM. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 12:24 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Sherry Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good morning, We have contacted senior staff and received some information on your concerns/questions: “Please know that the underlying zoning and use was approved for this type of facility within the PUD in 2011. As stated below, the petitioner is seeking an insubstantial change to eliminate the requirement for an emergency call button in each room, providing and supporting in house dining areas, and transportation services (shuttle). The developer did not seek, nor was granted any additional incentives or density for affordable housing and they have elected to move up their age restriction from the 55 years or older that they were originally approved for in 2011 to 62 years or older. Staff attended a neighborhood meeting in Hacienda Lakes with Commissioner LoCastro last Tuesday where it was explained to the residents that this would appear before the hearing examiner at a public meeting for consideration and that the senior housing use had already been approved in 2011 before the Hacienda Lakes Community was developed. We spoke with the petitioners design professional about setback and landscaping buffer comments from the community meeting after the meeting. The official neighborhood information meeting (NIM) by the portioner is scheduled for Monday evening (5/17) and staff will be in attendance at that meeting.” I hope this helps answer your questions or concerns. Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 6:47 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Collier County Commissioners It is my understanding that the developer of the proposed senior residential facility to be constructed on Rattlesnake- Hammock has requested the removal of certain mandatory requirements for said construction. The purpose of this communication is to note my opposition to removal of 50% of mandatory requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41, Exhibit A. The minimum requirements are[1]: 1) The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2) Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3) There shall be an onsite manager /activities coordinator to assist residents, who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; 4) An on -site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents. 5) Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The requirements are clear, unambiguous, and do not lend themselves to arbitrary interpretation. In each case the word SHALL is the operative word. SHALL is obligatory, mandatory, and compulsory. It does not mean MAYBE; Not PERHAPS; nor does it include IF CONVENIENT. The very word SHALL excludes the notion or idea of discretion. The Applicant is committed to providing a senior housing development that caters to the concept of aging in place.[2] The concept of aging in place is not compatible with the Applicant’s present request to gut the minimum requirements as set forth in the Ordinance for senior housing care. It is my understanding that the developer/applicant of the senior housing development has requested 3 of the 6 mandatory requirements be removed; that they are insubstantial changes[3] The Applicant’s request for removal of mandatory requirements as being insubstantial is troubling. In fact, said removal lowers the bar for future senior development. It may well be the first step in a slippery slope; a precedent, if you will. Will the next request go further and eliminate on site wellness facility to reduce costs and increase affordability?[4] OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF REQUIREMENTS Remove: There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on-site, or catered.” Resident centered dining makes it more likely that residents will have more healthy lives[5]. Moreover it provides and maintains social contact. Socializing is important mental well being as we age. Resident-centered food service is an essential part of the culture change movement. Even though independent in many ways, for various medical reasons, not all seniors are capable of driving. Neither are all able to walk to the nearest restaurant. Depending on the distance from the residence to Rattlesnake-Hammock, the distance to the nearest grocery, including return may be more than 1 mile. Remove: “Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits.” Group transportation services are essential for seniors. By 2030, it is projected that 8.7 million Americans will be age 85 and over, and a substantial portion of them will no longer drive.[6] Ground transportation is particularly important in a senior residential setting. Next to health, transportation is the most important issue for seniors.[7] In areas where public transportation is less efficient, it can end up taking much longer to reach the destination than it would by car. Also, depending on the level of mobility, making it to the nearest bus stop in the first place may be difficult to impossible. Imagine just one resident, able to ambulate without the aid of a walker, walking to Publix for groceries. Further, consider the following vision and driving facts:[8] Vision provides about 85% of information we need to make safe decisions when driving. A 60-year-old requires 10 times as much light to drive as a 19-year-old. A 55-year-old takes eight times longer to recover from glare than a 16-year-old. Older drivers can take twice as long to distinguish the flash of brake lights as younger drivers. Remove: “Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency.” The developer or its agent is requesting removal of minimum standards to achieve affordability of the project. In the case of removal of devices to notify emergency service, the applicant asserts “The Applicant can provide cost-effective safety measures that will uphold the intent of this condition, but without the associated cost.” However, the applicant has failed to produce details as to how or what those safety measures are. CONCLUSION Throughout the applicant’s request to eliminate 50% of the minimum requirements of Ordinance 11-41 as it pertains to senior housing, much of its argument is based on cost and affordability. What is the Applicant’s concern? Is it the cost of development by the Applicant or the affordability for the proposed senior residents? May I suggest that market forces determine what seniors are willing to pay for retirement living. For the reasons set forth above, I respectfully urge you to deny the applicant’s request to remove the mandatory requirements. Respectfully, Jerry L. Walrath, Esq. 8905 Redonda Dr. Naples, 34114 [1] Exhibit A, Ordinance 11-41 [2] 9/15/2020 correspondence from Waldrop Engineering to James Sabo page 4 of 8 [3] ibid [4] Submittal 2 - Revised Request Narrative, pages 2,3,&8 [5] https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com [6] https://www.aarp.org › transportation › info-06-2011 [7] https://www.seniorliving.org/ [8] ibid Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:jw To:GrecoSherry Cc:LoCastroRick Subject:Re: Senior Housing Development Date:Tuesday, May 11, 2021 12:25:07 PM EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Sherry Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good morning, We have contacted senior staff and received some information on your concerns/questions: “Please know that the underlying zoning and use was approved for this type of facility within the PUD in 2011. As stated below, the petitioner is seeking an insubstantial change to eliminate the requirement for an emergency call button in each room, providing and supporting in house dining areas, and transportation services (shuttle). The developer did not seek, nor was granted any additional incentives or density for affordable housing and they have elected to move up their age restriction from the 55 years or older that they were originally approved for in 2011 to 62 years or older. Staff attended a neighborhood meeting in Hacienda Lakes with Commissioner LoCastro last Tuesday where it was explained to the residents that this would appear before the hearing examiner at a public meeting for consideration and that the senior housing use had already been approved in 2011 before the Hacienda Lakes Community was developed. We spoke with the petitioners design professional about setback and landscaping buffer comments from the community meeting after the meeting. The official neighborhood information meeting (NIM) by the portioner is scheduled for Monday evening (5/17) and staff will be in attendance at that meeting.” I hope this helps answer your questions or concerns. Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 6:47 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Collier County Commissioners It is my understanding that the developer of the proposed senior residential facility to be constructed on Rattlesnake-Hammock has requested the removal of certain mandatory requirements for said construction. The purpose of this communication is to note my opposition to removal of 50% of mandatory requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41, Exhibit A. The minimum requirements are[1]: 1) The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on - site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2) Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3) There shall be an onsite manager /activities coordinator to assist residents, who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; 4) An on -site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents. 5) Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The requirements are clear, unambiguous, and do not lend themselves to arbitrary interpretation. In each case the word SHALL is the operative word. SHALL is obligatory, mandatory, and compulsory. It does not mean MAYBE; Not PERHAPS; nor does it include IF CONVENIENT. The very word SHALL excludes the notion or idea of discretion. The Applicant is committed to providing a senior housing development that caters to the concept of aging in place.[2] The concept of aging in place is not compatible with the Applicant’s present request to gut the minimum requirements as set forth in the Ordinance for senior housing care. It is my understanding that the developer/applicant of the senior housing development has requested 3 of the 6 mandatory requirements be removed; that they are insubstantial changes[3] The Applicant’s request for removal of mandatory requirements as being insubstantial is troubling. In fact, said removal lowers the bar for future senior development. It may well be the first step in a slippery slope; a precedent, if you will. Will the next request go further and eliminate on site wellness facility to reduce costs and increase affordability?[4] OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF REQUIREMENTS Remove: There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on-site, or catered.” Resident centered dining makes it more likely that residents will have more healthy lives[5]. Moreover it provides and maintains social contact. Socializing is important mental well being as we age. Resident- centered food service is an essential part of the culture change movement. Even though independent in many ways, for various medical reasons, not all seniors are capable of driving. Neither are all able to walk to the nearest restaurant. Depending on the distance from the residence to Rattlesnake-Hammock, the distance to the nearest grocery, including return may be more than 1 mile. Remove: “Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits.” Group transportation services are essential for seniors. By 2030, it is projected that 8.7 million Americans will be age 85 and over, and a substantial portion of them will no longer drive.[6] Ground transportation is particularly important in a senior residential setting. Next to health, transportation is the most important issue for seniors.[7] In areas where public transportation is less efficient, it can end up taking much longer to reach the destination than it would by car. Also, depending on the level of mobility, making it to the nearest bus stop in the first place may be difficult to impossible. Imagine just one resident, able to ambulate without the aid of a walker, walking to Publix for groceries. Further, consider the following vision and driving facts:[8] Vision provides about 85% of information we need to make safe decisions when driving. A 60-year-old requires 10 times as much light to drive as a 19- year-old. A 55-year-old takes eight times longer to recover from glare than a 16-year-old. Older drivers can take twice as long to distinguish the flash of brake lights as younger drivers. Remove: “Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency.” The developer or its agent is requesting removal of minimum standards to achieve affordability of the project. In the case of removal of devices to notify emergency service, the applicant asserts “The Applicant can provide cost-effective safety measures that will uphold the intent of this condition, but without the associated cost.” However, the applicant has failed to produce details as to how or what those safety measures are. CONCLUSION Throughout the applicant’s request to eliminate 50% of the minimum requirements of Ordinance 11-41 as it pertains to senior housing, much of its argument is based on cost and affordability. What is the Applicant’s concern? Is it the cost of development by the Applicant or the affordability for the proposed senior residents? May I suggest that market forces determine what seniors are willing to pay for retirement living. For the reasons set forth above, I respectfully urge you to deny the applicant’s request to remove the mandatory requirements. Respectfully, Jerry L. Walrath, Esq. 8905 Redonda Dr. Naples, 34114 [1] Exhibit A, Ordinance 11-41 [2] 9/15/2020 correspondence from Waldrop Engineering to James Sabo page 4 of 8 [3] ibid [4] Submittal 2 - Revised Request Narrative, pages 2,3,&8 [5] https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com [6] https://www.aarp.org › transportation › info-06-2011 [7] https://www.seniorliving.org/ [8] ibid Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:FrenchJames To:GrecoSherry Cc:GuitardDonna; LynchDiane; CallahanSean; BellowsRay; JenkinsAnita; LauraDeJohnVEN Subject:RE: Senior Housing Development Date:Wednesday, May 12, 2021 3:22:47 PM Hi Sherry, I spoke with Mr. Walrath today, he was appreciative of the call. Diane Lynch will be providing him with some additional research information but I was able to answer his questions during our conversation. Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns. Thank you Respectfully, Jamie James C. French, Deputy Department Head Growth Management Department, Collier County Government Main (239) 252-2400 Office (239) 252-5717 Email james.french@colliercountyfl.gov 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 colliercountyfl.gov From: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 9:18 AM To: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: FW: Senior Housing Development Jamie, Can you please help Mr. Walrath in preparation of the NIM next week see below? If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 6:34 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Thanks, but as I noted in my request I was seeking the answer to my questions so that I can prepare for the NIM on 5/17/2021. If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for your assistance. Jerry L. Walrath (239) 732-1356 On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 3:38 PM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good afternoon, I spoke with Jamie French and I believe he will address most of your questions at the NIM. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 12:24 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Sherry Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good morning, We have contacted senior staff and received some information on your concerns/questions: “Please know that the underlying zoning and use was approved for this type of facility within the PUD in 2011. As stated below, the petitioner is seeking an insubstantial change to eliminate the requirement for an emergency call button in each room, providing and supporting in house dining areas, and transportation services (shuttle). The developer did not seek, nor was granted any additional incentives or density for affordable housing and they have elected to move up their age restriction from the 55 years or older that they were originally approved for in 2011 to 62 years or older. Staff attended a neighborhood meeting in Hacienda Lakes with Commissioner LoCastro last Tuesday where it was explained to the residents that this would appear before the hearing examiner at a public meeting for consideration and that the senior housing use had already been approved in 2011 before the Hacienda Lakes Community was developed. We spoke with the petitioners design professional about setback and landscaping buffer comments from the community meeting after the meeting. The official neighborhood information meeting (NIM) by the portioner is scheduled for Monday evening (5/17) and staff will be in attendance at that meeting.” I hope this helps answer your questions or concerns. Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 6:47 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Collier County Commissioners It is my understanding that the developer of the proposed senior residential facility to be constructed on Rattlesnake-Hammock has requested the removal of certain mandatory requirements for said construction. The purpose of this communication is to note my opposition to removal of 50% of mandatory requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41, Exhibit A. The minimum requirements are[1]: 1) The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2) Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3) There shall be an onsite manager /activities coordinator to assist residents, who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; 4) An on -site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents. 5) Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The requirements are clear, unambiguous, and do not lend themselves to arbitrary interpretation. In each case the word SHALL is the operative word. SHALL is obligatory, mandatory, and compulsory. It does not mean MAYBE; Not PERHAPS; nor does it include IF CONVENIENT. The very word SHALL excludes the notion or idea of discretion. The Applicant is committed to providing a senior housing development that caters to the concept of aging in place.[2] The concept of aging in place is not compatible with the Applicant’s present request to gut the minimum requirements as set forth in the Ordinance for senior housing care. It is my understanding that the developer/applicant of the senior housing development has requested 3 of the 6 mandatory requirements be removed; that they are insubstantial changes[3] The Applicant’s request for removal of mandatory requirements as being insubstantial is troubling. In fact, said removal lowers the bar for future senior development. It may well be the first step in a slippery slope; a precedent, if you will. Will the next request go further and eliminate on site wellness facility to reduce costs and increase affordability?[4] OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF REQUIREMENTS Remove: There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on-site, or catered.” Resident centered dining makes it more likely that residents will have more healthy lives[5]. Moreover it provides and maintains social contact. Socializing is important mental well being as we age. Resident-centered food service is an essential part of the culture change movement. Even though independent in many ways, for various medical reasons, not all seniors are capable of driving. Neither are all able to walk to the nearest restaurant. Depending on the distance from the residence to Rattlesnake-Hammock, the distance to the nearest grocery, including return may be more than 1 mile. Remove: “Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits.” Group transportation services are essential for seniors. By 2030, it is projected that 8.7 million Americans will be age 85 and over, and a substantial portion of them will no longer drive.[6] Ground transportation is particularly important in a senior residential setting. Next to health, transportation is the most important issue for seniors.[7] In areas where public transportation is less efficient, it can end up taking much longer to reach the destination than it would by car. Also, depending on the level of mobility, making it to the nearest bus stop in the first place may be difficult to impossible. Imagine just one resident, able to ambulate without the aid of a walker, walking to Publix for groceries. Further, consider the following vision and driving facts:[8] Vision provides about 85% of information we need to make safe decisions when driving. A 60-year-old requires 10 times as much light to drive as a 19- year-old. A 55-year-old takes eight times longer to recover from glare than a 16-year-old. Older drivers can take twice as long to distinguish the flash of brake lights as younger drivers. Remove: “Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency.” The developer or its agent is requesting removal of minimum standards to achieve affordability of the project. In the case of removal of devices to notify emergency service, the applicant asserts “The Applicant can provide cost-effective safety measures that will uphold the intent of this condition, but without the associated cost.” However, the applicant has failed to produce details as to how or what those safety measures are. CONCLUSION Throughout the applicant’s request to eliminate 50% of the minimum requirements of Ordinance 11-41 as it pertains to senior housing, much of its argument is based on cost and affordability. What is the Applicant’s concern? Is it the cost of development by the Applicant or the affordability for the proposed senior residents? May I suggest that market forces determine what seniors are willing to pay for retirement living. For the reasons set forth above, I respectfully urge you to deny the applicant’s request to remove the mandatory requirements. Respectfully, Jerry L. Walrath, Esq. 8905 Redonda Dr. Naples, 34114 [1] Exhibit A, Ordinance 11-41 [2] 9/15/2020 correspondence from Waldrop Engineering to James Sabo page 4 of 8 [3] ibid [4] Submittal 2 - Revised Request Narrative, pages 2,3,&8 [5] https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com [6] https://www.aarp.org › transportation › info-06-2011 [7] https://www.seniorliving.org/ [8] ibid Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:GrecoSherry To:LynchDiane Subject:Re: Senior Housing Development Date:Thursday, May 13, 2021 3:43:40 PM Thank you. Sherry Greco Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor (239) 252-8604 On May 13, 2021, at 2:27 PM, LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Based on the conversation I had with Jamie yesterday, I believe the part of his email that Mr Walrath is waiting for is the information that Laura provided. It’s with Jamie and I’m just waiting for Jamie to get back to me. Diane From: LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2021 2:22 PM To: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov>; GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov>; LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov>; CallahanSean <Sean.Callahan@colliercountyfl.gov>; BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; JenkinsAnita <Anita.Jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE: Senior Housing Development Mr. Walrath noted he did not receive an answer to his original question. The system of me crafting and response, sending it to Diane for “AIMS” purposes, does not seem to be working. Should I be answering these inquiries directly to keep communication more efficient? Laura DeJohn, AICP Collier County Growth Management Department Zoning Services (Vendor) 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Desk: (239) 252-5587 laura.dejohn@colliercountyfl.gov From: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 3:23 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov>; LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov>; CallahanSean <Sean.Callahan@colliercountyfl.gov>; BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; JenkinsAnita <Anita.Jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov>; LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE: Senior Housing Development Hi Sherry, I spoke with Mr. Walrath today, he was appreciative of the call. Diane Lynch will be providing him with some additional research information but I was able to answer his questions during our conversation. Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns. Thank you Respectfully, Jamie James C. French, Deputy Department Head Growth Management Department, Collier County Government Main (239) 252-2400 Office (239) 252-5717 Email james.french@colliercountyfl.gov 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 colliercountyfl.gov From: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 9:18 AM To: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: FW: Senior Housing Development Jamie, Can you please help Mr. Walrath in preparation of the NIM next week see below? If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 6:34 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Thanks, but as I noted in my request I was seeking the answer to my questions so that I can prepare for the NIM on 5/17/2021. If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for your assistance. Jerry L. Walrath (239) 732-1356 On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 3:38 PM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good afternoon, I spoke with Jamie French and I believe he will address most of your questions at the NIM. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 12:24 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Sherry Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good morning, We have contacted senior staff and received some information on your concerns/questions: “Please know that the underlying zoning and use was approved for this type of facility within the PUD in 2011. As stated below, the petitioner is seeking an insubstantial change to eliminate the requirement for an emergency call button in each room, providing and supporting in house dining areas, and transportation services (shuttle). The developer did not seek, nor was granted any additional incentives or density for affordable housing and they have elected to move up their age restriction from the 55 years or older that they were originally approved for in 2011 to 62 years or older. Staff attended a neighborhood meeting in Hacienda Lakes with Commissioner LoCastro last Tuesday where it was explained to the residents that this would appear before the hearing examiner at a public meeting for consideration and that the senior housing use had already been approved in 2011 before the Hacienda Lakes Community was developed. We spoke with the petitioners design professional about setback and landscaping buffer comments from the community meeting after the meeting. The official neighborhood information meeting (NIM) by the portioner is scheduled for Monday evening (5/17) and staff will be in attendance at that meeting.” I hope this helps answer your questions or concerns. Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 6:47 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Collier County Commissioners It is my understanding that the developer of the proposed senior residential facility to be constructed on Rattlesnake- Hammock has requested the removal of certain mandatory requirements for said construction. The purpose of this communication is to note my opposition to removal of 50% of mandatory requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41, Exhibit A. The minimum requirements are[1]: 1) The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2) Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3) There shall be an onsite manager /activities coordinator to assist residents, who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; 4) An on -site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents. 5) Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The requirements are clear, unambiguous, and do not lend themselves to arbitrary interpretation. In each case the word SHALL is the operative word. SHALL is obligatory, mandatory, and compulsory. It does not mean MAYBE; Not PERHAPS; nor does it include IF CONVENIENT. The very word SHALL excludes the notion or idea of discretion. The Applicant is committed to providing a senior housing development that caters to the concept of aging in place.[2] The concept of aging in place is not compatible with the Applicant’s present request to gut the minimum requirements as set forth in the Ordinance for senior housing care. It is my understanding that the developer/applicant of the senior housing development has requested 3 of the 6 mandatory requirements be removed; that they are insubstantial changes[3] The Applicant’s request for removal of mandatory requirements as being insubstantial is troubling. In fact, said removal lowers the bar for future senior development. It may well be the first step in a slippery slope; a precedent, if you will. Will the next request go further and eliminate on site wellness facility to reduce costs and increase affordability?[4] OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF REQUIREMENTS Remove: There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on-site, or catered.” Resident centered dining makes it more likely that residents will have more healthy lives[5]. Moreover it provides and maintains social contact. Socializing is important mental well being as we age. Resident-centered food service is an essential part of the culture change movement. Even though independent in many ways, for various medical reasons, not all seniors are capable of driving. Neither are all able to walk to the nearest restaurant. Depending on the distance from the residence to Rattlesnake-Hammock, the distance to the nearest grocery, including return may be more than 1 mile. Remove: “Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits.” Group transportation services are essential for seniors. By 2030, it is projected that 8.7 million Americans will be age 85 and over, and a substantial portion of them will no longer drive.[6] Ground transportation is particularly important in a senior residential setting. Next to health, transportation is the most important issue for seniors.[7] In areas where public transportation is less efficient, it can end up taking much longer to reach the destination than it would by car. Also, depending on the level of mobility, making it to the nearest bus stop in the first place may be difficult to impossible. Imagine just one resident, able to ambulate without the aid of a walker, walking to Publix for groceries. Further, consider the following vision and driving facts:[8] Vision provides about 85% of information we need to make safe decisions when driving. A 60-year-old requires 10 times as much light to drive as a 19-year-old. A 55-year-old takes eight times longer to recover from glare than a 16-year-old. Older drivers can take twice as long to distinguish the flash of brake lights as younger drivers. Remove: “Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency.” The developer or its agent is requesting removal of minimum standards to achieve affordability of the project. In the case of removal of devices to notify emergency service, the applicant asserts “The Applicant can provide cost-effective safety measures that will uphold the intent of this condition, but without the associated cost.” However, the applicant has failed to produce details as to how or what those safety measures are. CONCLUSION Throughout the applicant’s request to eliminate 50% of the minimum requirements of Ordinance 11-41 as it pertains to senior housing, much of its argument is based on cost and affordability. What is the Applicant’s concern? Is it the cost of development by the Applicant or the affordability for the proposed senior residents? May I suggest that market forces determine what seniors are willing to pay for retirement living. For the reasons set forth above, I respectfully urge you to deny the applicant’s request to remove the mandatory requirements. Respectfully, Jerry L. Walrath, Esq. 8905 Redonda Dr. Naples, 34114 [1] Exhibit A, Ordinance 11-41 [2] 9/15/2020 correspondence from Waldrop Engineering to James Sabo page 4 of 8 [3] ibid [4] Submittal 2 - Revised Request Narrative, pages 2,3,&8 [5] https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com [6] https://www.aarp.org › transportation › info-06-2011 [7] https://www.seniorliving.org/ [8] ibid Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:FrenchJames To:GrecoSherry Cc:GuitardDonna; LynchDiane; CallahanSean; BellowsRay; JenkinsAnita; LauraDeJohnVEN Subject:RE: Senior Housing Development Date:Wednesday, May 12, 2021 3:22:47 PM Hi Sherry, I spoke with Mr. Walrath today, he was appreciative of the call. Diane Lynch will be providing him with some additional research information but I was able to answer his questions during our conversation. Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns. Thank you Respectfully, Jamie James C. French, Deputy Department Head Growth Management Department, Collier County Government Main (239) 252-2400 Office (239) 252-5717 Email james.french@colliercountyfl.gov 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 colliercountyfl.gov From: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 9:18 AM To: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: FW: Senior Housing Development Jamie, Can you please help Mr. Walrath in preparation of the NIM next week see below? If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 6:34 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Thanks, but as I noted in my request I was seeking the answer to my questions so that I can prepare for the NIM on 5/17/2021. If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for your assistance. Jerry L. Walrath (239) 732-1356 On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 3:38 PM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good afternoon, I spoke with Jamie French and I believe he will address most of your questions at the NIM. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 12:24 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Sherry Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good morning, We have contacted senior staff and received some information on your concerns/questions: “Please know that the underlying zoning and use was approved for this type of facility within the PUD in 2011. As stated below, the petitioner is seeking an insubstantial change to eliminate the requirement for an emergency call button in each room, providing and supporting in house dining areas, and transportation services (shuttle). The developer did not seek, nor was granted any additional incentives or density for affordable housing and they have elected to move up their age restriction from the 55 years or older that they were originally approved for in 2011 to 62 years or older. Staff attended a neighborhood meeting in Hacienda Lakes with Commissioner LoCastro last Tuesday where it was explained to the residents that this would appear before the hearing examiner at a public meeting for consideration and that the senior housing use had already been approved in 2011 before the Hacienda Lakes Community was developed. We spoke with the petitioners design professional about setback and landscaping buffer comments from the community meeting after the meeting. The official neighborhood information meeting (NIM) by the portioner is scheduled for Monday evening (5/17) and staff will be in attendance at that meeting.” I hope this helps answer your questions or concerns. Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 6:47 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Collier County Commissioners It is my understanding that the developer of the proposed senior residential facility to be constructed on Rattlesnake-Hammock has requested the removal of certain mandatory requirements for said construction. The purpose of this communication is to note my opposition to removal of 50% of mandatory requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41, Exhibit A. The minimum requirements are[1]: 1) The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2) Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3) There shall be an onsite manager /activities coordinator to assist residents, who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; 4) An on -site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents. 5) Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The requirements are clear, unambiguous, and do not lend themselves to arbitrary interpretation. In each case the word SHALL is the operative word. SHALL is obligatory, mandatory, and compulsory. It does not mean MAYBE; Not PERHAPS; nor does it include IF CONVENIENT. The very word SHALL excludes the notion or idea of discretion. The Applicant is committed to providing a senior housing development that caters to the concept of aging in place.[2] The concept of aging in place is not compatible with the Applicant’s present request to gut the minimum requirements as set forth in the Ordinance for senior housing care. It is my understanding that the developer/applicant of the senior housing development has requested 3 of the 6 mandatory requirements be removed; that they are insubstantial changes[3] The Applicant’s request for removal of mandatory requirements as being insubstantial is troubling. In fact, said removal lowers the bar for future senior development. It may well be the first step in a slippery slope; a precedent, if you will. Will the next request go further and eliminate on site wellness facility to reduce costs and increase affordability?[4] OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF REQUIREMENTS Remove: There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on-site, or catered.” Resident centered dining makes it more likely that residents will have more healthy lives[5]. Moreover it provides and maintains social contact. Socializing is important mental well being as we age. Resident-centered food service is an essential part of the culture change movement. Even though independent in many ways, for various medical reasons, not all seniors are capable of driving. Neither are all able to walk to the nearest restaurant. Depending on the distance from the residence to Rattlesnake-Hammock, the distance to the nearest grocery, including return may be more than 1 mile. Remove: “Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits.” Group transportation services are essential for seniors. By 2030, it is projected that 8.7 million Americans will be age 85 and over, and a substantial portion of them will no longer drive.[6] Ground transportation is particularly important in a senior residential setting. Next to health, transportation is the most important issue for seniors.[7] In areas where public transportation is less efficient, it can end up taking much longer to reach the destination than it would by car. Also, depending on the level of mobility, making it to the nearest bus stop in the first place may be difficult to impossible. Imagine just one resident, able to ambulate without the aid of a walker, walking to Publix for groceries. Further, consider the following vision and driving facts:[8] Vision provides about 85% of information we need to make safe decisions when driving. A 60-year-old requires 10 times as much light to drive as a 19- year-old. A 55-year-old takes eight times longer to recover from glare than a 16-year-old. Older drivers can take twice as long to distinguish the flash of brake lights as younger drivers. Remove: “Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency.” The developer or its agent is requesting removal of minimum standards to achieve affordability of the project. In the case of removal of devices to notify emergency service, the applicant asserts “The Applicant can provide cost-effective safety measures that will uphold the intent of this condition, but without the associated cost.” However, the applicant has failed to produce details as to how or what those safety measures are. CONCLUSION Throughout the applicant’s request to eliminate 50% of the minimum requirements of Ordinance 11-41 as it pertains to senior housing, much of its argument is based on cost and affordability. What is the Applicant’s concern? Is it the cost of development by the Applicant or the affordability for the proposed senior residents? May I suggest that market forces determine what seniors are willing to pay for retirement living. For the reasons set forth above, I respectfully urge you to deny the applicant’s request to remove the mandatory requirements. Respectfully, Jerry L. Walrath, Esq. 8905 Redonda Dr. Naples, 34114 [1] Exhibit A, Ordinance 11-41 [2] 9/15/2020 correspondence from Waldrop Engineering to James Sabo page 4 of 8 [3] ibid [4] Submittal 2 - Revised Request Narrative, pages 2,3,&8 [5] https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com [6] https://www.aarp.org › transportation › info-06-2011 [7] https://www.seniorliving.org/ [8] ibid Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:LauraDeJohnVEN To:FrenchJames; GrecoSherry Cc:GuitardDonna; LynchDiane; CallahanSean; BellowsRay; JenkinsAnita Subject:RE: Senior Housing Development Date:Thursday, May 13, 2021 2:22:21 PM Mr. Walrath noted he did not receive an answer to his original question. The system of me crafting and response, sending it to Diane for “AIMS” purposes, does not seem to be working. Should I be answering these inquiries directly to keep communication more efficient? Laura DeJohn, AICP Collier County Growth Management Department Zoning Services (Vendor) 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Desk: (239) 252-5587 laura.dejohn@colliercountyfl.gov From: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 3:23 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov>; LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov>; CallahanSean <Sean.Callahan@colliercountyfl.gov>; BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; JenkinsAnita <Anita.Jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov>; LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE: Senior Housing Development Hi Sherry, I spoke with Mr. Walrath today, he was appreciative of the call. Diane Lynch will be providing him with some additional research information but I was able to answer his questions during our conversation. Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns. Thank you Respectfully, Jamie James C. French, Deputy Department Head Growth Management Department, Collier County Government Main (239) 252-2400 Office (239) 252-5717 Email james.french@colliercountyfl.gov 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 colliercountyfl.gov From: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 9:18 AM To: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: FW: Senior Housing Development Jamie, Can you please help Mr. Walrath in preparation of the NIM next week see below? If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 6:34 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Thanks, but as I noted in my request I was seeking the answer to my questions so that I can prepare for the NIM on 5/17/2021. If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for your assistance. Jerry L. Walrath (239) 732-1356 On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 3:38 PM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good afternoon, I spoke with Jamie French and I believe he will address most of your questions at the NIM. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 12:24 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Sherry Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good morning, We have contacted senior staff and received some information on your concerns/questions: “Please know that the underlying zoning and use was approved for this type of facility within the PUD in 2011. As stated below, the petitioner is seeking an insubstantial change to eliminate the requirement for an emergency call button in each room, providing and supporting in house dining areas, and transportation services (shuttle). The developer did not seek, nor was granted any additional incentives or density for affordable housing and they have elected to move up their age restriction from the 55 years or older that they were originally approved for in 2011 to 62 years or older. Staff attended a neighborhood meeting in Hacienda Lakes with Commissioner LoCastro last Tuesday where it was explained to the residents that this would appear before the hearing examiner at a public meeting for consideration and that the senior housing use had already been approved in 2011 before the Hacienda Lakes Community was developed. We spoke with the petitioners design professional about setback and landscaping buffer comments from the community meeting after the meeting. The official neighborhood information meeting (NIM) by the portioner is scheduled for Monday evening (5/17) and staff will be in attendance at that meeting.” I hope this helps answer your questions or concerns. Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 6:47 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Collier County Commissioners It is my understanding that the developer of the proposed senior residential facility to be constructed on Rattlesnake-Hammock has requested the removal of certain mandatory requirements for said construction. The purpose of this communication is to note my opposition to removal of 50% of mandatory requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41, Exhibit A. The minimum requirements are[1]: 1) The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2) Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3) There shall be an onsite manager /activities coordinator to assist residents, who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; 4) An on -site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents. 5) Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The requirements are clear, unambiguous, and do not lend themselves to arbitrary interpretation. In each case the word SHALL is the operative word. SHALL is obligatory, mandatory, and compulsory. It does not mean MAYBE; Not PERHAPS; nor does it include IF CONVENIENT. The very word SHALL excludes the notion or idea of discretion. The Applicant is committed to providing a senior housing development that caters to the concept of aging in place.[2] The concept of aging in place is not compatible with the Applicant’s present request to gut the minimum requirements as set forth in the Ordinance for senior housing care. It is my understanding that the developer/applicant of the senior housing development has requested 3 of the 6 mandatory requirements be removed; that they are insubstantial changes[3] The Applicant’s request for removal of mandatory requirements as being insubstantial is troubling. In fact, said removal lowers the bar for future senior development. It may well be the first step in a slippery slope; a precedent, if you will. Will the next request go further and eliminate on site wellness facility to reduce costs and increase affordability?[4] OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF REQUIREMENTS Remove: There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on-site, or catered.” Resident centered dining makes it more likely that residents will have more healthy lives[5]. Moreover it provides and maintains social contact. Socializing is important mental well being as we age. Resident-centered food service is an essential part of the culture change movement. Even though independent in many ways, for various medical reasons, not all seniors are capable of driving. Neither are all able to walk to the nearest restaurant. Depending on the distance from the residence to Rattlesnake-Hammock, the distance to the nearest grocery, including return may be more than 1 mile. Remove: “Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits.” Group transportation services are essential for seniors. By 2030, it is projected that 8.7 million Americans will be age 85 and over, and a substantial portion of them will no longer drive.[6] Ground transportation is particularly important in a senior residential setting. Next to health, transportation is the most important issue for seniors.[7] In areas where public transportation is less efficient, it can end up taking much longer to reach the destination than it would by car. Also, depending on the level of mobility, making it to the nearest bus stop in the first place may be difficult to impossible. Imagine just one resident, able to ambulate without the aid of a walker, walking to Publix for groceries. Further, consider the following vision and driving facts:[8] Vision provides about 85% of information we need to make safe decisions when driving. A 60-year-old requires 10 times as much light to drive as a 19- year-old. A 55-year-old takes eight times longer to recover from glare than a 16-year-old. Older drivers can take twice as long to distinguish the flash of brake lights as younger drivers. Remove: “Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency.” The developer or its agent is requesting removal of minimum standards to achieve affordability of the project. In the case of removal of devices to notify emergency service, the applicant asserts “The Applicant can provide cost-effective safety measures that will uphold the intent of this condition, but without the associated cost.” However, the applicant has failed to produce details as to how or what those safety measures are. CONCLUSION Throughout the applicant’s request to eliminate 50% of the minimum requirements of Ordinance 11-41 as it pertains to senior housing, much of its argument is based on cost and affordability. What is the Applicant’s concern? Is it the cost of development by the Applicant or the affordability for the proposed senior residents? May I suggest that market forces determine what seniors are willing to pay for retirement living. For the reasons set forth above, I respectfully urge you to deny the applicant’s request to remove the mandatory requirements. Respectfully, Jerry L. Walrath, Esq. 8905 Redonda Dr. Naples, 34114 [1] Exhibit A, Ordinance 11-41 [2] 9/15/2020 correspondence from Waldrop Engineering to James Sabo page 4 of 8 [3] ibid [4] Submittal 2 - Revised Request Narrative, pages 2,3,&8 [5] https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com [6] https://www.aarp.org › transportation › info-06-2011 [7] https://www.seniorliving.org/ [8] ibid Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:LynchDiane To:LauraDeJohnVEN; FrenchJames; GrecoSherry Cc:GuitardDonna; CallahanSean; BellowsRay; JenkinsAnita Subject:RE: Senior Housing Development Date:Thursday, May 13, 2021 2:27:37 PM Based on the conversation I had with Jamie yesterday, I believe the part of his email that Mr Walrath is waiting for is the information that Laura provided. It’s with Jamie and I’m just waiting for Jamie to get back to me. Diane From: LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2021 2:22 PM To: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov>; GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov>; LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov>; CallahanSean <Sean.Callahan@colliercountyfl.gov>; BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; JenkinsAnita <Anita.Jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE: Senior Housing Development Mr. Walrath noted he did not receive an answer to his original question. The system of me crafting and response, sending it to Diane for “AIMS” purposes, does not seem to be working. Should I be answering these inquiries directly to keep communication more efficient? Laura DeJohn, AICP Collier County Growth Management Department Zoning Services (Vendor) 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Desk: (239) 252-5587 laura.dejohn@colliercountyfl.gov From: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 3:23 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov>; LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov>; CallahanSean <Sean.Callahan@colliercountyfl.gov>; BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; JenkinsAnita <Anita.Jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov>; LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE: Senior Housing Development Hi Sherry, I spoke with Mr. Walrath today, he was appreciative of the call. Diane Lynch will be providing him with some additional research information but I was able to answer his questions during our conversation. Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns. Thank you Respectfully, Jamie James C. French, Deputy Department Head Growth Management Department, Collier County Government Main (239) 252-2400 Office (239) 252-5717 Email james.french@colliercountyfl.gov 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 colliercountyfl.gov From: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 9:18 AM To: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: FW: Senior Housing Development Jamie, Can you please help Mr. Walrath in preparation of the NIM next week see below? If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 6:34 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Thanks, but as I noted in my request I was seeking the answer to my questions so that I can prepare for the NIM on 5/17/2021. If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for your assistance. Jerry L. Walrath (239) 732-1356 On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 3:38 PM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good afternoon, I spoke with Jamie French and I believe he will address most of your questions at the NIM. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 12:24 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Sherry Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good morning, We have contacted senior staff and received some information on your concerns/questions: “Please know that the underlying zoning and use was approved for this type of facility within the PUD in 2011. As stated below, the petitioner is seeking an insubstantial change to eliminate the requirement for an emergency call button in each room, providing and supporting in house dining areas, and transportation services (shuttle). The developer did not seek, nor was granted any additional incentives or density for affordable housing and they have elected to move up their age restriction from the 55 years or older that they were originally approved for in 2011 to 62 years or older. Staff attended a neighborhood meeting in Hacienda Lakes with Commissioner LoCastro last Tuesday where it was explained to the residents that this would appear before the hearing examiner at a public meeting for consideration and that the senior housing use had already been approved in 2011 before the Hacienda Lakes Community was developed. We spoke with the petitioners design professional about setback and landscaping buffer comments from the community meeting after the meeting. The official neighborhood information meeting (NIM) by the portioner is scheduled for Monday evening (5/17) and staff will be in attendance at that meeting.” I hope this helps answer your questions or concerns. Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 6:47 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Collier County Commissioners It is my understanding that the developer of the proposed senior residential facility to be constructed on Rattlesnake-Hammock has requested the removal of certain mandatory requirements for said construction. The purpose of this communication is to note my opposition to removal of 50% of mandatory requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41, Exhibit A. The minimum requirements are[1]: 1) The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2) Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3) There shall be an onsite manager /activities coordinator to assist residents, who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; 4) An on -site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents. 5) Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The requirements are clear, unambiguous, and do not lend themselves to arbitrary interpretation. In each case the word SHALL is the operative word. SHALL is obligatory, mandatory, and compulsory. It does not mean MAYBE; Not PERHAPS; nor does it include IF CONVENIENT. The very word SHALL excludes the notion or idea of discretion. The Applicant is committed to providing a senior housing development that caters to the concept of aging in place.[2] The concept of aging in place is not compatible with the Applicant’s present request to gut the minimum requirements as set forth in the Ordinance for senior housing care. It is my understanding that the developer/applicant of the senior housing development has requested 3 of the 6 mandatory requirements be removed; that they are insubstantial changes[3] The Applicant’s request for removal of mandatory requirements as being insubstantial is troubling. In fact, said removal lowers the bar for future senior development. It may well be the first step in a slippery slope; a precedent, if you will. Will the next request go further and eliminate on site wellness facility to reduce costs and increase affordability?[4] OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF REQUIREMENTS Remove: There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on-site, or catered.” Resident centered dining makes it more likely that residents will have more healthy lives[5]. Moreover it provides and maintains social contact. Socializing is important mental well being as we age. Resident-centered food service is an essential part of the culture change movement. Even though independent in many ways, for various medical reasons, not all seniors are capable of driving. Neither are all able to walk to the nearest restaurant. Depending on the distance from the residence to Rattlesnake-Hammock, the distance to the nearest grocery, including return may be more than 1 mile. Remove: “Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits.” Group transportation services are essential for seniors. By 2030, it is projected that 8.7 million Americans will be age 85 and over, and a substantial portion of them will no longer drive.[6] Ground transportation is particularly important in a senior residential setting. Next to health, transportation is the most important issue for seniors.[7] In areas where public transportation is less efficient, it can end up taking much longer to reach the destination than it would by car. Also, depending on the level of mobility, making it to the nearest bus stop in the first place may be difficult to impossible. Imagine just one resident, able to ambulate without the aid of a walker, walking to Publix for groceries. Further, consider the following vision and driving facts:[8] Vision provides about 85% of information we need to make safe decisions when driving. A 60-year-old requires 10 times as much light to drive as a 19- year-old. A 55-year-old takes eight times longer to recover from glare than a 16-year-old. Older drivers can take twice as long to distinguish the flash of brake lights as younger drivers. Remove: “Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency.” The developer or its agent is requesting removal of minimum standards to achieve affordability of the project. In the case of removal of devices to notify emergency service, the applicant asserts “The Applicant can provide cost-effective safety measures that will uphold the intent of this condition, but without the associated cost.” However, the applicant has failed to produce details as to how or what those safety measures are. CONCLUSION Throughout the applicant’s request to eliminate 50% of the minimum requirements of Ordinance 11-41 as it pertains to senior housing, much of its argument is based on cost and affordability. What is the Applicant’s concern? Is it the cost of development by the Applicant or the affordability for the proposed senior residents? May I suggest that market forces determine what seniors are willing to pay for retirement living. For the reasons set forth above, I respectfully urge you to deny the applicant’s request to remove the mandatory requirements. Respectfully, Jerry L. Walrath, Esq. 8905 Redonda Dr. Naples, 34114 [1] Exhibit A, Ordinance 11-41 [2] 9/15/2020 correspondence from Waldrop Engineering to James Sabo page 4 of 8 [3] ibid [4] Submittal 2 - Revised Request Narrative, pages 2,3,&8 [5] https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com [6] https://www.aarp.org › transportation › info-06-2011 [7] https://www.seniorliving.org/ [8] ibid Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:GrecoSherry To:"jw" Subject:RE: Senior Housing Development Date:Tuesday, May 11, 2021 3:38:00 PM Good afternoon, I spoke with Jamie French and I believe he will address most of your questions at the NIM. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 12:24 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Sherry Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good morning, We have contacted senior staff and received some information on your concerns/questions: “Please know that the underlying zoning and use was approved for this type of facility within the PUD in 2011. As stated below, the petitioner is seeking an insubstantial change to eliminate the requirement for an emergency call button in each room, providing and supporting in house dining areas, and transportation services (shuttle). The developer did not seek, nor was granted any additional incentives or density for affordable housing and they have elected to move up their age restriction from the 55 years or older that they were originally approved for in 2011 to 62 years or older. Staff attended a neighborhood meeting in Hacienda Lakes with Commissioner LoCastro last Tuesday where it was explained to the residents that this would appear before the hearing examiner at a public meeting for consideration and that the senior housing use had already been approved in 2011 before the Hacienda Lakes Community was developed. We spoke with the petitioners design professional about setback and landscaping buffer comments from the community meeting after the meeting. The official neighborhood information meeting (NIM) by the portioner is scheduled for Monday evening (5/17) and staff will be in attendance at that meeting.” I hope this helps answer your questions or concerns. Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 6:47 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Collier County Commissioners It is my understanding that the developer of the proposed senior residential facility to be constructed on Rattlesnake-Hammock has requested the removal of certain mandatory requirements for said construction. The purpose of this communication is to note my opposition to removal of 50% of mandatory requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41, Exhibit A. The minimum requirements are[1]: 1) The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on - site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2) Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3) There shall be an onsite manager /activities coordinator to assist residents, who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; 4) An on -site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents. 5) Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The requirements are clear, unambiguous, and do not lend themselves to arbitrary interpretation. In each case the word SHALL is the operative word. SHALL is obligatory, mandatory, and compulsory. It does not mean MAYBE; Not PERHAPS; nor does it include IF CONVENIENT. The very word SHALL excludes the notion or idea of discretion. The Applicant is committed to providing a senior housing development that caters to the concept of aging in place.[2] The concept of aging in place is not compatible with the Applicant’s present request to gut the minimum requirements as set forth in the Ordinance for senior housing care. It is my understanding that the developer/applicant of the senior housing development has requested 3 of the 6 mandatory requirements be removed; that they are insubstantial changes[3] The Applicant’s request for removal of mandatory requirements as being insubstantial is troubling. In fact, said removal lowers the bar for future senior development. It may well be the first step in a slippery slope; a precedent, if you will. Will the next request go further and eliminate on site wellness facility to reduce costs and increase affordability?[4] OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF REQUIREMENTS Remove: There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on-site, or catered.” Resident centered dining makes it more likely that residents will have more healthy lives[5]. Moreover it provides and maintains social contact. Socializing is important mental well being as we age. Resident- centered food service is an essential part of the culture change movement. Even though independent in many ways, for various medical reasons, not all seniors are capable of driving. Neither are all able to walk to the nearest restaurant. Depending on the distance from the residence to Rattlesnake-Hammock, the distance to the nearest grocery, including return may be more than 1 mile. Remove: “Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits.” Group transportation services are essential for seniors. By 2030, it is projected that 8.7 million Americans will be age 85 and over, and a substantial portion of them will no longer drive.[6] Ground transportation is particularly important in a senior residential setting. Next to health, transportation is the most important issue for seniors.[7] In areas where public transportation is less efficient, it can end up taking much longer to reach the destination than it would by car. Also, depending on the level of mobility, making it to the nearest bus stop in the first place may be difficult to impossible. Imagine just one resident, able to ambulate without the aid of a walker, walking to Publix for groceries. Further, consider the following vision and driving facts:[8] Vision provides about 85% of information we need to make safe decisions when driving. A 60-year-old requires 10 times as much light to drive as a 19- year-old. A 55-year-old takes eight times longer to recover from glare than a 16-year-old. Older drivers can take twice as long to distinguish the flash of brake lights as younger drivers. Remove: “Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency.” The developer or its agent is requesting removal of minimum standards to achieve affordability of the project. In the case of removal of devices to notify emergency service, the applicant asserts “The Applicant can provide cost-effective safety measures that will uphold the intent of this condition, but without the associated cost.” However, the applicant has failed to produce details as to how or what those safety measures are. CONCLUSION Throughout the applicant’s request to eliminate 50% of the minimum requirements of Ordinance 11-41 as it pertains to senior housing, much of its argument is based on cost and affordability. What is the Applicant’s concern? Is it the cost of development by the Applicant or the affordability for the proposed senior residents? May I suggest that market forces determine what seniors are willing to pay for retirement living. For the reasons set forth above, I respectfully urge you to deny the applicant’s request to remove the mandatory requirements. Respectfully, Jerry L. Walrath, Esq. 8905 Redonda Dr. Naples, 34114 [1] Exhibit A, Ordinance 11-41 [2] 9/15/2020 correspondence from Waldrop Engineering to James Sabo page 4 of 8 [3] ibid [4] Submittal 2 - Revised Request Narrative, pages 2,3,&8 [5] https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com [6] https://www.aarp.org › transportation › info-06-2011 [7] https://www.seniorliving.org/ [8] ibid Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:jw To:GrecoSherry Cc:LoCastroRick Subject:Re: Senior Housing Development Date:Tuesday, May 11, 2021 12:25:07 PM EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Sherry Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good morning, We have contacted senior staff and received some information on your concerns/questions: “Please know that the underlying zoning and use was approved for this type of facility within the PUD in 2011. As stated below, the petitioner is seeking an insubstantial change to eliminate the requirement for an emergency call button in each room, providing and supporting in house dining areas, and transportation services (shuttle). The developer did not seek, nor was granted any additional incentives or density for affordable housing and they have elected to move up their age restriction from the 55 years or older that they were originally approved for in 2011 to 62 years or older. Staff attended a neighborhood meeting in Hacienda Lakes with Commissioner LoCastro last Tuesday where it was explained to the residents that this would appear before the hearing examiner at a public meeting for consideration and that the senior housing use had already been approved in 2011 before the Hacienda Lakes Community was developed. We spoke with the petitioners design professional about setback and landscaping buffer comments from the community meeting after the meeting. The official neighborhood information meeting (NIM) by the portioner is scheduled for Monday evening (5/17) and staff will be in attendance at that meeting.” I hope this helps answer your questions or concerns. Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 6:47 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Collier County Commissioners It is my understanding that the developer of the proposed senior residential facility to be constructed on Rattlesnake-Hammock has requested the removal of certain mandatory requirements for said construction. The purpose of this communication is to note my opposition to removal of 50% of mandatory requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41, Exhibit A. The minimum requirements are[1]: 1) The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on - site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2) Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3) There shall be an onsite manager /activities coordinator to assist residents, who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; 4) An on -site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents. 5) Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The requirements are clear, unambiguous, and do not lend themselves to arbitrary interpretation. In each case the word SHALL is the operative word. SHALL is obligatory, mandatory, and compulsory. It does not mean MAYBE; Not PERHAPS; nor does it include IF CONVENIENT. The very word SHALL excludes the notion or idea of discretion. The Applicant is committed to providing a senior housing development that caters to the concept of aging in place.[2] The concept of aging in place is not compatible with the Applicant’s present request to gut the minimum requirements as set forth in the Ordinance for senior housing care. It is my understanding that the developer/applicant of the senior housing development has requested 3 of the 6 mandatory requirements be removed; that they are insubstantial changes[3] The Applicant’s request for removal of mandatory requirements as being insubstantial is troubling. In fact, said removal lowers the bar for future senior development. It may well be the first step in a slippery slope; a precedent, if you will. Will the next request go further and eliminate on site wellness facility to reduce costs and increase affordability?[4] OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF REQUIREMENTS Remove: There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on-site, or catered.” Resident centered dining makes it more likely that residents will have more healthy lives[5]. Moreover it provides and maintains social contact. Socializing is important mental well being as we age. Resident- centered food service is an essential part of the culture change movement. Even though independent in many ways, for various medical reasons, not all seniors are capable of driving. Neither are all able to walk to the nearest restaurant. Depending on the distance from the residence to Rattlesnake-Hammock, the distance to the nearest grocery, including return may be more than 1 mile. Remove: “Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits.” Group transportation services are essential for seniors. By 2030, it is projected that 8.7 million Americans will be age 85 and over, and a substantial portion of them will no longer drive.[6] Ground transportation is particularly important in a senior residential setting. Next to health, transportation is the most important issue for seniors.[7] In areas where public transportation is less efficient, it can end up taking much longer to reach the destination than it would by car. Also, depending on the level of mobility, making it to the nearest bus stop in the first place may be difficult to impossible. Imagine just one resident, able to ambulate without the aid of a walker, walking to Publix for groceries. Further, consider the following vision and driving facts:[8] Vision provides about 85% of information we need to make safe decisions when driving. A 60-year-old requires 10 times as much light to drive as a 19- year-old. A 55-year-old takes eight times longer to recover from glare than a 16-year-old. Older drivers can take twice as long to distinguish the flash of brake lights as younger drivers. Remove: “Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency.” The developer or its agent is requesting removal of minimum standards to achieve affordability of the project. In the case of removal of devices to notify emergency service, the applicant asserts “The Applicant can provide cost-effective safety measures that will uphold the intent of this condition, but without the associated cost.” However, the applicant has failed to produce details as to how or what those safety measures are. CONCLUSION Throughout the applicant’s request to eliminate 50% of the minimum requirements of Ordinance 11-41 as it pertains to senior housing, much of its argument is based on cost and affordability. What is the Applicant’s concern? Is it the cost of development by the Applicant or the affordability for the proposed senior residents? May I suggest that market forces determine what seniors are willing to pay for retirement living. For the reasons set forth above, I respectfully urge you to deny the applicant’s request to remove the mandatory requirements. Respectfully, Jerry L. Walrath, Esq. 8905 Redonda Dr. Naples, 34114 [1] Exhibit A, Ordinance 11-41 [2] 9/15/2020 correspondence from Waldrop Engineering to James Sabo page 4 of 8 [3] ibid [4] Submittal 2 - Revised Request Narrative, pages 2,3,&8 [5] https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com [6] https://www.aarp.org › transportation › info-06-2011 [7] https://www.seniorliving.org/ [8] ibid Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:GrecoSherry To:"jw" Subject:RE: Senior Housing Development Date:Wednesday, May 12, 2021 8:22:00 AM Good morning, I will forward to Mr. French. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 6:34 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Thanks, but as I noted in my request I was seeking the answer to my questions so that I can prepare for the NIM on 5/17/2021. If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for your assistance. Jerry L. Walrath (239) 732-1356 On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 3:38 PM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good afternoon, I spoke with Jamie French and I believe he will address most of your questions at the NIM. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 12:24 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Sherry Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good morning, We have contacted senior staff and received some information on your concerns/questions: “Please know that the underlying zoning and use was approved for this type of facility within the PUD in 2011. As stated below, the petitioner is seeking an insubstantial change to eliminate the requirement for an emergency call button in each room, providing and supporting in house dining areas, and transportation services (shuttle). The developer did not seek, nor was granted any additional incentives or density for affordable housing and they have elected to move up their age restriction from the 55 years or older that they were originally approved for in 2011 to 62 years or older. Staff attended a neighborhood meeting in Hacienda Lakes with Commissioner LoCastro last Tuesday where it was explained to the residents that this would appear before the hearing examiner at a public meeting for consideration and that the senior housing use had already been approved in 2011 before the Hacienda Lakes Community was developed. We spoke with the petitioners design professional about setback and landscaping buffer comments from the community meeting after the meeting. The official neighborhood information meeting (NIM) by the portioner is scheduled for Monday evening (5/17) and staff will be in attendance at that meeting.” I hope this helps answer your questions or concerns. Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 6:47 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Collier County Commissioners It is my understanding that the developer of the proposed senior residential facility to be constructed on Rattlesnake-Hammock has requested the removal of certain mandatory requirements for said construction. The purpose of this communication is to note my opposition to removal of 50% of mandatory requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41, Exhibit A. The minimum requirements are[1]: 1) The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2) Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3) There shall be an onsite manager /activities coordinator to assist residents, who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; 4) An on -site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents. 5) Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The requirements are clear, unambiguous, and do not lend themselves to arbitrary interpretation. In each case the word SHALL is the operative word. SHALL is obligatory, mandatory, and compulsory. It does not mean MAYBE; Not PERHAPS; nor does it include IF CONVENIENT. The very word SHALL excludes the notion or idea of discretion. The Applicant is committed to providing a senior housing development that caters to the concept of aging in place.[2] The concept of aging in place is not compatible with the Applicant’s present request to gut the minimum requirements as set forth in the Ordinance for senior housing care. It is my understanding that the developer/applicant of the senior housing development has requested 3 of the 6 mandatory requirements be removed; that they are insubstantial changes[3] The Applicant’s request for removal of mandatory requirements as being insubstantial is troubling. In fact, said removal lowers the bar for future senior development. It may well be the first step in a slippery slope; a precedent, if you will. Will the next request go further and eliminate on site wellness facility to reduce costs and increase affordability?[4] OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF REQUIREMENTS Remove: There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on-site, or catered.” Resident centered dining makes it more likely that residents will have more healthy lives[5]. Moreover it provides and maintains social contact. Socializing is important mental well being as we age. Resident-centered food service is an essential part of the culture change movement. Even though independent in many ways, for various medical reasons, not all seniors are capable of driving. Neither are all able to walk to the nearest restaurant. Depending on the distance from the residence to Rattlesnake-Hammock, the distance to the nearest grocery, including return may be more than 1 mile. Remove: “Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits.” Group transportation services are essential for seniors. By 2030, it is projected that 8.7 million Americans will be age 85 and over, and a substantial portion of them will no longer drive.[6] Ground transportation is particularly important in a senior residential setting. Next to health, transportation is the most important issue for seniors.[7] In areas where public transportation is less efficient, it can end up taking much longer to reach the destination than it would by car. Also, depending on the level of mobility, making it to the nearest bus stop in the first place may be difficult to impossible. Imagine just one resident, able to ambulate without the aid of a walker, walking to Publix for groceries. Further, consider the following vision and driving facts:[8] Vision provides about 85% of information we need to make safe decisions when driving. A 60-year-old requires 10 times as much light to drive as a 19- year-old. A 55-year-old takes eight times longer to recover from glare than a 16-year-old. Older drivers can take twice as long to distinguish the flash of brake lights as younger drivers. Remove: “Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency.” The developer or its agent is requesting removal of minimum standards to achieve affordability of the project. In the case of removal of devices to notify emergency service, the applicant asserts “The Applicant can provide cost-effective safety measures that will uphold the intent of this condition, but without the associated cost.” However, the applicant has failed to produce details as to how or what those safety measures are. CONCLUSION Throughout the applicant’s request to eliminate 50% of the minimum requirements of Ordinance 11-41 as it pertains to senior housing, much of its argument is based on cost and affordability. What is the Applicant’s concern? Is it the cost of development by the Applicant or the affordability for the proposed senior residents? May I suggest that market forces determine what seniors are willing to pay for retirement living. For the reasons set forth above, I respectfully urge you to deny the applicant’s request to remove the mandatory requirements. Respectfully, Jerry L. Walrath, Esq. 8905 Redonda Dr. Naples, 34114 [1] Exhibit A, Ordinance 11-41 [2] 9/15/2020 correspondence from Waldrop Engineering to James Sabo page 4 of 8 [3] ibid [4] Submittal 2 - Revised Request Narrative, pages 2,3,&8 [5] https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com [6] https://www.aarp.org › transportation › info-06-2011 [7] https://www.seniorliving.org/ [8] ibid Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:GrecoSherry To:FrenchJames Cc:GuitardDonna; LynchDiane; CallahanSean; BellowsRay; JenkinsAnita; LauraDeJohnVEN Subject:RE: Senior Housing Development Date:Thursday, May 13, 2021 8:11:00 AM Thank you very much Jamie. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 3:23 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov>; LynchDiane <Diane.Lynch@colliercountyfl.gov>; CallahanSean <Sean.Callahan@colliercountyfl.gov>; BellowsRay <Ray.Bellows@colliercountyfl.gov>; JenkinsAnita <Anita.Jenkins@colliercountyfl.gov>; LauraDeJohnVEN <Laura.DeJohn@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: RE: Senior Housing Development Hi Sherry, I spoke with Mr. Walrath today, he was appreciative of the call. Diane Lynch will be providing him with some additional research information but I was able to answer his questions during our conversation. Please let me know if you have any other questions or concerns. Thank you Respectfully, Jamie James C. French, Deputy Department Head Growth Management Department, Collier County Government Main (239) 252-2400 Office (239) 252-5717 Email james.french@colliercountyfl.gov 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida 34104 colliercountyfl.gov From: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2021 9:18 AM To: FrenchJames <James.French@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: GuitardDonna <Donna.Guitard@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: FW: Senior Housing Development Jamie, Can you please help Mr. Walrath in preparation of the NIM next week see below? If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 6:34 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Thanks, but as I noted in my request I was seeking the answer to my questions so that I can prepare for the NIM on 5/17/2021. If permitted to speak at the meeting it is my intention to speak in opposition of the applicant's request for a waiver of the mandatory requirements. I had hoped to use the information in support of my opposition. Perhaps Mr. French can provide the information in an email? In the alternative, we could speak by telephone. I am generally available throughout the day. Thank you for your assistance. Jerry L. Walrath (239) 732-1356 On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 3:38 PM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good afternoon, I spoke with Jamie French and I believe he will address most of your questions at the NIM. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2021 12:24 PM To: GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> Cc: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Re: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Sherry Thank you for the reply. However your answer does not address my last question to Rick which was in reference to the removal of the three requirements. My question was twofold: In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:28 AM GrecoSherry <Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov> wrote: Good morning, We have contacted senior staff and received some information on your concerns/questions: “Please know that the underlying zoning and use was approved for this type of facility within the PUD in 2011. As stated below, the petitioner is seeking an insubstantial change to eliminate the requirement for an emergency call button in each room, providing and supporting in house dining areas, and transportation services (shuttle). The developer did not seek, nor was granted any additional incentives or density for affordable housing and they have elected to move up their age restriction from the 55 years or older that they were originally approved for in 2011 to 62 years or older. Staff attended a neighborhood meeting in Hacienda Lakes with Commissioner LoCastro last Tuesday where it was explained to the residents that this would appear before the hearing examiner at a public meeting for consideration and that the senior housing use had already been approved in 2011 before the Hacienda Lakes Community was developed. We spoke with the petitioners design professional about setback and landscaping buffer comments from the community meeting after the meeting. The official neighborhood information meeting (NIM) by the portioner is scheduled for Monday evening (5/17) and staff will be in attendance at that meeting.” I hope this helps answer your questions or concerns. Thank you. Sherry Greco Executive Coordinator to Commissioner Penny Taylor, District 4 Board of Collier County Commissioners 239-252-8604 Fax 239-252-6393 Sherry.Greco@colliercountyfl.gov Click here to sign up for our District 4 newsletter View current and previous District 4 newsletters From: jw <jlw9358@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2021 6:47 PM To: LoCastroRick <Rick.LoCastro@colliercountyfl.gov>; SolisAndy <Andy.Solis@colliercountyfl.gov>; SaundersBurt <Burt.Saunders@colliercountyfl.gov>; TaylorPenny <Penny.Taylor@colliercountyfl.gov>; McDanielBill <Bill.McDaniel@colliercountyfl.gov> Subject: Senior Housing Development EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Collier County Commissioners It is my understanding that the developer of the proposed senior residential facility to be constructed on Rattlesnake-Hammock has requested the removal of certain mandatory requirements for said construction. The purpose of this communication is to note my opposition to removal of 50% of mandatory requirements for senior housing pursuant to Collier County Ordinance 11-41, Exhibit A. The minimum requirements are[1]: 1) The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2) Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3) There shall be an onsite manager /activities coordinator to assist residents, who shall be responsible for planning and coordinating stimulating activities for the residents; 4) An on -site wellness facility shall provide exercise and general fitness opportunities for the residents. 5) Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The requirements are clear, unambiguous, and do not lend themselves to arbitrary interpretation. In each case the word SHALL is the operative word. SHALL is obligatory, mandatory, and compulsory. It does not mean MAYBE; Not PERHAPS; nor does it include IF CONVENIENT. The very word SHALL excludes the notion or idea of discretion. The Applicant is committed to providing a senior housing development that caters to the concept of aging in place.[2] The concept of aging in place is not compatible with the Applicant’s present request to gut the minimum requirements as set forth in the Ordinance for senior housing care. It is my understanding that the developer/applicant of the senior housing development has requested 3 of the 6 mandatory requirements be removed; that they are insubstantial changes[3] The Applicant’s request for removal of mandatory requirements as being insubstantial is troubling. In fact, said removal lowers the bar for future senior development. It may well be the first step in a slippery slope; a precedent, if you will. Will the next request go further and eliminate on site wellness facility to reduce costs and increase affordability?[4] OBJECTIONS TO APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF REQUIREMENTS Remove: There shall be on-site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on-site, or catered.” Resident centered dining makes it more likely that residents will have more healthy lives[5]. Moreover it provides and maintains social contact. Socializing is important mental well being as we age. Resident-centered food service is an essential part of the culture change movement. Even though independent in many ways, for various medical reasons, not all seniors are capable of driving. Neither are all able to walk to the nearest restaurant. Depending on the distance from the residence to Rattlesnake-Hammock, the distance to the nearest grocery, including return may be more than 1 mile. Remove: “Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits.” Group transportation services are essential for seniors. By 2030, it is projected that 8.7 million Americans will be age 85 and over, and a substantial portion of them will no longer drive.[6] Ground transportation is particularly important in a senior residential setting. Next to health, transportation is the most important issue for seniors.[7] In areas where public transportation is less efficient, it can end up taking much longer to reach the destination than it would by car. Also, depending on the level of mobility, making it to the nearest bus stop in the first place may be difficult to impossible. Imagine just one resident, able to ambulate without the aid of a walker, walking to Publix for groceries. Further, consider the following vision and driving facts:[8] Vision provides about 85% of information we need to make safe decisions when driving. A 60-year-old requires 10 times as much light to drive as a 19- year-old. A 55-year-old takes eight times longer to recover from glare than a 16-year-old. Older drivers can take twice as long to distinguish the flash of brake lights as younger drivers. Remove: “Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency.” The developer or its agent is requesting removal of minimum standards to achieve affordability of the project. In the case of removal of devices to notify emergency service, the applicant asserts “The Applicant can provide cost-effective safety measures that will uphold the intent of this condition, but without the associated cost.” However, the applicant has failed to produce details as to how or what those safety measures are. CONCLUSION Throughout the applicant’s request to eliminate 50% of the minimum requirements of Ordinance 11-41 as it pertains to senior housing, much of its argument is based on cost and affordability. What is the Applicant’s concern? Is it the cost of development by the Applicant or the affordability for the proposed senior residents? May I suggest that market forces determine what seniors are willing to pay for retirement living. For the reasons set forth above, I respectfully urge you to deny the applicant’s request to remove the mandatory requirements. Respectfully, Jerry L. Walrath, Esq. 8905 Redonda Dr. Naples, 34114 [1] Exhibit A, Ordinance 11-41 [2] 9/15/2020 correspondence from Waldrop Engineering to James Sabo page 4 of 8 [3] ibid [4] Submittal 2 - Revised Request Narrative, pages 2,3,&8 [5] https://www.managedhealthcareconnect.com [6] https://www.aarp.org › transportation › info-06-2011 [7] https://www.seniorliving.org/ [8] ibid Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. From:jw To:LoCastroRick; SolisAndy; SaundersBurt; TaylorPenny; McDanielBill Subject:Senior Housing Development Date:Sunday, May 9, 2021 12:56:37 PM EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links. Dear Commissioners In preparation of a NIM on 5/17/2021 I have two questions [below]. For background information: Collier County Ordinance 11-41 mandates Senior Housing Developments to include, among other requirements, the following: 1. The facility shall be for residents 55 years of age and older; There shall be on -site dining facilities to the residents, with food service being on -site, or catered; 2. Group transportation services shall be provided for the residents for the purposes of grocery and other types of shopping. Individual transportation services shall be coordinated for the residents needs, including but not limited to medical office visits; 3. Each unit shall be equipped with devices provided to notify emergency service providers in the event of a medical or other emergency; The developer of Allegro at Hacienda Lakes PDI (PL20200001294) has requested the removal of the three requirements noted above. My question is : In past senior housing developments, have any of the above requirements been waived? If so, where can I find further information that would explain why? Jerry L. Walrath