Landmark Tower Apartments

Pros

• The no-smoking policy in the one-bedroom apartments is viewed positively.
• The reviewer's father-in-law loves his home and has lived there for nearly twenty years.
• The residence is designed to serve seniors and disabled residents, creating a focused, supportive community.
• The doors being locked at both entrances are appreciated for resident safety.

Cons

• Meth is everywhere at the residence.
• The stated "No smoking" rule seems violated, with plenty of smoking occurring anyway.
• It seems no one cares about conditions varying by floor, making the place feel sloppy.
• The facility appears inaccessible to essential medical and emergency personnel, hindering residents' health needs.
• The door policy is problematic: although protective, it would require a staff member at the door during business hours to avoid blocking access.
• There are no activities for residents, and the policies are described as overly strict.

Review

The reviews paint a troubling picture of a seniors and disabled residence that seems to struggle with safety, consistency, and engagement. The writer opens with a blunt contrast between the facility's advertised environment and what they experience on the ground: meth appears to be pervasive, and while there is a strong "No smoking" sign, it seems that smoking is still happening in abundance, varying by floor and seemingly going unchecked. The overall impression is one of disorganization and neglect, with the reviewer labeling the place as sloppy and not reflecting the calm, well-managed atmosphere one might expect in a residence intended for vulnerable populations.

A central thread in the critique is the disconnect between policy and practice, especially around health and safety. The reviewer questions why a facility designated for seniors and disabled residents would be so resistant to allowing essential care services inside. They point out that physical therapists, respiratory therapists, home health aides, CNAs, food delivery, and even emergency services are effectively blocked from entering for their routines and visits. The doors are locked at both entrances, which, in the reviewer's view, is a necessary security measure - yet the same measure becomes a barrier to necessary care. The suggestion that an employee should be stationed at the door during business hours reflects a desire for a practical compromise: security without hindering access for legitimate, life-supporting services.

Amid the policy complaints, there is a personal, emotionally charged element. The reviewer notes a beloved family member - specifically a father-in-law - who has lived at this residence for more than two decades. Despite the long tenure and the fact that residents pay to live there, the reviewer wonders why door closures and restricted access should interfere with basic home needs and health requirements. The tone conveys a sense of loyalty and attachment to the place, mingled with frustration over rules that seem to jeopardize or complicate daily living and medical support.

The description also touches on quality-of-life concerns. The reviewer mentions a strictly enforced "no smoking" rule for one-bedroom apartments, but this rule is juxtaposed with a broader sense that activities for residents are lacking and policies are rigid. The facility is described as "disabled and seniors only," which may feel isolating to residents who crave a sense of community or engagement. The absence of mentioned activities contributes to an impression of stagnation or neglect, where routine opportunities for socialization or recreation are missing and rigid rules take center stage.

Another layer of the critique focuses on the safety-meets-security dynamic of locked entrances. While the reviewer acknowledges the protective benefit of having doors secured, they argue that the current setup creates an undue obstacle to health and emergency services. The ideal balance - security without obstructing essential care - appears to be missing. The suggestion that someone should be at the door during business hours underscores a practical demand for a policy that protects residents while still enabling caregivers and emergency responders to perform their duties promptly.

Overall, the review leaves an impression of a facility that holds significant potential but is hampered by inconsistent enforcement, tight restrictions, and a lack of resident-focused programming. The writer's affection for the place, especially given the long-term residency of their family member, is clear, but so is the call for meaningful improvements: better access for healthcare and support services, more resident activities, and policies that honor the health and well-being needs of seniors and disabled residents without compromising safety. The narrative blends care for a loved one with clear frustration about how current practices fail to meet basic expectations for comfort, accessibility, and engagement.

This part of Nampa, Idaho offers a variety of amenities that cater to the needs of seniors. In terms of healthcare, there are multiple physicians and pharmacies conveniently located within a few miles radius, providing easy access to medical services. The presence of cafes and restaurants nearby ensures that residents have plenty of dining options, while parks such as Lions Park offer opportunities for outdoor activities and leisurely strolls. Additionally, there are several places of worship in the area for those seeking spiritual fulfillment. With hospitals like Davita Healthcare and St Luke's Center for Breast Imaging in close proximity, seniors can feel reassured knowing that quality medical care is readily available. Overall, this neighborhood provides a well-rounded environment that supports a comfortable and convenient lifestyle for seniors.

Cafes

• Flying M Coffee Garage (0.1 miles)
• Dutch Bros Coffee (1.2 miles)
• Starbucks (1.6 miles)
• Moxie Java (1.8 miles)
• Starbucks (2.6 miles)
• Starbucks (2.7 miles)
• Dutch Bros Coffee (2.9 miles)

Restaurants

• Stella's Ice Cream (0.2 miles)
• Domino's Pizza (0.7 miles)
• McDonald's (1.1 miles)
• Express Lucky Star Mongolian BBQ (1.2 miles)
• Jack In The Box (1.3 miles)
• McDonald's (1.5 miles)
• Subway (2.5 miles)

Physicians

• Chatterbox Pediatric Therapy Center (0.3 miles)
• Primary Health Medical Group - South Nampa (1.6 miles)
• Randell Page (1.7 miles)
• Dr Jon Hlavinka, MD (1.7 miles)
• Saltzer Medical Group (1.7 miles)
• Robert Buxton, DO (1.8 miles)
• Idaho Urologic Institute, P.A. (1.9 miles)

Pharmacies

• Walgreens (0.5 miles)
• Albertsons Pharmacy (0.5 miles)
• Caremark Rx (1.8 miles)
• Good Neighbor Pharmacy (1.8 miles)
• Walgreens (2.2 miles)
• Sav-On Pharmacy (2.3 miles)
• CVS Pharmacy (2.8 miles)

Places of Worship

• College Church of the Nazarene (1 miles)
• Crossroads Community Church (2.1 miles)
• Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (3.1 miles)
• Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (6 miles)
• Iglesia Damasco (7.7 miles)
• Rockharbor Church (8.2 miles)
• Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (8.5 miles)

Parks

• Lions Park (1.6 miles)
• Fuller Park (6.5 miles)
• The Park (7.9 miles)

Hospitals

• Davita Healthcare (2.3 miles)
• St Luke's Center for Breast Imaging (3.3 miles)