Woodbend Apartments

Pros

• The living room in the building is gorgeous.
• The property is very safe.
• The units are well maintained and management works with tenants well.
• The accommodations are exceptional and the amenities are on point.
• It is a place residents can call home.
• It is very clean, nice, and quiet.
• The space is loved by residents, and the washer and dryer are highly appreciated.

Cons

• They don't fix anything.
• They don't accept HUD, despite the website listing HUD acceptance (claimed false advertising).
• They won't allow a unit viewing, saying "we don't do that around here," which feels like a red flag.
• They claim all units are up to code because they are HUD units, which the reviewer finds unbelievable.
• The manager is off-putting and the overall management is a red flag.
• Move-in units were not ready or clean (stains, dirty appliances, missing closet doors).
• A washer issue caused flooding next door, preventing laundry for a month, and left a large hole in the bathroom wall unrepaired.
• Water bills are unreasonably high and water was disconnected for weeks without resolution.
• Rats entered the living spaces due to maintenance failures, damaging belongings.
• Customer service is horrible and staff are unresponsive to problems.
• There is persistent turnover with no permanent property manager, leading to miscommunications and disputed charges.
• The apartments are very old and in need of remodeling.

Review

The collection of feedback about this apartment complex paints a mixed and often troubling portrait. On the one hand, several people praise the building's aesthetic appeal and a sense of safety: "the living room in the building is just gorgeous," and a reviewer who has lived there for nearly a decade calls it "very safe." A few residents also mention clean, quiet days and comfortable spaces - one person even notes loving the washer and dryer and another simply calling it a place they can call home. There are compliments about well-maintained units and amenities "on point," and at least one tenant highlights the space that a family member appreciates as a bright spot in daily life. For those who feel secure and find value in the property's look and feel, these aspects stand out as the strongest positives.

Yet the same property becomes a case study in misalignment between marketing, policy language, and actual practice. A recurring grievance concerns the property's handling of subsidies and HUD-related programs. Several reviews state that the complex does not accept HUD, despite being listed on the website as participating in HUD-related programs, which leads to accusations of false advertising. One reviewer emphasizes a particularly troubling interaction in which staff claimed, "we don't do that around here," and asserted that "all the units are up to code because they are HUD units," which many readers interpret as a contradictory or evasive stance toward housing aid. The question of whether disabled applicants can even view a unit before making a decision is raised repeatedly, with a prospective parent noting that it felt inappropriate and inconsistent with typical practice in housing for people with disabilities. This tension creates a sense of red flags, especially for families that rely on accessibility accommodations.

Accessibility and viewings become another focal point of concern. Several reviews recount experiences where potential residents were not allowed to tour units, or were told that tours aren't offered "around here," even when a unit was available. For families with a disabled member, the absence of an opportunity to see and assess a unit's accessibility features before committing can be particularly disheartening and ethically troubling. A reviewer who was evaluating it for their daughter - described as high-functioning but disabled - expresses disappointment at not being allowed to evaluate the unit's accessibility firsthand. The sentiment is that any apartment that could house a disabled person should invite a viewing and a careful assessment of how well the space would accommodate needs, but the reality described here feels inconsistent with that expectation.

Maintenance and management realities add another layer of frustration. A number of tenants describe units being dirty, not ready at move-in, or in disrepair - ranging from stained carpets and dirty fridges to missing closet doors and general cleanliness issues. One person recounts a washer problem that flooded a neighboring unit, a delayed response for weeks, and then a partially fixed but poorly concealed repair that left a gaping hole in the bathroom wall. The water bill story is particularly striking: a tenant reports a water charge exceeding $1,000 with little clarity about the cause, and they describe being left without water for three weeks during a dispute over responsibilities. These anecdotes contribute to a perception that maintenance is reactive at best and opaque at worst, with tenants left carrying the burden of unresolved problems and unclear financial accountability.

The relationships between tenants and management compound the dissatisfaction. Some reviews praise kindness or professionalism in individual staff members, but they are overwhelmed by systemic issues. Complaints range from "horrible customer service" and "horrible management" to more concrete problems like unanswered phone calls, frequent turnover in property managers, and a feeling that staff are focused more on rent collection than on addressing tenant concerns. In one extended account, a former tenant details a troubled sequence involving mismanagement of subsidies, miscommunication about EIV requirements, and a revolving door of property managers. The result is ongoing disputes over charges after move-out, with the tenant alleging improper collection practices and a lack of proactive communication about accounts and exit procedures. The overarching impression is that tenants feel unsupported and unseen, especially when they are contending with subsidies, billing, and maintenance needs.

Despite the heavy load of negative experiences, there are still pockets of positive sentiment worth noting. Some reviewers describe the property as well-located, safe, and clean when upkeep is on track, and a few tenants mention being satisfied with certain amenities or the overall environment. One or two reviewers emphasize improvements or the possibility of a better experience in the future, indicating that the property has the potential to be a good home if management challenges, maintenance issues, and policy inconsistencies could be resolved. A few individuals even reflect gratitude for features they appreciate, such as laundry facilities, a quiet setting, or the sense of home that the space can offer when things go well.

When you read these impressions together, the picture is nuanced and unresolved. The property clearly has strengths: a strong aesthetic appeal, some safety assurances, and certain livability features that some residents value highly. But those strengths are consistently overshadowed by persistent concerns about false or confusing advertising around HUD participation, barriers to viewing units, episodic but serious maintenance failures, and what many tenants perceive as dysfunctional management practices. For families considering this complex, especially those with disabled members or those relying on housing subsidies, the reviews suggest a cautious approach: verify current HUD status directly, insist on a guaranteed unit tour and an accessibility assessment before signing, and prepare for the possibility of chronic maintenance delays and administrative disputes. In its best light, the building could be a refined, welcoming home; in its ongoing reality, it often falls short of the standards that residents and prospective tenants rightfully expect.

Physicians

• Carfagno Family Practice Clinic (0.5 miles)
• Central Arkansas Vein Center (4.8 miles)
• Little Rock Family Practice (4.8 miles)
• Endoscopy Center of Little Rock (4.8 miles)
• Baptist Health Family Clinic-Pleasant Valley (6.1 miles)
• Premier Gastronenterology (6.2 miles)
• Breckenridge Family Clinic (6.6 miles)

Restaurants

• Chick-Fil-A (0.9 miles)
• Sonic Drive-In (2.3 miles)
• Chick-Fil-A (4.6 miles)
• Chipotle Mexican Grill (4.6 miles)
• Taziki's Mediterranean Cafe (6.2 miles)
• Petit & Keet (6.3 miles)
• Olive Garden (6.4 miles)

Pharmacies

• Walgreens (0.9 miles)
• The Drug Store (6.3 miles)
• Walgreens (6.7 miles)
• Mayflower Family Pharmacy (6.8 miles)
• Cornerstone Pharmacy (6.8 miles)
• Bowman Curve I (7.1 miles)
• Walgreens (7.2 miles)

Places of Worship

• Rolling Oaks Free Will Baptist Church (1.4 miles)
• Second Presbyterian Church (5.2 miles)
• Covenant Presbyterian Church (7.5 miles)

Hospitals

• The BridgeWay (4 miles)
• Arkansas Surgical Hospital (5.3 miles)
• Hickingbotham Outpatient Center (8.2 miles)
• CHI St Vincent Infirmary (8.5 miles)

Parks

• Two Rivers Park (4.3 miles)
• Burns Park (6.3 miles)
• Hounds Lounge Pet Reso (8.1 miles)
• Allsopp Park (8.5 miles)

Theaters

• AMC Chenal 9 (7 miles)

Cafes

• Starbucks (7.5 miles)
• Panera Bread (8.2 miles)
• Starbucks (8.3 miles)