Downtown residents opposed to increasing building heights beyond the 10 storeys set out in the Official Community Plan (OCP) are up against one of the Yukon’s biggest developers.

The Downtown Residents Association (DRA) has been lobbying city council through a series of letters to stick with the 30-metre limit set out in the OCP, giving five reasons:

• There is no case for buildings higher than 30m;

• 40m buildings are not needed to accommodate population growth;

• The public is strongly opposed to buildings higher than 30m;

• The change will undermine public confidence and trust in city council and the OCP process, and

• 40m buildings will have significant negative impacts.

A Jan. 29 motion by Coun. Ted Laking to increase building heights to 35 metres prompted the issue. An impromptu amendment by Coun. Mellisa Murray then raised the limit to 40 metres (up to 15 storeys).

The matter is expected to next come before council on May 6.

Northern Vision Development (NVD) wrote a long letter of support Feb. 5 for increasing heights to 35 metres.

The company cited reduced urban sprawl, efficient land use and encouraging innovation among 13 reasons.

“We believe that an increase in the height allowance for downtown buildings is critical to ensuring that the industry can continue to meet the needs of the growing Whitehorse community and for the city as a whole to grow and thrive for decades to come,” wrote NVD chief executive officer Michael Hale.

The letter cited clauses of the OCP to support each of NVD’s reasons.

The contractors’ association and two developers supported the rationale for the motion made Jan. 29, according to Laking.

“The selective and to my mind, exaggerated, reference to the OCP is quite infuriating,” says downtown resident Elizabeth Hanson.

“It makes no reference to the human scale aspects of the OCP. Nor does it acknowledge the process that resulted in the OCP.

“In effect, what we have is a ‘Big’ Yukon developer telling city council to ignore the OCP.”

Taking the height limit beyond the current 30 metres will undermine public confidence and trust in city council and the OCP process, says the DRA.

“Council appears to be on a path to substitute 4-1/2 years of orderly work, planning, engagement, and process confidence with an unplanned, ad hoc change to an important and consequential part of the Official Community Plan,” Nathan Millar wrote on behalf of the DRA board.

Hundreds of people and hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent on developing the 2040 OCP, the association noted.

Data, expert advice and extensive public input went into the plan, which is the highest-level policy and planning document for a municipality.

“Like all plans, the OCP represents a compromise, including on building heights,” the DRA said.

“No one group or entity necessarily gets all that they want but the OCP, when done properly, represents a reasonable compromise between a whole bunch of interests, some oppositional to others.”

The DRA noted that community engagement in 2022 on the draft OCP made clear that most felt a 32.5m limit (approximately nine to 11 storeys) was a little too high or way too high.

That feedback made its way into the final version, which set a limit of 25m, or 30m in special circumstances.

(The DRA’s five letters to council can be found online through its Facebook page, at https://www.facebook.com/groups/DRA.Whitehorse)

The tallest building in Whitehorse right now is the Cornerstone Building at the end of Main Street.

Prior to that building’s construction last year, Mah’s Point on Jarvis Street was the tallest, at 20 metres or six storeys.

Laking said his call for a 35m limit was based on public input gathered recently as part of the Zoning Bylaw update, where 40 per cent supported or strongly supported allowing taller buildings in the downtown and/or near public transit hubs.

It wasn’t clear how high would be too high for respondents.

Taller buildings make sense now, he said, because developers start to see savings when they go above 30 metres, to a “sweet spot” where the cost per square foot drops enough to get a good return on investment.

But the DRA noted that study was flawed, as it was based on the existing bylaw, which limits building heights to 25m, and only in the north end of downtown (with a few exceptions). “

Knowledge of what the existing zoning bylaw says about building heights was not a prerequisite to answering the survey,” it said.

“Without knowing what the existing zoning bylaws set out for building heights, it is not possible to know what reference point(s) was being used by respondents for building heights when considering the questions about whether “taller” buildings should be allowed.”

City staff have been working on a report for administration which is to look into shadowing, wind, skyline and other impacts of a new 35m or 40m limit.

The report is expected to be brought to the planning committee for review on May 6, and to full council on May 13.

A mandatory 45-day ministerial review would push final approvals to September if council still wanted to amend the OCP.

Whitehorse’s downtown cityscape is currently comprised of two- to four-storey buildings (15m), with a small number of new six-storey structures (20-25m).

Taller buildings would not only affect the skyline but also the views that residents have of the river, clay cliffs, Grey Mountain and Golden Horn.

Taller buildings throw bigger shadows and create wind tunnels, the DRA noted in its fifth letter to council.

“Just like we insist that buildings in the subarctic are built with more insulation than those down south, we must also insist that buildings and neighbourhoods in the subarctic are built to reflect the local light regime,” it said.

Parking may also be an issue.

“Downtown residents reject the idea that just because a building is downtown means that those residents won’t have cars,” the DRA said.

“Prior to any further discussion about taller buildings, the city must invest appropriate resources into researching and further understanding the potential negative impacts.

“Once a change has been made, it will be too late to do this work.”