Residents want door closed to housing plan

Again, it is completely mystifying why the residents of Whitehorse continuously reject the renewal and development of housing in their little corners of the city. Where in your lot survey does it stipulate the access to sun or a specific view.  This “owner” wants to bring forth a fresh, new development and remove a structure that was built with a 10 year lifespan. Comparison to century homes in the maritimes is ludicrous as the Steelox building is a metal clad box without any historical value or character.  Please end this NIMBYism and let others enjoy Whitehorse as well.

As the developer, I acknowledge the legitimate concerns that neighbours have concerning height, density, and parking.  I have bent over backwards to address those concerns and am prepared to offer yet more concessions, if necessary,  to alleviate concerns.  However, the premise that the steeloxes are comparable to Frank Lloyd Wright masterpieces is really a concept that I struggle to come to grips with, and I am being diplomatic here.
The RCAF had these pre-fabricated housing kits (steeloxes) shipped up from the deep south of the United States, not because they wanted aesthetically pleasing and energy efficient homes in a vibrant neighbourhood, but because they needed a quick and cheap solution for housing their military staff.  Once the initial demand was met, the RCAF opted for the sturdier and more aesthetically pleasing stick-built home styles that are seen on Kluane Crescent, Chalet Crescent, and Sunset Drive.
Maybe the RCAF knew something about these buildings and that’s why they stopped procuring them?  Who knows? Change can be scary, but sometimes change is required in the interest of urban renewal, neighbourhood rejuvenation, and sustainability.  The process is working well in Takhini North.  Why can’t it work in Hillcrest?

Not to mention they would impair our view of the mountains…if I wanted to see a city landscape I would live where I could be surrounded by apt buildings, as it is I can sit in my living room and have a beautiful view of the mountains. I don’t want to look out and see buildings, I really don’t.

It is a common trend for neighbourhoods in Whitehorse and beyond in the Yukon to reel in despair when a new development is proposed around them. While it’s easy to call it nimbyism it is also easy to see some of their points. I’d agree the parking issue needs to be further developed, but it could be developed to a grade satisfactory to everyone, just need to see if it’s possible, like a parking lot somewhere in the area or something….what should never be attemped is to compare those steel boxes with withering paint jobs and dubious interior conditions with any form of century homes throughout the rest of Canada. That is not an argument that can be accepted, in fact based on that alone you could argue those steel boxes need to go.

Residents can have things like “access to the sun” and “specific views” stipulated in the zoning bylaw. More typically, OCPs and zoning bylaws stipulate density and parking and numerous other items that contribute to quality of life.

Zoning bylaws are about as stable as the shifting sands of time here. So regardless of whether a certain allowance is in there or not, it will be soon enough, if a developer has the wit to offer “solar panels” and what-have-you.

As for the architectural significance of the steeloxes—there is a case to be made that they represent a certain period of time and resourcefulness of Yukon residents, in all their incarnations. Some people here have an elitist view of what kinds of building should be deemed important, but that’s not what it’s about.
The steeloxes helped build this city too.

I’m sorry but do these people complaining own the air rights to the property pending development? It definitely seems that they don’t; therefore, they don’t really have any legal entitlement to put a restriction on the height of any building being built on that lot.

What I have a problem with is that the landlords have never done anything, ever, to maintain or clean up their properties and the result is visible, I am sick of the garbage, bottles and kids toys thrown out into the street and wrecked vehicles in their yards. The only time I have have seen any cleaning up was recent, when this proposal was new. If there is some kind of promise that this new development will be different, well ok, I am all for it, I just don’t want more of the same crap going on. I don’t want to see slum dwelling overtake what is to me a nice neighborhood.

@ Jeff – When you rent, the deal is you supply a clean liveable rental unit to tenants, and they give the place back to you the way the received it.  The deal is NOT that the renter trashes the place, expects the landlord to pick-up after them, and leaves without providing the requisite 30 days notice.  The deal is NOT to refuse to pay last month’s rent before you are kicked out, thus leaving no security deposit for the landlord to clean up the mess you left behind. 
Unfortunately, the understanding that once existed between landlord and tenant is quickly eroding.  We are not running an assisted living establishment.  We will leave that to the Government’s domain.  Once people leave, or refuse to pay rent and get kicked out, the places will get cleaned up and rented again.  However, as long as the government social assistant cheques keep arriving, we really have no grounds to kick people out.  And what would the headlines say if we booted out someone on social assistance right before winter? 
People think that being a landlord is easy.  Let me assure you from personal experience that it is NOT!  Jeff, you don’t like the current situation in your neighbourhood, then please let us replace these steeloxes with brand new energy efficient homes that home owners can be proud of!