Whitehorse Daily Star

Image title

Photo by Vince Fedoroff

HOUSING PROPOSED – The development proposal involves 10 affordable housing units at 305 Hawkins St., where the trees are on the left. Inset Betty Irwin

City OKs zoning changes for affordable housing

A proposed micro-housing project that could add 10 affordable housing units at 305 Hawkins St. can move forward as planned.

By Stephanie Waddell on January 17, 2017

A proposed micro-housing project that could add 10 affordable housing units at 305 Hawkins St. can move forward as planned.

That became evident Monday evening after council unanimously approved the final two readings on zoning amendments needed for the project.

The changes take away the requirement for private amenity space (typically provided in the form of a balcony) on eight of the 10 units.

The changes also reduce the required off-street parking spots from six to five.

A rooftop patio would exceed the size regulations of both shared and private amenity space that would otherwise be required.

There would also be commercial space on the main level of the four-storey building.

360 Design Build was approved for $500,000 from the territory to build the project.

Under the program, the apartments must be kept affordable, with 360 proposing a rent of $795 per month for each unit.

Coun. Betty Irwin praised the project before voting in favour of the zoning changes. She highlighted the “severe lack of affordable housing” in Whitehorse, particularly in the downtown area.

The units are set to range from 350 to 411 square feet.

That makes them the perfect size for an individual or a couple, Irwin said. As long as they’re kept affordable, that individual or couple may be able to set aside some money to put toward buying a home, she argued.

Irwin went on to cite the vision of the city’s Official Community Plan (OCP) in calling for higher-density housing that’s connected to existing city services and won’t require adding extra bus service, utilities and the like.

The city will have to consider zoning changes such as those that were studied for this project.

That means, Irwin said, there will have to be more multi-family units and fewer single-detached homes that are priced out of reach for many potential home owners.

For the city to meet its OCP vision of greater-density developments built in areas like the downtown sector, there will have to be changes in zoning such as those that were voted on for this development, she said.

Irwin called this a way to improve development in the downtown core.

She also acknowledged the many concerns that arose over parking through the public input the city collected on the project.

She suggested the Yukon government could help in finding a solution to parking for its employees, since some park on Hawkins and nearby streets during work hours.

There are no data showing exactly who is parking along Hawkins Street. However, a number of residents said the street is often full of vehicles parked there Monday through Friday.

In a previous report to council on the zoning amendments, city staff pointed to recommendations under the current downtown parking plan that would gradually expand the two-hour unmetered parking zone and implement a residential parking permit program.

There are also plans to look at parking in the area as the city updates the downtown parking plan this year.

Area residents also expressed concerns about additional noise, traffic and garbage collection if the Hawkins Street proposal became a reality.

Comments (9)

Up 5 Down 5

Whatever happened to Lowe Street property plans? on Jan 20, 2017 at 4:44 pm

The abandoned building next to Riverside Grocery used to be owned by the Hougen family, not sure if that's still the case. But a few years ago everyone living there was evicted because the building was going to be torn down and a new building? or parkade? (can't remember) put up. Maybe that property should be looked at for affordable housing units - it's flat, large and serviced. Or maybe the Hougen family should sell it for $1 to the City?

Up 6 Down 2

ProScience Greenie on Jan 20, 2017 at 2:42 pm

I have no idea what their EBITDA is Born and Raised but it's a small territory and people talk so I know they are not hurting.

I use a 40K population for the Yukon for my simplistic calculations concerning free giveaways of our tax dollars to businesses as it better reflects the impact it has emptying all Yukoners pockets.

As this is a done deal there is no sense discussing it any longer until the next corporate welfare handout occurs. I'll wrap it up by saying $500,000 in tax dollars is still a lot of money in my books.

Up 10 Down 2

Fed up Yukoner on Jan 20, 2017 at 12:04 pm

First of all prices for detached homes in Whitehorse are not ridiculously high, why do folks think because they live in the Yukon prices should be not in line with the rest of Canada. People moving to the Yukon (especially retirees that for some reason the government thought was good for our economy, so folks move here for the most expensive medical years of their lives, buy a condo and go to Arizona for 6 months less a day, great deal for them as really prices here aren't bad and then they can bring their parents here for the super expensive years for $35 a day in Copper Ridge) am I a bit jaded about this nonsense of creating affordable housing, you bet. $800 for 400sq ft is affordable but you are not getting much except one of those horrible KZ designed buildings. The relaxation of parking regulations is also ridiculous, the parking situation in Whse is insane. At some point the city is going to have to look at having some parking lots which should have happened years ago. Quit acting like this is Vancouver, housing is high but not crazy. My tax dollars going to these guys makes me crazy!

Up 7 Down 6

Born&Raised on Jan 20, 2017 at 5:33 am

@Proscience

Interested to find out what % of revenues you believe will drop to the bottom line after the developers have paid for materials, labour, and all other expenses including tax. Tell me, what is their EBITDA margin? and their free cash flow? My guess is you have no idea.

My point is, the company is not benefiting nearly as much as you believe they are from a $500,000 contract. And furthermore, the $500,000 is realistically paid 90% by 10,000-15,000 Yukoners who contribute the vast majority of the tax base, as the headcount you used in your calculation included children, unemployed, and those with low incomes. Those groups contribute very little to projects like these, so in my view, it only makes sense that tax dollars contributed from those who are well off, can be deployed in a project benefiting those who are not - the renters.

You really think 360 Build is the main entity benefiting from this project? Any Yukon government contract over $5000 is subject to a dutch auction to obtain the lowest cost possible. Quite literally, no other reputable developers offered to do this project at this low of a cost.

Up 9 Down 4

ProScience Greenie on Jan 19, 2017 at 4:47 pm

Half a million in tax dollars is still a lot of money Born and Raised. About $12 per Yukoner. That's a beer and a burger almost. 360 Design Build can surely afford to kick that much extra in considering they are not poor and will be making good money on the project.

And the average home price here is about $100K too high due to a profiteering network that maintains an artificially inflated housing market. Sorry I just don't like backroom profiteering on such a large scale like that. It's wrong and it hurts too many. Especially many young born and raised Yukoners trying to get a start.

Up 4 Down 11

Born&Raised on Jan 19, 2017 at 9:21 am

@prosciencegreenie

Since when is half a million dollars a lot of money? You realize an average single detached home in Whitehorse is going for over $425k in Q3/16 right?

And I wouldn't be so quick to lament over the developers taking on the role of landlords as well... Maxing the rent at $795/month should make the business' cap rate well below what they could achieve putting that money to use elsewhere as landlords... Effectively it keeps them accountable for the quality of their development, rather than passing on the landlord's liability to the gov't.

Up 10 Down 5

Seriously? on Jan 18, 2017 at 12:25 pm

If memory serves me right, the City paid to have the services installed for the lot as a "donation" to the tiny house that was put on the lot in 2012. Of course there would be no extra cost if you've already paid for it once before. I believe the lot owner (KZA) was to reimburse the City if they did something else on the property, what are the chances of that actually happening???
Another shining example of council and administration listening to those residents who will be directly affected. Once again drinking the "densification" Kool-Aid

Up 24 Down 6

Joe on Jan 17, 2017 at 8:10 pm

What a joke. The gov could give 10 people $ 50,000 to go towards down payment and those people could then afford to buy a home. Instead they give a rich developer 1/2 million bucks to build hotel rooms and stuff people into tiny rooms. How sad.

Up 39 Down 9

ProScience Greenie on Jan 17, 2017 at 3:29 pm

Why the half million dollars of our tax dollars going to a company that already has lots of money? And then they'll be the landlords as well? Too much corporate welfare going on CoW.

Add your comments or reply via Twitter @whitehorsestar

In order to encourage thoughtful and responsible discussion, website comments will not be visible until a moderator approves them. Please add comments judiciously and refrain from maligning any individual or institution. Read about our user comment and privacy policies.

Your name and email address are required before your comment is posted. Otherwise, your comment will not be posted.