Can you give me a general description of Kent? (Seattle: apartments, condos)

[while parked]

My company (trucking) has a terminal in Kent. I currently live in Boise, and find it a bit boring for my tastes. For a nice 1BR with a fireplace in Boise, I pay $650 in rent. Is this comparable to what I would pay in Kent for a nice one BR?
Is Kent considered to be a desirable location of the Seattle area, or is it considered to be undesirable? Or perhaps just neutral on the desirability scale?
I like to live close by to the terminal so if I did transfer to Kent, I would live in Kent. Your general impressions of Kent would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

[Hemlock140]

Kent is a mostly industrial area of big warehouses, and yes, trucking terminals with storage and deliveries to local stores. The residential areas range from older downtown to newer developments. It is not known for any crime issues to speak of, nor is it considered among the most desirable places to live. It's not the typical hilly, wooded place seen here, but flatter with a lot more concrete. While I wouldn't consider it you might like it just fine, I'd really suggest going to see it. I think I'd prefer nearby Covington or Auburn.

In this whole area it's hard to find any one bedroom for under $800, and a fireplace is rare for an apartment.

[Ira500]

In general, Kent is considered to be an undesirable part of the Seattle area. But in reality, it's a pretty nice place. As bisjoe said, there's a lot of industry. But it's definitely not mostly industrial ( and the industry is confined to industrial areas), it's actually a big mix of single family homes, apartments, condos, farms, office parks, retail, restaurants, etc...Kent has three golf courses, and a bunch of completely different neighborhoods.
I think it's one of the most ethnically diverse places in the state, the east hill of Kent in particular. On the east hill, there are tacquerias, Russian delis, Indian buffets, Vietnamese sandwich shops, Italian and Greek restaurants, and BBQ joints.
If working in Kent, why not live in Kent?

[The Siobhan]

I am not sure what the other poster meant about not being hilly, but there is a very large and steep hill on James Street. I lived in Kent from 2009-2010 so I didn't experience the heavy snow, but it is my understanding that when it gets really icy, the close the hill to traffic.

I personally liked Kent, and when I return to the Seattle area, I plan on moving back there. I've lived in Renton, Shoreline, Kent, and Des Moines, but I would say that I just generally liked the community in Kent better. I lived near Central and James so I wasn't far from Kent Station and easy access to 167. As with most areas, you will have good pockets and bad pockets.

[while parked]

thanks, very helpful info.

[rbkoreaus]

The majority of folks you ask around here wouldn't consider Kent to be a desirable area to live. The cost of rent/living will be greated than Boise, even in the Kent area. Pretty sure you'll have to dish out more $ for a "nice 1BR with a fireplace." About a 20-30 minute commute to Seattle/Bellevue if there's no traffic. I would caution choosing to live by the terminal though, as the train makes noise at ungodly hours, like 3am? I'm a light sleeper though so that would have been a deal-breaker for me personally.

Shoot if you're in Boise, why not just take a few days to drive out here and come look at the area for yourself?

[Inkpoe]

Kent's a pretty big area. I know there are apartments on the western border touching SeaTac (off of Orillia RD) where they have these nice apartments for $550/mo and up. (So it is possible to find something... but I would suggest upping the limit by another ~300 dollars if you want something nice.) The undesirable part of it is in and around the Kent Station/Mall/DT area... traffic sucks in this area. The nicer part would be up the hill.

Kent's pretty much got everything one would need (Shopping, food, accessibility to Seattle and to nature).