Overall sentiment across the reviews is predominantly positive, with many reviewers praising the staff, the newness and cleanliness of the facility, the robust activities, and the quality and variety of amenities. Multiple reviewers describe staff as kind, caring, compassionate and welcoming; front desk and direct care personnel are frequently singled out as treating residents like family. The building’s new construction, bright common areas, natural light and wood accents, along with well-kept outdoor spaces and attractive common rooms (library, cinema, restaurant) are repeatedly noted as major strengths. Apartments—both studios and one-bedrooms—are described as spacious, clean and bright, and a number of reviewers specifically call out the facility as immaculate and well maintained.
Care quality and clinical aspects receive generally strong praise but with important caveats. Several reviews commend competent clinical staff, good medication control, secure and well-run memory care (including Alzheimer’s-specific care and hospice coordination), on-site rehab services, and confident RN assessments during move-in. Families repeatedly express trust in the caregiving team and satisfaction with communication from directors and nurses. However, there are also serious negative reports: a small but significant set of reviews document lapses in basic personal care (missed showers, failure to brush teeth or shave), and at least one report describes an altercation that caused injuries and left family members feeling that management was unaware and did not respond adequately. Another clinical concern raised is inconsistent use of POLST (Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment) during hospital transfers, which could impact end-of-life or emergent care preferences.
Dining and food service emerge as mixed but mostly positive. Many reviewers praise the varied menus, long kitchen hours, daily specials and the ability to accommodate dietary restrictions; some call the dining delicious and note weight gain and good portions. There are multiple mentions of a restaurant-style dining room, mealtime music and personalized options. Conversely, a few reviewers find vegetarian options uninspiring, describe some meals as only average, and note instances where food was not hot yet (with staff working to improve this). Overall, dining is a strength but with room for consistency improvements, especially for specific dietary preferences.
The activities program and social life are clear highlights. The community is described as active, joyful and engaging with many opportunities for residents: theater events, Ladies Tea, yoga, Bible study, outings, in-progress poker and a planned pub are all mentioned. Reviewers consistently report that staff engage residents, that there’s good community involvement and that residents find friends and a sense of family. This level of programming supports social wellbeing and is cited repeatedly as a reason families feel the community is a good fit.
Facility management and staffing present a mixed picture and are the most notable pattern of concern. Several reviews praise the management, orientation process, and responsive communication; others report management turnover (including mention of a third administrator in a year), pandemic-era staffing challenges, and staff that are stretched thin. These staffing pressures appear to have impacted service consistency for some families—while many experienced stable, named caregivers and familiar faces, others experienced inconsistencies severe enough to prompt moves out of the community. Staffing shortages, turnover, and areas described as "a mess" by some reviewers contrast with the many accounts of well-run, clean operations, indicating variability in experience that prospective families should investigate further.
Safety and risk-related themes deserve emphasis. While the memory care unit is described as secure and well-managed, and most families feel safe leaving loved ones there, the reports of missed personal care and a violent altercation are serious outliers that must be taken into account. These incidents, combined with comments that management was unaware or slow to respond, suggest the need for prospective residents and families to ask specific questions about incident reporting, staff training, supervision, and how the community handles conflicts and personal-care lapses.
Other practical concerns are relatively minor but recurrent: limited parking and a desire for more varied weekly shuttle outings were noted across reviews. A comment that there is "no voluntary leaving option" appeared in one review summary and should be clarified with the community, as that may reflect a misunderstanding or a specific contract/policy. Finally, while many reviewers note competitive pricing, a few explicitly describe moving out because the facility was not meeting expectations.
Recommendation and closing perspective: The Landing generally receives strong marks for its staff warmth, modern and clean facilities, active programming and comprehensive amenities, making it an attractive option for families seeking a staffed, social senior living community—especially for those needing secure memory care and onsite rehab. However, because there are documented concerns around staffing consistency, leadership turnover, isolated but serious care lapses, and a few logistical issues (parking, outings, and some food consistency), prospective residents and families should perform targeted due diligence. Recommended questions include: current staff-to-resident ratios, staff turnover rates, incident reporting and resolution procedures, policies on POLST and hospital transfers, examples of how the community handles missed personal care, and clarification about any contractual restrictions on leaving. Visiting multiple times, meeting direct-care staff by name, and speaking with current families can help assess whether The Landing’s dominant strengths align with a particular family’s priorities and whether the outlier concerns are being addressed.
