Page 2 of 2: businesses ranked 101-152 of 152. Ranked by score and relevance, start from the top or open the full map view.
Satisfaction splits sharply: residents with engaged staff praise affordability and comfort, but recent reviews flag serious gaps. Pest problems, slow-to-nonexistent maintenance on key issues, and confrontational management responses appear to undermine the complex's claim of quick, responsive service. Long-term residents struggle to recommend.
Lisa's leadership and staff energy have transformed the leasing experience. Residents consistently praise the office team-Odays, Madison, and Lisa herself-for warmth and efficiency. Maintenance responds quickly to work orders. Yet the same residents who celebrate management also struggle with ground-level reality: packages vanish regularly, pest control is inadequate, covered parking now costs extra, the buildings show age and poor upkeep, and late fees kick in fast. Earlier reviews cited AI bot ads showing lower rents, only to find prices $250 higher at tour. These contradictions run deep: the complex genuinely cares about its leasing team, but cuts corners everywhere else.
Current management has earned strong marks for cleaning up the property and responding quickly to maintenance requests, with residents praising spacious layouts and a genuine sense of community. Earlier periods saw poor phone access, slow repairs, and uneven rule enforcement, though recent reviews indicate meaningful improvement under the new team.
Collier is a mixed bag shaped by management transition. Many residents praise the welcoming staff, speedy fixes, and appealing spaces with a dog park; lease extensions and heartfelt testimonials from long-term residents reflect genuine satisfaction. However, recent reviews highlight a sharp divide: new management (Knightvest) has drawn complaints about unresponsive AC repairs during heat, pest infestations, condescending leasing staff, and rules applied inconsistently. Maintenance tickets sometimes sit unresolved for over a week, and residents report health concerns go unaddressed. Timing matters here. Positive reviews clustered months ago praise former management and named staff like Sofia, Genesis, and Angelo. Recent one-star reviews, concentrated in the last two months, point to Knightvest's acquisition as a turning point. Current residents report unresponsive emergency maintenance, poor communication, and a shift in the property's priorities. Those seeking stability and community should ask whether the new ownership has stabilized these issues since the most recent complaints.
Recent five-star reviews praise the leasing and maintenance teams for attentiveness and warmth, and highlight the property's walkable location within two miles of parks, grocery stores, and restaurants. Staff members Daniel and Jenny are named specifically for excellent customer service. However, older one-star reviews document serious problems: multiple residents reported roach and mold infestations upon move-in, months-long delays fixing appliances, common areas left dirty, and disputed move-out charges that were not honored in writing. A long-term resident noted that despite premium rent, maintenance remained slow and amenities poorly maintained.
Townes on Tenth delivers dependable maintenance and friendly staff, with Delaney, Waracy, and Megan consistently praised for going above and beyond. But recent management changes have soured the experience for long-term tenants, who report surprise fees, broken payment systems, and threats of eviction over administrative errors.
Danielle Blasquez and her leasing team earn consistent praise for quick responses and stress-free move-ins, with many reviewers crediting her patience and attentiveness. Units are clean and well-maintained, parking is plentiful, and water bills run cheap. However, three negative experiences stand out: one prospective renter encountered cockroaches and unprofessional management during a three-month application process, another faced a grueling move-in marred by rude treatment and administrative confusion, and a third reported unresponsiveness from management and a hostile front-desk employee. The pattern suggests staff performance depends heavily on who you deal with. Several reviewers named Danielle, Lisa, and Elisa as assets to the leasing process. The property itself draws praise for being quiet and well-kept. The complaints centre on management volatility: high turnover, inconsistent courtesy, and communication breakdowns. One resident paid hundreds in application fees across two properties before moving forward under stressful circumstances.
The leasing team, especially Jahmani Ramsey and Genee, earns consistent praise for patience, kindness, and handling applications smoothly. However, residents report a serious roach problem that persisted a year and a half after a health department complaint, chronic pool closures, and frequent office staff turnover. The experience hinges on front-desk interactions versus living conditions and management responsiveness.
Lone Oak draws strong praise for maintenance responsiveness and grounds upkeep, with reviewers naming staff like Charlize, Lene, and Cornelius. However, persistent complaints surface around noise (thin walls, neighbor behavior), office communication failures, nonfunctional security gates, and parking shortages. The split reflects two very different experiences: those who use amenities and get fast maintenance report high satisfaction, while long-term residents cite operational frustration.
Front-line staff earn consistent praise for speed and kindness, and the hilltop location near downtown plus pet-friendly grounds appeal to many residents. However, reviews split sharply over management practices: some tenants faced mounting fees for vague violations, mold in bathrooms, AC delays during summer, and non-functional communal laundry, while others found the older complex well-maintained and comfortable for the price.
The James draws praise for helpful leasing staff, responsive maintenance, and fair pricing for newer units in a convenient North Austin location. However, reviews flag significant frustration over noisy tenants (especially at the pool on weekends), roach infestations, a frequently broken elevator, and poor neighbor behavior like pet waste and vandalism. Quality of life depends heavily on which neighbors you get.
Five-star tenants praise the physical space and specific staff members (Nicole, Ken, Elord, Tim) for hands-on care, but the complex's broader operations are heavily criticized. Reviewers report month-long waits for repairs, gnats and roaches left unaddressed, surprise parking fees ($35/month per vehicle), forced internet charges despite having other providers, and move-out bills exceeding $400 even after professional cleaning. Management shifted to a Colorado office, making human contact nearly impossible; billing errors and denials of refunds recur repeatedly. Former residents say the location and décor matter little against the financial extraction and neglect they experienced.
Residents who have settled in praise the grounds, pool, and named staff members Rafael, Luvrin, Esmeralda, and Nubia for genuine, attentive service. The community offers activities and affordable senior apartments. New visitors sometimes encounter cold front-desk treatment. Long-term issues include elevator breakdowns without adequate alternatives for elderly residents, recurring mold tied to HVAC failures, and slow response to some repair requests. Management quality has fluctuated, though recent upgrades to carpets and outdoor spaces are noted.
Half of recent reviews are one or two stars, with tenants reporting roaches, ants, and broken appliances that linger for weeks despite repeated maintenance requests. Several describe office staff as unwelcoming to prospective renters and dismissive or rude to residents, though a few name positive interactions with Luz and Lisa. When repairs do happen, reviewers report mix-ups between units, careless work, and staff marking tickets complete when nothing has been fixed. A pattern emerges: move-in apartments look different from tours, management stops responding after lease signing, and fees for pest control and package handling continue even as services fail. One tenant moved out after five months, withheld rent due to zero repairs on the initial walkthrough list, and alleged the office falsified court documents. Another noted the gym remains closed and describes frequent loud noise and drug paraphernalia at the pool.
Strong praise for staff friendliness and clean apartments draws many five-star reviews, but significant complaints about maintenance delays, pest infestations, and disputed security deposit charges create a divided picture. Reviewers consistently note affordability and community feel, yet those facing repair issues or move-out conflicts report serious frustration with management follow-through and what one tenant claims are illegal deposit deductions.
Named leasing staff like Xyre, Isabel, and Lana draw consistent praise for going above and beyond during applications and move-ins. Maintenance responds fast, the grounds stay clean and quiet, and pricing undercuts neighbors. But dozens of calls and emails go unanswered; processing that should take weeks stretches to months, and visitors find the office closed or unresponsive despite posted hours. The property itself shines; the experience getting in feels like a gamble. Reviewers rave about specific staff members (particularly in the front office) who make leasing smooth and kind. Maintenance tackles requests in under 15 minutes. The neighborhood feels peaceful. Pest control, contracted outside, does not solve the bug problem. The real friction point is consistency: great staff offset by long waits, ignored calls, and frustration with reapplying or restarting paperwork mid-process.
Strong maintenance support from Abraham and the repair team attracts consistent praise, with several residents noting rapid response to maintenance needs and welcoming front-desk service. However, critical safety lapses undermine confidence: ice covering entry ramps and mailboxes went uncleared during winter despite this being marketed as a senior community, and basic infrastructure (trash collection for 286 units, carpet cleaning, elevator maintenance) shows signs of strain. Management communication is spotty, and one family's experience involving a towed vehicle left them without resolution or explanation. Staff turnover or inconsistency appears to offset the positive individual performances. While amenities like a pool, fitness center, and clubhouse exist on paper, resident concerns about 55+ marketing claims, pet management enforcement, and on-site supervision suggest operations do not consistently meet the promises made in listings. The 68% five-star rating masks two distinct resident experiences: those who engage with responsive maintenance and front-desk staff feel well-served; those navigating safety issues or complex problems encounter indifference.
Metropolis draws residents seeking affordable housing near downtown with a genuine artistic community feel. Live music events, low rent, and a dog park appeal to creative tenants who value connection over polish. However, safety concerns surface in recent reviews alongside complaints about pests, noisy neighbors, and inconsistent lease office behavior. Maintenance responds well when asked but roach problems persist despite weekly pest control. The complex attracts strong opinions: lovers praise its unique cultural identity and genuine friendships; detractors cite substance use, crime in the complex, and an inability to escape difficult living conditions despite community spirit.
M Station draws residents seeking low-cost housing in East Austin near transit and shops, but pest control failures, slow maintenance responses, and punitive management practices create significant daily frustration. Leasing staff are described as dismissive and inflexible; roaches persist despite repeated pest control visits, and residents report being penalized over maintenance requests rather than helped.
Lakeline Crossing draws strong loyalty from residents who appreciate the office team's warmth and maintenance crew's visible presence on the property. Serious concerns emerge around move-out billing practices, particularly unexpected four-figure charges for minor notice delays, coupled with reported difficulties getting management to listen or negotiate when residents dispute fees or encounter maintenance delays. Reviewers also flag noisy nights, dirty fixtures, and slow repairs unless residents escalate formally. The property attracts two distinct voices: those who feel welcomed and cared for, and those who experienced aggressive financial policies and communication breakdowns during disputes.
Strong leasing experience with Denise, Nakeiya, and Conor earning consistent praise for patience and professionalism. Management change created sharp decline: newer staff slow to process applications, dismissive toward residents facing hardship, and reluctant to address maintenance problems transparently. Maintenance gaps stand out. Multiple residents report unresolved mold despite repeated requests; management blamed humidity or dust rather than investigating. Pet-friendly amenities well-received, but neighbor violations (dog waste attracting flies) went unenforced. Lease disputes show little flexibility when residents need early exit or re-leasing options.
Half the reviews celebrate the location, staff responsiveness, and amenities; half report systemic neglect that management has refused to fix. Fire alarms trigger nightly without cause, trash rooms overflow for months, pests infest common areas, and poor construction (thin walls, faulty infrastructure) makes units uncomfortable. One-year residents describe these as known but unaddressed problems.
Bexley Silverado divides sharply between residents thrilled with the leasing team and grounds and those frustrated by move-in defects and management responsiveness. Early months deliver friendly staff (Maddy and Troi stand out) and well-kept common areas, but serious problems emerge: broken appliances on arrival, dirty unit conditions, safety gaps like unlit walkways, and maintenance tickets that close without explanation. Recent management changes and avoidance of direct communication have escalated concerns, leaving some residents feeling unsupported through legitimate issues.
Long-term residents credit Samir, Nakisa, and Mike by name for making their stay feel like home, citing swift AC repairs and attentive maintenance within 24 hours. Yet recent complaints describe a complex in transition: a management change mid-year sparked visible decline, with slow fixes on AC and toilets, parking chaos that triggered unfair late-night towing, and higher rates despite construction noise. Rude office staff and language barriers during inquiry calls have also damaged first impressions. Pet owners and newcomers face cleanliness issues in green areas and limited notice windows for repairs; one Spanish-speaking caller was hung up on twice. Longer-term residents from earlier periods praise the property's responsiveness, but the shift suggests operational consistency has become a gamble depending on who handles your request.
Staff warmth draws praise from some residents, especially property manager Charlotte and maintenance response times. However, repeated complaints about mold, roaches, mice, and dirty move-in units undermine the community's appeal. Security lapses, communication delays, and thin-walled construction are cited alongside concerns about pet waste management and uneven rule enforcement.
Guillermo and the leasing team earn consistent five-star praise for patience and knowledgeable service during the sign-up process. New manager Martha has residents noticing real improvements: removed abandoned vehicles, cleaner patios, and better trash management. However, maintenance and unit quality remain serious concerns. Tenants report stuck windows, non-functional outlets, wasp nests inside units on arrival, black mold, roaches, and bed bugs; work orders sit unaddressed for weeks. The office is hard to reach, scheduled appointments go unconfirmed, and the single dumpster creates overflow issues. Neighbor problems also surface: loud behavior, unleashed dogs, and children throwing rocks at cars. The leasing experience masks deeper operational struggles. Once you move in, responsiveness drops sharply. Staff are described as nice but overwhelmed. Recent management changes suggest the property recognizes these problems, but residents in units already dealing with pest infestations, broken climate control, and poor maintenance feel abandoned. The business attracts renters with affordable pricing and Guillermo's charm, then struggles to deliver on livability.
Villas at Grand Avenue polarizes residents: loyal long-term tenants praise the leasing team (especially Maria and Terence) and spacious units, but newer arrivals report urgent maintenance failures, pest infestations, and staff who dismiss concerns rather than solve them. Water heater repairs allegedly took over 24 hours despite Texas law, pet areas went uncleaned, and management was blamed for defensive communication and lack of follow-up. The split is stark: 46% five-star reviews celebrate transparency and personal attention, while 41% one/two-star reviews cite cockroaches, mold, broken appliances that aren't fixed, and a property manager (Wanda) described as defensive and dismissive. Staff turnover and inconsistency appear to be the fault line between good experiences and frustration.
Many residents praise fast maintenance response, clean grounds, and staff like Isabel for genuinely helping them choose the right unit. Yet significant complaints emerge about lax building security, unreturned deposits, and management inconsistency; newer tenants report serious issues including vehicle damage, unaddressed mold, and poor follow-up from front office despite mixed responsiveness on grievances. The community center and food pantry are mentioned as genuine perks, and long-term tenants often renew leases happily. Recent management shifts appear to have triggered frustration, though friendly office interactions still happen. The tension between reliable day-to-day upkeep and serious security/administrative failures is the defining split in resident experience here.
Long-term residents praise the affordability and spacious layouts, with maintenance crew Raul and leasing staff Janell drawing specific kudos for responsiveness and helpfulness. Yet newer residents report significant gaps: filthy stairwells and hallways, a non-functional security gate left open for months despite marketing promises, and units that don't match showrooms at move-in, with gaps in flooring and water damage. Management turnover and unresponsive staff during lease disputes add friction. The complex offers standard amenities (pool, fitness center, gated entry, pet policy) and same-day work orders through an online portal, but execution falters on the ground. Cleanliness, security, and follow-through on repairs vary sharply by unit and timeframe. Reviewers advise touring carefully, inspecting the actual unit you'll occupy, and asking hard questions about gate functionality and security patrols before signing.
The property works well for families seeking affordable housing with supportive services; residents praise the food pantry, learning center, and kind staff like Kathy and Jeremiah. Management and maintenance responsiveness are uneven, though: while some residents report quick answers, others faced months of ignored pest control requests and staff transitions that disrupted case management. Parking is consistently tight and poorly regulated.
Auro Crossing draws strong praise for individual managers like Ty and Ms. Crawford, who residents credit with improving the living experience and organizing community events. However, the complex is hampered by inconsistent management: online rent payment systems fail for months without resolution, office hours are unreliable, staff communication is fragmented, and some residents report rude interactions. The fitness center struggles with broken air conditioning and missing equipment. Ground maintenance is solid, but noise complaints about residents near amenities and slow repairs to core units (washers, AC, electrical issues) create frustration.
Red Stone Ranch divides tenants sharply. Those with responsive leasing staff (Nicole, Amy) and stable living situations praise friendly service and quick maintenance response; one 1.5-year resident highlighted staff coordination for pet-specific access. However, over half the recent reviews cite serious problems: poor soundproofing making apartments uninhabitable, unresponsive leasing during application (20 unanswered calls, $550 retained), pest infestations left unaddressed, unexplained billing charges, and management dishonesty about staff availability. Families report noisy conditions unsuitable for children, while former tenants describe being charged incorrectly and denied accountability.
Long-term residents and those dealing with current management praise quick maintenance and a responsive team, but a sharp divide emerges: newer or Section 8 residents report mice, cockroaches, ants, and a pattern of billing for cleaning never done or charging for pre-existing damage. The property manager Marisa draws both glowing reviews (same-day repairs, moving assistance) and serious complaints (midnight debt collection calls, locked leasing office, confrontational communication). One resident called management "the change this place needed" after 4.5 years; another fled citing the complex as a "section 8 slum" infested with pests. The amenities (two pools, fitness center, business center) exist on paper but reviewers report pools closed during tenancies, guest parking that requires long walks, and bins overflowing despite included trash service. Towing appears swift and harsh, with one food delivery documented as towed mid-drop-off. Newer or vulnerable tenants face either rapid fixes or a cycle of neglect and fees, depending on who handles their lease.
Crosstown draws strong loyalty from residents who praise Alejandro and the maintenance team for their friendliness and responsiveness, along with modern apartments and lively community events. The property itself is well maintained and conveniently located. However, persistent complaints about slow service request handling, aggressive towing practices, unresolved noise and security issues, and management's dismissive response to formal complaints create frustration for long-term residents. Experience varies sharply by building and individual circumstances. Residents consistently highlight Alejandro's patient, communicative approach during leasing, and the gym, pool, and social events draw positive mention. Yet multiple tenants report waiting weeks for repairs, facing sudden payment delinquency notices without advance warning, and seeing management refuse to enforce community rules around noise and smoking. Parking enforcement is described as predatory, and security concerns-including gate malfunctions and documented car break-ins-undermine the claimed luxury positioning.
Staff warmth masks deeper service failures. Praised maintenance workers like David and the newer management team under Lauren show genuine care, and residents consistently highlight safe grounds, clean common areas, and strong amenities. Yet move-in experiences reveal a troubling pattern: billing glitches with concessions go unresolved for weeks, unresponsive office staff hide behind an automated system, and unit issues (AC leaks, flooding) linger for days or months. Security gates remain broken years after promised fixes, package theft is common, and soundproofing is inadequate. While recent management changes show promise on trash and communication, the complex's track record on maintenance responsiveness and administrative competence remains unreliable for new and existing residents. Recent leadership under Lauren has begun addressing longstanding dumpster overflow and engagement issues, yet these improvements have not yet bridged a deeper trust gap. The complex charges premium rent for amenities but frequently closes or delays them without notice. Applicants report rushed tours, aggressive leasing tactics, and unclear denial processes. For those prioritizing friendly faces and nice pools, 401 Teravista appeals; for those needing prompt, transparent service and reliable problem-solving, the reviews suggest looking elsewhere nearby.
Sunchase divides renters sharply: half love the affordable pricing, quick maintenance response, and friendly staff (Christa, Miranda, Berenice named), while the other half faced rude leasing staff, lengthy maintenance delays, filthy laundry facilities, deposit clawbacks, and phone lines that hang up mid-call. The property shows age but some units have been renovated.
Long-term residents praise the friendly staff and quick maintenance response, though several note safety concerns with pest problems managed inconsistently. More recent complaints describe emergency systems that malfunction repeatedly, maintenance ignoring explicit repair requests, poor communication from the office, and structural issues including water damage and possible mold that management disputes.
Reviewers split sharply: some praise staff like Nicole and Tre, community grounds, and pet policies. Many others report aggressive fees (cleaning, double-charged insurance, excessive deposits), poor construction (foundation cracks, loose door knobs), persistent pest issues, and relentless towing despite limited parking. Application barriers including high bank balance demands raise fairness concerns.
Five-star reviews consistently highlight the attractive property design, strong leasing team help (staff members Nick, JP, Isabella, and Brad named), and walkable Cedar Park location near shops and schools. However, a substantial portion of reviewers report slow maintenance response (washing machines, ceiling leaks, window damage taking months), a recurring roach infestation despite monthly treatments, broken security gates, and management unresponsiveness through both current and past leaders. Long-term residents describe a pattern of cosmetic upgrades while core problems like pest control and trash service remain unaddressed, paired with steep renewal price increases.
John's maintenance crew earns consistent praise for quick, professional responses when they arrive; residents highlight the quiet setting and proximity to shopping. But the community struggles with delayed repairs on core appliances, persistent security issues including package and car theft, and pervasive neglect of common spaces and parking infrastructure. The mandatory bundled internet ($70 extra monthly) is standard copper spectrum despite marketing claims of fiber, making remote work problematic for many. Management turnover and communication gaps are recurring frustrations. Lengthy lease-up delays, unresponsive phone lines, and leasing office disorganization deter prospective residents. Those praising the property tend to focus on the wooded setting and maintenance crew; those with longer tenancies report compounding maintenance backlogs, mold and water damage left unaddressed, and equipment failures that go unresolved for weeks or months.
Recent staff turnover has brought marked improvement in office responsiveness and tenant communication, with newer team members earning consistent praise for helpfulness and follow-through on applications and move-ins. However, long-standing infrastructure and ground maintenance failures persist: pest infestations (rats, roaches), overflowing dumpsters, a non-functional front gate, chronic parking problems, and a closed pool remain unresolved despite resident complaints spanning over a year.
Lantower's leasing team and maintenance staff earn consistent praise for responsiveness and professionalism, yet residents battle an unresponsive corporate office, stacking fees, and recurring pest problems. Long-term tenants report spending months recovering deposits and resolving billing errors that require repeated in-person visits to resolve.
Five-star and one-star reviews split sharply. Visitors and new residents consistently praise the leasing team-named staff like Kai, Roberto, and Gerby appear multiple times for going extra miles during tours and move-ins. The office organizes regular resident events. Yet long-term residents report a stark reversal after signing: broken front gates left unfixed for years, repeated theft (bicycles, car tools, mail), cockroaches residents say management won't address, and a consistent pattern of staff telling residents problems are "in the computer" but not their responsibility. Parking enforcement is aggressive; security lapses are widespread and acknowledged by residents themselves as the main pain point. Property finishes live up to marketing (granite countertops, quiet units, good maintenance response), but management appears to prioritize marketing and enforcement over resident safety and follow-through on repairs.
Experiences split sharply: some residents enjoy spacious units, responsive maintenance, and feel genuinely safe; others find the social environment contentious, rules limiting, and report ongoing pest and cleanliness concerns. Quality of daily life hinges heavily on resident mix and how much you value management's social programming.
Long-term residents speak warmly of maintenance speed, monthly food trucks, and a walkable North Austin location near Domain. Newer or departing residents report a stark divide: staff either solve problems promptly or ignore them entirely, leasing communications often mislead on move-in timing and costs, and deposit deductions feel aggressive. Maintenance excels for some; pest complaints, dead keyless-entry batteries, and broken garage doors plague others. The community works if your needs align with management's competence in your building. At price point, leasing pushes steep rent increases via software-driven raises, and lock outs cost $100. Management's reputation splits sharply on response to security concerns, water damage, and pest control. Families with young children and those renting under Section 8 have filed complaints suggesting inconsistent or dismissive treatment.
Five-star reviewers praise recent renovations and an attentive management team. Negative reviews from earlier years and recent months describe chronic maintenance failures (heat and AC controlled centrally, backed-up plumbing), unresponsive leasing staff, security problems including theft and violence, and persistent pest issues. The property appears to be mid-transition: some residents report genuine improvements, but complaints about safety, responsiveness, and basic utilities remain unresolved.
Whitestone Crossing attracts sharply divided reviews. Tenants who connect with staff like Raj and T'Quisha report spacious units, smooth move-ins, and responsive care; others face pest infestations, mold, unattended maintenance requests, missed office hours, and management behavior many describe as unprofessional or inconsistent. The complex allows pit bulls and airbnb rentals by staff, which some see as problematic.
Long-term residents describe a deep divide. Those who stay cite friendly staff, affordable rates, and a quiet hilltop setting, but dozens report severe mold in carpet and air systems, uncontrolled roach and flea infestations, and water service failures. Tenants who requested early lease breaks due to documented health problems and doctor's notes were refused. Management allegedly blamed residents instead of addressing hazards. A few satisfied residents say maintenance responds within a day if called, yet widespread complaints about the gym, laundry, and balcony fines suggest systemic issues beneath the low rent. Staff members Juan and Rosemary are named both positively and negatively across reviews. Pet owners report cats and hairless breeds exposed to pests and contamination. The business blocks carpet replacement, refuses rent credits for uninhabitable conditions, and residents have had to move to afford better managed properties at lower cost.
Avery Oaks splits sharply between residents who praise select staff members and those who describe unsafe, poorly managed conditions. Ivonne, Ise, and Jesse earn consistent recognition for helpfulness and care, but office consistency is unreliable, and leasing decisions frustrate applicants. Long-term residents report security breaches, car and garage break-ins, trespassing, and noise violations going unchecked; some mention gunshot activity in the area. Move-out charges surprise residents even after careful cleaning. The property itself is clean when maintained, but common areas suffer from damage and pest issues. Maintenance responds quickly to repair requests, yet corporate and management remain distant on safety concerns and policy enforcement. The value proposition (pricing in the $1,100–$1,400 range) appeals initially, but residents say the cost compounds through unexpected fees and the toll of living in an understaffed, under-managed complex.
Strong individual staff members like Vee, Sherri, and Gwen earn genuine praise for responsiveness and tenant care, and the rent remains affordable for the townhome size. However, frequent manager and maintenance crew turnover creates chaos. Residents report roach infestations that persist for months despite multiple requests, mold painted over rather than treated, and repairs delayed indefinitely. The application process suffers from poor handoff between staff: applicants are given conflicting timelines, documents requested repeatedly, and left waiting without clear status updates. Long-term residents cite security concerns, stolen belongings, and sudden charge increases; departure creates additional friction over cleaning fees and damage claims. The business serves tenants seeking second chances (poor credit welcome) and affordable housing in Round Rock, but consistency depends heavily on which staff member you encounter. Under newer or particularly engaged management, units rent quickly and maintenance responds within days. Under older regimes, the property has felt neglected for years. The 2.9-star average reflects this volatility: highly satisfied tenants living under attentive leadership, and deeply frustrated ones who experienced prolonged chaos.
Residents report serious and recurring maintenance failures, particularly AC breakdowns lasting weeks or months, trash left uncollected, and persistent communication breakdowns where calls go unanswered and staff show hostility. A small group praises named staff like Marie, Jordan, and Avery for responsiveness on individual issues, but the broader experience reflects systemic neglect: doors remain unrepaired, units lack proper internet access, and mold appears during water damage. Pricing shifts hundreds of dollars between quote and contract, and the contracted tow service removes guests' cars even when properly registered. For those who connect with specific staff members or stay short-term, certain experience is positive; for longer-stay residents, the pattern becomes one of frustration. The property operates townhomes with resort-style pools, courts, and fitness facilities across Round Rock and Cat Hollow, yet basic services consistently fail. Management rarely answers phones, replies to emails late or not at all, and resists accountability for errors. A handful of five-star reviews cite family stability over years and praising "Avery" and the team, but these sit alongside detailed warnings from residents experiencing months without hot water, AC, working showers, and uncollected garbage. The disconnect between short visits and long-term residence is stark.
Not enough recent reviews yet to synthesise a reliable sentiment read for this business.
Last updated 2026-09-22
