Smith Senior Village

Pros

• The units are spacious and affordable.
• The property is under new management.

Cons

• The approval process is incredibly lengthy.
• The units are spacious and affordable, but have mold.
• The property is under new management, yet the same people and attitudes persist under a different name.
• Residents received their first lease violation within two weeks of moving in and accumulated five within the first few months.
• The manager lacks knowledge of what is legal and what violates residents' protections under the ADA or FHA.
• The reviewer claims blatant violations of residents' rights by Sustainable Property Management at Smith Senior Village and Harvest Villas.

Review

The experience described starts with a frustrating obstacle that colors the entire housing experience: the application and approval process is described as incredibly lengthy. The reviewer notes that the delay in approvals casts a shadow over what might otherwise be straightforward housing decisions, turning what should be a simple step into a stress-filled bottleneck. Despite the promise of comfortable living, this initial hurdle sets a negative tone and frames subsequent experiences in a context of bureaucratic sluggishness rather than customer care.

In parallel with the slow approvals, the physical conditions of the units are addressed. The reviewer points out that the units themselves are spacious and affordable, which would ordinarily be a plus, but there is a major caveat: mold. This combination - desirable space and price threaded with a mold problem - creates a troubling contrast. The reviewer implies that the affordability and size are negated by health and safety concerns, suggesting that the living environment could be compromising residents' well-being right from the outset.

Complicating matters further is the management situation. The property is under new management, specifically Sustainable Property Management, which the reviewer notes is in place at Smith Senior Village and at Harvest Villas, described as their sister property. The most unsettling observation is the assertion that it is "the same people, same attitudes, different name." This statement hints at a broader critique: that the leadership and staff have not fundamentally changed, and that the name change does little to alter the underlying dynamics or the treatment of residents.

The reviewer highlights a troubling pattern of enforcement or punishment in the form of lease violations. Within two weeks of moving in, the reviewer received the first lease violation, and in the following months, they claim to have accrued five more. This rapid accumulation of violations suggests either overly punitive enforcement practices, inconsistent interpretation of lease terms, or perhaps a misalignment between management expectations and residents' day-to-day realities. The implication is not merely about rules, but about how those rules are applied and experienced by new tenants.

A sharp turn in the narrative concerns the manager's knowledge of the law. The reviewer asserts that the manager has little to no understanding of what is legal and what violates protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act. This point shifts the discussion from complaints about policies to concerns about legal compliance and residents' rights. The reviewer describes what they perceive as "blatant violations of a person's rights," attributing these actions to Sustainable Property Management at both Smith Senior Village and Harvest Villas. The tone here is stark and accusatory, painting the management as knowingly or negligently disregarding key protections designed to shield residents from discrimination and other unfair practices.

Throughout the narrative, the impact on residents' rights and daily life is foregrounded. The reviewer emphasizes the seriousness of the alleged violations and the potential harm to vulnerable residents, particularly those who rely on accommodations and protections under federal civil rights laws. The repeated references to ADA and the Fair Housing Act are not just rhetorical flourishes; they frame the complaints as systemic, not merely episodic annoyances. The experience is presented as a pattern rather than a series of isolated incidents, casting the property management as a recurring obstacle to safe and fair housing.

The closing sentiment is a stark warning: the reviewer urges readers to approach these properties with caution, signaling a lack of confidence in the current management's ability to provide compliant, safe, or respectful housing. The final note - "Good luck" - leaves readers with a sense of defiance and unease, underscoring the perceived risk and the severity of the grievances described. The overall impression is that the combination of procedural delays, substandard living conditions, punitive lease enforcement, and questionable legal awareness by management creates an environment that feels hostile or unsafe for residents, particularly those with disabilities or other protected status.

In sum, the narrative presents a confluence of administrative delays, problematic living conditions, and management practices that appear misaligned with legal protections and resident needs. The new management company is portrayed as continuing patterns associated with the prior administration, rather than transforming the experience into a compliant and supportive housing environment. The reviewer's account raises serious questions about how Smith Senior Village and Harvest Villas are being run under Sustainable Property Management and whether residents' rights and health are being adequately safeguarded.

Richmond, Missouri offers a variety of amenities and services that may be appealing to seniors looking to settle in the area. With multiple places of worship nearby and a range of dining options, including fast food and cafes, residents have convenient access to spiritual fulfillment and social activities. Additionally, there are several pharmacies and medical facilities within close proximity for easy access to healthcare services. For leisure, there are parks in the surrounding area for outdoor activities or relaxation. Transportation options are also available for those looking to travel within or outside the city. Overall, Richmond provides a combination of essential services and recreational opportunities that may cater well to the needs and interests of older adults considering senior living in the area.

Places of Worship

• Messenger Chapel Pentecostal Church of God (0.3 miles)
• Assembly of God Church (0.6 miles)
• Bethel Mennonite Church (0.7 miles)
• Faith Lutheran Church (0.7 miles)
• United Methodist Church (0.7 miles)
• First Baptist Church (0.8 miles)
• Jehovah's Witnesses (2.6 miles)

Restaurants

• McDonald's (0.5 miles)
• The Scoop (0.6 miles)
• Depot Tavern (0.7 miles)
• Sonic Drive-In (0.7 miles)
• The Scoop of Richmond (0.8 miles)
• Taco Bell (0.8 miles)
• KFC (0.8 miles)

Pharmacies

• Red Cross Pharmacy (0.6 miles)
• C & C Discount Pharmacy (0.8 miles)
• Walmart Pharmacy (0.8 miles)
• Medicine Shoppe (0.9 miles)
• C & C Discount Pharmacy (1 miles)
• C & C Discount Drug (1 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (7.6 miles)

Cafes

• Serendipity Coffee (0.7 miles)
• At Ease Coffee and Design (7.5 miles)

Hospitals

• Fresnenius Medical Care (0.9 miles)
• Ray County Memorial Hospital (1 miles)
• Excelsior Springs Hospital (15.5 miles)
• Excelsior Springs Medical Center (15.5 miles)

Transportation

• U-Haul (5.2 miles)
• Excelsior Springs Memorial Airport (3EX) (12.8 miles)
• Excelsior Springs Municipal Airport (12.8 miles)

Physicians

• Lexington Medical Clinic (7.6 miles)
• Twin Oaks Family Care (15 miles)
• Family Medicine Specialists of Excelsior Springs (15.1 miles)
• Schreier Family Medicine (15.1 miles)
• H Andrew Pickett (15.2 miles)
• The Excelsior Springs Clinic (16.1 miles)

Theaters

• Cannonball 6 (7.7 miles)

Parks

• Lexington City Park & Rec (8 miles)
• Tryst Falls Park (14.1 miles)
• Sunnyside Park (14.6 miles)