Overall sentiment across the review summaries is mixed but leans positive on several core day-to-day qualities while showing recurring concerns about maintenance, infrastructure, and treatment for a subset of residents. The strongest and most consistent positives are cleanliness and the building being well kept. Multiple reviewers specifically praised the housekeeping and described the apartments and common areas as very clean, without the typical 'convalescent' smell that some worry about in senior housing. Stability of residency is also a notable strength — with at least one resident having lived there for 20 years — which indicates a measure of resident satisfaction and continuity.
Staff and community interactions are frequently cited as strengths. Many reviews emphasize friendly, kind, and helpful staff and residents. Phrases like "staff are great," "staff is awesome," and "kind staff" recur, and the on-site housekeeper receives explicit praise. Residents report a friendly social atmosphere, good neighbors, and a sense of safety. The presence of on-site or nearby services — a weekly dollar store visit, a store owner bringing bread, staples, and vegetables, and a Sunday church service — contributes to residents' quality of life and convenience. The building is described as quiet and somewhat old-fashioned, which some reviewers prefer.
Value and amenities: several reviewers call the rates reasonable for seniors and say the community represents good value compared with other local options (one reviewer explicitly compared it favorably to Wayne Towers and apartments in Caro). There is an on-site dining room, though at least one reviewer said they do not use the meal service. Ongoing construction was mentioned; some took it as a sign of improvements, while others noted it as a source of disruption.
However, there are clear and recurring negatives. Infrastructure and maintenance problems come up repeatedly: reviewers reported elevator issues — both reliability complaints and lack of sufficient cleaning — and at least one review noted that the phone does not work. Odors were mentioned in two contexts: the absence of a clinical smell was praised, but a "smell from refuge" was also reported as an issue. Lack of visitor parking was singled out as a practical inconvenience. Train noise is a specific environmental concern raised by more than one reviewer.
More serious are the mixed reports about treatment and care. While many reviewers praise staff, a minority express strong negative experiences: words like "horrible experiences," "poor treatment of seniors," and even warnings such as "Don't send loved ones here" appear in the summaries. Relatedly, at least one resident explicitly said they regret moving in. These comments point to variability in individual experiences and suggest that interpersonal treatment or specific incidents have been significant enough for some reviewers to report deep dissatisfaction.
In sum, Romulus Tower Apartments appears to offer a generally clean, quiet, and community-oriented environment with friendly staff and reasonable senior pricing, plus useful nearby services and an on-site dining room. Yet the facility also shows notable weaknesses in maintenance and infrastructure (elevators, phones, occasional odors), parking, and a small but vocal set of reviews describing poor treatment of residents. The pattern suggests a largely positive day-to-day living experience for many residents, tempered by operational pain points and occasional serious care/interaction lapses that prospective residents and families should investigate further. Given the mix of strong positives and significant negatives, visitors should consider an in-person tour, speak with current residents about specific concerns (elevator reliability, staffing consistency, parking availability, and any recent complaints), and ask management about measures taken to address the maintenance and care-related issues mentioned in these reviews.
