Whitehorse Daily Star

Image title

Photo by Vince Fedoroff

THE WORK BEGINS – An office-residential development is being built at the corner of Third Avenue and Alexander Street. The Centre de la francophonie is seen at the left.

Image title

Photo by Photo Submitted

A COMMUNITY OF BOXES? – City councillor Betty Irwin says she’s disappointed with how the new building at the corner of Third Avenue and Alexander Street will look. Courtesy CITY OF WHITEHORSE

Developers could get up to $500,000 as incentive

The developers of a new four-storey office and residential building under construction on Alexander Street could receive up to $500,000 over the next 10 years through a development incentive program.

By Stephanie Waddell on July 22, 2015

The developers of a new four-storey office and residential building under construction on Alexander Street could receive up to $500,000 over the next 10 years through a development incentive program.

The recommendation for council to approve the incentive was brought forward by planning manager Pat Ross at Monday’s council meeting.

The project, he said, will see six residential units built on the fourth floor, with three stories of office space below and underground parking below.

The developers are listed as 535756 Yukon.

The Yukon government plans to lease the lower two floors, a spokeswoman for the Department of Highways and Public Works said early this afternoon.

The developers also have plans to add landscaping and street furniture on the city boulevard along Alexander Street, meeting a requirement under the city’s major development incentive policy to build an off-site amenity.

As Ross described in his report to council Monday night: “An off-site amenity is intended for public enjoyment or benefit and may consist of permanent art, culture or recreational installations, or streetscape improvements such as boulevard landscaping and street furniture.

“The policy specifies that the minimum value of an off-site amenity should be $20,000 as evaluated by the City of Whitehorse.”

Ross went on to note the city will be working with the developers to ensure the design for the boulevard landscaping and street furniture meets city requirements.

The policy governing major development incentives was adopted in 2011. It was meant to encourage the building of rental housing, mixed-use developments and supportive housing in the city.

In this case, Ross said the development meets the requirements in the policy for mixed use development, including the benefit of underground parking.

Council members noted they’re pleased to see development happening in the area.

Mayor Dan Curtis referred to the investment in the downtown as “pennies from Heaven.”

One councillor, however, was quick to criticize the drawing of the proposed structure included in the report as one of the most “uninteresting” designs for a new development.

“We’re building another box,” Coun. Betty Irwin argued.

“We’re going to become a downtown community of boxes.”

Like other council members though, she said she is pleased to see some sort of development there.

The maximum amount for the grant is set at $500,000 over a 10-year period.

The actual amount the developers stand to receive is based on the value of the improvements made to the land.

Essentially, the developers are granted back – provided taxes are paid in full – the value of the increase in property taxes resulting from development on the land.

The incentive can also be transferred to future owners if the property is sold.

Coun. Dave Stockdale was quick to note the development and plans to upgrade the boulevard could serve as a “great opportunity” for the city to make necessary improvements to the street.

“That road really needs to be fixed,” he said of the condition of the street.

Ross stated in his report there have been discussions between the city’s engineering department and developers to ensure project designs fit with any potential future road upgrades.

Council will vote next week on whether to approve the agreement for the development incentive.

Several old, abandoned houses, one of which was destroyed by fire a couple of years ago, formerly occupied the site.

Comments (14)

Up 0 Down 1

Yukon mom on Jul 28, 2015 at 6:58 pm

Isn't having commitment by YTG to rent two floors enough feeding at the trough? Why should city taxpayers subsidize this building any further? Are the residential units condos for their cronies or affordable rental units? If the same fellow still owns this property, he hasn't proven to be the stellar landlord over the years. Councillors please say no.

Up 6 Down 1

north_of_60 on Jul 27, 2015 at 5:41 pm

@G'dN, PF is correct.

This is little more than a taxpayer funded 'gift' to a BIG member of the 'good-'ol-boyz' club, likely linked to favorable political contributions to someone's political advancement. People can get away with anything, if they have the right connections.

Up 11 Down 7

Groucho d'North on Jul 25, 2015 at 10:19 am

Reading the comments below I see a range of issues being tossed on the debate table. Some don't like how tax payer money will be used to leverage the construction of a new multi-purpose building that will create jobs and provide a financial benefit for many going into and possibly over the winter months. Others appear to be concerned that the property owner has some political connection to the incumbent government, like this project is some mysterious back-room deal where others were denied the opportunity to build on that plot of land and enter into long-term lease agreement with government.
I believe there is surge of pre-election pettiness that some are looking to capitalise on for whatever purpose, by attempting to create issues that do not exist.
Development incentives from various levels of government are not new and I expect they will continue with whoever forms the next territorial or municipal governments.
I hope we do not descend to the level where whichever political party someone belongs to will determine the conduct of business in the Yukon or its communities.

Up 20 Down 1

Pound Foolish on Jul 24, 2015 at 4:42 pm

This is ridiculous. They're going to spend more than that if they move the cenotaph to make way for a dubious venture, and then turn around and do the write-offs for this guy. They're supposed to be collecting for the Public Use Land Development anyway, which should cover landscaping whatever little bits are left over once he builds out the lot to the maximum. This is probably more of a subsidy than they gave Argus Development for the lands around Walmart, when you figure it per square foot.

And yes, I believe a prominent YP member may own this land and has been sitting on it for decades. Although I don't know that this city council cares so much about YP connections. I think sometimes they're just way off base with subsidies like this.

Up 36 Down 7

Public info on Jul 24, 2015 at 1:02 pm

Either the building is feasible or it isn't. Shovelling tax dollars into a private developer's pocket is criminal.

Up 30 Down 12

Mayor does not know what he doing on Jul 23, 2015 at 2:21 pm

Mayor does not know what he is doing!

Up 17 Down 0

Lost in the Yukon on Jul 23, 2015 at 12:35 pm

I may well be "truly lost" however I don't think I'm the one who needs glasses. The propositions put forward may appear to be unconnected however if you take a step back you may see a bigger picture. But thanks for caring

Up 30 Down 3

Max Mack on Jul 23, 2015 at 12:07 pm

$500K subsidy for a single development. Can't wait for the next round of tax/fee/fine/penalty increases.

Up 11 Down 26

Not a bad use of money, in my opinion on Jul 23, 2015 at 9:15 am

$500,000 over 10 years is not huge - and if it results in some nice landscaping and streetscaping, I'm for it. Downtown is becoming a mess. Garbage, crumbling sidewalks, trees dying, weeds everywhere, so something like this might help. I don't understand the comments about a 'box' - what exactly would people like to see instead? Pretty much all buildings are boxes of some type.

Up 13 Down 2

Mur on Jul 23, 2015 at 12:31 am

I was once photographing the old buildings that once stood there, and some guy in a pickup pulled up to ask what I was photographing, and why. As if he had any business asking. Or did he?

Up 36 Down 11

follow the money on Jul 22, 2015 at 11:35 pm

Do a little digging Star 'reporters', the property owners are known YP top echelon, hiding behind a numbered company. Of course they believe their entitled to preferential treatment.

Up 23 Down 22

You are truly lost in the Yukon on Jul 22, 2015 at 10:44 pm

This is CoW money nothing to do with YTG or Yukon Party. Time for some glasses.

Up 116 Down 7

Thomas Brewer on Jul 22, 2015 at 4:29 pm

As this project is already well underway... calling this an incentive is disingenuous.
At best this is a subsidy, at worst this is lining the pockets of the developer with taxpayer dollars.

Up 96 Down 94

Lost in the Yukon on Jul 22, 2015 at 3:55 pm

It may be worthwhile to investigate if this company is in any way connected to a major Yukon Party back room decision maker.
Just like who owned the land the Yukon Party bought to build the new Salvation Army building is going on.

In their last year of power they are pulling out all the stops to ensure the faithful are taken care of. So if you don't think the Yukon Party has influence with the City ... you're being naive.

And the other question to ask is ... if the Yukon Party is renting the bottom two floors and moving government services into them, where are they moving from and who is now losing money?

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.