Skip to content

Falcon Ridge developer unveils new plans

A developer has agreed to replace a controversial proposed apartment complex in Falcon Ridge with four-plexes and single family homes.
falconridge

A developer has agreed to replace a controversial proposed apartment complex in Falcon Ridge with four-plexes and single family homes.

In January a territorial judge ordered the numbered company owned by Brian Little to come up with new plans for the development because it did not have the consent of the condo board to build the apartments.

The apartment building stands partially finished on the site of the proposed development. Work on the building was halted by court order last winter. The developer had already spent $1 million on the project.

Now the developer has proposed two different scenarios to fill the vacant land and replace the nixed apartments.

The first option is to build two sets of three connected four-plexes and one standalone four-plex, for a total of 28 units.

The second option is to build three connected four-plexes, three standalone four-plexes and one single-family home, for a total of 25 units.

“You will see from the conceptual plans that whichever development proceeds, the character of Falconridge will be preserved through similar design elements, elevations and density,” the proposal states.

The developer would be pleased to consider whichever option the condo board prefers, according to the letter.

The height of the new proposed units will be much lower than what was planned for the apartments, and consistent with existing homes in the development.

Currently the development is made up primarily of single family homes, with a few duplexes.

But Justice Ron Veale ruled in January that some combination of four-plex units and single-family homes would be “just and equitable” for the developer and for the condo board.

Veale also ruled recently that the developer owes the condo board nearly $400,000 in unpaid condo fees.

The developer argued it had an “understanding” that condo fees would only be paid on units once they were sold or leased.

But Veale ruled that there was no evidence to support that claim.

He also ordered the developer to pay the condo corporation’s legal costs.

Contact Jacqueline Ronson at jronson@yukon-news.com