Pavilion

Pros

• Previous management did a good job.

Cons

• The complex is poorly maintained and plagued by infestations (roaches, flies, bed bugs).
• Management is described as rude, uncaring toward residents - especially the elderly - and dishonest.
• There is severe understaffing and maintenance neglect: one maintenance worker for hundreds of units and unreliable elevators.
• Safety concerns are rampant, including an elderly resident being assaulted with staff/security failing to intervene.
• Office staff are repeatedly described as unprofessional, unhelpful, and unresponsive.
• Rent has increased, adding financial stress for long-time residents.
• Accusations of favoritism and protection for problematic residents undermine accountability.
• Residents feel unsafe and treated like inmates, with calls for external oversight (HUD/state agencies).

Review

A chorus of residents and family members paints a consistently grim picture of this apartment complex, especially for elderly and vulnerable tenants. Across the array of reviews, the dominant themes are neglect in maintenance, pervasive pest problems, and a management culture that is repeatedly described as rude, uncaring, and unresponsive. The overall sentiment is that the building is run with little regard for the health, safety, or dignity of its longtime residents, many of whom are elderly and living on fixed incomes. The situation is described as deteriorating over time, with new management or ownership seemingly failing to address longstanding issues that were previously handled (or at least addressed) to a greater degree.

Pest infestations are a constant refrain. Several reviewers report roaches, flies, and bed bugs appearing regularly, with no meaningful or timely remediation from management. The presence of pests is framed not only as a nuisance but as an indicator of broader neglect in cleanliness and upkeep. Alongside pests, there are alarming indications of dangerous electrical issues - outlets that spark when plugs are inserted - and a general sense that safety risks are not being properly managed. Complaints include delayed or ignored maintenance requests, with some reviewers noting that only a single maintenance mechanic is responsible for hundreds of units, a ratio described as woefully inadequate given the needs of elderly residents. The result, according to those writing reviews, is a building that feels unsafe and increasingly uninhabitable for its vulnerable occupants.

Management is the focal point of much of the outrage. A recurring name is Marcella Windle (also spelled Marcela Windle in some reviews), who is described in stark terms as rude, mean-spirited, and uninterested in the welfare of residents, especially the elderly. Commentators accuse her of lying, displaying a complete lack of empathy, and creating an atmosphere of fear rather than service. The criticism extends to a broader assessment that the office operates with hostility toward tenants and that communication is handled in a way that feels intentionally dismissive. Some reviews explicitly call for HUD involvement and even for a change in management, arguing that the current leadership fails to meet basic standards of professional conduct or accountability. There are also mentions of a former manager who allegedly did a better job, suggesting a sharp decline with the new leadership.

The treatment of elderly residents is highlighted repeatedly as a core moral and practical failing. Several accounts describe elderly residents being talked down to, ignored, or otherwise neglected. One particularly troubling testimonial involves an elderly aunt who was assaulted by another resident in full view of a recently hired security guard who did nothing to intervene. The same review notes that the police would not pursue action because there were no visible injuries, a claim that many readers may find implausible or alarming, yet it underscores a perceived pattern of inaction and fear among residents. Compounding the fear is a sense that a powerful resident - described as the head of the residents association or someone with significant influence - has undue protection from management, leading others to fear retaliation or dismissal if they complain. The overall impression conveyed is that residents feel unsafe, unheard, and trapped by a system that prioritizes appearances or internal politics over genuine protection of the elderly residents.

The financial and procedural elements add another layer of frustration and distress. Rent increases are noted, with one account mentioning a rise of about $73, a change that plainly upsets elderly tenants living on fixed incomes. In a particularly painful and provocative episode, a reviewer describes being pressured to handle the belongings of a deceased grandmother within a tight time frame - despite rent already having been paid through the end of that month - forcing emotional distress during a moment of grief. The reviewer alleges that the manager insisted on a quick turnover and threatened to charge for anything not cleared or returned promptly, a demand that felt insensitive and punitive to someone already grieving. When the family tried to obtain surveillance footage related to an incident, they encountered resistance and unfriendly behavior from staff, including being transferred to a staff member who would not identify herself and eventually had the call dropped. This trope - unresponsive office staff, evasive individuals, and a sense of obstruction - recurs in multiple anecdotes.

Safety concerns extend beyond individual incidents to a broader fear that the building does not adequately protect its residents from violent or disruptive neighbors. Complaints about a dangerous resident, the lack of effective security, and the general atmosphere of intimidation or coercion contribute to a climate in which many families consider leaving but cannot, due to tenure, finances, or the emotional burden of uprooting a longtime residence. Reviewers describe the building as a place where residents are treated more like inmates than tenants, with little access to reliable help or protection when issues arise. This sense of institutional neglect is starkly echoed by references to city or state oversight, with some reviewers indicating that government agencies should intervene to safeguard residents' rights and well-being.

Taken together, these accounts present a powerful, unambiguous indictment of the complex's management and operations from the perspective of current and former residents and their families. The recurring complaints - persistent pests, unsafe electrical conditions, insufficient and unresponsive maintenance, crude or demeaning treatment of elderly residents, and opaque, hostile office practices - form a mosaic of dissatisfaction that stretches across multiple years and generations of tenants. For those looking to advocate for loved ones, the tone of the messages is a clear warning: without substantial changes in leadership, accountability, and basic resident protections, the environment is unlikely to improve. Some reviewers suggest legal avenues or regulatory intervention as potential remedies, while others express a hopeful belief that new ownership or management could redirect the complex toward a more humane and responsive model of care and service for its elderly residents.

This part of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania offers a convenient and vibrant urban lifestyle with easy access to various amenities. The area is home to several cafes, pharmacies, restaurants, parks, transportation options, hospitals, physicians, and a theater, providing residents with everything they need within close proximity. With parks like Fairmount Park and Schuylkill River Park nearby, seniors can enjoy the outdoors and stay active. The availability of reputable hospitals like Temple University Hospital and Lankenau Medical Center ensures quality healthcare services are readily accessible. Additionally, the proximity to public transportation hubs such as Septa Wayne Junction Station and 30th Street Station makes it easy for seniors to get around the city. Overall, this part of Philadelphia offers a bustling yet convenient setting for senior living.

Cafes

• Panera Bread (0.4 miles)
• Starbucks (0.4 miles)
• Starbucks (0.8 miles)
• The Landing Kitchen (1 miles)
• Pilgrim Roasters (1.5 miles)
• Starbucks (1.5 miles)
• Starbucks (2 miles)

Pharmacies

• Rite Aid (1 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (1.3 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (1.8 miles)
• Rite Aid (1.9 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (2.7 miles)
• Rite Aid (3 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (3.1 miles)

Restaurants

• Pizza Hut (1.1 miles)
• Custard & Cakes Creamery (1.4 miles)
• Larry's Steaks (1.5 miles)
• Dalessandro's Steaks (1.8 miles)
• McDonald's (2.9 miles)
• Rosy's Taco Bar (3.9 miles)
• K'Far (4 miles)

Parks

• Fairmount Park (1.1 miles)
• Schuylkill River Park (4 miles)
• Rittenhouse Square (4.2 miles)
• Palmer Doggie Depot (4.3 miles)
• Palmer Park Farmers Market (4.4 miles)
• Piazza Dog Park (4.4 miles)
• Franklin Square (4.5 miles)

Transportation

• Septa Wayne Junction Station (2.8 miles)
• 30th Street Station (3.5 miles)
• SEPTA: MFL/TRL 30th Street Station (3.6 miles)
• Stenton Station (4.2 miles)
• Jefferson Station (4.4 miles)
• SEPTA: 101/102 Lansdowne Avenue Station (5.4 miles)

Hospitals

• Temple University Hospital (3 miles)
• Lankenau Medical Center (3.1 miles)
• Philadelphia VA Medical Center (3.8 miles)
• The Pavilion (3.9 miles)
• Veterans Administration Community Living Center (4 miles)
• Albert Einstein Employee Health Center (4.2 miles)
• Episcopal Hospital (4.2 miles)

Physicians

• Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (3.8 miles)
• CHOP Buerger Center for Advanced Pediatric Care - Raymond G. Perelman Campus (3.9 miles)
• Simms Hank Md Albert Einstein Medical Center Philadelphia (4 miles)

Theaters

• Landmark Theatres - Ritz Five (5.1 miles)