Aldershot community to be totally rebuilt if project is approved.

News 100 yellowBy Staff

July 25, 2017



The Councillor got that one right – this “clearly is a major redevelopment proposal.”

Georgian Court Estates

The all rental community is about to undergo a very significant change.

Georgian Court Estates, in east Aldershot, has disclosed the details of its redevelopment plan for this 20 acre site. The plan has not been submitted to the City yet, but was shared with existing tenants of the rental complex.

The owner is proposing major intensification, specifically replacement of the current 288 townhouses with 1,450 new rental units including townhouses and apartments.

The plan calls for one 23 storey building, one 18 storey building, one 15 storey building, eight 8 storey buildings, six 6 storey buildings, five 4 storey buildings and a series of 3 storey townhouses.

Georgian Court Estates rendering

Architects rendering of re-development plans for the Georgian Court Estates – originally developed 50 years ago the plan is to demolish everything and create a new community with considerably more density.

The plan also includes a central public park and a variety of amenities. Further it proposes to extend Sunset Road north to Surrey Lane. Spokespeople for the owner say the entire project, if approved, will take about ten years to build.

Ward 1 Councillor Rick Craven is working with the Warwick Surrey Community Association to establish a Neighbourhood Advisory Committee to examine this plan in detail and ensure existing tenants are protected.
When the city receives the application, perhaps in July, a full, formal consultation process will begin.

Craven explains the plan in a short video

Return to the Front page
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

9 comments to Aldershot community to be totally rebuilt if project is approved.

  • Maggie

    This might be the final straw that makes me sell my home and leave Aldershot. I live a short distance away and the last thing I want to put up with is years of this construction.

  • Tom Muir

    Landowners can propose anything they like and then argue to seek approval. It’s not like they got no dough.

    I would agree that on the face of the numbers and density and change, and in context of course, which is always a key to consider, this is pretty extreme. Redevelopment and change are allowed, but this?

    Craven can’t stop this process, and my experience is that he often understates what he really thinks. He could say it’s too much, but what do the people affected say? I would like him to speak for them.

    And he can’t be faulted surely for wanting to form an neighborhood group and have meetings and get people involved. Let’s talk about it. That is his job.

    This is not a NIMBY thing I don’t think, as most of the time development and change take place at a local level and affect people there.

    By nature most of the time people are most concerned and involved about things in their own backyard – so no surprise or basis for complaint there.

    This will be a very big effect – 10 years of never-ending tear-down and reconstruction?

    Isn’t that enough to make the hair on the back of your neck stand up if you live in the middle of it, or down the block in all directions?

    I would say so, and this will be an interesting test of city planning.

  • Wait a second – a quick look on google shows a basketball court, tennis court and two pools disappearing. Again we need to expand amenities and greenspace with density.

  • In all fairness to Rick Craven I don’t think he can make “pre-judging” statements without later putting an objecting in legal jeopardy. E.G. If he goes “I don’t like this development” before the “process” of submission is run then the developer can object to a vote against the project. It’s like a judge starting a trial by saying “This guy looks guilty to me.”

    Also Rick pretty clearly states he is in favor of the staff policy of large “density” increases almost anyplace.

    The problem is that the staff and some councilors believe in the necessity of “density everywhere” and if that affects communities or residents in a negative way “who cares”. The actual plan is to place 5%-10% more people into Burlington FORVER until the whole place looks like Manhattan then like that episode of Star Trek where then inhabitants are so crowded they pray for disease and death.

    Can you put an infinite number of people in a finite space? The city thinks so. The population just has to “adjust” it’s habits endlessly to how the city thinks you should live. If not where does it end? If 270,000 is not the designed final population of Burlington then what is? It’s just scheme after scheme of cramming more and more people in.

    FYI We should all thank the developer for pre-showing this before submission. He can just file it and try and keep the whole thing under raps until it’s approved.

    It’s have to review the app more fully, but in general I like the amenities and commercial space to increase greater than the population. E.G. If you want larger buildings that’s fine, but they need to sit in tones of greenspace with lots of places for kids and adults to play and be outside. Wwe need real places to get outside too.

  • steve


    The proposal is so insane, I think if I was the councilor for this region, I would make my position as clear as a bell.

    “Calcutta Level”

    Yup, really.

  • James

    Let me get this straight: Craven makes a video to update his constituents on this potential application. He does not state he is for or against, but instead notes a concern about potential building heights, and therefore plans to establish a neighbourhood advisory committee to review and provide input on this future development once an application is submitted. Sounds to me like he’s just doing his job.

    The proposed development would take an outdated rental community, modernize it, bring millions of dollars in development charges and building permit fees to our City, and provide an increase in affordable housing options to residents.

    How is this bad? What did Craven do wrong exactly? I’m hardly a fan of his, but it seems to me that there is some serious misplaced nimby-anger going on here, and already the “Just Say No” groupies are digging their heels in for a fight. If you want to live in a city where nothing is ever going to change, you’re living in the wrong city my friends.

    PS. “Calcutta level”? Really?

  • steve


    Yup, I’ll personally work for his success and I’m sure lots and lots of people in Aldershot will as well. This proposal is insane. The area is already high density, and now for greed’s sake, they want to take that density to a Calcutta level.

  • Stephen White

    By my count there are 22 buildings slated for this 20 acre property varying in height from 3 storeys to 23. This isn’t including the townhouses. Currently, there are 288 townhouses on the site. If there are 1,450 rental units for this projected development this means they will increase the density level of this property by over 500%.

    Questions: 1) How does the developer and, more this Council, intend to preserve or maintain any semblance of community by shoe-horning this many people into this space? 2) Moreover, what happens to existing tenants..or do they just get 30 days notice and dumped on the street?

    Seems to me that at one of the Mobility Hub meetings I heard the Mayor and the Planning Director talk about the need to preserve existing neighbourhoods in the City. I wonder how this development promotes and enhances existing neighbourhoods? Funny, but I didn’t hear Councillor Craven mention that in his You Tube video. I also found it amusing the Councillor’s references to “consultation” and “dialogue”. Right. This from the same guy who gets upset at Council meetings when discussions go a bit off tangent. The same guy who wanted to limit delegations to five minutes.

    I can’t wait for Greg Woodruff to file his nomination papers for the Ward 1 Council seat. It would sure be nice to finally have someone with some practicality, common sense and a backbone representing Aldershot.

  • steve

    Time for Craven to go.