News   Apr 25, 2024
News Roundup for April 25, 2024
 279     0 
News   Apr 25, 2024
How It Started
 486     0 
News   Apr 24, 2024
Latest Iteration of 50 Eglinton West Proposes 46- and 58-Storey Towers
 1.4K     1 

Ranking of best and worst condo builders in the city?

L

Lyphe

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 18, 2013
Messages
394
Reaction score
476
Location
Toronto
Hi everyone,

I'm looking to buy a new condo in the city, and wanted to shortlist builders according to reputation and quality.

There are a few I'm familiar enough with that I know how I feel about them, but that's about it. I'm hoping the forum could provide some advice. I'm creating a simple Best - Good - and Worst list. I've got Great Gulf in my 'best' list ... Tridel in the 'good' column since I've seen mixed construction from them ... and Daniels in the 'worst' column, due to their mess on the waterfront ( fair or not, it's what I think of with them ).

Would love some advice on who you recommend as the builders to look at and avoid.

Tyvm!
 
Depends on whether this is a list for exterior architectural expression or interior quality. Which can result in different rankings.

I haven't had experience with Great Gulf yet, but IMO I would have Tridel up there among the top developers for build quality of interiors and finishes.

Contrary to how Daniels Waterfront is received architecturally on this forum, the interiors are actually quite nice. I've seen units in both the west and east towers. Along with the older Cinema Tower which has held up well through the years and a couple in Regent Park. There's a solid consistency among them that I would put them in the above average overall.

The buildings by Plaza like Ivory on Adelaide and Musee have been positive from what I've seen.

I think Menkes is on the slightly above average for interiors. They have some projects which were hits and misses.

Minto trends somewhere between average to below average for me. They have some okay buildings, while from what I've heard their Minto Westside project at Bathurst and Front is quite subpar. And is lacking quality wise compared to their neighbouring counterpart in the older Tridel Reve building.

Freed and Cityzen also on the below average range for me.

While from what I've seen, Greenland and Lanterra would be on the poor quality end.
 
Many people have praised Tridel, but I think they're unaccomplished from an architectural standpoint. Praiseworthy developers build great buildings inside and out.

I don't think it's fair to evaluate developers solely on either exterior design or interior quality. Both are important.
 
I certainly wouldn't put Daniels in the worst category. They are up there with some of the major builders like Menkes, Tridel, Great Gulf, Pinnacle, etc. Mediocre/worst category would be Conord Adex, Lanterra, Lamb, Freed, etc.

When you're looking to own, you want a quality build. Aesthetics are secondary IMO. Trust me. I've lived in nice looking buildings that were a nightmare to live in because the construction quality was ass. I've heard good things about Diamante.
 
I find that developers like Freed and Lanterra often mislead with their exteriors because they often look interesting on the outside. But their buildings tend to be style over substance.

Lanterra's Ice towers are the best example of this, which have among the worst reputation in the city to live in. Similar with their older WaterParkCity project in the Fort York area which has a bad reputation. Especially compared to the neighbouring West Harbour City buildings by Plaza which fare much better.

I'll add Greenpark to my list of below average developers. I wasn't impressed by their Axiom Condos on Adelaide East. And I found the unit I saw to be lower quality compared to Plaza's Ivory next doors, despite Axiom being slightly newer built. The interiors at Allure condos in the Yonge & Davisville area was also disappointing.

I haven't had experience with any condo built by Cresford before they collapsed but I'm curious how the quality is like though.

A good way to track the quality of living for a building is by doing some research on the amount of units that are put on the market for sale or for rent. The ones with constantly high turnover tend to be warning signs. While buildings with lower numbers tend to be more mature settings with property owners wanting to stay.
 
TheKingEast said:
I certainly wouldn't put Daniels in the worst category. They are up there with some of the major builders like Menkes, Tridel, Great Gulf, Pinnacle, etc. Mediocre/worst category would be Conord Adex, Lanterra, Lamb, Freed, etc.

When you're looking to own, you want a quality build. Aesthetics are secondary IMO. Trust me. I've lived in nice looking buildings that were a nightmare to live in because the construction quality was ass. I've heard good things about Diamante.
Click to expand...

If we're going to be choosing the best, we need to be objective and find the builders that are able to build high-quality buildings with great design. To equate great design with poor build quality as some do isn't going to do anyone a favour in finding the best.

It's nice to read good things about Great Gulf's build quality in this thread. When you look at buildings like One Bloor East and Monde in the East Bayfront neighbourhood, it's clear that they care about architecture and design.

Good design gets a boost in property values in the long run. In my experience, anything with character in terms of design and good build quality gets more bids on the resale market. Design elicits more of an emotional response in people, which encourages them to spend more.
 
AlbertC said:
I find that developers like Freed and Lanterra often mislead with their exteriors because they often look interesting on the outside. But their buildings tend to be style over substance.

Lanterra's Ice towers are the best example of this, which have among the worst reputation in the city to live in. Similar with their older WaterParkCity project in the Fort York area which has a bad reputation. Especially compared to the neighbouring West Harbour City buildings by Plaza which fare much better.

I'll add Greenpark to my list of below average developers. I wasn't impressed by their Axiom Condos on Adelaide East. And I found the unit I saw to be lower quality compared to Plaza's Ivory next doors, despite Axiom being slightly newer built. The interiors at Allure condos in the Yonge & Davisville area was also disappointing.

I haven't had experience with any condo built by Cresford before they collapsed but I'm curious how the quality is like though.

A good way to track the quality of living for a building is by doing some research on the amount of units that are put on the market for sale or for rent. The ones with constantly high turnover tend to be warning signs. While buildings with lower numbers tend to be more mature settings with property owners wanting to stay.
Click to expand...

Lanterra is CHEAP!
 
DSC said:
Terrible though this sounds, it appears to be MAINLY a problem with property management rather than the developer. (Though they must have hired the initial PM company). If there is now an elected Board, they would now be responsible so, I assume, hired the second one.
Click to expand...

I think that responsibility in scenarios like these should be shouldered by both the developer that originally built them, and the active condo board.

Aspects like shoddy build quality of course to the developer. And poor management to the board in charge. Along with a mix for other elements.

There also seems to be a correlation among lower reputation developers with being mismanaged once they're occupied and operational. Lanterra's Ice Condos are notorious, while I've also read about some nightmare stories on their Treviso buildings at Dufferin & Lawrence.
 
AlbertC said:
I think that responsibility in scenarios like these should be shouldered by both the developer that originally built them, and the active condo board.

Aspects like shoddy build quality of course to the developer. And poor management to the board in charge. Along with a mix for other elements.

There also seems to be a correlation among lower reputation developers with being mismanaged once they're occupied and operational. Lanterra's Ice Condos are notorious, while I've also read about some nightmare stories on their Treviso buildings at Dufferin & Lawrence.
Click to expand...
Yes, clearly 'design problems' like a lobby that visitors cannot reach (and a garage that is open to all so too many can access) are clearly design problems. - and probably hard or impossible to fix. (Though both might have been red flags when condo shopping.) Dealing with a poor PM company is certainly a Board problem but it is normal for developers to set a low maintenance fee initially so they MAY have had to hire the cheapest they could find. or raise fees - which is never popular.

According to the Public Registry of the Condominium Authority of Ontario the building is still managed by First Service. I think that the Corporation has 30 days to report a change so you may want to tell the CAO? https://cao.microsoftcrmportals.com/en-US/public-registry/
 
Why in the world would the "lobby" be in the 5th floor? And mixing visitors and residential parking is just asking for a lot of problems. :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSC
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top