Bonner Carrington develops, constructs, owns, and operates multifamily apartment communities across Texas, serving general-population residents and active adults aged 55+. Its portfolio includes mixed-income, affordable, and market-rate housing, combining design, construction, leasing, property management, and resident services for households statewide.
AI-researched delivery record, not yet confirmed by the developer. Dates may be approximate; original sources are linked.
AI research over published reviews and resident comments. Scores are a model’s reading of opinion, not figures stated on a page, and nothing here feeds any number above it. The links under each block are the pages that research says it used. Based on available resident reviews of covered buildings. These are reported experiences, not independent building inspections, and may not represent all residents or properties.
AI-researched delivery record, not yet confirmed by the developer. Dates may be approximate; original sources are linked.
AI research over published reviews and resident comments. Scores are a model’s reading of opinion, not figures stated on a page, and nothing here feeds any number above it. The links under each block are the pages that research says it used. Based on available resident reviews of covered buildings. These are reported experiences, not independent building inspections, and may not represent all residents or properties.
| Project | Overall | Structure & systems | Management & living |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cypress Creek at Stoney RidgeDel Valle280 units | 10.0/ 10 | —/ 10 | 10.0/ 10 |
The largest published review base located was Google Reviews/Maps at 5.0/5 from 14 reviews, which converts to 10.0 under the specified curve. A separately surfaced Google-derived page reports the same 5.0/5 result from 7 reviews, and the seven written reviews read were all positive; no structural evidence was published, so structure remains unevidenced rather than marked down. | |||
no notes returned no links returned | The published resident feedback is uniformly positive: reviewers describe the property as “modern, clean, and thoughtfully designed,” say staff “goes above and beyond,” and report that a small repair was fixed “immediately.” Residents also praise the pickleball court, gym, inviting staff and efficient manager. No operational complaint was found in the written reviews read; this is a limited and strongly positive sample, not proof that no problems exist. | ||
| Cypress Creek at Montfort DriveDallas168 units | 8.4/ 10 | —/ 10 | 7.4/ 10 ApartmentRatings 5/5, 5/5, 5/5, 5/5, 5/5, 5/5 · 1 review · apartmentratings.com Combined from 6 published figures on 1 platform, weighted by review count, adjusted for where resident ratings usually fall and weighted toward the 6.5 midpoint where reviews are few: 7.4. |
The 4.4/5 Google Reviews/Maps aggregate from 50 reviews is the only rating set with a review base large enough to anchor the score, converting to 8.2 under the supplied curve. The limited written evidence is mostly positive and supports a small upward commentary adjustment, but the building has no published physical-condition evidence and the management complaint is isolated. | Not found in sources: No physical-condition evidence · No plumbing evidence · No HVAC evidence · No electrical-infrastructure evidence · No leak or waterproofing evidence | Not found in sources: Limited review depth | |
no notes returned no links returned | Reviews describe a generally positive day-to-day impression: one reviewer called it a “Beautiful new apartment community” and said the onsite team was “so friendly and helpful,” while an ApartmentRatings prospect praised the “very clean” atmosphere and knowledgeable tour. The contrary review reported “no call backs nor has anyone picked up the phone” and said arranging an appointment through the website was a “horrible experience”; these are early, sparse observations rather than an established resident trend. | ||
| Mariposa at WestchesterGrand Prairie93 units | 7.9/ 10 | 8.3/ 10 Caring.com 5/5 · 3 reviews · caring.com Brightplace 5/5 · 1 review · brightplace.ai Combined from 2 published figures on 2 platforms, weighted by review count, adjusted for where resident ratings usually fall and weighted toward the 6.5 midpoint where reviews are few: 8.3. | 7.9/ 10 Caring.com 4.7/5, 4/5, 5/5 · 3 reviews · caring.com Brightplace 4.5/5 · 15 reviews · brightplace.ai Combined from 4 published figures on 2 platforms, weighted by review count, adjusted for where resident ratings usually fall and weighted toward the 6.5 midpoint where reviews are few: 7.9. |
Google Reviews/Maps supplies the largest building-specific review base and sets the level at 4.5/5, converted to 8.5/10. The score is reduced for the reported security-gate/car-break-in response and repeated elevator outage, with a smaller reduction for stained, unsealed hallway concrete; the evidence is favorable overall but the most recent serious complaint creates meaningful current-status uncertainty. | Not found in sources: No infrastructure detail published | ||
Published reviews describe the property as new, well landscaped and generally clean; one reviewer said the rooms were “very nice and huge” and the grounds were kept clean. The same review reported that the elevator had been broken “many, many times” and that exterior hallway concrete was stained because it had not been sealed; these are isolated written reports rather than a published structural score trend. | Residents and visitors frequently praise the staff: one reviewer called the manager “very nice,” described the staff as lovely, and said residents were friendly; another said service requests were completed “within 24 hours or less.” However, the latest severe complaint available in the reviewed material says a change in ownership and front-office personnel had a “negative impact,” while another review reports repeated security-gate failures, car break-ins and delayed management response. | ||
| The Kelsey at Scofield FarmsAustin383 units | 7.7/ 10 | 6.5/ 10 | 7.7/ 10 |
Google Reviews/Maps supplies the anchor at 4.3/5 from 83 reviews, which converts to 7.9/10 under the specified curve. The score is adjusted modestly downward because the written sample includes a serious lift-outage allegation and a serious safety allegation, while repeated praise for staff, cleanliness and amenities provides a partial offset. Structural scoring is held at 6.5 because the only direct systems complaint concerns elevators and there is no broader published evidence on plumbing, HVAC or electrical systems. | Not found in sources: Limited direct engineering evidence · No published plumbing feedback · No published HVAC or electrical feedback | ||
The available written feedback contains little direct engineering evidence. One resident reported that “the elevators are never working” and are “out of business for weeks,” a serious lift-maintenance allegation; another tour reviewer described the units as “very clean and well maintained,” while the listing identifies the property as built in 2024. | The positive reviews describe a clean, quiet community, friendly and helpful staff, timely maintenance, community events, pools, gym and dog amenities; one reviewer said the property manager provided a tour even without an appointment. The negative evidence is materially different: a resident reported safety and nuisance problems and said they had not heard back from the manager, while another wrote that the elevators were out for weeks and alleged a disputed collections charge. | ||
| Cypress Creek at River Oaks BoulevardWaxahachie168 units | 6.6/ 10 | —/ 10 | 5.7/ 10 |
The largest building-specific published review base is busquedalocal.us-info.com's 3.3/5 from 40 ratings, converted to 4.9/10 under the requested curve. Apartments.com and ForRent.com each report 4.0/5, but only from six reviews, so they provide limited upward disagreement; repeated positive living-quality themes raise the final resident-experience score to 5.7. No structural score is assigned because the reviewed material did not publish evidence about building fabric or systems. | |||
no notes returned no links returned | The resident reviews are predominantly positive about day-to-day living: one resident said maintenance was completed "ASAP," another reported that maintenance "always shows up the next dsy," and several described the community as quiet and friendly. The main negative review complained that the property was "wayyyyyyy over priced" and that advertised availability did not match what was offered; the available reviews provide no meaningful evidence about structural systems. | ||
| Cypress Creek at South CedarTemple180 units | 6.4/ 10 | —/ 10 | 5.9/ 10 |
Google Reviews/Maps provides the largest published review base, at 3.8/5 from 51 reviews, which converts to 6.4 under the requested curve. The mostly positive comments about staff, amenities and new construction support the anchor, while the reported gate-access security problem warrants a modest downward adjustment; no structure score is assigned because no published structure-specific aggregate was found. | Not found in sources: No repeated structural complaint identified · No repeated plumbing complaint identified · No repeated HVAC complaint identified · No repeated electrical complaint identified · No repeated leak or waterproofing complaint identified | ||
The published excerpts describe the property as “newly built” with “new and updated features,” and one reviewer called the apartments and grounds “beautiful.” The material reviewed did not publish a repeated complaint about plumbing, HVAC, electrical systems, leaks or waterproofing; the pool was described as maintained. | Day-to-day feedback is mostly favorable: reviewers describe the office as “welcoming,” staff as “helpful and kind,” and cite the pool, dog park, pet spa, gym and coffee bar. Counterpoints include a reviewer saying the gates create “a false sense of security,” parking is inconvenient, and another calling an assistant manager “very unprofessional.” | ||
| Cypress Creek at Hazelwood StreetPrinceton188 units | 6.1/ 10 | —/ 10 | 5.7/ 10 |
The Google aggregate for the building is 3.5/5 from 61 reviews, which converts to 5.5/10 and sets the level. The sampled written reviews add repeated praise for helpful staff and an easy move-in, but there is no published structural rating or qualifying recurring serious complaint to move the score further. | Not found in sources: limited review detail | ||
no notes returned no links returned | The published Google sample is generally favorable about the leasing experience: reviewers describe staff as “extremely helpful,” praise “great communication,” and call move-in “fast and easy.” The main operational complaint is a resident who said two calls over the previous month had not been returned and that the problem followed the last lease renewal; Rise Apartments separately describes “prompt maintenance responses” and “friendly office interactions,” but that page is promotional rather than a resident-review aggregate. | ||
| Mariposa at Harris RoadArlington180 units | 6.1/ 10 | 5.6/ 10 | 6.3/ 10 |
Google Reviews/Maps provides the largest reported review base and sets the level at 3.9/5, converted to 6.7/10 under the specified curve. The reported reviews add meaningful operational and infrastructure concerns, including a severe plumbing/ceiling repair report, while repeated praise for staff offsets part of that downward movement. The structural sub-score is lower because the published material includes pool, drain-line, floor-crack and sheetrock complaints; the living sub-score reflects both strong staff praise and recurring operational problems. | |||
The published reviews contain specific infrastructure complaints rather than an independent engineering assessment. One reviewer reported repeated plumbing visits for a noisy drain line, holes in the ceiling and wall, and delayed sheetrock repair; the same review says the pool surface was cracked and the pool had been closed for months. Another reviewer reported “large cracks in the floors along hallways,” while the property listing describes the community as built in 2022. | Daily-life feedback is divided. Positive reviews call the managers “professional” and “pleasant,” and praise “nice amenities” and neighbors; negative reviews describe gates that can remain open, only 3/5 washers and 2/6 dryers working, damaged gym equipment, and delayed responses to parking and maintenance requests. The current listing has renamed the community Seleno at Harris Road, but the review pages explicitly identify it as formerly Mariposa at Harris Road. | ||
| Anthem at Ledge StoneAustin292 units | 5.8/ 10 | 5.9/ 10 RentCafe 3.5/5, 3.5/5 · 20 reviews · rentcafe.com Combined from 2 published figures on 1 platform, weighted by review count, adjusted for where resident ratings usually fall and weighted toward the 6.5 midpoint where reviews are few: 5.9. | 6.8/ 10 RentCafe 4/5, 4/5, 4/5, 4/5, 4.5/5, 3.5/5 · 20 reviews · rentcafe.com Combined from 6 published figures on 1 platform, weighted by review count, adjusted for where resident ratings usually fall and weighted toward the 6.5 midpoint where reviews are few: 6.8. |
Google Reviews/Maps supplies the largest review base and sets the level at 3.6/5, converted to 5.8/10. Apartments.com is materially more positive and pulls the result upward, but severe and moderate operational/physical complaints pull it back; the resulting resident-experience score is 5.7/10. Structure is separately held at 5.5/10 from the reported maintenance, finish and elevator evidence, while living is 5.7/10 from the daily-experience evidence. | |||
The strongest physical-condition evidence is negative: one resident reported an elevator in Building 9A broken for “7-8 weeks,” while another described paint splatter and an apartment that was “not very clean.” A longer-term review also reported drawers falling off their glides, poor paint quality and loose carpet; RentCafe’s published maintenance sub-score is 3.5/5, although other residents praised the modern apartments, appliances and views. | Daily life reviews praise the “peaceful” setting, pool and gym, kind staff, gated security and convenient location; RentCafe lists amenities at 4.0/5, staff at 4.0/5 and location at 4.5/5. The negative feedback is material: a resident called the stairwells “disgusting,” another said maintenance requests were not completed, and a 2025 review raised concerns after a package containing a Social Security card was missing. |
Apartment Life places a team to live in each Bonner Carrington community, welcoming residents, planning social events, and supporting community life.
Sycamore Strategies co-developed Cypress Creek Apartment Homes at Montfort Drive with Bonner Carrington.
Hunt Capital Partners syndicated federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credits for the Dallas development.
Our properties partner with Apartment Life, a faith based nonprofit organization that has been serving the apartment industry for over 20 years.
Our properties partner with Apartment Life, a faith based nonprofit organization that has been serving the apartment industry for over 20 years.
Apartment Life places a team to live in each of our communities that welcome new residents, plan social events, and look for ways to love their neighbors as themselves.
Cypress Creek is being co-developed by Bonner Carrington and Sycamore Strategies.
Cypress Creek is being co-developed by Bonner Carrington and Sycamore Strategies.
Cypress Creek is being co-developed by Bonner Carrington and Sycamore Strategies.
syndicated by Hunt Capital Partners
$20 million in federal 9% Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs) awarded by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs and syndicated by Hunt Capital Partners.
$20 million in federal 9% Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs) awarded by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs and syndicated by Hunt Capital Partners.
| none found |
| United States | active 10 projects tracked |
| Residential, for rent | 10 of 10 |
I wanted to recreate that experience.American Builders Quarterly 2014-06-30https://americanbuildersquarterly.com/2014/bonner-carrington/
Stuart Shaw serves as the Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Bonner Carrington, a vertically integrated, privately owned and operated commercial real estate development, construction and property management company.
“I wanted to recreate that experience.”
Stuart Shaw serves as the Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Bonner Carrington
His accountabilities include leading the vision, culture and direction of the organization while mentoring and leading the next generation of executive leaders throughout the enterprise.
Stuart Shaw serves as the Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Bonner Carrington
Stuart Shaw serves as the Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Bonner Carrington
Stuart has an extensive background of forty years in commercial real estate
#### Founder and Chief Executive Officer
We are thrilled to see Cypress Creek Apartment Homes come to life as a unique, mixed-income community.Hunt Capital Partners 2024-07-30https://huntcapitalpartners.com/news/hunt-capital-partners-bonner-carrington-and-sycamore-strategies-close-on-20-million-in-lihtc-financing-for-168-unit-mixed-income-development-in-dallas-texas
Casey graduated from the University of Texas at Austin with a degree in Economics
Casey graduated from the University of Texas at Austin with a degree in Economics
Casey Bump joined Bonner Carrington in October of 2000 where he launched his career in the real estate development, construction and property management field.
“We are thrilled to see Cypress Creek Apartment Homes come to life as a unique, mixed-income community,” said Bonner Carrington President Casey Bump.
today Casey serves as President of Bonner Carrington Development
In 2013, Casey was named President after holding several positions within the organization
In 2018 he became a minority owner and today Casey serves as President of Bonner Carrington Development, reporting directly to the CEO and Founder, Stuart Shaw.
In 2018 he became a minority owner
Casey graduated from the University of Texas at Austin with a degree in Economics
#### President, Development
0 undated completions and 0 boundary-uncertain completions are retained but excluded from figures.
| Project | Location | Type | Units | Floors | Area | Cost | Payment plan | Launched | Construction start | Original target | Handover | Delay | Confidence | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cypress Creek at Montfort Drive | Dallas, United States | residential for rent | 1681 | 4 | — | USD 32.5m construction loan | — | 2024 | July 30, 2024 | Sep 2024 – Dec 2024 | Jul 2026 | +20.5 mo (+19.0 to +22.0) | estimated | completed |
| Cypress Creek at South Cedar | Temple, United States | residential for rent | 1801 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | Jan 2025 – Dec 2025 | — | not scorable | completed |
| Cypress Creek at Stoney Ridge | Del Valle, United States | residential for rent | 2801 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | Feb 2022 – Aug 2023 | Jan 2025 – Dec 2025 | +31.5 mo (+17.0 to +46.0) | sourced | completed |
| The Kelsey at Scofield Farms | Austin, United States | residential for rent | 3831 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | Jan 2024 – Dec 2024 | — | not scorable | completed |
| Cypress Creek at River Oaks Boulevard | Waxahachie, United States | residential for rent | 1681 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | Jan 2022 – Dec 2022 | — | not scorable | completed |
| Mariposa at Harris Road | Arlington, United States | residential for rent | 1801 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | Jan 2022 – Dec 2022 | — | not scorable | completed |
| Cypress Creek at Hazelwood Street | Princeton, United States | residential for rent | 1881 | 3 | — | — | — | 2021 | 2/1/2021 | Jan 2021 | Jan 2020 – Dec 2020 | −6.5 mo (−12.0 to −1.0) | sourced | completed |
| Mariposa at Westchester | Grand Prairie, United States | residential for rent | 931 | 3 | — | — | — | — | — | — | Jan 2020 – Dec 2020 | — | not scorable | completed |
| Anthem at Ledge Stone | Austin, United States | residential for rent | 2921 | — | — | — | — | 2020 | February 29, 2020 | — | Jan 2019 – Dec 2019 | — | not scorable | completed |
| Mariposa at Clear Creek | Webster, United States | residential for rent | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | Jan 2019 – Dec 2019 | — | not scorable | completed |
| Coverage | active |
| Tracked since | October 10, 2026 |
| Last checked | October 11, 2026 this month |
| Profile last researched | October 11, 2026 |
| Claim |