Overall sentiment in the reviews is mixed, with clear strengths in amenities, activities, and frontline staff, but recurring concerns about age, value, communication, and management consistency. Multiple reviewers praised the physical amenities and communal spaces: the building is described as secured with underground parking and additional parking availability, a large library, a big kitchen area, workout room, craft and workshop rooms, an on-site salon, and balconies in some apartments. Several notes emphasize an active activities program including a weekly yoga instructor and an engaged activities director. These features contribute to a sense that the property offers many of the common-room and lifestyle elements desirable in a senior community.
Staff and day-to-day care receive generally positive remarks. Reviewers commonly described staff as professional, nice, helpful in answering questions, and mentioned a pleasant in-house manager. Cleanliness of common areas is frequently highlighted — several people call the building "very clean" and comment positively on smells and neatness. There are also indicators of resident stability for some units: at least one reviewer indicated long-term residency (seven years), suggesting that parts of the community are satisfying to longer-term tenants.
However, a strong and recurring theme is a mismatch between price and perceived value. Multiple reviewers explicitly call the community expensive, note high rent increases, and describe a poor value proposition that has prompted many residents to leave. While a few reviewers call rent reasonable, the dominant commentary centers on rising costs and dissatisfaction with what rent buys relative to the apartment condition and amenities.
Physical condition and maintenance are another major concern. Several summaries describe the building or units as older, outdated, dark inside, or in need of renovation. Terms such as "run down" and descriptions of areas that "went downhill" under new management appear in multiple reviews. While the exterior and location are described as "stellar" by some, the interior condition and aesthetic upkeep seem uneven, with multiple reviewers urging caution about unit condition relative to rent.
Management and communication produce mixed signals. Some reviewers explicitly praise management and the manager, calling management "great" and the manager pleasant, while others report poor communication with residents and assert that new management has caused a decline in quality. The contrast suggests variability over time or differences in individual experiences; several reviews directly mention that many residents have left and that communication lapses contributed to dissatisfaction.
Location and accessibility are ambivalent. The property is repeatedly noted as a good location for non-drivers and praised for its exterior setting. At the same time, a number of reviewers say the location is somewhat far out or far from family, so suitability depends on an individual’s circumstances. Practical accessibility issues are also mentioned: some units are first-floor only with no elevator, which could be limiting for some prospective residents.
In sum, Lake Square Apartments presents a mixed picture: strong communal amenities, programming, and generally positive frontline staff and cleanliness contrasted with concerns about unit condition, perceived value for money, rising rents, and inconsistent management/communication. Prospective residents should weigh the attractive amenities and activity offerings against reports of aging interiors, rent increases, and mixed reviews of management. It would be prudent for a prospective tenant to tour multiple apartments (including interior units at different times of day to assess lighting), ask for a history of rent increases and any upcoming renovation plans, confirm elevator/accessibility for the specific unit of interest, and speak directly with current residents about recent management changes and communication practices before deciding.
